an error of the lower size And I am very well contented to sit down and hear his judgment and if it be upon this determined against me I shall say the authority of man is mightily prevalent I have yet seen no title of Scripture nothing of reason onely that which I take to be Scripture-Paradoxes are laid down as Maximes Restraint of Covenant denies any breach of Covenant There followes As for that you adde that then there is no Covenant-breaking I reply 1. quoad essentiam et possibilitatem there is 2. quoad existentiam there is a breaking of mere verbal and erring half Covenants but if you think that sound Covenanting may be utterly broke then you are against the certainty of perseverance Real Covenants may be broke I desire to know whither this essence possibility and existence refers whether to the Covenant or to the breaking of Covenant If it refer to the Covenant as the words seem plainly to imply then here is a new piece of learning that the essence of a thing may be broke and the existence stand firm I have learnt that existencies may be destroyed and essences remain and instance is commonly given in Roses in winter But I have not untill now heard the contrary But if these referre to breaking of Covenant then the meaning is there is a possibility but there shall not be a futureity But this is flatly to gain-say the Scriptures that complain so frequently of actual breach of Covenant Somewhat therefore is granted and somewhat denyed It is granted that there is a breaking of mere verbal and of erring half-Covenants but I am told that if I think that sound Covenanting may be utterly broke then I am against the certainty of perseverance If by sound Covenanting truth of Covenant be meant this may be broke and no Saint apostatize but if integrity of heart and such soul-qualifications as might be desired in Covenanters be understood the truth of a Covenant stands where this is wanting otherwise none but upright honest sincere men can ever make bargains It follows They broke their particular Covenants about reforming Idolatry and such particular sins And these particular Covenants were branches of their grand Covenants and so habemns reum confitentem It is farther said They broke their verbal and equivocal Covenant or promise to God whereby they seemed to accept him on his own terms but did not But it should be remembred that this Covenant they broke was a marriage-Covenant as is frequently testified in Scriptures as Jer. 31.32 where the Lord speaking of the Covenant made with Israel when he brought them out of the Land of Egypt Which my Covenant they brake saith he although I was an husband unto them which is further clear Jer. 3.1 14 20. Hos 2.17 This then was a reall and no equivocal Covenant or else Mr. Baxters similitude on which he puts so much stresse is spoyled And I never knew that verbal Covenants where sincerity of intention for faithful performance was wanting were equivocal Covenants much lesse where a man did not fully understand himself in covenanting All want of integrity is not equivocation Men may promise and not perform men may promise and never mean to perform which I think few unregenerate men directly do and yet not equivocate If a Gentleman shall promise a Tenant a Lease for life provided that he will give him a dogge he brings him one and accordingly expects his Lease the Landlord puts him off in telling him that he indented with him for a dog-star or a dog-fish here is equivocation but had he directly promised and broken faith it had been no equivocation but falsification I have heard of one of quality that often solicited one to serve him after long importunity he got a promise from the man that such a day he would come and serve him he kept his day and came and served a writ upon him This was equivocation but if he had not come at all as the son in the Parable did not work in the Vineyard when he had said he would that had been plain falsification If those were equivocal Covenants and no reality of the being of a Covenant between God and them in them then all the honour that followed upon them and mercies enjoyed were equivocal likewise Then whensoever God calls Israel his people we must understand him his equivocal people when he calls them his portion we must understand it his equivocal portion when he sayes Judah is his inheritance we must understand his equivocal inheritance and Christs word Matth. 8.12 The children of the Kingdom shall be cast out must be interpreted the children of the equivocal Kingdom and Matth. 22.14 Many are equivocally called and Rom. 9.4 the Apostle must be understood To whom pertaineth the equivocal adoption and the equivocal glory These certainly broke Covenant and yet we have no example of Saints apostasie in them When the Jesuits forced Texts of Scripture to find if it had been possible one or two equivocal speeches in our Saviours words as Joh. 7.8 I go not yet up to this feast leaving out Yet that so there might be either an untruth for he did go up or an equivocation as also in those words of his quoted from the Psalmist Joh. 10.34 I have said ye are gods how would they have gloried in case they had learned that Scripture was almost all over equivocal Give them this and the day is theirs in the doctrine of equivocation Mr. Baxter addes Your second absurdity is That then there are no hypocrites and replyes rather Then all unregenerate professors are hypocrites They pretend meerly to real proper covenanting and they do covenant but verbally and equivocally But the great falshood of this I have sufficiently discovered and therefore my Argument which he notably curtails still stands firm It were too tedious to trouble the Reader with all my words and his The third absurdity which I presse Mr. Baxter doth not vouchsafe to name but onely refers to his answer to Mr. T. I shall therefore let it alone not intending to interpose between them Argument 3. vindicated My third Argument to prove That a faith short of justifying may give title to baptisme is To make the visible seal of baptisme which is the priviledge of the Church visible to be of equall latitude with the seal of the Spirit which is peculiar to invisible members is a Paradox To which he answers The seal of the Covenant and the seal of the Spirit not of equall latitude But you take it for granted that we do so which is too easie disputing and I may well take it for granted seeing in the next words he yields it where he sayes We give the seal of Baptisme to all that seem sound Believers and their seed and we say the seal of the sanctifying Spirit is onely theirs that are such believers Their seeming faith works then onely by way of cheat to procure that which is none of their right
on the Sabbath Part. 2. Pag. 176. For further clearing of this point we must consider of the preceptive part of the Moral Law which alone in this place is our business to enquire after 1. As it is epitomized in the Decalogue those ten words as Moses cals them Exod. 34.28 or else us commented upon or more amply delivered in the whole Book of the Law Prophets and Scriptures of the New Testament 2. We must distinguish of the manner how the Law prescribes or commands any thing as duty which is either expresly or Synecdochically either directly or else interpretatively virtually and reductively I very well know that the Law is not in all particulars so explicitely and expresly delivered but that 1. The use and best improvement of Reason is required to know what pro hic nunc is called for at our hands for duty The Law lays down rules in affirmative precepts in an indefinite way which we must bring home by particular application discerning by general Scripture Rules with the help of reason which sometimes is not so easie to be done when it speaks to us in a way of concernment as to present practicall observation 2. That hints of providence are to be observed to know what in present is duty as to the affirmative part of the commandments of God If that man that fell among theeves between Jerusalem and Jericho had sate by the way on the green grass without an appearance of harm or present need of help the Samaritane that passed that way had not offended in case he had taken no more notice then the Priest Levite did But discerning him in that case as he then was the sixt commandment called for that which he then did as a present office of love to his neighbour according to the interpretation of this commandment given by our Saviour Mark 3.4 When the Pharisees watched him whether he would heal the man with the withered hand on the Sabbath day He demands of them Is it lawful to do good on the Sabbath day or to do evill To save life or to destroy It was not their mind that Christ should kill the man onely they would not have had him then to have cur'd him but not to cure when it is in our power according to Christ's interpretation is to kill If diligent observation be not then made the commandment may be soon transgress'd 3. Skill in Sciences and professions is to be improved by men of skill that the commandment may be kept The Samaritane powred Wine and Oyl into the Samaritans wounds knowing that to be of use to supple and refresh them Had he known any other thing more soveraign which might have been had at hand he was to have used it As skill in Medicines is to be used for preservation of mens lives so also skill in the Laws by those that are vers'd in them for the help of their neighbour in exigents concerning his estate and livelihood 4. We must listen to Gods mouth to learn when he shall be pleased at any time further to manifest his mind for the clearing of our way in any of his precepts There was a command concerning the place of publique and solemn worship Deut. 12.5 Vnto the place which the Lord your God shall choose out of all your tribes to put his name there even to his habitation shall ye seek and thither shalt thou come Now they must depend on the mouth of God to observe what place in any of the Tribes he would choose for his habitation When God commands that all instituted worship shall be according to his prescript this is a perfect Rule implicite and virtual tying us to heed the Lord at any time more particularly discovering his will and clearing this duty to us Was not the Law of worship perfect to Abraham unless it explicitely told him that he must sacrifice his Son And if you take your self to be so acute as to set up a new Rule as you are pleased to stile it then you antiquate and abolish the old Rule and singularly gratifie the Antinomian party Two Rules will no more stand together then two Covenants In that you say a new Rule you make the first old Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away Heb. 8.13 You adde moreover doth not the Scripture call Christ our Law-giver and say The Law shall go out of Zion c. Is 2.3 And was not I pray you the old Law as you are pleased to call it his Saint Paul I am sure quotes that which belongs to the preceptive part of the Moral Law and calls it the Law of Christ Gal. 6.2 His Laws were delivered in the wilderness whom the people of Israel there tempted and provoked This is plain for they sinn'd against their Law-giver and from his hands they suffered And who they tempted in the wilderness see from the Apostles hand 1 Cor. 10.9 And as to your Scripture the words quoted are exegetically set down in those that follow them The Law shall go out of Zion and the word of the Lord out of Jerusalem Which is no more but that the name of the Lord which was then known in Judah shal be great from the rising of the sun to the going down thereof You further demand And is he not the anointed King of the Church and therefore hath legislative power For answer I desire to know what King the Church had when the old Law was before Christ came in the flesh the Kingdome was one the same the King one and the same then and now as I take it Many shall come from the East West shall sit down with Abrah Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven The Gentiles comming in at the Gospel-call are under the same King and in the same Kingdome And if all this were granted you for which you here plead it is no more then a change in some positive circumstantial Rites and what is this to our question That our righteousnesse which is imperfect according to the old Rule can be perfect according to the new when old and new in that which is naturally Moral is ever one and the same When the Law required heart-service and love with the whole heart upon spiritual ends and motives upon which account all fell short in their obedience and performance shall we say that Christ did dispense with any of this so the Rule being lower our obedience now may answer Others that make Moses and Christ two distinct Law-givers and agents for God in holding out distinct precepts give the pre-eminence to Christ and account his Law to be of more eminent perfection You on the contrary seem to make the Laws of Christ to stoop far beneath those of Moses 2. Exception 2. For Justification of your accusation of the Moral Law of imperfection you say I think the Moral Law taken either for the Law given to Adam or written in tables of stone is not a
is the note of the Church and gives his censure that that is a more laxe and ambiguous terme then the former And seeing that I am not able to satisfie him with any notions that I can reach I shall endeavour at present to help his sight in pointing out to him men in Covenant with God that when he lookes upon the men and the character given of God himself of them he may if he please guesse at the Covenant it self Scripture-characters of men in Covenant Do's Mr. Baxter know what Covenant that was that the Captains of tribes Elders Officers with all the men of Israel little ones wives strangers from the hewer of wood to the drawer of water entred into Deut. 29. and what kind of men they were that avouched the Lord to be their God and whom God avouched to be his peculiar people Deut. 26.17 18. Do's he know who those be that throughout the Old testament-Testament-Scriptures the Lord calls his people his inheritance his portion his sonnes and daughters And who those kinsmen of Paul according to the flesh were to whom pertained the Adoption the glory and the Covenants Rom. 9.4 Do's he know who those were in New Testament-times that were converted by thousands myriads of thousands then he knows who God lookes upon as his in Covenant and to whom Covenant priviledges appertain And doubtlesse those hearers that Isaiah describes and from him all the Evangelists of fat hearts dimme eyes heavy eares whilest God had not removed his Candlestick were included They were in Covenrnt with God If it be said that these are said to be in Covenant equivocally I answer 1. I dare not charge the constant language of the Spirit of God in Scripture with equivocation 2. I am sure that they upon that account really enjoyed the priviledges under dispute were called by the name of a Church Acts 7.38 and had that elogy a people near unto the Lord. And to say that these were in Covenant with a quatenus aliquo modo sic aliquo modo non when God testifies that they avouch him to be their God I think is too great boldnesse That those that rose no higher then these mentioned have no right to the great blessings of the Covenant as Christ pardon Justification Adoption glory upon that account that they come not up to the faith called for in Covenant I freely with Mr. Baxter grant Those are too high Favours for Covenant breakers yet I say as all Israel did de facto enjoy so all of the like faith in foro Dei have their right of his free bounty to all those Church-priviledges that serve to fit for glory He is pleased to say Mr. Bl. had done better if with that moderate reverend godly man Mr. Stephen Marshall he had distinguished between those two questions who are Christians or Church-members and whom we are to judg such and use as such and to bring in the latter rank onely I know not where Mr. Marshall thus distinguishes If he speaks of members of the Church invisible it is not at all to our purpose we are not speaking to them And if he mean members of the Church visible I know no use of such distinction we can well enough know such members otherwise they were not visible Let Mr Baxter look upon those notes of a Church-member which he mentions where he intended a confutation of my 31. chap. in case I had not spoken to his mind and the same things with him and then see whether such cannot be known I think those of the Worcestershire combination may know who those be whom they take into Communion In a parenthesis he is pleased to tell me that herein I joyn with Mr. Tombs To which I reply what animosity soever he hath against me I shall not leave any one truth to shunne agreement with him when Mr. Baxter himself affirms that Mr. Tombs and he are agreed in that particular that he there mentions pag. 92. though most Divines as he there saies are against them both sure I may boldly joyn with him when most Divines are for us He tells me Those that professe to fear God and love him we must love and honour as men that do fear and love him yet in different degrees as the signs of their graces are more or lesse probable In some common confessing Christians we see but small probability yet dare we not exclude them from the Church nor the number of true believers as long as there is any probability Others that are more judicious zealous diligent and upright of life we have far stronger probability of and therefore love and honour them much more All this is true in case we were to enquire after the fear of God in its power or the image of God renewed in sincerity But when it is applyed to visible Church-membership I know not what to make of it Must I more or lesse honour a man accordingly as he appears more or lesse visibly in Congregations After a long discourse about the Covenant and faith dogmatical which I shall have occasion further to touch upon he concludes thus The words which Mr. Bl. questioneth I confesse are mine against Dr. Ward The Author vindicated from singularity and I did not think in so grosse an opinion Dr. Ward would have found any second to undertake that cause How this passage fell from his penne may well be to every intelligent Reader matter of admiration not that he chargeth an opinion from which he dissents to be so notably grosse which is not very unusual but that a man of such multiplicity of reading should think that Dr. Ward in this opinion would not have found a second when if he hath perused our approved Authors about the question especially since it came to a punctuall just debate he may soon see that he hath almost every one to appear for him if this which he mentions be his opinion unlesse perhaps he hath been so held in reading the Fathers and other Writers for the first thirteen or fourteen hundred years in which few will I think come out and vye with him that he hath not regarded what hath been said this hundred and fifty years in this corner of the world when his book came first out I received a letter from as learned an hand as any I have to converse withall noting this as a singular tenent and when upon occasion I have mentioned it that Mr. Baxter holds that no faith that is short of that which justifies gives title to Baptisme it sounded so strange that I could not gain credit to the report of it He that hath spent so much pains in that Scripture 1 Cor. 7.14 cannot be ignorant of that usual distinction of Covenant holinesse and holinesse habituall and personall The former according to Divines and Mr. Baxter himself is an holinesse of relation to God and separation for him which was found in all the Nation of the Jews and now is in all professed believers and their
conditions of Gods Covenant or promise rather than of ours for our own promise is the first part of them and our performance of that promise but a secondary part Is not here a convincing reason Our own promise is the first part our performance the second part Ergo they are more properly the conditions of Gods Covenant then of ours I deny not the thing but wonder at the reason but speed it as it will I thence collect that promises and performances are distinct things and that is enough for me Our promising to God I am sure is our covenanting this then differs from Covenant-keeping or performance and is not to be confounded with it There followes For 2. Gods Covenant is a free gift of Christ and life to the World on condition of their acceptance This our Divines against the Papists and the doctrine of merit have fully proved That God doth freely give Christ to those that accept him I freely yield and that our Divines have fully proved it against Papists I confesse and that it must be asserted against Antinomians but what Divines have proved that Gods Covenant is his free gift of Christ and life to the world on condition that they will accept I know not It is the first time I think that ever I heard it This then is a full definition of a Covenant which I yet think comes short of it and if it be a truth it well serves my purpose many a Covenant is made and conditions never performed After his expression of himself about the modification of our acceptance of Christ by faith he addes Our acceptance or consent is our Covenanting and our Faith So that our Covenanting with Christ and our Faith is the same thing that is our accepting an offered Saviour on his terms or a consent that he be ours and we his on his termes And who knowes not that this Faith or Covenanting or consent is the condition by us to be performed that we may have right to Christ and life offered I do know the latter and therefore upon that account as upon divers others I deny the former I know that justifying faith is the condition by us to be performed and I as well know that it is not our covenanting but our making good our Covenant That Faith by which the Romans stood in Covenant with God was such a faith that the whole visible Church of the Gentiles had and the Jewes both Rom. 11. But this was not a justifying faith but short of it To make justifying faith and Covenanting Synonyma is an error I am confident of what size I leave to others to determine If they were both one Scripture would promiscuously speak of them but we find that it still distinguisheth them and gives us clearly to understand that the greatest part of Covenanters are short of Faith that is saving and justifying Ordinances in which the Covenant of grace is dispensed and which speak all those that entertain them to be in Covenant are granted of God to men short of justifying faith as their proper inheritance Rom. 3.1 Deut. 33.4 Titles implying a Covenant-state as I have abundantly shewed are given of God to them that are short of this faith viz. Christian Disciple Saint Believer Called Brethren God imposes Covenant-conditions makes promise of Covenant-blessings upon these imposed conditions to those that are short of Faith that justifieth These therefore are in Covenant Though I hear neither of Scripture nor argument nor any thing else but bare words in two or three Paradoxes for my conviction yet by a similitude I shall understand that our own Covenant-act is the primary condition of Gods Covenant In his Aphorismes he sayes It may seem strange but now a similitude shall render it familiar If a King saith he will offer his Son in marriage to a condemned woman and a beggar on condition that she will but have him that is consent and so covenant and marry him here her covenanting consenting or marrying of him is the performance of the condition on her part for obtaining her first right in him and his but for the continuance of her right is further requisite If we had had either Scripture or argument to have given us a first light then a Simile might have served for somewhat and come in as a garnish but being served in alone it may speak the Authors thoughts but never settle any in the truth And I shall leave it to the Reader to judge whether the edge of it may not easily be turned against himself and whether when it is brought home it will not prove destructive to his own opinion I must therefore tell the Reader that our relation to Christ whilest on earth is more frequently expressed in Scriptures by espousals then marriages as we may see through the book of Canticles and Hos 2.14 2 Cor. 11.2 and that there is ordinarily a relation of men to God preceding faith that justifies Now Mr. Baxter is not so ill read in the Civill Law but that he knowes that there are sponsalia de futuro and sponsalia de praesenti Those God is pleased to take for his people that are his onely in the first relation and to honour them with priviledges to bring them on to the second Whereas he sayes Our Covenant principally is to receive nor is it onely de futuro but de praesenti I may answer first If our Covenant be to receive then it doth precede this receiving and secondly if he mean that it is our duty to receive Christ in present and not to delay the least moment of time I shall readily yield but in case he say that present profession and engagement to receive gives a people no title to any Covenant-relation before Christ be actually and savingly received I may well ask what we are to say to the whole body of Old testament-Testament-Scriptures were not all Israel in Covenant were they not all visibly the people of the Lord are they not owned of God for such when they were at the worst and lowest How many thousands of Scripture-Texts may be brought to evince it Had they called themselves so and valued themselves as such on this account to be a people nigh unto the Lord and no people so nigh it might have been said to be their own vapour but when God gives them that testimony of honour and hath never done with it sure he would have us to believe it There is a first right therefore before that right in the similitude contended for and that is no other but a right of Covenant to be without God and without hope is the case of a meer heathen uncircumcised in the flesh Eph. 2.11 The state of visible relation is one step nearer than aliens from the Common-wealth of Israel do enjoy and yet too short of a state of salvation Mr. Baxter concludes By this time I leave it to the Reader to judge who it is that introduceth confusion about the Covenant and whether it be
and the bruised reed broke There have not been a few hungry sad souls that I have known that have born the terror of the Lord separate themselves for this reason But it will be replyed by those that give this warning that they mean not these they are not at all intended in their speech these they would tender and with all endeared affection of love encourage as those that have most need and are most fit to receive food for their strength But all of this helps not when this Proposition is laid down That no man in whom justifying faith and a new life by the Spirit is not wrought may dare otherwise then on the peril of his soul to draw nigh hither will not such a soul necessarily assume A new life through the Spirit is not wrought in my soul I am conscious to my self that I am carnal whatsoever endeavours I have used to believe yet how far am I from faith in strength and truth I find my self all over doubts and fears and plunged in unbelief And though I have made it my businesse to keep off from sin yet how far am I from a true change by repentance I find my heart hard obdurate even as an adamant yea the poor deserted soul will take to it self the state of Cain the condition of Judas If there be any other high in wickednesse they have matched yea they have exceeded them They are to put it to the question whether they are in grace or no whether they have a new life wrought or as yet are short of it This they must either determine in the affirmative that they are in grace at least there are those hopeful signs in present that they cannot but conclude it and then they safely may come upon sight of this they may with cheerfulnesse make their addresse or else they must carrie it in the negative all that is yet wrought is not life is not grace is not faith in its power is not repentance in truth as they can do no other that walk in darknesse and see no light that say God hath forgotten to be gracious and so they must keep off from the Ordinance and debar themselves from those cordials those apples those flagons that are there tendered and sick of love yet dare not intermeddle with the Lords tokens that are tendered to them or in the third place suspend and so sit down in doubtful fears whether they have grace or no and then that of the Apostle Rom. 14.23 He that doubteth is damned if he eat because he eateth not of faith for whatsoever is not of faith is sin will soon come into their thoughts and so all that are short of fulnesse of assurance must in dreadful horror separate themselves Secondly This Sacrament in that it is a Sacrament hath the name and nature of a seal as we see in the text and God willing shall be shewn a visible seal intrusted in the hands of man and therefore must needs be of a more different latitude and large extent then that seal which God reserves in his own keeping the seal of the Spirit The Lord knowes them that are his 2 Tim. 2.19 But man is to seek who are the Lords God knowes how to put to his seal to his own man who hath not this knowledg must needs be here allowed a greater latitude either men entrusted with it must have the knowledge of God as to this particular who they are in whom a new life is and grace wrought or else they must be allowed a greater latitude to take in men that make profession of God and as members in Church-Communion may be edified by it I know this argument is carried another way and that we conclude the contrary upon a double account 1. These seales of God outward and inward should answer each to other Those that have the outward seal they are to have the inward those that take into their hand the seal of the Sacrament should have the impresse of the Spirit on their soules To which I answer That the writing of the Word with Inke and Paper in the Bible and the writing in the heart by the Spirit should answer each the other that is every Christian should make it his businesse to hide that Word in his heart that by the Ministery sounds in his ears and yet Christians are not warned not to take a Bible into their hands till the impresse of that which is there is put on their hearts The Word is delivered in a greater latitude and so also must the Sacrament 2. Some say this Sacrament seales Gospel-promises onely they therefore that can claime the promise and have their interest in it can claime the seal otherwise the seal is put to a blank there is a seal where there is no Covenant-promise 1. I answer this argument thus carried speaks sadly to the hearts of all dispensers of the Sacraments they must see there is a Covenant-promise or else they must not dare to put to a seal To put any mans seal to a blank paper where nothing is written is a vain use of that seal It stands there as a cypher Now to put Gods seal to a blank where nothing is written doubtlesse is as vain and an high taking of Gods Name in vain according to these the Covenant is written in non-legible and invisible characters This inward work is that white stone with a new name written which no man knoweth save he that receives it Revel 2.17 and so the dispensers too often against convictions of conscience allwayes at hap-hazard must deliver them any thing written or not written whether a blank or filled up they cannot tells but are all at uncertainties 2. I answer as is the seal so is the Covenant both of them external and one must answer to the other Now these in question as hath been demonstrated at large are in Covenant An outward Covenant is by few questioned and so the seal is put to no blank but given to one interested in Covenant It seals the grace of the Covenant and mercy tendred in the promise on Gods termes and propositions So that the different latitude of the seal of the Spirit and of the seal of the Sacrament do conclude that men of no more then visible Church-interest may partake of it 3. The Church de facto hath injoyed it in this latitude not to instance in some ages following the times of the Apostles in which the Pastors called all their people to daily Sacraments and the use of it in Austins time when wicked ones in the Church were so numerous that they durst not deal with Church-censures but look into the Scripture though we are kept much in the dark concerning their practice little mention being made of the administration after the institution yet we know that this Sacrament was the priviledge of visible members then in being and it is clear enough how far many even then were short of sincerity If that of 1 Cor. 11. be
