the flesh their former dignity and consequently their future recovery unto the state from whence they were fallen in which the Gentile-Nations by discipling do succed let us go no farther for determination of the question then the preceding verse As concerning the Gospel they are enemies for your sakes but as touching the Election they are beloved for the Fathers sake Here is to be enquired 1. Who were enemies concerning the Gospel 2. Who the Fathers are for whose sake they are beloved 3. What this election is and then we shall soone see who are beloved for the Fathers sake For the first It is not the spiritual seed that were as concerning the Gospel enemies that is the highest of contradictions but as Diodate sayes the Jewes who at present time were alienate from God by reason of rebellion against the Gospel which only can unite souls to him Enemies against the Gospel are enemies against God which cannot be understood of spiritual Israel The fathers for whose sake they are beloved are the ancient fathers from whom after the flesh they did proceed especially Abraham Isaac and Jacob. The word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prepter patres for the fathers Then Election must needs be as Paraeus upon the words Diodate and Ravanellus in verbum Electio observe understood of an external grace of the Covenant whereby God chose this Nation to himself according to that of Moses Deut. 7. 6. For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God The Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself above all people that are upon the face of the earth unlesse we are elect in Abraham to salvation and not in Christ And Abraham Isaac and Jacob are our Mediatours reconciliation and when the Apostle saith We are accepted in the beloved Ephes 1. 6. it is to be understood of acceptation in Abraham and we are to conclude our prayers not in and through Christ but Abraham Isaac and Jacob we are not for their sakes beloved to salvation Paraeus indeed makes the grace of eternal Election to be secondarily here understood which God saith he deposited in that Nation for adopting them into Covenant he makes it evident saith he that he hath many of that Nation and ever shall have that are Elect unto salvation But this is not the Election here mentioned but only an adjunct of it and now of it self it will follow that these beloved for Abraham Isaac and Jacob are the children of their flesh Because saith Paraeus God loved the Fathers the love extends it self to the children for if among men friendship with parents be divolved to Children why should it not be so with God likewise I desire that it may be considered for whom Moses interceded when he prayed Remember Abraham Isaac and Israel thy servants to whom thou swarest by thy own selfe and saidest unto them I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed and they shall inherit it for ever Exod. 32. 13. Was it not the whole body of Israel And for whom is it that God promises to remember his Covenant with Jacob and also his Covenant with Isaac and also his Covenant with Abraham Levit. 26. 42. Was it not the whole Nation under suffering as there is exprest I will remember the land Either then Paul and Moses erre together with the list of Authours here mentioned or else the love election calling in this place is into a Church state and condition Argument 8. Eighthly If the ingraffing both of Jews and Gentiles be the fruit of Gods mercy the breaking off by shutting up in unbelief then the ingraffing is into the invisible Church by election and giving faith But the former is true verse 30 31 32. Ergo the latter Answ The priviledge of a Church-state which the Jewes once had and againe shall have is a mercy as may be seene Hosea 1. 6 9. Our Author addes What shall I say more It is so plain from the whole scope and tenour of the Apostles words that the ingraffing there spoken of is into the invisible Church by election and giving faith that from the first of the chapter to verse 13. there is scarce a verse but speaks of rejecting foreknowing election grace hardening giving a Spirit of slumber darkening the eyes stumbling falling or some equipollent terme to these and the Apostle doth plainly signifie his intention in all that discourse to be the shewing the mystery of Gods counsel in electing reprobating blinding conuerting one while the Jews another while the Gentiles so that I cannot but admire that Mr. Marshal should interpret the ingraffing of bare admission into visible Church-membership Answ 1. I would willingly learne what ingraffing by Election is I take Election to be an immanent act in God which is terminated in himself and not on the creature such expressions do not suit with so high pretendings to scholastical learning as every where may be seen in this Authour 2. I would have this Argument made up by taking in the assumption which can be no other then this But the Jewes in their fall from Church-fellowship cannot be said to be rejected hardened given to a spirit of slumber or that their eyes are darkened or that they have stumbled neither Election or Grace should have any hand in their Church-fellowship This must be the reasoning if there be any shew of reason in this heap of words and then all may well admire while he is in his admiration of others I say no more but that he is very weak both in Divinity and Logick that cannot presently upon the first sight discover the weaknesse and return a satisfying answer to this flourish of words Argument 9. Parallel places as is said must be understood of implanting into the invisible Church as Ephes 3. 6. 1 Cor. 12. 13. Gal. 3. 14 26 28 29. Answ Master Hudson page 132. hath not onely affirmed but proved that the Text 1 Cor. 12. 13. is meant of the Church as visible to whom I referre the Reader He places his greatest confidence in the first as he professes and thus enlarges upon it Now sure the Gentiles were made fellow-heires of the same body and co-partakers of the promise of God in the Gospel not by an outward Ordinance but by giving of faith according to Election Ergo the ingraffing Rom. 11. 17. parallel to it is not by an outward Ordinance but by giving Faith according to Election To this I onely say O that this were truth Then as the Apostle saith of Israel at their restauration all Israel shall be saved Rom. 11. 26. so we may say all England in statu quo shall be saved in the sense that he would understand salvation Whether we be by descent Britaines Saxons or Normans we are gentiles and consequently by his Divinity partakers of the Gospel by Fatih according to Election But it is too clear that
child-bearing The natural posterity which was the birth by Promise we only understand And so the Apostle explaines it Rom. 9. 7 8. Neither because they are the seed of Abraham are they all children but in Isaac shall thy seed be called That is they which are the children of the flesh these are not the children of God but the children of the Promise are counted for the seed Where children of God is taken in the same latitude as Adoption ver 4 comprizing all the visible body of the Jewes as it is also taken Deut. 14. 1. Only those that are borne by Promise are included and all the sonnes of Ishmael and Keturah though their parents were once in Covenant are by Gods special command shut out Neither are all these included for as God cast off Ishmael and his seed so he also cast out Esau and his posterity Therfore the Apostle having brought the former distinction of seeds rests not there but addes verse 10 11 12 13. And not only this but when Rebecca also had conceived by one even by our Father Isaac for the children being not yet borne neither having done any good or evil that the purpose of God according to Election might stand not of works but of him that calleth It was said unto her the elder shall serve the younger as it is written Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated And therefore the denomination of the seed is in Jacob sirnamed Israel Therefore when the head or if you will the root of the covenant is mentioned in Scripture it is not barely Abraham but Abraham and Isaac to exclude all Abrahams seed of any other line not barely Abraham and Isaac but Abraham Isaac and Jacob. The natural seed of Jacob then not according to ours but Gods own limits is included in that covenant in the full latitude and extent of it Secondly we do not say that this covenant was entred with Abraham as a natural Father nor his seed comprehended as natural children we well know that quâ tale is omne then all natnral parents were in Covenant in that they had natural children and all natural children were in Covenant because they were the natural issue of their parents Abrahams Father was a natural father and Abraham was his natural son yet neither of them upon that account were in covenant we say it was entred with Abraham accepting the termes of it from God for himself and his natural issue all his natural issue not by God himself excluded were in covenant He that made the covenant according to his good pleasure might put limits to it Abraham may be considered 1. As a man the Son of Terah of the race of Adam 2. As accepting of Gods call and receiving his tender for him and his 3. As a faithful and an upright man regenerate and stedfast in covenant It is not as man that God enters covenant in this latitude for Abraham himself was not thus in covenant If he had been in covenant as a man then no man had been out of covenant Neither is it as an upright man before God and keeping covenant for those of his posterity whose hearts were not stedfast were in covenant and did hand it over to their seed But as a professour of the Faith accepting the covenant taking God for his God in contradistinction to false gods he accepted it for himself and for his seed his natural posterity And all that professe the faith hold in the like tenure are in covenant and have the covenant not vested in their own persons only but enlarged to posterity Thirdly we entitle the seed of Abraham as before to spiritual mercies and so the seed of all that hold in the tenure of Abraham to saving grace and life eternal not by an absolute conveyance infallibly to inherit we know though Israel be as the sand of the sea yet a remnant only shall be saved Rom. 9. 27. but upon Gods termes and conditions in the Gospel held out of God to his people Salvation is made over by vertue of covenant to all thus in covenant in that sense as Christ speaks John 4. 22. Salvation is of the Jews In that sense as Christ useth it of Zacheus family This day is salvation come this house Luke 19. 9. In that sense as the Apostle to the Hebrews speaks of it where he sets out the danger of neglecting so great salvation Heb. 2. 3. In that sense as I conceive the Apostle speaks of it where he saith that upon the cal of the Jews All Israel shall be saved Rom. 11. 26 They shall enjoy those priviledges in which salvation upon Gods terms may be obtained and this is all that can by any means be squeezed out of their words that say the covenant of Grace was made of God with Abraham and his natural seed or with beleevers and their seed It is even irksome to read the large businesse that is made to find out our meaning about the covenant of God made with Abraham and his seed and we must per force confesse that we mean it of a covenant infallibly absolutely to conferre grace and consequently salvation To be so in Covenant as that a man cannot fall from it To this end words of mine are produced that I never uttered and several arguments produced against this supposed tenent and authorities multiplied out of Protestant Writers Beza Twisse Wallaeus The Annotations on the Bible Ames Paraeus Downham I am content that all these Worthies shall still stand up in their honour and that this shadow should fall with shame as well as I am that Bellarmine Stapleton a Lapide Becanus Estius should fall with it whose arguments in this controversie one after other have been brought against me To draw all up towards a conclusion All that is necessarily included in Gods entrance of covenant with a people engaging to be their God and taking them for his people is here by this grand Charter of Heaven made over to Abraham and his natural issue by Isaac and Jacob. All their posterity are branches of this root by nature simply considered and they are holy branches by vertue of this covenant which necessarily implies priviledge of Ordinances the fruition of Gods Oracles which are his covenant-draughts without which no people are in Covenant but all are strangers And this priviledge of Ordinances implies also all Priviledges leading to and accompanying salvation and salvation it self upon Gods terms in his word revealed and so before the disputation the Reader hath my supposition CHAP. XLVI Arguments concluding the natural issue of Abraham Isaac and Jacob to be taken into Covenant MY first Argument is taken from the addition annext to this covenant in the words immediately following The Lord having made a covenant in full words with Abraham and his seed he addes and I will give unto thee and to thy seed after thee the land wherein thou art a stranger all the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession and
