doth he direct his speech unto any unbeleever but unto beleevers wherefore this principally concerneth beleevers that they might know the privioidges which appertaine unto them and their seed according to the covenant of God Gâ—n 17.7 8. which declareth that God will be their God Secondly The Apostle doth not say that the unbeleâ—viâ—â— â—â—â—band or wife sanctifieth the beleeving husband or wife but the â—â—â—â—leeving wife is sanctified in the beleeving husband and the unbeleeving husband in the beleeving wife that is to say in consideration that â—â—e is hâ— sanctified yoak-fellow Where wee are to note that though the unbeleeving wife have a priviledge to be sanctified in her beleeving husband yet not to sanctifie her beleeving husband nor hath the unbeleeving husband any priviledge to sanctified is beleeving wife Nor doth it need in this case for beleevers are holy without them though their unbeleeving yoak-fellowes are not sanctified without them Thirdly Wee are to note from the Apostles words Else were your children uncleane but now are they holy That because the unbeleeving wife is sanctified to the beleeving husband or the unbeleeving husband to the beleeving wife therefore the children are holy else not Fourthly We are to take notice that the cause of the sanctification of the unbeleeving wives or that which made them to be so sanctified was two things Frist Their abiding And Secondly Because their yoak-fellowes were beleevers if her yoak-fellow be a beleever else she cannot be so sanctified to the beleever for that that is not cannot be said to be Fifthly The Apâ—stle treateth of holinesse which wee are to take for that excellent spirituall holinesse which becometh the Lords House even such a holinesse which Abraham and his infants had Which holinesse giveth the persons who have it visible right to the covenant of Grace and scales thereof The Apostle speaketh of holinesse and doth no way lesson it and therefore considering what the infants of bel evers have been what Christ hath done for them wee may well understand that the holinesse which they have now is a holinâ—ssâ— in relation to the covenant and Church of God Sixthly It evidently appeareth from the Apostles words that wee may safely coÌ„clude that such children spoken of here are different from heathens for the unbeleeving wife had not that priviledge to bring forth such a holy seed unto a heathen And so the like may be said for the unbeleeving husband that he could not beget a holy seed of her that was an unbeleeving wife but it is peculiarly bound up in the beleeving yokâ—fellow Therfore the childeren of one or both beleeving parents are hâ—ly indeed taking the Scripture in the largest extent Seventhly If the Apostle had said to the beleevers that their children were unholy neverthelesse you might still have made suâ—h a collection as you have here to wit that he meaneth tâ—at they are no Bastards but legitimate for the legitimate children whose parents are neither of them beleevers are unholy and yet they have your holinesse to wit that which evidenceth them to be no Bastards Wherefore that the Apostle Paul meâ—neth such a holinesse which you speake of we may not in reason conclude but the contrarie as hath been observed before naâ—ely that the Apâ—stlâ— meaneth a holinesse directly opposite to thâ—◠〈…〉 spoken of 2 Cor. 6.17 And also in this place 1 Câ—â— 7.14 When he saith Else were your children unclean but now are 〈…〉 But you in giving the sence according to your sence or understanding say it is thus Else were your children Bastards but now are they no Bastards And further you say And that this is the genuine sence of this place A. R. Pag. 10. lin 33. may further and clearly appeare by the generall scope of the Apostle in the 20 21 22 23. verses following in the same Chapter where he after he had resolved the married Beleevers not to depart from their lawfull yoke-mates he then in these verses exhorts Servants and all others to abide likewise in the lawfull callings wherein they were before their Conversion and seemeth to tell them in effect thus much That their being converted to the faith did in no wise release them from any lawfull Covenants and civill duties in their severall relations wherein they stood before but bound them to a more due performance of all such obligements towards all men but in poynt of Religion and worship of God therein they were not to be in subjection to any save onely to Jesus Christ who had therefore bought them with a price Ans All which you have sayd here maketh nothing for your purpose for vindication illustration or confirmation of your strange restriction of the Apostles words but rather maketh against you for as much as the Apostle desireth every beleever to abide in the same calling wherein he was called So that the beleeving married persons had no need to put away their unbeleeving yoak-fellowes for as much as the Lord allowed them to abide together and that the unbeleeving yoak-fellowes were so sanctified for producing a holy seed Else were your children uncleane sayth the Apostle but now are they holy But you pretend that you gathered your interpretation Else were your children Bastards c. from the generall scope of the Apostle in the 20 21 22 23. verses following of the same Chapter The words therefore I will repeat at large because you shall see that here is nothing in these verses which you pretend or by which you have any occasion to urge what you doe Ver. 20. Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called Ver. 21. Art thou called being a servant care not for it but if thou mayest be made free use it rather Ver. 22. For he that is called in the Lord being a servant is the Lords freeman Likewise also he that is called being free is Christs servant Ver. 23. Yee are bought with a price be not yee the servants of men Now consider what ground you had to build such an affirmation that the Apostle in speaking of holinesse 1 Cor. 7.14 doth not meane a holinesse in relation to faith and that where he sayth Else were your children uncleane but now are they holy he meaneth else were your children bastards but now are they no bastards What title of Scripture is here to warrant these your vaine conceipts in thus opposing holy infants Or upon what reason doe you ground these unreasonable collections Is it because the Apostle sayth that the called of the Lord are the Lords freemen the Lords servants are bought with a price Surely this maketh nothing against holy infants being in Covenant for they are bought with the same price Christ came not to damnifie them but to dignifie them not to make them loosers but gainers And all this is wrought by him in whom is all fullnesse and no emptinesse riches and no povertie life and no death He it is that came to give himselfe a ransome for them But you
to be godly or holy neither from 1 Cor. 7.14 nor from any other Scripture In consideration whereof it doth appeare that there is a reall difference between the infants of the godly and the infants of the wickâ—d and that the holinesse which differenceth them is a spirituall holinesse For in respect of legitimaciâ— some of the infants of unbeleevers had the preheminence when some of the infants of beleevers had it not and yet the infants of beleevers whether legitimate as Isaac or illegitimate as Pharez were in respect of their religious sanctification the onely infants whom God accepted of visibly in his Covenant But as for the others which were out of the Covenant God rejected them whether they were legitimate or illegitimate So then it appeareth that it is the holy Covenant which demonstrateth the children of beleevers to be holy and members of the visible Church as the holy infants were in formed time By this you may see how you are deceived both in mistaking and mis-construing the words of the Apostle 1 Cor. 7.14 and misunderstanding and perverting the words of the Prophet Mal. 2.14 15. Your next words are these In the same sense is the Apostle to be taken Heb. 13 4. where he saith Marriage is honourable in all and the Bed undefiled but Whoremongers and Adulterers God will judge If Marriage be honourable in all and the Bed undefiled then the issue of that Bed must needs be undefiled that is cleane and holy as â—n the other side the issue of all unlawfull conjunctions are uncleane illegitimate and Bastards Now this holinesse and unholinesse of Children proceedeth not from the holinesse or unholinesse of the Parents But from the lawfull or unlawfull conjunction of the Parents in the begetting of their Children for the Apostle in this place speakes of all men universally That the Apostle speaketh of all men universally in Heb. 13.4 when he saith that Marriage is honourable amongst all is in a sense true but that he speaketh of all men universally in Cor. 7.14 is not true in any sense for the Apostle Paul in 1 Cor. 7.14 speaking to the members of the Church of that which principally concerned them he groundeth his speech concerning the holinesse of children and sanctification of the unbeleever to that use upon the faith of one of the parents that if one of the parents be a beleever though the other parent be an unbeleever the Children are holy that is to say they are under the holy Covenant And so it necessarily implyeth that if neither parents are beleevers the children are unholy that is they are not born holy nor under the holy Covenant For it was faith that made the beleevers yâ—â—k-mate to be so sanctified to him as the Apostle speaketh Because he was a beleever the Infidell was sanctified to him For to an unbeleever shee could not be sanctified but unto a beleever And therfore the children of those beleevers were holy because one of the parents was a beleever and this faith so sanctifying the unbeleeving yoak-mates to this end and use made the children holy which cannot be sayd of an infant whose parents are neither of them beleevers though his parents were honourably married and the bed undefiled in his procreation but he is unholy ungodly and out of the Covenant neither of his parents being holy nor any of them sanctified then in themselves nor sanctified in by or to a beleever for producing a holy seed spoken of in 1 Cor. 7.14 But you goe on still and say that A. R. Pag. 11. li. 34. It seems that the holines here of the children ariseth not from the faith or holines of the parents but meerly from the lawfull marriage and conjunction of the parents in begetting their Children * Lin. 38. It is even so Ans Is it even so How is it even so Doth the holines of the holy children spoken of in 1 Cor. 7.14 arise meerly from the lawfull marriage c How prove you this Who revealed this unto you Belike you thinke your bare affirmation it is even so is sufficient proofe It may be you will say that Pharez and Zarah were ungodly and unholy Gen. 38.16 17 24 25 26 29 30. and out of the Covenant because their parents had not lawfull marriage at their conjunction in begetting of them And also that Davids illegitimate Infant was ungodly and unholy out of the covenant because he was not lawfully married to Bersheba 2 Sam. 11.4 5. before he