A just vindication of the covenant and church-estate of children of church-members as also of their right unto bastisme : wherein such things as have been brought by divers to the contrary, especially by Ioh. Spilsbury, A.R. Ch. Blackwood, and H. Den are revised and answered : hereunto is annexed a refutation of a certain pamphlet styled The plain and wel-grounded treatise touching baptism / by Thomas Cobbet.

PART I. A Discourse of Federall and Ecclesiasticall holinesse of Children of Persons visibly beleeving, and In-churched; Occasionally from 1 Cor. 7. 14. [But now are they holy.]

CHAP. 1. Sect. I. The Explication of 1 Cor. 7. 14.

THE Church of Corinth, having written to Paul about some cases of conscience touch∣ing matrimony, with which some of the members had acquainted the Church; the Apostle in this Chapter returneth answer thereunto from Vers. 1. to 15. To the first question, Whether a Christian in such a time as then it was, might marry, hee answereth affirmatively, they may, Vers. 1, 2. The second question, What due benevolence Christian yokefellowes doe owe to each other, is answered, Vers. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. A third case, much like to the first, viz. How farre it is meet for widowers, or other un∣married persons to remaine so, is answered further, Vers. 8. 9. A fourth case, touching the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of di∣vorce, is answered, Vers. 10. 11. A fifth case, Whether persons being unequally yoaked, the beleeving party may abide with the Infidell, or with a good conscience may continue cohabitation and commu∣nion;

this is answered from Vers. 11. to the 25. In which answer, you have first, The Instructor, viz. not the Lord Jesus immedi∣atly and personally, who albeit hee spake by word of mouth to that other case of divorce, Matth. 5. 39. and 19 9. yet to this other case last mentioned, he expressely spake not (not the Lord) but I Paul, speake rather expresly by word of mouth to this last case, albeit what I also herein speake, I speake by divine Inspiration from the Spirit of the Lord, Vers. 40. Secondly, you have the matter of this divine mandatory answer; and therein, 1. An Inhibition of any such refusall of desired conjugall communion and cohabita∣tion with an Infidell yoke-fellow, vers. 12, 13 This he confirmeth by 4 reasons. 1. Because no pollution of conscience ariseth from such conjugall cohabitation unto the beleeving party, but rather a sancti∣fication of the infidell. 2. Because inward and outward peace is fur∣thered by such cohabitation Ver. 15. 3. Because thereby an oppor∣tunitie is offered of gaining the Infidell party to the faith, Vers. 16. 4. Because each Christian is bound to be content with their calling, Vers. 17. whether respecting nationall, Vers. 18, 19, 20. or perso∣nall references, Vers. 21, 22, 23, 24. 2 A ••oleration and grant of libertie in a passive way, in case of being wilfully and hatefully rejected by an Infidell spouse, to the beleeving party. This rather needing the check and bit, then the loosing of the reines, he doth but touch it. In the first reason of the Inhibition lay the weight of the scruple of sundry of the Corinthian Church-members troubled consciences, and therefore Paul backeth that reason with another distinct reason to confirme it, in the later end of the foureteenth Vers. viz. else were, &c. but now, &c. where the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 used in Argumentations, as 1 Cor. 5. 10. and the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in like sort used 1 Cor. 12. 18. 20. so Rom. 3. 21. Heb. 8. 6. and 9. 26. and 11. 16. doe declare that that sentence is annexed in way of Argu∣ment to the proposition immediatly before.

SECT. II.

ERe we launch into this deep, so variously coasted and sounded, let us premise some few things.

1. That the persons moving this scruple, were not persons then to marry, as if that were inquired: whether it were meet for a be∣leeving party to match with an Infidell, forbidden 2 Cor. 6. but they were parties actually married, husband and wife.

2. That such as moved the case, were not couples whereof both were Infidels, and out of the Church: nor yet both visibly beleeving

and in Church-fellowship: but persons unequally yoaked; one be∣leeving Christian, and of the Church: the other Infidell, Pagan, and without.

3. That it was not the case properly and originally of the whole Church, but of some members in it, like as the former cases about persons which were to marry were the cases onely of some.

4. That the ground of the beleeving parties scruple touching a∣biding in a conjugall way with their Infidell Yokefellowes lay in their perplexing feare, lest their soules might come to bee thereby polluted; as having fellowship with such whose unbeleefe of it selfe tended to make such a course in it selfe lawfull to become un∣sanctified, Tit. 1. 15. Prov. 15. 8. and 21. 4. And some other way they doubted they might runne hazard of participation and reflexi∣on of guilt by intimacy of Communion, as Nebem. 13. 25, 26. or the like.

5. That the whole Church of Corinth ingaged and imbarqued themselves in this case of some of their particular members, so farre as to write for satisfaction about it, 2 Cor. 1. 2. compared with Chap. 7. 1, &c.

6. That by the words foregoing, husband, wife, is intended one∣ly the beleeving parties, whether husband or wife: and that also they were considered in this passage, of such, as to, in, or by whom the Infidell parties were sanctified, not meerely as husbands and wives, but as beleeving. The former I thinke none will deny: For what had the Church to do with those couples whereof both were without? or what likelihood was it, that Pagan couples should scruple such abode upon any ground of pollution of conscience, which they feared? Besides, the occasion of this Vers. 12. The hus∣band having such a wife is expresly called a brother, vers. 15. in the resolution of the matter in case of wilfull rejection, what liberty may be taken: The parties chiefely interessed, are called by the name of brother and sister. The second is as evident, that in this case, they are considered as beleevers, both by the opposition of them to the unbeleeving parties, in regard of whom they scrupled pollution: and in that that being sanctified, is not appropriated in any way of efficiency to the unbeleevers; thus. The wife is sanctified to, in, or by the unbeleeving husband, or the husband is sanctified, to, in, or by the unbeleeving wife; as if the unbeleeving party were chiefe in this; but contrariwise, rather the unbeleeving husband is san∣ctified in, to, or by the wife, &c. Finally, when in the 16. verse the

case is understood of a person, which is as well a beleever, as an husband or wife, by whom it's said the other infidell party may come to bee saved, yet that party is barely named wife or husband, not beleeving wife or husband; will any now say, that there can be no other reason thereof rendred, but this; that albeit the party in∣tended were both an husband or wife, and a beleever: yet in that particular the party is considered, not as a beleever, but as an hus∣band or wife? I suppose here the absurditie would bee so grosse, that none would owne it, no more let any truely judicious speake that way of that here mentioned; the unbeleeving husband is san∣ctified by, or to, or in the wife.

7. That the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, are thus to bee understood, by the particle [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] in, or to, or by, as our tran∣slators have rendred it, for so also that particle is frequently used, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, per, or by, as John 1. 4. life in, or by him: So Rom. 5. 15. The Gift, in or by grace: So 1 Cor. 15. 21, 22. in one verse, 'tis by man, and by man, verse 22. expressed, die in Adam, in Christ made a∣live, or by him. So, 2 Cor. 6. 6, 7. in or by knowledge purenesse, &c. and vers. 7. in, or by the word of truth, there 'tis [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] in the next phrase it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In the same sense by the power of God, &c. But I contend not, if rendred in, or to, the husband or wife.

By [Sanctified] is not meant made Gratious, or Converted. This might be possible, vers. 16. yet uncertaine; not knowne: but this is so, de praesenti, the unbeleeving husband is sanctified.

2. Nor is it meant barely, being made a lawfull husband or wife, of whom the other party might make lawfull use: John Spilsbury is right in that: That the Corinthians never scrupled that, but that marriage fellowship was honorable, and the bed undefiled. This was so, to and among all, Pagan or Christian, equally or unequally yoked in the dayes of the Author to the Hebrews, Heb. 13. 4. This was no such puzling case, that they need write to an Apostle so so∣lemnly about it from learned Corinth, where they had so much, if not too much civill and common Law. And to what purpose were it to make so narrow a Plaister, as that of civill lawfulnesse of con∣jugall use to so broad a sore, as a troubled conscience: knowing, that many things may be by civill Lawes lawfull, yet tender con∣sciences dare not take libertie to make use thereof accordingly▪ some Lawes, even amongst Gods people, were made rather for their hardnesse of heart, as that of divorce, Matth. 19. 8. then other∣wise; yea this was to give Physick which did not suite with the

malady: The Corinthians not being troubled about the matter of lawfulnesse of marriage fellowship. That bed was to all Corinthians, as well as others, counted in it selfe undefiled. But rather, whether that use was sanctified to them; so, as that which was in it selfe lawfull, did not by the Infidels sinne become defiled, yea, so farre, as that they partaking with them in that marriage use, should par∣take with them in some defilement of conscience. The Apostle when speaking to the case as beleevers were Interested in it, hee saith more in that, the unbeleeving husband or wife is sanctified to the other party; then thus: that such become lawfull husband or wife to such, or their conjugall use lawfull. Beleevers in all lawfull things have all which others have, scil. lawfull use thereof: as men: but they have more then any unbeleeving Infidell persons have, or can have, whilst Infidell, even a holy use thereof also as beleevers; To the pure all things are pure: scil. not onely lawfull, for so meate, and drinke, and physick, and marriage, &c. are to others, but holy in and for the use thereof: Each one which hath a lawfull use of a person or thing, hath not therefore an holy use thereof. To the impure and unbeleeving many things, as plowing, apparell, conju∣gall cohabitation, &c. are in themselves lawfull, yet nothing is pure to them, but their consciences are defiled in the use thereof, Tit. 1. 15. Prov. 24. 4. whether the promise give right to such and such blessings, or no, or whether ever the blessing of the blessings bee pleaded for in prayer, or no, men may have a lawfull use of their meate and sleep, &c but such have the holy use, or every thing is sanctified to such by the word and prayer, which improve the same for that end, 1 Tim. 4. 5. for so hee giveth meate to them which feare him, as mindfull of his covenant, Psal. 111. 5. and so hee giveth his beloved sleepe, Psal. 127. 2.

The eighth and last thing premised is, that the Apostle in the Argument which hee useth here to confirme that of such yokefel∣lowes, being thus sanctified to, or by the beleeving parties, hee changeth the person, from the third to the second: as concerning and nearely touching the body of the Church collectively; espe∣cially such as were parents and had children. The case might ori∣ginally respect some few: yea, but hee argueth about it not thus: Else their children were uncleane, &c. but else your children were uncleane, but now are they holy, as extending it to all the chil∣dren of the Church, and to the children of the members of it, whe∣ther the parents were both fathers and mothers of the Church, as

it was the case of many, or whether the fathers or mothers one∣ly were in the Church, which was the case of some.

SECT. III.

ANd now to ascend the Watch-Tower. Albeit Gigantine Casuists have done worthily, yet let a dwarfe on their shoul∣ders mention what roaving fancies he discovers to misse, and what explication hee observeth to hold a right and streight course, and to weather, and directly to fall in with, and come up to the point of divine truth, circumscribed in the clause mentioned, [Else your children were uncleane, but now they are holy.]

And here, but barely to name explications of the words, un∣cleane, and holy, to which our opposites stick not: As when holy is used as opposed to corporally uncleane by actuall lusts; as 1 Sam. 21. 5. 1 Thess. 4. 4. or holy, as actually holy for office, Numb 16. 7. or holy, for a person borne without sinne, and so not inherent∣ly uncleane: So onely the Child Jesus, was not uncleane, but holy, Act. 3. Prov. 20. Job 23. Albeit, grosser Anabaptists some of them have not doubted to affirme this of other children also; or holy for one personally holy, or truely gratious and godly, wee con∣tend not to determine of all beleevers children, that they are thus. Albeit, wee are charitable in our thoughts and hopes this way, of this or that particular child: or holy, for persons elected or saved: we doe not positively affirme this neither of all them considered together: Albeit we hope the best of the particular children pre∣sented to us: and yet we judge that a most unsound and unchari∣table speech of I. S. in his booke against Infants-Baptisme, p. 3. That Infants in respect of their nonage are neither subjects of e∣lection, nor subjects capable of glory; Contrary to that Rom. 9. 10, 11, 12. Esay 65. 20. some beleevers Infants die Infants: will any say, they are all damned? God forbid. Yea, but if supposed to bee saved, then to bee glorified, unlesse some Limbus Infantum be imagined, which is neither the place of glory, nor of damnation. And if supposed to come to glory, they are capable subjects of it, unlesse God order any to glory, whom he fitteth not for it. If sup∣posed to be sayed, then also elected, and so subjects of election, or persons in whom election is partly subjected; unlesse it be supposed either that some reprobates, or persons not elected, nor capable of being elected are saved, or that there is some middle state betwixt Iacob have I loved before he had done good, & Esau have I hated or

rejected before hee had done actually evill. Contrary to Rom. 9. And supposing that such Infants dying Infants, are elected and glo∣rified, it must be concluded, that as Infants, they were subjects of e∣lection, and are capable of glory, unlesse any will fondly imagine that God in choosing them eyed them as other persons then ever they lived to become, or glorified other persons, then ever they were in glorifying of them; for dying Infants they never came to be other then Infants.

Nor by holy, is meant ceremonially holy; of which holinesse the Apostle speaketh, as is evident by the mention of the instrumen∣tall meanes of sprinkling of bulls and goats blood, Heb. 9. 13. which Mr. B. would seeme to draw as if intended of outward ho∣linesse now visible to the Church, when it's evidently spoken of that branch of Jewish ceremoniall holinesse now abrogated.

Nor by holy, is meant here persons which possibly may be con∣verted; but this is but a may bee in respect of all such children: whereas the Apostle saith peremptorily, they are, not they may bee holy.

Nor by holy, is meant persons that may be religiously educated, as I doe not remember such use of the word holy in Scripture: how∣ever, it is not here the thing intended; for the Apostle positively saith, they are, not, they may be holy; whereas many beleevers babes never live to be holy by holy education.

Others expound it thus, in reference to that inhibited separation, verse 12, 13. that if you stay together, the children will bee coun∣ted legitimate, but if you part, they will be accounted bastards. This is far-fetcht, nor de jure, in cases of lawfull divorce for adultery, ought the children begot of the divorced Wife in lawfull wedlock before her adulterous pranks, and divorce for it, bee counted ba∣stards.

SECT. IV.

BUt there are three other Expositions of this clause, which are more usually urged, and pleaded by opposites to Infants fede∣rall holinesse.

First, some make this clause [Else your children, &c.] to be a reason inforcing that inhibition, verse 12, 13. and not of the sanctifying of the infidell spouse in the other. Thus, if you divorce your yoke∣fellows, you must put away your children also, as they did, Ezra 10. 44. And Hen. Denne maketh the meaning of your children are holy, to be the same with the unbeleeving husband or wife is san∣ctified,

scil. They are not to be put away. Whereas the immediate connection of this clause to that passage, vers. 14. in way of argu∣ing; and not to vers. 12, 13. sheweth it to be a reason of the former, not of the other in vers. 12, 13. The case of putting away came in question, but as a supposed remedy of pollution of conscience by conjugall communion: the unlawfulnesse of which remedy, being so expresly mentioned, vers. 12. 13. and confirmed by foure rea∣sons, vers. 14, 15, 16, 17. there needed no more weight put there. But since the feare of pollution of conscience, did occasion that case, vers. 12, 13. and that feare is so fully taken off in the first of the 4 reasons against such putting away mentioned in the former part of the 14 vers. meet it was to strengthen that reason in especiall: which so directly met with the bottome scruple, as it was in this very clause, Else, &c. but now, &c. And to imagine this to bee the Apostles inference: If you put away husbands or wives, you must put away children too, &c. supposeth an Apostle to reason imper∣tinently and unsoundly, since in the case of divorce of spouses, it doth not necessarily follow, that the children begotten of them bee also put away.

For 1. even in lawfull divorces for adultery, no word of the enjoy∣ning childrens being put away, Matth. 19. & Chap. 5. nor was it so practiced: the husband need not own his wives bastard indeed, as his other children, but must own those begotten of his own wife before her divorce, Deut. 21. 15, 16, 17. compared with Chap. 24. 1.

2. The children lawfully begot, partaking of the believing pa∣rent as well as Pagan; Reason will plead as strongly with nature, and more strongly with grace in the divorcing party, putting away the other when desirous to abide, verse 12, 13. that the children are rather to be detained by the beleeving party, as suppose the father, &c. for higher and holyer ends, then by putting them away to ha∣zard their owne childrens soules welfare.

3. If there had been any weight in their feare of pollution, by retaining the infidell yoke-fellow, yet no colour of pretence of pol∣lution of conscience, by retaining their little ones; whom they might better season with their owne Christianisme, then feare being leavened by their paganisme, or the like. There needed not therefore any such supposed remedy of pollution, by removing their children also. As for that parallelling of that, Ezra 10 44. with this case, it is very unsuitable; That was a case of persons inchurched having an expresse prohibition to the contrary, not

to joyne with such, as persons betwixt whom and themselves, there was a partition wall yet doing it. This is a case of persons, all of one sort Pagan, when first married, and under no such prohi∣bition; onely after they were married one partie embraceth the faith: now to make the intervening of grace as a sole occasion of such breakings of families in pieces were sad and scandalous: yet to suppose Pagans to be under such a prohibition, as the Jewes to match with Pagans, had been to make them wholly prohibited marriage at all.

2. Others expound it onely of legitimacy or illegitimacy of the children in reference to the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of the spouses, some, as I. S. consider the beleeving spouse, as such, in both effects of the spouse being sanctified unto them, and the childrens being holy, or lawfull producing, Tit. 1. 15. To the pure all things are pure, or lawfull use, as hee expounds it. Others of whom Beza speaketh in his notes upon 1 Cor. 7. extend it to the children of both parents Infidell: that they are not spurious, but legitimate, which he refuteth from the supposition of the Apostle. For wherefore, saith Beza, should hee discourse of bastards, or of both spouses Infidell? which makes me the more wonder at Beza as quoted by some for matrimoniall sanctitie, as here understood, if taken of civill sanctitie or lawfulnesse, Beza professedly disclaimes it, for saith hee, the Apostle discourseth not of civill policy, but touching conscience. And I grant, saith he, that the marriage of Infidels is civilly lawfull: It's not fornication before God. But what is this to Pauls scope, discoursing touching conscience? and Beza professedly argueth against any supposall, that because the beleeving party is not mentioned, Vers. 14. yet that therefore not understood in the present case as such, as some expound this place, which yeeld that he speaketh of persons, one a beleever, the other infidell, but say, that in this case, hee considers not the person as a beleever, but as any other lawfull man or wife. This Beza by Ar∣gument refuteth. C. B. hee seemeth to propend to this later expo∣sition, that the Apostle considers them not here, as one a beleever, the other not, but meerly as husband and wife.

As for the conjecture of I. S. it hath already appeared, that, Tit. 1. 15. intends more then a bare lawfull use, common to all Infidels, as the opposition sheweth. [But to the unbeleeving is nothing pure when yet many things are lawfull. And so here, when the Apostle speakes of persons as such, one whereof is a beleever, in,

and to whom the other is sanctified, hee intends more then a bare lawfull husband or wife to them; and for their children also more then civilly legitimate. And it were too absurd in an Apostle, to lay that for a cause of legitimacy which is not: But Gods ordinance rather, not faith, Pagans marriages being as lawfull as Christians. And it were absurd to reason: That unlesse one bee a beleever, the children are bastards, when the children of each man and wife, Pagan or Christian, are as Adam and Eve, which herein were radically considered in reference to all such like couples, such whose children are a seed of God, or of his institution, in generall ap∣probation, as Mal. 2. 15. truly proveth. This was unheard of do∣ctrin, Heb. 13. 14. and tended rather to destruction in all families, where such doctrine should come, then to peace. And if there had been any ground of scruple in these cases of the Corinthians conside∣red onely as man and wife, what need they trouble Apostles with such civill cases? or what hath Christ and his Disciples; as such, to doe in civill matters? Luk. 12. 2 Tim. 2. The Apostles would not bee cumbred with Table-service, Act. 6. 4. much lesse with the civill law intricacies.

And whereas Mal. 2. 15. is urged as a proofe by some; it proveth that which was not questioned, scil. legitimacy of children of any lawfull man and wife, but disproveth such a Tenet, that unlesse the couples bee one or both Inchurched beleevers as were these, 1 Cor. 7. 14. their children are not a seed of God, a legitimate seed. In that God eyed all the sonnes and daughters of Adam and Eve, as conjugally united in the same common reference, as of duties in common, of love, care, &c. in the husband and subjection in the wife, and fidelitie in both; so in this fruit of such lawfull conju∣gall fellowship, legitimacy of children; wherein both parties, as lawfull man and wife, have equall share, without any such peculiar beleeving Covenant and Church respect, as any Instrumentall cause thereof, whereas the Apostle speaketh of a case of holinesse of children, arising from some peculiar consideration of some one parent and not the other, or if of both, yet not of both in that common way of meere civill lawfulnesse of matrimony, but with peculiar reference to an instrumentall cause of an higher nature.

And so wee come to the other opinion, to which answer is made, in the sixth and seventh considerations before mentioned: as the Apostle speakes of Inchurched parents, at least one of them, so he considereth them at least (as) Ecclesiasticall beleevers, visibly in

Covenant with God & his people, and holding forth faith in God, and in his Covenant, (as) beleeving brethren and sisters, and not barely as lawfull man and wife, as the context and proofes for∣merly urged declare. But let us heare the reasons, why meant of them as man and wife, and not as beleevers in the case propoun∣ded.

Obj. 1. When the Infidell party is spoken of, he is named, and so is not the beleeving party, but is barely mentioned under the com∣mon name of man or wife; therefore, so to bee considered in the case there spoken to.

An. This hath been formerly answered. That as much is ex∣pressed in that case, Vers. 16. man and wife onely named, but it were absurd to reason, that therefore in that case there mentioned, they are considered as man and wife, not as beleeving: nor in that con∣cealing of the word beleeving, in the mention of the beleeving par∣tie, is it said, the wife or husband is sanctified, in, or to, or by, the unbeleeving partie, as if they as such, had an influence in this sanctifiednesse of the other spouse, but still the phrase is rather thus, the unbeleeving husband is sanctified in, or to, or by the wife, and the unbeleeving wife by the husband, evidently pointing out the wife or husband, as the subject of that sanctifiednesse, which in the other is an effect, and applyed to them as the object.

Obj. 2. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 [hath been sanctified] in the preter∣perfect tense twise repeated, therefore probably relating to their estate, when both were unbeleevers.

Ans. He repeateth the word twice, as being to speake of the un∣beleeving parties, in some couples the husband, in others the wife: as sanctified in, unto, or by the other parties beleeving: for, as such, the wife or husband, to, or by whom the Infidell partie is sancti∣fied, are considered, (as before proved) now, in the preter-perfect tense, such were so sanctified, not whilst both unbeleevers: since not then an unbeleever sanctified to a wife beleeving, but in refe∣rence to past time, since their comming to the faith, and to the Church-estate, which was some good space of time as in which ma∣ny had sundry children.

Obj. 3. The same word is used in 1 Tim. 4. 5. concerning the creatures, being lawfull to use: that therefore is the sense here.

Ans. If that had meant onely lawfulnesse of use, for the way there mentioned, as in some other Scriptures some such use of the Greek word here used, may be found; yet it's not therefore con∣sequent,

that here, as it is circumstantiated, it must be so meant like∣wise. But as for the place in Timothy, the confirmation it yeelds to this text, is rather for us then against us; since intending a way of the creatures becomming not barely lawfull to use, as it is to others, which makes no improvement of the word of Covenant as well as command in prayer, but of a way of a holy use to such as take that holy course for that end. And even so it is here, of which more anon. As much is mentioned in another phrase to like pur∣pose, Tit. 1. 15. but the opposition to unbeleeving persons shew∣eth, that albeit many things are lawfull to them, yet is nothing pure, as it is to the Saints, namely in a preter-naturall way holy to their use.

Obj. 4. But this is most pertinent to the Apostles scope, of en∣couraging to abide together.

Ans. The Apostles scope is not to speake to a case of civill law∣fulnesse of such abode, then indeed it had been lawfull to have spo∣ken in that sense: but to a case of persons troubled in conscience about pollution, even by a communion which out of doubt was amongst all, and so to them civilly lawfull, Heb. 13. 4. This there∣fore were but to beate the ayre to tell them for satisfaction to their troubled conscience, of a matter of which they never doubted: and of which, if never so well assured by what they knew, now or before, yet still their wound is not healed, but might bleed and fe∣ster for all that, in as much as many things lawfull, in respect of civill use amongst men, yet are not alwayes such things, by the use whereof the Saints may not bee in conscience polluted, as in the case of divorce of old tolerated.

Obj. 5. Hee speaketh of things not as contingent, and possibly never likely to be, but of things certaine in order to effects necessa∣rily following, and so of civill lawfulnesse of spouses, a certaine effect of the ordinance of marriage.

Ans. And so is the sanctifiednesse of a lawfull spouse as certaine a sequell in reference to the other, making improvement of the word of Gods covenant as well as commandement by faith in prayer, 1 Tim. 4. 4, 5.

Repl. Yea, but it's not so certaine a sequell, that the holinesse of children should follow from that spirituall condition and consi∣deration of the parent, as it's necessary it should, if the Apostles reasoning hold good from the cause to the effect: since, then it must necessarily follow, or else hee reasons impertinently: nor will it

reach the trouble of such, which never had, nor it may bee through age or other naturall inabilitie might never have children: or how could their faith sanctifie their conjugall communion in reference to children?

Answ. The Apostle reasons from cause to effect, ex natura rei, and not barely, ex natura eventus rei. It doth not follow that such a cause is not in its nature a cause of such an effect, or that one may not pertinently reason from the cause to the effect, because that sometimes a second cause may bee suspended in its full operation, either by the first over-ruling cause, or by secondary impedi∣ments.

But to come to the matter propounded. We will suppose it meant of matrimony, which as Gods ordinance is a certaine cause as of legitimacy of the husband to marriage use, so of the children be∣gotten in, and by marriage fellowship. This you will say will sa∣tisfie all sides. But will it indeed? Is it certaine, all married peo∣ple should have children? Is it not a very contingent effect? how can you reason from cause to effect rationally? Are not many married persons past having of children by each other? or natural∣ly disabled from generation? what satisfaction is it to such per∣sons, to tell them of an effect so unlikely, and naturally so unpossi∣ble? All will answer here, yea, but in the nature of the ordinance, it is such a cause tending by Gods appointment to such an effect: and ex hypothesi, supposing the object to bee qualified with that effect of legitimacy, scil. children actually begotten by marriage fellow∣ship, then the effect is not contingent, but alwayes followeth. And all married persons may bee incouraged to their condition, in that the ordinance hath not influence alone upon the spouses in refe∣rence to their marriage-fellowship, but upon such children as God pleaseth to bestow upon married persons, for that both became lawfull, and not unlawfull. As much say I in this case. That a faith∣full man in covenant with God and his Saints, hee by improve∣ment of Gods word, &c. hath this certaine to him, and for his incouragement, whether hee stand in relation to a spouse onely, and have yet no children, yet hee hath a sanctified use of his spouse: or if God make his spouse fruitfull, hee hath a sanctified use of her, yet further in a reference to any child by her, to which hee stands in relation as a parent; That as another effect of the covenant improved, and of faith also therein, hee hath this pri∣viledge of a Federall and Ecclesiasticall condition of his child,

and this is a comfortable incouragement to all such persons, that there is such an influence of the word of God improved by faith, that as marriage-use is sanctified by it: so children begotten in mar∣riage are Ecclesiastically and Federally holy; when the Apostle saith, All things are pure to the pure, Tit. 1. and every creature is sanctified by the word and prayer, 1 Tim. 4. hee doth not thereby weaken or falsifie the ground-worke from cause to effect, or wea∣ken their comfort thence; because it may bee said, it is very con∣tingent, yea impossible, that one beleever should have all things or creatures, &c. but it sufficeth ex hypothesi, what ever hee hath more or lesse, its pure to him: And if hee have any thing more, which he had not, that then it becomes actually pure to him, so in this case: Therefore the Apostle doth not reason thus, else you should have no children, but supposing you have children, it would follow they were else uncleane, but now they are holy.

Obj. 6. But hee speakes of an holinesse incident to an unbelee∣ver, remaining an unbeleever, and therefore of a civill holi∣nesse?

Ans. When the Apostle saith, every thing is sanctified by the word, &c. 1 Tim. 4. and Tit. 1. 15. All things are pure to the pure, will any say that hee speakes of a puritie meerly civill and naturall in reference unto the pure? say an Indian servant, yea say a beast, to whom this puritie is attributed, remaine Heathen or irrationall, in themselves, and are civilly pure onely to the unbeleeving, yet they are in a more peculiar and spirituall respect said to bee pure to the pure, else why is there put such a distinction between them therein, Tit. 1. 15? It is in a peculiar way and sense that the creatures 1 Tim. 4. and the Infidell spouse, 1 Cor. 7. are sanctified to the faithfull.

Obj. 7. Yea, but he speakes of an unbeleever, as a joynt cause of the childrens holinesse, therefore that is but civill holinesse or legitimacy.

Ans. Hee is a joynt cause of the child properly: but of the child thus priviledged, hee is not any proper cause, as an unbeleever, but as an unbeleever sanctified to his beleeving spouse.

3. I. S. hath some further expression tending to the same end, that the children are holy to use, as are other creatures to the Saints, and concludeth, that the holinesse of the parent, and child is the same in nature, scil. the holinesse of the creature, in a naturall, not in any spirituall respect. That is, they are made

lawfull to use, as before he spake when he shewed in what sense the husband was sanctified, scil. made lawfull to use, or as others say, as C. B. doth; That children in this Text are not holy, with any holinesse distinct from Idolaters, as appeareth in the repetition of the word sanctified, and that holinesse, hee afterwards saith, it is civill holinesse.

Ans. Albeit this hath been in substance objected before, and an∣swered, yet let me give a distinct answer to it.

1. Then, I deny that the same word used touching the parents, is repeated in mention of the children, if wee speake Grammati∣cally. Yea, but they are of the same roote, one the verbe, the other the noune. And what then? is there no difference in the use of the words? non sequitur. Aquinas is right in that: touching the meaning of words saith hee, non tam attendendum est, à quo, quam ad quid. Wee must not so much heed the roote whence they are derived, as the use to which in common speeches they are applied. Sanctified in, or to a person, is one thing, and holy is another. Afflictions, persecutions, yea the falls of the Saints are sanctified to them, but they are not holy. It's Pauls wont when intending that use of the word sanctified either expresly or implicitly, to mention to whose use the person or thing is sanctified: As here, twice in this verse, •• sanctified to the husband, and to the wife, so Tit. 1. 15. To the pure, all things are pure, and 1 Tim. 4. 4, 5. mentioning prayer, he noteth out Gods suppliants, &c. to whom the cretures are sancti∣fied. But here is no mention to whose use the children are holy: yea in that holy for civill use, they are holy to the infidel parent as well as to the beleever, he may make a lawfull use of his child: yet be∣ing unbeleeving, the child is not sanctified to his use, as Tit. 1. 15. sheweth.

2. Suppose it of an holy or sanctified use of the children strictly taken, as incommunicable to others then to Saints for use: yet why rather your children holy, then others, then other Pagans chil∣dren? since to the members of Corinth, the Pagan Cities children might be said holy for use, and they might make a holy use of them many wayes in prayer, &c. Yea, why not instancing as well as any other creature, as holy, thus, as well as the children of the members of Corinth Church?

Obj. It was more suitable to instance in children, being to prove, that the Infidell parents were thus sanctified in their beleeving pa∣rents.

Ans. Yea, but if that bee the question, it is not one particular instance like it would prove the same: unlesse an induction of more particulars: that the husband is thus sanctified: for so are the chil∣dren, so are such and such things, &c. therefore so is the Infidell hus∣band, or wife to the beleeving party.

SECT. V.

HAving thus removed and cleared such mistakes in the ex∣pounding this Text, we come now to what I conceive to take up the full meaning of what is said of these children of the bo∣dy of the Corinthian-Church-members, that they are holy. Some take it of Federall holinesse, some of Ecclesiasticall and Church-holinesse: I would exclude neither: It being spoken of the children of parents in such sort in the Covenant of Grace, as it is invested with Church-Covenant also, explicit or implicite, and in the same respect the children are Federally holy, as the Covenant of Grace is cloathed with Church-Covenant in a Politicall visible Church-way.

And thus I conceive of the Apostles inference and argument [else your children were uncleane, but now they are holy] Scilicet, That unlesse your Interest in the Covenant of Grace, which you hold forth, and your faith therein, which you in a Church-way professe, have so much influence upon your yokefellowes, as to sanctifie them in, and to, your conjugall use: But that there be in∣validitie and privation of influence thereof, in that your conjugall relation; then must you be as well to seeke of any validitie there∣of, in another relation also: scil. in your parentall relation to your children: even there also, shall the covenant, and faith have no influence unto such an effect of holinesse of your children. If they produce not such an effect in the former, by which yet the Infidell partie have no personall priviledge, how will they produce the la∣ter, by which children have according to you an unquestioned personall priviledge, that they are holy? hee that will question, or cast off the force of such instruments influences in one thing, hee by the same distemper, will cast the same off in another. Yea, if it be groundedly and really for that the Covenant of Grace which beleevers lay hold of together with their faith therein, have no effi∣cacy in one condition, or relation, it is as well true in another, only reserving the diversitie of influences, as diversly elicited or ex∣pressed. If they are not effectuall to produce something peculiar to

beleevers in a conjugall relation differing from all Pagan spouses, they will neither produce any thing peculiar to them in a parentall relation to their children. But as your spouses shall bee to you as all other pagan spouses, in common to each other: meerely law∣full to use, so your children, with, and to you shall be in your pa∣rentall relation, but as pagan children are uncleane or profane, which to all were absurd: But now, rather they are holy; namely, Federally, and not as other Pagans children, profane. Now, when I mention in this exposition the Covenant, as in part having some influence in both relations, as well as faith, I doe it, as not daring to sever faith from the word of faith, which even giveth strength to faith it selfe: And besides, God having made a Covenant with Abraham, and with his spirituall seed in their Generations, as well as with the Jewes: And that in such sort also, as with respect to Church estate, and as invested with Church-Covenant, hence it is, that the [meere] Infidelitie of a Pagan spouse abiding Pagan when the other comes to the faith, shall not hinder the course and force of Gods Covenant to In-Churched beleevers seed, witnesse the ex∣ample both of the son of Moses, Exod. 4. 24. &c. and of Eunice, Act. 16. 1, 2, 3. even many personall sinnes of the Saints hinder it not, much lesse doe other personall sinnes evacuate the same.

Hence, so long as this Covenant-Interest holdeth in force, that either it be not rejected by the parents, as it was by those Jewes Rom. 11. 20. or that they be not justly, for covenant breaches di∣spoyled of Church benefit by it by some Church-censure, so long the covenant is Ecclesiastically of force to the childrens federall & Church-estate. So in the case of those Idolatrous Church-mem∣bers, being not discovenanted, and discharged by Gods hand, or by Ecclesiasticall authoritie, their children were federall, and Church-seed, the Churches children borne by her unto God, Ezek. 16. 8. 20, 21, 23. compared. That holy Covenant produceth that respect of holy persons, Dan. 8. 24. compared with 11. 28. 30. 32. Hence the Covenant and Church-estate of Covenant and In-chur∣ched parents, is firstly the parents priviledge, and so to bee con∣sidered. Hence also I conclude then that the little ones of visible beleeving and In-churched parents, such as these mentioned in the Text were, 1 Cor. 1. 1, 2. with 1. and 14. they are Federally and Ec∣clesiastically holy. In this sense the word holy is frequently used, yea, of many persons, which were neither inherently holy, nor

imputatively holy in a strict sense, no nor so much outwardly ho∣ly in point of lively expressions of personall holinesse, yet are cal∣led holy, scil. Ecclesiastically, and in externall respect to the Co∣venant, and that not a Covenant of workes, for that calleth no sinners holy, nor by any meere ceremoniall holinesse, but by ver∣tue of Abrahams Covenant, Gen. 17. 7. with Ezra 9. 2. They are called the holy seed, and the same phrase in the same Covenant and Church respect, is in Scripture frequently used, with respect to such Infants, the holy people destroyed by Antiochus, Dan. 8. 24. were the Jewish children as well as growne persons. The chil∣dren were a part, and a speciall part, of that chosen, beloved, and people redeemed from Egypt, which were called holy. Hence both Deut. 14. 2. and 26. 18, 19. and 28. 2. 9. speaking of the whole people as holy: it is in the phrases, thou, thee, loved and establish∣ed. Thee, that thou mayst bee an holy people, &c. Adoption be∣longeth to the little ones as did the promises, as well as to the rest of Pauls kindred, Rom. 9. 4. They were children of the Church, and borne to God, as husband to the Covenant Church, Ezek. 16. 8. 20, 21. 23. compared with Jer. 2. 2. & 3. 1. and Esa. 54. 4, 5. nor was this as I intimated a ceremoniall matter, no more then either Abrahams Covenant was with some which oppose us confesse did belong in speciall sort to the Jewes, and that Covenant was the very Covenant of Grace, and therefore that did by this grant in speciall wise belong to them, nor was it more ceremoniall, then was that, Deut. 30. 6. 11, 12, 13, 14. which the Apostle maketh the very doctrine of faith, which they preached, as by comparing that with Rom. 10. 6, 7, 8. wee shall God willing declare. This was not as the ceremonies against them, but for the good of them and theirs, and avowed by the Apostles after Christs ascension, Act. 2. 38, 39. of which afterwards. And as 1 Pet. 2. 9. which Interpre∣ters agree relateth to Exod. 19. 6. spoken of them not as an invisi∣ble Church, but visible, such as had officers over them, which the invisible Church, as such hath not. For supposing a company with Church-officers, they are now not an invisible but visible C•…•…us, see, 1 Pet. 5. 1, 2, 3. and 4. 10, 11. hee calleth them elected; such they were to the judgement of charitie and in respect of visibilitie; so that visible Church of Babylon, hee calleth it elected, 1 Pet. 5. 13. yet were there in that visible Church as in others, some tares, and vessels of dishonour. Some things mentioned in Peter, of their obe∣dience,

exercise of faith, &c. are not actually appliable to Infants, yet that hinders not, but that Infants are intended, in that In∣churched part of the 10. Tribes, as Calvin and Ames thinke, in re∣ference to James 1. 1. and Hos. 1. 10. or in that In-churched part of the Gentiles, as Oecumenius, Aretius, &c. thinke, since in Exod. 19. 6. to which this place is to bee referred, this condition of that Covenant-priviledge, scil. Actually and personally to keepe Gods Covenant and to obey his voyce indeed, Exod. 19. 5. was applya∣ble onely to the growne part, yet the Infant part were in that ac∣count of an holy people, &c. and as much may bee conceived of 1 Pet. 2. 9.