as above 3. Brings arguments sor the negative which I shall here take into consideration First The infant that is to be baptized if we consider it in it self as abstracted from the parent gives no reason for it selfe why it should be baptized This we willingly yield the infant hath no independent title the right claimed is in relation to the parents and thence I inferre the infants right is somewhat that parents can transmit to their children that gives the title otherwise they might have regeneration from parents as well as Baptisme It is not then inherent graces that we must look after respective to the childes interest but covenant-priviledge covenant-holinesse A second ground is inferred from the former All children then saith he are baptized by vertue of the parent one or both ever considering the childe in relation to the parent being the branch of such a root and so I take in the childe together with the parent Hence we say commonly they must be children borne in the Church that is of such parents as are members of the Church being a society of visible Saints joyned together by way of covenant to exercise an holy communion with God in Christ and so one with another according to the order of the Gospel for I presume none are so sottish to understand a Church to be that place which by a Metonymy of the subject we call a Church nor the Parishes that men live in which never were of Ecolesiastical constitution I am utterly to seek what is meant by that place which by a Metonymy of the subject we call a Church our meeting places seeme to be intended but few children are borne there and the Authonr speaks of a Church where children are borne For the covenant of which he speaks one with another according to the order of the Gospel which he seemes to understand of a Congregational Church constituting covenant and puts into the definition of a Church this should not have been premised but proved His adversaries in this thing know no such explicite covenant If an implicite one will serve then the Parish inhabitants which he sayes were never of Ecclesiastical constitution are all in covenant Men that professe God in Christ and by vertue of conveniency of habitation joyne in one in the worship of God in the use of Ordinances tacitely and implicitely are in covenant together and we take it to be no sottish thing to esteeme these as Churches If this be his meaning to assert onely an implicite covenant where he sayes page 3. This rule warrants any Minister comfortably to administer that Ordinance Here is a parent one or both visibly in covenant with God and a visible member of Christs Church I do therefore administer the seal of the covenant unto this infant by vertue of this parent according to that Command given to Abraham the father of believers with whom when the Lord entered into covenant and laid the foundation of the Church visible in his family he took his seed into covenant with him and commanded that they with him should keep that Seale of his covenant we freely consent and then the question is determined in the affirmative I am sure the Church of the Jewes took in such by circumcision that some would exclude from Baptisme In case he meanes an explicite Church-covenant over and above the covenant of grace as the Jewes had no such way so neither had the Apostles or primitive Christians Those converts Acts 2. did not that first day of their conversion before their Baptisme set up Congregational Churches with officers they dwelt in many remote places at great distance whither they were to returne to their respective families and therefore could not in this way embody themselves in one distinct society for exercise of discipline Assoon as the Eunuch by Philips preaching of a Jewish proselyte is made a Christian Disciple he saith to Philip See here is water what doth hinder me to be baptized Acts 8. 36. Had Philip understood a necessity of confederation into a Church-way over and above the covenant of grace before Baptisme he had doubtlesse informed him and as Christ sent the Leper that he had cleansed to shew himselfe to the Priest and offer the gift that Moses had Commanded Matth. 8. 4. so Philip would have observed the Gospel-order appointed and have sent him to some particular constituted visible Church upon his covenant to have been received and not hand over head upon his bare profession that he beleeved that Jesus Christ is the Sonne of God baptized him When the Gentiles had received the Holy Ghost Peter said Acts 10. 47. Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we had there been any such rule of a Church-covenant orderly to have preceded he might easily have seen that any man upon that account might have forbidden it Paul had made much more haste as I may say than good speed Acts 16. In baptizing the Jaylour and his houshold in case Jesus had set down an order of a preconfederation into a particular Church-society Master Bartlet in his model of the Congregational way saith that those particular instances which are produced by divers reverend Divines of the Eunuch Centurions Jaylours Baptisme though not belonging to any particular Church against what we have laid down are of little force and validity in regard that which was done to those persons was by the hands of extraordinary officers that were not tied to particular Churches as ordinary Pastours and Teachers were then and still are But these persons whom they thus baptized were not persons in any such extraordinary capacity and they must come in in a Gospel-way This might have priviledged the Leper cleansed by Christ from offering his gift appointed by Moses as well as it could priviledge these new Converts from any covenant-way appointed by Christ and the Eunuch saith What doth hinder me to be baptized without mention of any special priviledge of an officer extraordinary in a way otherwise irregular And the like we may observe in the speech of Peter 2. They should shew us where when and by what authority any ordinary Pastours and Teachers tied themselves to such an order to bring men into a Congregational Church-way and to baptize into such particular Church Congregational and not into the universal Church visible 3. Those of his judgement may do well to give us their thoughts of their own Baptisme They had no independant right all their right was in relation to their parents Their parents were not as we conceive thus in any particular Church federation perhaps they were no fit persons in their judgement for admission neither were they baptized by the hands of extraordinary Officers If their Baptisme was null then they are yet to be baptized if valid they had then title to Baptisme and others in their condition are entitled 4. Then it is in the power of man at
pleasure to keep parent and childe from the priviledge of Ordinances to have them passe as Heathens and Infidels yea believing godly men and their children at their courtesie must be reputed either of the number of dogges or of children this cannot be denied The majority of these have power at pleasure of admission of members And to be no Church-member with them is the same as to be a Turke or Indian page 9. And how different their judgements are who are fit to be received and who are to be denied is evident Some of no obscure note have affirmed though minded be contrary minded that to render a man capable of admission into Church-membership grace is not sufficient but he must have expressions and so a fathers slow tongue shall exclude his childe from admittance into the fellowship of the Saints when upon the other hand upon the bare account of his fathers glib tongue though there be scarce another commendable quality another may be received when these are not judged worthy of fellowship who are not of abilities to sit in judgemeut with the Congregation to admit members to passe sentence upon delinquents to judge of Doctrines not only to elect but to ordain Pastours and Church-Officers we may easily guesse how many they exclude as without whom Christ receives Such a way had it been taken had deprived the Church of an Hezekiah Josiah and many others in their age renowned How great a provocation is this to such children when once of growth to joyne with them with whom the Church rancks them and to oppose with the uttermost of fury such that after the revolution of so many generations inheriting that priviledge now do debarre them And how great an encouragement to joyne with such in all holinesse with whom they are honoured with these priviledges As to the second whether the Ministers of England are bound by the Word of God to baptize their children which say they beleeve in Jesus Christ but are grossely ignorant scandalous in their conversations scoffers at godlinesse and refuse to submit to Church-Discipline Our Authour puts a Question What parent do you mean the immediate parent onely or the predecessors For suppose the immediate parent be as your question mentions yet it may be the Grand-father or some of the predecessors have been godly And farther sayes I perceive diverse of our Divines help themselves here and some in discourse are content to lose that ground of the immediate parent and flie to this Though I see no reason that any should fly hither in hope of help yet it is strange to me that he should stand for the immediate parent excluding all mediate predecessours who hath said enough for their power in giving of this interest to the children He sayes I do administer the Seale of the covenant unto this childe by vertue of this parent according to that Command given to Abraham the father of Beleevers with whom when the Lord entered into covenant and laid the foundation of the Church visible in his family he took his seed into covenant with him and commanded that with him they should keepe that Seale of his covenant When God tooke Abraham into covenant and his seed with him it was not onely his immediate seed but the issue of his flesh at the greatest distance Gods covenant with Abraham Isaac and Jacob is mentioned in Gods apparition to Moses Exod. 3. 6. and was pleaded by Moses in his intercession with God for Israel Exod. 32. 13. Moses then and all Israel were in this confederation of Abraham yea all Israel in succeeding ages Levit. 26. 42. When the worst of Jewes make that plea that they are Abrahams seed the Lord Christ yields it John 8. 37. and the Apostle concludes a holinesse in the whole body upon that account that the root at such a distance Abraham Isaac and Jacob were holy Rom. 11. 16. I know not how we can bottome any thing upon the grand Charter of God made to Abraham and exclude the mediate parent from all power to conferre this interest upon posterity When Jacob calls Ephraim and Manasseh by the name of sonnes Gen. 48. 9. as a father gives his blessing to them putting his name and the names of his fathers Abraham and Isaac upon them ver 16. and 20. were they not to be reckoned for the sonnes and seed of Jacob doth not their mediate Parent as well as Joseph their immediate Father conferre an interest on them Mr. Hooker was before our Authour in this tenent and his grounds are fully answered by Mr. Caudrey in his Diatribe concerning infant-baptisme I shall onely take into consideration our Authors Reasons First he yields that England had Christians in Primitive-times Thousands of Martyrs under Dioclesian but after the waters grew brackish at Rome and brings it to us in England we held saith he the name Christianity under the Romish yoke till of late the State threw it off and then the people following the State concluding I doubt not but God had his number in those dark times but what were those few in comparison of the body of the people or predecessours since the time of the Gospel restored to its purity God hath wonderfully appeared in England but those who use the argument of predecessours runne very high Answ 1. If the waters grew brackish at Rome so that they gave their sent hither so did the waters of Judea and Jerusalem grow as brackish yea and of a worse savour in the dayes of Ahaz and at those times when they brought forth children to God and gave them to Moloch Ezek. 16. 20. 2. Neither do we look so farre back when we look back as farre as Dioclesian as the Jewes in Christ time as Paul that looked as farre as Abraham in his time yea himself stayes not till he come up to him we are not necessitated to look so high A pedigree in a shorter line as to this purpose will serve our turne we are not tied to make it out that our Progenitors were really godly to conferre such covenant-interest upon us Primitive-Christians were admitted upon the account of Profession by our Authours confession and not upon the account of reality of godlinesse and they gave their posterity interest We see how much reverend Master Hooker speaking the opinion of his party gives to the Churches connivance negligence or indulgence in this thing If the Church saith he either through connivance negligence or indulgence shall tolerate such evils and evil persons in that state of Church-membership they cannot then deny them the priviledge of Members And I dare attribute as much to Gods connivance his indulgence and long suffering Till he sue out a bill of divorce and openly casts a people off that they be none of his Kingdome or called by his name they are in covenant and their children with them It seems Master Hooker judges that the Church may thus connive without sinne seeing he distinguisheth between connivance indulgence and
