Anabaptists more true to their principles than they and that then the baptizing of persons may be as well deferred till they have special grace as their particular Church-membership may and so upon that account among others have gone over to them Secondly hereby some who may have no saving grace are in great danger of being betrayed into self flattery and into a being confident that they have because so good and knowing a Congregation as they esteem such a Church to be hath judged that they have and so rest secure in an unsafe condition Which made several of the New-England Ministers after their long experience of the effects of this way at last in their joint answer to Mr. Davenports Apologetical Preface p. 43 44. to say thus Indeed when men confound these two and do tie visible Church-membership unto such conditions and qualifications as are enough to salvation this may tend to harden men and to make them conceit that if they be got into the Church they are sure of heaven whenas alas it may be they are far from it Thirdly A guiltiness of a great Schism in the Church and consequently of the many sad effects of it some of which I have mentioned before If the separation built upon the principle under consideration had been matter of duty by vertue of that principle they that have engaged in it would not have been accountable for the evils consequent upon it no more than they were of setting Father against Son and Son against Father Mother against Daughter and Daughter against Mother by preaching the Gospel Lu. 12.53 But whosoever hath undertaken a separation from though but part of the Church upon insufficient grounds and mistaken principles must be accountable for the ill effects and consequences of it until they repent and leave off as well as for the Schism it self which caused them But now I have already represented to you why a Judgment in the Church that persons have not saving grace cannot be the rule of non-admission of them to particular Church Communion supposing them to have been baptized into the Church Universal and I have shewed likewise how that in the account of Scripture such have been visible Church-members and externally related to God and to Christ and called by his name and denominated Saints upon another account than that of saving grace or internal holiness Which if truly represented then it cannot be matter of duty but the contrary to ground a separation from such Congregations as are constituted upon other terms and because they are so In that those of the Churches mentioned in Scripture have been stiled Saints it is no argument why none are to be admitted to Church-fellowship but such as are Saints in a saving sense though this principle of separation I now speak of is wont to be grounded on that For some in those Churches which were not Saints in that sense were yet stiled Saints from their being separated and set apart to own and profess the worshipping of the most holy God only and to be of his holy Religion as I have shewed both in this discourse and elsewhere more at large Saints then was the common appellation of those that profest the Christian Religion as Christian is now and was not then used to discriminate the sincere from the unsound Christians as it is now This was a device of a later date and is too like that of the Church of Rome which does appropriate the honour of being Saints unto such only as they esteem to have been eminently Religious The conclusion then is that if the separation of these friends with that of your own be unaccountable from the Scriptures then they and you must needs be accountable for it as an unlawful and naughty Schism and for the many evils produced by it until pardon be obtained by repentance which none can promise themselves but upon reformation THE last thing I shall observe from the foregoing discourse is that it doth afford us a substantial ground for National Churches That is it affords us ground to conclude that the whole body of a Nation who are baptized into the Universal Church and that profess Gods true Religion are in that respect subject matter of a Church though this is indeed a thing which lies cross to your thoughts and which you are wont to oppose with some indignation The whole body of the Nation of the Jews as was shewed before were by Gods call and their profession Abrahams Spiritual Seed and as such were Church matter and a Church inorganically considered And for the same reason if the whole body of a Nation now by Gods call and their profession of the true Religion become Abrahams Spiritual Seed in a sense they must needs be as well National Church matter as the Nation of the Jews were Now that other Nations which have profest Gods true Religion have thereby become Abrahams Spiritual Seed in a large sense as well as the Nation of the Jews ever were we have good reason to believe not only from the nature of the thing it self but also from the Scriptures The Lord said unto Abraham My Covenant is with thee and thou shalt be a father of many Nations a father of many Nations have I made thee Gen. 17.4 5. Which is not to be understood in a restrained sense of his being a father of many Nations by natural generation only but also if not only of his being a spiritual father of many Nations who were to derive their being and what they should be in a spiritual or religious capacity from him from whom the true saving doctrine hath been since propagated first to the Nation of the Jews and then to Nations of the Gentiles And thus St. Paul interprets the aforesaid promise of God to Abraham Rom. 4.16 17. That the promise might be sure to all the seed not to that only which is of the law but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham who is the father of us all as it is written I have made