beares no relation to the cleansing of sin but washing with water and bread and wine no relation to the setting forth of the Lords death remembrance of him or life by him but the breaking eating and drinking Thirdly That which being removed nulls a Sacrament that is necessary to the being of Sacraments This is plain Nothing can destroy being but the want of that which is necessary to being But the removal or taking away of the use nulls and destroyes the bring of Sacraments Let not the foreskin be cut off nor the Lamb rosted and eaten the water not be applyed to the person nor bread and wine eaten and drunken there is no Sacrament therefore the use of Sacraments gives being to them Fourthly All benefit of and in the thing signified consists in the application therefore the Sacraments for their being use and benefit consist in their application likewise The consequence is grounded upon the analogy that is between the sign and the thing signified The antecedent is clear the blood of Christ the sufferings of Christ not brought home to the soul and interest obtained by application doth not benefit or profit Fifthly That which enters the definition of a Sacrament is of the being of it This none can deny But the use or office of a Sacrament enters the definition of it Ergo. The Apostle defines it to be a sign and seal which plainly speaks not the nature but the use of Sacramental elements Here is no Conroversie in this thing among parties save with the Church of Rome neither is there any with them save in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper They confesse that the being of Baptisme doth so consist in the use that without it it is no Sacrament Onely the Lords Supper for Transubstantiations sake though never used is still a Sacrament when they reserve it in a box carry it about for pomp hold it up for worship it is still a Sacrament The body of Christ is still there and if a mouse falls upon it the mouse receives a Sacrament knawes upon Christs flesh But when worms breed in it as they may by their own confession they are hard put to it They cannot breed upon accidents the shape the colour of bread cannot give being to worms And to say that the substance which remains there which is the flesh of Christ breeds them is no low blasphemy The generation of one is the corruption of another and God will not suffer his holy One to see corruption I remember an answer to this great difficulty when I first read Philosophy out of Conimbricenses Physicks That learned Society did determine that God by miracle did create matter and laid it by the consecrate host and that did putrifie and not the consecrated bread and so Worms were generated They sure believe that it is an easie thing to put God upon miracles Against this permanency of this Sacrament out of the use of it we say First If the use of this be instituted The Sacrament of the Lords Supper equally transient with Baptisme as well as the use of Baptisme and given in command then this Sacrament consists in the use as well as Baptisme This cannot be denyed for the institution and Comman of Christ must equally lead us in both But in the Lords Supper as well as in Baptisme the use is within the institution and given in Command by Christ Therefore this Sacrament of the Lords Supper consists in the use as well as that of Baptisme Whereas Bellarmine replyes to this that Christ commanded the bread to be eaten but not presently after consecration therefore to delay eating is not against the institution To this we answer 1. Neither did he command water as soon as set apart for Baptisme to be applyed to the party to be baptized yet till it be applyed the party is not baptized water is no Sacrament and so the bread and wine in that interim still applyed still wants the nature of a Sacrament 2. He did command it then to be eaten by Bellarmin's confession though not instantly to be eaten and he gave the like command of the cup as of the bread yea with more exactnesse a note of universality added Drink ye all of it yet their Laity have a Sacrament and never drink of it 3. That which the Apostles did that Christ enjoyned as Amesius well replyes they understood Christs intimation as well as the most nimble-headed Jesuites but they did not reserve it but did eat it Secondly If there be no footsteps in all the holy Scriptures of any other way of dealing with the elements of the Lords Supper then the eating and drinking of them then according to the institution they must be eaten and drunken But there is no footstep there of any other dealing with the Sacrament then eating and drinking Therefore according to the institution it is not to be reserved but to be eaten and drunk Indeed Chamier quotes Croquet replying that some of the Ancient have said that Judas took one part of the Sacrament and reserved the other for scorn but this may be well reckoned among others of like nature in their Legends And I would advise all those that believe it if they be ambitious to be disciples of Judas to follow it Thirdly The promise in this Sacrament is not to be divided from the precept by any that will expect a blessing But where the promise is This is my body this is my blood in the New Testament in the institution There is a precept Take eat Drinke ye all of this therefore they must eat and drink that will have benefit in the promise It would little I suppose please the Reader to hear Bellarmine Suarez and other Jesuits to exempt this Sacrament from the common nature of Sacraments and to make it permanent when the other as they speak are transeunt Thomas Aquinas Part 3. Quaest 73. art 1. resp ad 3. makes this difference between the Eucharist and other Sacraments This Sacrament is perfected saith he in the consecration of the matter other Sacraments are perfected in the application of the matter to the person to be sanctified Suarez disp 42. Sect. 4. quotes it with approbation and Scotus in quanto Dist 8. quaest 1. as he is quoted by Amesius All the Sacraments except the Eucharist consist in their use so that in them the Sacrament and the receiving of the Sacrament is the same He that pleases may read Bellar. Arguments lib. 4. de Eucharistia Cap. 2 3 4. Suarez in the place named with Whitakers Amesius Vorstius in 3. Tom. Bellar. Thes 9. pag. 406. Chamier against them both with others of that party de Eucharistia lib. 7. cap. 4 c. I shall desire to take up the Reader with that which I judge more necessary Gerard in his Common places Cap. 4. de Sacramentis makes it his businesse to find out the Genus in the definition of a Sacrament in which the general form of Sacraments he sayes is to be
Annotat Bellar. de Scriptor and though Pamelius and Bellarmine suppose that the Author was ancient and of the same time with Cyprian because the title speaks it as if it had been directed to Cornelius who was Bishop of Rome in Cyprian's time yet B. Usher observes that in old Manuscripts B. Vsher in the Catalogue of Authours cited in his Answer to the Jesuites Challenge Arnoldus Carnotensis Abbas Bonevallis who was many hundred years after Cyprian viz. in the year 1160. is mentioned as the Authour Hilarie about 100 years after Cyprian Quà m autem in eo per Sacramentum communicate carnis sanguinis simus c. Hilar. de Trin. lib. 8. speaks of the Sacrament of Christs body and blood Ambrose about the same time with Hilary or but a little after hath written six Books De Sacramentis and which is observable he treateth therein onely of Baptisme Accedit verbum ad elementum fit Sacramentum etiam ipsum tanquam visibile verbum Aug. in Joh. Tract 80. and the Lords Supper Austine writing not much after Ambrose by whom he came to the knowledge of the truth often useth the word and that in the most strict acception The Word saith he being added to the Element there is made a Sacrament which is also it self as it were a visible Word And again Quid sunt aliud quaeque corporalia Sacramenta nisi quaedam quasi verba visibâ—lia Contra Faust l. 19. c. 16. What else are all corporal Sacraments but as it were certain visible words And having said that Christ did institute Sacraments in number very few for observation very easie Christus Sacramentis numero paucissimis observatione facillimis significatione praestantissimis societatem novi populi colligavit sicut est Baptâ—smus et Communicatio corporis et sanguinis ipsius etsi quid aliud in Scripturis Canonicis commendatur Epist ad Jan. 118. cap. 1. and for signification most excellent he expresly saith that these Sacraments are Baptisme and the Lords Supper adding indeed and if there be any other commended in the Canonical Scriptures But that there is any other Sacrament besides Baptisme and the Lords Supper commended in the Scripture Hoc tempore posteaquam resurrectione Domini nostri Jesu Christi manifestissimum indicâ—um libertatis nostrae illuxit nec corum quidem signorum quae jam intelligimus operatione gravi onerati sumus sed quaedam pauca pro multis eadamque factu facillima et intellectu augustissima et observatione castissima ipse Dominus et Apostolica tradidit discipl na sicuti est Baptismi Sacramentum et Celebratio corporis et sanguinis Domini De doct Christ. l. 3. c. 9. he doth not affirm Yea in another place having used the like words concerning the Sacraments of the New Testaments he mentioneth these two onely leaving no suspition at all as if there were any other Besides when he affirmeth the Sacraments to be as it were visible words as in the places before cited he plainly enough excludeth those Popish Sacraments Penance and Matrimony Satis est ad Sacramenti naturam quatenus signum est sensibile ut alâ—quo sensu percipiatur nec debet excludi sensus audiendi c. Bellar. de Sacr. in gen l. 1. c. 14. Bellarmine would have it suffice if the outward sign be any way sensible though it be perceived onely by the sense of Hearing But as Chamier well observes Austine needed not to have mollified his speeches with as it were if he had not taken the word visible properly and as distinct from that which is perceived by any other sense then that of Seeing Si de Sacramentis secundum aliquas conditiones quas haeretici requirunt loqueremur neque nos diceremus esse tam multa quam ponimus Greg. de Valent. apud Cham. tom 4. lib. 4. cap. 6. Gregorius de Valentia as Chamier cites him granteth That Sacraments being considered in respect of some conditions which Protestants whom he as their manner is termeth Hereticks require so there are not so many as otherwise they hold there are So though Bellarmine in the place above cited will not admit Sacraments to be seals Fatemur Sacramenta novae Legis esse signa seu sigilla quodammodo promissionis divinae And again Sacramenta vetera fuerunt velut sigilla quaedam quibus est obsignata et firmata apud homines Divina promissio Greg. de Valent. apud Cham. tom 4. lib. 2. cap. 9. yet this other Jesuite Valentia is not so strait-lac'd but doth acknowledge that they are after a sort seales of Gods promise whereby it is confirmed unto us So the Councel of Trents Catechisme doth make this one reason why Sacraments were ordained Altera verò causa est quod animus noster haud facilè commovetur ad ea quae nobis promittuntur credenda Quemadmodum igitur in Veteri Testamento Deus fecerat ut magni alicujus promissi constantiam sâ—gnis testificaretur Ita etiam in novâ lege Christus Salvator noster cum nobis peccatorum veniam coelestem gratiam Spiritus Sancti communicationem pollicitus est quaedam signa oculis et sensibus subjecta instituit quibus quasi pignoribus obligatum haberemus atque ita fidelem in promissis futurum dubitare nunquam possemus Catech. Trid. de Sacram. viz. because we are slow to believe and therefore Sacraments are not onely signes but as pledges to assure us of those things which are promised unto us And as the Apostle calls Circumcision a seal Rom. 4.11 So Abrabaneel a famous late Rabbine among the Jews in his Commentary on Esay 52.13 c. speaking of Circumcision doth call it chotham berith that is the seal of the Covenant It is true he speaks of it onely as a seal whereby Abraham did assure himself unto God to be his whereas the Apostle speakes of it as a seal whereby God did confirm his Covenant unto Abraham But the Covenant being mutual wherein God doth engage himself unto man and man doth ingage himself unto God the Sacraments as seales of the Covenant serve to confirm both the one and the other ingagement Now the Sacraments thus having respect unto the Covenant and standing in a subserviency unto it this reverend Author Mr. Blake having by Divine assistance composed and published a Treatise of the Covenant which deservedly hath found good acceptance by the good hand of his God still upon him doth now offer to publick view a Treatise of the Sacraments which I presume will be no lesse accepted The Authours former Works do sufficiently speak his worth he needs not my Elogie neither can it adde any thing unto him Yet having been more then ordinarily acquainted with him above 20 years though more then half of this time the great distance whereat Providence hath set us hath much hindered the improvement of our acquaintance this I cannot but say that I alwaies held him one whose judgment in any matter of
that conquered should take away his part and he that was conquered should leave his with the Priest according to Varro was called a Sacrament They collected therefore that the Sacrament signifies our depositing of our selves as I may say with God or our yielding up of our selves to him As they that strive for mastery did leave for a pledge a summe of money so we leave our selves as a pledge with God But this use of the word Sacrament I suppose is more obscure and the analogy not so clear and therefore Divines in ancient times would scarce borrow this word from thence so few understanding the allusion or the application of it Secondly The oath which anciently Souldiers took when they listed themselves to the Emperour for faith and obedience was called by the name of Sacrament Therefore others judge it very probable that these Ordinances are called Sacraments in that in them every Christian Souldier doth tye himself to his Captain Christ Jesus This is far more probable for three Reasons 1. The use of the word in this sense was more common and received and therefore more apt to give occasion to the like use of it in these Sacred Ordinances 2. The application is more clear seeing our Sacraments as God willing shall be shewn are engagements 3. Heathen Writers make such allusion d Deo oportebat nos jurare milites Caesar It behoves us saith one of them to swear to God and Souldiers to Caesar And the Fathers used the word Sacrament with this allusion as Vossius out of Tertullian quotes two passages e Vocati sumus ad militiam Dei vivi jam tunc cum in Sacramenti verba respondimus We are at that instant called to the warfare of the true God when we answer in the words of the Sacrament and elsewhere f Ut Sacramento benedictionis exauctoretur nunquam in castra Ecclesiae reversuâ—us That he may be disbanded and shut out from the blessings of the Sacraments never more to return into the tents of the Church To which may be added a third quoted by Bellarmine The Devil imitates the very things of Divine Sacraments in idol-Mysteries he washes some and signes other of his Souldiers in their foreheads And Austine in his Preface to the 181 Sermon De tempore saith g Notum est dilectissimi quod beneficia temporalia a temporalibus Dominis accepturi prius Sacramentis militaribus obligantur Dominis suis fidem se servaturos profitentur Quanto magis ergo aeterno Regi militaturi aeterna praemia percepturi debent Sacramentis coelestibus oligari fidem per quam ei placituri sunt publicè profiteri It is known Beloved that the Souldiers being to receive temporal rewards from their temporal Masters do first tye themselves with military Sacraments and professe faithful service to their Lords How much more should those that war under an Eternal King and are to receive rewards from him bind themselves with heavenly Sacraments and publickly professe that faith whereby they may please him In this Rivet rests satisfied as appears in his Cathol Orthodox Tract 3. Quaest 2. h Vox Latina Sacramentum deducta est à verbo Sacrare à Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis Latinis à militia desumpta fuit in qua juramentum quo milites duci obstringebantur vocabatur Sacramentum Refert Claris Ed. Leigh Crit. Sac. pag. 270. The Latine word Sacrament saith he is borrowed from the verb Sacrare and by Ecclesiastical Latine Writers is taken from proceedings in war in which the Oath wherewith Souldiers were tyed to their Captain was called a Sacrament Thirdly There being so great affinity between Mystery among the Greeks and Sacrament among the Latines Mystery signifying that which is secret of any kind whether sacred or prophane of which there are many instances given and Sacrament signifying that which is made sacred or consecrate words seldome long holding their signification Mystery began to be taken more strictly for holy secrets and so Sacraments for Sacred secrets afterwards the word Mystery and with it Sacrament began to be used for sacred things held forth in outward signes The vision of the seven Candlesticks setting out seven Churches are called Mysteries Revel 1.20 The conjunction in marriage of man and wife setting forth the union between Christ and his Church is called a Mystery Ephes 5.32 And when Divines found no word in Scripture to set out these Ordinances of the Old and New Testament Circumcision Passeover Baptisme the Lords Supper they gave them the name of Sacraments further restraining their signification to holy secrets held forth in outward signes and sealing spiritual grace to us This Vossius takes to be most satisfactory Though I professe my self scarce satisfied with the reason that he gives Thes 16. and comparing it with what he hath said in his 6th Thesis it may seem to speak as much in favour of the second opinion which he rejects as this third which he followes The reason that he assignes as taking with him is i Latinos in variis Sacramenti notionibus secutos esse Graecos qui ipsi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nunc rem arcanam appellant nunc rem arcanam sacram nunc rem arcanam symbolicam nunc denique rem arcanam sacram symbolicam gratiae spiritualis significativam That the Latine Fathers in the use of the word Sacrament had much respect to the use of the Greek word Mystery And so in several places by him produced they had respect unto the military use of it in like manner Here it is not for me to interpose I suppose none is able to speak any more then conjecture In which I leave the Reader to use his own liberty assenting to Vossius that those are weak arguments that are drawn from the use of the word either in the first or second acceptation and concluding that they are as weak that are drawn from the use of it according to the third opinion There must be a better bottom for an argument then the bare denotation of the word especially when it is of humane not of Divine imposition And the use of the word being thus taken up by man the acceptation or use of it upon that account hath been very various and ambiguous insomuch that when Writers speak of Sacraments the Reader is often at a stand what they mean by them The various acceptation of the word Sometimes every thing that is secret is called by the name of Sacrament therefore the vulgar Latine which appears to be more ancient than their number of seven Sacraments doth not onely render the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sacramentum in Eph. 5.32 upon which they take advantage to bring in marriage into the number but frequently elsewhere when nothing towards a Sacrament by their own confession is intended Having made known to us the Sacrament of his will Eph. 1.9 By revelation he made known to me the Sacrament Eph. 3.3
by his people on earth Concerning which I shall deliver my thoughts in several propositions God had his Church and people in that juncture of time First That God had his Church and People with a way of worship pleasing to and accepted by himself in those times This evidently appears out of the History Abell Henoch Noah Melchizedeck who without all doubt lived in those times and Job as it is commonly received spake so much and the Apostles Comment or observation of those times Heb. 11. makes it more evident Abell offered to God a more excellent gift then Cain and obtained witnesse that he was righteous Heb. 11.4 They both made Visible profession of the same God and both sacrificed to God and God put a difference between their gifts An embleme of the Church in all succeeding ages which is that great house where are vessels of honour and dishonour By faith Henoch was translated that he should not see death and was not found because God had translated him for before his translation he had this testimony that he pleased God Heb. 11.5 and as he affirms that it was by faith that be was thus translated so he proves it he had this testimony that he pleased God But without faith it is impossiblc to please him vers 6. Noah became heir of the righteousnesse by faith vers 7. God had his worship then as appears by Abells and Noahs sacrifice and in Melchizedeks function Gen. 14.18 Who was a Priest of the most high God taken from among men and ordained for men in things appertaining to God that he might both offer gifts and sacrifices Heb. 5.1 The Woman had all that time her seed and the Serpent his who kept up their mutuall enmity as Cain and Abell Noah and the men of the world Lot and the men of Sodom do give witness God had a people of Covenant-holiness those Sons of God that saw thc daughters of men that they were fair and took of them wives of all which they chose Gen. 6.1 He had a people truly holy Lot had that Epithete of just 2 Pet. 2.7 the name of a righteous man Noah had that witness of God that he saw him righteous Gen. 7.1 and of Abel the Apostle saitb that his works were righteous Secondly Scripture makes no mention of any Sacraments of Sacramental signs in that â—ime We read not of any Sacrament appointed of God for these times nor of any Divine Ordinance or sign that comes up to the nature of a Sacrament Those that may be instanced in with most colour are 1. That of sacrifice both before and after the floud and that of the Rain-bow immediately upon the floud That of sacrifice comes more near up to the nature of a Sacrament then that of the Bowe But how both come short of the nature of a Sacrament in the sense generally received and now to be spoken to I shall God willing in a more fit place make known Thirdly Sacraments in substance of the same naâ—ure with the Covenant If there were any Sacraments in those dayes appointed of God for his people in Covenant they must be of the same nature as to the substance of them and thing signified by them with those under the Law and now in the dayes of the Gospel There was one common salvation ours and theirs one and the same Saviour theirs and ours we and they were under the same promises Their Sacraments then must seal these promises Noah was an heir of righteousness of faith These supposed Sacraments could then signe and seal no other thing then that righteousness Fourthly Though we do not rest upon that argument à non dici ad non esse Scripture silence a most probable argument that in those times there was no Sacrament because we read of no Sacarments in those dayes to conclude that there was none then appointed or in use yet we may conclude that it is an high presumption in any in this last age of the world to undertake to assert any Sacraments in those times This were indeed contrary to that which the Apostle warns to presume above that which was written 1 Cor. 4.6 Where Scripture is silent how dare we speak Scripture silence affords an argument of far greater probability for the negative that in those times there was no Sacrament in use then all the imaginary conceits which men can invent or find For the affirmative that there were Sacraments then appointed The old Rabbines had their traditions concerning Gods transactions with his people in that age Weemse in his Divine exercitations Exer. 16. pag. 61. tells us that the Hebrews say that before the Law was written God gave to Moses seven Precepts which he delivered by tradition to his posterity after him These they call the traditions of their fathers which he there reckons up but not any one concerning Sacraments It is then sure a vain labour for us at such a distance to have any thoughts of finding them out Many Jesuites bestirre their wits to conclude Sacraments in those times To save labour of further search for that which is of no greater necessity the Reader may find much of what they have said in Chamier de Sacramentis in genere lib. 1. cap. 8. which Chapter he entitles De Sacramentis in lege naturae Suavez will by all means conclude that there was then some Sacrament for the remedy of Original sin grounding himself on this which he puts into his margin Pag. 40. Colume 2. b Divinae providentiae est omni aetati providere That Divine providence is to take care of all ages taking it fot granted that providence is defective if a standing Sacrament in any age of the Church be wanting and that there is no way in Divine providence to save an infant from Original sin but the actual application of a Sacramental sign Election cannot obtain it nor Regeneration nor Justification by the Spirit and blood of Christ effect it without a Sacrament to make application of it The Jesuit might know and if Divines on our part might be heard they would make known that Sacraments are not the remedy against Original sin but Christ and the righteousness of faith in Christ which is the thing signified and sealed in the Sacrament and the people of God enjoying means in those times to attaine this righteousness Heb. 11.7 they were not without a remedy Himself ingenuously confesses there is nothing in Scripture respective to those times nor in tradition of any such Sacramental remedy nor do any of the Fathers as he saith mention it before Austin And Austin as he also acknowledges speaks of it doubtingly what he speaks by way of conjecture is not consistent as he observes with his own doctrine elsewhere In which the modesty of that Father is farre to be preferred before the Jesuites boldness in it who concludes there was such a Sacramental remedy though not instituted of God but left to the Parents liberty
a body that darkens the place neer to it There are a third sort of signes of a middle nature that have their resemblance of the thing signified but in that indeterminate confused manner that they may rather be said to be fit to signifie that whereof they are signes then that of themselves without further declaration added they do signifie And such are the signes in Sacraments as Thomas Aquinas observes part 3. quaest 60. artic 6. and after him Bellarmine lib. 1. de Sacramentis in genere and Chamier gives his assent to both lib. 1. de Sacramentis in genere Cap. 11. Water hath a faculty to wash as also to refresh and cool when water is set apart for Baptisme though there be a fitnesse in it to signifie washing yet there must be a word to explain that it is to signifie washing and with it the thing that is cleansed 4. Ritual Fourthly They are not barely substantial signes but rituall also The outward elements do not barely signifie but the instituted actions likewise are significant In Circumcision the foreskin alone was not a sign but the cutting of it off in the way appointed of God seemes the chief in signification In the Passeover there is not onely a lamb but rosting eating c. all which are significant In Baptisme there is not onely water but the application of the person to the water in dipping or the water to the person by infusion or sprinkling The word in Scripture use comprizes any washing and therefore in Baptisme it is of it self indifferent In the Lords Supper there is not onely bread and wine but the bread is broke the bread and cup delivered receiving eating and drinking Some indeed question whether the breaking of the bread be any Sacramental rite or at all of the integrality of the Sacrament but all confesse that in case it be within an institution it is then necessary About the beginning of the reformation some that stood for the ejection of Ceremonies pleaded for sitting at the Lords Supper as an instituted Sacramental rite signifying our coheireship with Christ But others that in after times did manage the same cause saw that mistake and therefore urged not the necessity of sitting upon that account but onely did except against kneeling either as Idolatrous or carrying too great an appearance of it Fifthly They are distinguishing and differencing signes separating a people that receive them 5. Distinguâ—shing from all others that are not interessed in them so they have the nature of badges or cognizances Calvin justly rejects those that make the Sacraments no more but bare testimonies of our profession or distinguishing marks That as a Roman was known by his gown from a Grecian in his cloke and in Rome the several orders had their distinctions The Senatour was distinguished from the Knight by his Purple and the Knight from one of the Commonalty by his ring as with us a Knight of the Garter is distinguished by his blue Ribband and a Knight of the Bath by the red yet they cannot be denyed but that they have this distinguishing use By these Sacramental signes the people of God are known from others which is herein plain in that they are signes of the Covenant and by an usual metonomy called by the name of the Covenant Gen. 17.20 Act. 7.8 And therefore distinguished those that received them from all that are out of Covenant So Circumcision distinguished a Jew from all others A man in uncircumcision was an heathen Circumcision in the flesh did denominate a Jew outwardly as Circumcision of the heart which is that to which Circumcision in the letter did engage did denominate a man a Jew inwardly That which Circumcision was in this respect Baptisme is As soon as any joyned himself to Abrahams family and afterwards to the seed of Abraham in Covenant he was to be circumcised Gen. 17.13 Exod. 12.48 None were to be as one born in the land but a circumcised man As soon as any joyned himself to the body and society of Christians he was baptized so was Christs Commission Disciple all Nations baptizing them No sooner was Paul the Eunuch the Jaylour Lydia yea Simon Magus made disciples but they were forthwith baptized The Passeover as well as Circumcision the Lords Supper as well as Baptisme are distinguishing signes But these find men before-hand distinguished The preceding Sacraments whereby men are initiated and first enrolled are more properly distinguishing Sixthly They are congregating uniting and closing signes 6. Congregating this may seem contradictory to the former which makes them distinguishing and differencing To unite and difference are evidently contrary but these well enough agree the contradiction being not ad idem They are not the same that they unite and difference They distinguish men in Covenant from strangers and they unite men in Covenant as one among themselves A Souldiers Colours difference him from all other companies and unite him to those of that body into which he is received As Philosophers say of heat that it doth congregare homogenea and dissipare heterogenea gather together those things that are of a like and separate those that are of a different quality so it is with Sacraments This the Apostle takes for granted 1 Cor. 10.16 17 18 19 20 21. His business there is to take Christians off from joyning with heathens in their Idol-sacrifices because such joyning makes them one body with those Idolaters Which is clear in the 19 20 21. v. What say I then that the Idol is any thing or that which is offered in sacrifice to Idols is any thing but I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to Devlls and not to God and I would not that ye should have fellowship with Devils ye cannot drink of the Cup of the Lord and of the Cup of Devils ye cannot he partakers of the Lords Table and of the table of Devils And this he had also argued against Chap. 8. Vers 10. And he proves that this makes them one Idolatrous body with Gentiles in their sacrifices to Devls by way of an analogy with Christian and Jewish worship Because joyning in the Lords Supper to partake of one bread makes men one body Christian and partaking with Jewes after the flesh eating of their sacrifices made partakers of the Altar of the Jewes and one body Jewish vers 17 18. therefore joyning with heathens in their worship makes one body heathenish A text which some weakly enough have brought against mixt communions to prove that none must joyn with a bad man in a Christian Sacrament when it onely serves to prove that Christians may not joyn with Idolaters in the Devils Sacraments They difference us from all those that want and joyne us unto all those that enjoy these badges of a Christian profession 7. Engaging Seventhly They are engaging signes to answer the profession that we make the company or family to which we relate The name that we bear and