this day And this whole visible body of Israel was not Christ 2. There are testimonies of Israels entrance into covenant with God Deut. 29. 10 11 12. Ye stand this day all of you before the Lord your God your Captaines of your Tribes your Elders and your Officers with all the men of Israel your little ones your wives and the stranger that is in thy Camp from the hewer of thy wood unto the drawer of thy water that thou shouldest enter into covenant with the Lord thy God and into his oath which the Lord thy God maketh with thee this day Psalme 50. 5. Gather my Saints together unto me those that have made a Covenant with me by sacrifice Deut. 26. 17. Thou hast avouched the Lord this day to be thy God and to walk in his ways 3. The particular time and place of Gods entrance into covenant with his people is in Seripture noted likewise In Horeb as we have heard which was the first yeare of their coming out of Egypt the third moneth Exod 19. 1. Again in the fourth year the eleventh moneth the first day Deut. 1. 3. Deut. 29. 10 11 12. compared This day saith the text Now there was no day in which the covenant of God with Christ was entred no day when it was not entred but it was from all eternity as all the works of the Trinity are ad intra 4. Covenant duties are imposed to walk before the Lord to be perfect to be an holy peculiar people Gen. 17. 1. Exod. 19. 6. These are not imposed upon Christ but upon Christians 5. The people of God have the praise of keeping and are under the blame of covenant-breaking which praise of faithfulness and blame of perfidiousnesse is ascribed to them and not to Christ Jesus 6. They that have the seals of the covenant given them are in covenant but man receives the Seales both of Baptisme and the Lords Supper as the people of God of old did Circumcision and the Passeover therefore man is in covenant 7. If the covenant were made with Christ and not with man then he is a Mediatour between God and himself and not between God and man This is plain in that he is the Mediatour of the covenant viz. between persons in covenant But he is not a Mediatiour between God and himself which were absurd to imagine but between God and man There is one Mediatour between God and men the man Christ Jesus 1 Tim. 2. 5. There is only I think that one difficult text of the Apostle to be objected against this thing Gal. 3. 16. Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made He saith not and to seeds as of many but as of one and to thy seed which is Christ from whence some conclude that the covenant was entred of God with no other of Abrahams seed but with Christ consequently not with man but with Christ only As this was not in my thoughts in my first Edition so I shall not now as I soon might weary my self and reader in wading into all the difficulties about it being such as have occasioned not onely the Jewes to insult as Calvin observes but Hierom the greatest Linguist among the ancients to speak words unworthy of such an Apostle which I shall spare to repeat and all upon the occasion of the Apostles words That the promises were not made to Abraham and his seeds as of many but his seed as of one on which the forenamed father says Running over the whole Scripture both with his eye and memory he doth not finde the word seed ever used in the plural number but alwayes in the singular whether it be in the better or worse sense But Gomarus on the words takes him up as being too short in his memory and quotes Samuels speech 1. Sam. 8. 15. to the contrary where the word is used plurally Rivet indeed Exercit 108. in Genes seemes to help him out though he do not mention him affirming that the word seed is never used in the plural number for the posterity of men but always collectively used in the singular number The place objected in Samuel speaking of the seed of the earth but Ravanellus on the Apostles behalf pleads That it is uncertain whether the word be only used of the Hebrews in the singular number for though it be not used plurally in the Hebrew Text of the Old Testament yet it cannot thence be gathered that the word hath onely the singular number and wants the plural when it is without all doubt that all the words which have been in use with the Hebrews are not to be found in the Old Testament Howsoever I am not the man from whom a satisfying Comment on these words may be expected others more able that have travelled in it may be consulted yet I doubt not but enough may be easily said to vindicate it from this glosse that is here put upon it and to make it appear that this text will not bear this doctrine that the covenant of grace is not entred with fallen man but with Christ only which may appear by these following Reasons 1. There is no safe opposing any one difficult text about which Expositors are at so much difference among themselves against so many that are full and clear against it The texts that are against it are as I may say without number and this I think stands alone with any colour for it Thus the Papists have adventured to fasten their purgatory on 1 Cor. 3. 13 14 and some few like difficult places 2. The word covenant is not in the text neither under the more proper word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 promises in the plural number repeated again verse 19. in the singular and a promise and a covenant as Paraeus on the words observes much differ 3. If they will needs understand by promises to a covenant with as every covenant is a promise though every promise be not a covenant they differ as the Genus and the Species yet there is that in the text as Master Bulkley in his Treatise of the covenant observes which makes against them they say this covenant is made with Christ and with none but Christ but in the text it is otherwise Abraham is made a party in the covenant as well as Christ which serves to overthrow their exclusive particle 4. Christ here in this place may be taken collectively as seed is usually taken and so the word is taken 1 Cor. 12. 12. As the body is one and hath many members all the members of that one body being many are one body so also is Christ And so Mr. Bulkely Diodati Rivet Gomarus and our last Annotations upon the words expound it 5. Being understood of Christ personally which with submission to better judgements I confesse most satisfies me it must not be understood of Christ as a party in Covenant for blessednesse but as a Mediatour
make vessels some to honour and some to dishonour so God having more transcendent Sovereignty may make some creatures ever blessed and others during pleasure to remaine in misery 2. It stands not yet with Gods ordinate justice to strike his people where there is no fault The termes of the covenant being pre-supposed none can suffer that have not offended every one upon engagement from God must be happy that is innocent This is plainly implyed in those words In the day that thou eatest thou shalt surely die sinne not and suffer not and more explicitely held out in those words do this and live under death is comprized all evil from which man upon covenant is free that doth not sinne Under life is comprised all blisse which upon covenant all are to enjoy that yeeld full obedience So that the inlet of suffering is from sinne Rom. 5. 12. God having as I may say tyed himself not out of Sovereignty to afflict when man hath not offended 3. When way is made by sinne to divine justice to bring evil upon man yet the reason why this or that evil is inflicted on this or that man is not alwayes mans provocation by sinne All afflictions are not punishments nor yet corrections or chastisements There are often other ends and motives Sometimes God looks solely at himselfe alone at his own glory in his strokes of this we have many instances John 9. 1 2. John 11. 4. The same we may say of the viper upon Pauls hand Acts 28. 4 5. Sometimes he looks at his people in the sufferings that he inflicts 1. The patients themselves laying afflictions upon them not as corrections respecting by-past faults but tryals for discovery of their graces That which God laid upon Job was not for his sinne but to make it appeare that Satan had formed a false charge against him that his whole service of God was upon by-ends and base accounts and that sufferings God appearing against him in contrary providences would presently draw him into all wickednesses It was a sore affliction to Abraham to leave his countrey and his fathers house to offer up his sonne Isaac yet these were no corrections or chastisements that we know but temptations 2. He looks upon others that are no sufferers to bring about mercy to one by the sufferings of another so it was in Josephs sufferings Gen. 50. 20. 4. The corrections that God lays upon the godly are far different from those that he layes upon the wicked His hand upon his own children differs much from his hand upon his enemies God deales otherwise with a Nation that is a stranger to him then he deals with a people that are his own Jerem. 30. 11. Though I make a full end of all Nations whither I have scattered thee yet will I not make a full end of thee but I will correct thee in measure and will not leave thee altogether unpunished Though both suffer yet they do not equally and alike suffer So it is with the Elect and reprobate both suffer from the hand of God but there is great difference in their sufferings 1. They differ in the cause from whence their sufferings respectively do arise The sufferings of the wicked are out of pure wrath wicked men being under a state of wrath The sufferings of the people of God are out of present displeasure but yet out of love Prov. 13. 11. Heb. 12. 6 7. 2. They differ in the end of their sufferings A piece of silver is trode upon with the feet to scoure and brighten it but a worme or spider to crush or spoile it 3. They differ in the respective improvement that either make of them the godly are are bettered by their afflictions their sufferings are their purges and purifications Psalme 119. 67. Their eares are thereby opened for discipline Job 36. 10. the wicked are more and more hardened by them and grow more and more wicked under them Esay 1. 5. 2 Chron. 28. 22. The Sunne hardens the earth but softens the butter and the wax The sufferings of the people of God many times proceed from as high displeasure in God as can stand with love and the more high the sinne is the greater and sorer is his displeasure They work in God as great a dislike as can stand with his purpose not utterly to leave and cast them off When David had sinned in that high manner as he did the Text saith The thing that David did displeased the Lord 2 Sam. 11. ult Few men have had more of Gods heart then he yet we see his heart rises in sore displeasure against his wickednesse We may see how he takes him up for it we can scarce see in all the Scriptures a man so chidden The Prophet reckons up the courtesies and high favours that he had received from God I anointed thee King over Israel and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul and I gave thee thy Masters house and thy Masters wives into thy bosome and gâ—ve thee the house of Israel and of Judah and if that had been too little I would more-over have given thee such and such things And as he had before aggravated his wickednesse in a parable so in expresse termes he further layes it open Wherefore hast thou despised the Commandment of the Lord in doing evil in his sight thou hast killed Vriah the Hittite with the sword and hast taken his wife to be thy wife Then he falls to threatnings three great evils as we may there see follow upon this evil yet all this while that the Lord thus chides him that he thus threatens and beats him he doth not cease to love him as appears in Nathans words verse 13. The Lord hath put away thy sinne some will have love and anger to be inconsistent hatred and wrath inseparable God is angry as they say with none but those that he hates and when anger appears love is no more But all know that this is false among men a father is many times angry with his child that he would be loath to hate It is as false with God he was wrath with Moses but he never hated Moses he owns his with much love when he manifests much dislike and distaste of their present actions 6. These sufferings of the godly must by no means be accounted satisfactions of divine justice as coming from vindicative wrath nor any part of the curse that is due from vindicative justice for sin Having a tendency not to harme but to reforme not to destroy but amend they are only fatherly corrections and chastisements not properly at least as some rigidly understand the word punishments satisfaction was the work of Christ and the whole of the curse was divolved upon him Gal. 3. 13. Papists do distinguish between the friendship that is lost by sinne and the justice that is deserved The friendship that is lost is made up again as they confesse of free grace but the justice deserved must by the offender
sinners of the Gentiles Gal. 2. 15 16. All these identities evidence one and the same Church ours and theirs Therefore say I unto you the Kingdome of God shall be taken from you and given to a Nation bringing forth the fruits thereof Matth. 21. 43. The same Kingdom was taken from them and given to us was taken from the Jewes and given to the Gentiles where Sem left there Japhet took possession Gen. 9. 27. Sems Tents are Japhets These speak the covenants into which we have successively entred to be one and the same in substance A covenant entred by the same parties upon the same termes and propositions on either hand is the same covenant Such is the Old covenant entred with the Jewes and the New covenant entred with Christians they are therefore one and the same in substance CHAP. XXXII Differences assigned between the Old and New covenant THese covenants are not in that manner fully and entirely one but there is difference in the way of administration They are one in substance constituting one Church one Kingdome but different in circumstances Upon which account they are distinguished by the names of the Old and New the first and second Covenant Some have made it their ambition to rise as high as may be in the number of differences and have assigned several where there is a full accord and perfect agreement I shall lay down such where the difference is clear and afterward take view of those imaginary differences upon which any controversie of moment hangs 1. They differ in the agents employed in administration of these respective covenants entred of God and upheld and continued with his people The Old covenant was administred and held forth by Servants only Prophets Priests and such as God pleased to appoint whether by ordinary call as those of the Tribe of Levi who were appointed among men in things appertaining to God Or extraordinary to whom he spake in visions and dreams God in sundry wayes and manners as the Apostle to the Hebrews observes then speaking to his people Heb. 1. 1. The New covenant is held forth by the Son as in the same place the Apostle witnesseth He was the Angel or Messenger of the covenant Upon that errand he came from the Father clothed with our flesh This is that great salvation which first began to be spoken to us by the Lord Heb. 2. 3. And this he carries on by his delegates and deputies whom from the right hand of the Father he gifts and qualifies 2. They differ in their extent and latitude as to the Nations taken into covenant The Old covenant received only the Jews To them appertained the Adoption the Glory and the Covenants Rom. 9. 