SECT. VI.

AGainst what is usually brought from 1 Cor. 7. 14. That is ob∣jected, that children of parents, not sanctified by faith, in their matrimoniall fellowship, as Pharez and Zarah of Judah and Tha∣mar, Jepthah of Gilead, and many others, were within the Cove∣nant both of saving grace, and Church-priviledge. Therefore faith sanctifying of the use of the marriage bed, is not such a cause of sanctifying of the children Federally and Ecclesiastically, so as that unlesse that bee, the children are uncleane in that respect.

Ans. This objection may seeme to make a faire flourish against such as give the Apostles meaning, as onely such. But mee it hurts not, who make the maine spring of the holinesse of the chil∣dren, not to be the sanctifying of the unbeleeving yoke-fellow to the beleeving, but the grace of the Covenant to the beleever, and his seed; even the sanctification of the beleeving yoke-fellow spring∣eth from the grace of the Covenant, sanctifying beleevers seed, by vertue whereof, the infidelitie of the yoke-fellow, becomes no o∣verpowering let thereunto, and so in part by vertue of that Cove∣nant, as well as faith in it, such a yoke-fellow is sanctified so farre forth, nor is the Apostles influence from the cause to the effect of that communion, but rather from a like effect of the Covenant and faith in another relation of a beleever, as a parent to children, unto that in that relation of an yoke-fellow: that if the influence of the Covenant and faith bee wholly denyed in the one, it may well bee wholly denyed in the other, and that hee makes account was an absurditie in the sight of all.

Concerning the assertion, that Bastards were Interested in the Covenant of saving grace, I will not now dispute it, but reason

ex suppositis. That Covenant interest of those bastard-Infants, it was not from the parents faith sanctifying of that communion: Whence was it? It could not be from any actuall faith of the babes, they had it not; it was surely from the force of Abrahams Cove∣nant, at least as invested with Church-Covenant, from which the parents being not cut off by Gods hand, nor cast out by the Chur∣ches power; their Covenant relation still stood so far in force, that is, they were interessed externally therein and so their seed with them: and thus in foro Ecclesiae, the force of the Covenant took off even that impediment according to that position of the objectors; and how much more doth the same force of the Covenant take off any impediment of a Pagan parents infidelitie, in the Texts case of lawfull conjugall followship, so that such children of a Gentile Corinthian Church-members, have an interest at least externall in the saving Covenant of Grace and Church-priviledge.

Obj. Whether the parents beleeve or not, the children may bee in the Covenant, and regenerate, therefore that's no cause thereof.

Ans. Wee speake not of the inherent holinesse of the child, as re∣generate, that is, immediatly from God, but of holinesse Federall and Ecclesiasticall, which may bee applyable to persons unregene∣rate, as Psal. 50. 5. 16. 17. Of which more afterwards. The parents visibly beleeving and Inchurched, are instrumentall causes of that holinesse of their children, yea whether beleevers in veritie, or onely visibilitie. It sufficeth thereunto, nor are little ones thus in Covenant with God and his Church, without either the visibilitie of faith in the parents past or present: personall holinesse consist∣eth not with living in knowne sinnes, but Federall holinesse may, Ezek. 16.

Obj. The Text is a reason of the question, which was not about Federall holinesse, but living together.

Ans. The former part of the Text is a reason of that, and none pleades for the Infidell spouses Federall holinesse, but the latter part is a confirmation of that reason from another ground. And Mr. B. knoweth in proofe of conclusions, we take divers mediums.

Obj. Yea, but if the child bee Federally holy, then the Infidell wife is holy, with covenant sanctification?

Ans. It followeth not. The word sanctified in and to another, and being holy, differ and signifie different things, as before said.

Obj. If Federally holy, then Abrahams seed, and then they have faith, Gal. 3.

Ans. Wee shall in due place I hope prove, that they are Abra∣hams seed without actuall personall faith of their owne, and so as Abrahams seed federally holy.

Obj. The Apostle speakes of an outward holinesse common to reprobates also, Heb. 9. 15. and not of holinesse knowne to the Church, for which persons ought to bee baptized, and it's either inward holinesse which the Church deales not with, or outward, of which Baptisme is not a signe.

Ans. Outward holinesse, scil. that which is visible to the Church, is seal'd in Baptisme. The Church deales not with inward holi∣nesse, therefore with outward, unlesse there is an holinesse which is neither invisible nor visible, Hebr. 9. is of Ceremoniall holinesse; This of Federall and Church-holinesse, knowne to the Church, and holinesse visible or knowne to the Church is common to Re∣probates, unlesse any will say the Churches judgement erres not, and confound visibilitie, and infallibilitie.

CHAP. II. Sect. I. Touching the Explication of Act. 1. 38, 39.

ANother Scripture confirming the Doctrine of Federall ho∣linesse of children of In-churched parents, as approved and held forth by the Apostles, is that Act. 2. 38, 39 where Peter directing his speech chiefly to the Jewes, vers. 22. and 36. saith, the promise is to you and to your children: not, was to you, &c. as intending any legall blessing, but, a promise then in force after Christs ascension, to effect some chiefe promised bles∣sing; [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] used to signifie the free promise, or Covenant of Grace, to which they had visible right.

SECT. II.

THe promise here I. S. conceiveth to bee meant onely of the Messiah which was the promise to be sent; and by children, to be meant allegoricall children, which others inlarging, ex∣presse these two wayes. 1. That the promise made unto Abra∣ham, was then fulfilled, Act. 2. in sending Christ to them, and to their children, and to all that are afarre off; namely, those of the

dispersion, as many as the Lord our God shall call, that they may bee turned from their iniquitie, and bee baptized into his name, for the remission of their sinnes. Secondly, supposing the promise to bee of a saving grace, of Christ sent, of the out∣ward ordinance of baptisme, of the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost, &c. It is none of these wayes true, but with that limitation, scil. If they repent: For neither God promised sa∣ving grace, nor outward ordinances, nor extraordinary gifts, nor sent Christ to them, their children, or all that were afarre off, without calling them, and every of them. Hen. Den spea∣keth to like purpose as this second particular hath first, the promise is to you upon calling; to them that are afarre of upon calling; and so to their children upon calling, and no other∣wise; of which hee gave a reason before, that by the promise to the children, was not meant the seed after the flesh, the Copie of beleevers being not larger then that of Abraham was in respect of the eternall Covenant, which belonged not to his seed after the flesh, but after the spirit, which hee expounds to bee such as Mark. 3. 32. and Mark. 16. 16. scil. that obey the words of Christ that beleeve and are baptized. To like purpose A. R. in his se∣cond part hath the same, scil. that the promise is equally made to them and to their children, and to them that are afarre off. But those that are afarre off, are not in the Covenant by the pro∣mise, untill they beleeve; therefore, neither those children; which hee further confirmeth, that if then they were in Cove∣nant, thou had they been also of the Church of the Gospel: But that they were not of: For it's said afterwards, vers. 41. that they were added to the Church, as many as beleeved, and therefore were not of it before. C. B. hath divers sences of it. Expounding children to bee men, by Mark. 10. 44. John 8. 39. Gal. 4. 19. But the meaning hee makes to be no other promise, then of remission of sinnes, as the onely salve of guiltie consci∣ences, hee maketh it not as others, to bee the promise of the Messiah, nor as A. R, &c. in his booke expoundeth the promise it selfe to be meant of that promise cited by Peter, as then fulfil∣led, which is mentioned, Joel 2. scil. of the gifts of the holy Ghost. But C. B. maketh it not a promise, but a proffer of a promise, to persons not actually converted, vers. 37, 38, 39, 40. And if there were any promise, yet being of remission of sinnes, it was not to their children, since many godly persons children prove wick∣ed,

and so God must either fall from his promise, or they from Grace. And that this promise was no more to them that were pricked in their hearts then to those afarre off, (whether from them as Gentiles, or from the promise as unregenerate persons) even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

And in this parti∣cular Mr. B. jumpeth with some others mentioned: as hee did in that, that this was spoken to comfort guiltie consciences cast down, as well in regard of that bloody wish against their children, as in respect of other bloody acts against Christ. In these different ap∣prehensions it's hard to reconcile persons, either to others of their judgement, or else to themselves.

SECT. III.

COme wee then to the first opinion, touching the words. First, the promise is to you, that is, it is fulfilled to you, accordingly as made to Abraham, for sending of Christ, &c. here wants Scrip∣ture proofe, to make this sense of the promise is to you, (i. e.) is ful∣filled to you, nor yet doth that in Act. 3. 25, 26. yee are the chil∣dren of the promise, &c. prove this sense. Secondly, it is sending of Christ, or of Christ sent. But let it bee considered. 1. That the Apostle doth not say, the p••omise was to you, as in reference to the time of making it to the fathers, with respect unto them, or in reference to Christ, who was not now to come, but already come, as the Apostle proveth, from ver. 3. to 37. nor is it the use of the Scrip∣ture, when mentioning promises as fulfilled, to expresse it thus in the present tense: the promise is to you, or to such and such, but rather to annex some expression that way, which evinceth the same, for which let Rom. 15. 8. 1 Joh. 2. 25. Eph. 3. 6. Nehe. 9. 8. 23. 2 Chron. 6. 15. 1 King. 8. 56. Act. 2. 16, 17. 33. and 13. 32, 33. Josh. 21. 45. and 23. 14. Matth. 1. 22, 23. and 21. 4. Luk. 1. 54, 55. 68, 69. and Psal. 111. 9. Rom. 11. 26, 27. be considered. 2. They knew already to their cost, that Christ indeed was sent amongst them, and to bee that Jesus or Saviour of his people from their sinnes, Act. 22. 36, 37. compared with Matth. 1. 21. And this was cold comfort to them, to tell them of that which wounded them, unlesse there bee withall some promise annexed, and supposed in his being come. The promise meerely of Christs comming could not com∣fort them, unlesse also in and by Christ come in the flesh, there bee some promise made to them, touching the removall of those bur∣dens of guilt which lay upon them. 3. The blessing principally propounded to them, for their reviving, healing, succour, and

support, it was not Christs sending, nor his being sent, but remissi∣on of sinnes, vers. 38. wherefore unlesse the Apostle argue imper∣tinently, this may not be excluded, but must bee one principall thing intended. 4. It is that promise to which Baptisme the seale is annexed, now the seale is ever to the Covenant, which is not barely to Christs being sent in the flesh, but to the benefits con∣tained in promises by his comming. The third thing they say, it is to those of the dispersion, those of the ten Tribes, as others have expressed it, and why not also of the Gentiles as well? since spoken indefinitely of all that were afarre of; which the Scripture expresly applyeth to the Gentiles, Ephes. 2. 11, 12. Suppose those other Jewes were as the Gentiles, not a people actually in Cove∣nant with God, so much as externally, as being long divorced from God, and his Covenant, and Church-liberties, yet the Gen∣tiles in the maine of their outlawry condition, were as one with them. Yea, but the conversion of the Gentiles was not yet re∣vealed, till Act. 10. in that vision. What? had not Christ before this Sermon of Peters declared his mind to all his Apostles touch∣ing the discipling, and In-churching of the Gentiles? onely they knew not whether it might be by joyning them first by way of ad∣dition, as proselytes to the Jewes, rather then by gathering them into other distinct Churches. 4. It's affirmed, that

this promi∣sed sending of Christ was to them, their children, and those afarre off, as many as our God should call, that they may bee turned from their iniquitie, and bee baptized for remission of sinnes, and yet also that the promise, what ever it bee supposed to bee, was to them all, with that limitation, that they repent, or that they be called.

What? is it to as many as the Lord shall call, or con∣vert or cause to repent? and yet is it, that they may bee turned from their iniquitie? is it to persons called, and yet also to uncal∣led persons? is it to them, that they may bee called, yet the per∣sons to whom the promise is, are as many as are supposed to bee called? how can these two bee right? yea it's said, it is to them all, upon condition that they be called, and yet also, that it is to them, that they may be called. Why, if it be to them, that by Christ they may bee called, then is that promise to persons as yet uncalled, and their calling is an effect following their interest in that pro∣mise as a cause, and not preceding their interest in the promise as a condition. As touching this, whether the sole condition of this being of the promise to them, &c. we shall examine that anon, God willing.

SECT. IV.

AS for Hen. Dens exposition, of children, here not to be those after the flesh, but spirit, even beleevers, I cannot see how it's pertinent to the cause propounded touching the children mentio∣ned, Act 2. hee doth not intend it thus, your children, (i. e.) Abra∣hams children: for Abraham is considered rather by him as a pattern, having the precedentiall copy of the Covenant mentioned. And it had been incongruous to have said; It is to your children, that is, to Abrahams children: Abrahams children, were not all their children, nor were their children alone all the children which A∣braham had: and besides Hen. Den confesseth it is to comfort them concerning their owne children, against whom they had wished that curse, Matth. 27. 25. now taking it then of their chil∣dren, how will Hen. Den. make these Jewes, whom hee cannot but eye at this present, when these words, Act. 2. 39. were applyed to them, to bee such spirituall fathers to any children of theirs, or sustaine the relation of such fathers at that instant unto such chil∣dren; themselves not being yet such relates, as beleeving fathers, nor having such correlata, as children after the spirit? nor was Abrahams charter lesse then what here avowed by the Apostle, scil. that the promise even of remission of sinnes, did belong to the Jewes, and to their children in respect of externall right and ad∣ministration, and no more is pleaded for: and so much is to Gen∣tile beleevers in their generations; of which more elsewhere. Nor will C. B's exposition of children hold, as if here taken for men, because in some other Scriptures so used; he saith, that to the farther scruple of the Jewes, about their wish, of Christs blood on their children, Peter answereth, The promise is to you and to your children: What were their children growne to bee men in two moneths space, since they made that cursed wish? Or had they no children but such as were men growne? or if they had, did they intend that curse of blood to bee on their growne children, and not as well on their babes? on their children indefinitely? To like purpose is A. R's conceit, that by children are meant their grown children, according to that in Joel, your sonnes and your daugh∣ters: but as hath been intimated, this plaister is too narrow for their wounds rising from the guilt of blood wished upon all their children, including, and not excluding their babes. Nor will the conceit of I. S. and some others hold: that by children are meant

allegorically such as imitate, and walke in their footsteps of faith and repentance, &c. for which end Scriptures are urged, where fathers are taken for such as are patternes to others, and children for such as imitate them.

But 1. Is it the use of Scriptures to propound comforts to such kind of persons by allegories?

2. If it bee supposed, that the naturall children are excluded, and onely allegoricall children understood, there needed no such circumlocution. But it might have been plainly thus, The promise is to you, and to your children, even to such as are afarre off, as many as God shall call: whereas hee speaketh distinctly of all three; it is to you, and to your children, and to such as are afarre off, as many as God shall call.

3. These convinced Jewes at present could not bee such father∣ly precedents to others that should bee called to follow their in∣stant faith, and repentance, which as yet they acted not, nor doth Peter say, the promise is or belongs to you, for you have repented, and consequently beleeved; for that is rather mentioned, as ex∣erted, after many words besides, ver. 40, 41. But repent and bee baptized, de futuro, for the promise in praesenti is to you, scil. in re∣spect of externall right.

4. It would rather have discouraged then incouraged; stum∣bled, then satisfied them, for Peter thus to bid them to their losse. All the Jewes, as visibly in Covenant with God, were in some sence fathers to the Gentile Church-members, 1 Cor. 10. 1, 2, 3, 4. All our fathers, scil. of you of this Church of Corinth and of mee Paul, and yet withall these were fathers too, from Abrahams time down∣ward, to conveigh Abrahams covenant, and its priviledges to their owne naturall seed, Rom. 9. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Deut. 29. 1. 14, 15. 29. and 30. 6.

SECT. V.

NOr will C. B's apprehension of the phrase, the promise is to you, &c. (i. e.) not the promise but the proffer of the promise, hold consonant to himselfe, or to the truth, for hee grants that promise to bee to those that were prickt in heart, but no more then to them afar off, &c. as many as God shall call; nor know I what Scripture hee builds upon for such an exposition of the phrase [the promise is to you] when it is offered to you. Albeit others speake as much in effect, when they say, the promise made to Abraham of sending Christ, and now fulfilled, is to them. But

deale ingenuously, is that all which in Act. 3. 25. 26. is under∣stood, by that, [yee are the children of the Covenant made with the fathers, &c.] (i. e.) God hath fulfilled the promise made to the fathers, concerning Christs comming, whom now hee offereth to you? Why are the Jewes onely such children, and not the Gen∣tiles, all kindreds as well, albeit Christ was first sent to them? For vers. 25. all kindreds of the earth are mentioned, as those that should bee blessed in Abrahams seed. Yea, doe not such as so speak, affirme before, that this promise of sending Christ, was to them, their children, and those afarre off? which notion Paul, Ephes. 2. 11, 12. applies to the Gentiles. They are the children of the Pro∣phets, Act. 3. and hee doth not say thus, and of the fathers, with whom the Covenant is made, as if it were meant in respect of bare naturall relation, but, and of the Covenant made with the fathers, to shew, that it's meant of Church, and federall interest in them, as Covenant fathers, and dispensers: yea, to shew, that the Covenant was as seed, by vertue whereof, they considered as federally and ecclesiastically priviledged, did spring. I had thought that these parallel phrases, that [children of the Covenant] of grace, mentioned, Act. 3. 25. and [children of the promise] Gal. 4. 28. was not meerely applyed to either Jewes or Galatians, because Christ according to the promise of God to Abraham, &c. came into the world; that blessing might bee offered to them, through him the promised seed. But because they had a visible interest in the pro∣mise of blessing by him, and therefore both Jewes and Galatians were so stiled; sure I am, Pauls phrase of the Jewes, Rom. 9. 4. To whom belongs the adoption and the promises, comprehending Gen. 17. 7. Jer. 31. 33, 34. holdeth forth no bare offer thereof, but at least an externall interest therein. And C. B. who maketh the promise to bee the offer of it to them, their children and those afar off, as many as the Lord shall call, will not easily reconcile him∣selfe to others of his mind, denying that the Scripture hath to doe with children that way, in that they understand not. And how then is the offer of the promise at present [the promise is] to your children] unto those children, many of which were but Infants? Besides, those afarre off from them, as were the Gentiles, how was the promise to them then in the offer thereof, when as yet it was not offered to them, untill afterwards, that the Jews came to reject the same, Act. 13. 46, 47. unlesse in respect of some few sprinklings and first fruits, which yet was after this also, Act. 8. 10. Or, if he

doe stretch it to the future, with others, scil. that it is to them up∣on that limitation that they be called, namely effectually; surely he will not say, that the promise, i. e. the meere offer thereof is to be∣leevers. Now, to come to that wherein A. R. and Hen. Den, and others doe center, scil. That it was no otherwise to the Jewes, then to those afar off, and so, and no otherwise to their children, or (as A. R. phraseth it) it was equally to all three sorts, scil. when they beleeve, then they are in the Covenant, &c. But why are all made equall herein? Act. 3. 25, 26. even as it is expounded by our opposites, will give the Jewes the prioritie, the Text is expresse, and to you first, &c. all are not then equall therein. The Gentiles come not in, but by occasion of the Jewes casting out, and then they considered as in Olive or Church-estate, partake of no other Church fatnesse, for substance, then did their predecessors the Jewes, Rom. 11. 12. 15. 17. no other kingdome for the nature of it, and in the essentialls of the externall right, and administrati∣on of the royall Covenant to the Gentile successor, then was to the Jewish predecessor, Matth. 8. 11. 12. and 21. 43. In a sense then, the Jewes are preferred and not made equall, albeit in ano∣ther respect of essentiall samenesse of Covenant priviledges, wee have now proved and yeelded them to bee equall, yet so, as it ma∣keth against A. R. and others, more of which anon.

SE••T. VI.

BUt A. R. I suppose forgets himselfe, when he maketh the sole condition of the promise, to bee equally to Jew and Gentile, scil. beleeving, meaning saving-beleeving. For hee expounds this Text, Act. 2. 38, 39. to bee the promise mentioned in Joel 2. of powring out the extraordinary gifts of the spirit upon them. Now doth A. R. suppose the same reason of pouring out such gifts on the Gentiles to bee called to the worlds end, as was in those first times of planting the Gospell? or would hee have all beleevers now expect such extraordinary gifts, as having according to his exposition, this place and promise for it? I suppose not, why then doth hee make them all equall? And if effectuall calling bee the onely condition of obtaining these promised gifts, those that cast out devills in Christs name, &c. might have had some∣thing more to say they plead, Matth. 7. 31. But why doth any speake so exclusively, when expresse mention is made of remission of sinnes, Act. 2. 38. in confirmation also whereof, the promise

is partly occasioned, vers. 39. And for further discovery of this mi∣staken exposition, let it bee considered. 1 That the very confessed occasion of this here spoken to these heart-pierced Jewes, was the guilt of hainous sinnes, and of that cursed wish, Matth. 27. 25. They were not troubled for want of such extraordinary gifts, and to tell them of such gifts, was both impertinent and unsatisfactory, and it could minister but little comfort to sin-sick soules, to pro∣mise them such gifts, which they might have, and yet die in their sinnes, Matth. 7. 23. 2 As the maine thing propounded, Act. 2. scil. of remission of sinnes, is not so much as named, Joel 2. so nei∣ther is that in Joel set downe in this order, I will poure out my spirit upon you, and upon your children; or thus, you and your sonnes and daughters (onely) shall prophesie. 3. The subjects in∣stanced in Joel 2. are not reducible to the notions, as here men∣tioned, [you and your children] your sonnes and daughters might fall under the notion of you and your children, but not your old men and servants. It were absurd to explaine your children, that is, your old men, as if they were these hearers children. And thus much to that wherein A. R. is singular.

SECT. VII.

AS for that wherein hee joyneth with the rest, that the chil∣dren are put in the same skale with those afar off, &c. The pro∣mise is to them all upon condition of effectuall calling: True it is, that the phrase, The promise (is) to you, and (is) to your children, and (is) to those afarre off, &c. is the same; but non sequitur, that ergo it is to them all alike, and in the same sense. It is at present to them all, that is evident by the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the present tense, but not alike to all. The notion of the other as persons afarre off, in∣timateth that these Jewes and their children were not all accounted afarre off too, scil. strangers from actuall externall interests in the Covenants of promise and commonwealth of Israel, or the visible politicall Church, Ephes. 2. 11, 12, 13. but rather nigh in that sense, and yet the promise is to them afar off intentionally and quoad deum, even whilst afarre off and uncalled; but to the other the Jewes and their children, the promise is to them actually, and quoad hominem. To all Pauls kindred, Infants or elder Jewes, belonged the adoption and the promises indefinitely, Rom. 9. 1, 2, 3, 4. nor is it unusuall in Scripture to expresse covenant grace,

made over as in present, to divers persons, some whereof are future and to come, others are in present existence and view, Deut. 29. 14, 15. neither with you doe I make this Covenant, but with him which standeth here this day, scil. the Jew and Proselyte, and the little ones present, and with him, that is not here this day, scil. with the persons unborne, comming of you, or of the Proselyte. The phrase is alike to them, which were actually existent in Church estate and humane being, and to others which were not so, with both doe I (at present) make my Covenant, &c. In the one it is verified actually, and quoad homines, in the other intentio∣nally, and quoad deum. And this promise here mentioned, Act. 2. 38, 39. containing in it remission of sinnes, and so the righteous∣nesse of faith, on which faith pitcheth, Rom. 4. 7, 8. with 11. what was it other, then that which by circumcision was visibly sealed un∣to them and their children, by Gods owne appointment? Cir∣cumcision being in the Sacramentall nature of it, a visible seale of the righteousnesse of faith it selfe, and not meerely in a personall respect to Abraham, as applyed by his faith to his justification. And albeit beleevers came with Abraham to have the saving experience of it, Rom. 4. 7, 8. 11, 12. yet to the rest, Circumcision was a Co∣venant, or a Sacramentall signe or seale of Gods Covenant, Act. 7. Gen. 17. even of that his Covenant mentioned, vers. 7. I will bee a God to thee and thy seed, which containeth that promise of ju∣stification, Jer. 31. 33, 34. Nor will it suffice to say, that Covenant was a mixt Covenant. It held forth temporall things indeed, but by vertue of a Covenant of Grace, Psal. 111. 5. as doth the pro∣mise now, 1 Tim. 4. 8. but it holds forth also spirituall things in the externall right and administration thereof as to all, albeit in the internall operation, as to some. The promises are to them all, Rom. 9. 4. sci. in the former sense, and yet ver. 8. some onely are the children of the promise, and the choyce seed in that generall Covenant, scil. in respect of the saving efficacy of the Covenant up∣on them, vers. 6. And the same distinction is now held out in such sort, amongst persons in Church-estate: unlesse any will say, that there are none in the Covenant, as well as in Christ the Vine, John 15. 2. externally onely, which I suppose will not bee affirmed. And in this sense Peter speaking to these Jewes before they had actually repented or beleeved, vers. 38. with 40, 41. saith, the promise of remission of sinnes is, or belongeth to you, scil. in the externall right and administration of it, the Apostle calls upon them to re∣pent,

and be baptized, not because then the promise should be theirs, but because the promise was theirs already, in the sense mentio∣ned, repent and bee baptized: for the promise is to you, or be∣longs to you: as Rom. 9. 4. hath it. Both baptizing and repenting are joyned as duties unto which, upon this Covenant ground they are called, and not as conditions of their comming by externall right in the promise, none will say of the one branch, that bee baptized was a condition propounded by Peter to them of their comming to right in the promise; since baptisme as a Co∣venant Seale, presupposeth a Covenant right; yet is the dutie of being baptized, as well as of repenting, alike urged on the same ground upon the Jewes. Yea but Peter having exhorted them to repent, &c. would not have baptized them, unlesse they had repen∣ted: therefore it was not their Covenant-right, which hee looked at. Admit he would not, yet that doth not make voyd, either their Covenant, or Church-right thereto: because being adult∣members under offence, and admonished thereof by Peter: they might for their obstinacy against such an admonition notwithstan∣ding Church, or Covenant-right, have been debarred that seale. If one of our members be under offence, and the Elders admonish him to repent thereof, and hee doth not, hee is debarred the seale of the Lords Supper, and his children of Baptisme the while; not that hee is not a Church-member, and so hath Church-right as well as covenant-right thereto; but in that this intervening ob∣stinacy doth suspend his [jus in re] albeit otherwise considered hee had [jus ad rem:] so in the case of these offensive members of that Jewish Church, which was a true visible Church, and not yet dischurched and divorced by the Lord; which maketh way for answer to A. K. that if they were then in Covenant, they were then in the Church of the Gospel; if hee meane it, of being inter∣nally in the Covenant, it is not that we plead for: it of being ex∣ternally, or quoad homines, we have proved, they were so in Cove∣nant and Church estate also; as being yet in the Olive and king∣dome of God, and not cast out, untill their unbeleefe, or totall, and finall rejection of the Covenant, as ratified in Jesus of Nazareth as that promised Messiah, Rom. 11. 20. to which the Jewes had not as yet come, and this Church was a Gospel Church visibly inte∣rested in the Covenant of Grace, the subject of the Gospell, and the same essentially with that Gospel, or Christian Church; un∣lesse, whilst the Jewish Church stood, any will say, there was no

Evangelicall visible Church in the world, but a legall Church: for there was no other visible Church, then that of the Jewes: that then something further was required by Peter, of the Adult-Jewes, to actuall participation of baptisme, and it was not because their Church of which they were members, was no true visible Evan∣gelicall Church: since it was Gods onely visible Church, in the time of Christs incarnation, of which hee lived and dyed a mem∣ber: and none will say, hee was no member of any Evangeli∣call Church, but of a legall; nor was it because the seale of Bap∣tisme was not administrable, in, or by, or to that Church of the Jewes: for it's evident that the Commission of Baptisme was first given by God, to John Baptist, in reference to that Church of the Jewes, as a seale of their membership therein; the same God that told him, who should Baptize with the holy Ghost, hee sent him to Baptize, John 1. 33. the Pharisees themselves could not deny Johns baptisme to bee from heavens authoritie, Matth. 21. 25, 26. and Baptisme being a Church-Ordinance, to bee in ordinary dis∣pensation or administred onely in and by a Church of Christ, that baptisme was at that time the Jewish Church-Ordinance, so farre forth, there was no other floore, wherein all sorts which John baptized, whether they proved chaffy hypocrites, or solid graine, upright ones, were in his and Christs time interessed, Matth. 3. 11. 12. this was then, the onely floore, or visible Church of Christ, (for in the visible Church is no chaffe) [his] floore; hee shall purge [his] floore. Into this Church fellowship also did Christs owne Disciples by that new way of initiation, visibly seale per∣sons, which were the reformed part of that Jewish Church, con∣tinuing still their relation to those officers of the Jewish Church, and their fellowship in the Church-Ordinances, then dispensed, and not separating from the same: either gathering into distinct Churches, or calling to them other ordinary Church-officers; which yet were not actually given by Christ, untill upon his ascen∣sion, Ephes. 4. 8. 11, 12, &c. but the reason rather was partly be∣cause (as was said) they were under such offence: and partly be∣cause albeit their Church were a true Evangelicall Church, yet it was not so pure and perfect, but had many grosse mixtures both of meere ceremoniall administrations, which were now to bee laid aside, and of most palpably and openly corrupt, and rotten mem∣bers: and partly because it was now requisite, not onely to acknow∣ledge the promised Messiah of Abrahams loynes, to be hee alone,

which by his blood should come, actually, as well as virtually, to ratifie the Covenant of grace, visibly made with them, as they did in receiving the seale of Circumcision, but that they owne the Lord Jesus, who was crucified by, and among them, as he which a lone did thus: which amongst other testimonies Baptisme witne∣seth, therefore more was now required of the adult-Jewes, then formerly; which yet was not required of their unripe Children: even as when wee are to receive members of other visible Chur∣ches, into compleat fellowship of all Church priviledges, and ordinances with us: wee require some satisfaction of the growne persons, to testifie their repentance of their former Church-sinnes, and personall scandalls, therein committed, and their willing sub∣jection unto the government, and worship and doctrine of Christ, as administred amongst us; not because wee question the truth of their Church-estate elsewhere, but, because those Churches, albeit true, yet very corrupt, and themselves then scandalous; and with∣all being desirous, not to bee with us barely, as transient mem∣bers, by vertue of Communion of Churches, but being to be of us, as fixed members, wee rest not in their former Church ingage∣ments; but require of such, some new ingagements, in reference to us; and yet we require not this of their children, which are not sui juris, nor capable of giving personall satisfaction, but admit them to the initiatory seale of baptisme with: us so was it with them, Acts the second, being to bee incorporated into a purer company, exhibiting the Ordinances of Christ in a more perfect evangelicall way. Nor must that needs follow, which A. K. saith, that because it's said, they were added to the Church, that there∣fore they were not of the Church before, but after Peter spake those words, Vers. 39. the promise is to you, &c. for this is as well spoken after that expression that they were baptized, as after that mentioned, of their receiving the word gladly, and yet will our opposites conclude, that therefore they were not of the Church, nor in the Covenant before they were baptized, but came into that estate by baptisme? if Baptisme were the forme of the Church, or that which they so much urge wholly failed; that a person must bee first discipled and so in Covenant and Church-estate before he be baptized.

Nor is that cogent, which is urged against the Childrens right in the promise and unto Baptisme, that they should bee so priviledged, when they came to be effectually called, and to bee

turned from their sinnes, as if this were quoad homines, their onely rule of judging of persons visible interest in the Covenant of grace, or visible right to the initiatory seale thereof: or at least the onely way of having such a visible interest in the visible Churches Court. For besides that it was not so of old, in applying of circumcision, as Gods appointed seale of the parties visible Covenant estate and right: even with us also, it is not the rule in Foro Ecclesiae: for then none are by the Church to bee by rule admitted to baptisme, but such as are effectually called: and then, John which knew, that the most of them which hee baptized, would bee as chaffe in the floore, hee kept not rule, in baptizing of them. Or if calling bee taken for externall inviting, in the word preached, and offer of Christ, that I suppose will not be pleaded: for then every hearer should be forth∣with baptized, albeit an Indian or Black a more; but calling as ta∣ken in reference to baptizing unto remission of sinnes, seemeth to bee rather calling into visible Covenant, and Church-estate: unto which some, whose was the promise intentionally, yet were afar off from that estate actually at present, but when called to it, they were then to bee baptized. And yet further to evince, that the little ones of these Jewes, not then capable of actuall repenting, were not in defect of that repentance, excluded from the promise men∣tioned Act. 2. 38, 39. Consider,

1. Such a supposed exclusion of their babes, as here intended, or implyed by that speech of the Apostle [to as many as God shall call] had been, to lay an occasion, and addition of more cum∣bers and trouble to the darkned disquieted spirits of his hearers, then to cleare and ease them, supposing as is undeniably evident, that their wish against their poore children, pressed them sore, as well as other guilt. It was all along thitherto, a received truth, that God was a God to their seed externally, by vertue of Abra∣hams Covenant they were his adopted Children, Ezek. 16. 21. and the Churches children, which shee bare to the Lord, vers. 20. See Deut. 29. 29. and it was evident, by Gods owne appointment of Circumcision, to bee the initiatory seale not to a blank but to his Covenant of being a God to them, whilst babes, and before cir∣cumcised in heart, so as actually to repent, Deut. 30. 6. this their babes had externall right unto, whilst these their parents were unconvinced or unwrought upon, remaining uncut off by cen∣sures from the Church; as of old, Ezek. 16. 20, 21. is mentioned of those Idolaters. Now if not so when their Parents are

wrought upon by Peters Sermon, as the parents were thus farre lo∣sers, by Christ and his Gospel, and the efficacy thereof, losing that pretious parentall priviledge which they had before this of their childrens federall interest, and priviledge of Abrahams Co∣venant, so also their children are losers too, by their parents comming so far on to Christ; comming now thus to be excluded their former Covenant right, and neither Parents, nor children, to have any Covenant right, and priviledge in lieu thereof. How such doctrine might well stumble, and trouble such Parents, let any sober and judicious mind judge; to bee sure they have laid a load of guilt, and given a deadly wound unto their poore babes, by that curse of theirs; now if they are as Pagan strangers from the Covenant, then is there no hope, in reference to ordinary, and re∣vealed grounds and wayes of hope and life, Ephes. 2. 11, 12, 13. Yea but they might repent: True, if they lived to yeares, but they may more likely die in Infancy: and what then? why Christ was accor∣ding to promise unto Abraham sent, &c. True, but what is that to our babes if not interested in his Covenant or testament, in regard whereof alone, he is a mediator to any? Heb. 9. or what ordinary meanes of sanctifying and justifying our babes, or saving efficacy upon them, if not by and through the word of Covenant? Ephes. 5. 25, 26. Rom. 9. 6. Yea but the promise is to them in Christ; True, but you tell us it is with this onely limitation, that they be effectu∣ally called, and turned from their sinnes, of which our Infants in ordinary course are not capable. Guilt there is in an ordinary and revealed way conveyed to our babes, but no revealed and ordina∣ry way is left by this doctrine visibly to confirme us that it may bee taken off, so that their bleeding wound is unstanched.

2. The Apostles which as yet preached not, for the abolishing even of Mosaicall rites, would much lesse at that time, so publique∣ly hold forth, implicitely at least, the exclusion of the Jewes babes, from Abrahams Covenant, Gen. 17. 7. And verily the Apostles which so long after, were so tender of the better and more pliable part of the Jewes, that they would have Paul to take off that aspersion, as if hee should as yet lay a necessitie upon the Jewes, not to cir∣cumcise their children, Acts 21. 20. 22, 23, 24. would much lesse give such manifest and just offence to them, as to hold forth an exclusion of their babes, from right in that Covenant of Abraham it selfe, whereof Circumcision was a visible seale; as the places quoted in Gen. 17. 11. 13. and Acts 7. 8. declare.

3. If Peter should intend by that clause, such an exclusion at present, of the Jewes babes from that externall interest in the Co∣venant of grace, it were to bee crosse to Pauls doctrine, Rom. 15. 8. who makes it Christs end not to evacuate, undermine, or abolish by his comming [the promises] indefinitely made to the fathers, whether in Gen. 17. 7. or Deut. 30 6. or the like, as respecting parents or children, but to confirme the same, Ibid.

But some will yeeld the case as verified in those Jewish children, as being never before denied to bee visibly in Abrahams Covenant: but what is this to our childrens federall interest in the dayes of the Gospel?

An. Yes it's very much. 1 It proveth that by the Apostles since Christs ascension, this tenent of the children of visible members of the Church are visibly interested in the Covenant of grace is of di∣vine authoritie, and is no humane invention. 2. These Jewes are eyed by the Apostles, as persons to partake of priviledges of a Church of Christians, as was baptisme; and therefore what extent of federal right & priviledge is granted by the Apostles to them, and theirs in that way, is equally belonging to Gentiles in a like way. 3. To suppose God by Apostolical ratification, to allow to children of Jewish parents comming on to Christ, &c. a larger priviledge then to Gentile parents, as came on to Christ, &c. is to make God a respecter of persons. 4. The force of the words seeme to carry it, that the same promise which was to those Jewes actually in Church and Covenant estate, was intentionally to those afarre off which were strangers actually from a like estate, whether those of the ten tribes, or rather those of the Gentiles, and should be actually to them, when they came to bee called actually into the fellowship of that Covenant and Church estate. Now what pro∣mise was that? Verily a promise, which carried with it a partiall reference unto their children: The promise is to you, and to your children: And the same is unto them afar off, whom God shall call, scil. in reference to their children also.

CHAP. III. Sect. I. The Explication of Gen. 17. 7, &c.