into four heads 1. That as to the cutting off the foreskin and the smart suffered in it it was no injustice in Masters to compell them seeing they were their Money 2. That he best approves of their opinion That hold that the Law of circumcising of Proselytes was on that condition that they were willing to be circumcised 3. That Masters ought to make it their businesse to perswade them but not against heart to circumcise them 4. If that any think that a necessity lay upon Masters to circumcise all servants it is safest to be of Cajetans mind to deny it to be any note of profession of the Jewish Religion Secondly It is objected on the other hand that some in Covenant were denyed Circumcision as 1. Infants before the 8th day But that is unworthy of any answer A stated day for it is not any denyall of it 2. Females were not to be circumcised seeing the institution is onely for the males To which three things may be answered 1. For those that make use of this objection they have authors of their own namely Walafridus Strabo de rebus Ecclesiasticis as he is cited by à Lapide on Genes 17. affirming that they were circumcised 2. The reason of their exclusion from any actuall participation was their incapacity of it And thirdly they were circumcised virtually and so reputed of that number as appeares in that they were admitted to the Passeover when the law was expresse no uncircumcised person must eat of it Exod. 12.48 And Samson was charged that he took a wife of the uncircumcised Philistines Judg. 14.3 So that I say a Covenanting people of God and they onely are entitled to the right of Sacraments when they are given to a people out of Covenant a seal is put to a blank which must needs be an horrid prophanation of the seales of the Covenant of God And when they are denied to those in Covenant as not their right they are injured from whom they are thus detayned SECT II. FOr further explanation of this point several Propositions must be laid down Explicatory Propositions Proposition 1. First A Covenant properly so called is entred between God and his people God enters a Covenant exactly and properly so called with his people A Covenant in the true nature of it passeth between God and man I took this for granted in the introduction into the Treatise of the Covenant of God entered with mankind where in its proper place it might have been handled supposing that there had been none that had denyed it But since that time I have seen my mistake and among the many questions that have been moved and agitated about the Covenant it is questioned whether there be any such thing as a Covenant entered between God and any of the sons of men upon earth Commands and promises are confest but a Covenant is disputed The way to make it good is to prove from Scripture the name and the thing when these are proved all is clear The word Covenant proved The word we find in places above number Deut. 29.12 They stood that they might enter into Covenant with the Lord God God is often put in mind by his people of his Covenant Psal 74.20 and he promises Levit. 26.42 to remember his Covenant These are then such transactions between God and his people that are called by the name of a Covenant when this cannot be dâ—nyed the impropriety of the word is objected that the word of command given of God out of Soveraignty and the word of promise given out of mercy they are called by the name of a Covenant when strictly so called they are as is objected no Covenant at all But to avoyd this the thing it self may be as easily proved as the word The thâ—ng it self proved and when we have nomen and nominis rationem then we have a Covenant not aequivocally but truly so called And here I may deal liberally with any adversary and undertake to make proof not onely of all the essentials of a Covenant but the usual adjuncts not onely all that makes up the nature but all accessories usually added to the solemnity of Covenants For the essentials of a Covenant or real properties they are as Mr. Burges saith A mutual consent and stipulation on both sides In the essentialls of it Parties consent and mutual engagement is all that is required to the being of a Covenant when two parties agree and either of them both have their conditions to make good there is a Covenant or bargaine see it exemplified in several instances given Treatise of the Covenant Pag. 3. All of these we find in that one place Deut. 26.17 18 19. in the Covenant that God enters with his people Thou hast avouched the Lord this day to be thy God and to walk in his wayes and to keep his Statutes and his Commandements and his Judgements and to hearken to his voyce And the Lord hath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar people as he hath promised thee and that thou shouldest keep all his Commandements And to make thee high above all Nations which he hath made in praise and in name and in honour and that thou maiest be an holy people unto the Lord thy God as he hath spoken There are the Covenanters God and his people There is consent on both parties Thou hast avouched the Lord hath avouched And there is a stipulation on both sides On Gods part to make them high above all Nations which he hath made in praise and in name and in honour On the peoples part to keep all his Commandements to be an holy people There are Covenant-mercies from God to his people unto which of grace he engages himself and there are Covenant-duties unto which man stands engaged Psal 103.17 18. But the mercie of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him and his righteousness unto childrens children to such as keep his Covenant and to those that remember his Commandements Let none say that this was a legal Covenant in which man had his conditions but is freed from all in the Covenant Evangelical Not to mention what I have elsewhere said Mr. Ball Treatise of the Covenant Pag. 102 103 104. Mr. Burges Vindiciae legis Pag. 224 225. have abundantly manifested the contrary and most amply of all others that I have read Mr. Cobbet in his Vindication Pag. 60 to Pag. 70. where he delivers this conclusion that the body of the Jewish Church was under the Covenant of grace making it good with twelve arguments and answering as many objections Gods engagements in Gospel-times none deny mans restipulation is all the question And this is as clear in New Testament-times as it was in the dayes of the Law that of Christ fully holds it out Joh. 8.51 If any man keep my sayings he shall never see death Christs engagement there is to keep from death and upon these termes that man keep
unbeliefe to the working of it for regeneration so we that hold that infants are confederate with their Parents do conclude likewise that they put no obstacle or barre to their admission to the sign or seal As there was no further qualification required in an infant for title to Circumcision then to be the son of an Israelite or one by Circumcision joyned to Israel so there was no barre by reason of uncleannesse or want of previous purification mentioned either in the command given to Abraham Gen. 17. or in the Law given by Moses Levit. 12. There is mention made of the uncleannesse of the Mother that hath born a man child Levit. 12.1 2 3. she was to continue in the blood of her purifying thirty three dayes and to touch no hallowed thing nor come into the Sactuary untill the dayes of her purifying be fulfilled but nothing said of the uncleanness of the child but on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin was to be circumcised without mention either of uncleanness or purification Those that can find no barre in the child tendred to Baptisme but seek for one in the Parent to withhold it from this initiating Ordinance may here see that when the Parent was personally polluted the child was clean when the Parent might touch no hollowed thing the child was yet to be circumcised And moral uncleannesse in the Parent can have no more influence on the child to indispose for this priviledge then legal when according to themselves Original sin though transfused by the Parent into the child is no barre In vain do they make the Parents actual sins an obstacle which is terminated in the Parent as defiling the person but transmitting no blot to posterity It is a most un-Scriptural way in those that in their judgement are for Paedo baptisme to inhibite the tender of infants upon pretence of either their Parents sin or their want of Congregational membership And here that supposed great argument to debarre the infants of ignorant and scandalous persons from Baptisme may have an easie answer Such Parents if they were now to be Baptized ought not to be Baptized Ergo they cannot challenge it for their children Baptisme belongs primarily to the Parent The consequence is here manifestly false seeing such Parents have unquestionably a fundamental first right both to Baptisme and the Lords Supper in their respective order by virtue of their profession of the worship of God in Christ as their God in opposition to all false gods and their profession of the wayes of Christianity in opposition to all other wayes though their ignorance and scandal do prove a barre to their present admission to either and having this right and being to be Baptized their children with them are enrighted and children putting in no barre may be actually admitted Priviledges in Church and Common-Wealth are ex traduce and so are not crimes In this I have delivered my self Treatise of the Covenant chap. 46. as also in my Birth-priviledge making good this position by several arguments That the children of all that by profession are Christian are by virtue f Covenant-interest to be received into the Church by Baptisme Enlarging my self in several particular instances in such whose seed some would debarre which yet according to Scripture rules we ought to receive Examining Mr. Firmins grounds to the contrary in his serious question stated Mr. Firmins appendix as to the latitude of infant-Baptisme examined And answering his arguments he hath been pleased in one day to read and undertake to refute what I have spoke He must therefore give his Reader leave from his own mouth to believe that it is a very hasty birth and what need there is that he should yet lick it over the work it self will speak I little expected I confesse so unfair dealing from a man of his candour he might easily have seen that all that I speak to him in this thing there is by way of Corollarie or inference drawn from that which by Scripture-testimony and arguments in several foregoing Chapters I had made good Which as it appears from his own hand when his refutation came out he had never read and therefore by his own acknowledgement hath taken my conclusion into consideration having never seen the premises and so must judge according to his own reason onely having never had any sight of mine Before I come to give answer to his exceptions against that which this Position affirmes I must clear my selfe from some imputations of his touching my dealing with him The Author cleared from some imputations I observe sometimes saith he you dresse my argument in such a fashion that I cannot know it to be mine but disclaime it then you find fault To give the Reader here an account Mr. Firmin had framed this argument against the power of mediate Parents to conferre Baptisme on posterity If that promise doth give this power to predecessours then though there were none to educate this child for the ignorant and prophane Parents will not but teach them how to breaks Covenant predecssours cannot they are dead and are not yet we must seal to the child Having explained my self to avoid mistake I first answer that Mr. Firmin himself here concludes such a childs interest In case he can be brought to break Covenant he is interessed in the priviledges of the Covenant to which he sayes nothing at all but either in haste or prudence passeth it by and dealing with Mr. Caudrey speaks fully to confirm the strength of it Interest in the Covenant of the Gospel he saith Pag. 4. gives first right to Baptisme This child hath this interest otherwise he can be in no capacity to break Covenant he hath therefore this first right and let Mr. F. see how he can deny an infant the second I add in the second place let him make it up into a formal argument and then it runs thus That child whose immediate Parents will not bring it up to the power of Godliness hath no right to Baptisme Here his exception lyes and therefore he demands Where have I mentioned the power of Godlinesse as a requisite in him who claimes Baptisme but to bring up a child in it is harder matter To which I reply 1. That here is a strange question seeing we were not speaking to any prerequisite for Baptisme but after education which was his exception 2. Though he mentions not education in the power of godlinesse in words yet in case his meaning be not so his argument answers it self For the child of such a parent that he mentions shall infallibly so farre as man can judge have education in a away of Christianity so farre as to be of the Society of professed Christians under the dispensation of those Ordinances that are able to save the soul and are called by the Apostle the power of God to salvation Rom. 1.16 He further addes Sometimes your answer is a bare laying down your own judgement with a
similitude added for illustration quoting pag. 441. He addes we call for Scripture and reason Similia ad pompam non ad pugnam This that he relates unto was thus occasioned In his serious Question stated pag. 8. he saith If the predecessour may by this promise give right to Baptisme without the immediate parent then I pray tell us how farre we may go for this predecessour how many generations where hath Gods Word limitted Ministers you may go to this predecessour and no further After that I had replied that I knew but few that say the predecessour gives right without the immediate parent but all concurre in a joynt way to communicate a Covenant interest I there for further satisfaction of his Question demand in titles of honour and inheritance of Lands which men claim by descent from their Ancestors where is it that they will stay adding that it will soon be answered that they stay when they can go no higher to find out any other predecessor vested in such honour or inheritance and then I bring it home by applicatian of Scripture instances full to our purpose Some can make no claime at all from parents they are the first of their house in honour or inheritance and this was the case of Abraham he had no interest in Covenant from Terah such was the case of the primitive converts and such is the case of the Indians that now by a gracious providence are converted by the English Some can go no further then their immediate parents they were the first in honour or that gained an inheritance to their house This was the case of Isaac and those children called by the Apostle holy 1 Cor. 7.14 and will be the case of the children of Indian converts Others can rise to the third or fourth generation others can go as high as the conquest some can claime beyond the conquest by Deeds without date so it is with Christians they may go as high as Ancestors have been in Christianity I here demand whether there be not reason in this parallel seeing Christian priviledges as I have proved at large and he never denyed are descendable from parent to child as are honours and inheritances and whether Scripture be wanting in that answer I had proved at large pag. 436. that mediate parents give this right and I appeal now to the Reader whether that question of his Where we may stay hath not a sufficient answer both from Scripture and reason so that he might have spared his call for it I tell Mr. F. that his first argument brought for the exclusion of infants of ignorant and scaudalous persons from Baptisme managed in the way that he doth was Mr. Blackwoods argument before him to debarre all Infants from Baptisme putting his own Medium into Syllogisticall forme against him with equall force concluding against all Infant Baptisme which he saies Sir is no clever way of disputation pag. 53. Then I am to learn how to dispute cleverly if I may not deal by retortion against a man with his own weapon did not Christ dispute in a clever way with the Pharisees when they charged him to cast out devills by Beelzebub answering them By whom then do your children cast them out Matth. 12.27 He answeres for himself that he never saw any thing of Mr. Blackwoods and I never had it in my thoughts to charge him with borrowing from him but onely to shew him that either his arguments might have an answer or else he must deny Baptisme to all Infants which is against both his own judgement and practice He tells me that Mr. Johnson hath answered the argument before me and I in his words though he saies it may be I saw him not which to me is strange that we should so hit in one I having seen no more of Mr. Johnson then he hath done of Mr. Blackwood but it is worth the observing how he goes about to avoid it as turned against himself For he knew well that I brought it not as an argument ad rem for he saies I have answered it but ad hominem His argument is this pag. 18. of his Serious question Such persons as de jure ought and de facto are excluded by godly Ministers from the Lords Supper ought also to be excluded from their childrens Baptisme But such persons as the question mentions de jure ought and de facto are excluded from the Lords Supper Ergo. The Major he proves thus If Baptisme doth seal to the same Covenant which the Lords Supper doth and doth signifie and seal as great blessings and priviledges as the Lords Supper doth then those who are excluded from the Lords Supper ought also to be excluded from their childrens Baptisme But the antecedent is true Ergo the consequent is true This in Mr. Blackwoods behalfe I thus urge against him If Baptisme doth seal to the same Covenant which the Lords Supper doth and doth signifie and seal as great blessings and priviledges as the Lords Supper doth then those that are excluded from the Lords Supper ought also to be excluded from Baptisme But all Infants are excluded from the Lords Supper eo nomine because they are Infants and therefore they are to be excluded from Baptisme Further adding when Mr. Firmin hath given a fair and a full answer to this Syllogisme he may easily fit it to his own to give like satisfaction All his answer is My argument is not hurt at all though the parent may be suspended for a time what is this to the suspension of three parts of a Church six or ten yeares together and never proceed further And I say what is this to the purpose Though parents be suspended all their daies whether justly or injuriously root and branch are not therefore under suspension Words of mine pag. 426 424. he challenges Infants of parents that are nomine tenus Christians have right to Baptisme if they professe the worship of the true God though nothing more of a Christian be in them In which how much my words are curtailed for haste I leave to the Reader by comparing to find out For answer He speakes first by way of concession I make no question but many such nominal ones a Minister may baptize and their children though they have not truth of grace in them and goes on But I perceive your scope is to spread the Word very large and that directly opposite to my question If they will say they are Christians bear the Name of Christ own his worship though it be but from the custome of the Nation others do so and so do they though their course and frame of conversation be like the infidels or worse yet they are Christians nomine tenus hence we must baptize if they have but fides no matter for observation The great fault is it seemes that I presume to go opposite to his question which I must ingenuously acknowledge but seeing I am allowed to baptize both parent and child where
have challenged thousands of others But they feared that he onely pretended conversion upon a design to advance his way of persecution Let Mr. Cobbet from New England in this particular be heard who laies down this conclusion That the Church in dispensing an enjoyned initiatory seal of the Covenant of grace looketh into visibility of interest in the Covenant to guide her in the application thereof nor is the saving interest of the persons her rule by which she is to proceed There we find in the affirmative what that is that must lead viz. visibility of interest in the Covenant and in the negative what must not lead and that is saving interest in the Covenant And visibility of interest is certainly theirs who professe Christ engage for Christ and avouch themselves to be for him unlesse we will utterly confound Covenant entring and Covenant keeping which Scripture so carefully distinguishes I know Mr. Firmin in his reply to Mr. Caudry speaking of Scandalous persons Mr. F. appendix as to the admission of men of years examined pag. 4. saith According to our Congregational principles that which gives a man the first right to a Sacrament viz. his interest in the Covenant of the Gospel this man hath not for he doth visibly declare to the Churches that he hath no interest in the Covenant That interest in the Covenant of the Gospell gives a man the first right to a Sacrament we willingly imbrace but that censure of scandalous persons that they visibly declare to the Churches that they have no interest in the Covenant we must reject as evidently contrary to Scripture principles Israel of whom Moses gave that testimony that the Lord had not given them an heart to perceive and eyes to see or eares to hear speaking of the generality of them had some that might have been judged scandalous yet they all of them even then entred Covenant with God Captaines of their tribes Elders Officers even all the men of Israel from the hewer of wood to the drawer of water Deut. 29.10 11. Those that God owns as his people in Covenant and calls by the name of his people I shall take to have interest in the Covenant though thousands say the contrary But God ownes these as his people respective to Covenant interest they that did steal murder commit adultery sweare falsely burne incense to other gods and walk after other gods all men would judge to be scandalous yet such come and stand before the Lord in his house and professe themselves to be his people in Covenant and whether or no God doth not so esteem them let his own mouth speak Jer. 7.12 Chap. 6.26 Chap. 8.11 The Vineyard of the Lord consists of a people in visible Covenant yet with these we find not a few scandals and scandalous ones as Isay 5. is manifest see Hos 4.6 12. My people are destroyed for lack of knowledg my people aske counsel at their stockes and their staffe declareth unto them for the spirit of whoredome hath caused them to erre and they have gone a whoring from under their God Shall we say they were not Gods people or shall we say that these were no scandals to put all out of question the Apostle tells us Rom. 9.2 3. that interest in the Covenant pertaines to all Israel after the flesh neither is it any otherwise in Gospel times 1 Cor. 5.11 If any man that is called a brother be a fornicator or Covetous or an Idolater or a rayler or a drunkard or an extortioner c. he that is called a brother is visibly in Covenant but such a one we see may be scandalous The seven Golden Candlesticks are the seven Churches amidst which Christ walkes and whether there were not scandals among these read the Epistles to them If visible interest in Covenant give a first right then these undoubtedly may claime it their first right according to the forementioned principle is undoubted and for actuall admission as well as the first right to the Sacrament of initiation let the same Mr. Cobbet speak John Baptist did and lawfully might baptize those multitudes albeit in the general he knew that many yea most of them would prove false and frothy quoting Matth. 3.5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12. and afterward Albeit we may think in the general that to be sure in all visible Churches there will be some vessels of dishonour sometimes yet Ministers which are the Churches as well as Christs servants are not therefore to refuse to dispense Church ordinances since they are in the face of the Church such utensills as the Lord may have and hath need of Hence the Apostles which are extraordinary persons knew the guile of persons secret from the Church witnesse that act against Ananias and Sapphira Acts 5.1 c. yet in administring the Church seal of Baptisme they refused not Ananias and Sapphira no nor Simon Magnus Acts 8. Nor thousands of other of the Jewes amongst whom how many proved false Acts 2.41 and 4.1 2 3 4. compared 21.20 21 22 23 24 28 30 31 36. and 22.20 22 and 23.12 13. witnesse So that we see Scripture gives precedents if we judge them safe to follow of a very facile admission of those that professe and manifest their willingnesse to engage in Christian waies Mr. Firmin saies If a bare profession of faith in Christ be sufficicient to make a member of a Church then no person can be justly excommunicated out of a Church for the vilest sinnes or heresies provided he doth but hold this profession of his faith The consequence is cleere the person is the same now which he was when you took him into the Church To this I have answered pag. 449. The consequence is cleerly erroneous for he made a profession of his faith and not of his sin To this Mr. Firmin replyes Then it seemes the man must professe his sin with his own mouth as his faith though Mr. Blake knowes he is a ranter c. The members of the Church witnesse it yet because the mans own mouth doth not professe it you admit him I desire to know where witnesses were called in for this purpose to speake what they had to say against such and such a mans admission to Baptisme as now by an instrument affixt on the door of the publique place of meeting men are called to except in case they have any thing to speak against Ministers ordination Had Paul and Silas nothing against the Jaylour at Philippi who was so serviceable to those in power that he thrust them into the inward prison and made their feet fast in the stockes Acts 16.24 And wheras our author saies elsewhere that there was a legal work on his conscience so there is many a time on mariners in a sea storm which a calme will suddenly quiet Can he imagine that the lives of all the people even the Publicanes and harlots that John baptized Matth. 21.31 Luke 7.29 compared were so inoffensive that none could say
the one hand as it puts upon profession on the other And in case any such thing be though the Covenant is perfidiously broke yet as I conceive not totally cast off as long as any open profession is continued What shall we say of those that take their sons and daughters to give them to Moloch this can be no low crime and an high departure from the true God yet these bring forth children unto God and they are his children that they thus sacrifice Ezek. 16.20 21. So also Psal 106.35 c. Israel was mingled among the Heathen and learned their works and they served their Idols which were a snare to them yea they sacrificed their sons and daughters unto Devils and shed innocent blood even the blood of their sons and daughters Yet this as appears casts them not out of Covenant God notwithstanding remembred with them his Covenant ver 45. This was therefore doubtlesse but a partial apostasie taking in the worship of Idols they did not totally cast off the worship of God God was not totally cast off in Judah neither did cast off Judah Ahaz was of the worst of Kings and yet his posterity was reckoned among the people of the Lord. Had the Jews then been as severe disputants against a Covenant-state as are risen up now the Church of God had wanted an Hezekiah he had never lived much lesse wrought so happy a Reformation in the Church of God Propos 2 2. Those that are look'd upon by men as in Covenant with God and so ordinarily judged as the people of Israel were by the name that they bear their abode in the Church and profession that they make and so accordingly styled they are truly and really in Covenant A man may know a man to appertain to such or such a person because he sees him in his family hears him call him Master sees him sometimes at least in his work and knowes him to have the repute of his servant Though to know him to be a faithful servant requires more diligence of enquiry and a stricter scrutiny So a man may be as easily known to appertain to Jesus Christ The same Characters make him known For all that is required to being in Covenant is visible open evident but sincerity of heart in covenanting is invisible and secret And therefore the Jew outwardly Rom. 2.28 is called by the Vulgar Vatablus Tremelius Arias Montanus and Castalio Judaeus in manifesto by Calvin Judaeus in aperto by Beza Judaeus in propatulo the Jew inwardly Judaeus in abscondito or occulto Their Church or Covenant-station giving them those great advantages after mentioned was open and manifest Those that say Lord Lord as Matth. 7.21 are of those that avouch God to be their God and God avoucheth them to be his people And therefore when they come with their sacrifices though in their sins and God upon that account testifies against them yet he sayes I am God even thy God It is confess'd by Mr. Baxter that we must judge those that make profession to be in Covenant with God we must give them the name of Christians and men in Covenant with God and we must use them as Christians in works of charity and Ordinances and Church-communion and so must use their Children as Christians children And seeing reason to judge so according to Scripture-character of men in Covenant they are so Either in this we judge right or else we proceed upon mistake If we judge aright then all is well If we mistake then all in these proceedings is null Water hath been applyed to the child of such an one but no Sacrament dispens'd And according to a mans hopes thoughts or fears of his fathers regeneration are his hopes thoughts and fears of his own baptisme and consequently of his interest in Church-communion for this stands or falls according to his fathers interest or non-interest in the Covenant When Mr. Baxter is urged with this he uses to refer to his Treatise of Infant-Baptisme where he layes us down a grand Rule or Maxime and out of that extracts many others His grand Rule is That a serious Professor of the faith is to be taken for a true Believer and this being laid down he proceeds on If this Proposition were a Scripture-Maxime then it would have born a farther superstruction but being neither found there nor any proof made that it is any way deduced thence mother and daughters may all justly be called into question and seeing he cannot but know that very many as to the thing for which it is produc'd which is in order to admission to Ordinances will utterly deny it he might have done well to have made some essay to have proved it I do yield that charity is to hope the best but that we should put our charity to it or our reason either for probability or certainty when we are no where so taught and have a more sure rule for our preceeding I see no reason I can scarce meet with a Minister that sayes and I have put the question to many of the most eminent that I know that he baptizeth any Infant upon this ground of hope that the Parent is regenerate but still with earnest vehemence professes the contrary I desire the Reader to consider Mr. Cobbets third and fourth Conclusions in his just Vindication pag. 46 52. There is a bare external being in the Covenant of Grace saith he of persons who possibly never shall be saved Concl. 3d. The Church in dispensing an enjoyned initiatory seal of the Covenant of Grace looketh unto visibility of interest in the Covenant to guide her in the application thereof Concl. 4th Visibility of interest and saving interest are there oppos'd See also Mr. Hudson pag. 249. John Baptist did not in his conscience think they had all actually really and compleatly repented and reformed themselves whom he baptized but he baptized them unto Repentance Matth. 3.11 and they by receiving the same bound themselves to endeavour the practice thereof It were a sad case for Ministers if they were bound to admit none or administer the Lords Supper to none but such as were truly godly or that they judged in their conscience to be so or were bound to eject all that they judged were not so Propos 3 3. Mans obligation of himself in Covenant unto God upon the terms by him proposed necessarily implies Gods obligation to man Where God makes tenders of the Gospel by his Ministers to any one out of Covenant there he makes tender of the Covenant and where a person or people professedly accept that is engage themselves as myriads of thousands did through the Acts of the Apostles this person this people each man of them is in Covenant As Scripture calls them by the name of Saints Disciples Believers Christians so we may call them Covenanters They have all a sanctity of separation which Camero sayes is reall and Mr. Baxter disputed from thence to a right in Baptisme from that Text 1