had begotten him For surely if the godlines holinesse of the Infants of the faithfull arise meerly from the lawfull marriage and conjunction of the parents in their begetting then all the infants of the faithfull whose parents have not lawfull marriage in their begetting are not holy nor godly But seeing the infants of the world whose parents were married to each other in their begetting were though born legitimate yet not borne holy that is to say not under the holy Covenant And seeing that Davids infant was in the Covenant though he was illegitimate 2 Sam. 11.27 12.16 17.23 which thing might be sayd of other illegitimated Infants of the Church then It plainly argueth that there is a great gulfe between the holy infants of the Church spoken of in 1 Cor. 7.14 and the infants of the world whose parents are ungodly and out of the Covenant And also it is clearly seen that you fowly misse it in saying that the holinesse ariseth meerly from the lawfull marriage and conjunction of the parents in begetting their children In all which speeches you still crosse your selfe in what you have set downe in the fourth Page of your Booke * See A.R. his second Book pag. 4. where you enter upon this particular concerning 1 Cor. 7.14 For there you affirme in opposing Infants holinesse First That there is now but one Covenant on foot c. Secondly That there is but one manner of entering and being therein And thirdly That there is but one holinesse now acceptable with God c. Consider what you sayd there and that which the Apostle declareth here in 1 Cor. 7 14. That the children of beleevers are holy now under the Gospel Now are they holy sayth he and so judge your selfe in reason whether you doe not wrong the Scripture and your selfe also unreasonably in making this one holinesse to be a meer legitimacie proceeding meerly from the parents lawfull conjunction in matrimony But let us see what further reasons you can give for maintenance of this your opinion For the question or doubt was only whether they might put away A. R. Pag. 11. lin 38 or depart from their unbeleeving yoak-mates the which the Apostle answers that they ought not to put them away and he implies this reason because they were lawfully married unto them according to Gods ordinance Ans Here you grant that the Apostle saith the beleevers ought not to put away their unbeleeving yoak-mates This maketh directly against
wee in this case If wee cannot justly object against Gods worke in nature but doe beleeve that our Infants are reasonable creatures and are borne not bruit beasts but men though actually they can manifest no reason or understanding more then beasts yea a young Lambe knoweth and discerneth his damme sooner then an Infant knoweth his Mother then neither can wee justly object against Gods worke in grace but are to beleeve that our Infants are sanctified creatures and are borne beleevers not Infidells though outwardly they can manifest no faith or sanctification unto us And why should it be thought incredible that God should worke faith in Infants If it be because wee know not or perceive not how it can be let us consider that we know not the way of our naturall birth and other earthly things Eccles 11.5 Joh. 3.8 How then can wee know heavenly things If we make question of the power of God nothing is unpossible with him He made all things of nothing He can make the dumbe beast speak with mans voyce Numb 22. He can make the babe in the mothers wombe to be affected and leap for joy at the voyce of the words spoken to the mother Luk. 1.44 And can he not also work grace faith and holines in Infants Hath Sathan power by sinne to infect and corrupt Infants as is before proved and shall not God have power to clense from corruption and make them holy If wee makâ— doubt of the will of God herein behold wee have his promises to restore our losses in Adam by his graces in Christ as he sheweth in Rom 5. That he will circumcise our heart and the heart of our seed to love him Deut. 30.6 Wee have the seale of his promise in giving Circumcision to Infants to signifie and seale the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 4 11. Gen. 17. And wee have assurance of all his promises and of that to Abraham and his seed in particular to be confirmed unto us not abrogated or lessened by Christ 2 Cor. 1.20 Luk. 1.72 73. Gal. 3.14 c. Wherefore they are but a faithlesse and crooked generation that notwithstanding all that God hath spoken and done in this kinde doe deny this grace of Christ to the Infants of his people and the seale or confirmation of this grace by Baptisme now as it was by Circumcision of old Next you say Secondly A. R. This reason is grounded upon a great mistake of the sense of the Text for the words are not unto them belongs the Kingdome but of such is the Kingdome that is of none else but of such as the next words which follow in these Texts doe manifestly declare for in Luk. 18.17 Mat. 10.15 In both places where Christ had said Suffer little Children to come unto me for of such is the Kingdome of God He presently confirmes it in the next words thus Verily I say unto you whosoever shall not receive the kingdome of God as a little childe shall not enter therein As also in Mat. 18.34 Christ speaking to his Disciples sayth Except yee be converted and become as little children yee shall not enter into the Kingdome of heaven Whosoever therefore shall humble himselfe as this little childe the same is the greatest in the Kingdome of heaven Whereby it is evident that when Christ sayth of such is the Kingdome of heaven