ANother Scripture holding forth the former doctrine of the Federall holinesse of such children is Gen. 17. 7. a place that in these later dayes, hath been through mens distem∣pers like Isaacs well, an Esek for contention about the waters in it. Touching which, and so the whole doctrine of Fe∣derall holinesse propounded, let us make use of a few distinctions, and then set downe some few conclusions, and withall take off what is brought to the contrary. The Covenant of grace is considered either nakedly, or as invested with a visible politicall Church-co∣venant, if not explicite, yet implicit. Wee are to consider this place, Gen. 17. not so much in the former, as in the later sense; God making of it with reference to the Church, which was to remaine in the posteritie of Isaac, vers. 18, 19, 20, 21. albeit at present it bee to bee contained in Abrahams owne family, whence also hee or∣daineth an initiatory seale, and way of restipulation, to which they submitting together, as one selected body, collectively, and as members thereof, distributively, they did implicitly make con∣fession and promise to God, and bind themselves in a nearer reli∣gious tie one unto another. Hence often renued, Deut. 29. 2 Chro. 15. and 30. and 34. Nehem. 10. Ezek. 16. 8.

Againe, that Covenant of grace is considered either in it selfe, or in its administration; to which purpose circumcision is called the Covenant, partly, because it was the signe and seale of the Cove∣nant of grace, Gen. 17. 11, 12, 13. Partly too, because it was the Cove∣nant of grace in the administration of it, Jer. 13. 11. and Esay 24. 5. and Zach. 11. 10. hath reference to the Covenant of grace both as invested with Church-covenant, and in respect of Church-administration thereof.

Concerning persons being in covenant, some are said to bee in the covenant intentionally, so children of the Church, which are yet unborne, Deut. 29. 15. so those afarre off, the promise was to them at that time, Acts 2. 39. so the Jewes also which yet were to come in, were in Pauls time holy Federally, Rom. 11. 15, 16. or actu∣ally, so were the Jewes holy which were not cut off in Pauls time, Ibid. so Deut. 29. 14. we attend rather to the later then the former in this discourse.

Persons actually in covenant, are either internally and saving∣ly in covenant, as are all true beleevers, and their children which belong to Gods election: and as were many of those included in that phrase, Rom. 11. 16. and as were Isaac and Jacob, which were not onely children of the promise, intentionally, before they were borne, Rom. 9. 9, 10, 11. but actually, as soone as borne; God revealing his mind of covenant-grace in such sort, as never rever∣sing the same, after they were actually borne, hence that Gal. 4. 23. 28. compared, albeit many of the Galatians were but such, in point of visibilitie, as appeareth. Or they are such as are onely externally in the covenant, thus even Ishmael was, for circumci∣sion was even to him also Gods covenant or visible seale thereof. This distinction is the Apostles, Rom. 9. 4. hee speakes of some to whom the promises belonged, scil. onely externally, and of others to whom they belonged, in respect of the saving efficacy thereof, Vers. 6, 7, 8.

Such as are externally in covenant are either such as are so up∣on their owne personall right meerely, as many proselytes, Exod. 12. 44, 45. Deut. 29. 10, 11. even those Gibeonites: so were the soules in Abrahams house which hee gained to his religion, according to Ainsworth, Gen. 12. 5. such as hee had commanded to feare God, Gen. 19. 19. as appeares by their free submission to that ridi∣culous painefull ordinance to flesh and blood, Genesis 17. 27. Or such as withall are externally in Covenant, so consi∣dered as invested with Church-covenant, in their parents right: as the Jewes and Proselytes Children, Deut. 29. 10, 11. God accepting the actuall owning of his Covenant by the grown part, and parents instead of the children also. So of all collectively is that spoken, not onely that God that day avouched them to bee his people, Deut. 26. 18. both parents and children, as also Deut. 30. 16. and 29. but thou hast avouched the Lord to bee thy God, Vers. 17. thou collective Israel, yet it was acted but by the growne part in their own, & in their childrens stead. Abrahams seed is either taken for the head and principall as was Christ, and so rather in∣tended, Gen. 12. 3. and 22. 18. or for the head and body together even Christ mysticall, so Gen. 22. 15. Thy seed shall possesse the gates of thine enemies, and so Gal. 3. 16. Jew and Gentile but one seed with Christ the head of the Church. Again, Abrahams seed is either taken collectively, or distributively; collectively, either his seed by propagation, or proportion. In the former sense the

Jewes in their generations, were the seed mentioned, Gen. 17. 7. that is, parents and children, for they are seed in their generati∣ons: seed by proportion, were the Proselytes of old in their gene∣rations, and visible inchurched beleevers in their generations, scil. parents and children together. And both againe are considered specifically, or individually: specifically, so some of that sort of parents and growne persons and some of that sort of children are as well internally and savingly in the covenant as externally: albeit many individuall persons of both sorts are onely externally; thus, Deut. 29. 14. with [him] that is here and with [him] that is not here: him, not them, as noting a collection; yea a certaine species, or sort of persons growne or babes, and of babes borne or unborne: according to a different respect of Gods making his covenant with them. So in Gen. 17. to thy seed indefinitely, God absolutely covenanting thus, as Vers. 7. with them in their species and sorts: conditionally in respect of the individuall persons of each sort. Or more briefly, the seed of Abraham, are either his choyce seed in speciall, or his Church seed indefinitely, wee consi∣der herein the later and not so much the former.

SECT II.

1. COnclusion, that Covenant, Gen. 17. 7. was a Covenant of grace, and the same in nature, with that Covenant of grace now held forth to us. Neither of the branches of this conclusi∣on I think are denyed by the more judicious of our opposites, albe∣beit both have been by some of the more vulgar sort, making that covenant in Gen. 17. to bee a Covenant of workes, &c. that it was a Covenant of grace, may appeare by the qualitie of the persons, betwixt whom the covenant is made, scil. not God as a Creator, & men as innocent, as in that covenant of works made with Adam, but God as gratious, justifying ungodly persons in the sense of the Law, or such as cannot become legally godly, perfect in them∣selves or workers, covenanting with such like non-workers, Rom. 4. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. s••il. God and Abraham, yea God and Isaac, yea God and the spirituall seed of Abraham to whom with him the promises indefinitely were made, and so this also, Gal. 3. 16. 2 By the matter promised on Gods part, scil. I will bee a God to thee and to thy seed, holding forth more then any legall covenant, as 1. to tender and give to them his ordinances according as they should bee capable of them, as their peculiar priviledge by right

of Covenant; hence these two coupled, Lev. 26. 11, 12. Rev. 21. 3. I will bee a God to them, I will set my tabernacle amongst them; hence any without these or any externall right to them, are accor∣ding to men said to bee without God in the world, Eph. 2. 11, 12, 13. 2 That hee will dwell amongst them, and manifest his spe∣ciall presence with and in his Ordinances, and providences among them; hence being a God to any and Gods dwelling with them, are coupled together, Exod. 29. 45. Lev. 26. 11, 12 Rev. 21. 3. 3 That hee will tender them deliverances as their federall right, and bee really forward to give such deliverances from all sorts of miseries, and from the causes of the same; yea actually to worke such de∣liverances, so far as is meet, and sutable to their present conditions: hence God, his being a God to any, and his removing sad mourn∣full thoughts from any, are joyned; Revel. 21. 4. see Levit. 26. 41. 42. 45. Deliverances from common providences are common to all, even Pagans; but not such as spring from the vertue of the Cove∣nant, Zach. 9. 11. 4 so as to give to such an externall covenant right at least; as to temporall blessings; hence giving Canaan, and his being a God to them joyned, Gen. 17. 5. 7. 8. see Psal. 111. 5. so to spirituall mercies, as justification, Jer. 31. 33. 51. Adoption 2 Cor. 6. 16. 18. also owning after death, Exod. 3. 6. compared with Luke 20. 37, 38. and glory after all: hence as to the former, so to this, is joyned, God his being a God to any, Heb. 11. 6. All this is included as by vertue of Gods covenant offered to such as hee is a God to, yea and as that which according to men, and as men are in charitie to judge, is with all the visible right of such. Albeit, the former two senses suffice, to the visible administration of the covenant, as their right; in that God doth hold forth that hee is a God to such in covenant, to whom hee giveth his ordinances, and with whom hee vouchsafeth his presence therein as their externall covenant right. 3. By the condition propoun∣ded and promised to adult Abraham, with whom God was now in this solemne wise to enter into this Covenant, not with him alone but with his, scil. the exercise of faith, and Evangelicall up∣rightnesse or perfection; Walke before mee and bee upright or perfect, Vers. 2. And I will make my Covenant between mee and thee, Vers. 4. as for mee, behold my covenant is with thee, &c. this is my part of the covenant, that was thine, and Vers. 7. I will esta∣blish my covenant betweene mee and thee, and thy seed after thee in their generations, &c. Now that the same covenant is to us since

Christs ascension, appeares by the former: in that it being the covenant of grace, it is an everlasting covenant: hence Gen. 17. 3. and Heb. 13. 20. hence too, when God would expresse the matter of his Covenant, since Christs incarnation, hee useth and annex∣eth the old phrase, and forme of promise; I will be a God to such or such, 2 Corin. 6. 18. Heb. 8. 10. Jer. 31. 1. spoken in reference to our times: So when speaking of the Jewes and their children, which hereafter are to come into Church estate actually he useth the same phrase, Ezek. 37. 25. 27. compared. Hence the same language in mentioning new Jerusalems condition & priviledge, I will be a God to them, I will set my tabernacle among them, Revel. 21. 3. The Covenant then of the Gospell, hath outward priviledges of Gods tabernacle annexed, as well as Abrahams Covenant, yea in that it's the same with it. By this which hath been said, it appeares how short and unsafe the speech of Mr. B. is, who in answer to the ar∣gument from Gen. 17. saith

that Gen. 17. the new Covenant is promised but not covenanted, even as it was before to Abraham, Gen. 12. 3. bringing Jer. 31. 35. where God saith, not I have made, but I will make a new Covenant, which was made good at the death of Christ as the Apostle makes it appeare, Heb. 8. 9, 10.

I confesse I have met with such a notion in Cameron de triplo foedere, Thes. 20. distinguishing of faedus gratiae promissum et promulgatum, or sancitum, proving it by Gen. 3. 12. 15. But with reverence to so worthy a man bee it spoken; I cannot readily subscribe to his notion, and proofe thereof; in that the covenant made with Abraham, is cal∣led both by the name of promises made to him, Vers. 16. and the covenant confirmed before of God in Christ, that mediator of the new covenant, Heb. 12. 24. 430. yeers before the Law; which exactly considered referreth us to Gen. 12. 3. so that though God said, Jerem. 31. Not I have, but I will make such a covenant, this proveth not, that it was first made good, or verified, in Heb. 8. 10. &c. For it was confirmed in Christ long before, saith Paul, Gal. 3. In respect of the vertue and efficacy of Christs blood, in which it was ratified; else neither Abraham nor Isaac had been saved, see Heb. 13. 20. and Revel. 13. 8. albeit actually and fully accomplish∣ed afterwards, hee had not made it, in so many words expresly, as Jer. 31. noteth, but in substance hee had both, Gen. 12. 3. and 7. 7. and Deut. 30. 6, &c. those particulars in Jer. 31. being bran∣ches: 1. Of being blessed in Christ. 2. Of God his being a God unto them. 3. Of circumcising their hearts to love him, &c. He had not made that covenant in that way in Sinai, upon their com∣ming

out of Egypt, which is there hinted, Jer. 31. 32. but that hee made no more Evangelicall a covenant, then at Sinai before or after with the Jewes, it followes not: not according to the covenant made with your fathers, when I tooke them by the hand to bring them out of Egypt; not according to it, scil. for externall dispen∣sations with thunder and lightnings, and in the former of the ten words, &c. but hee saith not, that it should not bee according to that Covenant with Abraham, for the matter which, or sorts of persons, to which it was dispensed, or as if hee had made no co∣venant of grace with them before their comming out of Egypt, in Abrahams covenant, &c. or that the covenant made with Abraham, was not the covenant of grace, which was made with him above foure hundred yeers before that time Ieremy speakes of, Gal. 3. 16. Exod. 19. 1, 2, 3. 20. 1, &c. and 12. 2. 6. 40, 41. and Gen. 15. 13. and 21. 9. and 12. 3, 4. compared together. A. R. is also too presump∣tuously bold with Christ, that faithfull and true witnesse, when not content to vent his owne unsound notions, but hee will needes father them upon Christ himselfe and bring him in as speaking thus to the Jewes, from Iohn 8.

You see then how the Covenant of Circumcision, made with Abraham, and you his naturall seed, was to bee an everlasting covenant in your flesh, to wit, in mee, who was to come of your flesh, Gen. 17. 13. And to this end, to this covenant of circumcision, was that covenant of the Law added, &c. by which you plainely see, how that circumci∣sion, was to you naturall Jewes, both a covenant, and yet also but a signe of another covenant, Gen. 7. 11. scil. of that ever∣lasting covenant, made with Abraham, and all his spirituall seed.

But how dareth A. R. to father such unsound things upon your faithfull Prophet of the Church, as these are; first, that by that your flesh is meant, him, or Christ who was to come of their flesh; whereas the context speaketh thus of all and every male in their generations, stranger or o••her, borne in their house or bought with money amongst them; yet this should bee his cove∣nant in their flesh: that is Christ, who was to come of their flesh even of Ishmael and Esau and of the strangers of other countries; will Christ owne this as his doctrine at the last day? Yea restraine it: of your flesh, that is of you Jewes of all the Tribes, when yet Christ came of the tribe of Judah onely: Would Christ speake so heterodoxly? Secondly, that there were three distinct covenants, besides that covenant of nature made with Adam in innocency,

and so foure covenants, besides that with all the creatures, Gen. 9. and besides these there are three distinct covenants here mentio∣ned; first, that of Circumcision, secondly, that superadded of the Law, thirdly, that everlasting covenant unto which Circumcision was but a signe, will this doctrine be owned by Christ? Nay doe not these sayings crosse each other? scil. That the covenant of circumcision was to bee an everlasting covenant in their flesh Christ: and yet it was not that covenant. The Text saith, for my covenant shall bee in your flesh, &c. that is, as here Christ is said to affirme the covenant of circumcision: This cove∣nant then of circumcision being in their flesh, scil. Christ: it see∣meth there is some other covenant ratified in Christ then that which is the covenant of grace; even this covenant of circumcision, which this Pseudo-Christus affirmeth to bee another covenant di∣stinct from the everlasting covenant, scil. the covenant of grace. I dare not see the Lord Jesus Christ thus abused. Thirdly, that was plainely to bee seene, that circumcision was to them a Cove∣nant, and yet but a signe of another covenant, scil. that of grace. As if these two expressions were as wide as a covenant, which cir∣cumcision it selfe was, and a signe of another covenant; when every one that hath read catecheticall doctrine will say, that when in one verse it's said of circumcision in their flesh, that it was his Covenant in their flesh: it is a usuall Metonymy in speaking of Sacraments to call the outward sacramentall signe and seale, by the name of the thing signified and sealed. As the cup is called the te∣stament of Christs blood, 1 Cor. 11. 25. that is, the visible signe or seale of it. The bread is called Christs body, ver. 24. So in menti∣oning that extraordinary sacrament, the rock is called Christ, 1 Cor. 10. and here in Gen. 17. 11. Circumcision is called a token or sacramentall signe of the covenant, in Rom. 4. 11. The seale of the righteousnesse of faith, where the Scripture speaketh plain∣ly, and explicitely. Yet here A. R. will have Christ himselfe to hold forth other doctrine then is usuall in speaking of Sacraments. Fourthly, that God made with Abraham and those Jewes another Covenant distinct from that everlasting covenant, scil. that covenant of circumcision. And yet also made with Abraham and his spirituall seed that other everlasting covenant, of which the circumcision of Jewes was a signe; as if God at one and the same time made with one and the same person Abraham two distinct co∣venants, one which was not the everlasting covenant or covenant

of grace, namely the covenant of circumcision, as 'tis called; and the other which was that everlasting covenant it selfe: And like∣wise that circumcision was given by God who said it shall bee a signe to them, to bee a signe of a covenant made, not between God and them that by his appointment were thus circumcised, but of a covenant made betwixt God and others: when the letter of the Text is thus, Gen. 17. 11. It shall bee a token of the covenant be∣tween mee and you. What covenant was that? was it that Vers. 10. where it's said, This is my covenant which you shall keep between me and you and thy seed after thee? nay, that was a dutie and condition of the covenant rather, which they were to keepe or observe, as it followes: this is my covenant, every manchild a∣mongst you shall bee circumcised, Vers. 11. yee shall circumcise the foreskin of your flesh: So then circumcision is but a branch of the covenant or a condition of the covenant on their part, which in the sacramentall nature of it is a signe, not of that mentioned which was their dutie in being circumcised, and so circumcising their flesh, Vers. 11. should bee a signe of being circumcised, Vers. 10. which were absurd; But rather it is a signe of the covenant of God, even that covenant mentioned Vers. 7. scil. of Gods becom∣ming a God to them: which is essentially the very everlasting co∣venant of grace. And whereas A. R. his Pseudo-Christus saith, that circumcision in their flesh was to bee an everlasting covenant in their flesh, and yet to bee but a signe of that everlasting Covenant, &c. grounding upon that Vers. 13. my covenant in your flesh shall bee for an everlasting covenant: As if it should meane, that that eternall covenant was not made with them that had that signe of the covenant at the present, but yet it was to bee made with o∣thers, when yet the same phrase used in mentioning the signe is used in expressing the forme of the covenant it selfe, Vers. 7. I will establish my covenant between mee and thee, and thy seed after thee in their generations 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in faedus seculi, unto or for a covenant of perpetuitie, to bee a God to thee and to thy seed after thee. Here the phrase for an everlasting covenant evidently noteth, not any future covenant, which is not here held forth, but the qualification rather of that covenant, which God saith hee will establish at present with Abraham and his seed; for having mentioned the covenants, hee expresseth the qualifications of the covenant it selfe, that it is of no temporary but of an everlasting nature. And then setteth downe the matter of his Covenant thus

made with him and his seed, scil. that hee will bee a God to them, and that vers. 13. is but a Sacramentall phrasing of the same thing.

SECT. III.

Conclu. 2. THat the covenant of grace in Gen. 17. is to be con∣sidered as invested with Church-covenant, and therefore mention is made of this covenant as to bee kept by them, vers. 9. which is further expressed in one particular thereof, vers. 10. Not as if this were all which God required of Abraham and of his seed, but because this was the first initiating condition, and that which did as an initiatory sacramentall signe, in a more peculiar way, incorporate him and them into one instituted Church-body at present, which should more fully bee carried on for after time in Isaacs time, ver. 19. 21. and 21. 12. Besides, this made them fur∣ther capable afterwards of partaking of other Church ordinances. Hence also if others desired to partake of that Church ordinance of the passeover, albeit they might bee otherwise godly, yet they might not bee admitted to the same, unlesse by circumcision ini∣tiated into their Church body, Exod. 12. 44. 48. Hence when the Scripture would speake of the Jewish Church, it sets them forth by that name, those of the circumcision, Act. 11. 2. Rom. 15. 8. and 3. 30. Gal. 2. 17. But verily in requiring circumcision many other duties lay upon them virtually. As first, the knowledge of their owne undone estate by nature: as being persons whose blood not of one member of their body alone, but even of their whole man, the life of body and soule might in justice bee requi∣red of them, and this not so much in regard of actuall sins of their owne, as in regard also of Adams sinne derived to them by pro∣pagation; if they had no more guilt then that they deserved to die. Secondly also, knowledge of their extreame need of Christ, whose blood as the blood of the principall seed of Abraham, was to bee shed in fulnesse of time, and by virtue whereof that cove∣nant was at present ratified, Gal. 3. 4. 17. Hence also faith was re∣quired of them to apply that benefit of Christ and his blood, Rom. 3. 30. Those of the Jewish Church had faith required of them to justification, as well as the baptized Gentiles; all duties and branches and acts of repentance and mortification, were there∣in required also, of persons admitted to the seale of circumcision; hence such exhortations thereon grounded, Deut. 10. 16. All in∣ward acts and branches of renovation and sanctification were

therein also involved as that which they were bound to endeavour and attaine, Rom. 2. 29. And all outward obedience of faith to the Law as a rule of life, was therein also required. Whence that, Rom. 2. 25. The profitable use of circumcision is to keepe the Law, the righteousnesse of it: What, as that whereby they should be ju∣stified? No verily, God gave it not to them for that end, but such a keeping thereof as the godly gentiles, who being not circumcised but baptized, it shall bee all one as if they had beene externally circumcised, Rom. 2. 26, 27, 28.

SECT. IV.

Conclu. 3. THat there is a bare externall being in the covenant of grace of persons who possibly never shall be sa∣ved. Hence the promise is said to belong to those Jewes, Rom. 9. 4. on whom yet the word tooke no saving effect, vers. 6. hence by opposition to the Gentiles they were those which were not stran∣gers to the Church, but of it. They were not strangers to the co∣venant of promise, but in the same, Ephes. 2. 11, 12. hence God saith hee maketh his covenant with them all; Deut. 29. 10, 12, 13, 14, 15. speaking there of that solemne renuall of the covenant of grace, as Deut. 30. 6. 10. 12, 13, 14. compared with Rom. 10. 6, 7, 8. evinceth. So Ezek. 16. 8. hee made a Covenant with that Church and peo∣ple, many whereof proved very base, as that Chapter sheweth. Now this was a covenant of grace, albeit invested with Church-covenant, as appeares in that vers. 60. that God for that his cove∣nant sake considered as his, will deale so gratiously with them af∣ter all their provocations, as vers. 62, 63. Albeit, hee did not thus properly for the sake of that investure of his covenant annexed: scil. Thy covenant, the Churches covenant abstractively considered vers. 61. see more Ezek. 36. from vers. 17. to the Chapters end. There is an externall being in the covenant of grace, as there is an externall being in Christ, John 15. 2. and partaking of Christ, hence that of Heb. 13. 14. An externall belonging to Christ: hence those Jewish refusers to beleeve in Christ, yet called his owne, John 1. 11. As there is an externall being called, Matth. 22. 14. an externall being sanctified by the blood of the Covenant, Heb. 10. 29. an externall being purged from sinne, 2 Pet. 1. 9. an ex∣ternall being purchased by Christ, 2 Pet. 2. 1. an externall Saint∣ship, Deut. 33. 3. And therefore both are joyned, being Saints, and making a Covenant with God, Psal. 50. 5. and such as had Gods

covenant made with them to glory of, verse 16. yet what persons many of them were that Psalme doth declare. There are those invi∣sible Churches which are as Isaac was, children of the promise, Gal. 3. 28. children of the Gospel Church, verse 31. and 26. this must bee verified in all the members of the Galatian Churches, unto whom Paul wrote that Epistle, Gal. 1. 2. for hee spake this of them all; Jerusalem which is the mother of us [all] verse 26, 27, 28. compared: They then were all such either effectually and savingly: And then there were some particular visible Churches in which were no hypocrites. Contrary to the very scope of the parable of the Tares, and Net, and Virgins, and Wedding, and varietie of vessels in the Church visible as an house of God, 1 Tim. 3. 15. com∣pared with 2 Tim. 2. 20. Yea then there should bee a possibilitie that such as are savingly interessed in the covenant of grace should end in the flesh, Gal. 3. 3. suffer many things in vaine, verse 4. have Apostolicall labour bestowed on them in vaine, Gal. 4. 11. fall from grace, and have no profit to salvation by Christ, Gal. 5. 2. 4. for if there were not a possibilitie of some such members and cases to bee found in the Galatian Churches; why doth the Apostle speake such things as there are mentioned? but there is no possibilitie of fatall seducing the elect one, savingly interested in the covenant and Church. 2 Tim. 2. 16. 19, 20. 1 John 2. 19. Matth. 24. 24. So then it must needs follow that according to God, some were such indeed, but externally and according to men all were children of the promise. In which sense the promise of grace and glory may bee to one as ones legacy, or portion externally, and accor∣ding to men, of the saving good whereof it is possible one may fall short, Heb. 4. 1. 4. When Antipaedobaptists admit any to the seales of Church and covenant fellowship, is it not possible that some false brethren may creepe in unawares, Jude 4. some wolves enter in, and of their owne selves some turne seducers? Act. 20. 29, 30. can it be otherwise but that in visible Churches with us or them, there will bee some unapproved ones to God? 1 Cor. 11. 18, 19. yet you admit them to the fellowship of covenant, but without ground, unlesse to them they are in covenant. Will you ordinarily put seales to blankes? and the seale must follow the covenant, Gen. 17. 7. 9, 10, 11. 13. Acts 2. 38, 39. 1 Cor. 11. 25. You will surely say, they appeared to us, to bee in the covenant of grace; wee judged them to bee in it: else wee had not admitted them. So then according to your selves, persons may bee externally and quoad homines in

the Covenant of grace, which are not savingly so; I plead for no more; wee are then thus farre agreed; I yeeld no more advan∣tage to Arminius, nor undermine perseverance in grace, nor the Po∣lemicall doctrine of our choyse Divines more then you doe, nor then Amesius, Chamier, Luther, Calvin, Beza, and then your owne Tertullian, as you count him, doth; who in his booke De Anima, Chap. 21, 22. urgeth that Text, 1 Cor. 7. 14. for a peculiar cleannesse of beleevers children by priviledge of seed, as the rest which I have named: to whom Pareus, Peter Martyr, Bucer, Melancton, Mr. Philpot, besides many others might bee added, who pleading for Infants baptisme, urge it from their interest in the Covenant. As many of the ancients, Cyprian, Gregory, Nazianzen, Jerome, Austine and others which plead for Paedobaptisme from the argument of circumcision, must need implicitly, if not expresly, maintaine In∣fants Covenant estate, to which the baptisme of the one as the circumcision of the other was ex natura rei, a sacramentall signe, Gen. 17. 11. And yet they held not, that all such were infallibly sa∣ved, and therefore must maintaine with mee, an externall inbeing of some in covenant which possibly may never be saved.

But leaving humane authorities to returne to Scripture proofe of this third conclusion; let our opposites consider of Gods breaking that gratious Covenant which hee had made with his people of old, which was as his staffe of beautie, Zach. 11: 10, whether it can be verified of a legall covenant of workes and not rather of his covenant of grace in respect at least of the externall administration thereof amongst them, as verse 9. and their exter∣nall right in that his covenant. And whence else is there any sup∣posall of some interested in that same covenant of God wherein the upright are faithfull, stable, and perminent, but others are false, treacherous, and apostatising? Psal. 44. 17. Dan. 11. 30, 31, 32, 33. If they were never in this holy covenant, how came they to for∣sake it, to deale falsely in it? or was this Covenant wherein they together with those true beleevers were interested in communion, other then the covenant of grace? If it were not that from Sion, was it that from mount Sinai, which are the Apostles membra di∣videntia of the covenant, Gal. 4. 24. If so, then beleevers, which as beleevers must necessarily be in the free covenant of life and grace, yet also at the same time are under a contrary covenant of bondage and death and curse; if this covenant in which they were with true beleevers were a covenant of grace, as is evident, then were

hypocrites externally in it, for internally and efficaciously they were not; and whence else were they charged with breaking the ever∣lasting covenant, cat••exochen, if they were never in that bond; And if in it, it was but externally, else had they never so fatally broken this covenant which is thus plainely described by the old periphrasis of Abrahams covenant, Gen. 17. 7. 13. and whence also are some charged with not beleeving the faith or ingaged truth, the covenant of God, Rom. 7. 3. if it were not plighted with them? which notwithstanding tooke saving effect onely in the elect and in the beleeving: Nor will any say that it was other then the cove∣nant of grace which tooke such effect, Rom. 9. 6. And what need that preoccupation of the Apostle, when speaking before of the promise indefinitely, as belonging even to those refuse Jews, he saith: not that the word of God tooke none effect, scil. in the persons to whom it belonged: As if his meaning were thus, to prevent all objection, I yeeld that many to whom the word of Gods gratious covenant did externally belong, never got any saving good by it, as appeareth by their sad case at present, verse 1, 2, 3. but yet this will not follow, that Gods covenant had none effect at all, namely in others which were savingly interested therein. And the reason hee giveth is added, for they are not all Israel which are of Israel: as if hee would say, they are indeed Israelites; or of called, covenant, in-churched Israel, verse 4. and 6. compared, but they are not all elected Israel; so then, that the word of covenant taketh not sa∣vingly in such like persons, it is neither in that they were not in that covenant externally; for the promise belonged to them, verse 4. nor that the word of Gods covenant is not per se efficacious; since it doth take effect in as many as are the choyse seed, principal∣ly intended in that Covenant; but here rather is the secret ground of it: They are not, nor never were elected of God, and such as in his secret counsell hee intended and ordained to extend eternall mercy to: for had they been of that number they could never (according to the objection included) have so fallen as to reject and cast off so irrecoverably the revealed grace and mercy of Gods covenant as ratified in Christ, Rom. 15. 8. Acts 4. 45, 46, 47, 48. and Rom. 11. 20. and 9. 31, 32, 33. 1 Pet. 2. 7, 8. compared: This here said may serve for answer to Mr. B. his distinction of the Cove∣nant of grace and an outward Covenant, &c. they are not two di∣stinct covenants, but the covenant of grace made with the elect in respect of their saving interest in that, I will bee a God to them;

the same is made with others, in respect both of visible interest, and the visible administration of it; nor is Gen. 17. 10. a proofe of an outward covenant, distinct from the covenant of grace, verse 7. but it is the covenant or conditionall part and dutie of the same co∣venant on their parts. As God had before told Abraham what was his part of the covenant, both more personally respecting Abraham, verse 4, 5, 6. As for me, or my part: behold my Covenant is with thee, and more parentally and radically in respect to him conside∣red with his seed, verse 7, 8. So verse 9. hee telleth Abraham, what is his and his seeds part of the covenant, thou shalt keepe my co∣venant and thy seed &c. If Abraham demand, What is that his and his seeds part? It is answered verse 10. &c.

From the same principle may sundry objections of I. S. against the truth in question bee answered; as, that there is but one way of entring into covenant, scil. by a true and lively faith. The contrary whereof here appeares in that persons may bee said to bee in covenant with God in respect of externall right which never came to beleeve actually nor savingly. Of like nature is that; the promise being yea and amen in Christ, 2 Cor. 1. 20. such as have not true faith in him, as Infants &c. have not, they cannot bee in∣terested in the covenant, to which purpose also, Gal. 3. 9. 27. 29. is brought; now taking that of saving faith, wee see others may bee called the children of God, Ezek. 16. 20, 21. 23. Rom. 9. 4. yea children of the promise, Acts 3. 25. Gal. 4. 28. then such as doe at∣taine to saving faith, as before was cleared. Of the like nature is that, that wee by our doctrine doe set up another way of salva∣tion then by regeneration; which is a meere non sequitur, since un∣regenerate persons may bee in covenant with God, on whom the word never taketh effect, Rom. 9. 4. and 6. compared, and no o∣ther is our doctrine; we disclaime that conclusion, that all that are externally in covenant attaine salvation; nor doth that sequell of universall redemption follow from our doctrine of Federall holi∣nesse since wee maintaine no other but that whatever such are quoad homines counted redeemed of the Lord, and sometimes so stiled, as that visible Church of Ephesus is said to bee purchased by the blood of Christ, Acts 20. 28, &c. yet in that and other visible Churches many prove otherwise, even rent-members, verse 29, 30. so 2 Pet. 2. 1. If these had not been externally in Covenant, they had not been in the Churches. And albeit they were so, yet the effect proved they were not internally of the number of redeemed

ones. Hitherto that Dilemma being reduced may receive answer. That according to our doctrine beleevers children being in the covenant of grace: that covenant is made with them, either con∣ditionally or absolutely; if conditionally, then either on condi∣tion of faith, or workes. Not of workes, none will affirme that, then of faith: and that is nugatory to say this Covenant is to be∣leevers seed, if beleevers; to which branch wee answer, the Cove∣nant is theirs externally, and quoad homines: considered as invested with Church-covenant, and in reference to Covenant Ordinances, whereof they are capable, as of old they were of Circumcision, and are now of baptisme.

Thus it's theirs at present, in respect of the visible faith and in∣terest of the parent or parents in the Covenant, and for the future, it's theirs in the further grace of the Covenant, upon condition of their beleeving if they live to yeeres of discretion: If absolutely, then God either keepes it, and so all the seed of beleevers should bee saved, which is false, or hee doth not keepe what hee absolutely covenanted, which to affirme were blasphemy. Wee answer, God may bee said absolutely to covenant with beleevers seed, collective∣ly and specifically considered; and yet all the Individuall children not saved. It is absolutely made, and made good, that that sort of persons shall bee and are saved by vertue of Gods Covenant, for some of them are infallibly saved: The Covenant is to the in∣definite collective seed or children, in respect of the internall sa∣ving interest: else none of them dying Infants should bee saved. Supposing they are the Israel of God, a part of the elect seed, yet the meanes of saving effect in and upon them is the word of Co∣venant, Rom. 9. 6. It's thorough the effectuall word and ingaged truth of God that that part of the Church are savingly purged, Ephes. 5. 25, 26. The Covenant is to the individuall seede, all and each of them in respect of externall interest, and yet many of them not saved, nor yet is Gods faithfulnesse impeached or impaired, nor need the faith of beleevers bee shaken, if this or that child should prove, live and die wicked, the force of the Covenant is not to bee measured by the fatall miscarrying of many of Abra∣hams Church seed. To bee sure it taketh in some of his Church-seed, as the Apostle reasoneth, Rom. 9. 4. 6. compared, Whether our doctrine herein or the adversaries which deny any interest at all to any beleevers Infants in the Covenant, bee more uncomfor∣table, let the world judge. And therefore to affirme with Paul, if

taken in the strict of elect ones, and of sincere beleevers, that they onely are Abrahams choyce seed, yet it's no other then Gospell to af∣firme as much as wee have done of others: ye they also are Abra∣hams Church seed.

SE••T. V.

4. A Fourth Conclusion is, that the Church in dispensing an enjoyned Initiatory seale of the Covenant of grace, loo∣keth unto visibilitie of interest in the Covenant to guide her in the application thereof. Nor is it the saving interest of the per∣sons in view which is her rule by which shee is therein to proceed. The matter to bee dispenced is not an Initiatory seale of the Co∣venant before it bee commanded, as before Circumcision or bap∣tisme bee commanded: but supposing that de facto they are com∣manded, the rule of judging of the jus of persons propounded to the Church, with desire of her admission by her officers, to the fellowship of the initiatory seale of the Covenant; it is not the internall and saving state of the partie, or parties, but the visibility of covenant right and estate; saving right, consisting in Gods electing act which is a very secret: in saving interest in Christ and his death: in saving influences and operations of his spirit and the like, all which incurre not to outward discerning, nor can be infallibly known by man being things per se invisible to others, John 3. 8. John Baptist did and might lawfully baptize those mul∣titudes, albeit in the generall hee knew that many, yea most of them would prove false and frothy, Matth. 3. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. It sufficeth that albeit hee were perswaded in the generall, that many were unworthy members of that floore, and Church of Christ amongst them all; yet they having appearances of a bet∣ter estate, and hee not being able to say in the particular persons presented to baptisme, which of them notwithstanding would prove chaffie and vile, hee baptized them. Albeit wee may think in the generall that to bee sure in all visible Churches there will bee some vessells of dishonour sometimes, and yet Ministers which are the Churches, as well as Christs servants, they are not there∣fore to refuse, to dispense Church-Ordinances; since they are in the face of the Church, such utensils, as the Lord may have and hath need of. Hence the Apostles which as extraordinary persons, knew the guile of persons secret from the Church, witnesse that act against Ananias and Saphira, Act. 5. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. to 11. Yet in administring the Church-seale of Baptisme they refused not Ana∣nias

and Saphira, no nor Simon Magus, Act. 8. nor thousands of others of the Jewes, amongst whom, how many proved false, let 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. Nor could the Apostles imagine otherwise in the generall, but many of them would prove such. Yea Christ himselfe, who by his divine know∣ledge, knew Judas to bee a devill, John 6. 70, 71. and 13. 18. yet hee ministred to him that Supper; whether the Pascall Lambe or the Lords Supper, Verse 1. 2. 26. and 21. compared with Luke 22. 19, 20, 21. I determine not; one of them it appeares it was; Au∣stin and others thinke Judas was admitted to the Lords Supper, and that he did partake of the bread of the Lord, albeit, not of the Lord that spirituall bread: so thinkes Mr. Cartwright from that connexion, Luke 23. 19, 20, 21. but if admitted by Christ to the Passeover which Christ administred to him formerly, and at that time, it sufficeth to our purpose. Christ ministring as man, dea∣leth with Judas in his ministration of the Sacrament as man, and as Judas was according to man, and to the rest of that family to which hee then in speciall sort ministred. Ishmael God discovered by a divine revelation to Abraham, Esau to Rebeckah, not to bee Gods elect seed of the Covenant; yet Abraham and Isaac as Pro∣phets and Priests at that time to the Church in their families, cir∣cumcise them; extraordinary cases brake not ordinary rules. If Peter kill bodily any persons, or Phinehas or Elias; It's not a warrant for Ministers to bee executioners, or orderers of civill ju∣stice: It's the Magistrate is to do that by ordinary rule. Rom. 13. If Ananias a private Disciple by extraordinary call in a vision, bap∣tize Paul, yet it's no crosse to that ordinary rule of ministring bap∣tisme onely by preaching ministers, Matth. 28. 19, 20. So here in extraordinary cases persons to bee admitted to the seales of the old or new Testament, may bee discovered to bee false hearted as was Ishmael, Esau and Judas: yet that hinders not, but being in facie Ecclesiae visibly interested in the Covenant, the seales are to bee ad∣ministred unto them. The Church in Abraham and Isaacs house had not that revealed to them touching Ishmael and Esau; as nei∣ther the family of Christ knew that of Judas: therefore as to them they had visible right to those seales, so were they administred to them. A Minister may see much good or evill in persons which are to partake of the seales: yet if this bee not as well visible to the Church, as to himselfe, hee cannot of himselfe admit or reject

them regularly; hee is not the Church, but acteth in admission & rejections to or from the fellowship of Church-Ordinances such as the seales are, by and with their consent. A person Ecclesiasti∣cally holy is admittable, and hee may not refuse them upon his owne private surmises. It were to breed confusions in Churches, and lay foundations of enthusiasmes. The ordinary Elders of that visible Church of Ephesus must feede the Church in the dispensati∣on of the word or seales occasionally. Albeit, many admitted to that fellowship, many among themselves will prove Apostates, Acts 20. 28, 29, 30. If particular persons saving interest in Gods promise and Covenant of grace were the rule, it were either to necessitate ministers to come under guilt of sinne or Anomie, breach of rule or for avoiding of that, which they must needs doe with such breach of rule, never to administer any Church-ordinan∣ces; since they sometimes shall breake that rule in administring the same to hypocrites, and albeit they doe sometimes administer them to elect ones, yet not being able to know that secret infalli∣bly, they observe not that rule in faith, but doubtingly, and so can have little comfort of any such of their administrations.