thee a father of many Nations Now if Abraham be hath been and shall be a spiritual Father of many Nations then many Nations must needs be his spiritual Children For Father and Children are corlaretives and in what sense the one is a Father the other must be his Children And when St. Paul saith if ye be Christs then are ye Abrahams seed Gal. 3.29 is true of all that are so and in the same sense in which men are Christs in that sense they are Abrahams Seed whether it be by profession only or by a sound Faith also And in correspondence to all this the Kingdoms of this World are said to become the Kingdoms of the Lord and of his Christ Which must be understood of their becoming professors of the Gospel of Christ or the Christian Religion Revel 11.15 And this hath come to pass according as was foretold by the Prophets as well as to Abraham himself To instance in one instead
when they are but placed in circumstances that will bring them to do it actually in the Issue And thus the Children of the Rohathites of a month old were numbred with their fathers as with them keeping the charge of the Sanctuary when they were but in a way of being trained up to it Numb 3.28 And in this respect perhaps it was that our Saviour spake of some little Children as believing in him of which I shall say more afterwards Mat. 18.6 And for the same reason it may be little Children were said to enter into Covenant with God when their Parents did so Deut. 29.11 12. To conclude this enquiry Most certain it is that Infants were then received into the Church and were a part of it as all acknowledge and it must be in the respects which I have mentioned that they were so unless any more likely can be named which I cannot imagine For other Infants of the Heathen which were not under these circumstances were not reputed Church Members nor were in any immediate capacity of the Church initiating Ordinance The next thing after this which would be enquired into is whether the visible Church membership of the Infants of believing Parents was discontinued or terminated by the taking place of the Gospel ministration or by any new Church state under it And I doubt not to say that there are many things which will determine this question against you in the Negative I will begin with that in Rom. 11.29 where it 's said for the gifts and calling of God are without repentance These words relating to the calling of such Jews who as concerning the Gospel were then Enemies for the sake of the believing Gentiles and yet beloved for the fathers sake that which I chiefly note from them is That the calling of God or his antient way or method of bringing the Jews to be his people is not now under the Gospel recalled no more than his donation or gift conferred on Abraham and his Seed is when he promised to be their God on the terms he did but both are still continued without any repentance in God The way into the Church is as open the terms of admission as touching the general nature of them as easie and the means of procuring it vouchsafed by God as sufficient now as ever they were God hath not repented of any favour or grace that was antiently granted to the Jews whether old or young in reference to their being of his Church and People And in that very prediction in Isa 59.20 21. which the Apostle here in Rom. 11.26 27. recites touching the calling of the Jews in Gospel times it is foretold that the same way of propagating Church-members and the true Religion which God used in old Testament times by Parents training up their seed in the true Religion and by that means transmitting it from Generation to Generation shall continue in the Church to the end of the World For it is there said As for me this is my Covenant with them saith the Lord My spirit which is upon thee and my words which I have put in thy mouth shall not depart out of thy mouth nor out of the mouth of thy seed nor out of the mouth of thy seeds seed saith the Lord from henceforth and for ever And accordingly we find in point of event that except in the first planting of Christian Churches in an extraordinary way by extraordinary means the ordinary way of propagating the Christian profession and professors from age to age hath been the very same with that which was used by Gods appointment by the Jews of old which was by receiving their Infant Children into the Church and so educating them in the true Religion professed by the grown members of the Church For further light in this matter let us consider what doctrine our Saviour taught and what his Apostles after him in relation to it Our Saviour saith Suffer the little Children to come to me and forbid them not for of such is the Kingdom of God Mark 10.14 Which words for of such is the Kingdom of God are the reason here given by our Saviour why little Children should be suffered and not forbidden to be brought to him Which shews that when he says of such is the Kingdom of God he meant it of such little Children properly as those were which were brought to him and not of men like little Children in humility innocency or docility as you would have it For if we should understand it in your sense then that which our Saviour gives here for a reason seems to be no reason For what consequence is there in this or how would it follow thaâ— because the Kingdom of God is of other persons like little Children in other things but altogether unlike them in what was the matter of exception against their being brought to Christ which was their minority that therefore little Children properly meant ought to be suffered and not forbidden to be brought to Christ And if it be meant of little Children properly then our Saviour in these words asserts such little Children to be of the Church whether you understand by Kingdom of God Heaven