4. Circumcision the Seale of the covenant was proper to them with some few of other Nations that forgetting their own people and their fathers house joyned themseves to them whilest other Nations were known by the name of uncircumcision being without title to that Seale and were without Christ aliens to the common-wealth of Israel and strangers from the covenant of Promise Eph. 2. 12. Therefore the Apostles before the vaile was taken away had that restraint upon them Matth. 10. 5. Go not into the way of the Gentiles and into any City of the Samaritans enter ye not The lost sheep of the house of Israel being in covenant onely were in their commission That was a valley of vision All other people were in darknesse They were a people of God Others were no people The New covenant takes in all Nations respective to the covenant no Nation hath any barre put to it but in every Nation he that feareth God and worketh righteousnesse is accepted with him Act. 10. 35. Christ having taken away the partition wall the Apostles have a commission for the discipling of all Nations so that in Christ Jesus There is neither Jew nor Greek Scythian nor Barbarian Col. 3. 11. 3. They differ in their duration or continuance The Old covenant had but its date of time which being expired it must give way for the New to succeed Thus the Apostle reasons from the Prophets prediction of a New covenant Heb. 8. 13. In that he saith A New covenant he hath made void the Old now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away This was to stand till times of reformation Heb. 9 10. This second covenant must remaine till the end of time These are called the last dayes in that after these there must be no change of Ordinances The Ministery now established is to remaine to the end of the world Matth. 28. 20. and the Sacraments until Christs second coming unto judgement 4. They differ in the way of dedication or consecration The Old covenant was dedicated and purified with the blood of Bulls and Goats and other Sacrifices which according to the Law were slaine and offered as the Apostle to the Hebrews observes from Exod. 24. 7 8. Heb. 9. 19 20 21. When Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the Law he took the blood of calves and goats with water and Scarlet-wool and hysope and sprinkled both the book and all the people saying This is the blood of the Testament which God hath enjoyned you Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the Tabernacle and all the vessels of the Ministery But in the New Testament the dedication is in the blood of Christ This is my blood in the New Testament shed for you and for many for the remission of sins Where we see 1. An agreement Either of both are Testaments and covenants Either of both have their dedication Either of both are dedicated in blood 2. An answerable difference and opposition The first was the Old Testament to be antiquated The second the New to succeed in place of the Old The first was dedicated in the blood of Bulls and Calves The second in the blood of the Mediatour in my blood saith Christ The first had no possible power to take away sinne as the Apostle presently shews chap. 10. 4. But this is shed for many for the remission of sins The Apostle in the words immediately before these quoted gives the covenant the name of a Testament though a covenant and a mans last Will and Testament really differ seeing herein they agree that the covenant had its validility as a Testament by the death of him that made the covenant Heb. 9. 16 17. 5. They differ in the way of exhibition of Christ the glory and grace of the covenant And upon a threefold account here there is a difference 1. In the Old covenant we have Christ only in a Promise to be incarnate to suffer and to rise again and to be received unto glory Under that covenant light was by way of prophecie In the New covenant he is evidently set forth as come in the flesh Having been dead and now alive Rev. 1. 18. Having suffered in the flesh risen again and entred into glory To us
many things to say First that Orthodox Divines both ancient and moderne have made circumcision to be of the same signification and use as Baptism and till Anabaptists closed they had no adversaries but Papists who to advance their â—pus operatum in the Sacraments of the New Testament will have them as far to exceed the Old as heaven doth earth and the substance doth the shadow This is observed by Chamier Panstrat Cathol Tom. 4. lib. 2. cap. 19. sect 58. having reckoned up several testimonies to this purpose he addes There are very many like testimonies by which it appears that Christians were heretofore perswaded that there was no so great difference between circumcision and baptisme and why saith he is it now changed Truly in favour of the Papists and according to the pleasure of the Iesuites Secondly if circumcision have respect to those Promises that were no Gospel mercies but civil domestical restrained to Jews and not appertaining to Christians How could it be a distinction between Jew and Gentile respective to Religion it might have made a civil distinction and the want of it have been an evidence against other Nations that they had been none of the multiplied seed of Abraham according to the flesh and that their interest had not been in Canaan But how it could have concluded them to have been without Christ strangers from the covenant of Promise having no hope and without God in the world as the Apostle determines upon their uncircumcision Eph. 2. 11 12. cannot be imagined Thirdly How is it that we hear so much in Scripture of circumcision of the heare Jer. 4. 4. Rom. 2. 28. Deut. 10. 16. Deut. 30. 6. Ezek. 44. 9. and the circumcised to have this character that they worship God in Spirit and in Truth if circumcision have not relation to Promises that are spiritual When complaint is made of uncircumcision in heart is it not as it is ordinarily understood that their â—â—ndes were carnal and not taken up with spiritual things or is it that they were not fixt on their civil and domestick interests when they are said to be uncircumcised as Ier. 6. 10. is it not upon that account that Ieremy there gives that they could not hear the Word of the Lord that they had no delight in it that it was a reproach to them or is it because they could not suck in Promises of meer civil home and self-interests So it must need be if circumcision be such a Seale when they emproved it for the use to which it was instituted they kept the right use of it and were not worthy of reproof concerning it Fourthly what Sacraments had the Jewes of any Gospel-relation if this respected alone their civil interests There might be more spoken to that of the Passeover to carry it to peculiar National mercies than to this of circumcision See Exod. 13. 14 15. And it shall be when thy sinne asketh thee in time to come saying What is this that thou shalt say unto him By strength of hand the Lord brought us out from Egypt from the 〈◊〉 of Bâ—ndage And it came to passe when Pharaoâ— would hardly let us go that the Lord slew all the first-borne in the land of Egypt both the first borne of man and the first-borne of beasts therefore I sacrifice unto the Lord all that openeth the Matrix being males but all the first-born of my children I redeem I am sure far lesse can be said to carry it to that which is spiritual and of common concernment both to Jews and Christians Fifthly how is it that the Apostle giving a definition of circumcision refers it to nothing national civil or domestick but only to that which is purely spiritual Speaking of Abraham he saith He received the signe of Circumcision a seale of the righteousnesse of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised The righteousnesse of faith is a Promise purely Evangelical Romanes 3. 22. Romanes 3. 30. Romanes 10. 3. Philippians 3. 8. and this Circumcision sealed the self-same thing that our Sacraments seale So that as their extraordinary Sacraments are expressely affirmed to be the same with ours by the Apostle 1 Cor. 10. 3 They eat all the same spiritual meat and did all drink the same spiritual drink so are their appointed established Sacraments Circumcision and the Passeover Will they with Bellarmine lib. 1. cap. 17. de Sacramentis in genere deny that Circumcision was an universal seale of faith and affirme that it was only an individual seale of the individual faith of Abraham that so all may fall to the ground which is spoken from that Text of the use of Circumcision to the Jewes all that is there spoken having reference only to Abraham in person I answer 1. This Popish shift is flat against the Apostle He brings it as an argument for proof of the way of our Justification to be by faith alone which were a meer inconsequence if proper to him and not belonging to others 2. It is flat against Moses who referres this of circumcision to the covenant there mentioned Genesis 17. 7. But the covenant is not with Abraham alone but his seed also together with him as is there plaine 3. It carries several absurdities with it 1. By this meanes Gods covenant with Abraham in person and his covenant with Christians in Gospel-times is indeed the same but his covenant with all beleevers in the Old Testament and with beleevers in the New Testament are essentially differing Abraham and New-Testament beleevers are under one covenant Old Testament-beleevers are under a covenant essentially differing 2. Then Zachary Luke 1. 72. interpreting the covenant made with Abraham of salvation by Christ should have limited it to Abraham and not extended it to the Fathers But we see all are there under one and the same mercy our father Abraham and all that followed him even all that came out of Egypt and were for Canaan are called Fathers 1 Corinth 10. 1. All our Fathers were under the cloud and all passed through the sea and all these had the same mercy in promise with Abraham To performe the mercy saith Zachary promised to our Fathers and to remember his holy covenant the Oath which he sware to our father Abraham 3. Then Abraham himself in person and Christians in the dayes of the Gospel are interessed in Christ and all other beleevers in the Law were without Christ but the contrary is plain Moses esteemed the reproach of Christ greater than the treasures of Egypt Heb. 11. 26. 4. Then Abraham and Christians have from God the Kingdom of heaven and salvation but the rest of the Jewes have nothing better than the land of Canaan They have no more than the covenant reaches unto and the seale of the covenant did confirm But the covenant reaches only temporal Promises as the land of Canaan in their opinion These evasions Bellarmine is put to and Anabaptists are glad to follow both of them willing to say any thing
rather than confesse a truth But they say Object This was a seale to Abraham of the righteousnesse of faith that he might be the Father of all them that beleeve c. But only Abraham is such a father Answ This priority of receiving the Faith and the signe and seale is proper to Abraham each one could not be first but father and childe both received it and both had the righteousnesse of Faith sealed in it If Bellarmine please so well I shall referre to Bellarmines opposites Chamier de Sacramentis in genere lib. 2. cap. 9. Ames Tom. 3. more especially Whittaker praelectiones de Sacramentis page 22 23. Hâ—c desperationis c. So that which way soever they take truth fastens upon them and the friends of truth flie in their face and all to make it appear that a pure Gospel was preach't to Abraham and that the first covenant was not mixt but truly Evangelical CHAP. XXXV The Covenant of Grace in Gospel-times admits Christians in a state of unregeneration and is not limited in the bounds of it to the Elect regenerate THe two former supposed differences did lay the first covenant too low not vouchsafing it the honour of a Gospel-covenant or at the best a mixt Gospel Two others follow which will hold us longer that put too great a limit to the second covenant in respect of the latitude and extent of it A third difference therefore assigned by some is that the first covenant took in all the seed of Abraham by Isaac and Jacob as many as professed themselves to be of the Faith and that were willing to joyne in the worship of the God of Abraham The New Covenant they affirm admits no more than Elect Regenerate persons The Gospel strips us of all relative Covenant holinesse of all holinesse that is not real and intrinsecal and God ownes none as his Covenant-people but Elect regenerate persons In the first place we shall take what is yielded or at least not gain-sayed and after proceed to the examination of what is affirmed In Old Testament-times the covenant was made with Israel in the uttermost latitude and extent with all that bore the name of Israel as we may see Deut. 29. at large held forth There is a covenant entred and the words of it exprest 1. With Israel verse 1. 2. With all Israel verse 2. 3. With them to whom God had not given an heart to perceive eyes to see and eares to hear ver 4. viz. with unregenerate persons 4. It is made with Captaines of Tribes Elders Officers little Ones Wives Strangers Hewers of wood Drawers of water vers 10 11. 5. With them that were present and with them that were absent verse 14 15. All this clearly shews in how great a latitude this covenant is entred No Israelite of any Sex Age Rank nor any that joyned themselves to that body are exempted Which also farther appears in those innumerable places of Scripture where God owns that people generally promiscuously as his people professing himself to be their God and he is the God of none but a covenant-people of his own covenant-people others are without God Eph. 2. 12. He was the God of all that came out of Egypt Exod. 20. 2. I am the Lord thy God which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt out of the house of Bondage Of all that whole family Amos 3. 