If this therfore bee not the rule of Church administration of the Initiatory injoyned seale of the Covenant; then the other of visi∣bility of interest is that which wee must goe by therein. Which may suffice for answer to what A. R. suggested to the contrary. And I say, visibility of the parties interest in the Covenant, I say not meere visibilitie of faith or repentance. The Initiatory seale is not primarily and properly the seale of mans faith, or repentance or obedience, but of Gods Covenant rather; the seale is to the co∣venant, even Abrahams Circumcision was not primarily a seale to his faith of righteousnesse; but to the righteousnesse of faith ex∣hibited and offered in the covenant; yea to the Covenant it selfe or promise, which hee had beleeved unto righteousnesse; hence the covenant of grace is called the righteousnesse of faith, Rom. 10. 6, 7, 8. The righteousnesse of faith speaketh on this wise, verse 8. and it's called the word of faith: hence albeit Abraham must walke before God, who is now about to enlarge the Covenant to his, as well as to make it to him, in a Church reference, Gen. 17. 1. &c. yet the Initiatory seale in his as well as in their flesh is Gods Co∣venant, verse 13. or a Sacramentall signe firstly and expresly of Gods Covenant, Verse 11. and 7. compared; albeit, it implicitly oblige him and them to other duties formerly mentioned.

Hence Act. 2. 38, 39. the seale of baptisme is put to the promise, as the choyse matter and foundation in view, and as that was a ground of repentance it selfe. Repent and bee baptized, for the promise is to you: Not, for you have repented, as if that were the thing to bee firstly sealed by baptisme, but the promise rather: and when wee speake of visibilitie of Covenant right, as such a rule to goe by, wee exclude not the lowest and least degree of visibilitie, since degrees doe not vary the species of any thing; if we propound a higher degree where shall wee stay and pitch? Why not a higher degree as well as that? wee must looke to it, that not the least of Gods Covenant little ones bee left out unfolded in the Church visible. Wee were better seeme to bee remisse in respect of Church care of 99. which are but seemingly just ones, then neglect any, and leave out any which possibly is savingly as well as seemingly of the flock of the covenant Church; the least of Gods visible fa∣mily or Church must have their portion as of the family; if Mi∣nisters bee faithful in their office; the least visible measure of grace must occasion our judgement of charitie to judge them gratious, so the least degree of visibilitie of covenant right may challenge the like charitie; not in word and in tongue but in deed and act of expression, Wee put a difference betwixt those in Heb. 6. 4. and Infants in degrees of visibilitie of this right, but in the nature of the visibilitie wee say they are all one, all are visibly in covenant, albeit that visibilitie in point of degree bee not in all equall. God putteth a difference in point of degree of faith in justifyed per∣sons, but in his act of justifying of persons hee puts no difference, the least sparke in Flax is enough that way: For if it were more it would flame as well as make a smoake, and yet if but so much it's not sleighted by the Lord. I might apply the same in point of degrees of visibilitie of Covenant right, in reference to the Chur∣ches act of approbation; It's a higher degree indeed of visibility of interest in the Covenant to make personall profession and confession of faith in the Covenant, as it is in Adultis, then to have onely the visible testimony of God in his word of Covenant expressing his mind of grace, touching the seed of Abraham to bee a God to them. And to adde the•…•… •…•…sible testimony of his provi∣dence, that these children are of th•…•… race and parentage▪ to which also Abraham and other inchurched parents, by visible owning of the covenant in the Latitude upon the termes of it, and as now Christian Parents doe make profession of their parentall faith in the

Covenant as made to them and their children, and this profession of theirs may not bee (possibly) sincere, yet it's visibly a federall confession, and such an avouching of God to bee their Covenant God as taketh in their children, as that did, Deut. 26. 17. and that Deut. 29. 10, 11, 12, &c. And this is to the Church a degree of their childrens visibilitie of covenant right and Church right; albeit, not so high as the former, and not varying the species of visibili∣tie, it sufficeth, not to vary the species of Church admission to fellowship of the initiatory Church-seale. Judgement of charitie reacheth further then to judge of persons estates by their own per∣sonall words or workes: Charitie beleeveth all things in way of testimony if they give any testimony; as that of God who testify∣eth more absolutely for that species of beleevers children, that they are such as hee doth covenant to bee a God to them. And the parents testifie als•• for them in the profession of their faith in that covenant of God for their seed. The Churches also owne them as visibly such, leaving secrets to God; which particular In∣fant is not the elect seed principally intended; here charitie as it beleeveth all things witnessed, so it hopeth all things of the par∣ticular persons which are themselves dumbe, but are included in the testimony of others mouths opened for them, nothing being of counter-force to the contrary touching this point of visibilitie of their covenant and Church interest. And I the more wonder that any which confesse that it's not to be denyed, that God would have Infants of beleevers in some sense to bee accounted his, to belong to his Church and family, and not to the devills, as true in facie ecclesi•…•… visibilis, &c. yet doe oppose us in this particular now in question.

SECT. VI.

Conclus. 5. THat Christ is in Scripture considered as head of the visible Church in which are many members of Christ the head in that respect, which prove unsound, as well as in other respects, hee is considered as head of the visible Church, wherein are none but elect ones: And when Gal. 3. 16. it's said, to Abraham and to his seed, which is Christ, were the promises made, it's not meant of Christ personall, as if the promises, as that of pardon of sinne, &c. were made to Christ personally considered: or the promises were first made to Abraham and unto Christ per∣sonall, as the Text hath it.

Promises were made to Abraham and to his seed Christ. Nay Christ personally considered is rather Abrahams seed, not to, but in which the promises are confirmed, Gal. 3. 17. with 16. But rather of Christ with his body the Church, whether of Gentiles or Jewes, Gal. 3. 14. which though many personally yet make but one seed, and not many seeds, being all one in Christ the head of the Church, Verse 16. 28. compared, like as Gen. 3. 15. the seed of Eve, is Christ with his members in and with him, So 1 Cor. 12. 12, 13. the name of Christ is not ascribed to the head the Lord Jesus without his bo∣dy the Church: or to the Church of Jewes and Gentiles without him the head, but collectively considered. Quaeritur, whether this in Gal. 3. and 1 Cor. 12. be spoken of the visible or invisible Church. I answer, to me it seemes that the places admit of the consideration of the Church as visible. First, in that the Apostle speaketh of all the Galatian Church-members as well as others, as one in Christ, Gal. 3. 28. Now were all those members elected, will any say? I suppose not, yet all are one in Christ their head. Secondly, in that hee speakes of them all as Sacramentally one with Christ in bap∣tisme, Gal. 3. 27, 28. compared, so 1 Cor. 12. 12, 13. Now albeit, the spirit bee the cause of the internall and saving union with Christ, in all which are united: As Ecclesiastically all the Corin∣thian members were judged to bee; yet indeed and in truth there were many of them not approved to God, 1 Cor. 11. 18, 19. com∣pared. But in both places the Apostle considering them as a bap∣tized Caecus: intimateth the consideration thereof as a visible, and not as an invisible Church: Baptisme being the seale committed to the visible Church by her officers to bee dispensed, and not to the invisible Church which hath no Officers in it, as such. And bap∣tisme being by the Church administred to persons as visible, and not as invisible members of the Church. Thirdly, in that Christ hath head-like influences into the officers and members, many whereof are not savingly joyned to him. Fourthly, in that it is the Church wherein hee hath set diversitie of Church-officers, which are not set in the invisible, but visible Church: that Church being not invisible but visible where Church-officers are set and chosen, and act. From this consideration it followeth, that albeit a mans owne personall faith uniteth him to Christ, in respect of saving and invisible union, yet the profession and confession of faith before and in a visible Church, in reference to visible com∣munion therewith, this doth unite a person to Christ as head of

the visible Church; whether the party bee sincere or no. Hence also a Parent, making profession of faith in the covenant of grace, as invested with Church-covenant in reference to his children it doth unite them also to Christ, as head of the visible Church so farre, as to give right to solemne imitation of them, into the fel∣lowship of the Church in circumcision as of old, or baptisme as now. Parents acts in this case being in the face of the vi•…•…ble Church, their childrens acts, as the places quoted, Deut. 26. 17, 18. and 29. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16, 16, 17 declared. Whence contrariwise, the parents neglect of ci••cumcision of a babe, not capable of per∣sonall neglect, was c••unted the childs neglect, the uncircumcised manchild, whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised [that soule shall bee cut off ••rom his people [Hee] hath broken my covenant. And as in other cases the Lord Christ who required personall faith in growne ones to their cure, yet in case of children is contented, that their parents beleeve on their behalfe, John 4. Marke 9. from verse 12. to 18. so Matth. 15. 22. to 29. so is it in the case of this externall Church benefit. Albeit, the just onely live an effectuall life of grace, and attaine the vertue of the seale by their owne faith, yet that hindreth not, but a child may attaine, as it were a Church-life, and pertake of the visible interest and use of that ini∣tiating Church-seale, by his parents covenant and Church faith, or that faith which is such to the Church. Nor yet doe wee here∣by establish (as some say) a meriting faith, no more then we make visibilitie of personall faith, to merit personall right to baptisme, &c. But rather the parents professing to apply the covenant as made to him and his, there doth result a parentall as well as a per∣sonall right. Such weight there is in the covenant applyed, as by vertue of the covenant of grace invested with Church-covenant thus professedly applyed, there doth arise such a union, as of the parent, so of the child (quoad homines) unto Christ, as head of the visible Church. And looke as the covenant laid hold upon, by the lively faith of gracious parents, as made with respect to their children hath mighty force to effect very gratious things in the elect seed, yea albeit dying young, as sundry of those elect ones of Abrahams race did, Rom. 9. 6. yea so as to make their outward wa∣shings to become effectuall in Christ to an inward clensing, Ephes. 5. 25, 26. yea so as to bring in and bring home many of such cove∣nant children. Whence those revolters beloved for their covenant fathers sake, as such, Rom. 11. 28. and hence made as a ground of

their returne, verse 15, 16. So is there such validitie in the cove∣nant invested with Church-covenant, albeit but unworthily oft∣times held forth by the parents, which doth beget upon the chil∣dren an externall filiall relation unto God, and to his spouse the visible Church; whence that respect of children of God and his Church, by vertue of that Espousall covenant, Ezek. 16. 8. Even in the children of Idolatrous members, verse 20, 21. 23. Great is the force of this way of the covenant so clothed. Albeit many unwor∣thy members are girt up in it, to hold them and theirs in externall Church-communion, Jer. 13. 11. untill either that Church bee di∣vorced from God, or the particular members disfranchised by some Church censure, of such a Church-covenant priviledge. This consideration with the former mentioned in that first conclusion, may also satisfie M. B. that our doctrine touching Infants covenant and Church-right to baptisme doth not necessarily produce, ei∣ther that absurdity of a state of grace and remission of sinnes be∣fore calling, or of birth grace (as J. I. hath it) conveyed from pa∣rent to child: understanding it of grace absolute and grace in them and not of grace upon them, or relative grace. And if of grace up∣on them, yet if understanding what hee saith as meant of justifi∣cation and saving adoption, and not of externall adoption and covenant administration, the former they convey not, as neither doth a free Denison his personall gifts of wisedome, &c. the later hee may; not as a man barely, but with this reduplication, consi∣dered as a parent in covenant and Church and spirituall citie e∣state; for so by vertue of the covenant hee is in, together with the professed parentall application and challenge of it, as to him and his, hee may convey such an externall right formerly mentioned. Nor is that absurditie ours, that wee make such visible members of Christs church before calling, for if hee meane it of effectuall cal∣ling; he, if invisible Church fellowship will come under that absur∣ditie too; unlesse hee could wholly exclude hypocrites from visi∣ble Churches, or suppose such a Church where neither are nor can come any false brethren. If hee intendeth it of externall cal∣ling, so visible beleevers and in churched parents Infants, are with and in their parents call, to the externall fellowship of Church-covenant, implicitely called with them. As before they were a farre off together from covenant and Church, so now are they made nigh together th••s farre. Of the like nature is that imaginary ab∣surditie, of entailing grace to generation not to regeneration or of

upholding a nationall Church; hee knowes wee in New-England which hold the one, yet doe not maintaine the other in the usuall sense of a nationall Church. And this which hath been here said also may answer that of I. S. that Infants have not union with Christ, as not having faith, and therefore may not have any com∣munion in Church-ordinances; if hee intend it of saving faith, his sequele is weake, since many which doe not savingly beleeve are in respect of their in-being in the visible Church, to which also Christ is head, in Christ as the head of that body, in which they are vi∣sible members, whence also that John 15. 2. But to speake to the proposition it selfe, I say Infants without actuall faith, are of Christs body the Church, of which more afterwards, and so in Christ as the head of the visible Church. Their parents professed application of the covenant with reference to them, as well as to themselves, they are together with themselves Ecclesiastically one with Christ as the head of the visible Church.

SECT. VII.

Conclus. 6. THat the body of the Jewish Church to old was un∣der the covenant of grace, as invested with Church covenant, in respect of externall interest therein. It was not (as some say) that they onely had a covenant of grace among them, which was made to some choyce ones among them, but that which was made with and dispensed to the body of the Jewes, was a covenant of works and not of grace; for the contrary appeareth, 1. In that the covenant was made with Abraham, Isaac and Iacob, in reference to their whole seed at least in respect of externall and ecclesiasticall right, as before wee proved. And hence God appointed them all to receive the visible seale thereof, see Gen. 17. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. and 26. 3, 4, 5. and 28. 12, 13, 14. either then these covenant fathers receiving the covenant in reference to their chil∣dren, had a contrary covenant of life and death, grace and works, made with them, and so at one and the same time were externally under the blessing and curse of God, and so were not one root to their seed, nor first fruits of one sort; but as their branches and lumpe in the body of them, are supposed to have the covenant of workes dispensed to them, so are they to them as a legall root and first-fruits of that sort: yet sundry of the branches being elect ones, to them they are an Evangelicall roote, and first-fruits of another sort, contrary to that letter of the Text, Rom. 11. 16. or if not both,

then either receiving a covenant of workes alone, in reference to them all elected, or not: or it must be granted, that they received the covenant of grace with Ecclesiasticall respect to them all.

2. The very substance of the covenant made and enjoyned to be sealed upon all the children of those fathers, Acts 7. 8. with Gen. 17. 7, 8, 9, 10. was (as hath been proved) not a Legall but an Evangeli∣call covenant. It was not, Doe this and live, or else bee accur∣sed, Gal. 3. 10, 11, 12. but I will bee a God to thy seed, not to Isaac of Abraham alone; nor to Jacob of Isaac alone, in that Church-right and way, but to thy seede in their generations. It was their covenant-right to have the Tabernacle of God, or Ordinances as their priviledge, yea and his presence therein. Hence that Exod. 40. 34, 35. 38. and Num. 6. 6. 9. and Levit. 9. 14. hence that filling of their Temple with smoak, with the glory of God, 1 King. 8. 10, 11. so Isa. 6. 1, 2, 3, 4. hence that same testifying of the presence of God in the Churches, after Christs ascension, in a way of mercy to his people, and for their sakes in a way of justic•• against his and their enemies, Revel. 15. 8. Hence the frequent answers made to them, and for them by Oracle from Gods mercy-seate, Exod. 23. 21, 22. see Deut. 4. 7. Christ himselfe went with them whither soe∣ver they went, 1 Cor. 10. 4. whence they are said to tempt him, verse 9. see Exod. 33. 15, 16. besides those extraordinary Sacraments in which they shared as spirituall things, 1 Cor. 1, 2, 3, 4. onely those fathers so partaking of them, which to Egyptians, and beasts were not of that nature. It was their covenant-right to have such deliverances flowing thence, as that from Egypt, Exod. 6. 7. albeit afterward too God continued in other respects as well as that, their covenant God, Exod. 29. 45, 46. Levit. 26. 11, 12. so in and after that Babylonish deliverance, Ier. 24. 7. which deliverances of theirs, were not of any common nature to other people, but by vertue of Christ the Anointing, the Mediator (virtually) of that cove∣•…•… Isa. 10. 27. see Ier. 24. 7. and 15. 17, 18, 19, 20. see more Deut. 29. with 30. 6. Acts 2. 38, 39. hence that, Rom. 3. 29, 30. see Heb. 4. 1, 2. Acts 3. 25. Rom. 9. 4. not meaning the Law or two Tables of it, but distinguishing those promises from the other; nor was Cana∣an all which God promised them, as some have said. For,

First, it was promised them as an everlasting possession, when yet many, even the best of them, never enjoyed it constantly, if at all, Heb. 11. 9, 10. Num. 20. 12. the promise of Canaan was ratifi∣ed in Christ, as are other temporall blessings to us now, 1 Cor. 3. 21, 22.

hence Christ's said to drive out their enemies thence from them, Exod. 23. 20, 21. hence called Immanuels land, Esay 8. 8. hence sundry of them excluded thence for that Gospel sin of unbeliefe, Heb. 3. last compared with Chap. 42. Hence God promised to bee a God to them, and as one branch thereof, instanceth in giving them Canaan, Gen. 17. 7. 8. yet to shew that was not all hee pro∣mised, hee againe addeth after that; And I will be a God to them. Hence those expectations of faith beyond the same, Heb. 11. 9, 10. Ps. 142. 5.

Secondly, the Proselyted strangers were to have Abrahams cove∣nant sealed to them and theirs by Circumcision, Gen. 17. 7, 8, 9, ••0, 11, 12, 13. yet they might not have lots there, nor keepe them, •…•…t returne them at the Jubilee, Iosh. 13. 6. Numb. 36. 2. and •…•….53.

Thirdly, Christ was the mediator of that covenant of Abraham made with them and so held out to them all, witnesse their sacri∣fices expiatory, and propitiatory, injoyned the whole congregati∣on in case of sinne, Levit. 4. 13. unto 22. witnesse the two Goates, one for a sinne offering for the whole congregation, and the other the scape goate, over which all the sinnes of the children of Israel, were confessed by the Priests, and then it was in a typicall way to carry away all their sinnes, into a place farre remote, Levit. 16. 15, 21, 22, &c. what this did externally signifie, none is ignorant which knowes the Scriptures. And albeit all made not effectuall use of it by saving faith, yet God herein testified what a covenant they were under, even that of grace confirmed in Christ, and to what they had according to men externall right. Hence the high Priest in type of Christ, bare the names of the 12. Tribes, and made intercession and atonement for them upon the like ground. Adam, with whom that covenant of workes was made, had no such sacrifices, Gal. 3. 16, 17. the Apostle speaking of the promises to Abraham, not excluding this, Gen. 17. albeit more especially re∣lating to Gen. 12. 2. 31. saith not, they were [to bee confirmed] in Christ, as if not at all ratified in Christ to them of old: but saith the covenant [was confirmed] long before the Law in Christ, so as that could not disanull the validitie of it, and Acts 3. 25. they are said to bee children of the Gospell promise, Gen. 12. 3 hence Luke 1. 54, 55. 67, 68. unto the 76 Verse, and Christ as a Mini∣ster, not of circumcising, for he neither circumcised, nor baptized personally, Iohn 4. 1. but of the circumcision, that is the Jewish

Church and people, Gal. 2. 7. hee came actually and personally to confirme those promises made to the fathers, as Gen. 17, 7, 8. which hee had before virtually confirmed, Gal. 3. 16, 17. And which is observable, the Apostle, Rom. 15. 9, 10, 11, 12. brings in foure rea∣sons, to prove the receiving in of the Gentiles to the fellowship of the covenant and Gospel, as that which was opposed much, but to confirme that of the Jewish covenant estate, verse 8. hee brings no further reason, then that, taken from one end of Christs com∣ming in the flesh: as if to deny the former were to question the later. And how can it bee imagined that such an Evangelicall co∣venant as that, Gen. 17. 7. made with reference to them, should bee made without respect to Christ, in whom salvation was really exhibited to the elect among them, Acts 4. 10. 1 Pet. 23, 24 with Isa. 40. 8. Psal. 115 8. to 16. and 111. 3, 4 & 44. 17, 18. 22 with Rom. 8. 36 Heb. 11. per totum. Johns converts were but turned to the wise∣dome or faith of their righteous fathers, Luk. 1. 17 and to the rest externally ministred in the visible seales and types thereof; to shew, it was their visible covenant and Church-right also, if they had hearts to improve it, and that they should answer dearely for re∣jecting their owne mercy if despisers, &c. as they afterwards did, Rom. 11. 20. hitherto was their injunction of the brazen Serpent, and their looking upon it, Numb. 21. 7, 8, 9, 10. with Iohn 3. 14, 15.

Fourthly, the covenant of workes holds out no pardon or mer∣cy to transgressors, as did this covenant made and dispensed to the Jewes, Gen. 17. 7. as before wee shewed, so Acts 2. 38, 39.

Fiftly, the covenant of works required not either faith in Christ or repentance, those Gospel duties Mac. 1. but perfect personall obedience, much lesse did it offer grace inabling to repent, but this their covenant did both require and offer the same, Deut. Chap. 30. Verse 6. as I. S. confesseth, see more Acts Chap. 3. Verse 25, 26.

Sixtly, No salvation at all to any, by acceptance of the termes of the covenant of workes, nor possibilitie of it, Gal. 3. 10. but h••re was rest and salvation in the word to them dispensed, if they had hearts to have improved it, else none had ever been saved by it, contrary to Heb. 11. yea chap. 12. 1, 2. they are mad•• our patternes and leaders that way, that was Gospel, even glad tidings of salva∣tion by Christ to come, which was dispensed to them; albeit it were not Gospel strictly taken for the revelation of Christ as actu∣ally

incarnates and personally ratifying the same, Rom. 1. 16, 17. Revel. 14. 6. Heb. 4. 2. compared with 2 Tim. 1. 10. and 1 Pet. 1. 10.

Seventhly, all the Jewes best and worst, had the same dispensers of the covenant, as their Ministers in whom they were all intere∣sted, and by whom they were ministerially urged, with their co∣venant-right in common, Exod. 19. 5, 6. and 24. 7, 8. with Heb. 9. 15, 16, 17. 20. Psal. 50. 5. 16. and 44. 17. Isa. 24. 1. Ier. 31. 37. and 33. 25, 26. Ezek. 16. 8. 59. 60. 62. Zach. 9. 11.

Eighthly, the covenant of works was made with all men without distinction in Adam, but this covenant was a peculiar covenant, made with the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, as before was shewed.

N•…•…thly, the cause of the Jewes not profiting by the Gospell so ministred to them as their priviledge was, not their not doing, (which is the defect of the condition of the legall covenant) but their not beleeving, or want of the condition of the Evangelicall covenant, H••b. 4. 2 And lest any should say: yea true, the Gospel was preached to them, as it is or may be to Indians with us, which have not so much as externall right in it; I say, they were cast off from their Evangelicall covenant priviledges, not for not doing, but for not beleeving, hence cut out of their root, and cast off from the priviledge of their first fruits Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, not as be∣getting, and naturall fathers: for they are still their children thus, even the worst of them, John 8. 37. but from them as covenant spi∣rituall fathers, Rom. 11. 20. And observe that hee speaketh, that if the worst part of the Jewes, as if they accepted interest in the pro∣per object of faith, scil. the covenant, not of workes but of grace, out of which they are broken by their Gospel sinne of unbeleefe.

Tenthly, the refuse Jewes thus cut and cast off, I demand from what they are cast, and into what estate they are now put? to the former, none will say they are cut out and cast off from a visible right, or estate of a covenant of workes, and the dispensation thereof: that were well for them, if so: So then their former pri∣viledged estate for their covenant fathers, from which they were cast by reason of unbeleefe, was not barely a ceremoniall yoake, the which our opposites urge as grievous to them all and a privi∣ledge rather to bend thereof: Nor the bare subservient covenant at Mount Sinai, (as Cameron calleth it.) For first, the branch privi∣ledge which they had in reference to those covenant fathers, as

such was long before Moses or his fathers were borne, and that is that to which Rom. 11. 15, 16. 28. speakes to, as even our opposites will confesse. Secondly, according to Camerons grounds de Triplici faedere, Thes. 68. many things are in that subservient covenant, which was 430. yeeres after the promise to Abraham, Gen. 12, &c. which are not applyable to that covenant, Gen. 17. 7. as that: that convinced of sinne and cleared divine justice: but that covenant of grace tendred pardon, &c. And so did that covenant, I will bee a God to thy seed, as before: that sheweth dutie, but not grace to performe, as doth the covenant of grace: yea and as did that, Gen. 17. 7. as before, yea, and as did that covenant made with all Is∣rael. After and besides that covenant in Horeb, Deut. 29. 1, 2. with 30. 6. that had the stipulation of Doe and live, not so in the cove∣nant of grace, Gen. 17. no nor in that, Deut. 30. 6. see Gen. 12. 3. with Gal. 3. 8. That was a carnall Symboll of the Jewish Church (comparatively) but that in Gen. 17. and Deut. 30. 6. more spirituall; that shewed sinne and misery, but this happinesse in remission of sinnes, as well as misery without it, Rom. 4. 6, 7, 8. 11. 13. of that was Moses, of this was Christ, Mediator, Gal. 3. 16, 17. Rom. 15. 8. Hence those of the first borne of that Hebrew Church of old, Heb. 12. 23. priviledged in the blood and Mediator, verse 14. That Co∣venant was imbondaging, not so that in Gen. 17. 7. we now inhe∣riting the same by faith in him, not bondage in or by it, nor sor∣row, but comfort, see 2 Sam. 23. 4, 5. that sheweth the way of wor∣ship, but this grace to act it as before, so Gen. 17. so Deut. 30. 6. that was against us, yea but this was for us, Gen. 17. 7. as is evi∣dent, and so was for them, whence the same subjects in that Deut. 30. 6. Even parents and children; That held out Temporalls, yea but this Eternalls, Gen. 17. 7. with Heb. 11. 16. Matth. 22. 31. hence Abrahams bosome is heaven, opposed to hell, Luke 16. 22, 23. Hence heavens glory, is sitting downe with Abraham, Isaac and Ja∣cob in Gods kingdome, Luke 13. 25. 16. 27. Yea all our opposites contend for the rigour and burdensomnesse of Sinai's covenant, no such sore punishment of Jewish unbeleefe to bee rid of that: nay they count it their glory at this day to retaine it and bee zealous for it, but as was said they were discarded a former right and pri∣viledge and cast into a contrary estate. I enlarge here to cleare mistakes.

11. The better part of the Jewes which abode in their covenant estate from which they were not broken off, Rom. 11. 7. 17. 20. they

changed not their estate in the substantialls of it, but abode there∣in unbroken off. Now I demand, was this their priviledge estate in which they abode, an estate of a covenant of workes; or at best was it an estate of a subservient Sinai covenant, as Cameron phra∣seth it, the condition whereof was no other according to him, then do and live, or else die, which if so, was in effect as the covenant of workes strictly taken, I suppose none will affirme that: verily then what ever ceremoniall vailes were super-addded in Moses dayes, yet that could not invalidate Abrahams covenant, in which they with the rest of their fellow-members then cast out, were inte∣rested in common; albeit these had a more peculiar benefit there∣by, which the other fell short of by that unbeleefe.

12. The Gospelled Gentiles stood in that very condition by faith, and came into the very same kingdome estate, for the na∣ture or essentialls of it, out of which the worser part of the Jewes, were broken and cast, they were gaffed in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in the place, or roome of those broken branches: as Beza hath it, Rom. 11. 17. see vers. 19, 20. Matth. 8. 11, 12. and 21. 43. but such Gentiles are not in such a preternaturall way, Rom. 11. 24. brought under a bare co∣venant of workes, or at most under Sinai covenant considered in the legall part of it: but into a state of the covenant of grace, and the externall right and priviledge thereof. Therefore in the essen∣tialls of that covenant estate the same. Lastly, God remembred the worst of them for good, when in the worst estate by sinne, and made it as I may say frequently a motive to himselfe, to shew them this and that especiall favour, even the respect to his covenant with them, and with their fathers in their stead. If this covenant made with them had beene as Adams or Sinai's covenant, in the legall part of it, a covenant of meere doing, and living by it, or else perishing, &c. that being minded by God, would have called for justice against them in their just destruction, and have urged God, even for respect to his justice, to have then cut off all such Idolatrous Apostates. But verily, in that it was a covenant pre∣vayling for mercy and grace, rather to bee freely extended to them, albeit so unworthy, what was it other, then that free covenant of Gods grace, which when they failed of their part of the covenant in all Ecclesiasticall respects, Ezek. 16. 8. 59. 6, &c. yet God will out of respect to his owne part of the covenant made with them, shew them favour? vers. 60. 62, 63. so Ezek. 36. 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26. and 31, &c. And marke what the phrase is, spea∣king

to that church-body, of which Ezek. 16. 67. 8, 9, &c. he saith, I will remember my covenant made with [thee:] not with this or that particular Jew: but with them all in an Ecclesiasticall way, and in respect of externall right: albeit some onely had the saving benefit thereof, as being the select covenanters mainely intended. So Esay 48. 1, 2, 3, 4, &c. God considers that people as Iron sinewed, and refusing to heare, &c. Yet for his owne name or covenanted grace and truth and honours sake, he saith, hee will extend such and such patience and mercy to them, verse 9, 10, 11. Against this are objected.

SECT. 8. Objections against the Iewes co∣venant-state remo∣ved.

1. Object. They were the children of the flesh, not of God, and of his promise, Rom. 9. 7, 8.

Answ. If wee take children of God, for such as were savingly regenerate and adopted, or children of the promise, for such as were of the elect seed, in whom the promise tooke saving effect: So it's true onely of some of the Jewes, John 1. 12, 13. Rom. 9. 6, 7, 8. &c. But if you take it of the Church-seed of the promise, and such as were externally adopted of God, and instated in the covenant of grace, as invested also with Church-covenant: so they were children even of that free covenant of blessing in Christ, Acts 3. 25, 26. and had the promises indefinitely, as Deut. 30. 6. Jer. 31. 37. Gen. 17. 7, &c. belonging to them, Rom. 9. 4. and were children of God, Christs owne, &c. even the worst of them, John 1. 12. Deut. 32. 19, 20. Isa. 1. 2. and 43. 6. Ezek. 16. 20, 21. 23. Matth. 15. 26. Christs chickens, Matth. 23. end; not Gods children meerely by creation, as neither were that Church-seed of old, called the sons of God for that, Gen. 6. 1, 2. in opposition to the daughters of men, or of those without the Church: For so all were of God, Mal. 2. 10. Heb. 12. 9. nor yet by regeneration, and saving adoption such: but by externall filiation, and adoption. The argument then is a dicto secundum quid. They are not children of the promise, or of God, savingly and in respect of the effect of the promise, and of their covenant and Church estate to salvation, therefore not at all children of God or of his promise, which followeth not.

2 Object. They were children onely after the flesh, and of the Sinai-covenant, John 8. Gal. 4. now Abrahams spirituall seed onely are in the covenant of grace, Rom. 9.

Answ. If children after the flesh be taken properly, so even Isaac and Jacob were such. They had Abraham to their father, as well as the Jewes. If taken exclusively, as if no more but children of the

flesh, wee have already proved, in what sense they were children of God, and of his free covenant. If children of the flesh allegori∣cally, so I deny that the Apostles intent, Gal. 4. is to compare the state of the Jewes from Abrahams time downward, to Ishmaels of Hagar, as neither were they as Ishmael of Hagar the bondwoman, but of Sarah the freewoman, even as Isaac was, Esa. 51. 1, 2. Hebr. 11. 11, 12. Esa. 10. 22. 23. So neither doth the Apostle consider them, in reference to their first covenant estate in Abraham, but to their degenerate estate into a legall frame and way, scil. as adhering to the morall Law, delivered in mount Sinai, not as a rule of holy life, as there it was propounded and intended; but as the substance of the covenant of workes, so as to looke for life by it, in which way God never intended it to his covenant people. And likewise considering them, as abusing the ceremoniall law, not as given of God at Sinai, to represent the Messiah, before his comming in the flesh, as one, in whose blood virtually they might, and ought to have looked for life and grace, and by it to bee led to him, when come in the flesh, as hee, in whom all those shadowes were fulfilled and so to cease; but they abusing both morall and ceremoniall Law, so as to seeke to bee justified, after Christs comming thereby, and not by Christ, and persecuting such as held forth the contra∣ry, in this allegoricall sense, not Hierusalem, or the Church of old, but Jerusalem which then was, when Paul wrote this, long af∣ter Christs time; As might be shewed by comparing Gal. 1. 17. 18. and 2. 1. with other Scriptures. This Hierusalem which then was, and her children, Hierusalem which now is and her children, and verse 29. and so it is now, not so was it of old, verse 29. Those which did as Rom. 9. 31, 32, 33. and 11. 20. which were enemies to the Gospel-church, v. 21. 1 Thes. 2. 14, 15, 16. These which would bee under the Law, in that sense, not under Christ, Gal. 4. 21. to 26. These were the persons here intended. Yea, it's evident, that hee considereth not the Jew-Church of old, as in covenant with God, but that Allegoricall Hierusalem, in that hee applyeth this to all Legalists, whether Jewes or Gentiles. Those of Galatian Churches which are and will bee of that straine, they were such children also, Gal. 4. 21. Tell mee, saith Paul to them, [yee] that desire to bee under the Law, &c. where hee applyeth that further, verse 2, 3, 4, &c. whence also that, Gal. 5. 2, 3, 4, &c. In a word, it's one thing to bee under the morall or ceremoniall Law, as a tutor, another thing to bee under it as a parent, both the Church-seed

of Abraham, and his choyce elect seed, were all in common under the Law in the former sense, and so to the outward face of reason, and comparatively, they were as servants, Gal. 4. 1, 2, 3, 4. scil. not so free from vayles and manifold ceremonious burdens and servi∣ces. They were a royall nation, under a Princely covenant and estate, Exod. 19. 5, 6. They were then children, yea and heires as to Canaan, so to greater things also: in respect of externall right, Gal. 4. 1, 2, 3. But yet as Princes children at schoole, or as great mens sonnes, at a kind of service. Thus they were under the Law as a Tutor. ibid. but under it as a parent and mother, v. 23, 24, &c. scil. such as were only of the Sinai covenant in the legall part of it, and were to inherit by vertue thereof, or no way. Thus those Jewes, as of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob considered as covenant-fathers, they were of other manner of seed, scil. such like as Gen. 17. 7 and Deut. 36, &c. and were externally instated to another manner of inheritance.

3 Object. They were under the old and first covenant, which was formerly, &c. and not under the new, or in the covenant of grace.

Answ. Even that Sinai covenant could not disanuall that cove∣nant formerly made with them in Abraham, as being much later then it, Gal. 4. 16, 17. That was upon their comming out of Egypt, Jer. 31. 32. This above 400. yeeres before it. The covenant of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, in reference to their Church seed, was in the essentialls of it, the same with that dispensed to us now, and as to them before Abraham, an everlasting covenant and Gospel, Heb. 13. 20. Rev. 14. 6. The Lord, as others which are wise and not variable, made but one testament, or covenant, or will of grace, yet he caused it to be writ in divers characters, & some more legible and perspicuous. The royall charter and grant was and is the same, but renewed: so that the phrases [new and old] import not, new, in nature and substance, but in accidents and qualities, or new, that is, renewed. As the same grace in nature, it is said to be new or renewed every morning, Lam. 3. 22, 23. so the commandement of love, the same in nature, both old from the beginning, & yet also new, •• John 2. 7, 8. so, the new way, Heb. 10. 20. yet the old way too, Heb. 13. 8. 20. Christ is not two wayes but one way, John 14. 6. so new heavens and earth, scil. refined: new churches, yet the same essentially with those of old, as wee sometimes call garments new, which are but old ones new trimmed. When the covenant is said to be new and old, it is not divisio generis in species, but subjecti in adjuncta: So the phrases [first, and second] Heb. 9. note that two testaments

specifically different, but numerically, as the first and second per∣son in the Trinitie are called first and second, yet are not two Gods essentially, but one. Besides, it's called a first and second testa∣ment, scil. in order of succession. So, the former is said to bee faulty comparatively, not absolutely. In a word, in way and manner of dispensation, that was different from the covenant now di∣spensed, in respect of ceremony of administration, not in the essentialls. And this which hath been said, may take off divers empty scruples, which may make against Gods covenant of old, with the Jewes, as if not of any force to our purpose.

4 Object. It was not the same covenant made with them, as with Abraham, Isaac and Iacob.

Answ. It was a covenant made for ever, and the same with that unto Abraham, and with that oath unto Isaac; and it was that which God remembred, for their good, and so an Evangelicall covenant; yea, it was a soveraigne commanding word of grace, and certaine. Therefore said to bee commanded. For which see, Psal. 105. 8, 9, 10. And of the phrase of commandment, taken for the promise, see Psal. 119. 54. 66. 92, 93. 96. and Psal. 94. 19. and 133. 3. meaning of the Law of faith or of the promife, Rom. 3. 27. which is mighty to effect, notwithstanding other lets, Rom. 3. 3. True, you will say, in respect of Canaan promised, there was such a covenant with them, Psal. 105. 11.

Answ. That covenant was of another nature, then meerely such: else, not lasting in such sort to 1000. generations, verse 8. whereas Matthew noteth but 42. generations from Adam to Christ.