it self or the Church on Earth For none are of the Kingdom of Heaven above who are not first of the Church on Earth for it is his Body the Church only that Christ is thus the Saviour of But if this Text were to be understood in your sense yet it would prove that for which I alledg it by parity of reason For if that which makes adult persons like little Children in that for which they are propounded as a pattern will qualifie them for the Kingdom of God then it must needs qualifie the Children themselves for it If you say that this way of arguing as well proves Doves Lambs and Sheep qualified to be of the Kingdom of God as little Children because they in some respects are set for patterns unto men and good men upon account of resembling them in some respects are called by their names I answer it follows not because these Creatures have not rational natures as Children have and therefore are not capable of spiritual benefits as Children are Nor were ever constituted Church-members heretofore as little Children have been By reason of which difference it will not follow that the one are not Church-members because the other are not though both are propounded as patterns in some respect of that which will qualifie rational Creatures for Church-membership So that take it which way you will the argument from the Text for Infants Church-membership is far stranger than any thing which can be offered against it Again in Luke 9.48 Our Saviour speaking of a little Child which he had set by him saith Whosoever shall receive this Child in my name receiveth me Here you have no room to pretend it meant of men qualified like Children For it is not said whosoever shall receive such as this Child in my name but
whosoever shall receive this Child the individual Child then set by our Saviour in my name receiveth me And if that Child or other such were to be received in the name of Christ then that Child was and other such are spiritually related to Christ as those of his body the Church are how else could they be received in his name Now to receive one into the Church of Christ is to receive one in his name therefore since our Saviour would have some little Children received in his name he would have them received into his Church The words whosoever shall receive this Child in my name receiveth me are indefinite and not limited to any one way of receiving in his name So that if there should be more ways of receiving little Children in the name of Christ than by receiving them into the Church yet that being one way and an eminent way too it cannot according to Christs own Declaration but be highly acceptable to him to receive such little Children into the Church as that he spoke of was since he takes it as if he himself were received Let us consider yet further those words of our Saviour Mat. 18.6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me c. If I can demonstrate to you that this was spoken of little Children properly I shall not need to determine in what respects they can be said to believe in Christ I can easily think as well as you that they cannot be said to believe in the properest sense They are not indeed unbelievers as that signifies a wilful rejection of the terms of Grace and Salvation which yet it may be is the common sense of the word unbelief in Scripture which is damning And considering their redemption by Christs Death from Condemnation for original sin while actual is not added to it they may be as well in a state of Salvation as actual Believers are till actual sin take place and so be numbred with them upon that account When our Saviour says Whosoever doth not receive the Kingdom of God as a little Child shall not enter therein it is not only implyed that little Children receive the Kingdom of God but also more fully exprest that none shall receive the Kingdom of God but upon the same terms in some sort as they do and what can those be but Christs Ransom and Purchase and their being free from a prevailing principle of opposition against the Gospel and Government of Christ And that may well be true in this case which our Saviour says in another He that is not against us is for us Lu. 9.50 and if little Children in such a sense are for Christ they may well be reckoned to be of his party and called as those of his party are Believers Disciples The little Children of old could no more properly enter into Covenant nor the uncircumcised male Child break the Covenant nor the Children of the Kohathites of a month old keep the charge of the Sanctuary than little Children can believe in Christ and yet in some respect and in such a latitude of speech as the Scripture sometimes useth they were said to do all these things Let the reason then be what it will for which they are said to believe yet that it is some little Children properly taken who in this place are said to believe in Christ I shall endeavour to evince by shewing these two things First That they were little Children in a proper sense of which our Saviour spake Ver. 5. in the words next preceeding these in Ver. 6. Secondly That these in this 6. Ver. who were said to believe in Christ were the very same or the same sort of little ones of which he had spoken in Ver. 5. That they were little Children in a proper sense of which our Saviour spake in Ver. 5. when he said Who so shall receive one such little Child in my name receiveth me will appear partly by the relation these words bear to those which go before and partly by comparing them with the relation which another Evangelist makes of the same matter In the 2. Verse of this Chap. Christ is said to set a little Child in the midst of his Disciples And in the 4. Ver. he saith Whosoever shall humble himself as this little Child the same is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven This little Child in ver the 4th is the same with that said to be set in the midst of the Disciples ver 2. And then in ver 5. he saith Who so shall receive one such little Child in my name receiveth me meaning such little Child as had been spoken of just before in ver 2. and 4. And to put the matter out of all doubt that by such little Child mentioned ver 5. our Saviour meant that very little Child that was set by him or any other such and not men resembled by the humility docility or innocency of that or any other such Child the Evangelist Luke relating the same matter Chap. 9.48 saith thus Whosoever shall receive this Child in my name receiveth me plainly speaking this of that individual Child which in the very next Verse before Christ is said to have set by him The true sense of the same matter related thus by both the Evangelists seems to be this That whosoever should receive that little Child that very Child which Jesus had set by him or any other such in his name should by so doing receive him The one Evangelist relates one and the other the other part of our Saviours saying in this matter as is usual also in other Cases Thus far the matter before us is as clear as well could be desired that when our Saviour said whoso shall receive one such little Child in my name receiveth me he meant it of little Children properly And that it was these very little ones so understood or this sort which our Saviour said did believe in him when he said but whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me c. seems to be as plain as the other For to whom can those words one of these little ones relate but to them of whom our Saviour last spake Besides the opposition here between receiving and offending the receiving one of those little Children in Christs name and the offending of one of those little ones shews the matters spoken of in both verses 5. and 6. to respect the same sort of persons which then must needs be little Children properly And the opposition seems to ly thus as he whoever he be which shall receive a little Child in Christs name as related to him or so as to educate and instruct him in the knowledge of him and his Religion shall do a worthy act such as Christ will take as if done to himself So he that shall turn one such little Child aside by training him up in a contrary Religion shall do a most unworthy act and such as would expose
him to worse than being drowned in the depth of the Sea And this sense of the word offend exactly agrees with the common use of it in the New Testament But yet notwithstanding all that I have said I do not at all deny the emblematical use here of the little Child which our Saviour set in the midst of the Apostles which was to cure them or some of them of ambition and to perswade them to become if possible as free from it as little Children are And therefore tells them first that except they were converted and became as little Children they should be so far from being greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven the thing they contended about as that they should not at all enter therein ver 3. And secondly he tells them that the way for them or any other to interess themselves so far in his favour as to be made greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven is by becoming like little Children by purging out such ill habits of pride and the like which made them unlike to little Children in whom such ill habits had not taken place For saith he Who so shall humble himself as this little Child the same is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven ver 4. But then though all this is granted yet it must be considered how and after what manner our Saviour would cure this distemper in the Disciples by this emblem of a little Child And this he did first by intimating to them how free from pride and other ill habits little Children are till they have defiled themselves with actual sin And secondly by letting them know how very dear to him they are upon that account upon their not having actually defiled themselves with pride malice or opposition against him and his Gospel for which reason perhaps he numbers them with those that believe indeed so dear as that he takes what is done for or against them as done for or against himself And by thus discoursing to them of such little Children as that was which stood in the midst of them he instructed them touching the necessity of purging out ill habits and of becoming humble and innocent if ever they would endear themselves to him or become capable of entering into the Kingdom of Heaven or of being great therein By the way then by what hath been now said you may answer your own argument why you cannot think it probable that any little Children were said to be baptized when it 's said such and such were baptized and their Housholds Your reason you know is because it is said of some of them that all of those Housholds did believe Which yet is no reason to disbelieve little Children to be any of those all if the little Children of Believers are said by our Saviour to be Believers as you may see they are by what hath been now represented to you unless better reason can be offered against the sense argued for than what is offered for it THus far we have heard what our Saviour hath said touching the continuance of little Children in the visible Church under the Gospel Let us now hear what his Apostles say In the first Sermon they preached after they had received the Holy Ghost St. Peter used this as a motive to those Jews who had Crucified Christ to repent and be baptized for remission of sins for saith he the promise is to you and to your Children and to all that are afar off even as many as the Lord our God shall call Act. 2.38 39. This