1. Hear this word that the Lord hath spoken against thee O children of Israel against the whole family which I have brought up from the land of Egypt Hear O Israel the Lord our God is one Lord Deut. 6. 4. Yea Isreal at the very worst is thus owned as Gods in covenant Hear O my people and I will testifie unto thee O Israel if thou wilt hearken unto me but my people would not hearken to my voice Israel would have none of me Psal 8 8 11. The Oxe knows his Owner the Asse his Masters crib but Israel doth not know my people doth not consider Isa 1. 3. Therefore my people are gone into captivity because they have no knowledge Isa 5. 13. My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge Hos 4. 6. And when they entred into the Heathen whither they went they prophaned my holy Name when they said unto them These are the people of the Lord Ezek. 36. 20. This is brought as a motive to withhold Israel from sin Ye are the children of the Lord your God ye shall not cut your selves nor make any baldnesse between your eyes for the dead for thou art an holy people to the Lord thy God Deut. 14. 1 2. This is pleaded as an aggravation of sin You have I known of all the Nations of the earth and therfore you will I punish for all your iniquities Amos 3. 2. This is brought as a motive to prevail with God under misery for mercy Behold we beseâ—ch thee we are all thy people Isa 64. 9. Yea this covenant takes with God for national mercies The whole of the Nation then is in covenant Then will I remember my covenant with Jacob and my covenant with Isaac and also my covenant with Abraham will I remember and will remember the land Levit. 26. 42. The Apostles authority puts it out of question Reckoning up the priviledges of Israel according to the flesh nine in number Rom. 9. 4. This is one The covenants Israel then after the flesh was in covenant All Israel were the covenant-people of God There were many not Elect not Regenerate but there was not a man not in covenant not owned of God as visibly his Thou hast avouched the Lord this day to be thy God And the Lord hath avouched thee this day to be his people Deut. 26. 17 18. This was the state of the Church of old But now as is affirmed it is far otherwise God is not so large in his priviledges nor so ample in his munificence none have honour to be in covenant in Gospel-times but real beleevers men truly sanctified and regenerate And here it cannot be denied but there are many expressions ordinarily found in many Orthodox Writers and like passages frequently heard in Sermons from godly Ministers seemingly implying if not asserting it and restraining the covenant onely to the elect and regenerate As when they give Marks and signes of mens being in covenant with God this must needs imply that some professing Christians are in covenant with God and some without which is yet farther evidenced when they conclude that in case a man be in covenant with God then happinesse and salvation follows But when these men fully explain themselves they yeeld up again to us that which seemingly they had taken from us and ordinarily do distinguish of an outward and inward covenant acknowledging the outward covenant to be made with every member of the Church and the Parents with that hear and professedly accept the promises and their children But the inward covenant as they say belongs to
in the same Church of Christ and not any of them did set up new Churches 3. The old Church-way of administration among the Jewes was then to fall that present administration to be taken down by Gods appointment and a new one to be set up according to his prescript 4. John set up a new Sacrament in a new way which after his days was the alone Church-way If any can shew as our seekers look after that Jesus Christ shall now put an end to this way and that they have a Commission for a new Sacrament of initiation then they speak somewhat for setting up new Churches in like manner CHAP. XLIII A dogmatical Faith entitles to Baptisme 3. IT farther follows by way of consectary that a dogmaticall Faith ordinarily called by the name of Faith historical such that assents to Gospel-truths though not affecting the heart to a full choice of Christ and therefore was short of Faith which is justifying and saving gives title to baptisme The Covenant is the ground on which baptisme is bottomed otherwise Church-Membership would evince no title either in Infants or in men of years to Baptisme But the Covenant as we have proved is entred with men of Faith not saving and therefore to them Baptisme is to be administred How the consequent can be denyed by those that grant the Antecedent Baptisme denied in foro Dei to men short of saving faith when they are in covenant I cannot imagine yet some that have confessed their interest in the covenant now deny their title to Baptisme and affirme If men be once taught that it is a faith that is short of justifying and saving Faith which admitteth men to Baptisme it will make foule work in the Church 1. All that hath been said for the latitude of the covenant may fitly be applyed in opposition to this tenent for the like latitude of Baptisme 2 All the absurdities following the restraint of the covenant to the Elect to men of Faith saving and justifying follow upon this restraint of interest in Baptisme 3. To make the visible seale of Baptisme which is the priviledge of the Church visible to be of equal latitude with the seale of the Spirit which is peculiar to invisible members is a Paradox 4. The great condition to which Baptisme engages is not a prerequisite in baptisme This is plaine to man is bound to make good his covenant conditions before his engagements to conditions no servant is tyed to do his work to gaine admission into service no souldier to fight in order to get himself listed under command But Faith that is justifying is the condition to which baptisme engages and no condition necessarily required to vest him in it 5. That Faith upon which Simon Magus in Primitive times was baptized is that which admitteth to baptisme Simon himself beleeved and was baptized Act. 8. 13. But Simons faith fell short of saving and justifying 6. In case only justifying faith give admission to baptisme then none is able to baptize seeing this by none is discerned and to leave it to our charity affirming that we may admit upon presumption of a title when God denies I have spoken somewhat chap. 38. and I refer to Master Hudson in his Vindication whom learned Master Baxter so highly commends to shew the unreasonablenesse of it Here it is objected First Objections answered When Christ saith make me Disciples of all Nations baptizing them he means sincere Disciples though we cannot ever know them to be sincere Object I answer Answ In case I make this first objection brought against me my seventh and last argument for me it will fully discover the weaknesse of it and thus I forme it All that are Disciples unto Christ and made disciples for Christ are to be baptized but some are made Disciples to Christ that are short of faith saving and justifying as hath been proved at large This Discipleship that Christ there mentions is such of which whole Nations are in capacity as is plaine in the Commission to which this Nation with others hath happily attained according to the manifold prophecies before cited of these the whole universal visible Church consists as is irrefragably proved by Mr. Hudson in his Treatise of that subject and his Vindication and most amply spoken to by Mr. Baxter in his plaine Scripture-proof of Infants Church-membership and baptisme page 279 280. Sir if you were my father I would tell you that when you say Christ makes no one City Countrey Tribe his Disciples you speak most malignantly and wickedly against the Kingdome and dignity of my Lord Jesus Hath he not commanded to disciple Nations Hath not the Father promised to give him the Heathen or Nations for his inheritance and the uttermost parts of the earth for his possession Psalme 2. And that Nations shall serve him And that the Kingdomes of the world shall be become the Kingdomes of the Lord and his Christ and do you not see it fulfilled before your eyes Are not Bewâ—ly Keder Minsters c. and England till of late as full Christs disciples and so Church-members as the Jewes were in covenant with God and so Church-members We are not all sincere True no more were they for with many of them God was not well pleased but shut out all that Nation of covenanters from his rest save Caleb and Joshuah We may have Pagans and infidels lurk amongst us unknown but they had many amongst them known In the mean time we as generally professe Christianity as they did to serve the true God And are you sure there is never a City or Town that are all sincere I think you be not or at least is there never a godly family as Abrahams was you cannot be ignorant that the terme Disciples in Scripture is given to more to the sincerely-godly And if whole Nations yea the whole Universal visible Church consisting of discipled Nations were all beleevers it were a happinesse then election would be as large as Vocation when Christ saith many are called but few chosen Secondly Object When he saith he that beleeveth and is baptized shall be saved here faith goes before baptism and that not a common but a saving faith for here is but one faith spoken of and that is before baptism 1. This is the weakest of all arguments to reason for a precedency of one before another Answ from the order in which they are placed in Scripture So we may say John baptized before he preached the baptisme of Repentance for his baptizing is put before his preaching of baptisme Mark 1. 4. and that those that he baptized did confesse their sinnes after their baptisme seeing it is mentioned after that it is said that they were baptized Mat. 3. 6. and both of these with a farre greater probability of reason seeing in both there is a narrative of the thing by the Evangelists and in the place in hand there is neither commission given for the work of baptizing nor yet any
I will be their God That seed of Abraham that had possession of the land of Canaan through the gift and by vertue of the promise of God is the seed here taken into covenant to have the Lord for their God This is so plaine that nothing can be plainer to any that read the words But the natural seed of Abraham all the seed of Jacob in their several Tribes according as God set them their bounds inherited the land of Canaan which is called the land of their inheritance and not onely the spiritual seed Regenerate Look into the History of of Scripture who those were that inherited Canaan and you may see who were in this covenant The natural seed were there and not only the spiritual Even those of Abrahams posterity that died not having obtained the promises Heb. 11. 13. that only so journed in Canaan and were never possest of it had title to it It was theirs in reversion though they never came into actual possession My next Argument is drawn from the Seale that is annext in the words immediately following this additional promise ver 9 10 11. And God said unto Abraham thou shalt keep my covenant therfore thou aâ—d thy seed after thee in their generations This is my Covenant which you shall keep between me and you and thy seed after thee every man-childe among you shall be circumcised And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your fore-skin and it shall be a token of the Covenant betwixt me and you They that had the signe and seale of the covenant that had it by divine appointment were a people in Covenant This is so plaine that nothing can be more plaine God doth not enter covenant with one and give the signe and seal to another but all the natural seed of Abraham by Isaac and Jacob had the seal viz. all the males all those that were in a capacity of it it was not limitted to the spiritual seed There had been no place for that distinction of Circumcision in the flesh and Circumcision of the heart if none must be circumcised in flesh but those that are circumcised in heart My third Argument is drawn from the Comment that God himself makes of this covenant in the whole Series of Scripture-history holding it out every where in this way of tenure to Abraham and his natural issue as before Where God himself speaks to the whole body of Israel when they were newly come up out of the land of Egypt he sayes I am the Lord your God Exod. 20 2. Deut. 5. 6. God owned all of that whole people as his all of them being Abrahams natural issue yet all of them were not spiritual and while they were in Egypt God speaks of them all in community as his Let my people go that they may hold a feast unto me in the wildernesse Exod. 5. 1. We see the titles that he gives them Children of the Lord your God an holy People a peculiar People above all Nations Deut. 14. 1 2. That speech of the Lord to Israel Amos 3. 1 2. is very full to our purpose Heare ye the Word of the Lord that he hath spoken against you O children of Israel against the whole family which I brought up from the land of Egypt saying You only have I known of all the families of the earth therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities Every one that descended from Jacob the whole of the family that came out of Egypt were a select people to God in covenant He was according to the termes of that Covenant their God There is not a place where God calls them by the name of his people which are almost endlesse but there we have this confirmed that that people were the Lords by vertue of this grant made to Abraham and his seed In the fourth place I argue from the practice of the people of God making this Covenant of God entred with Abraham and his seed a plea to obtaine mercy from God for all Israel the worst of Israel in their lowest state and condition Deut. 9 26 27. O Lord God destroy not thy people and thine in heritance which thou hast redeemed through thy greatnesse which thou hast brought forth out of Egypt with a mighty hand Remember thy servants Abraham Isaac and Jacob look not unto the stubbornnesse of this people nor to their wickednesse nor to their sinne If this Divinity had been then known Moses might have been sent away with this answer That he spake for dogges and not for children not for Israel but for aliens and strangers to the Common-wealth of Israel But as this and the like requests of the people of God were made in faith so they prevailed with God Moses there urges They are thy people and thine inheritance verse 29. as doth the Church Isa 64. 