5 Object. It was a nationall covenant, say some, Ergo, a cove∣nant of workes.

Answ. It followeth not ex natura rei; for that Gospell covenant, Gal. 3. 8. was of a nationall nature, Gen. 12. 2, 3. being a promise to Abraham, to make a nation of him; and not excluding a Church respect of that nation, yet did not God make two contrary cove∣nants of workes and grace with him; nor if it had beene a cove∣nant of workes, which was made with that nation, as it had not held them so long together by the strength of it, Ier. 13. 11. so neither durst any have pleaded it in the revolted estate of that Church, as hee did Ier. 14. 19, 20, 21.

6 Object. It threatned and executed corporall punishments, as well as rewards.

Answ. And so doth the Gospel also, Iohn 3. 18. 36. Marke 16. 15, 16.

2 Thes. 1. 8. Rev. 11. 3, 4, 5, 6. Hebr. 2. 1, 2, 3. 1 Cor. 11. 29. 1 Tim. 4. 8, &c.

7 Object. That admitted of a fleshly seed, and such as proved carnall, this onely of a spirituall seed, and such as beleeve.

Answ. That, as invested with Church covenant, admitted none but a Church-seed, and Church-members, to the fellowship of the covenant externally dispensed: And so much, and no more is done, if rightly done now. Againe, if the Author take fleshly seed, for s•…•…h as came of Abraham, Isaac and Iacob; so in admitting all, it must needs admit the elect seed of Abaham also, unlesse any deny, that there were any such of that Church. Contrary to Rom. 9. 6, 7, 8, &c. And so it did not admit onely of such as proved carnall, but as well of beleevers also. If he take it in an allegoricall sense, as Gal. 4. so also it admitted of others, then such. And on the other side the covenant now, as invested with Church-covenant, and so most authoritatively administred; it admitteth, as of children, which come of good parents, so of carnall hypocrites, yea of fleshly legalists, which defy ordinances, and rest in, and trust unto them, and to their Church, and family, and closet duties, &c. the Galatian Churches had such legalists, Gal. 4. 21, 22, 23. Many are called into covenant fellowship, which are not chosen, Mat. 22. 13.

8 Object. That was in the flesh, this in the heart.

Answ. Was that onely in the flesh? was not the word of Cove∣nant as well in their heart? as Moses judging ecclesiastically avow∣eth of Israel, Deut. 29. 10, 11, &c. with 30. 11, 12, 13, 14. so Isa. 51. 7. Gods covenant now, is to write his Law in our hearts, Heb. 8. but is not all that included in this, I will bee your God? whence all is closed up in that phrase, ibid. or was not this first made to the Jewes after their returne from captivitie more expres∣ly, Ier. 31. as before more implicitely, Gen. 17. Yea, but God did not actually write such holy dispositions in them. Suppose he did not: that is the execution of the covenant, as for the very berith, or covenant it selfe; it is the promise hereof dispense to them, and this they had, both Gen. 17. and Deut. 30. 6. To circumcise the heart to love God, is to imprint gratious dispositions; to promise the same to them is to covenant to imprint it, and so he did cove∣nant with them and theirs, ibid. Besides, is not Gods covenant now also Sacramentally on our bodies too, and in many no further? which are onely baptized with water, but their soules filthy and

chaffie, Matth. 3. 11, 12. which have barely the washing of the flesh, not the heart. Answer, as some call it, 1 Pet. 3. 21.

9 Object. That was in their Generations, Gen. 7. not so now.

Answ. As that was to Abraham and Isaacs seed in their generati∣ons, till they actually became obstinate, perversely rejecting the covenant-grace and Christ, so it is now, Rom. 11. from 16. to 24. As In-churched Cain, who was of Adams house-Church, was then together with his, and not till then, rejected, Gen. 4. 15, 16. com∣pared with Gen. 6. 1, 2. where his posteritie are called daughters of men, as contra-distinct from the children of God, or of the Church. Then also, and not till then, was Ishmael, together with his rejected, scil. when hee mockt at both the head Christ, and the body the Church, in Isaac, in whose race it was promised, the covenant should bee confirmed, and by them carried on, see Gen. 17, 18, 19, 20, 21. compared with 21. 9, 10, 11, 12. and Gal. 4. And then, and not till then, was Esau, with his rejected, Hebr. 12. 15, 16, 17.

10 Object. That was a conditionall covenant, this an absolute. That had a commandement, as the instrumentall meanes, or cause of interest in the Covenant, and that required onely a male of eight dayes old, to interest them in the covenant of their fathers, and for that end to bee circumcised, &c. but now, not so.

Answ. If the intent of the objectors be to exclude all conditions, surely now the Gospell requireth faith and repentance, and so it did then. To externall interest personall faith was not required, witnesse that, Deut. 29. and 30. 6. But to effectuall interest, it was in adultis, Heb. 4. 2. But it's false to say the commandement gave right to covenant-interest, since covenant-right was first premised and declared, to bee the ground of that commanded service, of the initiatory seale, Gen. 17. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, &c. Thou shalt therefore keepe my covenant. Hee doth not say you must bee, or are cir∣cumcised, and therefore will bee your God: But I will be a God to thee and thy seed, therefore thou and they shall bee circumcised; the nature of a seale supposeth a covenant to bee sealed. Againe, that also is of like truth, which is said, that it required onely a male of eight dayes old. The promise being made indefinitely to the seed, whether male or female, and not to the eighth day old seed, but to the seed, albeit but a day old, else, what had become of them, if they died then, in respect of that ordinary covenant meanes of their good? Rom. 9. 6.

11 Object. That promised temporall things to both seeds, as Canaan; this spirituall.

Answ. Was not Canaan typicall to both seeds, as you call them? Else, why were any condemned for their unbeleefe? Heb. 3. last, and 4. 1, 2. compared. Or were temporall things all that was pro∣mised, in this [I will bee your God?] or was hearts circumcision promised them, Deut. 30. a temporall thing? or doth not the Gospel now promise, and exhibite temporall things also? 1 Cor. 3. 21, 22. 1 Tim. 4. 8.

12 Object. With the Jewes, the Church and the State were the same, but not so now.

Answ. God never confounded Church and civill state, either then or now. Who dare make God the author of confusion, which is the God of Order? Hee then kept them severall, paling in the civill state with the judicialls, with which the Church as such, dealt not, but as civill cases came under a Church-consideration. Shee had her ceremonialls and moralls to regulate her Kings and Princes, Priests, Levites, and Elders, had their proper worke, and moved onely in their owne spheres. The Elders of the assemblies knew and acted in their places Ecclesiastically, without interrup∣tion from civill officers, or intruding upon civill offices, as such, Josh. 9. and 16. 1. 2. Act. 14. Luke 4. the matters of the King and of the Lord, were carefully bounded and sundred, 2 Chron. 17. 11.

And because I. S. maketh many of these objections, let us see whether what himselfe affirmeth, will not necessarily confirme much of what wee have said, and undermine many things, which hee and others of his mind doe hold.

[To bee a God to them] saith I. S. was to fulfill his promise to Abraham in particular, or to his seed in generall. Citing for that, Nehem. 9, 8. Psal. 105. 9, 10, 11, 42. Luke 1. 72, 73, 74. In token of which God annexed Circumcision as a seale to confirme the same, Gen. 17. 11. And againe, unto which covenant circumcision was added, to put the people alwayes in mind of the said covenant, Gen. 17. 11. and a seale to confirme the covenant on both sides, God to be a God to them, as aforesaid, and they to be his owne people above o∣thers, and so to performe the same condition of faith and obe∣dience, as Abraham their father did, and to walke as such circum∣cised in heart, unto which they were ingaged by that ordinance, Rom. 2. 25, 26, 27, 28, 29. otherwise that covenant stood not in force, &c.

First then, there was a covenant of grace, which onely

requireth faith and repentance, made with Abrahams seed in gene∣rall, and so with the body of the Jewes, Infants and all, as be∣ing then particulars of that seed of Abraham in generall: God anexing circumcision in token thereof as his mind touching them whilst Infants, visibly to confirme the same to them whether they proved elect or reprobate, Gen. 17. 11. Secondly, then the Initiato∣ry seale of the covenant of grace, was not alwayes of present actu∣all grace in the party sealed, but unto future grace, and with con∣dition of future actings of faith and repentance: Albeit, not then able practically and personally to restipulate otherwise then passive∣ly, and in their parents. It being confessed to bee a seale on both seeds of Gods being a God to them, &c. And putting the people circumcised in mind, scil. afterwards of the covenant, and to per∣forme the conditions of it, of faith, and repentance &c. 3 Then circumcision sealed spirituall things, even that covenant [I will bee a God to them] and so fulfill my promises to them: such like as Luke 1. 72, 73, 74. In token whereof circumcision was annexed to confirme the same. And surely it confirming a promise of such mercies as Luke 1. 72, &c. it did confirme very spirituall things to them, and so not temporall things onely, as Canaan, &c. as sun∣dry have affirmed. Also, then circumcision, ingaging the circum∣cised persons to beleeve as Abraham did, and to bee in heart cir∣cumcised, &c. as I. S. cited that place for that purpose, Rom. 2. 25. to the end: Hee else-where contradicteth himselfe, affirming that faith in the blessed seed, was not required either in Abraham or others to be circumcised. If it ingaged them to his faith, then hee and adult proselytes stood prae-ingaged to the same faith. Like∣wise Infants, albeit not actually beleeving at present, yet that seale was on them virtually, as a present ingagement to after faith &c. Nor doth this accord with what I. S. elsewhere affirmeth, that cir∣cumcision required, not the second birth but first. Since, it inga∣ging to the hearts circumcision, this could not bee without a se∣cond birth supposed. This which hath been said, accordeth with much of that which wee speake, touching baptisme, that it sealeth the covenant indefinitely to all sorts, and that it sealeth on Infants present federall Grace, and unto future grace: likewise unto growne ones, it sealeth personall grace lesse principally, covenant grace principally.

From what hath beene said in this sixth proposition it ap∣peares, that the Infants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacobs loynes, were

as well as their covenant and Church-seed as any others; hence the covenant runs in the indefinite notion of seed, and the same seed to which Canaan was to bee given for an outward inheritance, whereof children were heires as well as parents; hence upon that ground of Gods being a covenant-God to them, was the injun∣ction of their being sealed by Circumcision, Gen. 17. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, &c. hence in that way is the Covenant of grace renewed to all Is∣rael in the termes of you and your seed, Deut. 30. 6. I have beene the larger in this matter of Gods covenant with the Jewes as con∣ceiving the contrary opinion to have beene a great ground both of Anabaptisme and Familisme.

SECT. IX. The Childrens Covenant estate in Gospel.

Conclus. 7. THat the Covenant interest, at least externall and ecclesiasticall, of Infants of inchurched beleevers, is Gospell as well as such covenant interest of growne persons. Now because Antipaedobaptists, or rather Anabaptists wholly de∣ny the Covenant-right of Infants of beleevers; let us here also addesome particulars for further clearing of this proposition. But first let us consider of that place, Deut. 30. 6. 11, 12, 13, 14. compa∣red with Rom. 10. 6. 7. 8. the matter of the promise, scil. inward power of grace, inabling to love the Lord intirely, to purge away and mortifie heart sinnes, and sheweth it was a very Gospel promise like that, Heb. 8. 10, 11, 12. of writing the Law of grace in the heart: now this was made to the seed or children of these Church-members assembled, as Chap. 29. 14, 15. here is not any evasion as is usuall in mentioning Abrahams seed, to say hee meant their Allegoricall and their spirituall seede, &c. this people to whom this was made being not so spirituall themselves. Nor was it some bare tender, but it was in way of speciall Covenant and oath on Gods part, as Deut. 29. 14, 15. sheweth, nay it was of a soveraigne nature, to bring about what God in his secret counsell intended, hence called a commandement, Deut. 30. 11. like that Psal. 105. 8. the covenant and the commanded word were one; and lest any doubt should arise, how this should bee ratified and made good, Moses prophetically setteth out Christ as dead and risen in whom this covenant was virtually ratified, vers. 12, 13. all which the Apostle further explaineth: when to set forth the

way of Gods free Covenant grace in Christ without workes, Rom. 10. 6, 7, 8. calling it the righteousnesse of faith or Covenant of grace in Christ, which justifying faith is to improve the righteous∣nesse of faith speaketh on this wise: say not, who shall, &c. where was this spoken, but in Deut. 30. 11, 12, 13, 14. That commande∣ment or covenant was not farre off, that any should say, who, &c. but it was nigh them, &c. and that commandement which was not farre off, vers. 11. that any need speake as verse 12, 13. who shall ascend, &c. was the same word, which was nigh them in their mouth and heart, vers. 14. this the Apostle expounds to bee the righteousnesse of faith, Rom. 10. 6. and word of faith, verse 8. or covenant and promise of grace in Christ descending into the grave, noting his humiliation, ascending into heaven, noting his exal∣tation, verse 6, 7. which faith was to beleeve, and that very do∣ctrine of faith, was that which the Apostles preached: as Paul saith, this is the word of faith which [wee] preach, this then, albeit called in Deut. 30. a commandement, yet was it a covenant, and that not of workes, nor a bare subservient covenant, but the very Gospell covenant ratified in Christ, the very object of faith, and that which the Apostle preached; now what this commande∣ment or Covenant was, that circumstance noteth, Deut. 30. 11. this commandement or covenant which I have commanded this day: for Moses had that day propounded it in a Church-way, and as a mutuall covenant betwixt them and God, as well as God and them, the parents stipulating therein in behalfe of themselves and children; and so in reference to them also, a conditionall cove∣nant made that day in the plaines of Moab, Deut. 29. 1. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15. 29. and 30. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. so that the places compared evidently prove, 1. That the covenant interest of inchurched stipulating parents children is Gospel. And se∣condly, that the Apostles preached this doctrine. Thirdly, that beleevers are to eye the Covenant in such a latitude, as to their children with them by faith? Fourthly, that the essentials of the Covenant of grace, in the latitude of the extent thereof to covenant parents with their children, held forth in the old Testa∣ment, was delivered and held forth as valid to the faith of the Saints in the new, and after Christs incarnation. This second and fourth particular here mentioned might bee further confirmed both by rule, in that it being proved to bee Gospel by the places now compared, it must needs bee, that the Apostles preached the same;

being injoyned to preach the Gospel, Marke 16. unlesse they either disobeyed Christs charge; or hid some part of Gods Evangelicall mind from his people; contrary to Rom. 10. 15. 18. and Acts 20. 27. 2 In that also Peter being to call upon his hearers to repent, and consequently to beleeve, hee propounds the word of their faith in such a Latitude as with reference to their children, Acts 2. 38, 39. The like doctrine doth Paul hold forth to the Saints at Rome, and inchurched beleevers there touching such children, Rom. 5. 14, 15. even touching the abounding of the graces of Christ to them. And the like virtually also is held forth by him, Rom. 11. 16, 17, 18, 19. as elsewhere is proved, and so 1 Cor. 7. 14.

First then, that which beleevers, as such, have, doe and ought to beleeve as a branch of the covenant of grace, that is Gospel; but this is of that nature, ergo. The major needs no proofe: the for∣mer Texts also clearing the same: the minor, de jure, it's evident: they ought to beleeve the whole Covenant made with them, as is evident, faith must bee as large as it's object, the Covenant is the word of faith. A beleever in the exercise of faith should as well have respect to the whole covenant, as in the exercise of the obedi∣ence of faith; respect the whole word of commandement, hee doth not else beleeve rightly which doth not desire and indeavour this: this therefore being one branch of Gods Covenant, to belee∣vers as beleeving and inchurched, as these Scriptures compared shew they ought to beleeve this, which respecteth their seed, as well as that which respecting themselves if they beleeve aright. God in making a covenant, in a Church reference especially, as was that with Abraham, Gen. 17. 7. hee taketh in their seed or children as joynt covenanters. Hence the phrase of seed in their generations: taking in parents generating and children begotten, as those in and by whom Churches are likely to bee continued; whence God, when to speake in reference to the Church seed, as well as to the choyce elect seed of Isaccs line in which the visible, and not meer∣ly the invisible Church was to bee continued, hee saith, hee will establish his covenant with Isaac, not with Ishmael; Ishmael was Abrahams seed too, and therefore externally in the covenant, and therefore sealed; but God knowing that Ishmael would reject this, hee warneth Abraham of it a little before, that it might not trou∣ble him afterwards: It is not to bee with him in his generations: for that cause, Gen. 17. 18. compared with Gen. 21. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. but with Isaac in his generations; God not opposing therein Isaac

to his Church-seed, but to Ishmael, who by rejecting the covenant will and did come, hee and his to bee cast out; hence when God speaketh in reference to our times after Christs incarnation when a woman compast a man, Jer. 31. 22. hee saith, hee will bee a God, not to the families in Judah or Israel meerly, but to those through∣out the earth. It's the old phrase in Abrahams covenant expounded and enlarged: I will be a God to thee and to thy seed, in their gene∣rations. Hee saith not barely, to thee and to thy seed in regenera∣tion, but, in their generations. Now in that Abrahams seed were to bee gentile believers also, in their generations: in Jeremy it is, I will bee a God to the families of all the earth, scil. where the Gos∣pel shall take so farre place to bring on the parent or parents to him and to his Church; not but that it may fall out, that in a beleevers family, some may come to hate their parents, as Matth. 10. for Religion, yet ordinarily it should bee and is otherwise; and God speaketh of things as they ordinarily come to passe: ex∣traordinary cases breake not square here. Yet even in that case too it followeth not but that the children were externally in co∣venant and Church estate when very children: But apostatising when growne up, they prove the desperatest enemies to the Gospel, even to persecute their owne parents. So it may bee the wife may remaine a Pagan, and so an enemy. But usually the Gospell when it commeth seasoneth the wife as well as the husband, and so ser∣vants as well as masters. Hence such frequent mention in holy story, when speaking of persons which had families to whom the Apostles came, that their families were Gospelled as well as them∣selves; witnesse that of Cornelius, Stephanus, Crispus, and the Jay∣ler, &c. And even Anabaptists deny it not to bee verified in all the adult persons of the families mentioned usually: then by their owne confession wives and servants were usually others at present, at least then Pagans, or persecuters, which sufficeth to for answer Hen. Dens objection, touching the desparitie of yokefellowes or masters and servants. It was usually otherwise, and God speakes of things as they usually prove: extraordinary occurrents crosse not such a rule, hence that testimony of the Angell to Cornelius, Acts 11. Hee shall speake words unto thee whereby thou and all thy house shall bee saved, verse 14▪ And so Pauls phrase runs in that notion, Be∣leeve in the Lord Jesus and thou shall bee saved, and thy house, Acts 16. 31. so Christs testimony is to like purpose, This day is salvation come to this house, inasmuch as he also is become a son of

Abraham; where by the comming of salvation to the house, hee doth not meane the bare comming of Christ, who is called the salvation, Luke 2. 30. to the materiall house of Zachaeus, as if that were such a notable priviledge of Zacheus as a beleever; since Christ went to many other houses then such as were the beleeving sons of Abraham, Luke 14. 1. and 7. 36. 39. and yet no such singular note upon the same as here. Nor by salvation come to his house is meant the comming of salvation to himselfe: as if hee and his house were all one: nor doe I know any parallel Scripture speaking in such language, that when the scope and intent is to mention the com∣ming of such or such a mercy to such a person, that phrase is used to denote the same; that such or such a mercy is come to his house. What need such a circumlocution? If so intended, the word might more plainely have been set downe, this day is salvation come to this Publican, this person, this man, or the like, inas∣much as hee also is become a sonne of Abraham: And what though the Greeke word bee used in Acts 2. 45. and 4. 35. for secundum according as, yet not for quatenus or in quantum: foras∣much as; the Texts and sense thereof are cleare, that it noteth pro∣portion of such administration, not meerly the cause or reason thereof. Or if it be supposed to imply the cause or reason thereof, it's evident it noteth the proportion also, they gave to every one as, or according as the needed, scil. proprortionably to their need: It being regular as to give to the needy, so to give them ac∣cording to the measure of their present necessitie. But how that sense will here bee fitly applicable I see not, to say that salvation is come to his house or to him according as hee is a beleever, but rather as our translaters render it, it's to be taken as a reason of the former, salvation is come to this house forasmuch as he is a sonne of Abraham. Yea, but will it not then follow that one mans faith saveth others as well as himselfe? No verily. Paul when hee spake so to the Jaylor, If thou beleevest thou shalt bee saved and thy house, Acts 16. 31. hee speakes more likely to such a pur∣pose, as it may seeme; yet verily hee entended not any such do∣ctrine, of others being actually saved onely by his faith; but that hee imbracing the covenant of grace in Christ, and by faith laying hold of the same, his whole house, even wife or servants and all (as it is usuall) shall fare the better, and come in the Gospels way: but if hee have children which are the continuers and upholders of the house in especiall, there is a more direct Covenant-line, and

therefore ordinary meanes of salvation runs unto them by virtue of Abrahams Covenant, and so if hee beleeve, not barely in the Lord Jesus, without reference to the promise, but as held out in the promise of ratifying of the promise, or covenant of grace, in this sense his house, Synecdochically, shall be saved, and brought within this covenant road and ordinary meane of salvation. None ordinarily can be saved but in such a way. It's the word of cove∣nant which must instrumentally bee effectuall thereto, that is Gods order, Rom. 9. 6. and Ephes. 5. 25, 26. and so in the ease of Zacheus; whence that periphrasis of his being a beleever, that hee was become a sonne of Abraham, and so an heire of Abrahams co∣venant, Gen. 17. 7. Nor is this sense of salvation, for covenant meanes of salvation, or the covenant and promise it selfe unusuall in Scripture. The salvation which Christ and his Apostles preach∣ed, and those, Heb. 2. 3. neglected, was not barely salvation it self, but the promises holding the same forth, for Acts 28. 28. the sal∣vation to bee sent and heard by the gentiles was the promises, and covenant and Gospell holding the same forth, this was that mer∣cy, and riches, and salvation also which came to the Gentiles, as rejected by the Jewes, Rom. 11. 11, 12, 17. 19 30. Verses compared. So Esay 51. 6. 8. Gods salvation is his promise, or covenant on which their salvation did depend, Calvin in locum. 2 Sam. 23. 5. David speaking of his house or posteritie, which albeit it were not so orient then, yet God had made a covenant with him, scil in re∣ference to his house ordered in all things and sure; And this, scil. this covenant with mee and my house, is all my salvation, and all my desire, albeit he maketh my house not to grow or flourish in such sort: this covenant then was his salvation, objective causa∣liter or Instrumentaliter. Albeit a parents faith bee not a princi∣pall cause, yet it may bee an occasionall meanes to stave off destru∣ction from and to further the salvation of their children; hence the faith of Moses parents preserved him in the waters, when a babe, Heb. 11. 23. hence that typicall sprinkling of the houses, representing the preservation of the first born, from other manner of destruction then meerely bodily: yet Moses his faith with other beleeving Israe∣lites, as verse 27. 25. compared sheweth, had a great stroake therein. And the like in that typicall passage of theirs with their children through the red Sea, verse 28. As much might bee said of that case of the beleeling Ninivites, Jon. 3. and 4. So in that typicall saving of Noahs house by Noahs faith, Heb. 11. 7. But to returne to the

houses mentioned, shall it then be yeelded, that such benefit should come as was before spoken of, to adult servants of the house, &c. & is here no reference to the poor babes by reason of their tender age? hath the mercifull God revealed no ordinary helpe for them? They are excluded from that actuall rejoycing and beleeving Jay∣lours house, Acts 16. whence Anabaptists doe therefore exclude them from the baptized house of the Jaylour; and why not as well exclude them by reason of want of actuall faith, from the saved house of the Jaylour? vers. 31. which I suppose they will not doe. Nay, why not rather so? since it's peremptorily said, He that beleeveth not shall bee damned; and, Without faith it is impos∣sible to please God, Marke 16. and Heb. 11. when it's no where said that, without faith it's impossible to bee baptized; or, hee that beleeveth not shall never bee baptized. Surely the Apostle adding that as an incouragement to the troubled Jaylour to beleeve, be∣cause of the saving of his house in such sort at least as wee mentio∣ned, it had beene little incouragement to suppose an outward way and meane of the good of his very servants by occasion thereof, and no such meane at all thereby to his owne children. For the Apo∣stle speaketh as supposing even that also: children being most usu∣ally supposed to bee included in that notion of the house: and if hee had none, yet the Apostles speech reacheth them as if hee had them. Some will say, the children might bee elected and that might comfort him: or they might bee included amongst the re∣deemed by Christ. Yea, but these are all secrets, here is nothing visibly to comfort him, in respect of any instrumentall meanes of their good; as was intimated in the case of the servants. And they are revealed, not secret things which beleevers as such must looke to in respect of their children, Deut. 29. Nor is it expresly said that the Jaylours house beleeved before they were baptized, but af∣terwards; and suppose they did so before, yet it followeth not that what is applicable to the adult persons in the house, scil. that joy of faith, must exclude the children of the house from baptisme, whereof they were capable; no more then when it's said, Deut. 12. 7. that they and their housholds were to eate before the Lord and to rejoyce in all they put their hands to, &c. because therefore their little children could not so actually expresse joy in what they put their hand unto, therefore they were none of the houshold which did eate before the Lord. Anabaptists would not like this arguing: which urge the joynt communion of the Jewish chil∣dren

in all sorts of Church ordinances. Suppose a mans hous∣hold, men, women and children, all diseased and cured at the Bath, and afterwards the houshold expresseth their joy for it by leaping and dancing for joy; and it bee said, such a man, hee and all his were washed at such a Bath, and hee and his whole houshold af∣terwards even danced for joy: None will say, that because his lit∣tle ones could not so leape for joy, and are excluded from the notion of the [whole houshold] in this latter, therefore they were not in the account of [all his] in the former. Who will say that Jacob carried not the little children in his family to Bethel, from that imminent danger to his house, because that the houshold at Bethel are said to bee such which had their strange gods, but up∣on his motion they put them away, which is not applicable to little ones, Gen. 34. 30. with Chap. 35. 1, 2, 3, 4. Sure I am it's most usuall in Scripture in mentioning this and that as done in or to the house, when speaking of such things which are applicable to Infants, to intend them therein, albeit not expressed, as Gen. 30. 30. and 45. 11. 18. with 19. Exod. 1. 1. 1 Sam. 27. 3. Prov. 31. 15. Luke 12. 42. It would bee too much to cite the many Scriptures which speake this; nay the Scripture oft-times in such things under the notion of house intendeth, if not onely, yet chiefly the children in it, as 1 Sam. 20. 15. and 2 Sam. 9. 9. 1 King. 17. 12, 13. 15. compared, Psal. 127. 1. 3. Prov. 12. 7. Esay 31. 2. Hos. 1. 4. Hab. 2. 9, 10. 1 Tim. 3. 4, 5. and 5. 4. 8. compared, also verse 14. 2 Tim. 1. 16. And sometimes againe when some parts of the fami∣ly are expresly instanced in, and children not withall mentioned: yet they are included and intended, as Gen. 14. 16. And there is more reason to conceive the same in cases of this nature; since the children are the ordinary instruments as to perpetuate and conti∣nue and hold up the house in naturall and civill respects, so in re∣ligious and Church respects also; they are builders of the house both wayes, as the Hebrew radix [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] from whence the word used for sonnes and daughters commeth, doth signifie; whence al∣so that phrase of Gods building the women houses, Exodus 1. 21. Yea the covenant expressions of seed, and seed in their generations, doe more directly reach them, as such; then either wives or ser∣vants as such, Gen. 17. 7. Deut. 30. 6. Esay 59. 20, 21. compared with Rom. 11. 26, 27. Esay 65. 23. Thus much for further clea∣ring of that, so much questioned by some, how children are in∣cluded in that notion of house and families, and if so the cove∣nant

made, Jerem. 31. 1. in reference to these times, reacheth them as instated, at least externally and Ecclesiastically therein: as much appeares too from Ezek. 16. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. that live-making co∣venant and not that killing letter and ministration of condemna∣tion which was againe and againe made to the fathers long before, yet was it made with reference to those Jewes, in Ezekiels time; for in those covenanting fathers of old, hee said to that Jerusalem then, Live: as in the same fathers hee had said to the Israelites of old, Live: the same mercy and truth ingaged to Abraham and Jacob, did God both sweare to other Jew fathers of families, and bound himselfe to performe to those of their loines in Micahs dayes long after, Mica. 7. 20. neither was it other then the covenant of grace, thus ingaged: even such a covenant wherein pardon of sinnes and subduing iniquities, &c. was, at least externally, made over to them, and therefore pleaded there for that end, vers. 18, 19. that cove∣nant which God made in Bethel, Gen. 35. 9. to 16. hee spake it not barely to, but with them, or covenanted it with them, in Hoseahs time which were of the posteritie of Jacob, Hos. 12. 4. God found him in Bethel and there hee spake [with us.] As much might be said of that, 2 Sam. 23. 4, 5. the covenant was made with David the father: yet in reference to his house or children, whence it was that his faith, as a beleeving father of his family, was the evidence of things not seene. Hee beleeveth that whatever his house bee at present, yet it shall excell in grace, both of Gods feare and justice, Vers. 3. as in the glory of government, &c. nor was this other then a covenant of grace here mentioned, since it had not else been to him as all his desire and salvation; whence it was that in sad∣dest times this covenant was pleaded by the Prophets, in behalfe of Davids posteritie, Psal. 89. vers. 38, 39. 49. 50. see more, vers. 20. 28. and so on: if the parents and the children both may thus act forth, and must in the covenant so made, it's a signe parents and children were joyntly interested therein. And so I come to instance as well in such as de facto have done so, as to shew, de jure they should doe it; to let passe Davids example here, the instance of our grandmother Eve is past exception: her sonne Cain being discovenanted and discharged hee and his, and Abel slaine, shee beleeved the promise of God, Gen. 3. 15. at first made to her: and when infant Seth was borne, shee beleeved that God had for his covenant sake lookt on her in that covenant babe: and therefore as soone as borne, she calls his name Seth: for saith shee

God hath appointed mee another seed in stead of Abel whom Cain slew, Gen. 4. 25. shee spake not thus, in reference to him, as a meere naturall babe borne of her as a sinfull woman, but as of a Covenant and Church seed, therefore comparing him to Abel, not to Cain: and calls him by such a name as signified her faith touch∣ing the Covenant estate of this babe, even whilst a very babe; nor did shee faile in her faith therein as appeares by the sequell, vers. 26. whence the Church seed continued in his loynes, externally at least, albeit much degenerating, as that distinction of sonnes of God and daughters of men doth shew, Gen. 6. 1, 2. And as Eve beleeved this way, so did Lamech, Gen. 5. 28, 29. as soone as Noah was borne, hee from saith in that promise of God, Gen. 3. 15. gave the babe that name of Noah; beleeved that that child should bee a root, as it were, to the Church, albeit that corrupt world were to bee destroyed. Another example of the Saints faith touch∣ing their childrens federall estate, see in Psal. 102. 25, 26, 27. with Heb. 1. 10, 11, 12. which referred unto Christ as in whom they pleaded, and expected this touching their children. And it's evi∣dent, that those Saints did expresse their faith in Christ, touching their children and seeds being established before him, nor did they exercise their faith touching the vanishing temporall good of their children barely, vers 25, 26. but in reference to induring mer∣cies of Christ to them, lasting when heaven and earth should dissolve. Now did they take the rise of this their faith from possi∣bilities of election or redemption without foothold from the co∣venant? verily no, they ought not to ground their faith on any thing but God his revealed will touching themselves or theirs, Deut. 29. 29. the Covenant and promise, is that which faith in its acts of beleeving, doth build, and rest upon, and faith, albeit it must goe as farre, yet no further that way then the word of faith, Rom. 10. 8. secrets of possibilities of election, and redemption of the children would not, might not, have caused in them, such a con∣clusive apprehension of faith, but the revealed covenant, and te∣stament, and will of Gods grace in Christ, election and redemp∣tion, though things which faith beleeveth, yet not grounds in themselves considered without reference to the covenant revealed of any mans faith touching himselfe or others, as being secrets; It's not the election of faith, but the word of faith, nor beleefe of election as such: for as such it's a secre•• act of God: hid within himselfe; but the beleefe of the truth, or revealed promise. Ano∣ther

argument of the federall interest of beleevers Infants to bee Gospell, and therefore of perpetuall validitie, now as well as at any time, may be, in that it was held forth as Gospel in the be∣ginning of the world, and so will bee in the purer times of the Gospell, towards the very end of the world, and therefore it's Gospell to us now. The consequence is evident, both from the everlastingnesse of the Gospell, and covenant of grace, of which this was, and will bee made a branch, which covenant of grace is Gospell, Heb. 13. 20. Revel. 14. 6. and from the essentiall same∣nesse, and onenesse of the covenant of grace from the beginning of the world to the end: for so farre forth as any thing partaketh of everlastingnesse, it partaketh so farre of immutabilitie. Now the covenant is not in nature the same, if the covenant, the confederate persons are not specifically the same, the covenant in the nature of it supposing God as one partie, and such or such a sort of persons as other parties betwixt whom that covenant is drawn, and made; if it were supposable that there were not the same God covenan∣ting with man, or not the same sorts of persons, specifically accep∣ted of by God into termes of covenant grace with him, the cove∣nant were not in nature the same. Albeit it bee not shut up in fa∣milies, as of old in Adams, Seths, Enoshes, Kenans, Mahaleels, Jareds, Enochs, Methuselahs, Lamechs, Noahs, &c. or in the posteritie of Abraham, Isaac, & Jacob, in respect of Church interest in, and admi∣nistration of it, but inlarged to all the families of Gospeld per∣sons, yet if the persons admitted to covenant, bee not specifically the same, even that sort of inadult, as well as adult persons, whe∣ther male or female, bond or free, then is not the covenant in na∣ture the same. Now to prove the proposition in both its branches; and first that it was held forth as Gospell, that the species of the Infants of beleevers in Church-estate were taken into the verge of the covenant of grace, Gen. 3. 15. sheweth. Adam and Eve were eyed by God, as a seminall visible Church, by whom, as well the Church, as the world was to bee built up, and God, that he might especially glorifie his grace, even in the weakest, mentioneth Eve as one, touching whom, hee first expressed his revealed minde of grace to her, and her seed, not intending meerely the principall seed Christ, in and by whom it was ratified, and fulfilled, but her Church seed whom the same promise also did comprehend toge∣gether with Eve, in whose hearing, God uttered these things to the Serpent. And hence Eve, by faith did thus interpret the scope

of that promise, as made in refernce to her Infant Church seed, as was Seth, as before wee proved, Gen. 4. 25, 26. And the opposi∣tion sheweth what kind of seed the promise reached, scil. Infant, as well as adult seed, the Serpents seed being as well the least Snake, &c. as the most venemous, and overgrowne; and the antipathie being naturall and forcible betweene even little children, and any sort of Serpents, as is evident, this then was held out as Gospel, even in the beginning of the visible Church and world: hence al∣so in the beginning of the renewed world, as I may call it, after the flood, the same doctrine is implicitely held forth, Gen. 9. in the opposition of the servill condition of Canaan, or 25, 26. to the future Church estate of Japhet, vers. 27. the one accursed parent and child to servitude, so that Chams babes as soone as borne were to bee slaves, but Japhet, parent and child, are prophetically devo∣ted to Church estate in Sems Tents, so that inchurched Japhets babes are actually within Sems tents, so soone as borne; As God would accurse collective Canaan, Noah prophesieth that God would inlarge, or cause collective Japhet to turne into the Tents of Sem; which interpreters expound of the joyning of the Gentiles un∣to the visible Church. Now visible Church estate, supposeth visible covenant estate, as is evident. The like opposition was allegorical∣ly made in the primitive times after Christs ascension, Gal. 4. 23, 24. betweene collective naturall Ishmael of the bond-woman in type, and collective legall Ishmael, in antitype: And collective naturall Isaac in type, and collective Evangelicall Isaac in antitype. In the types, the opposition is undeniably verified: that Ishmael with his children are expunged and cast out from a civill family priviledge, and portion in Abrahams house; and onely Isaac and his children are to have that civill and naturall priviledge of inheritance there∣in: The sonne of the bondwoman shall not bee heire with my son Isaac, Gen. 21. 10. And in the antitype, even persons formerly in Gods family the Church, if rejecting Christ and the covenant in him, and imbracing and adhering obstinately to any thing in a way inconsistent with him, such are cast out, and dischurched, they and theirs, as was verified in that legall Ierusalem and her children, even the body of the Jewes, adult and Infant. Thus far à typo ad veritatem, the argument is undeniable; and what reason then to make the other branch of the allegory dissonant onely, that there à typo ad veritatem, the argument holdeth not, that all inchur∣ched persons, which are gospelled, hold forth the free covenant in

reference to Gospel Church estate; are as Isaac and his posteritie, visibly priviledged, and instated in the Church heritage of the Lords family, the visible politicall Gospell Church? As in Isaac, Abrahams seed naturall is called, in point of civill heritage all of them, and as in the same Isaac, not Ishmael, Abrahams Church seed was called, and so all of them called to the externall fellowship, of covenant, and Church; and as in a restrained sense, Abrahams elect seed were called not in Ishmael but Isaac, Rom. 9. 7. so in the Ecclesiasticall Isaac, as I may say, in these dayes, the Church seed are counted, and not in pagans without the Church: and accor∣ding to ordinary dispensation, and in mans count, in the same line are Gods elect seed counted; all the individuall children in the former: that species of Church children, and none other in the sense mentioned, are of the latter account.