to baptize no Infant as being unable to know the Parents faith to justification and further with Walaes concluding that the Parents faith doth not justifie the child but as Calvin resolves lib. 4. instit cap. 16. Sect. 20. they are baptized into future faith and repentance which Walaeus also sayes is the opinion of most others Neither shall I baptize any man of years till I have as high assurance if not more of his justification than Mr. Baxter seems to think any man can have of his own If this must stand then Paedobaptists and Anabaptists must all leave their Principles and both men and women when they have learn'd to read that new name in the white stone that is have concluded their assurance must turn Sebaptists and then let us look for as many counterfeits as there were Jews in Christs time with broad Phylacteries Those that bottom Baptisme on the Covenant holinesse of Covenant distinct from that of sanctification stand ensnared in none of these difficulties or inextricable perplexities All the following Arguments to the 9th may be easily granted and that is thus formed Titles given by Apostles do not argue that in their thoughts they were alwaies answered with inherent grace If the Apostles use to communicate the proper titles of the justified to all that are baptized till they see them prove apostates or hypocrites then they did take all the baptized to be probably justified though they might know that there were hypocrites among them yet either they knew them not or might not denominate the body from a few that they did know But the antecedent is true Therefore For the truth of the antecedent here laid down That the Apostles use to communicate the proper titles of the justified to all that are baptized I expect better proof then a naked affirmation And all that is brought for proof is I need not cite Scripture to prove that the baptized ar called by the Apostles Believers Saints Disciples Christians Mr. Bl. hath done it already pag. 28. And he very well knowes that I there make it good That those titles are not proper to the justified but ordinarily given to those that are not justified nor in any saving condition But if my words in the place quoted or elsewhere may not be heard Mr. Baxters sure will take who in his Saints rest Part 4. Sect. 3. p. 105. saith There are many Saints or sanctifyed men that yet shall never come to heaven who are onely Saints by their separation from Paganisme into fellowship with the visible Church but not Saints in the strictest sense by separation from the ungodly into the fellowship of the mysticall body of Christ quoting these following Scriptures Heb. 10.29 Deut. 7.6 and 14.2 21. and 26.19 and 28.9 Exod. 19.6 1 Cor. 7.13 14. Rom. 11.16 Heb. 3.1 compared with vers 12. 1 Cor. 3.17 and 14.33 1 Cor. 1.2 compared with 11.20 21. c. Gal. 3.26 compared with Gal. 3.3 4. and 4.11 and 5.2 3 4. John 15.2 His demand therefore to me is strange Now who knows not that salvation is made the portion of Believers Saints Disciples when he himself affirms that there are Saints that never shall be saved He afterwards puts a further question Is it another sort of them or doth the Scripture use to divide Saints as a genus into two species Not that I know of It is but an aequivocum in sua aequivocata The name belongs to them but as the name of a Man to a Corps c. Then it seems that there is nothing of Reality in such Separations Camero tells us otherwise that there is a reality in this Saintship by separation In the relation of his dispute with Courcellius he affirmed that the Text of the Apostle 1 Cor. 7.14 was without doubt to be understood of reall holinesse To which Courcellius replying He that is really holy hath no need of regeneration and baptisme But Infants of Believers after they are borne have need of baptisme and regeneration Ergo. Which Camero answered as the relation sayes by distinguishing of real holinesse which is twofold One consisting in the bare relation of the person to the people of God or the Church and depends wholly upon birth within the pale of the Church and of parents embracing the Covenant The other is c. And it seems that the Scripture is still under the change of equivocal speeches all over As Camero hath somewhere observed that the word Saints in Scripture is far more frequently taken for Saints on Earth then for Saints in heaven so I doubt not but it may be maintained that it speaks far more frequently of Saints by dedication and separation and so of Believers and Disciples by profession then by inherent qualification and doth it in all these places speak equivocally had it been affirmed to be Genus Analogum in opposition to uni vocum Scripture Language real and not aequivocal as is said of Ens in respect of Substantia Accidens it had been lesse but to make nothing of this noble priviledge of which Scripture speaks so honourably is too plainly to side against the truth it self I would know for my learning what advantage or profit a dead Corps is in Capacity to enjoy I think one at all but these as the Apostle tells us have much every way even they that have no more then sanctity of this nature If such equivocation be found in the word Saint their the like is to be affirmed of the word Believer and believers having their denomination from their faith that is equivocal in like manner and so our Common division of faith into dogmatical or historical temporary miraculous and justifying is but a division of an aequivocum in sua aequivocata which I should think no man would affirm much lesse Mr. Baxter who makes common and special graces to differ onely gradually and then as cold in a remisse degree may grow to that which is intense so one aequivocatum may rise to the nature of another animal terrestre may become Sidus coeleste one of our dogs that we use on Earth may become a star in heaven then miraculous faith it self hath onely the name and nothing of the power and nature of faith in it Judas had power given him to cast out unclean spirits Maetth 10.1 4. and he never had faith that justifieth if his faith was onely aequivocal then the unclean Spirits were equivocall likewise I shall never believe that an aequivocal faith can cast out a real devil The Apostle tells us of faith to the remooval of Mountains void of charity 1 Cor. 13.2 If this were equivocall faith those must be equivocal Mountains Mr. Baxter addes To put the matter beyond doubt I wish Mr. Bl. to consider that it 's not onely these forementioned titles but even the rest which he will acknowledge proper to the regenerate which are given by the Apostles generally to the baptized Instances given in Adoption Gal. 3.26 27. union with
Christ and several others If I will acknowledge this I shall be soon brought to yield up all Is all Adoption proper to the regenerate what shall we say then to that of the Apostle Rom. 9.4 To them pertained the Adoption Had the Apostle that heavinesse and continual sorrow of heart for Israel after the flesh and doth he yet give them that testimony that they are regenerate Gomarus on the place hath these words Lest any in this place should mistake Adoption and acceptation for sons in Scripture is twofold general and special General adoption is an outward destination or call into the visible Church and Company of the Sons of God upon which account many are said to be the Sonnes of God as opposite to the Sonnes of men that is aliens from the Church Gen. 6.2 And Israel this general way are called the sons of God not onely those that were elect to life eternall and regenerate but also those that were reprobate and meerly carnal and therefore the Jewes Sons of the kingdome or the Church of God are said to be cast into utter darknesse Matth. 8.12 And whether all union with Christ imply regeneration let John 15.2 be consulted where an union with Christ is cleerly held out yet Mr. Baxter brings that text among others to prove that there are some Saints that shall never be saved Mr. Hudson and Mr. Cobbet tell us at large that Christ is the head of the Church visible and hath many unfruitful members Other phrases are there brought or titles as proper to the regenerate which are well known in Scripture to be applyed to such as have Apostatized and are brought by Arminians to prove falling away and are answered by their adversaries Mr. Hudsons words are here worthy of consideration Onely the invisible company have internal spiritual communion and are elect many of those that have external communion and are visible members shall perish and yet by reason of their profession are said 2. Thes 1. 1. to be in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ as Ames also confesseth Med. lib. 1. Cap. 32. art 9. Such was the Church off Corinth and Ephesus c. wherein all were not in Communion for life and of such Christ speaketh John 15.2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he takes away and verse 6. If a man abides not in me he is cast forth as a branch and is withered and men gather them and cast them into the fire and they are burned These are said to be redeemed 2 Pet. 2.1 denying the Lord that bought them and sanctified Heb. 10.29 yet hath accounted the blood of the Covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing and much more to this purpose Vindi. pag. 5. And if the Apostle give Testimonies to whole Churches holding out what they ingage to be ought to be and professedly were this comes short of his purpose I find little or nothing in all the other Arguments but that which either looks not at all towards any thing that I hold Humane authorities vouched or else is already spoken to His last onely from humane authority is observable Our Divines against the Papists saith he do generally plead that Hypocrites are not true members of the universal Church but as a wooden leg is to the body I must tell him that if they be Members of a particular Church then they are true members of the Church universal Taking universal and particular in a Similar homogeneal way for the visible Church state as we must take them if we speak any thing to purpose That which is pars partis is pars totius if my finger be a part of my hand it is a part of my body and if Mr. Baxter be an Inhabitant of Kederminster then he is an Inhabitant of Worcestershire and if of Worcestershire then an Inhabitant of England and let us see what they say of the Church visible indefinitely Lord Duplesse in his Treatise of the Church pag. 3. saith The invisible Church conteineth none but the good the visible containeth both the good and the bad that onely the Elect this all those indifferently that are brought into her by the preaching of the truth e Visibilis Ecclesia est coetus communiter vocatotum tum electorum tum reproborum Wollebius saith pag. 194. the visible Church is a company joyntly called as well of Elect as Reprobate f Ecclesia visibilis constat non solum ex electis vere piis sed etiam ex reprobis Hypocritis Ravanellus in verb. Eccles The visible Church consists not onely of the Elect and truely Godly but also of reprobates and Hypocrites g Nostri Ecclesiam universalem non invisibilem quae solos electos vere fideles complectâ—tur de quae Christus loquitur Matth. 16. sed visibilem quae electis hypocritis constant intelligunt Gomarus Analysis in 2 Thes 2. Our Divines understand the Church universal not invisible which onely contains the elect and truely faithful of which Christ speaks Matth. 16. but the visible which consists of Elect and Reprobate Mr. Hudson Vindication pag. 7. In the same sense that a visible Church may be called a Mystical body of Christ Christ may be also called a Mysticall head thereof as Christ terms himself a Master so he hath evil slothfull servants and stewards as a King he hath rebells that will not have him to rule over them even in his Church Matth. 25.6 giving like instance as a shepherd as an householder as a bridegroom a husbandman a fisherman a vine adding Christ saith My people are foolish they have not known me sottish children c. h Alia est Ecclesia vocatorum promiscue bonis malis fidelibus hypocritis constans Alia est Ecclesia electorum vere fid lilium qui quidem in coetu vocatorum sunt Pareus Revelation 3.1 The Church of the called is one consisting promiscuously of good and bad faithful and hypocrites the Church of the elect is another consisting of Elect and truely faithful which indeed are of the same company of those that are called Ames Anti Bel. T. 2. lib. 2. Cap. 1. not 5. when Bellarmine had stated the controversy between his party and his adversaries Others he saies require inward virtues to make any a Church member i Nosautem ut aliquis aliquo modo dici possit pars verae Ecclesiae de qua Scripturae loquuntur non putamus requiri ullam inteman virtutem But we faith he do not think that any inward virtue is required to make a man in some sort a part of that true Church of which the Scripture speaks After discovery of his sophistry in the word after a sort positively answers k Falsum est internas virtutes requirui à nobis ut aliquis sit in Ecclesia quod visibilem ejus statum It is false that inward vertues are required of us to put a man into the Church according to
the Disciples of Christ for discovery of a Disciple in the former sense by their affections to him and suffering of affliction for him are of singular use Christ himself hath gone before us in it But upon the notation of the word because Christ gave the Bread and Cup to Disciples to make the subject of that Sacrament to be onely those that reach these markes is besides the holy Ghosts intention All outward Ordinances are for the Church in fieri and not onely in facto for the bringing of it on to Christ I should desire to know where any outward sensible Ordinance is made or how in reason and according to Scripture it can be made the proper peculiar right of invisible members SECT XI Proposition 9 THe Sacrament of the Supper no more then other Ordinances is not limited to those that have received a new life in Christ by the Spirit that are actually regenerate and in grace The Lords Supper is not limited to those that have received a new life by the Spirit others as they may be admitted without sin so they are in a capacity and possbility to receive benefit from it This I am not ignorant that some will question But let these consider before they censure First That it is an external Ordinance as hath been said Arguments a priviledge of the Church as visible put into the hands of those for edification that are not able to discern men of spiritual life and invisible interest And though there be characteristicall differnces whereby a man in grace and he that is short of it may be distinguished whereby all bad ground at the best may be differenced from that which is good yet they are such whereby a man is to make trial of himself onely they are Spirit-works and none knowes them in any man save the Spirit that is in him and therefore no marks for any others cognizance For a Minister of Christ to dispence by command the Sacrament to many when he knowes that it is of possible use and benefit to some few unto these it is food and nourishment unto life unto the others as Rats-bane Poyson and onely for death is such a snare that may hold him in his administration in all horror and amazement A fad dilemma either to lay aside an Ordinance of Christ and so never come up in his place to the whole of his duty or else to deliver to them that which will inevitably be the ruine and destruction of so many of them I know no possible way that can be supposed or so much as pretended for avoidance but in the Name of Christ to give warning to all in whom this new life by the Spirit is not to abstain every man and woman not actually regenerate on their peril to keep off Let them say some know their danger in the highest terms that can be uttered and then if they come their blood is on their own heads and the Minister of Christ hath by this means delivered his soul But to this I have three things to say 1. That it is as I suppose without all Scripture-precedent to warn men upon account of want of a new life by the Spirit wholly to keep off from this or any other Ordinance of Christ I know we must warn men of their sin and the judgement hanging over their heads for sin in which let it be our prayer that we may be more faithful but that we should warn men upon this account upon this very ground to hold off from all addresse to Ordinances I have not learnt 2. I say this doth presuppose that which is wont to be denyed unregenerate men to be in a capacity to examine themselves respective to this Ordinance How can we warn them upon want of justifying faith and the saving work of repentance to hold back when they are in an incapacity upon trial to find themselves thus wanting 3. Shall we not hereby pluck the thorne out of our own sides and as much as in us lyes thrust it into the sides of many of our hungry thirsty and poor in spirit people How many may we suppose are in grace through a work happily begun on their souls yet for several reasons are not able to see this grace or reach to any discovery of it Sometimes by reason of the infancy of the work upon their hearts being yet babes or rather embryo's in grace The first that appears upon light received is an army of lusts and potent corruptions as we know Paul sets it out This cloudes for present any other weak work that as yet in present is wrought In this time Satan is not wanting he did not shew so much artifice before to lessen their sin but he now makes use of as much to aggravate it and as he was industrious before to seduce now he is as busie to accuse He led the incestuous man to incontinency 1 Cor. 7.4 And we know Paul feares least upon continuance of the Church-censure he would gain advantage to swallow him up in overmuch sorrow 2 Cor. 2.8 11. These perhaps as yet are not able to give an account of the nature of faith and repentance or their genuine fruits much lesse are they able by a reflex act to conclude the truth of them in their souls Sometimes by reason of some sharpe conflict of temptation being under the shock and assault of it and therefore whatsoever they have seen of grace heretofore or the favour of God now it is under a cloud which I believe was Pauls case when a messenger of Satan was sent to buffet him and a thorne in the flesh given him seeing it is put in opposition to the abundance of revelations that he had being taken up into the third heavens 2 Cor. 12. and therefore had need of Ordinances for support Sometimes on a soyle received by temptation of which his own heart and not the Church is witnesse and therefore is at a losse of the joy of his salvation and stands in need of strength for recovery Sometimes by over-much sloath and rust contracted on his graces through negligence which is supposed to be the case of the spouse indulging her self too much in carnal ease Cant. 5.2 I have put off my coat how shall I put it on I have washed my feet how shall I defile them Sometimes God out of prerogative withdrawing the rayes of his Spirit and refusing to testifie with our spirits in which case the soul that is most upright with God and sincere in his feare walks in darknesse and sees no light in which there is need of all communications from God and attendance upon him in Ordinances When these shall hear all in whom the work of grace is not in truth thus warned to keep back and told of the high danger of approaching to this Table in such away aggravated will not they put in their name and say their souls are now spoke to They must therefore absent themselves and so the smoaking flax is quenched
in whom by faith remission of sins may be obtained I know but that it is a signe either that we do believe or that we have remission of sin otherwise then upon our believing to which this engages but not presupposes I know not Simon Magus had not Baptisme to signifie that all his sins were forgiven but that by faith in the Name of Christ he might be forgiven Mr. Cobbet sayes well Vindication pag. 54. The initiatory seal which holds true of the other seal is not primarily and properly the seal of mans faith or repentance or obedience but of Gods Covenant rather the seal is to the Covenant even Abrahams Circumsion was not primarily a seal to Abrahams faith of righteousnesse but to the righteousnesse of faith exhibited and effected in the Covenant yea to the Crvenant it self or promise which had believed unto righteousnesse hence the Covenant of grace is called the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 10. I confesse it is a symbole of our profession of faith but this is not the faith spoken to neither is remission of sins annext unto it Secondly That which necessarily supposeth conversion and faith doth not work conversion and faith But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper supposeth conversion and faith The Minor is proved Mar. 16.16 Act. 2.38 Act. 8.36 37. ver 41. Act. 10.4.7 All which texts are spoken of Baptisme and not of the Lords Supper To that text Mar. 16.16 I have spoken fully Treatise of the Covenant pag. 243. To that Act. 8.36 37. I have spoken pag. 244. To that of Act. 2.38 I have spoken pag. 396. and ther is no need that I should repeat what I have said For Act. 2.41 They that gladly received his Word were baptized It speaks no more then ready acceptation of the tender of the Gospel and whether this necessarily implyes saving faith let Ezek. 33.31 Matth. 13.20 21. Gal. 4.15 be consulted For Act. 10.47 Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized who have received the holy Ghost as well as we it proves that men of gifts from the Spirit have title such gifts gave Judas a title not onely to baptisme but Apostleship such a faith may be had and sanctification wanting Thirdly That which gives us new food supposeth that we have the new birth and Spiritul life and that we are not still dead in trespasses and sins But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper gives us new food Ergo. Ans 1. Metaphors are ill materials to make up into syllogismes 2. A difference may be put between ordinary food and living and quickening food It may be true of the former but not of the latter 3. The Word as well as the Sacrament gives us new food 1. Pet. 2.2 and yet presupposeth not new life If any reply that the Word is more then food it is seed as well as food and it gives not new life as food but as seed I answer that the Sacrament is more then food There is a Sacramental work preceding our taking and eating which some say may be done to edification and profit by those that are not admitted to be partakers where they divide I may distinguish and there Christ is set forth to the aggravation of sin to carry on the work of contrition and compunction Fourthly That Ordinance which is instituted onely for believers and justified persons is no converting but a sealing Ordinance But this Sacrament is instituted onely for believers and justified persons The Minor is proved Circumcision was a seal of the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 4.17 much more then Baptisme and if Baptisme much more the Lords Supper Ans Upon this account it must needs follow that as Abraham was a justified man so Ishmael was justified also who according to the mind of God and in obedience to his commands was circumcised Gen. 17.23 yea every Proselyte that joyned himself to Israel and every male in Israel according to this Interpretation must be justified 2. Howsoever Abraham was a justified person yet his Circumcision in that place is not made a proof of his justification but a distinct text of Scripture Gen. 15.16 quoted by the Apostle ver 3. And that Scripture setting out his justification to be by faith and not by works the Apostles words onely shew that the Sacrament of Circumcision sealed the Covenant not of works but of faith so that Mr. Cobbets words quoted in answer to the first argument are a full answer here Fifthly The Apostle argues that Abraham the Father of the faithful and whose justification is a pattern of ours was not justified by Circumcision Circumcision was not the cause but the sign of his justification Therefore no Sacrament is a cause of our justication Ans Though animadversions might be made on these words yet if any will put them into form I shall grant the conclusion when I say the Sacrament as an Appendix to the Word may have its influence with the word upon a professor offaith to work him to the truth of faith I am far from saying it is any cause of justification I look on faith no otherwise then as an instrument in the work and the Sacrament as an help and not the principal to the work of faith Sixthly There is an argument drawn from the necessity of examination which before hath received an answer Seventhly That Ordinance unto which none may come without a wedding garment is no converting Ordinance But the Supper of the Lord the marriage feast of the Kings Son is an Ordinance unto which a man may not come without a wedding argument Ans 1. Arguments drawn from parables must be used with all tendernesse But in this Argument here is much boldnesse to make this Ordinance that marriage-feast 2. We shall find if we look to the scope of it that this feast is the fruition of Christ in his Kingdom as appears by those words that give occasion to the Parable of the Supper Luk. 14.15 And when one of them that sate at meat with him heard these things he said unto him Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God Now those that pretend a forwardnesse towards it and are not prepared and fitted for it according to the scope of the Parable shall be cast out from it This therefore may fairly prove that none that appear in Ordinances and yet remaine in their sins shall come to heaven But it no more proves that a man cannot get saving good by this Ordinance then it proves that a man cannot get saving good by the Word The VVord may lay as fair a claime to this wedding feast as the Lords Supper Eighthly That Ordinance which is not appointed to work faith is no converting Ordinance But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is not appointed to work faith Ergo. The Assumption is proved Rom. 10.14 Faith cometh by hearing hearing by the Word of God then not by seeing if by the Word then not by the Sacrament Ans If faith comes by hearing will
it therefore follow that hearing can receive no help from but must exclude seeing Did the Bereans when they had heard the Apostles yet nothing towards faith by their search of the Scriptures Act. 17.11.12 or did they not make use of their eyes in the search that they made When Christ had Preached to the Jewes not yet in the faith and commended to them the search of the Scriptures Joh. 5.39 can we think that this search could be no step in their way of believing Why were miracles wrought if they were of no use to the work of faith f What comment shall we make on those words Joh. 2.23 Many believed in his Name when they saw the miracles that were done If the Word do work faith it will by no means follow but that it may take in assistance by miracles and Sacraments by signes extraordinary and ordinary That consequence if by the Word then not by the Sacrament will never hold till the VVord and Sacrament are proved to be opposite and not subordinate Ninthly That Ordinance which hath neither the promise of the grace of conversion annext unto it or any example in the Word of God of any converted by it is no converting Ordinance But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper hath no such promise of the grace of conversion neither is there such an example Ergo. Answ For Examples though we could give instances of men being converted by receiving of the Lords Supper yet it would still be denyed to have any possible influence towards conversion as the last Argument is an evident witnesse We bring Examples of men that have been brought to the faith by seeing and yet it is still denyed that fight can be any help towards it And though we could bring a promise of such grace annext yet we should have little hopes to be heard or heeded seeing we can bring a Promise of blessednesse to reading which is by sight as to hearing Rev. 3. Blessed is he that readeth and they that hear the words of this Prophecy 2. We have as many examples of mens conversion by the Sacrament as we have of their receiving strength and nourishment If one may be asserted without an example then then other likewise 3. We have no particular precedents by name except at first institution of any that were Communicants and therefore we cannot expect examples of conversion or receiving of strength by communicating 4. The examples of conversion by the Word perhaps well examined would prove short of such conversion as here is intended The conversion in Gospel narratives is to a Christian profession A man may evince calling thence but not elctdion and this is the work of the Word without the Sacrament seeing it must precede the receiving of the Sacrament As to that of no promise made to it 1. When the adversary shall bring a promise made to the Sacrament for Spiritual strength it will happily be found of an equal force to the giving of a new life 2. Though we have no promise explicite and expresse yet we have promises implicite and virtual Every promise made to the Word is made to the Sacrament The Sacrament being not opposite but subordinate to it an appendant that receives strength from it Tenthly That Ordinance whereof Christ would have no unworthy person to partake is not a converting Ordinance But the Lords Supper is an Ordinance whereof Christ would have no unworthy person to partake Ergo. The Minor is proved 1 Cor. 11.27 Answ This Argument well followed will take off every Ordinance from that honour of conversion as well as this of the Lords Supper seeing many Texts may be produced equally calling for qualifications for them as for this equally shewing the danger of unworthy addresses As to this for hearing the Word see 1 Pet. 2.1 2. Wherefore laying aside all malice and all guile and hypocrisies and envies and all evill speakings as new-burn babes desire the sincere milk of the Word that ye may grow thereby Jam. 1.21 Wherefore lay apart all filthinesse and superfluity of naughtinesse and receive with meeknesse the engraffed Word which is able to save your soules Is not the Word a favour of death unto death to such 2 Cor. 2.14 15 16. Shall i. not be more tolerable for Tyre and Zidon then for them Matth. 11.24 For prayer to God see James 1.6 7. But let him ask in faith nothing wavering for he that wavereth is like a wave of the Sea driven with the wind and tossed for let not that man think he shall receive any thing of the Lord 1 Tim. 2.8 I will therefore that men pray every where lifting up holy hands without wrath and doubting Good will never be had by such mens prayers Esay 1.15 And when ye spread forth your hands I will hide mine eyes from you when ye make many prayers I will not hear your hands are full of blood Zach. 7.13 Therefore it is come to passe that he cryed and they would not hear so they cryed and I would not hear saith the Lord of Hosts Shall we now say that neither Word nor prayer is a converting Ordinance But perhaps it will be said Men unworthy must hear must pray to be made worthy must come in unconversion to be converted But they must bring worthinesse hither or else this can have no hand in making worthy they must bring conversion or else this cannot convert This is a begging of the question And as to prayer there is no more ground or colour to make it a converting Ordinance then the Supper we must pray in faith before we can pray with acceptance of our persons and so must the Word be mixt with faith when we hear it Heb. 4.2 Eleventhly That Ordinance which is eucharisticall and consolatory supposeth such that partake of it to have part and portion in that thing for which thanks is given and are such as are fit to be comforted But the Lords Supper is an Ordinance eucharisticall and consolatory Ergo. Answ And might not the Assumption as well have been That the Word and Prayer are Ordinances eucharistical and consolatory I hope none will deny the Gospel our good tydings to be eucharistical and consolatory nor yet thanksgiving which is a branch of prayer And then in case the Proposition be of universal truth both Word Prayer and Lords Supper are excluded from any power of conversion The Proposition then must be understood with limit and restriction That Ordinance which in whole and in part is eucharistical and consolatory can have no hand in conversion and then though perhaps exception might be taken at it it had colour in it But then the Assumption That this Ordinance is in whole and in part eucharisticall and consolatory must be denyed It is for humbling heart-breaking as it is comforting There we shew forth Christs death and see him broken for sin and it is no matter of consolation but humiliation and horrour to see our soules under that guilt that brought upon Christ a