his meaning is not of them nor of such as them in age nor understanding 1 Cor. 14.20 But of such as them in humilitie and such like qualifications Ans If you mean heer that the Seperates do ground their reason upoÌ„ a great mistake of the sense of the Text in saying that the Kingdome of God belongeth to the Infants and therefore Baptisme Then to your impertinent confused answer or groundlesse aspersion I reply First That it is not sufficient to say that the reason is grounded upon a mistake unlesse it be so which if it be not so then you are mistaken your selfe and that greatly both in the reason and in the sense of the Text also in charging us with a great mistake when it is not grounded upon any mistake much lesse upon a great mistake and least of all upon a great mistake of the sense of the Text as you unjustly speake and therefore your charge is but a treble evill surmise a meer supposition of that which is not and this may evidently appeare to be true because out of Christs owne words wee may gather that the Kingdome of heaven belongeth to the holy Infants for sayth he of such is the Kingdome of heaven Secondly Wee doe not say that the words are in expresse tearmes unto them belongs the Kingdome you shall not father this upon us but of such is the Kingdome of God and yet notwithstanding the sense is rightly taken according to the Text that the Kingdome of heaven belongeth unto the infants and therefore you cannot justly charge our reason to be impertinent or to be grounded upon any mistake at all much lesse a mistake of the Text So then it appeareth that the mistake is not ours but yours seeing you mistake your selfe and us and Christ and all Thirdly I doe not know your meaning when you rehearse Christs words Of such is the Kingdome of heaven and say that is of none else but of such You should know that the Kingdome of heaven belongeth to those that are past infancie as well as to Infants Aged persons are of the Kingdome of heaven as well as such children If you denie this you will denie your own enterance into the Kingdome or else say you are an infant which thing I suppose you will not doe But the drift of your interpretation is to prove that when Christ sayth Of such he meaneth such and none elâ—e but such therefore no Infants For so it appeareth by your words afterwards when you say Christs meaning not of them nor of such as them in yeares nor understanding a meer non-sense conclusion and your ground is Because Christ sayth of such and doth not say of them But herein you erre and are mistaken in the word such and your inferences therefrom are not according to truth which may appeare thus As for Instance When Paul sayth Rom 1.32 Those that do such things are worthy of death he mâ—aneth those things before specified in the same Chapter Suppose a person should come to you and before divers persons charge you saying Such persons who doe such things as you doe are worthy to be condemned I suppose the accusation toucheth your own particular person as much as any other and that so you will confesse and take it as meant of you But if upon examination of the accuser you shall find him to faulter say that therefore he meant not you nor any such thing which you doe c. would you not count him a knave or a foole or a lyar Againe He that should come and say Such an argument or arguments as you bring here are good
would inferre that because beleevers are exhorted by Paul to performe their civill Covenants and lawfull Contracts which they have made with men that therfore it appeareth that the gloss which you gave upon the Apostles words 1 Cor. 7.14 is a true interpretation What weight is in your words let any one that hath sence and reason judge For the like might have been objected in the time of the Law against the infants of the Church then whom the Lord did call and sanctifie and cause to approach neere unto him that because the parents and others were to performe their Conditions and bargains which they made each with other or with strangers not changing Psal 15.4 or going from their word though it were to their hindrance that therefore their holy infants then had no more holinesse then a meer lâ—gittimacie nor were different from the infants of Heathens and Infidells Were it not foolishnesse thus to thinke much more to affirme yea surely and therefore such affirmations of yours are to be taken for sensles imaginations and vaine conceptions not worthy to be uttered to any much lesse unto many Neither should they at this time have been mentioned heer but to manifest the vanitie thereof That reasonable creatures may not be deluded by such unreasonable collections and false inferences But may examine what they receive before they receive it and embrace nothing but what is agreeable to the Rule of Truth Further you say A. R. Pag. 11. at lin 5. to lin 23. And this may likewise appeare in Mal. 2.14 15. where the Spirit of God by the Prophet sheweth the reasons why their offerings were no more accepted because saith he God hath been witnesse between thee and the wife of thy youth that is his first wife then living against whom thou hast dealt treacherously yet shee is thy companion and the wife of thy Covenant and did not he make one yet had he aboundance of the Spirit and wherefore one in that he sought a godly or holy seed therefore keepe your selves in spirit and let none trespasse against the wife of his youth In which words it plainly appeareth that the scope of the place is that those Children which are generated by one man and one woman lawfully married are a godly or