9. Be not wroth very sore O Lord neither remember iniquity for ever behold see we beseech thee we are all thy people and Moses petition takes as the History shews Exod. 32. 14. And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people yea when God vouchsafes mercy to his people thus in covenant Levit. 26. 42. it is upon this account of the Covenant Then will I remember my Covenant with Jacob and also my Covenant with Isaac and also my covenant with Abraham will I remember and I will remember the land Lev. 26. 42. And appearing for the deliverance of Israel out of their hard and pressing bondage he saith to Moses I am the God of thy Father the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob Exod. 3. 6. and that to stay up his faith in confidence of deliverance To this here in this place delivered one replies Object The Covenant saith he with Abraham and his seed I finde Gen. 17. 7. and the urging of this covenant I deny not Exod. 32. 13. Deut. 9. 27. Lev. 26. 42. Exod. 3. 6. And though I say not that it contained only the promise of Canaan but grant it contained the Promise of Redemption by Christ Luke 1. 17. yet I like not Chamiers saying to call the Promise of Canaan an appendant to the covenant sith the Holy Ghost me thinks speaks otherwise Psalme 105. 8 9. 10 11. I shall say no more but leave it to the Reader whether this be any answer only for his censure of Chamiers calling the promise of the land of Canaan an appendant to this covenant the thing is so clear in the narrative of it Gen. 17. that nothing can be more evident The Covenant is full vers 7. To be a God to Abraham and to his seed and this he might have been had he pleased in the land of Vr of the Caldees or in any land whatsoever where Abrahams seed had been planted But when the covenant is thus made there is added And I will give unto thee and to thy seed after thee the land wherein thou art a stranger
Ye are the children of the Prophets and of the Covenant which God made with your Fathers Acts 3. 20. Doth the Covenant appertaine to them and they stiled the children of the Covenant and yet are they out of Covenant Are they children to whom the Adoption pertaines and yet no children When they have given any faire answer to these Quere's especially the two last we shall conceive some probability of truth in their Glosse on the Apostles words in the meane time we cannot but look upon it in full opposition and contradiction to that which the Apostle expressely delivers For the Text of the Apostle it will be besides my purpose to make any full Comment upon it it will be sufficient to take it out of their hands and vindicate it from that which they would assert from it and to let the Reader know the Apostles scope in that place which is not to make a full Comment on those words Gen. 17. 7. but only to free it from an objection which the unbeleeving Jews might raise from it God hath made a Covenant with them to be their God and the God of their seed If he now cast them off as the Apostle doth affirme the Covenant then is broke and the word of God is of none effect The Apostle denies that this follows and shews that the terme Israel or children of Abraham admits of distinction and produces a Scripture vers 7. where one distinction is implied viz. Gen. 21. 12. In Isaac shall thy seed be called and so a numerous company by Ishmael is excluded who were Abrahams seed after the flesh and only the sons of promise by Isaac are accounted the seed vers 8. that come from Isaac borne by miracle And verse 10 11 12 13. seconds it with others concerning the children of Isaac Esau and Jacob. As then there was a distinction of seed so also now one member he had laid down before viz. Israelites according to the flesh vested in all those priviledges there reckoned up ver 4 5. These they pleaded and the Apostle yeelds them And these men according to the discovery of these times deny them The second member he after falls upon the eternally beloved and chosen of God and largely amplifies In these Abrahams seed may continue though the other be cast off to whom yet God hath continued in successive generations a God in covenant and continued to them the priviledges of being his people though now he was upon the rejection of them And that it may appear that I go not alone I shall give an Exposition of this Text from a more able Penne above the suspition of an Arminian which is here charged namely Gomarus who having in his Analysis on that Chapter spoken to the Jews objection and the Apostles answer makes this inference From whence saith he the Apostles conclusion in which he denies that Gods word concerning the Covenant with Abraham and his seed and the blessing and salvation by the promised Messiah Gal. 3. 17. did fall or become void is manifest though the greatest part of the Jews be shut out from Christ and accursed And this he proves by distinguishing Israelites and the seed of Abraham and thereby shews that the promise of God respective to the efficacy of it is indefinite and therefore particular not universal and so an universal promise cannot rightly from thence be concluded for though the Israelites for a great part perish yet that the promise of God is not thereby made void appeares in that it hath its efficacy in the Elect for as he saith verse 6. All which are of Israel borne according to the flesh are not true Israelites to whom not only the tender of the Covenant of Grace with condition of duty to be performed but the heavenly possession and inheritance only belongs as in ver 7. and Rom 2. 28 29. is more fully shewn Neither because they are the seed of Abraham are they therefore all children or heirs of that blessing and partakers of the same grace and glory as Rom. 4. 12. Gal. 4. 28. For though these things seem contradictory to themselves and to that also which was delivered before where the Apostle affirmes that the unbeleeving Jews are Abrahamites and Israelites not only by reason of their birth after the flesh but also by reason of acceptance of the Covenants and promises yet there is no contradiction For though the Fathers and Adoption and Covenants and Promises belong to all the Israelites yet all are not therefore true children and heirs of salvation For these things which are objected viz. The Jewes great priviledges are attributed by the Apostle to the unbeleeving Jewes by vertue of their outward call because salvation is revealed and offered to them under condition of obedience and that offer sealed with Circumcision from whence all Israelites are promiscuously called children of the covenant as Acts 3. 25. and not by reason of their inward call according to the purpose of Election effectual because salvation is not only outwardly under condition of a lively faith revealed and offered in the word and sealed in the Sacrament but also inwardly and efficaciously the condition that is faith being given them is conferred by the Holy Ghost For this belongs not indifferently to all but only to the genuine Sonnes and true elect Israelites Thus farre Gomarus in which we have these three things 1. This objection wholly sâ—lved 2. The Apostle reconciled to himself And 3. The Doctrine of Covenant-holinesse from the Apostle fully established which when they have well considered with that which was spoke before having the whole current of Scripture against them they will have little list to make this one Scripture their asylum It is farther said Object that when the Pharisees and Sadduces came to Johns Baptisme and were about to plead this Birth-priviledge John beats them off it and takes that plea out of their mouths Think not to say within your selves we have Abraham to our father Matth. 3. 9. that plea could not stand when the men were carnal I answer First when those that were no better than these make the same plea John 8. 33. We be Abrahams seed and were never in bondage to any Christ yeelds it vers 37. I know that ye are Abrahams seed he allows them all that upon this account they can claime And for Pharisees he doth not barely yeeld them to be Church-Members but also Church-Teachers Matth. 23. 2. 2. I say John Baptist doth not deny what Christ yeelds but lets them know that this plea will not serve to avoid wrath while they live in impenitence They may perish notwithstanding this plea and yet Gods Covenant with Abraham hold being able of stones to raise up children unto Abraham to make good what in Covenant he had said He no where sayes that they are not entitled to priviledges of Ordinances and thereby interessed in the prerogatives of Gods visible people What Paul Rom. 9. 4 5. so largely yeelds
dwells in us by Faith so we in Christ Ephes 3. 17. 2. All ingraffing is into that which gives sap and juice to the ingraffed as the stock from the root to the syens Now Christ gives sap to the Elect beleeving not the Church and therefore it is not into the Church but into Christ 3. If saving faith ingraffe the branch into the Church invisible then the Church invisible is the proper object of such Faith but the Church is no such object of Faith but Christ 4. That supposed ingraffing into the invisible Church is either known to the body invisible or unwitting if know then it is no invisible They have no light to discerne an invisible work if unknown then there could not be such a dispute about the new ingraffing of Gentiles nor complaint of breaking off of the Jewes all being done by an invisible translation and so the subject of the question is taken away To dispute whether ingraffing into the Church be into the Church-visible or invisible is to dispute whether the Mount of Olives be a Mountaine of Earth or Aire I shall assoon finde a Mountaine of Aire in Geography as this ingraffing into the invisible Church in Divinity And here I tie not any up to the word which I conceive in reference to any Ecclesiastical or Spiritual station is not elsewhere used in Scripture but to the thing All that accesse to the Church from Gentile Nations which is so large fore-prophesied in the Old Testament and Historically related in the Acts of the Apostles was an ingraffing into the Church visible and this ingraffing here mentioned The visible Church did immediately receive these new branches and so the whole body of Jews and Gentiles professedly beleeving Ephes 2. 15. became one new man The visible Church communicates sap and juice which is the fatnesse of the Olive in Ordinances This is known by the Church visible they were sensible of and full of praises for the new addition to this number Argument 4. Fourthly That ingraffing is meant verse 17. whereby the wilde Olive is co-partaker of the root and fatnesse of the Olive-tree as is asserted there But such is only Election and giving of Faith Ergo. The minor I prove by considering who the root is and what the fatness of the Olive-tree is 1. Negatively the root is not every beleeving parent Answ I suppose I may answer for my self that I never said that every beleeving parent is the root I willingly yeeld that every beleeving parent is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the root but I affirm that every beleeving parent is a root I cannot reach this mystery that Abraham can be a root of all the branches in Israel reaching down to the Apostles times no intermediate rootes intervening no more then Adam can be a natural root of mankinde to this time without intermediate fathers of our flesh deriving us from him as Jacob with Rachel and Leah was a root from whom Israel sprang as branches of an Olive so Judah and Tamar Boaz and Ruth were roots likewise They built up the house of Israel Ruth 4. 11 12. The house of Israel was this Olive-tree these several Metaphors expressing the same thing the building of the house and bringing out the branches are one and the same All builders are roots these are builders therefore roots Abraham may be called the builder laying the first foundation so the root from whence every branch was derived yet every particular Beleever that had issue a builder a root Those Israelites that had no holinesse of inhesion but only of relation that were members of the Church visible not invisible were fathers by way of communication of this holinesse 1 Cor. 10. 1. All our fathers were under the cloud and all passed through the sea It is as necessary to have intermediate fathers between us and Abraham as to have intermediate mothers between us and Eue. Eve may as well be the mother of all living and no other mother between us and her as Abraham can be the father of the Faithful and no intermediate father to derive from him and communicate to us But his proof is very well worth the hearing that every beleeving parent is not the root For then all the branches should be natural the childe of every beleeving Parent is a natural branch from his father But here Apostle makes the Gentiles branches and a wild Olive graffed in besides nature and the Jews only natural branches growing from the root verse 21 24. The Apostle makes them wilde onely at their first ingraffing and so was all Terahs race wilde likewise till that change of Faith wrought in Abrahams call and the covenant of God entered with him We now are natural as they were and cannot be called wilde but in our first Original Positively he sayes the root is no other then Abraham that Abraham onely is a holy root or at most Abraham Isaac and Jacob. If this have any face of Argument it runnes thus If Abraham be the root and not every beleeving Parent then the ingraffing is by Election and Faith that justifies The truth is the sequel is undeniable on the contrary If Abraham be the root then the ingraffing is not into the invisible Church which he strangely calls by Election but onely into the visible This Master Blakwood saw and faine would have maintained that Christ is the root for ingraffing into Christ and not into Abraham makes a member of the Church invisible If the ingraffing be by a saving Faith only to derive saving Graces personally inherent as a fruit of Election from Abraham then it must needs be that we are Elect in Abraham Abraham may say Without me ye can do nothing and he that beleeveth in me out of his belly shall flow forth rivers of living water and we may say The life that we live in the flesh we live by faith in the sonne of Terah This must necessarily follow if Abraham be the root not only respective to a conditional Covenant but to the grace under condition covenanted It had been more safe for our Authour with Master Blackwood though in contradiction to himself to have made Christ the root when these consequences must follow To which he answers If I made Abraham a root as communicating Faith by infusion or impetration mediatory as Christ this would follow But I make Abraham a root as he is called the father of all them that beleeve Rom. 4. 11. Not by begetting Faith in them but as an exemplâ—ry cause of beleeving as I gather from the expression verse 12. That he is a father to them that walk in the steps of our father Abraham which he had yet being uncircumcised A root not by communication but example an ingraffing not to have any thing communicated from the root but to imitate it is such a Catacresis as may well make all Rhetorick ashamed of it and if the Sun ever saw a more notable piece of nonâ—sense I am to seek what sense is A