is evident To say nothing of Johns Baptisme instance might be given in the baptisme administred by Christs Disciples we find the Eunuch the Jayler and others baptized and no Eldership consulted Christ delivered the Lords Supper where no Eldership was set up and in case Act. 2.42 be understood of the Lords Supper as is generally conceived there can be no contradiction seeing that it is not imaginable that as yet that order was established with them If any shall object Object that a command lay upon them to administer the Sacraments which must in this case of necessity be obeyed and the duty not neglected though an Eldership for a more orderly and regular carriage be wanting To this I answer Sol. Omissions seem better to me then a prohibited or a disorderly proceeding expressely against a Command or Ordinance of Jesus Christ The Arke had better stayed where it was then a new Cart should have carried it in that disorder to the place appointed for it Better that Saul and Vzziah had let sacrifice alone then any to whom it did not appertain should have undertaken it This therefore with me is not cogent unlesse it be confest that there is no precept respective to such jurisdiction when there is a command for administration I never saw sufficient reason given that a man should break an expresse rule given in Command from God rather then omit a duty of meer positive institution Jeroboam must rather have no sacrifice then that Dan or Bethel should be the place for it And in case such necessity may dspense with irregularities why may we not on the other hand be irregular and in such necessary want of a full and compleat order the Minister who is one and the first in the number of such an Eldership to take upon him the whole work rather then on the one hand the administration should wholly cease or on the other hand promiscuously dispensed where there can be no possible benefit received To this I confesse I was for some time much inclined till that upon further examination and debate reason enforced me to conclude that the Minister by Divine appointment is authoritatively himself vested in power for admission or denyal And if I be driven out of this and all these arguments here laid down fully satisfied I shall rather believe that the Minister who is one party in the power pleaded for as before may rather act alone in such necessity then either the authority it self be wholly laid aside or Sacraments totally discontinued Object If any shall further object That Christ and his Apostles had virtually all offices in them so that if that order could not so soon be established among them the defect in this impossible case was sufficiently supplyed by the Apostolical Office Sol. I answer What power soever was vested in them yet it appears not that at once they exercised the power of all of them but acted orderly in an association when it was required Paul Ordained Timothy by laying on of hands but not alone but as associated in a Presbytery his hands were laid upon him 2 Tim. 1.6 and the hands of the Presbytery were laid upon him 1 Tim. 4.4 He ordered the incestuous Corinthians excommunication but this he did not alone but with the Church-Officers 1 Cor. 5. And if the Apostles Office had virtually all in it yet it may be questioned whether it were so with Philip unlesse we can make it good which is by few believed that he was Philip the Apostle Sixthly That which hath neither any law in Scripture for it Reason 6 nor any set up for execution of it is no Church-censure to be proceeded in by vertue of jurisdiction This is plain But in Scripture there is no Law enacted for proceeding in such a censure nor men set up for to proceed in such a juridick way Therefore it followes that this is no Church-Censure If any say The Keys imply this power and those that receive the keys are set up in power I answer That Sacraments are within the power of order which is distinct from jurisdiction and contains no censure and Keys in jurisdiction imply a letting in and shutting out now this is a Censure of those that remain within and neither serves for letting in nor exclusion 7thly If those must be kept back from the Sacrament in a prudential Reason 7 way on whom no sentence in way of jurisdiction ought to pass then this rather belongs to prudence then to jurisdiction This is plain But those are to be kept back on whom no sentence in a way of jurisdiction ought to pass This is also plain Jurisdiction for censure is not but in case of crime many are detained upon defect in judgment no criminal charge being laid against them Ergo. Eighthly The detaining of that from or denyal of it to any Reason 8 which they cannot improve for their benefit but visibly tends to their danger is no juridick act of penalty but a prudential care for his advantage from whom it is thus detained and to whom it is thus denyed This is clear To deny drink to an Hydropick person or flesh-meats to one in a Feaver garlick or onions to a wounded person or full of ulcerous sores is not to inflict a penalty but to exercise a prudential care But this denyal of the Sacrament to or detaining it from the ignorant c. is onely to withhold that which visibly tends to danger and cannot be improved for any advantage Therefore it is no juridick penalty but a businesse of prudential care And here an Objection which carries most colour of all that can be said is prevented and already answered To debar a man upon the grounds of ignorance error or scandal from that which otherwise were his right and proper interest belongs to the power of jurisdiction and is a censure But in this a man for ignorance error or scandal is debarred of that which otherwise is his right and therefore it belongs to the power of jurisdiction and is a Church-Censure To this upon the grounds before laid down is answered To debar a man of his right to his sensible prejudice and to hold from him that which would be his present livelihood and comfort is indeed a penalty or juridick censure as to sequester a man from his house and Lands to disfranchise a man of his Trade c. But for a Parent a Nurse or Physician to order dyet as most for health and to withdraw some food when digestion will not bear it and it evidently appears to be of danger is an act of prudence and no censure and so a Minister is considered in the administration of Word and Sacraments Reason 9 Ninthly If admission to or exclusion from other Ordinances of eminent height and excellency to which all are not promiscuously admitted be left to prudence and not to the exercise of any Juridick power then there is no reason to take this out of the Ministers hand and put it
over to any such powers But exclusion from and admission to other Ordinances of eminent height and excellency to which all are not promiscuously admitted as private Fasts and doubtful disputations Matth. 9. Rom. 14. is left to prudence and not to the exercise of any juridick power Ergo. Reason 10 Lastly If this be an act of jurisdiction to admit to the Sacrament and keep off from it then there must be a Law of Jesus Christ in it a Gospel-Ordinance for it This is plain Jesus Christ hath not left to his Officers an arbitrary Goverment he hath left no Commission to rule at pleasure as they are to speak so they are to act according to his will and pleasure known But no such Law no such Ordinance of Jesus Christ is found in Scriptures A command we have in the Gospel for administration of Sacraments as well Baptisme as the Lords Supper and Covenant-interest is our Directory as you have heard to lead us to those that have fundamental interest in them But concerning exclusion of any thus enrighted there is nothing by way of Ordinance written Therefore this can be no act of jurisdiction The Assumption is that which many will question It lyes upon them then to quote this Law to make known this Ordinance of Jesus Christ But instead of that I shall shew upon what grounds it yet appears to me that there is none at all If any such be it is either in plain and full words exprest such as the Law given to Israel to put out of the Camp every leper and every one that hath an issue or is defiled by the dead Numb 5.1 2. or else it must be such as is deduced by fair consequence from the nature and use of the Sacrament or preparation to it or benefit received by it That there is no Ordinance in such plain full words needs not to be doubted In all that enquiry into this so much controverted businesse it would have been long since produced In case it be deduced from any such consequence as hath been spoken it will hardly be made good to be an instituted Law or constituted Ordinance Mr. Firmin hath well excepted against the proof of institutions by syllogismes though to his great disadvantage in that dispute of a Church-Covenant Where there is an Ordinance in power as there was for exclusion from the Passeover proof may be made up by consequence for the latitude to discern who those be that are within the verge of it and concerned in it But consequences will hardly prove the enacting and instituting of it I shall be willing to gratifie Mr. Tombs in this that parity of reason will set up no institution A good cause is wronged when Ordinances of this nature are pretended and cannot be produced and on the other hand when a Ministeriall prudence in the Stewards of Christ is undervalued which might supply it Let it be granted that there is no Ordinance to debar an unexcommunicated man from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper yet a promiscuous admission will not follow when the end and use of the Sacrament is considered it will appear to them that have the care and charge about it that some are not in a present aptitude for it There is command for the preaching of the Word in a way to edification 1 Cor. 143 12. yet the particular way of application suitable to mens capacities so as to give milk to babes and children and strong meat to those of growth that have their senses exercised to discern between good and evil is not done by any vertue of any specifick particular institution but the Ministers prudence VVhich prudence was exercised by Paul 1 Cor. 3.1 2. Heb. 5.12 by Christ himself Joh. 16 12. There is no Ordinance for admission to or exclusion from private Fasts or punctual direction who are to be called and received or who past by yet our Saviour Christ from the high nature of the duty concludes that it is not for novices in the faith And as it is a point of prudence not to put a piece of new cloth in an old garment unwrought cloth some understand there will be a double inconvenience the weaknesse of the one will not bear the strength of the other and so the rent that was before will be made greater and the whole garment become uncomely and unsuitable nor yet to put new wine which is windy and working into old bottles the weaknesse of such a vessel being not able to bear it so neither had it been a point of prudence in our Saviour Christ to have put such an austere discipline upon the necks of his newly entred disciples Matth. 7.6 vindicated If any shall object that Text Matth. 7.6 Give not that which is holy unto dogs neither cast ye pearles before swine as I know it is produced as an Ordinance for the withholding of this Sacrament from those that are ignorant and scandalous I shall desire the Reader for answer to take it into consideration whether it be not more agreeable to the Text to make it an exhortation to an holy prudential circumspection in the dispensation of holy things in general whether in a private or a publick way then to make it a distinct peculiar Ordinance about any one piece or part of worship Making it a peculiar Ordinance we shall run our selves upon inextricable difficulties Our Saviour laying it down in an indefinite way All whatsoever that is holy must there be understood and pearles and holy things are the same one being exegetical of the other holy things excelling other things as far as pearles excel acorns And by doggs and swine both which were unclean in the Law we must understand all that Scripture comprehends under those names they are both put for one 2 Pet. 1.21 and so the result of all is that no person in visible uncleannesse must taste of any thing that is holy From which it followes that as Christ thought it not fit at that present to gratifie a Heathen with a miracle when he said It is not meet to take the childrens bread and cast it unto doggs Matth. 15.26 So it will at no time be meet or lawfull to preach the Gospel to any heathen or impenitent and unclean Christian they being no other then dogs or swine and the Gospel the most precious of holy pearles but understanding it as an exhortation to Christian prudence and observing the reason added lest they trample them under feet and turn again and rent you these absurdities and snares will be avoided and the result of all will be onely this that the holy things of God and rich Gospel-pearles are not to be communicated where there is no possible expectation of doing good But all the issue of it will evidently be danger to him that doth impart them and all scorn and contempt of the holy things themselve which was the Apostles way of dealing when the Jewes were filled with envy contradicting and blaspheming Act. 13. and is
neglected There is strength in that argument from the gift to the use Arguments evincing the necessity of Sacraments from the fruition of any thing from the hand of God as the servant the talent from his Master to the improvement of it These are instituted of God for his people and therefore for the use of his people That which the Apostle speaks respective to Gospel ordinances in general may be applyed to any one in particular We beseech you that ye receive not the grace of God in vain 2 Cor. 6.1 Secondly Frequent explicite commands are added as we have seen in the Scripture proofs respective to either of the Sacraments and though no other reason could be rendred yet the Soveraignty of heaven must be obeyed When the young Prophet that came from Judah 1 Kings 13. did eat bread upon his return expressely contrary to the command of God we know the judgement that followed when the like command is broke in refusal to eat there is the like danger God hath power in positives as well as negatives in commanding of eating as he hath in forbidding Thirdly As it is a duty so also a priviledg we obey a command when we receive a Sacrament and also take a gift And the sleighting of Gods favours equals the evil of disobedience to his commands What sin suffers more then theirs that upon call refuse to come to the wedding supper The gift is annexed to the duty Take eat this is my body they that do not eat have not the promise Fourthly Our necessity calls us to it we have proved the Supper to be an heart-breaking ordinance and there is none that deny it to be a soule strengthening ordinance Hunger will make haste to run to meat guilt to pardon and pain to ease and sorrow to comfort were we as sensible of our hunger or guilt we should make equal haste to Christ in each ordinance in this ordinance Those that are agreed about the necessity of Sacraments are yet at difference about the degree or kind of their necessity That distinction of necessity by precept or command of God and necessity as a means whereby salvation is gained is well known a Adversarii fatentur Sacramenta esse necessaria quia praecepta et etiam necessaira ut media utilia non tamen agnoscunt ullum Sacramentum necessarium simpliciter ut medium Bellarmine saies we yield to them the former that there is the necessity of a divine command upon them And they also yield to us that no other Sacraments of theirs are any otherwise necessary except Baptisme and repentance And we further yield that repentance is of necessity in the most absolute sense being understood of the change of the heart or conversion to God But not under any notion of a Sacrament As to their Sacramental repentance standing in confession in the eares of a Priest taking pennance and receiving absolution from him we do not so much as acknowledg any command of God concerning them All the dispute then is about Baptisme In which also we cannot grant that there is a command given of God concerning it but we must yield that it is necessary as a means whereby God in his ordinary way carries us on by his grace to salvation onely we deny such an absolute necessity of it as that no salvation can be obtained without it They yet yield that desire of Baptisme doth supply the want of it and we yield that those of years that neither have it nor desire it cannot be excluded from contempt of it This growing out of error as in Socinians The kind or degree of necessity in Sacraments and others we say it is dangerous but do not presently conclude it damnable But the want of it where there can be no desire of it as in infants they make damnable in which we wholly are dissenters and cannot yield a necessity of that height in it We have our reasons First Salvation was not tied to Sacraments in the Old Testament not to circumcision in room of which we have baptisme and is by the Apostle called by the name of Baptisme Col. 2.11 This is clear by the delay of it according to Gods command to the eighth day If those perished that died in the mean space which was the case of Davids child their parents obedience of Gods command brought them to perdition And salvation being not tied to Sacraments but attainable without them in the daies of the Old Testament there is no cause to believe that in the New Testament there should be restraint The promulgation of the Gospel did not streighten grace or make the way lesse passeable to life and glory Secondly They that are in Covenant with God are upon that account in capacity of Salvation This is plain what advantage is gained by Covenant if salvation be denyed But such are in Covenant many such that never were baptized This is as clear I will be thy God and the God of thy seed assoone as Abraham had a child he had a child in Covenant which howsoever Jesuits and after them Anabaptists would understand of the spiritual seed yet God as we see through the Old Testament ownes them as his in a greater latitude Those to whom he gave the land of Canaan are his seed there mentioned But he gave not the Land of Canaan to the spiritual seed onely Therefore they onely are not the seed there mentioned The New Testament holds it out in as great latitude as I have abundantly shewed Thirdly As Abraham the Father of the faithful came into a state of justification and salvation so others may attain to it in like sort This is evident of it self But Abraham was in a state of justification without application of any Sacrament in his state of uncircumcision and not of Circumcision as the Apostle argues by computing the time when it was said of him that he believed the Lord and it was accounted unto him for righteousnesse Rom. 4.9 10. Fourthly If Baptisme be of this absolute necessity that regeneration is affixt to it and none can be saved without it then it is in mans power to save and destroy as is said of Nebuchadnezzar whom he would he slew and whom he would he kept alive Dan. 5.19 which was the highest pitch of prerogative in regard of the outward man so it may be said of man respective to eternity of blisse or misery according to them the meanest midwife may Baptize them ready to give up the Ghost and save them neglect them and damne them The Infant set out in type Ezek. 16. And Moses in the flags lay sadly at mans mercy for this fading life but thousands of infants are alike at mercy according to this tenent for eternity Joh. 3.5 vindicated The great objection which is made on the contrary and that onely which is worthy of consideration is drawn from Christs words in conference with Nicodemus Joh. 3.5 Except a man be born of water and of
condescend to our weaknesse to answer what infirmity can expect or feeblenesse crave We might think that Gideon was exceeding bold with God to ask a double sign for the strengthening of his faith in the promise of God to save Israel by his hand yet we see God is pleased to gratify him Judg 6.39 40. yet God deales more abundantly with us not onely in a double but a multiplied confirmation to make good every truth which he hath been pleased to manifest And as he teacheth us by similitudes drawn from earthly things as we see in the Prophets and parables from our Saviours mouth so also to speak to our eyes in these signes and seales ratifying and confirming heavenly things unto us Those great mercies which no thought can reach are set out in so obvious a way that every eye doth behold and see That water which we employ for our common use and among other necessary services cleanses all filth that cleaves to us serves to set out that great mystery of the blood and Spirit of Christ taking away both guilt and filth of sin The bread which we have at our table the wine which we drink for our food and repast that sets out both the attonement and divine nourishment which our soules find in the flesh and blood of Christ crucified and dying for us There is abundant weaknesse and tottering in our faith that needs in this manner to be strengthened Abundance of sweet mercies in our God that will vouchsafe this to strengthen and support us Secondly If Christ thus condescends to our weaknesse Christs compassion towards us should move us to compassionate our selves in making provision of these helps let us learn to have compassion of our selves and not neglect or despise so great favours If Christ had judged us to have been of strength he had never tendred us this crutch and when he sees that we need it and therefore hath provided it let us see that we do not reject or despise it Is it not to imitate Ahaz in his obstinacy who when he could not believe the promise that God would deliver him and his people from the combined power of Israel and Syria that were then before Jerusalem and having a sign tendred him of God either in the depth beneath or the height above for his assurance in the thing he answers he will not desire a sign Isa 7.11 12. he will rather dwell in his unbelief and perish As that sign was to that promise so all Sacraments are to Gods great promise He that casts away Sacraments indulges unbelief and we may well fear that he shall dwell in it to destruction CHAP. XI SECT I. The whole of the work of Sacraments is by way of sign and seal THe next observation followes The whole office and use of Sacraments All that the Sacraments work on the soules of receivers is by way of sign and seal They have no immediate effects for the working of any inward graces or priviledges but as our understanding is exercised by them as Indicative signes and our faith as ratifications and seales of the promises The text that we have under our hand is abundantly full to his purpose Scarce any text holds out a truth I may say more clear and full then this text doth that which is here delivered if we take in the context with it The Context opened to which the copulative And leads The Apostle having in the former Chapter delivered the doctrine of justification by faith goes on here to make it good by the Example of Abraham and his argument rendred in syllogistical form appears to be this As Abraham the father of the faithful was justified so must all the faithful This is taken for granted as needing no proof But Abraham the father of the faithful was justified not by works but by faith The Assumption consists of two parts and the Apostle proves both 1. The negative that he was not justified by works this he proves by two arguments 1. If he were justified by works then he hath whereof to glory ver 2. But he hath not whereof to glory before God Ergo he was not justified by works 2. If he were justified by works the reward were reckoned not of grace but of debt ver 4. But the reward is not of debt but of grace Ergo. Which he further confirmes by the testimony of David describing the blessednesse of man to whom the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without works saying Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sinnes are covered Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin ver 7 8. As David describes blessednesse that way man is blessed But David describes it to be by imputation of righteousnesse and not by works Ergo. The affirmative that Abraham was justified by faith he proves by a full testimony of Scripture Gen. 15.6 He believed in the Lord and he counted it to for him for righteousnesse Now it might be objected that this justification of Abraham and blessednesse that David speaks of was nothing to the Gentiles uncircumcised but to the Jewes in the state of Circumcision and so Circumcision may yet have an hand in justitification This the Apostle denies ver 10. and proves the contrary by the time of Abrahams justification which was in uncircumcision not in Circumcision If Abraham were justified in uncircumcision then Circumcision hath no hand in justification But Abraham was justified in uncircumcision Ergo But then the greatest question is to what end or purpose he was circumcised having already that righteousnesse which doth justify what needs more Circumcision then might have been let alone The Apostle answers that he was circumcised on a twofold account for a double reason The first is in reference to his own estate in faith which equally concerns all in his state of believing He received the sign of Circumcision a seal of the faith which he had being yet uncircumcised The second in reference to the whole Church that he might be the Father of all that believe in Circumcision or in uncircumcision so that we have both the Apostles authority and his argumentative discourse for confirmation of our point That the work and efficacy of Sacraments is by way of sign and seal We shall find Peter giving his vote with Paul in this thing where he enters a dispute about Baptisme as Paul here doth about Circumcision as you may find 1 Pet. 3.20 21. having mentioned Gods long suffering towards disobedient ones in the daies of Noah while the Ark was a preparing he saies Few that is eight soules were saved by water That element which as an executioner of divine vengeance destroyed the world of the ungodly as an instrument in the hand of God preserved Noah and his family It destroyed the world by overwhelming of them as after it did Pharaoh and his host It saved Noah and his household by keeping the Ark above trees rocks mountaines buildings or whatsoever might have been