holy seed and those that are generated otherwise are not so but Bastards And the reason of this holinesse ariseth not here from any relation they had to the Jewish State nor from any Church Covenant but meerly from Gods first Institution of Marriage in the Creation and his then providing one woman for one man and which therefore is of Vniversall concernment to all man-kinde by the Law of Creation Ans Herein you pervert the Scripture and bring such Conclusions therefrom which are not included therein Whereas you say it is his first wife then living I aske you why not his second * Jacob had 2 wives Leah and Rachell the one was elder then the other and one was married before the other But the children which he had by theÌ„ as also those by Billa and Zilpah were all holy in their infancie and so are the Infants of beleevers a godly and holy seed and all other Infants are otherwise whether legitimate or illegitimate wife then living If you will limit it onely to the first wife then it seems by your speech that he might deale treacherously with the other and beare no blame for it But you should know that these Jewes to whom the Lord speaketh were taught to follow the righteous steps of their holy parents and not to deale treacherously with any of their wives You say that the scope of this place in Mal. 2.14 15. is That those Children which are generated by one man and one woman lawfully married are a godly or holy seed and those that are generated otherwise are not so but Bastards But that this is the scope of the place wee must take upon your bare word or else choose for Scripture to prove it you have none But by these your speeches it seemeth that you would have us to beleeve that godlines holines of children dependeth upoÌ„ the parents lawfull generating of them And so by this it will follow that all the legitimate Infidells in the world are godly and holy both young and old which is very strange and absurd and overthroweth the Scriptures which declareth that there hath been alwayes a difference between the holy and prophane between beleevers and Infidells between the Infants of the Church and the Infants out of the Church one sort being called the children of God the other the children of men Againe This speech of yours in saying that the children of one man and one woman lawfully married are a godly and holy seed and those that are generated otherwise are not so but Bastards It doth imply that then all legitimated persons shall be saved and that no Bastards shall be saved And so out of your owne mouth for ought you know you bring a heavie censure and sentence of condemnation against your selfe for it seemeth by your words that your owne assurance of salvation must rest meerly upon humane testimony for you know not whether you are legitimate or no but by the testimony of your parents which if they were not lawfully married at the time of your begetting then where is your godlines and holines You have it not at all upon your own grounds howsoever at the best I thinke you will say that you have it not from your owne knowledge but by humane testimony But for your comfort you should consider that in a religious respect a Bastard if he be a Convert must not be rejected as a cast-away for although his father and his mother sinned in his procreation yet their sinne shall not be imputed unto him neither will the Lord reject him any whit the more for his being unlawfully begotteÌ„ Yea though beleeving parents should through temptation derogate from Gods institution by begetting children contrary to Gods Law yet we will not say but as there is repentance forgivenesse for the parents returning unto God so the beleeving parents may have hope from the Scripture that sweet fountaine of consolation that God will not impute that their sinne unto their children who never sinned actually but will receive them to mercy with themselves So Davids childe which he had by the wife of Vriah the Hittite though it was unlawfully begotten contrary to Gods institution in Paradise yet it doth evidently appeare that we have no ground to say that the infant was out of Gods covenant any more then David was David repented and his sinne was forgiven him and his childe was cleane both in a civill and religious respect the which cannot justly be sayd of any infant whose parents are both of them unbeleevers though they are lawfull husband and wife and the childe legitimate yet the parents being neither of them in the Covenant were not to esteem any of their Infants
and full of wisdome and abound in sense you would heare hâ—m patiently and partly if not fully approve of his speech But if he should draw a consequence from his former words and say that therefore he meaneth your arguments are evill and full of foolishnesse and abound with nonsence and that in saying such arguments were good he doth not mean that your argumeÌ„ts are good at all nor such as yours in such a respect but in respect of such or such a thing Would not you begin to wonder at him and to count him a madman an idiote a foole or a lyar or one that setteth himselfe on set purpose to cavill or quarrell Apply this to your selfe for even so is your owne argument or objection here against Infants And therefore I hope I may tell you without giving you any occasion of offence that as your vindication unto that person before specified would be that your Arguments are such as those which are so answerable to them that they are such and that therefore his arguing can make nothing against your Arguments So I in answer to you may say that the infants