clause even as many as the Lord our God shall call shews that which I have been proving to wit that the promise of spiritual benefits or priviledges was not made to Abrahams seed meerly upon account of their relation to him according to the flesh but as they shall be his spiritual Children in deriving from him the profession of the same Faith or Religion which was in Abraham And so and upon these terms the promise was made to the Jews here spoken to as bad as they were and to all afar off whether Jews or Gentiles upon supposition of their being called and not to them only but to their Children also Now I have shewed before that the little Children in the Jewish Church could not have been of it no more than the Children of the Gentiles but by being some way or other called to it as they were whom God put under the nurture of believing Parents or Tutors and upon those terms the Gentiles Children might be of the Jewish Church too as the Children of the Strangers that were born in the House of him that was a Jew or bought with his money were By this part of St. Peters Sermon you may see that under the Gospel the promise continued to all such as were called both of Parents and Children just as it was before I mean as to spiritual priviledges The promise now is to as many both Parents and Children as God shall call and it was no otherwise before The Apostles words here run but according to the tenour of the promise of old and according to what was enjoyed in old Testament times both by Jews and Proselytes and their Children The Proselytes from among the Gentiles upon their being called were of old grafted into the stock of Israel and their Children with them and did partake of the root and fatness of the Olive Tree as the Apostles phrase is that is they were partakers of the same spiritual priviledges as Abrahams spiritual Seed were Thus the Proselytes were then and the believing Gentiles under the Gospel were no more they were but grafted into the same stock or Olive Tree i. e. into the same Church Rom. 11.17 I say into the same Church for that continued still though not all the same Laws and was constituted of Abrahams spiritual Seed as before it had been Which brings me to the next thing I would call you to the consideration of When St. Paul in Rom. 11.20 speaking of the unbelieving Jews saith because of unbelief they were broken off it doth appear thereby there was no discontinuance of the Church by any change made by the Gospel upon its first entrance This is implyed when it 's said of some Jews that they were broken off For it was the Church the same Church from which they were broken off of which they were branches or members until they were broken off But then the Church it self remained still in being at that time when they as branches were broken off and after also into which others were grafted The case was plainly this Before Christs appearance in the flesh the Jews generally both better and worse professed a belief in Gods promise of sending the Messias and that he should be of Abrahams Seed in which Seed all Nations were to be blessed By profession of which faith or this and the Religion of Abraham otherwise they were all externally Abraham's Spiritual Seed and as they were his Spiritual Seed they were the
Church of God When the promised Messias was come and the promise thereby fulfilled and a new Revelation made touching his being come and that Jesus the Son of the blessed Virgin was he some of them believed this and so kept their standing in the Church in as much as by that belief they continued to be the Spiritual Seed of Abraham as they were before by their former Faith Whereas the other Jews who did not believe this but opposed the profession of it in those that did ceased thereby to be so much as nominally or by profession the spiritual Seed of Abraham and so became broken off from the Church being now his Seed but after the flesh only This which is indeed the plain truth and easie to be understood is point-blank against your contrary opinion and assertion on which you much build touching the dissolution of the Church which had been Jewish when the Church as Christian did commence The belief of a new Revelation did not make a new Church but the Church in being before had thereby a new illumination and their faith changed into a belief that that now was done which they believed before would be done The Church considered as well before as after the entrance of the Gospel into the World is resembled by one standing Olive-Tree that had some branches broken off and others grafted in And as the same Church continued under the Gospel which did exist or was in being before so the very same Church-members kept their place and standing in it which were of it before except such as were broken off by unbelief And if so then those little Children which were of the Church immediately before their Parents became Christian did not cease to be so by their Parents becoming such nor by any alteration which the Gospel made For if those who were broken off were broken off by unbelief according to the Apostles express assertion Then unless those little Children I speak of were guilty of unbelief in themselves or had it imputed to them from their Parents they could not be broken off but still kept their place and standing in the Church of God But guilty of unbelief by imputation of it from their Parents they could not be for they were Believers Nor could they be any more guilty of it by any act or omission of their own than they were while as Abrahams Spiritual Seed they were of the Church before And therefore the only reason and cause of the dischurching of those who were dischurched not being found in those little Children they could not possibly be dischurched by any alteration which