root is too low in the earth to have its examples followed and syens suck in juice but know not how to imitate And what kinde of root soever any can make it the root mentioned by the Apostle in that Chapter is a root by communication verse 17. If some of the branches be broken off and thou being a wilde Olive-tree wert graffed amongst them and with them partakest of the root and fatnesse of the Olive-tree The root here communicates fatnesse to the branches and the branches receive from the root It is then a communicative root and doth communicate that which makes the branch one with it Abraham is indeed called a father as well as he is called a root but these two are not full Synonima's though in the maine they agree both Metaphors aptly setting forth what the branches as from a root the children as from a father receive namely their title to the Covenant from him and therefore as to Abraham so to all Israel appertained the Covenants and the Adoption Rom. 9. 4 5. And so to all those that are become children and branches with them The title father is yet extended to a greater latitude as he doth impart to his issue as before so he is a patterne and example as even natural parents are likewise according as Rom. 4. 12. it is set forth Argument 5. Fifthly From verse 25. If the breaking off the Jews be by blinding then the ingraffing is by giving Faith but the former is true ver 25. Ergo the latter Answ Here as in the third Argument I grant the conclusion and return the same answer Jewish blindnesse keeps them out of a Church-state and so from all Faith in the Covenant and when the vaile shall be taken away they shall be reinvested in a Church-state and Covenant-condition For proof there is added 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 blinding or hardening is verse 7. opposed to that state which the Election obtained by which ver 8. they had a spirit of slumber eyes that they should not see eares that they should not hear verse 10. Whereby their eyes were darkened that they might not see from which Anti-Arminians gather absolute reprobation Ames animad in Remon Script Synod Art 1. Cap. 16. Hoc ipsum ad reprobationem spectare Apostolus Paulus clarè ostendit Rom. 11. 17. Now according to the rule of opposites Oppositorum opposita sunt attributa If the blinding be the effect of reprobation and the breaking off be by blinding then the ingraffing is by inlightening and that enlightening is according to Election and so is all one with giving of Faith The proposition being If the blinding be the effect of reprobation and the breaking off is by blinding then the ingraffing is by enlightening and that according to Election then the assumption can be no other but that blindnesse is the effect of reprobation and the breaking off is by blinding No one of the Contra-Remonstrants worthy the name of an adversary of Arminians hath taught this doctrine It that which their adversaries indeed charge upon them but that which they unanimously do disclaime I have heard that reprobation is the antecedent of sinne but never that it was the cause and that sinne is a consequent of it but never an effect Reprobation is the Act of God and in case it be the cause of blindnesse then God is the cause of blindnesse so that the Contra-remonstrants have got a sweet Advocate to cast that upon them that none of their adversaries though they have turned every stone to do it could never proue by them And the other member that casting away way is by blinding is little better The Apostle speaks in another manner Blindnesse was their guilt and casting off was their just sentence Because of unbelief they were broken off verse 20. upon this account God God did not spare them as it follows in the next verse The work and the wages the guilt and the punishment are not one Unbelief and breaking off are the work and the wages the guilt and the punishment Breaking off then as not blinding The Apostle layes all at mans doore makes his blindnesse the moving cause according to that of the Prophet Thy destruction is of thy self and God only the severe but just Judge Our Authour layes all upon God Gods reprobation causes blindnesse and their breaking off is by blinding here is no hand but Gods in their destruction And now the blasphemy of the consequence being denied so that blindnesse is no effect of reprobation breaking off being not by blinding what becomes of the rule of opposites here produced Election and reprobation in the work of salvation and damnation do not per omnia quadrare otherwise as Election leads to salvation without any merit of works so Reprobation should lead to destruction without any merit of sinne which Contra-remonstrants unanimously deny though we finde it here affirmed It is further said that from verse 8. 10. of this Chapter Anti-Arminians gather absolute Reprobation and then explaining what this absolute Reprobation is in the words spoken to But though much be spoke of the irrespective decree both between us and Arminians and also among our selves yet I would faine learne what one Anti-Arminian ever made Reprobation absolute in this sense Amesius is quoted but the word absolute is not found in him And Gomarus a man for the irrespective decree as much as any and upon that account entred his dissent in the Synod of Dort where respective to reprobation that was denied and Sublapsarian opinion established yet he peremptorily denies any reprobation absolute in this sense Neither doth God saith he absolutely and barely destinate any man to destruction without subordinate meanes but he destinates him to just destruction that is by and for sinne justly to be executed Analysis Epist ad Rom. cap. 9. p. 60. Neither will he have this decree to effect the sinne that is a just Medium of destruction In the same page he saith God doth not decree to effect sin but to suffer or not to hinder and to governe for his glory Neither doth God effect all that he doth decree but those things which he decreed to effect of those he is the Authour us all the good that is done But the evil which he decreed not to hinder in his creature that he doth not effect because he did not decree to effect them but onely permits and governs them and at last justly according to his decree punishes them And Doctor Prideaux Lect. 1. de absoluto decreto That necessary distinction between the effect and consequent viz. of reprobation loâ—ses not a few knots which many understanding or not duely heeding are brought into fraits by their adversaries The condensation of water that I may use Austins instance is a consequent of the absence of the Sun not an effect The ruine of a house of it self tending to decay necessarily follows upon the want of repaire which the Master might do in
are under the same covenant as was Isaac to whom the promises were made If some of Abrahams children were left out that concerns not us so that we are taken in yet the instance is very weak to prove it As appeares saith he verse 19. concerning Ishmael and Heb. 11. 9. that Ishmael was himself in covenant though not established in covenant as God there and verse 21. promised concerning Isaac not his seed never received appeares not alone by the signe and seale which he received verse 23. which yet is sufficient for God to seale to a blanke is very strange to signe a covenant to a man never in covenant but also from Gal. 4. 30. What saith the Scripture Cast out the bond-woman and her sonne for the sonne of the bond-woman shall not be heir with the sonne of the free-woman A man cast out of covenant was before casting out in covenant Ejection supposes admission unlesse we will give way to our Authors dreame of Ejection by non-admission He was cast out after the time of the solemnity of his admission by circumcision as may be seen Gen 22. For that of Heb. 11. 9. it is a mystery what he will make of it unlesse he will conclude that because Abraham sojourned in the land of Promise that therefore none were in covenant that were not taken into that land so Moses and Aaron will be found out of covenant It is further said As for a visible Church-seed of Abraham that is neither his seed by nature nor by saving faith nor by excellency in whom the Nations of the Earth should be blessed to wit Christ I know none such in Scripture therefore some men have fancied such a kind of Church-seed as it is called I know not how saving faith comes in when a faith of profession will serve the turne The whole of Abrahams seed had circumcision as a seale of the righteousnesse of faith when many of their Parents had no more than a faith of profession Fourthly Were all these things yielded yet the Proposition as is said would not be made good from hence All these we see are made good against his exceptions Let us now see the strength which is reserved for the last push for overthrow of this Proposition The inference is not concerning title or right of infants to the initial seale as if the covenant or promise of it self did give that but the inference is concerning Abrahams duty that therefore he should be the more engaged to circumcise his posterity This should rather have been left to us for the strengthening of our proposition than have made use of it himself for refutation of it It was Abrahams duty to give them according to Gods command the initial Seale in this we are agreed whether it will thence follow that they had right and title to it or were without right let the Reader determine It is further said He was engaged to circumcise onely those that are males and not afore eight dayes and not onely those that were from himself but also all in his house whose children soever they were which apparently shewes that the giving Circumcision was not commensurate to the persons interest in the Covenant but was to be given to persons as well out of the Covenant as in If of Abrahams house and not to all that were in the Covenant to wit Females which doth clearly prove that right to the initiall Seale as it is called of circumcision did not belong to persons by vertue of the covenant but by force of the command If it could be proved that Abraham kept Idolaters in his house professedly worshipping a false god and gave circumcision to them in that faith and way of false worship it would prove that a man might have the seale and not be in covenant but it would not prove that he might be in covenant and be denied the Seale and then infant-Baptisme might be of easier proof Though they were not in covenant though they were not holy yet they might be baptized But I will not yield so much I do not believe that Abraham carried circumcision beyond the line of the covenant and that he had those in his house which were aliens from God seeing I finde that Testimony of the Lord concerning him Gen. 18. 19. For I know him that he will command his children and his houshold after him and they shall keep the way of the Lord to do justice and judgement that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him And that resolution of Joshua That if others would serve the gods that their fathers served that were on the other side the floud or the gods of the Amorites in whose land they dwell yet he and his house would serve the Lord Josh 24. 14 15. As it is a private mans duty to serve the Lord and not Idols so it is the Master of the Families duty to see that the Lord and not Idols be worshipped in his house As I do beleeve that if any of our adversaries had a profest Heathen in his Family he would not keep him there and not chatechize him and that he would not during his profession of Heathenisme baptize him So I beleeve concerning Abraham He catechized all that he took in as Heathens and did not circumcise them in their Heathenisme This some Paedobaptists as is said are forced to confesse when they grant the formal reason of the Jewes being circumcised was the command and the covenant he makes only a motive I wonder what need there is of an Argument to force such a confession The reason I say why Jewes were circumcised and Christians baptized is the command were there a thousand covenants and no institution of a signe or seale such a signe or seale there could have been no circumcision nor no Baptisme The command is the ground and the covenant is the directory to whom application si to be made We say all in covenant are entituled to the Seale for admission but we pre-suppose an institution They will have all Beleevers and all Disciples baptized which they cannot conclude upon their faith and knowledge barely but upon the command to baptize Beleevers and Disciples So that the command is with reference to the covenant with reference to interest in the covenant From these foregoing exceptions a conclusion is drawne that all this doth fully shew that the proof of the connexion between and the initial Seale without a particular command for it is without any weight in it And I conclude that it fully shewes that the proof of the connexion between the covenant and the initial Seale pre-supposing the institution of such a Seale and a general command is of that weight that all are meere frivolous trifles that are brought for exceptions against it Another Scripture holding out the connexion between the covenant and initial seale is Acts 2. 38 39. Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sinnes