which Christ tooke up in his armes are the same with those who are so answerable to them that they are such for reason teacheth us to know that those infants then in Christs armes are such as they then were not otherwise then they then were and so now reason teacheth us that reasonable creatures are as like unto themselves as those to whom they are compared and that those to whom they are compared rightly are not more like themselves then themselves are like themselves and therefore apply all this to our present purpose and then wee may see the unreasonablenessâ— and perversenesse crookednesse and foolishnesse of those who will so wrest Christs words as if when he sayth Of such is the kingdome of heaven he meaneth not them but excludeth them and such as them and onely includeth some others who are for qualifications like them And therefore now Mr. A. R. I challenge you and all that take your part in opposing Infants to bring me one instance in all the Scripture where persons are spoken of and where it is sayd of such that the persons with whom they are compared to whom such a thing is applyed are not included or comprehended in the word such as well as those who are compared with them In the mean time till you shew such an instance whicâ— thing you can never doe I must still rest in the mind of Christ that he meaneth them as well as any includeth them as well as the rest and doth not exclude them but include them in these words Suffer the little Children to come unto me c. for of such is thâ— kingdomâ— of heaven Fourthly If Christ had sayd Of them â—s the kingdome of heaven and had not sayd Of such is the kingdome c. Then you might have had more colour for to limit and restraine the Scripture as you doe And then you would object thus Yea It is true Christ as he was God knew all things therfore he knowing theÌ„ to be elected saith in particular Of them is the kingdom c. But it doth not follow that therefore such as they are of it and therfore we cannot say that any other beleevers infants are of the kingdome of heaven besides them But heer you may see that this blocketh up your objections considering that Christ sayth Of such is the kingdome c. And that the word such is of a larger extent then the word them and includeth them also as hath been observed before Fifthly If the next words after both in Luk. 18. and Mar. 10. doe confirme the former as you confesse then it still argueth that the reason is invincible and therefore neither you nor all the men in the world can overthrow it It was firme before and it being by your own confession confirmed in the next words after then it is not contradicted there as you have contradicted it here and therfore judge your selfe whether you have not bestowed labour in vaine in thus opposing holy Infants For these Texts doe prove still that as infants are of the kingdome so they are not destitute of the graces of the Spirit without which none are capable Subjects of the Kingdome Wherefore heer is sufficient demonstration of Infants conversion humiliation regeneration and great estimation which they have with Jesus Christ whose word is to be taken and not refused it being spirit and life and truth and so directly opposed to your erronious affirmations that it quite overthroweth your unsound collections in your violent opposition of holy infants Sixthly You speake very untruly and doe abuse and wrong the Scripture exceedingly by inferring from the premises That when Christ sayth Of such is the kingdome of heaven His meaning is not of them nor of such as them in age nor understanding For Christ as he speaketh of them so he meaneth them though he doe not shut out aged persons that are in respect of holinesse such as those holy infants then were or such as these holy infants now are and he meaneth such properly both in yeares understanding as may appeare by the scope of the place where it is sayd that Christ commanded to suffer them to come unto him and declareth the reason namely because they are Subjects of his kingdome for of such is the kingdome of heaven sayth he And when he cometh to teach a further lesson he applyeth it also to persons of yeares that they should learne to receive the kingdome of heaven like them and to be converted and to cast away all pride and to humble themselves All which graces the fruits of regeneration the Infants of beleevers are not destitute of for as much as they are regenerated they have the seed and beginning of all Christian graces as hath been proved before Now that Christ meaneth these infants when he sayth Of such is the kingdome is cleare in the Text and may partly appeare unto you from the former Considerations But for further confirmation of the premises let us minde the scope of the place and examine the Scriptures cited In which is expresly declared First That the Infants were brought unto Christ Luk. 18.15 Secondly The persons intent in bringing them or the reasons why they brought them was that Christ should put his hands on them and pray Mat. 19.13 Thirdly When Jesus saw that the Disciples rebuked those which brought them he was much displeased Mar. 10.13 14. Fourthly And he called them unto him Luk. 18.16 Fifthly Wee are discreetly to observe Christs two-fold charge given unto his Disciples In these words 1. Suffer the little Children to come unto me 2. and forbid them not Mar. 10.14 Mat. 19.14 Sixthly Wee are heedfully to minde the reason which Christ rendereth for this which is expressed in these words For of such is the kingdome of God Mar. 10.14 Luk. 18.16 Seventhly Christs addition or