But to hasten to the latter branch, that the same doctrine is held forth as Gospell to bee dispensed and fulfilled in the purer times of the Gospell, towards the latter end of the world, that Esay 56. 20. is a promise referring to the purer times of the Gospel Church, and probably to the times of the comming in of the Jewes, vers. 17, 18, 19. when albeit there may bee some accursed ones, yet the Churches children though Infants of dayes, not allegoricall In∣fants in humilitie or by imitation of beleevers, &c. that sort of per∣sons too dying in Infancie, yet God promiseth they shall die in a holy maturitie of covenant grace, and blisse, as if elder by ma∣ny yeeres. When elder ones, some die ripened for the cause of God: the like singular account doth the Lord expresly make, as of pa∣rents in his Church, so of their off-spring, vers. 13. see Esay 61. 9. God promiseth not onely that the growne persons should bee had in account, but their seed and off-spring, not meaning it of allego∣ricall seed, amongst the Gentiles; for it's not said they shall bee knowne to convert Gentiles, &c. but their seed shall bee knowne among the Gentiles: yet not meaning pagan Gentiles, but rather inchurched Gospelled Gentiles, the Hebrew word for knowing, being used to signifie speciall owning of persons either by God, Jer. 24. 5. or by men, Psal. 142. 5. Ruth 2. 10. 19. Deut. 21. 17. and 1. 17. Prov. 24. 23. now none will say the worser part of the Gentiles would thus owne the members of the Church, or their children, with such choyce respect, but the better part rather of the Gentiles, they are then the persons acknowledging the seed, not the allegoricall seed acknowledged; so Ezek. 37. 20, 21. 27.

when all the scattered of the Tribes of Israel, and Judah shall be∣come as the two sticks joyned in one in Ecclesiasticall respects, at least, under the discipline of Christ, God in reference to that time re•…•… the old Charter of Abrahams covenant to bee a God to th•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉 which promise hee includeth their children, they being a•…•… their parents scattered among the heathen, vers. 21. and to bee gathered to their Land, and parts of the nations and king∣domes, as of old to bee then joyned, yea vers. 25. expresly their children, and childrens children are by covenant put under Christ as their Prince, with them is the covenant of peace made, and that of no temporall but of an everlasting nature, and all this in refe∣rence to Church estate and administration, whence that branch of the old Charter now actually renewed of setting his Tabernacle and Sanctuary in the midst of them, vers. 26, 27. and that in a very glorious and perspicuous manner, as persons thereto, ex confesso, to the very heathen, sanctified and sequestred by the Lord, vers. 28. the very same [they] which shall dwell in the Land are children with their parents, [their] Prince will David or Christ bee, with [them] is that everlasting covenant of peace, vers. 26. amongst [them] will Gods Sanctuary and Tabernacle by vertue of cove∣nant be placed, vers. 26, 27. [their] God will God bee, and [they] shall bee his people, or hee their covenant God, and they his cove∣nant people, vers. 27. and all this in reference to Church admini∣strations of Sanctuary and Tabernacle ordinances, as they are ca∣pable thereof, by which they shall become a visible Church or san∣ctified and sequestred people in the very view of the heathen, which cannot, nor doe not attend to gratious efficacies, but externall administrations, and dispensations and priviledges; and the like, see vers. 28. other places to like purpose might bee quoted, but I forbeare.

3. Argument, if the Infants and little ones of visibly beleeving parents in church estate before they can make any personall con∣fession or profession of faith in the Covenant, yet then are Abra∣hams Church seed, then is it Gospell that the promises belong to them; but the former is true, Ergo the latter. The major is in substance the Apostles, Gal. 3. 16. to Abraham and his seed are the promises made: the minor is proved; 1. In those of Abrahams loynes, in the elect seed. I should thinke it should not bee questi∣oned but yet it hath by some; that Infants while Infants and till beleevers are not in the covenant, &c. and by such other speeches

of our adversaries in this point, the covenant right not only of the individuall Infants of beleevers, but the covenant estates of that species, and sort of persons is wholly denied, and so since it's evi∣dent and acknowledged that some are elected of that sort, yet it's denied that they have part in the word of Gods Covenant, so that if they die in Infancie, as many of the choyce seed of Abraham and Isaac, and Jacob did, &c. yet that ordinary meanes of saving efficacie in all the saved elect is denyed them, contrary to that prin∣ciple, Rom. 9. 6. but more hereof anon: but Rom. 9. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. is so cleare for it, I wonder any deny it, Isaac and Jacob are made precedentiall instances of interest not onely of election, but of Gods calling unto the fellowship of his free covenant, without respect either to their desire, or indeavour of it personally, vers. 16. It was that God might shew, not barely in the act of his choosing of them in his secret counsell, but in the act of his co∣venanting grace likewise, that it was not of their workes but of him that called them unto that covenant estate: in the example of Jacob most fully; when God would shew the rise of that his cove∣nant grace to him the younger, that hee should have the prehemi∣nence, vers. 12. hee vers. 11. instanceth in the time when that was revealed, with so personall a reference to Jacob, even whilst in the wombe, and expresseth the forenamed cause as the reason why: and so God expresly mentioneth his covenant as to bee established with Isaac in Infancy, or with Isaac to bee borne the next yeare of Sarah, Gen. 17. 21. And hence when Isaac was growen, and was actually a beleever, hee hath indeed then more actuall benefit of his owne improvement of the covenant by faith, but hee did not then first enter into covenant, but hee had interest in the covenant before made to his father with reference to him; that being to be minded in covenant expressions uttered, the persons spoken unto, and understanding what is spoken: are not the onely covenanters ingaged, but aswell the persons spoken of with covenant reference in the declaring of the covenant; so in Gen. 17. 7. 21. and 21. 12. and 26. 3, 4. and 20. 13, 14. and Deut. 29. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, &c. Now that Isaac had such a former covenant interest appea∣reth in that, Gen. 26. 3. when God spake so expresly to him touch∣ing his covenant, hee saith not, I now make a covenant with thee, or sweare to do such and such things for thee, but I will performe the oath, which I sware to Abraham thy father, hee referreth him to a former grant and ingagement of grace to him, see verse 4, 5.

hee doth not retract any thing, but confirmeth in solemne wise the validitie of the former bond, and the like might bee said of all the rest of the elect seed: if all the elect seed were not involved in that covenant, Gen. 7. 7. then the Apostles reasoning should bee under∣mined, Rom. 9. 6, 7, 8. who is so farre from denying the elect seed to bee these choyce children of the promise, Gen. 17. 7. and 21. 12. that he maketh that choyce company of the children of the promise to bee the onely elect seed; now if all the elect seed bee included in that, Gen. 17. 7. and 21. 12. then since some of Abrahams and Isaacs seed died in Infancie, either none of those were elect and saved, which none dare avow, or if some bee supposed to bee saved and elect, then were they in Infancie, and as Infants of Abraham and Isaac, children of the promise; Sith the promise and covenant runs to them as Abrahams seed, not as elect, also supposing they were circumcised before they died, that was no seale to a blanke, albeit they being Infants had no actuall faith, &c. but rather a seale of the covenant of grace or promise, of which they most pro∣perly were children. Yea to all the rest which were in an Ecclesia∣sticall respect, children of the covenant: that injoyned circumcisi∣on was to be that his covenant or the visible Sacramentall signe and seale of the righteousnesse of faith, or the covenant of God hol∣ding the same forth, Gen. 17. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. Rom. 4. 11. and 10. 6, 7, 8. and Deut. 29. and 30. 6. 11. 12, 13, 14. compared. And what is true of them, of Abrahams and Isaacs loynes as Infants of Abraham and Isaac considered as beleeving, and inchurched, is true of the Infants of others, as beleevers and in church estate, the formalis natio of the interest of the Infants of the former, as such, is as valid in those of the latter, the formalis natio being the same in both, as also the covenant of grace in the essentialls thereof, is the same, and therefore Abram had then first his name changed to Abraham, and then first was called a father of nations, in re∣ference to this covenant of grace to bee made with him and his in this politicall Church way and latitude of Church interest, and dispensation thereof, as Gen. 17. 4, 5, 6, 7, &c. compared, and then first propounded as a father, and exemplar to other beleevers of other nations, Rom. 4. And albeit it were a name given him be∣fore hee was actually circumcised, yet it was not to intimate that there was no need of a visible seale to his children and seed, whe∣ther of his loynes or otherwise, for hee was a father aswell of those of the circumcision, Rom. 4. 11, 12. But to shew that hee was not a

father to those which were bound to bee circumcised onely, but withall, a father to the Gentiles, albeit neither circumcised by actu∣all taking away of the flesh of their foreskinne, nor yet bound thereto, vers. 12. It was not then spoken to evacuate the force of reasoning from right to the promise, as invested, or Church promise or covenant unto right to the seale, or to shew that albeit Gentile beleevers did not partake of the initiatory seale of the co∣venant, yet having the promise they therefore have the seale in Abraham their father, albeit they never are, nor may bee sealed in their persons; the Apostles discourse cleareth it to bee otherwise, his scope being not to infringe any Gospel right to the Gospell seale, but to take off any reasoning in point of justification from a∣ny work of the Law considered apart from Christ; as the five first verses evince: and because that of circumcision was chiefely glo∣ried in by the Jewes, hee taketh off any reasoning that way in op∣position to faith which is all in all rather, in point of justificati∣on, whether of Jewes or Gentiles; for which end Abrahams ex∣ample in the way, and manner of his justification is propounded, as verse 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. declare, as for the sealing of Abrahams be∣leevers children the Gentiles, in Abrahams sealing, if that were in∣tended, as much might have been affirmed of the beleevers Jewish children of Abraham, as they were such, and so the circumcising of such Jewes, at least, had been more then needed, so farre forth. Yea but the Jewes were commanded to be circumcised; true, and so were the Gentiles to be baptized: yea but they were to be circum∣cised, when Infants; yea, and when adult too, in case, as Joshua 5. and in that case at least many of them, being actuall beleevers, Jo∣shua 5. and 6. compared with Heb. 11. 30. might have pleaded ex∣emption, as being, quatenus beleever, circumcised in the circumci∣sion of their father Abraham. It was not then spoken at all to weaken the bond to an initiatory sealing of Gentiles, but to [that] initiatory sealing up of the covenant to them by circumcision of the foreskin of their flesh; thus much by the way in answer to what some thus object. But to returne to the proofe of that propounded, let us shew that even in the dayes since the time of the fathers before Christs time, such children mentioned were, are, and will be eyed by divine approbation as covenant and Church-seed of Abraham, God hath promised to blesse the inchurched nations in Abrahams seed Christ; behold Christ by an outward Symbole testifying that the little ones of inchurched visible beleevers are in Church account

such, witnesse that act of his, and his offence that any such should bee hindred from any approach to him, in the use of any meanes to attaine, at least externally, that blessing of him the pro∣mised seed, Luke 18. 15, 16. 7. with Marke 10. 16. hence in the pu∣rer dayes of the Gospel: It was of old prophesied that such chil∣dren should bee accounted the seed which the Lord hath blessed as∣well as their parents should come under that account, by the Gos∣pelled Gentiles, Esay 61. 9. yea God himselfe expresseth his account as of such parents so of their children, to be such Church and cove∣nant seed: both are under one account so far forth, Esay 65. 23. besides, that if such parents, suppose Jewes or Gentiles, be Abrahams spirituall seed, Anabaptists will grant, then are their children also; the parents being not meerely abstractively considered, the cove∣nant seed, Gen. 17. 7. but as in reference to their children with them, for the seed of Abraham to whom the covenant, Gen. 17. 7. is made, is the seed in their generations, which necessarily imply, and suppose as the parents generating, so the children begotten of them, the parents make not the generation alone, nor the chil∣dren alone, but joyntly considered together. Here Anabaptists sever the subject parties taken into the covenant consideration, they agree it's Abraham and his spirituall seed, but leave out that notation of the seed, scil. seed in their generations, the prose∣lyte gentiles in Abrahams house, they were not his carnall seed; why are they then sealed? but as they were rather Abrahams spiri∣tuall and Church seed. Yea but their babes also have the visible seale of Abrahams covenant, yet are they not his fleshly seed: nor yet are they his actuall beleeving seed, and yet have they the feale of Abrahams seed, surely then, in and with their parents they are Abrahams Church and spirituall seed. You will say, God com∣manded them to be sealed, and therefore sealed. Answ. Suppose it so, yet God commanded their circumcision to be on them, also his co∣venant or the Sacramentall signe of that his covenant sealed to A∣braham, & to his seed, in their generation, Gen. 17. 7. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. either then they which in one sense were not of his seed or loynes, v. 12. yet were of his covenant and Church seed, vers. 7. or else God solemnly enjoyned a seale to a blanke or a seale to no covenant of his: no other covenant being then in mention to bee sealed, by circumcision which was enjoyned to bee his covenant or the Sacra∣mentall signe of his covenant, vers. 11, 12, 13. Yea but they parta∣ked not of the covenant, many of them at least, in their Infancy.

Answ. If yee speake of saving actuall efficacy upon them, then neither did many others, no not of the elect seed which lived to maturitie of yeares, so partake of the covenant in their Infancy, nor doth that hinder but that circumcision in the nature of it, and in the institution of it, was a visible seale of the covenant of grace, that which Moses phraseth touching circumcision, that it was a signe of the covenant, Paul explaineth, that it was a seale of the righteousnesse of faith; scil. not so much, subjective as objective, Rom. 4. The baptisme of Simon Magus was in the nature of it, and in Gods institution, a visible seale of the most spirituall part of the covenant, and yet did not Iscariot and Magus partake of the spirituall part of the Covenant. It is peculiar to the elect to bee in the covenant, in respect of participation of the saving efficacy of it, Rom. 9. 6, 7, 8. But it is common to Iscariot, and reprobates, adult or Infants, to bee externally in the covenant in the face of the Church; as verse 4. of which before. But as for the visible seale it selfe, whether to elect, or reprobate, to such as partake of the spirituall good of the covenant, or not; this vari∣eth not, nor multiplyeth, nor nullifieth the nature of the seale. The nature of it depends on God the author, not upon the sea∣led persons worthinesse, or unworthinesse, sex or age. Circum∣cision was not covenants, but one and the same covenant, ex na∣tura rei, nor was it a part, but the covenant, even the whole co∣venant Sacramentally, to elect or reprobate Infant or adult cir∣cumcised. The commandement of God did not put, or cause any difference, but injoyned it all equally to all sorts. The cove∣nant sealed was but one, not two covenants: albeit, God did hold forth varietie of covenant blessings, as doth the Gospell; some more common to all, and some more peculiar to a few; and so the seale it selfe was to Infant and adult, elect or repro∣bate, but one in nature: albeit in use and efficacy it were various, according as the Spirit of God and faith made thereof improve∣ment, or not.

To adde one word more in way of proofe, that Gentile-inchur∣ched-beleevers Infants they are the seed of Abraham: this being wholly denyed by Anabaptists. If I prove that this species or sort of persons, are Abrahams spirituall seed, without personall actu∣all faith, by which onely they say persons come to bee Abrahams seed, quoting for it Gal. 3. 7. 6. 9. 16. 27, 28, 29. it sufficeth. Now the place to mee is full proofe thereof: whole Christ mysticall,

in all the parts of his body, the Apostle maketh it to bee the seed of Abraham, but that sort of persons the Infants of beleevers are a part of Christ mysticall, or Christ considered with his body the Church, as Christ is in Gal. 3. and 1 Cor. 12. 12. compared, as hath beene proved, Ergo that sort of persons as well that other of actuall beleevers are Abrahams spirituall seed. And here suppo∣sing according to them, that Christ is considered there as with his body, the invisible Church; it maketh still more for what I am to prove: since, if that sort of persons bee not of the invisible Church whereof Christ is head, there can none of that sort, not beleevers children at all bee saved; since out of the invisible Church is no salvation at all, as some of the most judicious of our oppo∣sites doe speake, in way of answer to what is brought by our friends, that extra ecclesiam non est salus, that is, say such, extra ec∣clesiam invisibilem, non visibilem. But wee will goe yet further, and take this as meant of Christ considered with his body the visible Church, according as formerly it was proved to bee considerable: And I say, to exelude that sort of persons, scil. beleevers infants, from being a part of the visible Church in generall: is to exclude them from any ordinary state and way of salvation, Nay I will go further, and say; that for any to suppose all the individuall In∣fants and each of them which come of such inchurched parents, not to bee also parts of this body of Christ the visible Church, and consequently, not to bee Abrahams spirituall seed, is to exclude them from a state and way of salvation, in respect to the ordinary course thereof, and so to leave them all under the consideration of such a way to bee saved in, as is onely extraordinary: ordinarily they are not to bee supposed to bee saved, as at least it is not to be supposed, that ordinarily or that in any ordinary way, any Pa∣gans, or Turkes, out of the visible Church, or any in and of Rome, as Tridentine, and Antichristian, should bee saved: yet God may, and sometimes doth, and will have some soules brought on to him thence, and even from amongst Mahumetans, &c. but all will yeeld I suppose that this is an extraordinary case: & so crosseth not that rule, that without even the visible Church there is no salva∣tion; scil. taking the maxime in reference to ordinary times, and withall to the ordinary course and way of attaining unto salva∣tion.

Such then as exclude all Infants of beleevers, one or other from the notion of Abrahams spirituall seede, from Covenant and

Church estate, they put them in the Pagan Gentiles estate, of which Paul speakes, who being they and theirs strangers from the promise and covenants, and from the visible Church: they place them in that respect in an estate of persons that are without God in the world, and so under the devill the God of the world, and in an hopelesse estate; neither they nor any for them, can have any grounded hope of them, they are without hope, in regard at least of any ordinary way or meane of salvation, Ephes. 2. 11, 12. Nor let it seeme grievous that our friends and brethren in the Lord, of name and worth in the Church, have, as it seemeth, urged, that in case of such an exclusion of beleevers children, they are made as Turkes or Indians so farre forth, in regard that being not in covenant, nor Church estate, the Apostle truely states such persons cases, they are without hope, and without God in the world. Hee maketh no distinction of potentia remota & propinqua, in that case. Yea but hee speakes of Pagan parents, wee of Christian, and there is not the same reason of the childrens estate which are of the one, as of the other. Tell me the difference supposing them actually excluded from covenant and Church estate. It is not in their parents prayers, or in the Churches nakedly considered, without reference to any covenant or Church estate of theirs: for they pray as well for Indians, &c. as for them. Nor is it barely in their instruction, and education of them: for if they have any Indian or Black more bond servants in their house, they must in∣struct both them and their children in Gods feare as they are ca∣pable thereof. Yea but for the one their prayers and instructions, come from a nearer bond, and are carried on with more strength, then in the other: grant that, yet this is but more and lesse, and they vary no species of any formall reason of difference; yea but they may beleeve more for the one then for the other: and why so? because usually the one sort prove religious, when the other is not usuall. This confirmeth what I am to prove, that God is a co∣venant God to the children of his people, and Church; because, al∣beit sometimes some prove vile enough, yet usually they prove religious and pious: and God speakes of things as they more fre∣quently prove. Yea I demand, what is the ordinary revealed in∣strumentall meanes of the saving efficacy which is upon any chil∣dren of Gods people and Church, especially supposing they die very young: is it not the word of Gods covenant as hath beene often said from Rom. 9. 6. and Eph. 5. 25, 26. Yea I would know

whether if beleevers have hope, to take hope most properly, con∣cerning their childrens good, or glorious resurrection by Christ, if they die in Infancy, have they other ground then that of Gods being a God to them? This is Christs demonstration in that case: Luke 20. 36, 37, 38. Is it any other then Scripture hope or com∣fort that way, or must they sorrow as persons without hope? If they draw any waters with joy, Esay 12. 3. must it not bee out of the wells of salvation, the promises? not other promises which concerne not the case, they will not helpe at such a dead lift, but promises pertinent to the case of their children. Yea can they have such hope without faith, or can they have well-grounded faith where they have not a word of faith for it? and when they can∣not beleeve that God should bee so much as externally, much lesse internally and savingly a covenant God to them? or can they con∣jecture that ever any were saved ordinarily, if at all, touching whom God never made any promise, neither in respect of inter∣nall and saving, no nor so much as in respect of externall right therein.

I conclude then, that such children are Abrahams spirituall seed, and that therefore the promises belong to them at least exter∣nally. And so much for proofe of this seventh conclusion, wherein I have been the longer, in that it is the very hinge of the con∣troversie.

It is not then the Gospell of any mortall man deriving its rise from Zwinglius, or any such sinfull sonne of man, albeit pretious in the sight of God and his Saints; nor is it any other Gospel which may bee anathematized, I should feare to bee anathemati∣zed of God if I said so. It's Gospel that beleevers are Abrahams seed, Gal. 3. 6, 7, 8, 9, &c. true but that is not all, and onely the Gos∣pell: this part of the Gospell; their childrens covenant estate, at least ecclesiastically, this is Gospell too, Rom. 10. 6, 7, 8, compared with Deut. 29. and 30. as before: yea the rather is this Gospell, be∣cause the other is: one dependeth and followeth upon the other as hath beene shewed.

SECT. XI.

1 Object. BY what hath been now said, answer is ready to what I. S. objecteth. That if Infants be visibly in the covenant of grace, then at one and the same time one may be visi∣bly under grace, and yet as Ephes. 2. under wrath by nature, and so

by nature bee under two contrary covenants of workes, and of grace. Mr. B. also hath a like objection.

I answer, they are not under two such contrary estates by na∣ture, taken in the same sense: but by nature taken in a diverse sense, they may: take nature for corrupt sinfull nature, and so Paul a Jew and all other Jewes, or Gentiles, [Wee saith Paul] are by na∣ture children of wrath. But take nature for a birth estate of co∣venant-Ancestors: and so Paul and others of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, were not sinners or strangers from the covenant of grace, as were those of the Gentiles; but they were Jewes by nature, in∣churched persons. And in their confessing parents confessors and professors, as the word Jew is used, Rom. 2. 9. 28. and Est. 8. 17. Rev. 3. 7. they became Jewes, that is, joyned in a Church estate, &c. sinners they were in that sense, they had by sinfull nature sinne in them, but sinners in opposition to a Jew, or Church and co∣venant estate, at least externally they were not: not Jewes barely, scil. persons of that nation, without further Ecclesiasticall respect, to the administration of the covenant: for then the notion of sin∣ners of the Gentiles, had been unsuitably added; It had sufficed to have said, wee that are Jewes by nature, and not Gentiles, but Jewes by nature rather as above; the elect seed of Abraham of which yet many died in infancy, they were the choyce children of that promise, Gen. 17. 7. with Rom. 9. 7, 8, 9. yet they were also by nature children of wrath. Isaac was visibly the child of the pro∣mise in Infancy borne by promise: interested in the promise, expresly made with reference to him, as soone as borne actually; as before intentionally; yet also by nature, as a sonne of Adam, a child of wrath; but as a sonne of covenant-Abraham, a child of promise. The like may be said of David in the former sense conceived in sinne, Psal. 51. in the latter a child of promise: So of the other Infants of their loynes, whence injoyned whilst Infants to bee sealed with the seale of Abrahams covenant. Yea some of our opposites grant, yea urge it as a reason against the exposition of 1 Cor. 7. 14. which some give thereof: that

children of parents whereof one was not matrimonially sanctified to the other, but came together unchastly, as Pharez and Zara, of Judah and Thamar, Jephtah of Gilead, and many others, were within the covenant of saving grace, and Church priviledges.

Now the author intended not this thus; that they came into the covenant of grace, when they were growne, and came actually

to beleeve: for then there were no colour of argument against Paedobaptists reasoning from 1 Cor. 7. touching such Infants co∣venant estate: and that annexed, that they were in the covenant of saving grace, and Church priviledges, sheweth that to bee his meaning; since all confesse that the Jewes children, did whilst Infants partake of the initiatory Church seale of circumcision, which the author elsewhere counteth their priviledge, saying, that

they had that priviledge to bee reckones in the outward admi∣nistrations, as branches of the Olive by their birth, by vertue of God his appointment, &c.

albeit the author I suppose forgate himselfe: speaking of branches by nature, saith, that it seemeth to him to import, not that the Jewes were in the covenant of grace by nature, but that they had this priviledge to bee reckoned in the outward administration, as branches of the Olive by their birth, &c. when yet even those illegitimately born of Jewes mentioned, are confessed to bee in the covenant of saving grace, as well as Church priviledges, which as was said, must bee spoken of them, as Infants borne of such parents, or else it is not any argument against them, which plead for birth federall holinesse from 1 Cor. 7. 14. So then here are persons by nature children of wrath, but by priviledged nature and birth in the covenant of saving grace.

2 Object. If Infants, saith I. S. be in the covenant of grace, and borne so, then such Infants were borne in the covenant, and ne∣ver out. And besides Gods covenant of saving grace, being abso∣lute and undertaking to give▪ saving grace to such as are in co∣venant with him: all such must bee saved, unlesse God faile of his truth.

Answ. 1. That covenant of grace, as I. S. acknowledgeth it to bee mentioned, Deut. 29. it was made with little ones then un∣borne intentionally, vers. 14, 15. as well as with those then present actually: So that when they were borne, they were born in that co∣venant and never out: as much may bee said of the Infant elect seed, or children of the promise dying Infants, they were borne so and never out of that estate after they were actually existent; yea the rest were all girded in the covenant, Jer. 13.

2. Gods covenant did not barely offer, or promise to covenant, but made a covenant a covenant and an oath with them that day, Deut. 29. 12, 13, 14, 15. and amongst other promises ingaged him∣selfe to circumcise their heart, Chap. 36. 6. yet were not all in heart circumcised, and yet the promise of God failed not; being in the

generall propounded to them conditionally, and not as it is said here absolutely; at least as it had reference to them all in common. The word of promise tooke not effect in as many of the Jewes, to whom the covenant promises externally belonged, yet it follow∣ed not, that therefore it took no effect at all, and that God was un∣faithfull: for it tooke effect in others, Rom. 3. 3. and 9. 6, 7, 8. so here.

3. This argument supposeth, that one cannot bee within the covenant of saving grace externally, but they must bee in a saving estate, the contrary whereto appeareth, Conclus. 3. And it's said of sundry illegitimate Jewish children, that they were within the covenant of saving grace, namely externally: for the author can∣not meane other. And yet of all such who will say, they were all in a saving estate? even Esaus birthright was more then right to Isaacs temporall estate, as borne of Isaac: why else doth the Apo∣stle apply Esaus example of selling his birthright, in such sort, as Heb. 12. 15, 16, 17. hee propoundeth his example to deterre the Hebrewes which were in Church estate, Heb. 10. 25. and 12. 17, 18. from the mischiefe of falling short of the grace of God, not of meere temporall blessings; nay expresly, the thing hee fell short of as his birth heritage, as Isaacs first borne, is said to bee the bles∣sing indefinitely, even Abrahams blessing to his seed, the same bles∣sing, whereof hee rejecting his externall right, Jacob his younger brother came to possesse: which was a Church blessing as well as naturall and civill, Gen. 28. 3, 4. as for temporall blessings he had store of them notwithstanding, nor was Isaacs trembling, when hee saw how strangely God had ordered the blessing of the first borne to Jacob the younger sonne, Gen. 27. occasioned from a bare disappointing him of the externall right to temporalls, but with∣all to spiritualls, and ecclesiasticall good also, whence the Apo∣stle calleth him for his contempt, a prophane person, Heb. 12.

3 Object. But saith I. S. the covenant of grace being a covenant, there must be mutuall agreement betwixt the covenanters, and so knowledge, and consideration of the termes thereof, and restipula∣tion, as in mens covenants. Hen. Den, a little differently, maketh a necessitie of the persons entring into covenant with God, scil. by faith, unto covenant right, and not meerely Gods entring into co∣venant with the creature, for so hee entred into covenant with the beasts, &c. Gen. 9. 10.

Answ. To which I answer, the covenant of grace is as well a testament, 1 Cor. 11. Heb. 9. Now a testament may bee, and useth

to bee made in reference to little ones without knowledge; nor doe any use to deny a childs right in the testators will, because it was taken in amongst other legacies in the bequeathed legacies, be∣fore it understood the same, nor will it bee denyed in the case of the elect seed, the choyce parties in Gods covenant, Gen. 17. that they many of them dying Infants, without actuall knowledge, were not therefore children of the promises, or that that solemne co∣venant, Deut. 29. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15. and 30. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, &c. with that people, wherein conditions also were propounded on their parts, that therefore the covenant was not made betwixt the little ones there present, because they neither understood nor could actually subscribe to the conditions, the contrary being there expressed: no rather it sufficed, that the childrens covenant estate being the parents priviledge, whence the incouragement to Abra∣ham to walke with God, Gen. 17. 1, &c. From that amongst other incouragements, that God would become his seeds God also, &c. vers. 7. and so, Deut. 29. and 30. amongst other incouragements to the parents that is one, vers. 6. that God will doe thus for their seed also: yea the children being reckoned as in their parents, as Levi payd tithes in Abraham, &c. yea the externall avouching in a co∣venant way of God, being owned as the childrens, Deut. 26. 16, 17. yea the childrens circumcision being as well the covenant dutie: Whence called the covenant, or the covenant parties, cove∣nant part or dutie as well as the token of Gods covenant, Gen. 9. 7. 9, 10, 11. they restipulate in their parents knowing acceptance of the covenant, and professed owning of it upon the covenant termes, as well on their childrens part as their owne, and they restipulate in a passive reception of the covenant condition, and bond to after imitation of their father Abrahams faith and obedience; to which purpose I. S. confessed circumcision was annexed to the covenant. Yea the bastard children of Iudah, and Gilead and others, are ac∣knowledged to bee in the covenant of saving grace, which yet could not personally restipulate, in a way of actuall knowledge or faith, or the like.

4 Obj. Your doctrine would make God the author of sin, partly in causing persons to beleeve untruths: partly in pro∣mising life to the wicked, and so keeping of him from returning. Besides, it will make every beleever an Abraham, and make Christs body to consist of dead members, and even confound the world and the Church as if one.

Answ. To the first wee require the parents in reference to the Church and covenant estate of their children to make confession of their faith in the covenant of God as made with them, and their seed indefinitely according as the termes of the covenant are, and being the termes of the covenant, it's no untruth or sinne to be∣leeve it, in foro dei, or confesse that faith in foro Ecclesiae; which of the beleevers children is elect or saved, or not, it's to us a secret, and our doctrine requireth them to beleeve revealed things, as are those indefinite words of the covenant, leaving secrets to the Lord; and no other was Moses doctrine, having propounded the cove∣nant of God as with parents and children, and being yet further to inlarge, hee joyneth the former and latter part of his speech with that item, that secret things belong to God, but things revealed, scil. touching this his mind of grace indefinitely, these are for us, and for our children. And for further taking off of this cavill to∣gether with the second, I answer, when some say that even bastard children were in the covenant of saving grace, and even I. S. which objecteth the same confesseth that God promiseth to bee a God or to fulfill his promises: even such as Luke 1. 74, 75, &c. and gave them circumcision to confirme the same on both seeds, requiring them to walke in the footsteps of Abrahams faith, &c. I demand, were the carnall seed saved? I. S. will not say so, yet God promised and gave circumcision as a seale, to that end that hee would bee their God, requiring them to beleeve, &c. did not then God faile in his promise, or in requiring them to beleeve an untruth? surely no, so when they were on that ground according to I. S. to walke in the footsteps of Abrahams obedience, and circumcision of heart was required of them, did not this rather further, then hinder their repentance? is it not the Apostles argument to the Jewes to prevaile with them to repent? Repent, for the promise is to you, &c. Act. 2. 38, 39. Nay doth not our doctrine holding forth the interest at least externall of such in covenant thereby hold forth as well an externall interest in that which is in its self a most effectuall meanes to further their saving good, and to bee as a seed of regeneration, and faith, &c. unto them, 1 Pet. 1. to the end, Ephes. 5. 25, 26. Rom. 9. 6. and doe not our opposites rather block up so farre the ordinary way, and debarre beleevers children from the ordinary meanes of their chiefe good, by denying them interest in the word of promise, the which is such a meanes? Nor doe wee by our do∣ctrine make every beleever an Abraham, wee confesse many things

in Abrahams covenant, Gen. 17. to bee more personall, and some more peculiar to those times, yet this no way infringeth the co∣venant right of Abrahams spirituall seed, on the samenesse of that covenant with us in the essentialls of it: then there was such a par∣ticular land promised to him and his; the Gospel holdeth forth temporall mercies to us as well as spirituall, 1 Tim. 4. 8. 1 Cor. 3. end, 2 Cor. 1. 20. 1 Pet. 3. 10, 11, 12. albeit not such a particular land; so the multiplying of Abraham, &c. was of such a peculiar consideration, yet that hinders not onenesse of the covenant, now: that the promise made with Abraham long before the Law should not be to his spirituall seed, our opposites themselves being Judges, the like may bee said of the promise of blessing all nations in his seed, &c. Gal. 3. 8. yet vers. 16, 17. the promises are to the whole seed, so God saith to Abraham, I will make thee a father of many nations, Gen. 17. 4, 5. hee never said so to Isaac or Jacob, &c. what, were not they therefore children of the promise and heires of the covenant of Abraham, that God will become a God as to them, so to their seed? none will say so, or in that they were fathers of the covenant to their posteritie, Rom. 11. 16. 28. that therefore they were Abrahams, or that those Jewes assembled, Deut. 29. to whom God maketh that promise of circumcising their seed, Deut. 30. 6. as one part of his covenant, Deut. 29. 14. so Ezek. 37. 25, 26, 27, 28. God will bee a God to those mentioned parents and chil∣dren, so is Jesse a covenant root to David, Esay 11. 1. yet are not these therefore made Abrahams, no more are inchurched beleevers, by any doctrine of ours. Nor doe wee by our doctrine make Christs body such a body, or make such confusion of world and Church thereby, no more then did God of old, which yet ordai∣ned the Jewes children to bee his, and his Church covenant chil∣dren, Ezek. 16. 20, 21, 23. and how wee distinguish Church and world, let our practise judge and our doctrine which holds forth the covenant of grace as invested with Church covenant, if not explicit, yet implicit, to distinguish the politicall Church and its members from all others.

5 Object. Some in a more Familisticall way object against our proofes as most what in the old Testament, which they make ac∣count are not valid, unlesse the same things were come over in the new.

Answ. 1. Wee have aswell brought grounds of these conclusions touching Gen. 17. from the new Testament. Secondly, Christ

came not to evacuate the morall Law in the old Testament, no not in a title of it, but to fulfill it, and by expounding it in the very spirit of it to establish it, Matth. 5. 17. to the end; and the Law it selfe is established through faith, Rom. 3. 31. and it's spirituall, not carnall, Rom. 7. 14. and what then is the Gospel of which this point in question is part as was shewed, or would Christ make void a title of the Gospel in the old Testament, as if in, and of it selfe not valid unlesse come over againe in the new? of what force then would many pretious promises bee, in the old Testament ex∣pressed, but never againe expressed in the new, as Esay 12. 3. Ezek. 36. 26. and such like?

Thirdly, if such proofes are not valid, why keepe wee a weekely Sabbath, as the Lords day is called, Matth. 24. 20? why keepe wee solemne thanksgiving dayes, &c? why doe the Apostles referre us for proofe even of the new covenant, Heb. 8. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, &c. to what God saith, scil. in the old Testament, as in Jerem. 31. or why doth Christ fetch his usuall proofes of the maine matters of faith thence, John 5. 46, 47. Luke 24. 44, 45, 46? see more in such way of proofes, Acts 10. 43. and 28. 23. Rom. 1. 16, 17. Rom. 4. 6, 7, 8. and 10. 14. and 16. 16. besides many other like which the Apostles urge this way.

Fourthly, if such proofes bee invalid, wee must blot out such charges and testimonies touching their perfection and validitie, as Psal. 19. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. spoken before the new Testament was, and yet so perfect was it, and so efficacious, and pretious: so John 5. 39. 46, 47. and Rom. 10, 6, 7, 8. and Luke 16. 29. 31. 2 Tim. 3. 15, 16. Paul makes account the Scriptures, scil. of the old Testament little else being then written, were of sufficiencie to all uses, where∣of a Minister stood in need to make of the word, as Cartwright on the place expounds it, and 2 Pet. 1. 1. 19, 20, 21. speaking of Scripture by men inspired of old, those of the old Testament: Peter maketh them more valid then extraordinary voyces from heaven, touching Christ, &c. and chargeth them to be in perpetuall request with the Saints, see Ames and others in locum. If Hen. Den. within his first part of Antichrist unmasked, had kept to his testimony which hee brings from 2 Pet. 1. 19, 20, 21. against the argument used by Dr. Featly taken from the harmony of confessions, bee had never so miscarried, as in his second part, page 25. as to say, this is the Pro∣phets, to declare repentance as a meanes of remission, Ezek. 18. 21. 22. but this is not the Gospell, &c. And the Law and the Prophets

teach is to repent [for] remission, but the Gospel, repent [unto] remission, &c. to let passe his abuse of the testimonies he alludeth to, this I observe that Prophets, with him, of the old Testament are set in opposition to Gospell as if inconsistent with it, the absurditie of which is apparent enough in the very naming it.

Fifthly, if they bee invalid unlesse come over in the new Testa∣ment, then must all the Saints question their faith and comfort which was occasioned more immediatly from grounds in the old Testament, not eying at that present, nor possibly afterwards, this or that like passage in the new, touching the discovery of their good estate, or otherwise of their spirituall support, contrary to Rom. 15. 4. which Scriptures then mentioned, were of the old Te∣stament.

Sixtly, if so, how did John Baptist and the Apostles convince the Jewes, before yet the new Testament was existing of such, and such things touching their peace, and touching Christs kingdome, and government, yea, what ordinary meanes is left to convince the Jewes, when they are to come in, they denying the new Te∣stament to bee valid? see Acts 18. 26.

Seventhly, the primitive converts and disciples thought not so, touching such was of old testament Scripture proofe, Acts 17. 11. by Scriptures, meaning those of the old Tastament, as those places, John 5. 39. and 10. 35. and 7. 38. and 2. 22. Gal. 3. 8. 22. and 4. 30. Rom. 9. 17. and 10, 11. and 11. 2. and here let mee not forget what A. R. in his second part of Vanitie of childish baptisme, bringeth crosse to what wee have said, hee saith that no beleevers are fathers, scil. in such covenant and Church respects to their children which wee have mentioned, but Abraham onely; and hee maketh Abra∣ham rather a patterne father in other respects to beleevers quoting Scriptures to that end.