shall not enter upon that controversie what there is of the being of a Church under the Papacy The Papacy it self is none of it but onely a botch bred in it and cleaving to it onely this I say That he that shall oppose a Papist under the notion of a Christian shall bear his sinne and that upon the grounds that have been given Though a Papists damnable errors in the faith shut him out from the happinesse of Christians yet such an adversaries persecution renders him guilty of opposing the faith of Christ Jesus And he that follows with injuries a carnal Protestant because of profession of the sincerity of Religion in opposition to Antichristianisme is formally guilty of persecution The hearers resembled to the rocky ground suffer persecution for the Word as doth the good ground that brings forth fruit with patience Mat. 13. 21. But to come home with more cleare satisfaction A people of foully polluted Ordinance standing in opposition to a people of a pure and untainted way are as a people void of Ordinances are as a people without God in comparison The opposition of the purity of his service God accounts as the opposition of his great name though it be by a people that go under that name of his people And therefore though Elijah take so much to heart the pulling down of Altars set up by Jeroboam looking upon them as Gods Altars when it was done by Israel apostatizing and turned to Baal 1 Kings 19. 10. and in opposition to the worship of Baal makes that way of worship at Dan and â—achel a following of God yet we know how the Prophet from the mouth of God did cry out against that Altar which Jeroboam erected and foretold the destruction of it and the slaughter of the Priests that offered upon it 1 Kings 13. 2. and with what honour that act of Josiah is mentioned in accomplishment of this prophecy 2 Kings 23. 15. and the brand that lies upon Jeroboam himself in bringing in that worship of his 2 Kings 15. 9. scarce the like on any man in Scripture the man of sinne onely excepted the high phrases also in which this worship is set out making Priests for the high places and devils 2 Chron. 11. 14 15. with the heighth of guilt to which he rose in casting the Levites out from executing the Priests office Hosea 4. 6. And howsoever God often calls that people of the ten tribes by the name of his people as having Ordinances though miserably polluted yet in opposition to Judah where more pure Ordinances were enjoyed they are said to be without God without a teaching Priest and without the law 2 Chron. 15. 3. And fighting against Judah who could reckon up the particulars of the Ordinances of God in their purity they are charged to fight against the Lord God of their fathers 2 Chron. 13. 12. To come nearer home in an instance If the Turkish power should fall upon a Popish State under the name and notion of Christians they were guilty with Saul of persecuting the Lord Jesus If this Popish State fall upon a reformed Nation they are much more guilty A fouler sinne for a people of God in name and title to persecute his people in truth than for a people strangers to God to persecute a people onely in name and title Scripture prayers against Heathens we may fitly apply in our sufferings under the hands of Papists Pilate might have been guilty of persecution of a Pharisee under the notion of a Jew and yet that Nation was much more guilty in delivering up Christ into the hands of Pilate though Christ had been no greater than the meanest of his Disciples A Papist persecuting a formal carnal Protestant under notion of a man protesting against Idolatrous wayes blasphemes and persecutes that faith which he holds in opposition against those Antichristian tenents This man being thus persecuted persecuting another for the power of godlinesse professing the same truth is equally ye more guilty The very sinne of Cain against his brother Abel 1 John 3. 12. their Religions were both one and the same but Cains was onely in forme and Abels in power The result of the whole is to let us see what it is to oppose a people under any notion of Gods people upon any such account as belonging to Christ A man may have his reward giving to any in the name of a Disciple though he to whom he gives be such as God will never owne for a Disciple and answerably may incurre vengeance in opposition of one under such a name though with those on the rocky ground he be nothing lesse than such in deed and truth Fourthly Abundance of sweet consolations yet flow from this birth-priviledge and covenant-holinesse and that in several streames 1. In regard of Nations 2. In regard of Persons In regard of Nations they have royal transcendency above all others as alone worthy the name of a people Nigh unto God A people of hope Enjoying light when others are darknesse without hope and without God in the world The Psalmist reckons up many and sweet-blessings of a Nation That our sons may be as plants grown up in their youth that our daughters may be as corner-stones polished after the similitude of a palace that our garners may be full affording all manner of store that our sheep may bring forth thousands and ten thousands in our streets that our Oxen may be strong to labour that there be no breaking in nor going out that there be no complaining in our streets Psalme 144. 12 13 14. All these are singular National favours but onely serving to make up a comparative not an absolute blessednesse This one riseth higher and makes it compleat Blessed are the people whose God is the Lord. The glory pertaines to a Nation thus honoured Rom. 9. 4. Of such a people though otherwise mean and despicable as was Israel in the Wildernesse comparative to other Nations it may be said What Nation is there so great who hath God so nigh unto them as the Lord our God is in all things that we call upon him for Deut. 4. 7. No people can so bottome their prayers against adversaries as they who are the people of Gods holinesse This mercy is a birth-mercy to al such persons whose parents with Timothy from one to another have been Beleevers 2 Tim. 1. 5. and while national provocations break not forth which alone with God have separating and deafning power his eare is ready to hear and his hand to help while he sees not iniquity in Jacob nor perversenesse in Israel which I understand of National out-breaches from God which by Balaams counsel presently followed to Israels danger so long God is among them as the shout of a King and there is no sorcery nor divination against them Num. 23. 21 23. A Nation fast to God hath God fast to them The Lord is with you while ye are with him 2 Chron. 15. 2. In
regard of persons for Themselves Posterity For themselves it is much to be able with the Psalmist to say Thou art he that took me out of the wombe Thou didst make me to hope when I was upon my mothers breasts I was cast upon thee from the wombe thou art my God from my mothers belly Psal 22. 9 10. This puts upon confidence in prayer as an argument drawn from long continued acquaintance as there follows Be not farre from me for trouble is neer Ver. 11. Such have timely knowledge of God sucking in somewhat of him while they suck milk from the brests An expression of height setting out this birth-happiness that hath sure more in it then can be applied to sinners of the Gentiles see how the Psalmist yet farther pleads it with God O Lord truely I am thy servant I am thy servant and the son of thy hand-maid Psal 116. 16. an allusion to the law of servants who were the inheritance of the Master in whose house they were Exod. 21. 4. Levit. 25. 16. I am such saith the Psalmist thy servant thy servant with all earnestneâ—â— of affection I am of thine inheritance I am one of those that are thy house-borne-servants my mother was thy hand-maid I have therefore this relation to plead and this he pleads again and again in the same words Psal 86. 16. This great priviledge Isaiah in like manner takes notice of Isa 49. 1. The Lord hath called me from the wombe from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name The Apostle mindes the Ephesians of their former condition and will have them to remember the time past when they were without Christ being aliens from the Common-Wealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise having no hope without God in the world But there never was a time in which men of this birth-priviledge were in that condition these are Gods heritage from the wombe and with Timothy some in greater some in lesse measure from children have the knowledge of the Scriptures if not with John Baptist full of the Holy Ghost from the wombe Luke 1. 15. which yet doubtlesse is the happinesse not of few who are eminent in sanctification whose growth in grace is seen and yet the beginnings not known Howsoever it is with them for personal qualifications yet they are nigh when others are afarre off Ephes 2. 13. at the pools brim waiting the Angels moving of the water John 5. 3. Salvation is of the Jewes saith our Saviour John 4. 22. Saving Ordinances are their inheritance They are happily seated under that joyful sound which is able to save the soul Jam. 1. 21. Salvation is of his house who is the sonne of Abraham Luke 19. 9. As it is full of consolation to Beleevers in respect of themselves so also in reference to their posterity their children are Gods children they being the Lords inheritance their children are his heritage in like manner they bring â—orth children to God and he ownes and challenges their seed as his Ezek 16. 20. An infinite love in God an unspeakable comfort to a perent when the Infant who by corruption of nature is in Satans jawes and in no lesse danger of hell than Moses sometimes was of the water and not so much as sensible of his condition God pleases in this sad state to look upon him and to make it the time of love finding out wayes for his freedome What the Apostle speaks from the Prophet Rom. 10. 10. of Gods care of the Gentiles is certainly true being applied to infants I was found of them that sought me not and made manifest to them that enquired not after me Had we that hopelesse opinion of our children as Papists have of theirs that die without Baptisme what a wretched case were it with David to part with an infant out of the world How could such mourne in any other way than as those that are without hope parting with an infant without any part in Christ and in no better posture towards God than the seed of the sinners of the Gentiles doomed both by the Psalmist and the Prophet Jeremy Psalm 79. 6. Jerem. 10. 25. Pour out thy wrath on the heathen that have not known thee and upon the families that call not upon thy name they might with Rachel weep for their children and refuse to be comforted because for eternity they are not But we finde God more rich in mercy entring covenant with his and their seed Christ himselfe imbracing them in their infancy and taking them into his special love as those that bear his name and though death should prevent their Baptisme whereby they have an actual interest in visible Church-priviledges yet he that hath appointed Ordinances is not tied to them but where he hath entered covenant can save without them Bellarmine confesseth that the desire of Baptisme in one that is in the number of the Catechumoni instructed in the principles of Christ and not baptized doth save though the text John 3. 5. so much urged by that party against the salvation of infants understood with their Comment be in the letter against it why then should not that grace which would shew it selfe in like desires when the person is of capacity qualifie for salvation in like manner Finding this love in God these bowels in Christ we may safely conclude that children have blisse parents have comfort parents and children have their interest in Church-Ordinances and Administrations And let God have the glory FINIS AN ALPHABETICAL Table Relating to the chief Heads handled in this Treatise A Abraham CIrcumcision was not a Seale of Faith peculiar to him pag. 239. Arguments evincing it ibid. All his seed were not in Covenant but his seed by Promise only pag. 298 He was not taken into Covenant as a natural Father but as a natural Father accepting Gods tender pag. 299 His seed is entitled to saving mercies on Gods termes ibid. His houshold-members out of Covenant not circumcised page 425 See Circumcision Root Actions Immanent and transient pag. 132 See Justification Adam Was in Covenant with God pag. 9 His integrity was connatural pag. 103 Stood not in need of a Mediatour p. 91 In what sense imperfect ibid. In case he had stood whether he had been translated out of Paradise into Heaven p. 100 He might have gone quick to Hell if Christ had not been promised p. 102 See Covenant Adoption Adoptive-right to Baptisme questioned p. 454 Angels In Covenant with God p. 7 Needed not a Mediatour p. 91 In what sense their obedience was imperfect ibid. Antiquity For Infant-Baptisme cleared p. 416 Apostasie Total and partial p. 453 Assembly Of Divines vindicated p. 406 Assurance Is to be gathered from the conditions of the Covenant p. 195 See Spirit B. Baptisme SIgnifies not barely dipping but every way of washing It is the door for admission into the Church visible p. 275 Pharisees not denied it seeking but being tendered rejected