the Gospel made You may further observe how that such expressions are used in the holy writings of the New Testament as do denote the Children of believing Parents to be holy to be separated to God now as well as they were in old Testament times Thus when the Apostle speaks of the Hebrew Christians and their Seed of which the Christian Church was first constituted as the first-fruits unto God and how it was like to continue as the root or stock into which the believing Gentiles in part were already and were further to be grafted he saith thus in Rom. 11.16 If the first-fruits be holy the lump is also holy and if the root be holy so are the branches In old Testament times if the root were holy if the Parents Abrahams Spiritual Seed were holy the branches their little Children were holy also as coming under the same denomination with their Parents And we here see the Apostle asserts the same thing to be now and to take place under the Gospel dispensation He doth not say in reference to times past if the root were holy so were the branches but with reference to the time present if the root be holy so are the branches And as here St. Paul speaks of the Sanctification of the Seed of the Hebrew Believers so elsewhere he asserts the sanctification of the Children of the believing Gentiles when he saith The unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband else were your Children unclean but now are they holy 1 Cor. 7.14 If we should read this Text according to your interpretation of it thus else were your Children Bastards but now they are Legitimate we should impose such a sense upon the Apostles words as would represent him as speaking untruly For certainly the Children of Heathen Parents born in lawful Wedlock were no Bastards although the Parents were neither of them Believers nor neither of them sanctified by faith or by means of the faith of the other Whereas the holiness of the Children here spoken of did depend upon the faith of one of the Parents if one of them had not been sanctified by means of the faith of the other their Children would have been unclean and yet not Bastards neither provided the Parents were lawfully Married before either of them believed If then your interpretation be not the true sense of the Text and you see for what reason it cannot then what can so reasonably be assigned for it and so agreeably to the current tenour of the Scriptures as those Childrens being separated together with their Parents from Heathenism to Christianity from Idols to God from being without God and Christ in the World to be related to him as members of his Church chosen and called out of the World by which they became relatively holy Unto all that hath been already said let us add in the last place that little Children together with their Fathers are expresly called Disciples Acts 15.10 Where it 's said Why tempt ye God to put a yoke upon the neck of the Disciples which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear That which is here called a putting a yoke upon the neck of the Disciples was the urging the necessity of proselyting the believing Gentiles with their Children by Circumcision after the manner of Moses ver 1. Now the manner of initiating Proselytes of the Gentiles according to the Law of Moses was to Circumcise the Father and his Male Children too if he had any Exod. 12. And therefore the Children of the believing Fathers as well as their Fathers themselves must needs be understood to be those Disciples upon whose necks this yoke was endeavoured to be put This being the plain and genuine sense of this Text in all probability I must needs say it is but a faint put off and weak evasion to escape the force of the testimony given in this Text to the Discipleship of some Infants for you to alledge that it was the doctrine only of the false Teachers imposed upon the Parents and other grown persons who only and not their Infants were able to understand it that was the yoke the only yoke that was endeavoured to be put upon the neck of the Disciples here and that therefore they only must be here meant by the Disciples upon whose neck the yoke was
endeavoured to be put For this Doctrine of false Teachers was no further a yoke or burden than as it referred to the thing thereby urged to be practised The yoke or burden which St. Peter a Jew here saith neither they nor their fathers were able to bear was the pain they underwent in being Circumcised and the costly Sacrifices and other external burdensome observances which by the Law of Moses was laid upon them and this really or Circumcision which was a part of it was the yoke or burden which the false Teachers would now have imposed upon the believing Gentiles and their Children as necessary to Salvation And this was that which St. Paul also called the yoke of bondage wherewith he would not have the Believers intangled again Gal. 5.1 Which did not consist only in doctrine for he presently by an instance shews what he meant by it and wherein it did consist saying ver 2. Behold I Paul say unto you that if ye be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing And the like he had done before Chap. 4.9 How turn ye again to the weak and beggerly elements whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage instancing wherein in the next words ye observe days and months and years This yoke of bondage then we see did consist in more than meerly doctrine The neck of the Disciples must needs be the neck of all those who were to have born the yoke according to the Law of Moses if they had been obliged by it as the false Teachers pretended they were and such were Children of eight days old who among the rest were to have been brought under that yoke had the false Teachers prevailed To restrain then the