But doth A. R. indeed thinke that no others were covenant and Church-fathers but Abraham onely, the Apostle calleth all those inchurched Jewes of old our fathers, fathers to him and to the Gen∣tiles, Corinthian members, 1 Cor. 10. 1, &c. Yea will hee say that Isaac and Jacob, &c. were not such fathers to their seed also as was Abraham in covenant, and Church respects, because that was nei∣ther said to Isaac or to Jacob, I have made thee a father of nations? how then are the Jewes said to be beloved for their [fathers] sakes? surely it was not for their sakes as men, and naturall fathers, but as spirituall and covenant fathers, Rom. 11. 16. 28. compared, of

which more hereafter; yea the covenant is expresly made in those termes to Isaac, and to his seed; to Jacob; and to his seed, Gen. 26. 3, 4, 5. and 28. 13. 14. In respect therefore to their seed they are covenant fathers, yet in respect to Abraham, they themselves were Abrahams covenant and Church seed, to whom together with their father the covenant was made, even with a Church reference Gen. 17. and so are gentiles inchurched beleevers: fathers, as such, to their children; yet seed also in reference to Abraham: nor is it more contradiction to say thus, that the same persons may bee Abrahams seed, and yet fathers in divers respects, then to say the same man may bee a sonne, and yet a father in divers respects, a sonne in respect of his father, and a father in relation to his child. Nor can I perceive otherwise but that A. R. himselfe, layeth in the same place a groundworke crosse to his owne assertion this way:

the covenant (saith he) was not made with Abraham and with his seed, meerely for his being a faithfull man, but for his being such a faithfull man whom the Lord pleased to choose to make a patterne to all beleevers;

hence to me it seemeth, that Abraham is considered in a threefold respect.

First, as a faithfull man having seed. Secondly, as a faithfull man having the covenant made with him, and his seed. Thirdly, as one, with whom and with his seed the covenant is made, not meerely as a faithfull man, but as a patterne to all beleevers, which to me undeniably seemeth to bee an unwilling grant that as Abrahams seed in covenant with him admit a distinct consideration from all actuall beleevers, as such, whether Jewes or Gentiles: So that Abra∣ham in that consideration of such a faithfull man, with whom the covenant was made, and with his seed so distinguished from all be∣leevers, whether of Jewes or Gentiles, was therein a patterne to all beleevers actually, whether of Jews or Gentiles, yea that he was espe∣cially in such sort a patterne to them all, and had the covenant so made with him, and with that his seed, that hee might bee, or be∣cause hee should bee, therein a patterne to all beleevers whether Jewes or Gentiles: and this is the very truth, which wee affirme, that Abraham in the essentialls of the covenant, was a patterne of interest of beleevers and their children in the covenant of grace, at least externally, and ecclesiastically: but this is crosse to A. R. else∣where, yea in the same place as followeth.

Object.

All beleevers, and onely beleevers, are Abrahams seed, in that as Rom. 4. 16. it is affirmed that the promise is sure to all the seed, and so all the seed are saved.

Answ. But suppose that Abrahams seed intended in the promise were all saved, and so no others but they the seed, yet will it not follow, from what the Apostle saith that the promise is sure to all the seed, that therefore all actuall beleevers, and onely such are saved; wee have before proved from Rom. 9. 6, 7, 8. that all in whom the force of the covenant tooke, so as that they were saved, were the choyce intended children of the promise, or all elect Israel, which came of Abraham, Isaac and Jacobs loynes; yet did not all those live to become actuall beleevers, many such elect ones dying in Infancie. But to come to A. R's. assertion it selfe, I demand whe∣ther the members of the visible Church, of which A R. is officer, or member, be all and each of them Abrahams seed; for if not, I urge his owne plea against us; what right have they to the seale of the covenant made to Abrahams seed? if they be all Abrahams seed, then by A. R's. ground, they must needs be all & each of them saved, it is not possible there should bee any reprobates and hypocrites in a particular visible Church, which to affirme is ridiculous, but let him quit himselfe thereof from his owne principle if hee can: the Apostle saith of the Galatian Churches, and members thereof to whom hee wrote, Gal. 1. 1, 2. that they were children of the pro∣mise and of the free woman, and that Jerusalem above was the mother of him, and them [all] Gal. 4. 26. 28. 31. and that they were Abrahams seed, Gal. 3. 29. now then I demand whether wee must not conclude of them all that they were in a sure estate, and infallibly saved, according to A. R's. ground, comparing Rom. 4. 16. and Heb. 6. 16, 17. with Gal. 3. 29. Yea but why then doth Paul feare and question so much the estate of persons, so sure and infallible, if so it were, because called all Abrahams seed: for hee feareth lest hee had bestowed his labour in vaine, Gal. 4. 11. and that any saving worke, in many of them at least, was not so much as yet begun, that hee must bee faine to travaile againe with them in birth, till Christ bee formed in them, vers. 19. yea why doth he suppose any possibilitie of their suffering in vaine, of their ending in the flesh, Gal. 3. 3, 4, 5. of Christs becomming of none effect to them, Chap. 5. 4. many of them being of such spirits and way whom he there intended, as appeares by Gal. 1. 6, 7, 8. and 3. 1. and 23. 4, 5. and 4. 21? How will A. R. salve it? not by saying hee spake thus in a collective sense onely, understanding the former, of the elect part, and the latter of others. Yea but why then doth hee mention their being baptized into such an estate, Gal. 3. 27, 28, 29?

were none but true beleevers and elect ones in that Church bapti∣zed? for all that were baptized are said to bee one in Christ as ha∣ving put on Christ, and if Christ, then Abrahams seed: either then there were none but elect ones & true beleevers in those Churches, which were absurd, and crosse to the Scriptures before named, or if there were any hypocrites or reprobates in that Church, they were left unbaptized, which were as absurd, to avow it; for how knew they so exactly to distinguish of such divine secrets, in so infallible a way? were they Gods to know the secret guile of hearts? Now if not unbaptized, then they also in baptisme putting on Christ, and putting on Christ, being one with Christ, and so Christs, and being Christs were Abrahams seed; now A. R. must conte with us to say, that when 'tis said that all baptized persons put on Christ, Gal. 3. 27. it was verified in generall of them all Sacramentally and Ecclesiastically, and so when said to bee all one in Christ, and to bee Christs and Abrahams seed, and all chil∣dren of the promise and of Jerusalem which is above, &c. hee must distinguish of persons being such in foro dei, and of persons which are such, in foro & facie ecclesiae visibilis. In the former sense, onely the elect amongst them were such, in the latter sense, all in com∣mon, sound and unsound members, of the Church, they were such; and that the Apostle speakes such things of them in common not by a meere infallible Apostolicall dictate and sentence, as con∣cluding them to bee all such savingly, but ministerially to hold forth what such as members of Christ, as head of the visible Church, were Ecclesiastically.

Object. But will it not bee said that whereas, Gen. 17. 7. maketh but two subjects of the covenant God made, scil. Abraham and his seed, which Paul expounds to bee beleevers, wee by our doctrine doe make three subjects and parties, Abraham and beleevers, and the Infant seed of both.

Answ. To which I answer, that wee doe not make three such distinct subjects now any more then of old there was made be∣fore Christ was incarnated; then Abraham and his beleevers, growne children, and the Infant seed of both made but Abraham and his seed, and so is it with us. Secondly, that the covenant be∣ing made with Abraham and his seed, Abraham sustaining the per∣son of all beleevers, Jewes and Gentiles, which in a sense also were his seed in that covenant, hence therefore the covenant still is onely between Abraham and his seed.

CHAP. IIII. Sect. I. Touching the Explication of Luke 18. 15, 16, 17.

ANother Scripture holding forth the Federall and Ecclesia∣sticall right and holinesse of inchurched visible beleevers little ones is, Luke 18. 15, 16, 17. where the Lord affir∣meth of the children offered to him by those pious min∣ded parents, that of such is the kingdome of God, as Matthew hath it, Chap. 19. of such is the kingdome of heaven, which is here taken for the visible Church, so Matth. 8. 11. 12. and 13. 24. and it see∣meth evident from Luke 18. that hee mentioneth the kingdome of God three wayes, First, a kingdome of which such Infants and such like persons are; namely, as subjects. Secondly, a kingdome which such actuall subjects of that kingdome doe receive. Thirdly, a kingdome unto which in an ordinary way and meanes they come to enter. The first is meant of the visible, not of the invisible Church, and of them as members of the former, and not so properly of the latter; touching which, let it bee remembred that this was not a bare temporary, and present charge, in reference barely to those very children, and onely to that very present approach to Christ, but did respect after approches of such like persons unto Christ, hee saith not, suffer these little children to come (at this time) to mee, for of these is the Kingdome of God, but indefinitely, rather suffer little ones, scil. of this sort, such as these are to come to mee: nor would A. R. and others, which apply it to such like persons for humilitie, &c. restraine it to the occasionall act at that time, but inlarge it in reference to any such persons at any time in a like case that they should not bee hindred from Christ. Now as for the members of the invisible Church, as such they are invisible, and fall not under the proper cognizance of the sons of men to know, which or where they are: and to suppose an injunction of not hin∣dring their approach to Christ, unlesse they came under a visible re∣spect of members of the visible Church that they might bee discer∣ned, and it might bee knowne how and when, and in whom this rule of suffering such to come to Christ, were kept or broken, it were very incongruous, and it's a very improbable conjecture, that Christ spake thus of these very Infants, by an act of divine know∣ledge of them to bee the elect of God: as if a company of children

should bee by an unwonted providence, singled out to bee brought to him, which were every one of them elected to eternall life, and not any of them, in a contrary estate. And by the latitude of the extent of Christs speech, as before wee shewed in reference to after and other times, and examples of like nature as to the present case it appeares, hee neither spake thus as God, or as a meere extraor∣dinary inspired Prophet, but delivered as in ordinary administra∣tion of the mind of God, as at other times, an ordinary rule of ordinary practise and use afterwards, in reference not barely to those very little ones then brought, but to others like them; where∣fore such evasions of C. B. in his fourth answer to this place are fri∣volous. And why should there bee such startling at this place as if it were uncouth doctrine, that children of inchurched members should be counted subjects of Gods kingdom, or members of his vi∣sible Church? the Jews children, as well as parents which were cast out together▪ Matth. 8. 11, 12. were surely in that kingdome toge∣ther, out of which they came to bee cast afterwards; the uncir∣cumcised man child was of the people or Church of God in visible account, else not cut off from his people in that case of neglect, Gen. 17. 14. and in the purer dayes of the Gospell, yet expected, the children are put under David or Christ their Prince as King, and head, and Lord of his visible Church, as well as the parents, as before wee shewed from Ezek. 37. 25, 26, 27. and God accounted them even in very corrupt time, children of his covenant spouse or visible Church, Thy children which thou barest to mee, Ezekiel 16. 8. 20, 21. 23. witnesse the setting to of the initiatory Church seale of circumcision to those children of Abraham, Isaac and Ja∣cobs loynes; and no wonder, in that they were all interested in the covenant of grace, as invested with Church-covenant, which is even the very forme of the Church, giving Church being to per∣sons therein interested; nor is it likely that these children were other then such, being either proselytes children, joyned to the Jewish Church, or children of Jewes, either of them formerly circumcised, and in facie ecclesiae of the Church, the Apostles which used to bee questioning any thing obscure, which they understood not, or seemed to them strange, would in likelihood have inqui∣red after satisfaction therein, of Christ, as their manner was, if it had not been very cleare, convincing, approved, received do∣ctrine, which Christ urged as his reason of reproofe of their act in hindring the little ones approach to him; hee which himselfe

forbad them, Matth. 10. to goe into the way of the Gentiles, no not into Samaria, and when himselfe tooke up the Gentile Ca∣naanite in such sort at first, albeit she a beleever, Matth. 15. 22. if these had beene other then visible beleeving inchurched persons, yea though Gentiles yet inchurched proselytes which brought these children, hee would not have so roundly, and sharpely taken up his Disciples, for assaying to hinder them from him, when the Apostle, 1 Cor. 7. 14. speaketh thus to the Church, and not to the citie as such, which writ to him, and to whom hee writ this back againe; hee saith else [their] children, as appropriating externall adoption, as well as formerly, to others of that sort, Rom. 9. 1, 2, 3, 4. they were the children of that Spouse of Christ, 2 Cor. 11. 2. 3. as those were formerly of that Church, Ezek. 16. 20, 21. she brought forth other children by the ministry, Psal. 87. 5. albeit, not so many as now, and hereafter, Esa. 54. 5. but that way also did the Church beare children to the Lord. And are purer Gentiles Churches wombes in that respect shut up; or doth the Lord lesse affect communion with his Church in that expression of his love now, then hee did to the Church of old? surely no; the Corinthi∣an members as a Church body, had their Church children, and seed: also, the Apostle taketh order with the women, 1 Cor. 14. Let [your] women keepe silence in the Churches; but why [your]? what, because they were the members wives onely? no verily: since some such were Pagans, and without the Church, and hee protesteth against any Church dealing with such, 1 Cor. 5. end; what have wee to doe with them from any Church care, or respect? but rather [your] women as being of the Church, and so here, not [your] children holy: scil. barely of your members in a common naturall way: but yours in a Church relation rather. And let the Apostles division bee further attended, 1 Cor. 5. placing all persons as either within or without the visible Church: For if his division be regular, as who will say otherwise, of the wisest dictates of the holy Ghost? then these membra dividentia take up the whole di∣vision, and there is no middle or neutrall estate actually of per∣sons. And albeit the persons chiefly intended, bee adult persons, yet it must hold, as well of others, or else it is not a compleat di∣vision. So then the little ones which are borne of inchurched per∣sons, they are either actually within the Church, or actually with∣out at present, onely some possibilities as some suppose of their being actuall members, afterward at most: but at present their actu∣all

estate must bee the one, or the other; if actually within the Church, I have what I seeke, if onely potentially such as may come in, but yet actually without, 1. then the children of the Church in primitive times were such as the Apostles, as extraordinary, and now Elders as ordinary officers in the Church, were not, nor are to take any speciall Church care of; since the tie of that Church care, as such, dependeth upon covenant and Church relation, ei∣ther extraordinary, as that of the Apostles, to all the Churches; or ordinary, as that of the officers of this or that Church. 2. Then Churches and their officers are not to deale with any such chil∣dren more then with pagans in any Church way of instruction or admonition when growne up. 3. Then are such so farre forth to bee left as persons without actually, to the more immediate judge∣ment of God; what have wee to doe with such? God judgeth them, and the phrase of Gods judging them, how sad a case it noteth, see Heb. 3. 4. and 10. 29, 30, 31. 4. Then such children being actu∣ally without, they are actually and at present amongst the number of such persons of whom is little hope: as Marke 4. 11, 12. to them without: if hardned persons, in parables: so Revel. 22. without are dogs. The persons left out of Church fellowship by the new Jerusalem are of the worst sort, •…•…vel. 22. 15. 5. Then the Jewish Church is supposed to have a larger share in the charitie of God, and his people, so that their children in relation to Church estate are called and counted God and his Churches children, purer Gentile Churches have no such charitie allowed towards the members children: which absurdities if any will swallow, let them enjoy their conceipts.

SECT. II.

ANd thus farre of the dispensing kingdome of God, as it seemes to bee included, and intended in the first expression, Of such is the kingdome of God: which may serve to answer the scruples of some, as if such an assertion of children of beleevers, to bee of Gods kingdome, should crosse the course of providence, many proving wicked: For this hinders not, but they belong to the visible Church: no more then Christs assertion of all the Jewes, to be the children of the kingdome of heaven, into which the Gentiles from all parts should come after the rejection of the Jews, Matth. 8. 11, 12. nor is this any more crosse to Rom. 9. 6, 7, 8. then that is; yea suppose the Kingdome of heaven bee taken for that

of glory; yet in that covenant and Church estate is theirs, so far also is glory theirs, scil. in foro ecclesiae. And wee have before pro∣ved that Christ spake this as man, not meerely as God, as hee said before of the Jewes, Matth. 8. 11, 12. and after this spake to like purpose, Matth. 21. 43. they were as externally adopted, Rom. 9. 4. externally inrighted to that promise of glory, the promises indefi∣nitely being thus far theirs, & that promised heritage being thus far theirs. If they had not Gods kingdome, in respect of this estating of theirs in it, and right to it; how came they to have it taken from them? was not that in respect of any externall Church right actually theirs unto, or to the dispensation of the covenant hol∣ding the same forth? they were all heires, albeit under tutors, Gal. 4. 1, 2, 3. but to mee the former sense is rather most unquestio∣nable, that of such is the kingdome of God, or of heaven, scil. the visible Church as before was proved; and this may also satisfie that which is objected, that hee might speake this in reference to the future; that is, that they were elect ones, and should in time bee of Gods kingdome, that is, beleevers, or in that they were such as God would blesse: For Christs words are not, Of such may, will or shall bee the kingdome of God, nor that they were of his kingdome, because such as hee would blesse; but rather that they should not bee hindred from being blessed of him, because of such [is] the kingdome of God; as the context and force of that rea∣son in reference to the occasion sheweth: and as for that asserti∣on of their being all elect, the improbabilitie thereof hath before appeared; nor doth Christ seeme to speal: of the kingdome of God as taken for the invisible Church of actuall beleevers▪ but of visible members of the visible Church, as before was shewed. Hee affirmeth that those little ones, de praesenti, were of the king∣dome of God, yet were not they actually beleevers, hee asserteth as much of the Jews to be rejected afterward, that yet at present they were the children of that very kingdome of heaven, where∣into the Gentiles, even the very best of them come to sit; the Church estate in both was the same in the essentialls, and the co∣venant estate the same essentially: the externall right to grace, and glory the very same essentially, and so the reason of the grant here, and assertion, is the same in reference to the little ones, of other visible beleevers, as of these which brought their children to Christ, unlesse God should bee made a respecter of persons; their Infants must come to Christ, and not bee hindred, because they

were Federally and Ecclesiastically priviledged, or because of such is Gods kingdome; the same is valid now, since as adult persons externally in covenant and Church estate, must not accor∣ding to our opposites mindes bee hindred from Christ, because such like as these little ones; so neither beleevers little ones being also such like as well; they may not bee hindred from any such way of initiatory approach to Christ as they are capable of, as is externall baptizing in the name or fellowship, as of the Father, so of Christ the Sonne, and also of the holy Spirit; to which purpose I suppose our Divines had reference, in urging this place for Paedobaptisme, nor was this an affirming of Infants be∣ing saved by their parents faith, but an assenting of their externall Church right, by vertue of the latitude of Gods covenant apply∣ed by the parents, and by occasion of their holding forth of that faith, which did, foro ecclesiae, unite them, and their little ones to Christ, as head of the visible Church, in which may by externall adoption and insition are interested, which are not saved as be∣fore wee shewed; nor will that take off what it seemeth, some worthy Divines, have lately urged from hence for Paedobaptisme; that if Christs mind had beene that Infants should have been bap∣tized, hee would have commanded these little ones to have beene baptized for an example: for according to the principles of C. B. and others, Christ did love these little ones with his everlasting love, they received heaven of free gift, as all that will bee saved must doe: theirs was the kingdome of glory really, and Christ as God, and as an extraordinary Prophet of the Church knew all this, &c. now why should not, or were not these Infants, at least baptized? C. B. will answer, Infants of beleevers may die in their Infancy, and they may live to commit actuall sinnes, &c. and wee not knowing which will live or die, cannot baptize them, what then according to C. B. it seemes the uncertainty of Infants deaths, whilst young, or living to growne yeares, is an impediment to their baptisme. Where did C. B. here or ever read in Scripture or of such a just barre to Infants baptisme? but suppose it were so to us, which know not this, yet C. B. will not say but Christ knew all herein, how matters would prove, therefore that was no just hinderance in the nature of it thereto; for then hee to whom this could bee no hinderance touching these children about whom C. B. saith hee revealed his Fathers eternall live, and good will, hee had caused at least these little ones to have been baptized. Yea I demand upon the grant of those things mentioned, whether C. B.

or others opposing Paedobaptisme, would deny that such as Christ receiveth, and blesseth, and alloweth, the kingdome of heaven in their sense, that is, that of glory, to be theirs, if growne ones, should not therefore bee baptized. Now if this will not be denied, as I suppose, why, supposing the like case of any little ones, and Infants, shall the same bee denyed where there is the same ground of baptisme in both sorts? Nay suppose that by extraordinary re∣velation, C. B. and others of his minde did know as much as here is mentioned, in Marke 10. and Luke 16. that such and such chil∣dren were Gods chosen ones, that they were received, and blessed of Christ, not in any common way, but as the very heires of glo∣ry, as these Infants are by them supposed to bee, and so were actu∣ally blessed with the spirit of grace, &c. would not they baptize these Infants? I suppose the more judicious would, and have said that, in that case, they would doe it, because

such an extraordi∣nary revelation would suffice to warrant the act of baptizing such Infants without profession of faith, and because of Peters principle, Act. 10. 47. Can any forbid that these should bee bap∣zed which have received the holy Ghost as well as wee? and the institution of baptizing Disciples, would in this case beare it out, such sanctified persons being Disciples, &c.

Nor indeed could it bee denyed by them rationally; since in this case Infants are not meerely supposed to bee capable thereof, but really to have received the sublime things visibly sealed in baptisme, even the spi∣rit of grace, love, and blessing of Christ, the promise of grace and glory, &c. And therefore not to bee denied baptisme, especially seeing this their receiving of the thing signified, is also manifested, & so all usuall occasions that way removed. Now then to come to apply what here is granted; First, then persons may come under the notion of Disciples which were never outwardly taught, and cannot personally hold out actuall faith, which our opposites else∣where deny. Secondly, that it is not contrary to Christs minde, and to the rule, that persons, without personall profession of faith should bee baptized. For as the former notion of Disciples, if natura rei, it were not otherwise applyable, then as not ordinari∣ly, so neither extraordinarily: and whether ordinarily, or extra∣ordinarily, if applyable so; it is not simply to bee denyed; so I say in the latter: albeit, extraordinary things done besides rule crosse not ordinary rule; yet neither extraordinarily nor ordinari∣ly, is any thing to be done, which is in it self contrary to rule. It was

beside rule for a Priest to kill Zimri and Cosbi, but not a breach of rule, or any thing contrary to rule. Thirdly, that there was ground why Christ might command those little ones brought to him to bee baptized, yea it was his mind, and according to his will they should bee baptized, albeit it bee not mentioned that they were baptized: who could forbid water that they should bee bap∣tized, which received the holy Ghost, which were Disciples? Christs extraordinary knowledge of it himselfe, and revelation thereof to his Apostles then present, which used to baptize others, John 4. 1. 2. it's granted was sufficient warrant, albeit there had been no rule for it, when yet in this case the rule of baptizing Di∣sciples, John 4. 1. also might suffice. Let it then bee no more said, that if it had been Christs mind, that Infants should bee baptized, hee would have commanded those, Luke 18. to bee baptized, since according to the acknowledged principles, those little ones either were, or might groundedly have been baptized. But wee will suppose Christ did not then expresly injoyne those little ones bap∣tisme, or that they were not then baptized, yet will it not follow that it was not his mind such babes to whom hee expressed such love should not bee baptized, or were not baptized; hee that had his time of blessing them, was free to take his time of injoyning their baptisme. Yea hee gave not any expresse charge, touching any care to bee had of them, by those which brought them: nor touching their being further instructed, in the way of God, and many other things of that nature: And yet none will thence rea∣son that, Ergo, it was not his minde, that any speciall care or re∣ligious indeavour, touching their further good should bee used. No more doth the former follow that it was not his mind that ei∣ther those or any other such like persons should bee baptized, be∣cause hee did not then expresse his mind that way touching those little ones. There might bee diverse other reasons▪ why Christ might not then injoyne the same: possibly their parents themselves, albeit circumcised, yet not baptized, or if baptized, their children also might be baptized when they were. And his reasons to prove that by kingdome of heaven is rather meant that of glory then of grace, are as weake still. First, Because they understand not the Lawes of the kingdome of grace. Secondly, because this kingdome is a locall kingdome, as appeareth by the word entring in. But doth C. B. which saith these Infants did receive the kingdome of God by gift, thinke that they received not the kingdome of grace,

at present before their entrance into glory, they were not yet en∣tred heaven, but on earth then, and long after it may bee, yet hee saith those little ones received it of gift; in what way, or by what meanes could they receive it? without any covenant right? surely no: For there is no inheritance of glory other then that promised inheritance, hence the promise put for glory promised, Heb. 10. 36. nor eternall life, but such as is promised, Tit. 1. 1, 2, 3. yea could they receive it, without the Spirit? which yet they must also partake of by promise, or no way: none are made par∣takers of the Divine nature in any respect but by the promises, 2 Pet. 1. 4. now if thus really, and effectually interested in the co∣venant of grace, and partakers of the spirit, then the kingdome of grace too was theirs: albeit they understood not the Lawes of it. Yea doth Mr. B. thinke that the kingdome of glory belongs to any to whom that of grace belongeth not? must not that bee first ours before the other? yea doth not the phrase of receiving the kingdome note out, that the kingdome of glory is received, in and by the receiving of that of grace, or of the word of the king∣dome the promise, and covenant, &c. else is it not improper to say that those Infants before they entred into Gods kingdome of glory they did receive it? It's a Locall kingdome, as Mr. B. hath it, and is it proper to say that a man receiveth a place, before hee come at it, otherwise then by word of mouth, or writing, or some equivalent ingagement? I conclude then that the kingdome that they received was rather that of grace, even the covenant of grace, if not also grace of the covenant, wherein was plighted, and in∣gaged some right to that of glory, or that it was the kingdome of glory, in reference to such plighting and pledge of it. Nor doth Mr. B. his other reason conclude against what I have said, they were at least externally of Gods kingdome, in that first sense, scil. considered, as his kingdome dispensing, scil. his Church. Second∣ly, they received his kingdome in a second sense, scil. considered as dispensed in the revealed way of Gods plighting of it by word, and initiatory seale at last of Circumcision, if not of Baptisme; and how ever in the externall right to both they are such, which ac∣cording to men at least should enter into glory in respect of actuall fruition of it, which is the kingdome in a third sense, scil. the kingdome to bee possessed, and to which a entring in, in the Text hath indeed reference; but else Mr. Blackwoods reason would not inforce it, that because of that locall expression of entring in; the

kingdome must ergo bee a locall kingdome, or heaven it selfe: there are locall expressions very full, Matth. 8. 11, 12. sitting down of some in the kingdome of heaven, out of which others are cast: yet will not Mr. B. conclude that even the Jewes were in heaven, and so cast out thence, if they had not been first in, they had not been thence cast: in, and out, are here relatives. It was some other kingdome, scil. that of grace in the externall subject of it, the visi∣ble Church; and ingagement of it, the covenant of grace and dispensation of it: the administration of Church ordinances, &c. in which they were by externall adoption and incision, and out of all actuall priviledges whereof they were afterward cast. As for that which others object against us in this point of childrens fe∣derall and ecclesiasticall estate from hence, scil. that Christ saith not of these, but of such, and such like, scil. as A. R. hath it, such like in humilitie, &c. is the kingdome of God, &c. this is as groundlesse an interpretation as some others mentioned.

For first, it's evident that Christ maketh these little ones patterns to others like them, in that interest in Gods kingdome, of such or such like is Gods kingdome; now samples must have that verified in themselves, in some sense in which they are examples to others; secondly, they are inclusively made examples of such an initiatory receiving of the kingdome of heaven, as tendeth to a more full fruition, and injoyment thereof, Luke 18. 17. Mark. 10. 15. and and therefore at least externally such, and so qualified themselves now will their paralelling this with, Matth. 18. 3, 4, 5, 6. hold good therein, to say nothing, that that, Matth. 18. 6. may bee read from the Greek, these little ones 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, of persons beleeving or of beleevers in mee, scil. of parents beleeving in Christ, which little ones are not to be slighted but received in Christs name, vers. 5. scil. unto Church communion as well as others, as that phrase implyeth, Rom. 15. 7. This is undeniable that the occasion of that speech in Matth. 18. and of this in Matth. 19. Marke 10. Luke 18. was different, and at divers times uttered as the Texts compared shew, nor saith Christ in Matth. 18. as here, hee that receiveth not the kingdome of God as a little child, but thus; unlesse yee bee as children, scil. in humilitie, &c. vers. 3, 4. compared; and that like∣wise in Matth. 18. doth not conclude, ergo the interest of such chil∣dren, more then unto Doves, or sheepe unto whom subjects of Gods kingdome are like, but here as hee saith of such like is Gods kingdome: for withall, hee saith that others must receive Gods

kingdome as they doe, making them patternes as well of receiving of, as interest in Gods kingdome, which was never affirmed of sheepe or doves are harmelesse, if patternes of it. Actuall guile, malice and envie are removed from Infants, they act not such sinnes if they are patternes to others therein, 1 Pet. 2. 1, 2, 3. com∣pared, they are low and little in their owne eyes, not minding great things, &c. if patternes of it, Matth. 18. Psal. 131. 1, 2. so here they are interested in Gods kingdome, doe receive it ex∣ternally at least, both those here mentioned, and such like Infants, if they were made patternes thereof unto others, else the sense of Luke 18. 17. would bee thus, Unlesse any receive Christs king∣dome as a child doth, scil. in a bare resemblance of reception thereof without any realitie therein, so much as supposed, he shall not enter into it. Thirdly, Christ bringeth this as a reason why his Disciples should not hinder little ones as prophane from him, but rather further the approach of those babes, because of such∣like Infants, like them in covenant, and Church interest in God his kingdome. Now if this had beene Christs onely reason there∣of as is imagined, because not of these out of such like little ones by resemblance in humilitie, and harmelesnesse, &c. is Gods king∣dome, therefore further, and doe not hinder their comming to mee; then one might upon the same ground argue, that since oft persons like good seed, and good fish for usefulnesse and fruitful∣nesse, &c. is Gods kingdome, Matth. 13. 24. 38. 47. 49. and since of persons like Eagles for renovation, sight, and seed, &c. Gods kingdome doth consist, therefore further, and doe not hinder the bringing of such seed, fish, and Eagles unto Christ; this were ridi∣culous. Yea suppose any other thing short of what I have for∣merly mentioned touching these babes, wherein some of these creatures are not all out fully resembling the Saints, yet if not in∣terested more then those creatures in the kingdome mentioned, it's not the degrees of more or lesse like which will alter the force of that formall reason of not hindering these creatures therefore from Christ, scil. because bare resemblances of the Saints, as our opposites interpret this. Fourthly, as Christ taking them up in his armes, as the word is translated, sheweth they were little ones indeed, of whom hee spake, and not metaphoricall little ones, even growne persons like them; so other acts shew that hee ex∣pressed as much in effect touching those babes in his acts about them, as in his words hee spake touching them, the expressions of

Christs love toward those persons, whether he tooke them up in his armes or imbraced them, it was no complement in Christ, but a most significant expression of his love; & his blessing of them, do de∣clare that they had some more peculiar interest in some respects, at least in an Ecclesiasticall and Federall way, in him the King, and in that his kingdome mentioned, then to be bare semblances of others which had. Fiftly, the Greeke article 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in reference to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Luke 18. 15, 16, 17. the little ones, and not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in reference to the parents, as Beza noteth on the place, seemeth to shew, that he in∣tended not such allegoricall little ones, as the bringers of them, but the little ones brought in that assertion mentioned.

Object. Yea but Piscator maketh that an argument, in that hee called the little ones, vers. 16. that ergo they were not babes: and beside, the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies a child capable of teaching, as 2 Tim. 3. 15. from a child thou hast learned the Scriptures, &c. and so your purpose faileth to apply this against Anabaptists denying the covenant, and Church right of babes of inchurched beleevers.

Answ. 1. It's said hee called them, scil. in calling their parents which brought them, albeit, they might not bee all capable of un∣derstanding that invitation; it's usuall in Scripture because of pa∣rents nearest interest in their children to ascribe things to their chil∣dren, which are rather to bee understood of the parents, as when it is said Levi paid tithes in Abraham, Heb. 7, &c. Secondly, albeit, that phrase be used in Tim. thou hast knowne the Scriptures from a child, yet it followes not, that therefore 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 doth not in the ve∣ry naturall proper, and constant use of it signifie a babe more then the like phrases used in Scripture should not have their proper sig∣nification, because something there mentioned is not in strict ac∣ceptation applyable thereunto; as when it's said, thou madest me hope upon my mothers breasts 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or when I was up∣on my mothers breasts, so Psal. 58. 3. the wicked are estranged from the wombe, they goe astray as soone as they are borne spea∣king lies: in these places will it bee hence argued that the Hebrew words rightly translated, and so constantly used as translated, sig∣nifie other then from mothers breasts, and wombe, &c. in that a ve∣ry sucking or new borne child is not capable of actuall hoping in God or going astray actually from him, but rather persons growne up more in yeares; here all will say these species are hy∣perbolicall, shewing that these things were acted thus by them ve∣ry early, and very soone; so what though a little one, which is not a suckling but can speake and understand is capable of knowing

the Scriptures, yet it followeth not that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth any other then a babe, but it sheweth that Timothy was so trained up very early, hee doth not say, thou even a child [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] didst know, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from a child, that is, very soone and early in thy age. Thirdly, the Apostles did not use to hinder little ones which could goe and speake, from comming to Christ, but further them rather: whether the parents were Jewes of Gentiles, yea, and those not proselytes: witnesse that act Mark. 9. Matth. 15. this therefore was an example as they apprehended tending to trouble Christ more then ordinary to meddle with poore shiftlesse babes. Fourth∣ly, if they had been little ones which could goe, yet it sufficeth to prove what Anabaptists deny: that before persons could actually hold forth personall. Faith or repentance, may be actually in co∣venant with God and inrighted to the initiatory seale of it, and that albeit Christ did not actually cause these babes then to be bap∣tized, that they had therefore no right to bee baptized, it follow∣eth not.

But I. S. hee acknowledgeth those children to bee of that king∣dome or members of that Jewish Church, and therefore have right as well as others to temporall blessings, and that these children were brought to Christ for cure producing some Scriptures for that end, where prayer and imposition of hands was used upon that occasion; but doth the Text say, of such or such like was [that] kingdome? no verily, but indefinitely, of such is [the] kingdome of God; and what though those children were of that Church, since Christ inlargeth his speech, as wee shewed, to such like per∣sons, and so to other babes of like condition with those; and had the Jewes, and their babes onely right to temporall blessings will I. S. say: when that Abrahams covenant of God his being a God to them, scil. to fulfill his promises: instancing in that, Luke 1. 73, 74, 75. as one is acknowledged by I. S. elsewhere, to bee by cir∣cumcision visibly sealed upon both seeds, as hee termeth them. True it is that as, 2 King. 5. 11. Matth. 8. 3. and 9. 18. Luke 4. 3••. 40. one way of healing was putting on of hands, and prayer, but is all here meant? the Lord blessed them, scil. in way of cure onely, or the like: other Scriptures mention imposition of hands, and prayer in that way of curing; true, but here is no mention either of the diseases or of the cure of the little ones following upon Christs imposition of hands, as there is in the other Scriptures in other cases; no nor is here prayer mentioned: the parents desired

him to pray, Matth. 19. but hee blessed them saith Marke, whether in prayer way, it's not said, yea since the Scriptures mention these acts of blessing, and imposition of hands in way of ratification of covenant right, and priviledges of the covenant of grace as exter∣nally, at least, the heritage of such and such, witnesse that Gen. 27. 17. and 28. 1. 3, 4. and 48. 14, 15, 16. why should not wee on bet∣ter grounds look at this as comprehended in this act of Christ? and why is I. S. so uncharitable to limit the requests of these pious per∣sons intreating Christ to pray, indefinitely, for the little ones: that this was onely to move him to desire temporall things for them? Christ doth not seeme to make any such interpretation of their request when hee blessed them, as Marke saith, what was that onely in regard of temporals? who would limit Christs bles∣sing within so short a compasse? nor was it the Disciples use to hinder, but further the cure of persons children brought for that end, as the instances in Marke 9. Matth. 15. shew.

Object. But if you make Infants of inchurched beleevers to bee actuall members of a visible Church, doe you not destroy the usu∣all definition of a visible Church; given by Divines, that it's a com∣pany of persons professing the faith, &c.

Answ. Musculus, Aretius, Melancton, Calvin, Beza, Bucer, Dr. Ames, Mr. Cotton, Dr. Whittaker, Peter Martyr, & generally all our Di∣vines which define a visible Church severally, but in substance to like purpose, they yet make that no undermining of their owne do∣ctrine, de ecclesia, or of the descriptions visibilis ecclesiae which they doe give; when the same authors maintaine from Scripture grounds that such Infants are actually members of the visible Church, and externally in the covenant of grace, and such as are to bee baptized: yea such Infants being of the Church; It is not therefore not a company of professors of the faith, since Infants are fideles, as they are rationalls, as some say, scil. actu primo, non secun∣do; yea they confesse and avouch the Lord in their parents avouch∣ing of him, as they did of old, Deut. 26. 16, 17, 18. and 29. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. they promised to stand to those conditions in their pa∣rents promise made with respect to them.

Object. But if they are of the Church, and in the covenant, and have right to the Seale, then to both as well as to one, to the Lords Supper as well as Baptisme.

Answ. We do not say they are compleat members of the Church, but incompleat as Ames speaketh to this purpose in his Medullâ, & having interest in the Church and covenant, wee say they have

right to the initiatory Seale: but not therefore to all memberly priviledges of voting in Church censures, elections, admonitions, &c. even growne persons that are with us as transient members by communion with other Churches, yet are not reckoned as in full Church communion with us, in all Churches priviledges, as in chusing officers, censuring offenders, &c. Nor will Mr. B. his par∣alleling of Baptisme, and the Lords Supper prove that if to bee ad∣mitted by Church interest unto the one, then also unto the other: for suppose one, and the same thing bee sealed, yet not by one and the same way: the former onely being the initiatory seale of cove∣nant and Church interest, not the latter: nor is it true that the same preparations is required to the former as to the latter: since no where spoken so exclusively of persons to bee baptized as to come to the Lords Supper, Let a man examine himself, and so no otherwise, let him eate; nor doth it follow that because there is but one excommunication, there is but one communion; excommuni∣cation being properly of persons in full communion of all Church priviledges in this or that Church where the offence is committed. For to instance in no other case, but in that of a brother in another Church which is in Church communion in Mr. B's Church by ver∣tue of communion of Churches, yet not in compleat membership, & full communion of all Church priviledges there: he offendeth; will Mr. Blackwood now put him out of Church communion with his Church by actuall censure from his Church? I suppose not: in that the partie hath not personally submitted yet to the Churches pow∣er: but they will withdraw communion rather: this then is a diffe∣rent way of discommunicating, and by Mr. B's grounds, ergo argu∣eth a different communion, and so not the same, which was that hee assayed to prove; nor doe his proofes evince but that others were baptized then did partake of the Lords Supper.