their ruine Then he parallells Baptisme with it The like figure whereunto even Baptisme doth also now save us not the putting away the filth of the flesh but the answer of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ which according to Interpreters implyes no more then a resemblance or as Calvin speaks a correspondence though Heb. 9.24 the Apostle useth the same word otherwise The Ark then saved a few when the rest were destroyed Baptisme now saves a few by the resurrection of Christ It will alwaies be saith Calvin on the words as it was in Noahs daies when mankind runnes on their own ruine God wonderfully saves some from the common destruction But here an objection lies that Noahs Ark and New Testament Baptisme are nothing parallell few entred that but now numerous or rather innumerable multitudes are baptized The Apostle answers that the parallell lyes not between the outward Baptisme that is the outward act as man administers it which he calls putting away the filth of the flesh which we know is the work of Baptisme but the answer of a good conscience or the restipulation of a good conscience I desire now to know how the Apostle can be salved from a contradiction He saies Baptisme saves and yet saies the outward putting away the filth of the flesh doth not save but the answer of a good conscience towards God Now this putting away the filth of the flesh done in the Name of Christ or in the Name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost is Baptisme so is not the answer of a good conscience that is no Baptisme The Apostle then should rather have said that the answer of a good conscience saves and not Baptisme But he saies Baptisme saves I see no other way of reconciliation or to make sense of his words then to understand him that Baptisme saves as it hath its work on the conscience as it works upon our understanding and our faith as a sign and seal and is no immediate conveyance of happinesse not any other way of conveyance then as it hath its work on the conscience of the receivers Reasons con ∣ firming Reasons First The Word and Sacraments work after one and the same manner on the soul for salvation respective to any mediate or immediate way of conveyance of any graces or priviledges This is evident in regard of that relation that the Sacraments have to the Word as appendants to it But the force of the Word on the soul to salvation is not inherent not by any immediate conveyance of inward graces or priviledges but as it hath its work on the understanding and faith of him that receiveth it they that understand not are as the highway-ground that gaines nothing It is the power of God for salvation to them that believe Rom. 1.16 It profits not where it is not mixtwith faith Heb. 4.2 It is effectual onely in those that believe 1 Thes 2.13 The bare work done in hearing saves none and so also it is with Sacraments Secondly Signes and pledges added to promises are efficacious no other ways then as they work upon the understanding and faith of those that receive them as signes This may be made good in particular instances in a large induction of signes of all sorts The double sign vouchsafed of God to Gideon for his confirmation in the deliverance of Israel Judg. 6. did not work at all towards such a deliverance further then as it had its work upon the understanding and faith of Gideon to whom it was given The Scarlet thred in Rahabs window had no power for her safety further then it was a sign between her and Joshua minding Joshua of his engagement to her The rainbowe is of no power to save the world from an universal deluge of water further then it minds and assures us of Gods promise The same we may say of all signes and pledges both humane and divine But Sacraments are signes and pledges added to promises as we see here in the text Sacraments then have no others efficacy then as they work on the understanding and faith of the receivers Thirdly There is nothing that is material sensible corporeal that hath any immediate influence or operation upon any object that is spiritual This is plain There must be proportion between the agent and the patient the instrument working and the object wrought upon But the Sacramental signes that we receive as seales are material corporeal sensible and therefore have no such immediate influence upon the soul for the work of grace or conveyance of it Fourthly If this Scripture hold out the work of Sacraments onely by way of sign and seal and no other Scripture holds out any other work to be wrought by them in the soul then this is the whole of their work This is clear Scripture must somewhere hold out the whole that Sacraments effect But this is the whole that the Apostle in this Scripture gives to them where he gives an account of the fruit of Abrahams Circumcision neither is there any other Scripture in which any more is attributed to the working of Sacraments The assumption is of two parts The first none can question that the Apostle ascribes no more here to Sacraments then as hath been said For the second that no other Scripture ascribes any thing further to them shall God willing be made good when we come to examine those Scriptures which are brought in by way of objection for a further work If any would see authorities quoted of men of eminent name that have appeared in defence of this position I shall referre him to reverend Mr. Gatakers learned dispute held with reverend Dr. Ward where he may see multitudes voting for it And when Dr. Ward a Quod quosdam theologos ait hic haerere baptismi effectum hunc ad electos restringere Imo non quâ—dam dunxtaxat sed multo maxima nostrorum pars non tam hic haerent quam ex adverso se diserte opponunt quod ex testimoniis supâ—a adductis luculentissime demonstratum est saith that some Divines do stick at his tenent and do restrain the effect of Baptisme infallibly taking away the guilt of original sin onely to the effect Mr. Gataker replyes not alone some but the greater part of our Divines do not so much stick or hesitate here as professedly oppose which is evidently demonstrated in the testimonies saith he before cited pag. 134. And my reverend friend Mr. Bedford unhappily engaged in this controversy to carry the Sacraments higher then Scripture hath raised them misled with the over esteem of some that have gone that way tells us of hir discouragement by reason of the multitude of those of an opposite opinion that held otherwise then he did about the Sacraments And Mr. Baxter rightly doth observe that at the first broaching of this doctrine among us it was so much disrelished not by Dr. Taylour onely but by most Divines and godly people as
seal and confirm in this that we have grace Answ Not to dispute the absolute Covenant in this place as many call it The Covenant to which Sacraments are annext as seales properly promises priviledges upon condition of graces and requires the graces though God in his elect ever graciously works what it is respective to grace that Sacraments do we have now heard that is to shew us our want of it and point us out the fountain of it engaging us to it and upon our making good our engagements through Grace they ratify these promised priviledges to us 7. Scriptures of two sorts are brought by those that would advance Sacraments above that which they work as signs and seales Seventhly The texts of Scripture brought by those that would raise the work of Sacraments above all that they do as signes and seales and to evince that they have an absolute work on the soul without respect had either to the understanding or faith of the receivers are of two sorts The first are such where no Sacrament at all is mentioned neither can it by any good argument be proved that Sacraments in those texts are directly intended Others are such wherein Baptisme indeed is mentioned but faith is evidently required to the attainment of the effect there specified when these two are proved a full answer is given to all the Scriptures which by the Adversaries in this behalf are objected Scriptures of the first rank are 1. Such wherein no Sacrament is mentioned nor can be proved that any is intended Titus 3.5 According to his mercy he saved us by the washing of Regeneration Ephes 5.25 26. Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it that he might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word 1. Cor. 6.12 Such were some of you but ye are washed but ye are sanctified but ye are justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus Though the thing signified in Baptisme is here evidently spoken to and some allusion may be conceived to be here made to Baptisme yet I suppose that it can by no good argument be proved that the Sacrament of Baptisme in any of these Scriptures is intended First Arguments evincing that Baptisme is not intended in the Sacramental work of it The Lords Supper may be as fairely evidenced out of Christ words John 6.53 54 55. Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood ye have no life in you whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life and I will raise him up at the last day for my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed as Baptisme may be evinced out of any of those texts alleadged when yet Protestant Writers unanimously conclude and severall learned Papists yield that no Sacramentall eating is there intended To clear this they say there is a meer Sacramentall eating and drinking the flesh and blood of Christ when the outward signs are received and no more a meer spirituall eating and drinking when Christ is applyed by faith without any Sacramentall sign and an eating and drinking both Sacramental and Spirituall when the Sacrament is received by sincere believers and the text in John is understood as they conclude of bare spiritual eating and drinking The same we may apply to washing and conclude that it is meerly spiritual washing that in these texts alleadged is understood Secondly There are the same phrases or those that are parallell with them in Old Testament-Scriptures when no Sacrament of this kind was instituted and therefore could not be intended Psal 51.7 Purge me with Hyssope and I shall be clean wash me and I shall be whiter then Snow Ezek. 36.25 Then will I sprinckle cleane water upon you and you shall be clean from all your filthinesse And it must needs be that meer Spiritual and not Sacramentall washing for the reason alleadged must in these texts be understood Thirdly If outward Baptisme were there intended why should not the word Baptisme be there as in other places used when we see it is yet omitted when other words are in the stead of it industriously chosen when common washing is intended we know that the word Baptisme is frequently used as Mar. 7.8 Luk. 11.38 and so also when legall cleansing is spoken to as Heb. 9.20 And in case Baptisme it self were here purposely intended it is marvel that other words should by the Spirit of God be chose and this laid aside Fourthly This Interpreters of eminent note have seen Mr. Gataker disceptatio de Baptis Infant vi efficacia pag 51. saith It g Dubitari potest non immerito baptismine Sacramentum an interna ablutio hoc nomine eo loci designetur may justly be doubted whether the Sacrament of Baptisme or inward washing in that place of Titus 3.5 be understood then adds h Atque ego certe etiamsi ad baptismi ritum externum respectum aliquem haberi nullus negaverim de interna tamen ab lutione diserte dictum existimo quae externa illa lotione corporis designatur ut ex clausula mox sequente verba illa exponantur per lavacrum regenerationis non videtur apostolus significare baptismum sed ipsam regenerationem quam lavacro comparat Though I am not he that will deny that some respect is had in those words to the outward rite of Baptisme yet I believe that they are expressely spoken of the inward washing and that the words may be interpreted by the clause immediately following the renewing by the Holy Ghost quoting Piscator for his opinion Thes theol vol. 1. loc 25. Sect. 20. who saith By the laver of regeneration the Apostle seems not to intend baptisme but regeneration it self which he compares to a laver and also Dr. Slater on Rom. 2.25 affirming That it is doubtful whether in Titus 3.5 there be any speech of the Sacrament or onely of the blood of Christ and of the Spirit and in his words as the Reader that pleases to consult him may see he takes in Ephes 5.26 likewise Vorstius speaks most fully of all to these Texts mentioning the Argument drawn from Ephes 5. Titus 3. for the opus operatum in Sacraments he sayes Our Divines answer i Aliena testimonia citari viz. quae res quidem in Sacramentis significatas metaphorice declarant attamen de Sacramentis proprie dictis non agunt That impertinent testimonies are urged which hold forth the thing signified in Sacraments by way of metaphor but do not speak of Sacraments properly so called Antibel Tom. 3. Contro 1. Thes 1. 2. And whereas Calvin is produced by some as interpreting Titus 3.5 of outward baptisme his authority will but little help them k Non dubito quin saltem ad baptismum alludat imo facile patior de baptismo locum exponi I do not doubt saith he but that the Apostle doth at least allude to baptisme and further saith I can easily bear
that this place should be interpreted of baptisme on which words of his Mr. Gataker pag. 123. very well comments l Quasi aliam potius quorundam expositionem probaturus ni aliorum importunitas aliò impelleret Verba sunt enim alii concedentis aliquid potius quam animi sui sensum enuntiantis As though he would rather saith he allow another interpretation if the importunity of others did not lead him that way They are words of one granting or rather yielding somewhat to another man then speaking his own mind as he further observes And Mr. Burges Spiritual Refining Part 1. pag. 214. speaking of Baptisme saith it is called the laver of regeneration Titus 3.5 as some expound it giving us to understand that it is no exposition universally agreed upon and sufficiently hinting that it is the more inconsiderable part that do interpret it this way Fifthly Though we should yield that these places were to be understood of the Sacrament of Baptisme as Calvin saith he could be content to do yet all this while nothing is gained seeing it still rests to be proved that this is meant any otherwise then by way of sign and seal they conclude no abolute work but onely as they have their influence upon the understanding and faith of the receivers And therefore Calvin when he was prevailed withall to yield so farre as we have heard presently addes m Non quod in externo aquae symbolo inclusa sit salus sed quia partam à Christo salutem Baptismus nobis obsignat Not that salvation is included in the outward symbole of water but because Baptisme seales it to us when Christ hath obtained it for us And Danaeus speaking to that Argument of Bellarmine that the Scripture witnesseth that the words of the Sacrament are active instruments of our justification and not seales of the promise giving instance in these and the like Scriptures for this purpose answers n Instrumenta signa etiam mere obsignantia testantia dicuntur per tropum metonymiam id facere quod obsignant nam annulus sponsalium qui solus est signum eorum dicitur conjun gere obligare sponsos contractus instrumentum quod solum consensus signum obstringere contrahentes Doctoratus sigillum literae creasse effecisse n. Doctoâ—em quaeenim nos juvant efficere ea ipsa dicuntur propter finem in quem spectant in quibus ab eis juvamur Verum vitanda est verborum hujusmodi quae ut causis vel signis vel instrumentis actionem tribuunt homonymia ne propterea censcamus ea signa vel instrumenta esse causas istâ—us actionis vel effecti vel fructus efficientes efficiunt enim aut efficere di cuntur illa effecta suo tantum modo nempe per modum duntaxat signi quatenus obsignant certificant eam actionem vel effectionem aut per modum instrumenti quoniam ad effectionem ad hibentur multum enim signa vera instrumenta inter se proprie differunt signa vero nihil plane ad effectio nem conferunt qualia sunt Sacramenta sed affectionem Sp. S. opus illius in nobis duntaxat vâ—rissime certissime testantur consignant Instruments and signs meerly testifying and sealing are said by a trope and metonymy to do that which they seal for even a ring used in espousals which onely is a sign is said to joyn and bind the espoused an instrument of contract which is onely a token of agreement is said to bind the contractors and the letters and seal of a Doctor to create a Doctor for those things that are helpful to us are said to effect those things as to such an end in which they are helpful But the homonymy of words of this nature is to be shunned which attributes actions to signes or instruments as to causes lest upon that account we may think that such signes or instruments are causes of such actions or efficients of such fruits and effects For they effect or are said to do such a work alone after their manner that is onely by way of sign as they seal or certify such an act or work or by way of instrument because they are used in the work For signes and instruments properly so called do very much differ For signes contribute nothing to the work of which sort are Sacraments but onely truely and certainly testifie and seal the work of the Spirit of God wrought Danaeus Contra Bellarmi Tom. Contro 2. Cap. 14. ad Arg. 2. Abundance more might be added to clear these Texts and take them out of their hands that urge them for this purpose though they were meant of the Sacraments which is not to be granted And what we have said of these Texts may be affirmed of that also Deut. 30.6 I will circumcise thy heart and the heart of thy seed Circumcision which was a Sacrament is indeed there named but the speech is onely borrowed by way of metaphor from the circumcision of the flesh and applyed to the heart as is clear Deut. 10.16 where that work is given in command to the Jewes and they were not commanded to circumcise themselves but were already in Circumsion A second sort of Scriptures are such in which baptisme is mentioned but faith evidently required to the attainment of the effects of it A second sort of Scriptures are such where Baptisme is indeed mentioned and the Sacrament of Baptisme intended but faith is evidently required for the attainment of the effect specified These especially are Acts 2.38 Repent and be baptized every one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins Acts 22.16 Rise and be baptized and wash away thy sins calling on the Name of the Lord. I shall referre the Reader for a full vindication of these Scriptures to Mr. Gatakers disceptation pag. 9 10 c. pag. 56 57. and shall onely adde that that phrase in the Name of the Lord utterly destroies all that they would build on these words seeing it implies faith in his Name as Acts 3.16 may be seen And howsoever Infants that are in Covenant upon their parents profession of faith are baptized into this Name yet those of yeares as these were to whom this speech is directed are in their own persons not onely to make profession of faith but in sincerity to believe in order to attainment to the pardon of their sins or any other spiritual priviledge of the Covenant whatsoever Yea that which these men would draw from these Texts stands not with their principles that urge them The Sacraments work grace say they as instruments I shall then desire to know whether positive infidelity be not such a barre that will hinder If it be a barre in men of yeares then the Sacrament works not without actual faith in the baptized It is the priviledge of faith to obtain forgivenesse of sin Act. 13.39 Rom. 3.25 It is the work then
them making them to think that this is all that can be said for them Mr. Fuller in his history of holy warre lib 3. cap. 20. quoting out of Reinerius a charge against the Albigenses that they gave no reverence to holy places answers It is true And then gives in this for a reason because most in that age ran riot in adoring of Churches as if some inherent holinesse was ceiled to their roof or plaistered to their walls yea such as might more ingratiate with God the persons and prayers of people there assembled Let men take heed that they raise not Sacraments above the honour that Scripture gives them with like successe as these did places of publick holy assemblies a good cause hath not a greater adversary then a weak argument taken up in the defence of it This argument I confesse had it ground to stand upon might be of force for the battery of Anabaptisme but having no Scripture-bottome it presently falls before any adversary and Anabaptisme gathers strength by the fall of it 3. As to the argument it self tending to evince the uselessenesse of infant-Baptisme it may very fitly be parallelled with that Objection made against Pauls doctrine Rom. 3.1 when he had made it his great businesse to set circumcision on its right bottom and declared that it was not efficacious in the way that they expected and that it was without use for salvation unlesse it were answered with the Circumcision of the heart an objection presently is raised What profit is there then of Circumcision so these likewise when Sacraments are not raised to that height as the Schoolmen have advanced them to be instruments of conveyance of grace by the work done and as they expect from them they presently demand what profit And affirm as to infants at least that they are uselesse 4. That answer which Paul gives to his Questionists that demanded what profit is there of Circumcision I give to those that demand what profit is there of infant-Baptisme Having asserted in general Much every way he answers more punctually instancing in one eminent priviledge that virtually comprized all the external priviledges enjoyned by Israel as Church-members chiefly that to them were committed the Oracles of God It was said before that these priviledges in all Sacraments are either actually conferred or infallibly evidenced In Baptisme a true title is legally conferred Upon account of our baptisme we have an orderly and legall right and title to all succeeding Church-priviledges as the Jewes had done upon account of their Circumcision though there be not alwayes an aptitude for actual admission to them or improvement of them Upon this ground infants have 1. Their share and interest in all the prayers made for the Church collectively even in all that are preferred to God by his people for Zion and Jerusalem This was the duty of every son of Zion Psal 122.6 This was the faithfulls practice Psal 51.18 and in these infants as Church-members had their interest on this account infants were brought to Christ Priviledges following upon infant-baptisme That he might put his hands upon them and pray Matth. 19.13 2. They have their share in the blessings of the Church we see with what solemnity it was to be done Num. 6.22 c. The Lord spake unto Moses saying Speak unto Aaron and unto his sons saying On this wise ye shall blesse the children of Israel saying unto them The Lord blesse thee and keep thee c. and they shall put my Name upon the children of Israel and I will blesse them Infants had their share here and upon this account infants were blessed of Christ Mar. 10.16 3. Their relation to God by virtue of Covenant-interest is hereby evidenced and ratified How transcendent a priviledge this is to have the Lord for our God we see Psal 144.15 having reckoned up several mercies the Psalmist concludes Happy is the people that is in such a case yea happy is that people whose God is the Lord This is the priviledge of every infant that upon Covenant title is baptized God will not suffer their enemies to passe without vengeance As it was an acceptable work to dash the infants of Babylon against the stones Psal 137.9 being a seed growing up against God so it is as displeasing and provoking to harme these that are a seed dedicated unto and growing up for God 4. Baptisme teaches them to know as soon as they are of capacity to learn to whom they belong what Master they are to serve and in what School they are to be trained 5. A necessity is seen to get the knowledge of Christ and timely to walk in his wayes 6. A delight is wrought in them towards those in whose communion they are bred and that own them as theirs whereas being debarred in childhood from this society and denyed this badge it is the way to bring them to maligne them each one is apt to love those of his owne fraternity and on the contrary to study the opposition of others 7. The aggravation of their sin presently rings in their ears by reason of the favour they receive from God the society into which they are incorporated when their conversation doth not in some measure answer their profession 8. Parents here see a strong engagement to bring them up for Christ whom they have thus dedicated to him and put into the fellowship of those who are his Saints and members When they have brought forth children unto God they see their sin heightned in giving them to Moloch or any other besides God and there is no example of any believing parent in all the Scripture bringing up a child for Covenant but in Covenant with the Lord. These alone though more might be added might stop the mouthes of all that insultingly move this question 5. That which in present does not but hereafter may work upon the understanding is not vain and uselesse when it is done That was not vain which Christ did to Peter Joh. 13.17 when he said unto him What I do thou knowest not now but thou shalt know hereafter 6. Seals of purchases taken in infants names are of use to infants though during infancy they know not how to make actual improvement themselves of them If Baptisme hath its actual use in behalf of infants whilest infants as hath been shewed and remains with them to be improved by their understanding and faith when they come to maturity it cannot be thought to be vain and uselesse SECT IV. A Corollary from the former doctrine THen it followes by way of necessary Corollary from that which hath been said Answer to Sacramental engagementsâ— ncessary to salvation that unlesse the soul answer to Sacramental engagements Sacraments are not efficacious for salvation to the receivers This is a clear result from that which hath been said and is fully delivered by the Apostle 1 Pet. 3.21 speaking of the Arke of Noah wherein few that is eight souls were saved by water he
bigger then the Earth that â—e may call an opinion That which by reason we can certainly conclude we may call knowlege but that which we believe upon the credit of him that speaks it that is faith or belief This is so of the being of faith that without it there is no faith neither humane nor divine The Nobleman of Israel 2 Kings 7.1 Zachary the father of John Baptist Luk 1.18 Martha John 11.39 40. were all of them herein faulty This Truth of God was above their reason and therefore they suspended their faith in it We believe not what man saith when we do not assent to the truth of that which he speaks and we believe not what God speaks further then we assent to the truth of his Word Thus far the devills go having sufficient experience of the Truth of God and thus far and further we must go if we be in the faith Now this assent hath these two properties first It is Firm secondly Vnlimitted absolute 1. Firm. and full First firm Not alwaies free from assaults and doubtings Satan and our own hearts will muster up objections but such that yeilds not but withstands and overcomes doubtings holds firm to truth when all means are used to wrest from it Herein Eve failed God had said The day that ye eat ye shall surely die Satan brought such objections that upon his word she believed that she should procure good to her self 2. Absolute and unlimited and not incur evil by eating and so yielded to unbelief upon Satans reasonings As our assent must be firm so also absolute and unlimitted to the whole of all that God speaks such was the faith of Paul Acts 24.14 Believing all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets and Christ blames the two Disciples that their faith was not such Luk 24.25 How little honour do we give to man when sometimes we give credit and belief to that which he saies because we see reason and probability of truth in his words and at other times call all to question that he speaks such is the honour that many give to God when they pick and choose in believing as they do in obeying Promises must be believed in the way of Gods tender of them with limit to the conditions annexed to them Threatnings must be believed upon those grounds that they are menaced commands must be believed that is Gods soveraignty in them the justice and equity of them and a necessity of our yielding to them As it must be an assent to the whole Word of God So it must be an assent to it in that sense as God propounds it The Word in that sense that it gives of it self is the Word of God and not otherwise when we put our sense upon it we make it our word not Gods Where we must not condemn all for unbelief that are any waies subject to mistakes or that through weaknesse of judgment do not apprehend every thing as it is Willing and wilfull wrestings of the Word are here spoke against when carnall reasonings out of singularity vain-glory carnall contentment hope of gain and admiration of men are set up against the Truth of God if we should go no further in our scrutiny how many would be found unsound in the faith Have we not those that are so far from any close adherence to truth tendred that every wind tosseth them to and fro and drives them up and down that hold no longer in an opinion then a mimick gallant keeps in a fashion and change their faith as these do their dresse Have we not those that believe where they list and that is where it may serve for their advantage or repute but where they list not they can deny all faith to any truth that God speaks deny it they wil where they see it tends to their danger No swearer no drunkard no adulterer no extorting oppressor c. can believe the truth of God in his Word but he must with it believe his own condemnation 2. In the will with the affections But faith is a work of the whole soul and implyes the will with the affections as well as the understanding Faith is exprest in Scripture by our coming to Christ Joh. 6.35 And that is a work of the will and not of the mind of the judgement and not of the affections It is called a receiving of Christ Joh. 1.12 this is also done by the will and affections Consideration and deliberation are works of the understanding but choise and imbracing are works of the will when the woman of Samaria Joh. 4.29 saith Is not this the Messiah There was matter of consideration and deliberation there was work for the understanding to be imployed in whether he were to be acknowledged indeed the Messiah But now to leave all and follow Christ to forsake all and cleave to him This is matter of choise and work for the will and affections whose work it is to take or refuse Therefore as faith is set out in Scripture by words implying knowledge and assent so likewise by words implying affiance trust rolling casting a mans self on the Lord. Faith then takes Christ and cleaves to him in all of those relations in which a Christian stands to Christ takes Christ and lookes for no other delight or comfort takes Christ and will not indure any other Lord or commander takes Christ and lookes for no other helper takes Christ and lookes for no other Saviour takes Christ as a Saviour and trusts in him takes Christ as an husband and delights in him takes Christ as a Lord and obeyes him Thus according to the several offices that Christ does there are several actings of faith for to answer The great work of Christ was to give his soul an offering for sin to shed his blood to take away our guilt there faith answers and it is not alone said that they that believe are justified from all things from which they could not be justified by the Law of Moses which might imply no more then a qualification of the person to be justified but it is further said that Christ is set forth a propitiation through faith in his blood Rom. 3.25 which plainly denotes the instrument whereby we have our interest When there are many acts of faith that which respects his blood alone doth justifie Christ is set up as a King and hath all things put in subjection under him Here faith yields up all to him and consents as to be saved so to be ruled by him Christ in his Kingly power protects as well as commands as he holds out a Scepter so he is a shield Faith flyes unto him for shelter and so receives and quenches all Satans darts Christ is given as an head to his body the Chuch not onely for command but for quickning and enlivening power to supply with vitall energies every part and member Here faith answers and takes in from Christ the Spirit by the promises