sense of the word yoke to doctrine only when as the thing urged by that doctrine was the yoke which the Children were as much to bear as their Parents is as I said but a weak evasion I deny not but that adult persons are primarily meant and intended by Disciples in this place but that they only were so with exclusion of little Children is that which you will never be able to prove since it 's certain that the false Teachers did no less impose the burden of Circumcision upon the Children than upon the Parents Though it 's true they began with the adult and the dispute lay between the adult and them for they could not impose upon the Children but by procuring the Parents to accept of the imposition both for themselves and for their Children In that Infants are not in an immediate and the most proper capacity to learn of Christ makes you think I suppose that the Scripture should not call them Disciples But that need not make it incredible to you when you consider what I have already shewed and need not here repeat How that little Children in Scripture account are esteemed to be or to do this or that in a religious respect when yet they are but first put into a way or but brought near a proper capacity of being or doing it when they are but placed in such circumstances as will issue there and which makes it visible to men that they will do so How else should little Children be stiled Believers and be said to do several other things every whit as remote from their capacity in the properest sense as their learning of Christ is I could shew I think by many instances in Scripture that things are said to be or to be done when they are but visible in their foundation or cause Thus to give you one instance our Saviour said of the family of Zacheus This day is salvation come to this house for as much as he also is the son of Abraham Lu. 19.9 The name of the effect is given to the visible cause Salvation is said then to be come to the family of Zacheus because he himself being become a Son of Abraham would in all probability be a means of bringing his Houshold to be so too Besides in Scripture account as are the Parents so are their little Children reputed to be If the Parents are counted the seed of the blessed of the Lord so are their off-spring with them Isa 65.23 Psal 37.26 If they are called from the rest of the World into a near relation to God as his special or peculiar people or to be his Disciples which is but another name for the same thing Isa 8.16 so were and are their Children with them And in some sort they are accounted to do that in their somewhat remote religious Progenitors much more in their immediate Parents which they did And thus Levi paid tithes in Abraham Heb. 7.9 And when our Saviour said whoso should receive one of those little Children he spoke of in his name would receive himself it is intimated that in doing so they should receive such Child as specially related to him as Disciples are And to receive them in his name and to receive them as his Disciples seem to be two words signifying but the same thing as appears by comparing Mark 9.41 with Mat. 10.42 Where both express the same thing in different phrases That which one calls a giving to one a Cup of water in Christs name because he belongs to Christ the other calls a giving it to one in the name of a Disciple And to receive little Children into the Church of Christ which is one way of receiving them in his name which is his Family is to receive them as Disciples or Scholars into his School as designed by him there to learn his Doctrine which may well give them the denomination of his Disciples And the account which I have now given why little Children are called Disciples may serve as reasons also why they are said to believe in Christ Having now heard what doctrine our Saviour himself and his Apostles after him have taught concerning the little Children of believing Parents and in what visible state they stand in relation to Christ and to his Church I think you will find little room left for you so much as but once to imagine that the Gospel when it took place put a period to the visible Church-membership of Infants Let us now consider from what hath been said in what capacity such Infants stand in reference to Baptism And can any man that doth consider them forbid water that these should not be baptized If such Infants are as much of the Church and as much Abrahams spiritual Seed as ever Infants in the old Testament Church were then they can be no more uncapable than they were of a solemn admission into the Church by the Ordinance of initiation for the time being as Baptism is now as Circumcision was then That which qualifies any for visible Church-membership certainly qualifies them for Baptism All were baptized into one body that were of it 1 Cor. 12.13 And such Infants can be no less capable of the spiritual ends of Baptism now than they were of the spiritual ends of Circumcision then