promise and that in Scripture made to men baptized for a larger measure of grace for strength for confession of faith But our acute disputant should shew us where this promise is made to his Chrisme made up of oyl and Balsame and thus cross'd and bless'd 2. He should remember that he himself tells us that the Apostles had this promise made good unto them without this or any sign at all 3. He might have found many of these promises in Old-Testament times which yet made up no such Sacrament in those daies Act. 8.17 vindicated The outward sensible sign he finds Act. 8. where it is said They put their hands upon them and they received the Holy Ghost But 1. Papists use no imposition of hands in this supposed Sacrament 2. In other Sacraments both we and they make the outward sign and matter to be one and the same why is it then that imposition of hands is the sign and other things the matter 3. The gifts there mentioned are not saving but miraculous proper to those times and not found in ours 4. Those were conferred before Baptisme as well as after Act. 10.44 Who can forbid water that these should be baptized seeing they have received the Holy Ghost as well as we The command from God Bellarmine will prove from the Apostles use of this sign If God had not enjoyned imposition of hands The Apostles imposition of hands no proof of Confirmation they would not so ordinarily saith he have laid on their hands in conferring of gifts Answ 1. we look for a command for that which our adversaries do use viz. their Chrisme Balsame Crosse and not for imposition of hands which they use not 2. John did baptize yet our Author will not allow that for a proof that he had a command to baptize 3. The pen-men of the Holy Ghost wrote Scripture yet that is no proof with him that they had a command to write 4. Alex. Hal. part 4 quaest 9. affirms that Christ the Lord did neither institute nor dispense this Sacrament as it is a Sacrament 5. Thomas Aquinas is more modest likewise as we heard before when we spake to the Author of Sacraments confessing that their Chrisme is not found in Scriptures and he excuses it as not belonging to the being but solemnity of Sacraments therein confessing that all that belongs to the being of Sacraments ought to be written in Scriptures But though his answer is more modest yet it is lesse advised that which all his fellowes make the matter of this Sacrament he denies to belong to the being of it The ancient use of that which afterwards did degenerate into this soppery The ancient use of confirmation degenerated into this practice Bellarmine out of Chemnitius layes down in six Propositions 1. When a child baptized in infancy comes to discretion he is to be instructed in the principles of Religion and then to be brought before the Church and put in mind of his Baptisme how and why he was baptized 2. He is to utter a profession of his own faith according as he hath learned 3. He is to be examined in the principal heads of Christian Religion 4. He is to be admonished that hereby he now differs from Heathens Hereticks and all of prophane opinions 5. There is to be added an exhortation concerning the vow of Baptisme and the necessity of perseverance in the doctrine 6. This is to be concluded with prayer And if laying on of hands be used it may be well done saith Chemnitius without any superstition But when care in Catechizing and examination is wanting it is no better saith he then an idle Ceremony and with addition of the forementioned Ceremonies a meer foppery SECT VII Pennance no Sacrament THe next that they would obtrude upon us as a Sacrament is Pennance Satan not enduring the grace of Repentance hath made it his businesse to rob us of the Word and to bring in that of Pennance in the stead of it leaving little that is of God in it and making it up with the device of man It is not my work in this place to speak to Repentance as it is held forth in the Gospel to us and to be practised of Christians whether as it is inward the change of the mind and will from evil to good from Satan to God or outward in answerable works of obedience We confesse a necessity of it in this sense in the highest degree a necessity as well medii as praecepti being not onely enjoyned by command from God but of that necessity that salvation cannot be obtained without it Luk. 13.3 Except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish but the Sacramentality of it which they assert we wholly deny Our souls having all made shipwrack in our first parents and upon that account made lyable to wrath the first plank for safety they say is Baptisme in which all sin Original or Actual before contracted is actually pardoned and that Sacrament is as they say of no further use for the pardon of any sins following after it The second plank for safety after shipwrack with them is Pennance which is a following Sacrament for remission of sins not so easie as the former but attended with more trouble The parts of pennance 1. Contrition consisting of three parts Contrition Confession and Satisfaction The first of these aright understood we willingly acknowledge to be a Christian duty and a necessary requisite to the grace of Repentance 2 Cor. 7.10 Godly sorrow worketh Repentance to Salvation not to be repented of Upon sense of sin we are brought to turn from sin 2. Confession Confession we likewise acknowledge knowing with Job that it is an evil to hide our sins as Adam Job 31.33 and that the Apostle tells us If we confesse our sins God is just and faithful to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousnesse 1 Joh. 1.10 But that which they would bring in which is a whisper of all in a Priests ear in order to take from him some bodily Pennance and accordingly receive his absolution we deny and well know that it were a vain labour to search into the Scriptures or antiquity for it Satisfaction we so farre receive that offenders to publick scandal must make that publick acknowledgement that the Church may with freedom receive them into communion 3. Satisfaction But for satisfaction to God we must let it alone for ever unlesse we will shoulder Christ out of that function and take it upon our own persons he will never suffer that we should be sharers with him in it and so we should be for ever on the work as the damned in hell are and never able to go through with it This is as though a man were fined of his Prince as much as the servant in the Parable was indebted to his Lord ten thousand talents and should attempt to pay it with a few pence of a counterfeit coyn of his own stamp
to the question Saving from the power of Sin Sanctifies and not Justifies Your fourth Of faiths receiving Christ as he Justifies us affirming that he Justifies us as King Judge and Benefactor is the same for ought I can discern with your tenth and there is to be considered Your fifth is If receiving Christ as Satisfier and Meritor be the only faith that gives right to Justification then on the same grounds we must say It is the only faith that gives right to further Sanctification and to Glorification If you put this argument into form the word meritor will be found aequivocall and the Syllogism to consist of four termes We look at Christ for Justification as satisfying Justice and meriting pardon and remission not as meriting Sanctification Sixthly you say Rejecting Christ as a King is the condemning sin therefore receiving him as King is the Justifying faith This is like the old argument Evill works merit condemnation Ergo good works merit salvation An ill meaning damnes Prov. 21.27 Our good meaning therefore saves I further answer Rejecting Christ as a King is a sin against the Morall Law which damnes Yet somewhat more then subjection to the Morall Law is required that a sinner may be saved You give in your reason of your consequent Because unbelief say you condemneth at least partly as it is the privation of the Justifying Faith explaining your self that you speak of that condemnation or peremptory sentence which is proper to the New Law To this I answer Unbelief if we speak properly doth not at all condemne further then as it is a breach of a Morall Commandment The privation of which you speak only holds the sentence of the Law in force and power against us which me thinks should be your judgment as well as mine seeing you are wont to compare the New Law as you call it to an Act of Oblivion And an Act of Oblivion saves many but condemnes none If a Traytor or Murtherer be exempted in any such Act of Oblivion it is their crime that condemnes them only the Act provides no remedy for them It harmes them not only it does not help them If one of those which were stung by the fiery serpent Numb 21. had refused to have look'd on the brazâ—n serpent The sting had been his death and such obstinate refusall had kept him from the meanes of cure Your seventh is Kissing the Son and submitting to him as King is made the condition of escaping his wrath Answ If you had said A condition you had spoken fairlier The condition implies the sole condition The yeelding up of our selves to him in all his functions as the Lords Christ vers 2. is there understood which is of necessity in all that will escape his wrath Eighthly you say Matth. 11.28 29 30. The condition of case and of rest from guilt as well as power of sin is our comming to Christ as a teacher and example of meeknesse and lowlinesse and our learning of him a taking on us his yoke and burthen Answ This text shewes the duty of men to be not alone to seek rest and ease from Christ but to learn of Christ and follow him But neither their learning nor their imitation but faith in his blood is their freedome or Justification Ninthly you say That faith which is the condition of salvation is the condition of Justification or remission But it is the receiving of Christ as King as well as a satisfier that is the condition of our salvation Therfore c. Answ Here the Conclusion is safely granted You know that we yeeld that the faith that accepts Christ as a King Justifies But that is not the Justifying act The hand hath more officers then one It works as well as receives and so hath faith And that there is more reqâ—ired as a condition to Salvation then to Justification speaking of it in Scripture phrase you yeeld sufficiently where you distinguish of Justification begun the condition whereof is faith only and Justification consummate there you bring in Repentance and Obedience That which you call Justification begun is Justification properly so called Faith only is serviceable to reconcile us unto God but there is more required for reparation of our qualifications to hold us up in communion with God Of this I have spoke Chap. 1.2 13 14. of my treatise of the Covenant Your tenth and last reason is If accepting Christ a Lord Redeemer be the fides quae Justificat i. e. quae est conditio Justificationis then it is meerly strictly and properly the Justifying act of faith as the accepting of Christs righteousnesse is But the Antecedent you say is granted by all Divines that you have to do with Therefore c. Answ If they grant your Antecedent simply as in this phrase you deliver it I much marvell This seemes to imply that Christ acted quà Lord in paying the price of our Redemption and that this work of his is to be referred to his exaltation and not to his state of humiliation And I am sure the Scripture speaks otherwise That which I yeeld is That the faith which accepts Christ who is our Lord and Redeemer is the faith which Justifies and the condition of our Justification But as it lookes upon Redemption a sacrificing act of Priest-hood The distinctias fides quae and fides quà asserted done by him who is indeed a Lord and King sit only Justifies But this distinction of Fides quae Justificat and Fides quà Justificat is as you are pleas'd to say the generall cheat so that your Antecedent it seemes is granted you by all those Divines with whom you deal under this limit And as it seems you have met with a pack of impostors that of the most learned in the Land that out of their great condescension have written for your satisfaction This word you think sounds harshly from Mr. Crandon as indeed it doth and is no small blemish to his great paines you may then judge how it will take from your self in the ears of others And I much marvell that this distinction that every where else would passe and be confessed to be of necessity to avoid confusion in those distinct capacities in which men usually act should here not alone be questioned but thus branded Does not every man that undergoes various relatitions variously act according to them And do not men that make addresse addresse themselves in like variety He that is at once a Husband a Parent a Master a School-master a Physician acts variously according to all of these capacities Some come to him as a father some as a Master some as a Teacher all of them come unto him as a Physician But only they that come to him as a Physician are cur'd by him Believers through faith go to Christ that bears all the relations mentioned But as they seek satisfaction in his blood-shedding which is an act of his Priest-hood they are justified Learned Amesius may
with you are God for you tell us presently that he was justified by them The Apostle indeed addes in the following words He that judgeth me is the Lord But those words have not reference to these now in hand as is plain in the context but to that which he had spoken to vers 3. With me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you or of mans Judgment yea I judge not mine own self to which these words come in direct opposition But he that judgeth me is the Lord. And thus then the Apostle here argues He that must stand to the Judgment of the Lord may account it a very small thing to be judged of men But I must stand to the Judgment of the Lord Ergo. I think the Reader may find a better interpretation of this text from Mr. Ball quoted by me in this treatise which might be seconded by the authority of severall others and such as he sayth renders the text strong against Justification by works When you have expounded the words as you have done they serve to shut out all works in which Paul ever appear'd from Justification There followes such an inference that you would hardly bear with from another Can you hence prove say you that accepting Christ as a Lord is not the condition of Justification then you may prove the same of the accepting of him as a Saviour It seemes every word in a whole treatise must immediatly of it self formally prove the main thing that is in question It proves that works parallel to Abrahams offering Isaack or leaving of his Country are none such whereby men are justified It fully proves that which the next words seems to disprove I brought in by way of objection that text of James and endeavoured to give some answer to it James 2 24. vindicated James indeed saith that Abraham was Justified by works when he had offered Isaack his Son on the Altar Jam. 2.21 But either there we must understand a working faith with Pisator Paraeus and Penible and confess that Paul and James handle two distinct questions The one whether faith alone Justifies without works which he concludes in the affirmative The other what faith Justifies Whether a working faith only and not a faith that is dead and idle Or else I know not how to make sense of the Apostle who streight infers from Abrahams Justification by the offer of his Son And the Scripture was fulfilled which saith Abraham believed God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse How otherwise do these aceord He was Justified by works and the Scripture was fulfilled which saith he was Justified by faith Here are many exceptions taken If James must use the term works twelve times in thirteen verses a thing not usuall as if he had fore-seen how men would question his meaning and yet for all that we must believe that by works James doth not mean works it would prove as hard a thing to understand the Scripture as the Papists would perswade us that it is Answ First it seemes the difficulty of interpretation is supposed when the word is used 12 times so near together otherwise I doubt not but your self wil confesse a necessity of interpretation of this kind which yet you would be loath to have branded with such absurdity Secondly If I durst take the liberty that others assume the doubt were easily solved and say that Paul speakes of a reall Justification James of an equivocall which interpretation would far better suit here then else where A dead faith is fit to work a dead Justification and such as carries as full resemblance to Justification in truth as a dead corps doth of a living man Thirdly were you to interpret that of David Psal 22.6 I am a worm and no man I think you would so interpret it as to make him a man and no worm But to leave Metaphors Metonymies frequent in Scripture and come to the Metonymies of this kind How frequently are such found in Scripture which inforce us to say that not to be in strict Propriety of speech what Scrippture saies is He hath made him to be sin for us 2 Cor. 5.21 When yet we must say he was not made sin an entity cannot be made a non ens or meer privation He was made then an atonement for sin a sin-offering as we say a Metonymy of the Adjunct These died in faith having not received the promises Heb. 11.13 They had received the promises Rom. 9.4 It is a contradiction to say They died in the faith and had not received the promise It is taken there for the land promised a Metonymy of the Object When Herod the King heard these things he was troubled and all Jerusalem with him Matth. 2.3 Jerusalem was not troubled It was alone the Inhabitants that were troubled by a Metonymy of the Subjâ—ct This is the Will of God even your Sanctification 1 Thes 4.4 and this was not voluntas Dei but res volita not the Will of God but the thing willed by a Metonymy of the Cause A Thousand more of these might be named which yet are as well understood as we understand each others common Language 2. Do but read say you over all the severses put working faith instead of works trie what sense you will make Answ Here is implyed that As works are taken in some of these verses So they must be taken in all If there be no Metonymy in all then there is no Metonymy in any As one so all are to be understood But if you please to consult Gomarus in his vindication of those words of Christ Matth. 23.27 Com. 1. Pag. 110.111 One and the same word is often repeated in the same verse or neer to it in a different sense Infirma est haec consequentia nititur enim falsa hypothesi quasi ejusdem verbi repetitio semper eundem sensum postularet cum contra pro circumstantiarum ratione saepe diverso sensu accipiatur quem admodum illustria ex empla demonstrant You will find frequent instances where the same word in the self same place or verse must be taken in a different sense in one properly and in the other figuratively Interpreting those words O Jerusalem Jerusalem of the heads and leaders of the people of Jerusalem there lies an objection against him that in Luk. 13.33 the words immediatly before are It cannot be that a Prophet should perish out of Jerusalem where the word Jerusalem is taken for the City it self and not for the heads and leaders of the people He answers This consequence is weak For it is built upon a false ground as though the repetition of the same word should also enforce the same sense when contrawise according to the circumstance of the place it may be taken in a different sence as many illustr ous examples make manifest Instancing in Joh. 3.17 God sent not his Son into the world to condemne the world
teachers or contradict others when they have got two or three words of Scripture Nor such as have not wit for an ordinary businesse and yet think thy can master the deepest controversies He that thinks to do this without a peircing wit as well as grace ordinarily thinks to see without eyes 2. That he be one that hath longer and more diligently and seriously exercised himself in these studies then I have done 3. That he be one more free from prejudice and partiality then I am 4. That he have more of the illumination of Gods Spirit which is the chief 5. That he have a more sanctified heart that he may not be led away by wrong ends or blinded by his vices It is not for me here to enter comparison There being but one piece of one of them in which I can speak any such priority I have been longer I think exercised in these studies which is all that I have to plead and I wish it had been with more serious diligence It is my way then to keep silence Though many may think that you are scarce serious in judging all of these to be necessary requisites in any that shall take upon them such boldness seeing you seem not to tye your self up to this Rule in your dealings with others You are pleased sometimes to say that you should have little modesty or humility if you should not think more highly of the understanding of many Reverend and Learned Brethren who dissent from you in severall points debated between you and me then of your own Yet who is it of all these that you do not charge with error Yea where is there the man almost in the world that hears not that charge from your pen More then once you charge error on Reverend Dr. Twisse Prolocutor while he lived of the late Assembly in speaking for justification of of Infidels as you call it and making it an immanent act in God warning younger Students to be wary in their Reading of him In whose behalf Mr. Jessop hath stood up as an advocate not pleading justification in his name but not guilty In which I shall not interpose My judgement in the thing is sufficiently known You charge the Assembly that set him up in that honour in like sort entring your dissent from their larger Catechism in four passages from their confession in six desiring onely indeed a liberty of expounding but in several of them you well know that your exposition was none of their meaning which you do not obscurely signifie in the different expression of your self in your dissent from them and from the Synod of Dort You charge the pious Ministry of this Nation in general out of whom that Assembly was gathered in the Preface of your Confession with error in their thoughts about Church Discipline and if information do not deceive me as full an Assembly of Learned and pious Ministers as Conveniently live for such a meeting together in any part of the Nation after a full debate of that which you charge as an error determined it against you Lastly you charge the whole reforming party of Divines with four great errors as we have seen in your Apology pag. 16. Now for a man to think that you judge your self above all these in this gradation mentioned in every one of those enumerated qualifications were indeed to challenge both your humility and modesty Your Readers then must conclude that either you were not serious in your List given in or else you take liberty to transgress your own Rules and set upon that work your self which you will not allow in others After quotation of severall passages of the Fathers with which all must vote you seem to prefer one of Austin above all contra rationem nemo sobrius contra Scripturas nemo Christianus contra ecclesiam nemo pacificus Making that application of this as you have done of none of the other That in the point of faiths instrumentality and the nature of the justifying act taking in afterwards the interest of mans obedience in justication as it is consummate in judgement you are constrained upon all these three grounds to give in your dissent I can perswade none to abjure Christianity renounce reason and make a schisme in the Church as it seems you think you must do to come over to me and yeelding as cleerly enough you do that I have this little corner of the world wheresoever Protestants dwell for an hundred and fifty yeers past on my side sure you stand amazed that none of all these men in so long a space of time can either be brought to the sight of reason or to a right understanding of Scriptures or yet to returne to that unity from which they have in so foul a Schism departed These points on the two first grounds have been brought already as well as I can do it to the test In which you see my reason against yours and my sense of Scriptures against that which you have given The third onely doth remain to be enquired into and I cannot yet believe that the Church is my adversary And here you seem to put me fairly to it If you will bring say you one sound reason one word of Scripture or one approved writer of the Church yea or one Heretick or any man whatsoever for many hundred years after Christ I think I may say 1300. at least to prove that Christ as Lord or King is not the object of the justifying act of faith or that faith justifieth properly as instrument I am contented so far to lose the reputation of my reason understanding reading and memory You speak this you say because I tell you there was scarce a dissenting voyce among our Divines against me about the instrumentality of faith and if say you there cannot be brought one man that consenteth with them for 1200. or 1400. years after Christ I pray you tell me whom an humble and modest peaceable man should follow Answ For reason or Scripture I shall bring no more then I have done I think you may see both in that which I have already written The Churches testimony onely now remains to be looked after whether you or I can lay the fairer claime and here you distinguish of it 1. As it was for the first 1200 1300 1400 yeers after Christ for you name all of these Periods 2. As it hath been for 150. yeers now past The Church for one full hundred yeers at least it seems by you stood Newter viz. from 1400. to 1500. The Church for this little scantling of time viz. for 150. yeers is not denyed by you to vote with me if the Protestant party to which you joyn in communion may deserve that name But for all that space as before it was as you pretend unanimously yours at well the Orthodox as the Hereticall party in it Here for further discovering of truth two things should be enquired into 1. Whether he more worthily deserves the name of
oppose it to works and not to other sects giving clear instances 2. They object That in the use of this particle sole the Fathers exclude all works going before Faith and Regeneration and denying only that the works of Infidels and unregenerate do justifie This Rule Franc. à Sanctae â— Clara doth produce out of Casalius but plainely enough signifies that it will not satisfie This Chemnitius also overthrowes by severall cleare testimonies out Origen and Ambrose 3. They object That by the particle sole the Fathers do exclude ceremoniall works and not all works which indeed is unworthy of answere the Law of Ceremonies being antiquated before their daies 4. Seeing none of these will hold Franc. à Sancta Clara produceth another Rule out of Aquinas Quando aliquod commune multis tribuitur specialiter alicui illud provenit aut quia in illo excellentissimè reperitur aut quia primò reperitur in Quaest de veritate Quaest 14. artic 5. ad 12. When any thing that is common to many is attributed specially to one that comes to passe either because it is most eminent or because it is first in it which Rule might serve with some reason as applyed to this purpose for answer both to Scripture-texts and testimonies of Fathers in case they only said that we are Justified by Faith But when the Scripture doth not barely give it to Faith but denies it to works and the Fathers do not only say that Faith Justifies but that Faith only Justifies and particularly exclude works this Rule therefore can do nothing here So that I conclude that Faith hath its office in Justification which other graces have not which is not by you denied And that this office is ascribed to Faith in words implying an instrumentality as in Scriptures so in the Fathers an no other office peculiar can be found for it according to your Confession therefore according to Scriptures and Fathers it Justifies as an instrument Before I go off this head let me mind you of that of Dr. Prideaux which you may find Lect. 5. de Justific Pag. 146. * Arminio minimè placuit ait ejus inter pres Corvinus quod fides dicitur instrumentalis Justificationis nostrae causa Bonâ igitur fide dic Armini pro tuo acumine qua ratione fides Justificat It did not saith he please Arminius as his interpreter Corvinus says that Faith should be called the instrumentall cause of our Justification Whereupon he addresses himself to him Tell us in good earnest O Arminius how it Justifies May not I put the same question to you He speaks for Arminius oâ—t of an Epistle of his to Hippolitus à Collibus the Palsgrave's Ambassadour The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere hoe est actum fidei dicit imputari in justitiam idque proprio sensu non Metonymicè quatenus objectum apprehendit in Ep. ad Hippolitum à Collibus principis Palatini legatum i. e. the act of Faith is imputed for Righteousnesse and that in a proper not a Metonymicall sense as it apprehends the object which he there refutes But it will not serve you to answer thus For with you works justifie and yet you confesse that Faith hath its peculiar way and prerogative which agrees not to works in Justification We must either then yeeld that it Justifies as an instrument or shut it quite out from the office of Justification or plainely confesse we know not what office it hath in this work notwithstanding Scripture speaks so much of it and still in those words which in mens common Language denote an instrument The second That Faith in Christ quâ Lord is not the Justifying act is with you as the former a notorious novelty and comes within the same Challenge And if the Contention be alone about the termes in case it be yeelded what would you be advantaged Seeing I doubt not but we may say that it was never in Terminis by the Ancients put to the question and so you in affirming that Faith in Christ quâ Lord is the Justifying act are in as notorious a novelty as we on the other hand in denying it you can no more find the one in the Ancients then your adversaries can find the other But if the question be about the thing it self I doubt not but many testimonies may be easily produced In order to which the state of the question as it is laid down between Protestants and their adversaries is to be looked into which is Whether the whole word of God be the object of Justifying Faith or the speciall promises of mercy in Christ Thus Bellarmine states it Lib. 1. de Justificatione cap. 4. and saith that the Heretiques restrain it to the promise of speciall mercy but Catholiques will have the object of Faith to be as large as the whole word of God Here Protestants yield somewhat to Bellarmine somewhat they deny They yield that the Faith which Justifies looks upon the whole word of God as its object that it believes the History of the Creation the narrative of the years of Mathusaleh the floud of Noah that it acknowledges the equity of all Gods Commands and a necessity of obedience but not as Justifying We willingly grant that Justifying Faith is an obedientiall affiance yet it is the affiance and noâ— the obedience nor yet the assent to truths formerly mentioned or the like that acts in Justification Your self say that obedience is only the modification of Faith in the first act of Justification and the reforming party of Protestant Divines say the same in the consummation of it Now that these promises of speciall mercy or the blood of Christ held out in the free promises is the speciall object of Faith in this act of Justification and that it justifies as it applies such promises and doth interest the Soul in this blood may I suppose be made good by diverse testimonies Let that of Ambrose be consulted Lib. 1. Cap. 6. de Jacobo vitâ beatâ Non habeo unde gloriari in operibus meis possum non habeo unde me jactem ideo gloriabor in Christro Non gloriabor quia justus sum sed gloriabor quia redemptus sum Gloriabor non quia vacuus peccati sum sed quia remissa sunt peccata Non gloriabor quia profui neque quia profuit mihi quisquam sed quia pro me advocatus apud patrem Christus est sed quia pro me Christi sanguis effusus est Facta est mihi culpa mea merces redemptionis per quam mihi Christus advenit Propter me Christus mortem gustavit fructuosior culpa quam innocentia Innocentia arrogantem me fecerat culpa subjectum reddidit And that of Gregory in Ezek. Hom. 7. Justus igitur advocatus noster justos nos defendet in judicio quia nos ispos cognoscimus accusamus injustos Non ergo infletibus non in actibus nostris
Page 111 Over much rigour in admission to Baptisme hinders the progress of the Gospell Page 112 The admission of some to Baptisme in prudence may be delayed Page 113 Papists expect not grace for but a convenient disposition to grace in the person to be Baptized Page 111 The restraint of right to Baptisme a breach in the Church of Christ Page 181 Baptisme a leading Church-privilege Page 161 In what sense Baptisme works what it figures Page 383 Babtisme engages to the first work of regeneration Page 369 The Bloud and Spirit of Christ are not alwayes applyed in it Page 381 Dangers attending the restraint of Baptisme to the regenerate Page 551 Baptized A man unbaptized is bound to believe in Jesus Christ for justification Page 144 The Author vindicated from a supposed assertion of the contrary ibid. Titles given by the Apostle to Baptized persons do not argue they were alwayes answered with inherent grace Page 149 Vpon what grounds Simon Magus was Baptized Page 160 c. Believers A title in Scripture not proper to the justifyed Believing What ordinarily meant by believing in the History of the Acts. Page 177 The distinction of believing Christ and believing in Christ groundless ibid. Bloud Faith in the bloud of Christ onely justifies Page 766 This assertion quit from danger Page 582 Bloud and Spirit may be distinguished but must not be divided Page 367 C. Call AN outward call asserted Page 169 Calvin Vindicated Page 118. 550 Catholick And universall in Authors use of them distinguished Page 155 Chemnitins His testimony for the instrumentality of the word and faith in justification Page 490 See Antiquity Christ The Covenant of works was without reference to Christ as Mediator Page 10 Whether the Covenant of works be made null or repealed by Christ Page 19 Faith in his bloud onely justifies Page 566 Faith hath respect to whole Christ to every part and piece of his Mediatorship Page 562 Interest in him interests us in all other privileges Page 458 Scripture speaks of receiving Christ and not of the Species of Christ onely Page 459 The healing of our nature and the removall of our guilt is his work Page 366 Faiths instrumentality in receiviug Christ being granted it 's instrumentality in justification cannot be denyed Page 441 Communication of titles between Christ and his Church Page 448. 449 Christians Vnregenerates are reall and not equivocall members of visible Churches Page 153 Humane authority vouched for it ibid. c. Christian a title in Scripture not proper to the justified Page 149 Church-Membership What gives right to it Page 201 102 Circumcision How Infants were saved before Circumcision Page 26 27 28 Severall propositions for clearing of the truth Page 24 Circumcision and Baptisme engaged to the first work of regeneration Page 369 The right of Circumcision implyed the propagation of corruption Page 368 Circumcision was no earnall badge Page 425 Cloud Whether two or onely one Cloud with Israel in the wilderness Page 521 No ordinary one but supernaturall Page 522 The motion of it guided by an Angell ibid. The form of it in appearance as a pillar ib. The use of it twofold As Israels guide Page 522 As Israels guard ibid. It was of the nature of a Sacrament Page 525 No standing Sacrament Page 526 Communicants The Lords Supper must be administred for their edification Page 199 Communication Of titles between Christ and his Church Page 448 Conclusions Desperate conclusions often inferred from right principles Page 579 Condition The great condition to which Baptisme engages is not a prerequisite to the essence and being of Baptisme Page 143 44 The Authors meaning cleered Page 145 In what sense faith is the condition of the promise of remission of sin Page 171 Actuall existence not necessary to the being of conditions in a Covenant Page 462 One and the same thing is not the condition of both parties in a Covenant Page 632 Confirmation Preferred by the Church of Rome before Baptisme Page 528 Perfects what Baptisme begins ibid. The matter of it Page 529 The form Page 529 The fruit Minister Ceremonies at consecration at administration Page 529 Arguments evincing it to be no Sacrament Page 530 The Apostles imposition of hands no proof of it Page 530 The ancient use of it degenerated Page 531 Consecration Respects not elements but participants Page 58 Whether the word which gives being to Sacraments be Consecratorium or Concionatorium ibid. Contradiction The Author acquit from any Page 447 Conversion The Lords Supper with the word as an Appendant to it may be serviceable towards Conversion Page 200 Arguments evincing it Page 200 201 c. Whether the Lords Supper may be stiled a Converting Ordinance Page 211 Explicatory propositions ibid. c. The Lords Supper doth not necessarily suppose a through conversion Page 217 Covenant Law and Covenant are not to be confounded Page 598 Keeping Covenant failing in Covenant and forfeiture of it to be distinguished Page 392 The Covenant falling Sacraments annexed fall with it Page 18 c. Where God denies his Covenant there the seal must not be granted Page 20 The Covenant people of God the adaequate subject of Sacraments Page 74 All relation to God in tendency to salvation is founded in the Covenant ibid. Interest in Sacraments is upon the account of the Covenant Page 75 c. God enters a Covenant with his people exactly and properly so called Page 79 The word Covenant asserted ibid. The thing it self asserted Page 80 in the essentials of it Page 80 81 in the solemnities Page 81 Arguments evincing a Covenant between God and man in its proper nature Page 82 Covenant and seal are commensurate Page 120 Covenant outward and inward This distinction examined Page 83 The Author vindicated in it Page 124 The outward Covenant is most properly a Covenant Page 83 c. To it belongs the definition of a Covenant ibid. It usually bears the name in Scripture Page 84 Men enjoy privileges of Ordinances and interest in Sacraments upon account of the outward Covenant Page 86 Scripture characters of men in Covenant Page 115 Covenant God Gods Covenant with his people not equivocall Page 80 Men of a visible profession timely and really not equivocally in Covenant with God Page 128 Covenant of works Passe between God and man in an immediate way without any reference to Christ as Mediatour Page 10 11 Whether this Covenant be made null or repealed by Christ Page 19 Covenant of Grace Righteousness of faith the great promise of it Page 414 Duty and condition in it are one and the same Page 641 643 It requires and accepts sincerity Page 637 Arguments evincing it vindicated Page 639 Mr. Cramdons Arguments against Mr. Br. herein answered Page 645 Covenant absolute Conditionall Arguments offered against an absolute Covenant Page 626 Faith and Repentance are mans conditions not Gods in the proper conditionall Covenant Page 626 Covenant Old and New Sacraments under the old and new Covenant one and the
same Page 25 Disciple D. A Title in Scripture not alwayes proper to the justified Page 149 Discipline Church-discipline asserted Page 266 c. Objections answered Page 268 Dogmaticall Faith Is a true Faith Page 176 Entitles to Baptisme Page 103 The Authors Arguments proving That a Dogmaticall Faith or a Faith short of justifying entitles to Baptisme uindicated Page 120 121 c 17. Arguments added for the proof of it Page 161 Arguments from humane authorities against a Dogmaticall Faith examined Page 147 Dogs Dogs and Swine what they mean Page 260 E. Eldership ALlegations for the power of an Eldership in admission to the Sacrament Page 252 These taken into consideration Page 253 Ruling Elders uindicated Page 270 c. Grotius his testimony concerning them Page 171 Election And the Couenant of grace not commensurate Page 124 Elect. Restriction of the Couenant to the the Elect regenerate confounds the Couenant the and conditions of it Page 134 Exceptions against it answsred Page 135 136 Restraint of Couenant to the regenerate denies any breach of Couenaut Page 138 Exception against it examined ibid c. Elements No continuall holiness in Sacramentall Elements Page 324 Their touch or abode makes not holy Page 325 Engagement Answer to Sacramentall engagements necessary to Saluation Page 387 Arguments euincing it Page 389 Sacraments without spirituall profit to those that liued in breach of Couenant Page 18 Sacraments are meer shadowes and empty signes where conscience answers not to the engagements Page 389 c. Sacraments are aggrauations of sin and hightnings of judgements when conscience answers not to Sacramentall engagements Page 390 When conscience answers not to Sacramentall engagements men subscribe to the equity of their own condemnation Page 391 When it is that conscience answers to Sacramentall engagements Page 392 Equivocall Men of a uisible profession really and not equiuocally in Couenant with God Page 128 Gods Couenant with his people no equiuocall Couenant Page 80 Scripture language not equiuocall Page 140. 150 Equivocation What it is Page 139 Errors Reformers uindicated from a charge of four supposed great errors Page 438 Protestants uindicated from four supposed great errors Page 452 Erroneous Persons in an incapacity to receive any benefit from the Lords Supper Page 236 c. Evidence Men in grace often want assuring evidence of grace Page 190 Grounds laid down Page 190 191 c Eunuch His Baptism enquired into Page 176 F. Faith THe alone grace that interests us in the righteousness of the Covenant Page 432 All forein reformers make not faith a full persuasion Page 439 c. Whether the act or habit of faith doth justifie Page 442 These phrases to be justified by faith and faith justifies are one and the same Page 444 Faiths instrumentality in justification asserted by Scriptures ibid. The unanimous consent of Protestant writers in it Page 445 c. There is somewhat of efficiency in mans faith for justification Page 447 How Christ dwels in our hearts by faith Page 450 Faith doth more then qualifie the subject to be a fit patient to be justified Page 460 More then a bare presence of faith is required to justification Page 468 In what sense the Gospell through faith is efficacious for justification Page 481 Christians must bring their faith to triall Page 492 The absolute necessity of faith ibid. Manifold benefits of it Page 494. c. The humbled soul the proper seat of faith Page 498 c. Faith hath its seat in the will as well as in the understanding Page 504 It is hold out in words in Scripture implying affiance trust c. ibid. Faith defined Page 505 Faith far under-values all earthly things respective to Christ Page 510 Faith is against all whatsoever is against Christ Page 512 It suffers no lust to divide from Christ ibid. Faith in Christ quâ Lord is not the justifying act Page 554 The distinction of fides quae and fides quâ asserted Page 565 566 Protestant writers guilty of no cheat in it ibid. Arguments evincing that faith in the bloud of Christ onely justifies Page 566. c. Faith dogmaticall See dogmaticall Faith justifying See justification Faiths instrumentality See instrument Fathers And Councils often too rigorous in their Rules respective to Church discipline Page 112 Queres put touching the authority of the Fathers in Controversies Page 653 c. Mr. Firmin His Appendix as to the latitude of Infant-Baptisme examined Page 94 c. The Authhor vindicated Page 95 96 His Appendix as to admission of men of yeers examined Page 104 c. Advertisments given to Mr. Br. touching his undertakings for him Page 180 Their disagreement Page 180 c. Food Ordinary and quickening food differenced Page 218 The word as well as the Sacrament is food ibid. Forum Dei Mr. Brs. distinction of Forum Dei and Forum Ecclesiae examined Page 141 Form A precise form of words not of the essence of Sacraments Page 59 G. Gesture NO one Gesture of necessary observation in receiving of the Sacrament Page 310 God His great goodness in condescension to mans weakness in institution of Sacraments Page 52 c. He is the Author of all Sacraments and Sacramentall rites Page 63 He is to prescribe in his own worship Page 65 He alone must distinguish his servants in relation from others Page 65 66 He onely gives efficacy to Sacraments Page 66 He onely can seale his promise Page 66 67 His great goodness and the tender care of Christ in condescension to our weakness Page 349 His compassion to us should move us to compassionate our selves Page 551 Gospell Sacraments lead us unto Christ in his Priestly Office Page 567 Grace Papists speak doubtfully of any work of inherent grace infused in Baptisme Page 377 Protestants deny any such infusion of grace in Baptisme Page 378 The Fathers acknowledge no such infusion of grace in Baptisme ibid. Common grace is reall Page 132 H. Heresie IN the Parent divests not the Child from Church-privileges Page 99 Holiness Covenant-holiness must not be confounded with inward holiness Page 148 149 The doctrine of Covenant-holiness more antient then Zuinglius Page 117 Calvin and Beza not the inventers though the promoters of it Page 118 Mr. Humphreys His Treatise of a free admission to the Lords Supper Page 247 I. NAtural Idiots uncapable of benefit by the Lords Supper Page 229 Ignorance Ignorant In Covenant Parents divests not the Child of Church-privileges Page 99 Grossely ignorant ones in an incapacity of benefit by the Lords Supper Page 230 Ignorance distinguished ibid. Image An Image less like the Pattern is an Image Page 612 Impenitence And unbelief in professed Christians are violations of the Covenant of grace Page 622 Arguments evincing it Page 624 c. Infants Of confederate Parents put no bar to their Baptisme Page 95 They are uncapable of benefit by the Lords Supper Page 226 The different practice of Antiquity ibid. Schoolemen divided about it ibid. The present practice of the Church of
8 The Apostles definition Rom. 4 11 Vindicated Page 33 34 A full definition thence laid down Page 36 The sign and thing signifiâ—d in every Sacrament are Analogically one Page 49 50 No Sacrament without a promise preceding Page 56 Sacraments The distribution of them Page 9 God not tyed to Sacraments Page 30 31 They are standing Ordinances Page 294 Reasons evincing it Page 295 296 When they are dispensed they may not without weighty reasons be omitted Page 306 The being of them consists in their usâ— Page 317 c. Arguments evincing it ib. The Sacrament of the Supper not exempted Page 119 Reasons given ibid. c. Sacraments have respect both to the change of of our nature and the removall of our guilt Page 368 We are to look for no more from Sacraments then God hath put into them Page 405 As the word teacheth by the ear so Sacraments by the help of the word teach by the eye Page 413 Men professing relation to God may see in Sacraments further engagements and provocations to holiness ibid. Sacraments are necessary means of faiths nourishment Page 508 Sacraments are seales entrusted in the hand of men Page 192 c. Sacraments seal the promise of the Gospell condionally Page 194 Gospell Sacraments lead us unto Christ in his priestly office Page 567 All Sacraments from the fall substantially one Page 424 426 Sacramentall Gods condescension in sacramentall signes Page 52 53 Sacramentall signes must be explained Page 56 Mens aptness to delude themselves in Sacramentall privileges Page 405 All ages have over-highly advanced Sacramental privileges Page 406 Sacraments Covenant All interested in Sacraments must come up to the terms of the Covenant Page 280 Sacraments annexed te the Covenant of works were without relation to Christ Page 10 11 That righteousness which the Covenant requires the Sacraments appendant to it seal Page 413 Sacraments are ever suitable to Covenants Page 413 All Sacraments must answer to the Covenant to which they are annexed Page 6 Sacraments without spirituall profit to them that live in breach of Covenant Page 18 A Covenant falling Sacraments that are annexed fall with it Page 18 c. Sacraments under the Old and New Covenant one and the same Page 25 The Covenant people of God the adequat subject of Sacraments Page 74 All interest in Sacraments is upon the account of the Covenant Page 75 c. Sacraments Number The way to find out the number of Sacraments Page 514 No express Scripture to determine their number Page 515 Two onely standing ordinances in the Old Testament of the nature of Sacraments ibid. Five suppositious Sacrments of Rome examined Page 528 Sacrifices Whether of the dictates of nature Page 21 Not Sacraments Page 529 How far Sacramentall ibid. How they differ from Sacraments ibid. Saint A title in Scripture not proper in the justified Page 149 Sanctification The Spirit of God and not man is to have the denomination in it Page 452 Satisfaction How Christs satisfaction to God for us is received by us Page 457 Sathan His imitation of God in the wayes of his worship Page 20 Sea Israels passage through it of the nature of a Sacrament Page 525 No standing Sacrament Page 526 Seales Various acceptation of the word Page 326 Severall use of a Seal Page 327 For secrecy ibid. For warranty ibid. For distinction ibid. For security ibid. For ratification ib. c. Seal of the Covenant and the Seal of the Spirit not of equall latitude Page 141 Seals Sacraments Sacraments are Seales Page 326 Serving for ratification of promises Page 328 Objections answered ibid. c. The whole use and office of Sacraments is by way of signe and seal Page 352 Reasons confirming it Page 354 355 Humane authorities produced Page 356 Variety of opinions about the working of Sacraments Page 359 c. Propositions tending to cleer the truth Page 363 Texts of Scripture brought by those that would raise the work of Sacraments higher of two sorts Page 372 1. Such where no Sacrament is mentioned ib. 2. Such where faith is required to the attainment of the effect Page 376 Objections answered Page 380 Sermon Formally so called not essentiall to a Sacrament Page 61 Whether the word which gives being to Sacraments be concionatorium or consecratorium Page 57. c. Scripture Must not be left to hunt after humane authorities Page 111 Scripture order of words no foundation for arguments Page 170 Scripture characters of men in grace are laid down for men to try themselves by Page 189 Signe What it is Page 38 c. Severall kinds of Signes Page 39 Naturall ibid. Prodigious Page 41 c. By institution Page 42 Rules for the right understanding of naturall signes Page 39 Remote causes are no signes ibid. Partiall causes are no signes Page 40 Natural signes when causes work unavoidably Page 41 Sacramentall signes Sacraments are signes Page 38 Sacraments are to be defined as signes Page 321 Objections answered ibid. c. Sacramentall signes Their properties Page 43 Externall and sensible ibid. Visible Page 43 44 Analogicall Page 45 Rituall Page 46 Distinguishing Page 46 47 65 c. Congregating Page 47 48 Engaging ibid. Remembrancing ibid. 49 Ratifying Page 49 Gods condescension in Sacramental signes Page 52 53 Sacramentall signes must be explained Page 56 Sin All sins are not Spirit-grieving sins Page 392 Notable sins in regenerate persons followed with many dangers Page 394 They cloud assurance of glory ibid. They bring an inaptitude on the soul to enter into glory Page 395 They bring under wrath and displeasure though they work not into a state of wrath Page 396 They are such an obstruction in the way of bliss that they bring a necessity on the soul to come in by repentance Page 397 Rules to discern the nature and quality of sins Page 399 The more of light the less of weakness and the crime more hainous ibid. The less of temptation the more of sin and the less of weakness ibid. c. The more of deliberation and conviction the more of sin Page 400 The more opportunity for duty the greater the neglect Page 401 Severall sorts of sins that are Covenant forfeitures Page 402 c. Sincerity Of heart in covenanting not of the essence and being of a Covenant Page 131 Spirit The seal of the Covenant and the seal of the Spirit not of equall latitude Page 141 Bloud and Spirit way be distinguished but must not be divided Page 367 The acts of the Spirit in a believing soul are ascribed to faith Page 463 The Spirit works not in us respective to Salvation after faith is implanted without us ibid. The Spirit hath a further hand in justification or pardon of sin then alone by enditing the Gospell Page 483 Scriptures and humane authorities produced for it ibid. The Spirit of God and not man is to have the denomination in Sanctification Page 452 Lords Supper A privilege of the Church visible Page 187 It is not limited to
distinguished Seal is sometimes taken properly and that is yet twofold 1. A seal sealing or making an impression and so the instrument used for that purpose is called a seal or signet so Gen. 38.18 Judah delivered to Tamar his signet Several acceptations of the word or seal so Dan. 6.17 2. A seal sealed or receiving an impression so the Letters that we send have their seales upon them when we yet keep our signet or sealing seal to make thousands of impressions so in the vision Revel 5.1 there is a book with seven seales Sometimes the word is used Metaphorically And that is also twofold 1. By way of allusion to the signet or instrument sealing and so those things that are of great esteem and highly prized are called by the name of seales or signets Jerem. 22.24 As I live saith the Lord Though Coniah the son of Jehojakim the King of Judah were the signet upon my right hand yet would I pluck thee thence So Hag. 2.23 2. By way of allusion to the use and office of a signet or seal as making impression on things sealed that is as doing the office of such seales Here it is taken metaphorically not in a proper sense but in allusion to the use of seales not the signet it self Several uses of a seal Now the use of seales is various First For secrecy For Secrecy to keep things close so that while the seal is upon them none may look into them To that end we use to put seales on our Letters that they may not be read by any but those whom they concern so the chief Priests sealed the stone of Christs Sepulcher Matth. 27.66 To this use of a seal the Prophet alludes Isai 8.16 Bind up the testimony seal the Law among the disciples and John also in that vision Revel 5.1 I saw in the right hand of him that sate on the Throne a book written within and on the back side sealed with seuen seales Secondly For warranty For Warranty and authority in the discharge of any businesse Haman had Ahasuerus his seal for the slaughter of the Jewes Esth 3.12 And Jezabel had the seal of Ahab to bring Naboth into question 1 King 21.8 and to this use of a seal the Lord Christ alludes where he vouches the authority of the Son of man to give life to the world Him hath God the Father sealed Joh. 6.27 Thirdly For distinction For Distinction or separation to mark out things that are to be known and distinguished from others Commodities allowed to passe have the publick Officers stamp and the Merchant puts his mark on the wares that he buyes as the Grazier on his beasts the Shepherd on his flock to distinguish them from those that belong to others To this the Apostle alludes 2 Tim. 2.19 Having this seal The Lord knoweth them that are his Fourthly For security For Security to keep things inviolable and free from harm To that end Daniels prison-door was sealed Dan. 6.17 To this use of seales Solomon alludes Cant. 4.12 A garden enclosed is my sister my spouse a spring shut up a fountain sealed Water was precious in those parts therefore they shut up their Wells and sealed them that none might draw out water from them The like allusion we see in that vision Revel 7.2 3. And I saw another Angel ascending from the East having the seal of the living God and he cryed with a loud voice to the four Angels to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the Sea saying Hurt not the earth neither the Sea nor the trees till we have sealed the servants of our God in the foreheads Fifthly For ratification For ratification and confirmation for further and more firm assurance In the grants and conveyances of men the seal is to make the title unquestionable Jer. 32.10 I subscribed the evidence and sealed it The Corinthians conversion to Christ did evidence the Apostles Call to work of an Apostle and therefore he sayes The seal of mine Apostleship are ye in the Lord 1 Cor. 9.2 We find a seal and earnest given Ephes 1.13 14. 2 Cor. 1.22 to be one and the same and the use of earnests we know is for confirmation to ratifie a Covenant or bargain what the Apostle saith of an oath for confirmation that among men it for end of all strife Heb. 6.16 the same we may say of a seal that puts an end to differences and contentions And what an oath is to a promise a seal is likewise and Gods oath added to his promise is of the same use as his seal that by two immutable things in which it is impossible for God to lye we should have strong consolations Heb 6.18 yea Abraham the leading man in Covenant had from God both oath and seal added for confirmation of his promise The Apostle makes observation of his oath out of Scripture-history Heb. 6.13 14. When God made promise to Abraham because he could swear by no greater he sware by himself saying Surely blessing I will blesse thee and multiplying I will multiply thee And here he makes like observation of his seal God having entred Covenant with Abraham and his seed addes this for ratification Genes 17.10 This is my Covenant which ye shall keep between me and you and thy seed after thee Every manchild among you shall be circumcised which the Apostle here interprets to be both a sign and a seal He received the sign of Circumcision a seal of the righteousnesse c. And in this respect Sacraments are called seales to ratifie and confirm all that the Covenant doth hold out and promise That which doth the office of a seal or earnest between man and man that is fitly called a seal between God and his people But Sacraments do the same Offices between God and his people as seales and earnests do between man and man seales and earnests ratifie mans Covenant Sacraments ratifie and confirm the Covenant of God and therefore Sacraments are fitly called seales But exceptions are here taken by those that do deny that Sacraments have any such office as to be for seales Objections against of Sacraments First This is the alone place where any Sacrament is called in Scripture by the name of seal This Sacrament is onely once and no other Sacrament any where ever so called And therefore it will not hence follow that Sacraments are seals Sol. Answ 1. This will conclude them to be no signes as well as it will conclude that they are no seales Circumcision is here called a sign and no other Sacrament is in any Scripture-Text called a sign yet all confesse that they are all signs They may therefore notwithstanding this objection be seales as well as signes 2. The calling of it a seal doth not make it one but onely declare it to be such Before ever the Apostle had given it these names it was both a sign and seal as well as after other Sacraments
are likewise seals where there are like Sacramental expressions notwithstanding they have no such name in Scripture And as the Apostle infers from the institution of Circumcision and Abrahams acceptation of it that Circumcision was a seal so may we infer in like manner that other Sacraments are signs and seals Compare that which the Apostle here deduceth from Gen. 17. concerning Abrahams Circumcision with that which may be deduced from Acts 8.34 35. concerning the Eunuchs Baptisme Abraham believed and was justified upon believing and then received the sign of Circumcision a seal of the righteousnesse of faith which he had being uncircumcised And the Eunuch did believe on Philips preaching and afterwards received Baptisme May we not well then say He received the sign of Baptisme a seal of the righteousnesse that he had being yet unbaptized so we may say of Pauls Baptisme and the Jaylours upon their miraculous conversion to the faith they received the sign of Baptisme for the same reason Secondly It is demanded whether the Covenant of grace and promises of salvation be compleat valid and firm in themselves Object without these things annexed to them or whether they be meerly void and null in Law as Kings and mens Deeds and Charters without a seal to confirm them If incompleat infirm and invalid this is extreamly derogatory to the Covenant and therefore they are not properly seals Answ 1. Sol. If there be some dissimilitude between civill seals used by men in Charters and conveyances and seals of God put to his Covenant will it then follow that upon that account they are no seals There are dissimilitudes between the Ambassadors of Princes and the Ministers of Christ respective to their functions are Ministers then no Ambassadors There is difference between servants of men and servants of God are Christians then no servants Sacraments are seals by way of metaphor because they do the office that seals do among men and if they do not per omnia quadrare as no metaphors do yet in case they agree in the main for which that serves from whence the metaphor is borrowed it is sufficient Ministers are fitly called Ambassadors being sent of God to treat from him with a people as Ambassadors are sent of Princes notwithstanding that those to whom Ambassadours come may treat or not treat at pleasure may give in Propositions as well as receive them when they to whom Gods Ministers are sent must give audience must take the Propositions delivered and not stand to Capitulate If Sacraments ratifie to us the promises of the Covenant That is enough to denominate them seales though wit could devise twenty differences And yet I read some differences assigned which I confesse I do not understand to be any differences at all 2. I know not that it is absolutely true in Law that mens grants are void altogether without a seal I have heard of Leases parol and Wills nuncupative which I am sure have no seal And seales sometimes by the injury of time are utterly broke and lost and in this case I suppose the Covenant may yet stand 3. What is objected against this office of Sacraments as seales may also be objected against the oath of God made to Abraham for confirmation of his Word That will admit the dilemma Either his Word of Promise was true and firm without it or else which I am loath to speak subject to change The application is easie The same thing was revealed to Pharaoh in a dream for seven years plenty and seven years famine by a double sign If there was truth in one we may argue the second needs not if untrue neither have cause to be heeded or regarded If we will undertake such kind of reasonings we should make no end 4. The Covenant is compleat full firm and valid in case we should never more then once hear it or never have any seal put to it nor any oath for confirmation yet our unbelief and distrust is such that we need ingeminations inculcations oaths seals and all from God to uphold us Object Thirdly It is yet demanded whether these seales are inseparably annexed to the Covenant and promises of grace in the Old or New Testament as parts or parcels of them as seales are annexed To the Charter If yea then shew us to what Covenants and Promises and in and by what Texts they are thus inseparably annexed and how any can be saved or made partakers of the benefit of the Covenant and promises of grace who do not actually receive these seales of grace when as your selves with all Orthodox Divines must grant that many who were never baptized and infinite who never received the Lords Supper are and may be saved and are made partakers of the Covenant and promises of grace without receiving or enjoying these seales of grace If no then how can these be termed seales of the Covenant and promises of grace which are not inseparably affixed to them as seales are to Charters since many receive the Covenant and promises of grace without these seales and other receive these seales without the Covenant or promises the benefit whereof they never enjoy Answ They are inseparably joyned respectu praecepti Sol. as being enjoyned of God and here all the Texts brought to prove the Sacraments not arbitrary but necessary may be brought in to witnesse though not so respectu medii The Covenant may have its effect without them The Covenant is intire in it self without them They are not inseparable quoad esse yet they have their necessity though not simple and absolute quoad operari for the Covenant to have its due work on our hearts God saw them necessary helpful and useful and therefore gave them in charge as many Scriptures witnesse and we of necessity must submit to them in order to obtain the end to which they serve and for which they are designed and appointed SECT II. Rules for a right understanding of Sacramental Seales FIrst These are outward visible seales Explicatory Propositions touching the sealing of Sacraments and priviledges of visible Churches and Church-membership committed to the Stewards of God in his house to dispense and apply to their people And so different from that other seal of God frequently mentioned the seal of the Spirit which is internal invisible proper onely to the elect regenerate reserved in the hand of God according to prerogative to give That these are external and visible needs no more then our eyes and that they are the priviledg of visible Churches and Church-members sufficient hath been spoken And therefore they both agree in the general nature of a seal both are for ratification and confirmation of the truth of Gods promises yet in a different way and different latitude They have the former that never reacht the latter and the former is serviceable to attain to the latter Secondly They are seales not to confirm any truth of God in it self or to work in us any assent to general Scripture-Propositions But