which were and which are much-what the same And if it be so acceptable a thing to Christ for us to receive one such little Child in his name as that he takes it as well as if we received Him nay takes himself to be received in our so receiving it which could not well be if it were not a member of his body the Church can you then think it a thing displeasing to him to baptize such in his name when as that is a sacred Rite appointed by him for a solemn receiving such in his name into his Church as do belong to him as doubtless such Infants do or else they could not be received in his name And when Christ hath given Commission to disciple all Nations and baptize them can you fancy that the same Commission implies a prohibition to baptize little Children though they are Disciples If little Children are made Disciples in their Parents being made so and that in Gods account and by his appointment then to baptize them certainly cannot be a deviation from Christs Commission to baptize Disciples And lastly if our Saviour hath said it of some little Children that they believe in him then the same Commission which authorizeth the baptizing of Believers must authorize the baptizing of them The Commission is general to baptize Disciples indefinitely and therefore must needs extend to all that are so or that are Believers though but in the lowest sense These are no forced or far fetcht consequences but flow naturally from their premises And whereas the Scripture speaks of Baptism as the Sacrament of Regeneration or new Birth which you make as an argument against the administration of it to Infants by reason of their incapacity for Regeneration you should consider first that Circumcision was a Sacrament of Regeneration as well as baptism is and yet Infants were not uncapable of it upon any such account Circumcision in the Letter was a sign of spiritual Circumcision of that made without hands the Circumcision of the heart and was a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith And what thing more spiritual than this is I pray you signified by Baptism Which considered the spirituality of baptism in nature or use is no more an argument against Infants capacity for Baptism than the spiritual use of Circumcision was an argument against that And this is sufficient to take off your argument But you may consider yet farther that Infants even while such must needs be capable of Regeneration in one sense or other unless you will say they are not in a salyable state which yet you have not been wont to say or else that unregenerate persons may go to Heaven and be saved contrary to that of our Saviour Joh. 3.3 Except a man be born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God And therefore you seem to be under a necessity of granting Infants to be capable of Regeneration in a sense more or less proper And if you think Regeneration most properly and strictly taken to be incompetent to an infant state as Regeneration signifies that new state into which a person is brought by a change in the frame and temper of the mind and will and by a regulation of the motions and operations of the Soul in reference to their several objects then you must be constrained to accept of another sense of Regeneration and such as is more competent to an Infant State unless as I said you will say that persons may go to Heaven in an unregenerate State Dr. Hammonds Annot Mat. 19.28 Now therefore since the word translated Regeneration according to the assertion of learned men and the reason and nature of the thing it self doth properly signifie a new or second state it follows that if it can be proved that Infants are brought into a new or second State or capacity of being happy other than what is natural to them as deriving from Adam or their immediate Parents which is called a being born of blood John 1.13 then they may be said to be in a regenerate state And that the whole Race of Adam are put into a new state or capacity for happiness by the second Adam after they had lost it by the first until they fall into actual Rebellion against God by actual sin in their own persons of which sure they are in no danger while they are but in their infant state may I conceive be sufficiently evinced from Rom. 5.18 where the Apostle says as by the offence of one Judgment came upon all men to condemnation even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto the justification of life And the same might be backt by many other Scriptures And it may well be that it was in respect of this new state into which little Children are brought by Christ the second Adam that our Saviour said of such is the Kingdom of God Now so far as Baptism signifies our Communion in the virtue of Christs Death and Resurrection by which our state is changed as well as our conformity to it by a moral change in our nature there is in Infants or conferred upon them that spiritual grace which answers the outward sign in Baptism And that such a change of condition as to be raised out of a state of death into which we were brought for sin into a state of life by forgiveness of sin by virtue of Christs Death and Resurrection is called a being quickned together with him as well as that moral change which is made by sanctification is a thing which seems fairly to lie in those words Col. 2.13 And you being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh hath he quickened together with him having forgiven you all trespasses And let me say this further that it seems not improper neither to say that Infants are dead to sin to actual sin in their own persons in as much as we cannot say that lust hath conceived in them so as to bring forth sin by any consent of will though it 's true they are not dead to it as having mortified it they having not yet while Infants contracted any ill habits to mortifie So that as burying with Christ in Baptism signifies a death unto sin in the person baptized there is in some sort that in Infants which answers the outward sign in baptism in that respect also These things considered you may well infer that if that new state into which Infants are brought be in some respect a new birth a birth from above and such as puts them into an immediate capacity for Salvation as well as Regeneration in the common acceptation of it does the adult and you see by what reason you are perswaded to believe it is then you have as great yea greater certainty of the regenerate state of Infants in this sense than you have of the regenerate state of any adult persons in the other notion of Regeneration and consequently a more certain ground to baptize them so