Object. Before wee passe further, let mee remove another ob∣jection which I meet with, scil. that if wee make Infants members of a visible Church, which doe nothing from whence to denomi∣nate the same, but are meerely passive: It will follow that there may bee a visible Church, consisting onely of Infants of beleevers. For a number of visible members make a visible Church.

Answ. This followeth not, since the maine force of such denomi∣nation lyeth in the growne Citizens of God, which use in all Ci∣tie acts publike to carry it personally, and not from the children, which yet are free Deuisons. As for a Church of onely Infants:

it's not supposable their Church right depending upon inchurched parents; nor are the Infants such perfect members of the Church as others: nor do a number of beleevers regularly, make a visible politi∣call Church, but in such a way of actuall combining together either explicitly or implicitely, as in all other bodies politique. Whence a more peculiar relation one to another, and a peculiar ground of memberly care for, & power one over another, in a brotherly way to watch over, or seasonably to admonish each other, and the like.

SECT. III.

TO conclude, let such as oppose us in this doctrine of the faede∣rall and Church holinesse of inchurched beleevers little ones, consider of the absurdities which their opposite Doctrine exposeth them unto.

As first, the deniall of any ordinary way or meanes of the salva∣tion of beleevers Infants, as being neither actually in the visible Church, out of which ordinarily there is no salvation, nor being actually any of them in the covenant of grace, so much as external∣ly, and so excluded from any ordinary meanes, or way, or estate of salvation, as before in part wee shewed: The promises being made to the Church, and the covenant being the Spirits instru∣ment, by which to convey good unto such as ordinarily partake of it. Even before the world was: God, ordered all good to bee con∣veyed to us in a way, and by virtue of his covenant, therefore also called the everlasting covenant, and Gospel, Heb. 13. 20. Revel. 14. 6. hence God was said to bee in Christ reconciling the world to him∣selfe, 2 Cor. 5. 19. hence eternall life said to bee promised before the world was, Tit. 1. 2. Hence that, Ephes. 3. 8, 9. even Christ him∣selfe is his peoples no otherwise then in way of covenant, Esay 42. 6. and 49. 6, 7, 8. his blood is the blood of the everlasting cove∣nant, no interest in it, nor in himselfe, but by way of covenant with it seales, as that wherein, and whereby salvation is ingaged, Heb. 13. 20. mans salvation is onely in his name, Act. 4. 12. and reconciliation in his blood, Colos. 1. 19, 20, 21. and that blood is the blood of the covenant as before, see Zach. 9. 11. hee is a medi∣ator of the new covenant, and Testament, Heb. 9. 15. Heb. 12. 24. if beleevers Infants have not interest in that covenant, no interest in him as Mediator: for hee is no other Mediator but of such a co∣venant, his businesse as Mediator is to confirme a covenant to such to whom hee is a Mediator, Deut. 9. 24. Rom. 15. 8. none can par∣take of the Spirit, nor any influence of it but by the promises, 2 Pet. 1. 4.

nor of a glorious resurrection, but by virtue of, I am their God, Luke 20. 36, 37. nor of glory, but by virtue of the same, Heb. 11. 16. see of both, Act. 26. 6, 7. if therefore that species or sort of persons, covenant inchurched parents Infants, are excluded from right in the covenant, unlesse they come actually and personally to be∣leeve therein: actum est de salute eorum, they are given for lost irre∣coverably, and all the individuall Infants of such persons are left in as bad a case.

Secondly, that sort of growne gentiles being supposed onely to bee made nigh by the blood of Christ in covenant, and Church respects actually: it will argue that that sort onely were actually strangers before, & not their children with them, not only individu∣ally, but specifically considered, since the same sorts at least of Gen∣tiles, formerly strangers, are made nigh, Eph. 21. 11, 22, 13. compared.

Thirdly, then is it supposed that Christ tooke downe the parti∣tion wall which stood betweene growne Jewes and adult Gen∣tiles, but as for the beleeving Gentiles Infants, either there was no such partition wall betwixt them and their parallels the Jewish Infants inchurched, or if there were, it so farre remaines untaken downe as concerning that sort of Infants.

Fourthly, then Divine justice is supposed to have a larger latitude in involving the little ones of such as respect the Covenant under the expressions and visible dispensations of divine displeasure, as in Caines, Ishmaels, Esau's, the Jewes rejection together with their little ones; then divine grace hath in the expressions and dispen∣sations thereof, unto the little ones of such as tooke hold thereof; contrary to all former examples: how long did God continue ex∣ternall adoption, and son-ship in Seths line, Gen. 6. 1. how long in Abrahams, Isaacs and Jacobs, Rom. 9. 4. and not rejecting them till rebelling universally, and fatally?

Fiftly, then it's supposed, that there are two covenants of grace, one with them of old, another with us now, essentially different, which is absurd as before was shewed, and may bee further evinced in that baptisme, that new way of initiatory sealing of the cove∣nant, when first instituted, it was instituted precisely with sole re∣spects to the Jewes, John 1. 33. Matth. 3. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. John 4. 1. com∣pared with Matth. 10. 5, 6. to shew that there was no other cove∣nant to be sealed by baptisme, then that which was made with the Jewes in the substance of it, Luke 24. 44, 45, 46, 47. Act. 2. 38, 39. the same promise first sealed by baptisme to them before was to them

afarre off, and no other to them afarre off to bee sealed by bap∣tisme then that promise which was to them, and to their children; now if one covenant essentially, then either the Jewes children were not in covenant, no not so much as externally; contrary to what wee shewed before from Acts 2. and in the conclusions laid downe: or if they were, it was meerely ceremonious; now sup∣posing ceremony in the way of sealing, by circumcising of the flesh of their foreskin; yet what ceremony was in the principall part of the covenant it selfe, I will bee a God to thee and to thy seed after thee in their generations? or if it were one part of the covenant, then, but is now abolished by Christ, then it seemes Christ by his comming hath abolished one materiall part of the covenant of grace, without any other thing equivalent to parents as covenant parents in stead thereof.

Sixtly, then God is made a respector of persons looking at Jewes with theirs in covenant respects, but not so eying covenant inchur∣ched Gentiles: Yea hee is made to speake things at large, to bee a God to all the families of the earth, Jer. 31. 1. yet when it commeth to bee Analysed, he is not a covenant God to any more then per∣ticular persons actually beleeving onely: no covenant respect is had so much as externally, no not so much as to the choycest part and prop of the families, scil. children.

Seventhly, then is all former distinction, ever used to bee so care∣fully observed, and held forth, and mentioned, laid aside. Seed of the woman, and of the Serpent in the younglings of both are con∣founded, no distinction of sonnes of God, and of men, of seed of Isaac and Ishmael in the Infant part thereof. No Church distincti∣on of children cleane or incleane; Albeit, that wee mentioned not to the State, but Church at Corinth, as a Church to whom the contrary was noted as absurd; else even the children were as Pa∣gans uncleane, but now they are holy. So Acts 2. To you, and your children, not to others; as afterwards: actually to others with theirs Some onely were nigh in covenant, and politicall Church respects; the rest farre off: nay doe not C. B. Hen. Den, and some others ground upon Rom. 5. 18. whereby to put beleevers children in the same estate without any difference, as such, from any others children? Nay C. B. would know why Turkes, and be∣leevers Infants being alike free from actuall sinne and guilt of ori∣ginall, that they may not partake of the same benefit of free grace, and albeit in them there bee something worthy of damnation, yet

it appeares not from Scripture that any were damned for originall sinne onely, and would know why wee should not thinke as much of Infants in generall, dying infants, as was said of Davids child, 2 Sam. 12. 23. thought by Divines to bee saved, bringing Rom. 5. 18. for a proofe of such generall redemption of dying Infants. Strange charitie beyond all bounds of regular judgement, to all Infants dying, and none to beleevers Infants in generall, so much as of their externall interest in the covenant; but doth Mr. B. expound deaths reigne over Infants, Rom. 5. 14. to bee onely restrained to that of the first death? or might Babylons little ones bee accursed if not under wrath, as such? doth Mr. B. imagine that all the Infants destroyed in the flood, in Sodom and Gomorrah, in the last destructi∣on of Jerusalem, &c. that it is so much as probable they that were saved? are all by nature the children of wrath, and yet all dying in that estate, and under no covenant of grace, so much as exter∣nally it is, so much as probable that all such are saved? Is there any Mediation of Christ, but as a Mediator of a covenant? and are Turkes Infants under the covenant, when as their parents are not? were all Gentiles of old, yong and old, being strangers from the covenants of promise and of the Church, without God, and Christ, and hope: and now the case is so altered that the chrildren of strangers from the covenant are to bee judged hopefull? Doth Mr. B. startle at 1 Cor. 7. 14. that the children of beleevers, yea though dying Infants, yet as beleevers children, they are no more but civilly cleane, and in covenant respects as profane, yet are Pa∣gans children cleane in respect of Covenant mercy? for else how can they bee saved as before wee proved? as for Rom. 5. 18. our Di∣vines have used to answer Arminians, that [all] is taken for [many] as before, vers. 15. But here Mr. B. in the case of dying Infants will have it universall: and if universally true of dying Infants, why not so of all living Infants, why not of all men simply, where will there bee a restraint? If all men simply, in one sort of persons dying bee understood, and not all men that is many: whereas wee are used to bee upbraided with the absurditie of universall redemption; I feare Mr. B's doctrine rather. And so much of the first part of this discourse touching the covenant and Church estate and right of Church members children.

PART. II.

CHAP. I. Sect. I. Touching Childrens Baptismall right.

HAving discoursed of the doctrine of the Federall and Ecclesiasticall holinesse of the Children of visible beleeving and inchurched parents and cleared the same, let us addresse our selves a while to consider of the externall & Church right of such little ones, un∣to the initiatory seale of such covenant & Church right, which followeth thence. The initiatory seale followeth the covenant, wee speake not of an extraordinary time of the Church, when either it hath no particular expresse initiatory seale distinct from another sealing ordinance; as before that solemne covenan∣ting of God in reference to the Church in Isaacs race, Gen. 17. 7, 8, 9, &c. with 19. so there is some peculiar state of the time not ap∣pliable to the ordinary time and way of a visible politicall Church and its administrations: as then also were family Churches, as that in Melchisedecs and Jobs family; which not being successive∣ly to continue, were not so immediatly eyed in point of solemne institution and Church lawes, as was this of Abraham, Isaac and Jacobs race, wherein the visible Church was to bee continued: such extraordinary cases and times, are very impertinently urged by some to infringe the force of ordinary rules, and principles: they know an extraordinary case of eating shewbread by such as were not Priests, of plucking eares of corne on the Sabbath day, of a private Disciple's baptizing upon an extraordinary and immediate call, as did Ananias, Acts 9. of Zipporah's circumcising, and these doe not nullifie and invalidate ordinary rules and principles, touch∣ing circumcision or baptisme, or the sanctification of the Sab∣bath, &c.

This proposition then I shall lay downe for further proofe: that in ordinary times and cases, respecting the politicall visible Church, and its administrations; such little ones as are of parents in such visible Church estate, they have externall right unto the in∣joyned initiatory visible seale, of which they are outwardly capa∣ble, and ought not to bee denyed the use and benefit thereof; or∣dinary times then and not extraordinary are here considered: let none object then, children of members of an ordinary politicall visible Church are here considered: let none object an extraordi∣nary case of Johs or Melchisedecks family; a visible seale enjoyned, not a case wherein actually any such seale is not injoyned is here also considered; but either actually injoyned, or at least in view at the present making of the covenant with Church reference as in the case, Gen. 17. 7, 8, 9, &c. let none object Adam and Noahs time and cases against our thesis, externall right in such a Church seale is propounded; let none confound this with internall and saving right, which is visible to God and not to meere men; the initiato∣ry visible seale is propounded, not all the seales or Church privi∣ledges; as choyse of officers, and voting in other Church occasi∣ons, &c. A male child of eight dayes old might bee circumcised, but was never intended to bee injoyned personall appearance at the solemne celebration of the passeover, there to goe up, and not to bee carried or to have others appeare in their stead, Deut. 16. 16, 17. all the males which were to bee at that feast were as well to bee at the feast of tabernacles, Ibid. where such as kept that feast were to carry boughes to make Booths or Tabernacles to dwell in, Deut. 16. 16, 17. compared with Levit. 23. 34, 35. 38, 39, 40. which none will say was Infants worke. Let none then object, that you may as well plead for Infants comming to the Lords Supper, as in Cyprians time, and was the corruption of the time, as was crossing, rebaptizing, &c. in use in his time too, and as the Jewes Infants partooke of the passeover, the contrary whereof appeares in a word wee spake of initiatory sealing of persons outwardly ca∣pable thereof: otherwise albeit the parties have a covenant right unto it in the generall; yet in that case of incapability, it's pecu∣liar and their jus in re: justly suspended from being personally eli∣cited, and this doth not make the ordinary rule and ground of right to the initiatory seale to bee invalid: suppose an adult be∣leeving Pagan or Turke to joyne to our opposite Churches; who make totall immersion essentiall to baptisme, and that they were

banished into Freezeland or Greenland or some such cold countrey: if this person bee very weake and sick, yet desireth to joyne to them ere hee die, I demand whether hee hath right to baptisme or no? this will not bee denyed: Yea but is this right to bee elicited? sure∣ly no, unlesse they would bee guilty of his death. But why not baptized? because you will say it's not simply necessary to salvati∣on: There being no contempt of it, but onely a naturall and cor∣porall incapacitie thereof; but this crosseth not that ordinary rule, ground, and way of baptizing. Very true, but then let none object against such Infants covenant right to the initiatory seale; the case of the females of Abrahams seed, which albeit in Abrahams covenant yet not circumcised: for when God injoyned cutting away of the superfluous foreskin of the flesh to bee the seale of his covenant, the very nature of the command doth in reason, if the notion of males had never beene expressed, reach the case of the males, which have such a super∣fluous foreskin of their flesh, and not the females which are na∣turally and corporally uncapable thereof: as having by nature no such superfluous foreskin, and so in that case as in some others, that law of circumcision had some things peculiar in it, albeit it had other things in common with that of baptisme. For the clearer handling of this thesis propounded wee shall lay downe a few other propositions or conclusions.

SECT. II.

1. THat mixt commands of God having some part circumstan∣tiall, & vanishing, some part substantiall & abiding, the lat∣ter is binding to us, since Christs time, albeit the former be not. A se∣venth day which God shall single out to bee holy is binding to us; not the very seventh day of the week to be that day, he that com∣manded the sanctification of the seventh day, hee commanded a seventh day of his owne choosing, and that to bee that seventh day: the former stands in the fall of the latter. Hee that comman∣ded a strict holy worship on the Sabbath, Exod. 34. 21, &c. he com∣mands sutable worship to the day and strictnesse of worship, in such and such a manner of expressions; the former was perpetuall, the latter temporary; the moralitie of the second commande∣ment inforceth all the substantialls in seales or worship injoyned, nor doth Christ in that sense abolish a title of the Law.

SECT. III.

THat consequentiall commandements grounded on Scripture are Scripture commandements; as even consequentiall arti∣cles of faith are articles of faith: and in a word all consequences drawne as necessarily flowing from, or grounded upon Scripture principles, these are of Scripturall warrant. Paul, Act. 13. 46, 47. maketh a promise, yea an old testament promise, to bee virtually a command, yea a new Testament commandement: Loe wee turne to the Gentiles; why so? For God hath so commanded us; How doth that appeare, or where? It followeth, so hath God com∣manded, saying, I have set thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou shouldest bee my salvation to the ends of the earth: this was spoken too in Esay 42. and 49. and it was a gracious promise in the letter of it; yea but Paul rightly drew the force of a command as included in it, according to the old rule; Hee which promiseth the end, hee commandeth the meanes tending to that end; but of this more hereafter, but here wee see what ground worke is made use of in way of authorising so great and waighty a matter upon. It's verily the mind of God and Christ that Baptisme and the Lords Supper should bee administred to the worlds end; yet is it onely to bee drawne by Scripture consequence from such like places, as Matth. 28. 19, 20. and 1 Cor. 11. 26. So when it's said, As oft as yee doe this: our Divines make account it is a virtuall com∣mand to celebrate the Lords Supper often: and not, as in some pla∣ces, twice or thrice a yeare. That sisters as well as brethren should in case bee ecclesiastically censured it is of Scripture warrant; yet by consequence onely; for the rule is of a brother offending, &c. nor is [brother] of the common gender, Matth. 18. 15. 2. Thes. 3. 6. 14. And as in matter of practise, so of faith, it is thus; in Christs time there was no other Scripture, how then should that great article of the resurrection bee convincingly proved, even to learned Sad∣duces which deny it? verily an old Testament proofe Christ ma∣keth account sufficeth, as that Matth. 22. 29. 31, 32. compared with Exod. 3. 6, &c. and Luke 22. 37. yet this was but drawne by con∣sequence. Thus the orthodox fathers dealt against the Arrians de∣nying Christ to bee essentially one with the Father, they held him forth to bee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 consubstantiall or coessentiall with the Father, yet no direct Scriptures are for the same expresly: so in reasoning against such as denyed the deity of the holy Ghost, or that hee

was to bee worshipped they did the like: And where is it otherwise then by consequence to bee drawne from Scripture, that there are three distinct persons or substances in that one God? or that Christ hath two natures essentially distinguished, and yet united in one Person, &c? Circumcision is called a signe of the covenant, how did Paul in speaking of Abraham mention circumcision as the seale of the righteousnesse of his faith? whence drew hee that, that circumcision was in the nature of it; else it had not beene so to Abraham or any other, any such thing? verily it was from Scripture consequence. And as in matters of faith and practise, so in matters of fact, the same rule holds, Acts 4. 4. there were foure thousands 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 virorum, not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hominum, a word of the common gender, which beleeved: What no woman among them, none of their wives? that were very strange, but were they not baptized? Anabaptists will yeeld surely they were, yea but that must bee drawne by consequence. The Church of the Philip∣pians, Colossians, Ephesians, &c. surely had the Lords Supper admi∣nistred among them, so the Thessalonians, the seven Asian Churches had baptisme administred to and among them, yet this must bee drawne by consequence, or no way, according to that true rule all this is regular, scil. Scripture is not the letter alone, but the minde and intent thereof drawne by consequence, according to the Analogy of faith, and by this rule wee are to hold forth the doctrine of faith and rule of manners and worship, &c. Rom. 12. 6. Else as well many absurdities would follow. Must wee actually sell all, taking up a Gibbet daily, lend freely, looking for no∣thing againe, turne the other cheeke to him which smiteth one, plucke out our eyes, cut off right hands, &c? Analogy of faith must helpe here. Hence Evangelicall duties are not alwayes grounded upon expresse commandements, either in old or new Testament, but from consequences drawne from either: such as are praying morning and evening in the family, and also in the closet alone; constant, daily and set meditation; daily reading of the Scriptures in the family: holy vowing, setting a part solemne dayes in pri∣vate or publique for thanksgiving, &c. much lesse are many of these come over againe, as some phrase it, in the new Testament, with mention of the persons thereunto oblieged: thereby receiving their binding virtue; nor is that therefore sound that in point of wor∣ship that is excluded which is not expressed; doe not such even grant consequences?

SECT. IIII.

3. THat Federall ordinances, such as are the seales, are as well priviledges as precepts; hence circumcision is reckoned as the fathers priviledge, Acts 7. 2. 8. hence Rom. 3. 1, 2, 3, 4. see more Acts 2. 38, 39. this some which oppose us acknowledge when such speeches as these are used:

that it is certaine the Jewes had by Gods appointment the priviledge of circumcision, and the covenant made with Abraham did belong to them in speciall manner, and that children of parents not matrimonially sancti∣fied, as Zara and Pharez, were in the covenant of saving grace, and Church-priviledges; surely then circumcision was one, which these babes did partake of. [And] the Jewes had this priviledge, to bee reckoned in the outward administration as branches of the Olive:

and one of the wayes of that administra∣tion was circumcision, was it not?

[And] the priviledges in re∣spect of the administration of the covenant are now many wayes inlarged, and made more honorable; and a little before, the promises of the covenant of grace being of the substance, not of the administrations, are priviledges and the same now to belee∣vers, and as large and honorable as then.

These speeches in∣deed seeme not so consonant to some passages before, and some after:

that it is no priviledge to us, to have any thing in lieu of that administration, but Christ already come, who is in stead of all.

But let mee reason of these things a little, the covenant of A∣braham in speciall wise belonged to the Jewes, and that was a co∣venant of grace, scil. to bee a God to them and theirs, as I have proved; was this no priviledge to them? or was that, Deut. 29. 14. with 30. 6. no priviledge? was it no priviledge for this name∣sake of God to have such ingagements, not meerely for temporalls but spiritualls, even when they had provoked him? Ezek. 36. from the 17. to the end. Were they with theirs so peculiar a peo∣ple in these respects, and yet were these no priviledges? Deut. 14. 2. see more Chap. 7. 6, 7, 8. it's reckoned as a choyce fruit of his love: And were even sundry Infants of theirs base borne, in the covenant of saving grace, and Church priviledges, and was this no priviledge to them, if so? since the promises of the covenant of grace, are priviledges, and the same now to beleevers, and as large and honorable as then, either these promises to their chil∣dren mentioned, Deut. 30. 6, &c. were not of the substance of the

covenant of grace; and then how could even base borne children bee in the covenant of saving grace? or they are no priviledge; neither of which I suppose will bee affirmed: if these promises to Church children bee not barely of the administration of the co∣venant: for so are the Church priviledges rather, which are be∣fore made distinct from their inbeing in the covenant of grace, but of the substance. Then why not now the same and larger rather? Why are beleevers children then excluded the covenant? And are the priviledges in respect of administration of the covenant now inlarged, &c. Then either that administration of the covenant ini∣tiatory seale, as such, to their children, was no priviledge: or there must be such a like priviledge and not straitned, at least not wholly excluded, as that of a like, I say not the same, but a like admini∣stration of the initiatory covenant seale to inchurched beleevers children now. And suppose it bee no priviledge to have any thing in lieu of circumcision of Infants, but Christ; yet is it no priviledge to have any other thing then Christ to beleevers them∣selves? Circumcision is confessed to bee an appointed seale of initiation to them that entered into covenant with God before Christs incarnation, and baptisme such a seale since; and that it signified sanctification by the Spirit, justification and salvation by Christ, and faith in him, but as to come, and baptisme as come, &c. and is this no priviledge to beleevers, that now they have not that manner of initiation by circumcision; yea but in a better way they have, scil. by baptisme? Christ indeed was then to the Saints, and so hee is now all in all ordinances and priviledges; the Chief∣taine, that first, or principall one, Esay 41. Cant. 5. Psal. 73. 25. but it was not therefore no priviledge, nor is now the like, to have together with Christ many pretious ordinances dispensed to them and us: and verily the Scripture in old and new Testament, accounteth it no small priviledge, to have Gods Tabernacle and Sanctuary, Church and Church ordinances with us; and persons to bee in and under the same; hence promised as a reward and a fruit, yea part of the ratification of his covenant with them, Levit. 26. 9. 11. and therefore in the choyse times of the Gospel, it's so reckoned, Revel. 21. 3. yea and as of old the childrens Church estate and priviledge was therein included as of that nature: so in refe∣rence to the other times mentioned, was the same of the same ac∣count, as wee have shewed from Ezek. 37. 25, 26, 27.

SECT. V.

4. THat Baptisme is now the onely initiatory visible seale of the covenant; which being once administred, there needs no more renewing of it.

First, it is a seale of the covenant, no bare badge of Christiani∣tie as some have said, albeit the more judicious of our opposites yeeld this, that

the covenant of grace is said properly to bee sealed in Baptisme, and that Baptisme since Christs incarnation, is the appointed seale of God to such as enter into covenant with him.

And it appeares so, 1. In that it agreeth in the essentialls with circumcision as an initiatory seale, Col. 2. 11, 12. whence baptized Gentiles are said to be of the circumcision, Phil. 3. and Jewes said to bee baptized, 1 Cor. 12. hence first instituted for a seale to the cir∣cumcised Jewes; to shew it was in the essentialls of sealing Abra∣hams covenant to them, but the same with circumcision in a man∣ner; onely as that sealed it to them visibly in Christ, as to come, this did it in like sort in reference to Christ as come: that was the seale of the righteousnesse of Abrahams faith, or that whereon his faith acted to righteousnes of justification, Rom. 4. 11. even the promise of grace in Christ, Rom. 10. 6, 7. with Deut. 30. 14. hence when Christ is called the Minister of circumcicision, it is thus explained by the end of the signe administred, scil. to confirme the promises made unto the fathers, Rom. 15. 8. Acts 7. 8. Gen. 17. 11. hence the pro∣mise premised, and then baptisme annexed as the seale, Acts 2. 38. hence that washing annexed to the word, Ephes. 5. 25, 26. 2. It's a Baptizing in the name or covenant fellowship of God the Father, Sonne and Spirit: hee having exalted his word above all his name, Psal. 138. 2. 3. It's a seale of remission of sinnes, and there∣fore of the promise tendering the same, hence joyned, Acts 2. 38, 39. Acts 22. 4. The nature of it sheweth the same, it being a Gospell Sacrament, and that is a visible seale, and the seale is to the cove∣nant, hence called by the name, Acts 7. 8. 1 Cor. 11. 25.

Secondly, it is an initiatory seale: as first, annexed to the Gos∣pell dispensed, with reference to covenant fellowship with God in Trinitie; not first, Disciple them, and then, let them come to my Table, but baptizing them, scil. so soone as ever brought into co∣venant and Church estate, and seale them up thereby unto cove∣nant fellowship with the Father, Sonne and Spirit. Hence repent and bee baptized, for the promise is to you; not, repent and come to

the Lords Table; for the promise is to you. Hence that order observed of communion in breaking of bread after they were bap∣tized, vers. 41, 42, 43, 44. there John began in any sealing way, Matth. 3. Marke 1. As of old circumcision long before the Passeo∣ver, hence called the washing of regeneration; metonymically at∣tributing the thing sealed, to the visible seale, Tit. 3. 5. the new birth is the first fruits of the spirit of promise: nor is this ascribed to the other Sacrament as that which is its proper Sacramentall worke initiatorily to seale; albeit after it bee thus initiatorily sealed by baptisme, the other doth also virtually confirme it.

Thirdly, this being once administred needs never bee renewed, as if two initiations or beginnings, or regenerations, or first ente∣rances into covenant, or first ingraffings into Christ, &c. as there was not Iterations of circumcision. It were but to take the name of God in vaine, and a wilworship indeed, if ever before dispensed in the truth of the essentialls of the ordinance, and it were unsafe to say, wee may renew that one baptisme, as wee may renue that one faith of ours, unlesse as many times in a day: and as in variety of occurrents, changes, services, sufferings, temptations, ordinan∣ces, businesses, &c. wee are to renue our faith, so wee should re∣nue our baptisme, nor will the 19. of the Acts beare out any such practise. Luke mentions Pauls discourse touching the manner of Johns baptisme, scil. to hold forth the duty which God required in reference to the Lord Jesus, and accordingly they were by John baptized into the name of Jesus, whom John held forth, as vers. 4, 5. compared shewes, and as the annexing of Pauls name, 1. to this declaration, vers. 4, 5. and then 2. to his act which hee then did, vers. 6. •…•…inceth: It's not said, then Paul baptized them, but then Paul laid his hands upon them. It's said of the other seale, As oft as yee doe this, 1 Cor. 11. But not a whisper that way touching being oft baptized. The Apostle in mentioning of one spirit, body, hope of our calling, metonymically put for the thing hoped for, even glory, which is but one essentially, as one faith: which I sup∣pose is taken, as oft in Scripture, for the doctrine of faith, which is but one, Gal. 1. 6. 7, 8. Jude 3. and so one Lord and one God: hee mentions one baptisme: and why doth hee not as well say one Lords Supper too, which albeit oft renewed to the same persons, yet it's but one institution and the same ordinance still: if no fur∣ther matter bee in that onenesse of baptisme, but to signifie, that it's one and the same baptisme indeed, but yet so as that it hinders

not, but it may often bee renued upon one and the same person warrantably, though it were before orderly administred to him.

Fourthly, that baptisme is the onely initiatory seale: I never heard this yet so much as questioned by any which deny it not to bee a seale, therefore I need not speake any further in confirmation thereof.

SECT. VI.

5. THat the Application of such an initiatory seale of the co∣venant of grace made in reference to an ordinary politi∣call visible Church which God shall appoint, and whereof the se∣verall parties in that covenant are capable; this is an externall con∣dition of that covenant, and to bee so farre forth kept by all that are externally interested in the same, and that for that very reason and ground, because they are in such sort interested in that co∣venant. Ere wee confirme this, let us premise that, that covenant Gen. 17. was a covenant of grace, and it was made with reference to an ordinary politicall visible Church, as we have before shewed. And albeit that Church, quà such a politicall Church & nationall, &c. differ from congregationall Churches: yet quâ visibil•…•… ecclesia politica, & ordinaria; so it was essentially the same with ours; hence then needs no scrupling or startling. As for their externall interest also in the covenant of saving grace, it hath been likewise cleared, & that also need not breed contention upon the point of disparity.

This being premised, the proposition may more easily proceed, Gen. 17. 7. God propoundeth his gratious covenant, vers. 9. hee in∣formeth of one externall condition to bee observed, by persons taken into that gratious covenant, and inferreth the condition upon the premised covenant: thou Abraham and thy seed after thee: and when Isaac with whom — this covenant is established, vers. 19. as in whose race the Church and Church seed is to bee continued hath seed; then it is thou, and thy seed: and when Jacob hath his seed, it is still the same, thou and thy seed, in such covenant lan∣guage, what hee speaketh to one father hee speaketh to others; all are but Abraham and his seed still: yea and as then the same to Abrahams beleeving seed with their children, so it's but the same now; thou beleever and thy seed after thee, are the same parties as Abraham and his seed; yea thou Abraham and thy seed after thee, scil. in their generations; wherein fathers and children be∣getting and begotten are comprehended: And so now Abrahams

spirituall seed in their generations, are Abraham and his seed; thus farre it's the same: yea, but what must Abraham and this his seed doe, and therefore doe because in covenant? they must keepe the covenant. But some are Infants there intended in the seed af∣ter thee, and seed in their generations, how can they keepe cove∣nant? Yes verily in the sense intended they may, scil. receive such a covenant and Church initiatory seale, as he shall appoint to them, according to their outward capacitie, else to imagine any other externall way of their keeping of covenant, it were vaine. Abraham and his adult beleeving seed, which so farre forth hee as com∣munis persona did therein represent, they may keepe Gods covenant many other wayes; but the Infant seed of Abraham and of his belee∣ving children, then or now cannot externally and actually keepe the covenant and externall condition thereof otherwise.

And let it bee attended, that the wise, gratious covenanter, and Law giver of his Church, hee distinctly layeth downe; first, this ge∣nerall rule and principle with the ground of it; before hee instance in, or pitch upon any particular way or branch thereof. Where∣fore this generall being with greatest wisedome thus laid downe, it must have its distinct consideration and weight by, and in it selfe, absolutè, as well as any particular branch thereof may, and doth ad∣mit of the like, or as even this generall may have its consideration also, comparatè, in reference to any such particular. Hee that were to preach of this Text, Gen. 17. 9. might and would so handle it, and raise distinct observations from it: if one were to deale with an adult person, a seeker; which denyeth all visible Church ordi∣nances, &c. and onely pleads interest in the promise, in Christ, and the Spirit and Father, spirituall illuminations, and consolati∣ons, and quicknings promised; this Scripture ground amongst others, might now bee urged: Thou shalt therefore, even because of the promise and covenant, keepe my covenant, saith the Lord. Yea suppose it were some Jew that should bee converted, and not deny the ordinances of Baptisme, but like as many in former times, as Constantine, Theodosius, and divers others did upon unwarranta∣ble grounds, hee should deferre his baptisme too long, and nelect it too much, pleading the fulnesse of the covenant: and that all in all ordinances is their and in the branches of it, the promises, as in the well-springs, Esay 12. 3. this, Gen. 17. 9. might bee very perti∣nently urged to him, Thou shalt therefore keepe my covenant; ei∣ther then hee must deny this Sacrament to bee any externall con∣dition

of the covenant, on our parts, as well as a visible seale thereof on Gods part; which were ridiculous or if it bee yeelded to bee a dutie on mans part externally in covenant, then it is manifest indignitie to God, yea a breach of covenant to neg∣lect it, as receiving the initiatory Sacrament, is a speciall branch of keeping Gods covenant, so neglect or contempt thereof, must bee acknowledged to bee a speciall breach of it, and as much might bee urged in respect of neglect or contempt of the initiatory sea∣ling of their seed, or children; both are equally made Gods cove∣nant to bee kept, or the covenant condition and dutie which most immediatly and necessarily and properly doth follow thence. Hence this is firstly, and principally here included, as the keeping of Gods covenant, by the persons interested therein according to their outward capacitie of it.

This royall generall covenant Law, was not ceremoniall, nor was the ground work of it ceremonial: that covenant, I will be a God to thee and thy seed, was not ceremoniall & vanishing, but an everla∣sting, & if everlasting then an immutable covenant, even the same to the worlds end; that inference of this covenant duty, laying upon such as were externally interested in it, as propounded with Church reference; Thou shalt therefore keepe my covenant, and thy seed after thee; this was not ceremoniall. That covenant du∣tie in the generall, and the keeping of it, I meane an initiatory visible seale of the covenant, and the receiving of it, was not in the nature of it ceremoniall; for then every species of this subalterne genus an initiatory covenant seale, had been abolished by Christs comming, and so not circumcision onely in the symboll, and cir∣cumstance of it, but in the genericall nature of it as an initiatory seale and sense of the righteousnesse of faith, interest in the cove∣nant, &c. and so baptisme too, had never been instituted: because it had been then to revive abolished ceremonies, &c. this generall Law was never repealed or abolished. Say then that particular way of initiation first pitched upon on this ground worke: namely cut∣ting away of the foreskin of the flesh, and that of males of eight dayes old, &c. were ceremoniall, yet this generall covenant Law, must not run parallel with it too. I conclude then that particular way also of initiation unto covenant, and Church fellowship by Baptisme of confederate parents and their seed as it is a covenant duty, of which more anon, so it depends upon externall covenant interest; nor let any here interrupt the proceeding hereof with

the old cavill touching covenant females; it hath been said their naturall incapacity of that former way of initiation, exempted them then, and yet not now. Nor yet doth that any way invali∣date the conclusion propounded, no more doth the objecting of Job. It's likely hee had a family Church which was not to abide, and was a peculiarity of those times, and no ordinary visible po∣liticall Church in reference whereunto wee speake: So to what some object about any beleevers in Rome or India, &c. we say, such pearles are not ordinarily looked for in such dunghils, nor would any seeke such living ones amongst those dead persons, they are not a formed matter of a politicall visible Church, but they are as materia informis. They are quoad homines actually without, and not within any politicall visible Church. The covenant of grace nakedly con∣sidered giveth a person which is actually in it, a remote right to the initiatory seale, but it doth not give an immediate right there∣to, for so the covenant of grace as invested with Church cove∣nant onely giveth this proximate right to that seale. God being the God of order, will have that his Church seale to bee attained in a way of order; as of old strangers might not bee circumcised, but with some submission to that Church order explicitly or im∣plicitly, and so now; the orderly and ordinary dispensation of the seale is committed to the visible Church, Matth. 28. 19, 20. so that what ever right any have to the seale, which are not of any particular visible Church, yet they must come by the use of their right in a way of order.

Object. Yea but the Catechumens were in covenant and visible Church estate, yet were not presently baptized.

Answ. If they were in covenant and Church estate, they had then and thereby right so farre forth to the seale: but there might bee some other actuall causes why such adult new commers on from Paganisme, might bee suspended a while, the use and actuall benefit of their right; yet that hinders not but that in covenant In∣fants, in whom there are no such actuall impediments, that they should be suspended, much lesse wholly denied, as by Anabaptists they are, either any right, or use of their right to Baptisme.

SECT. VII.

6. ANd because in this particular, some stresse of the maine case is put, 1. I shall indeavour yet further to confirme it, that covenant interest carryeth a maine stroake in point of ap∣plication

of that seale, to persons interested therein, and not uncapable thereof in any bodily respect.

First, then it is the ground worke given to the generall Law, about an initiatory covenant duty, scil. application of some injoy∣ned initiatory seale, and therefore must bee of like force in the par∣ticular branches and wayes of such initiatory sealing, as circumci∣sing then and baptizing.

Secondly, the covenant in such sort invested with Church cove∣nant, now it is the forme of a politicall visible Church body; gi∣ving therefore, both a Church being as I may say, as naturall formes doe a naturall being, and withall the priviledge of a mem∣ber of such a Church body, suitable to its memberly estate, as is this of the Church initiatory seale, even to the least member there∣of, although they are not yet so perfect in all actuall energy of compleat members, and so neither in all actuall priviledges of such compleat members. I suppose what ever others deny this way, yet our opposites doe not deny, that Church covenant explicit or im∣plicit is the forme of a visible politicall Church as such; so that till that be, they are not so incorporated as to be fit for Church dispen∣sations, or acts of peculiar Church power over each other, more then over others, over whom they can have no power unlesse they had given explicit, or implicit consent thereto: as reason will evince.

Thirdly, even in doubtfull cases, where the extent of the com∣mand is questionable, yet interest in the covenant casts the scoales. As for instance, in strangers which proved religious, albe∣it not of their family servants, and so under the Law, Gen. 17. 12, 13. they might bee circumcised, if they desired other Church or∣dinances, &c. yet were they else free, unlesse in such a case of their owne desire that way, Exod. 12. end. Hence Cornelius a godly Gen∣tile, living neare the Jewes, yet not circumcised, as Acts 10. 1, 2, 3, 4. compared with Chap. 11. 3. 14, 15. 18.

Yea but if the command bound them, why were they at such li∣bertie? and if no binding command for their circumcision, why were they circumcised? suppose Exod. 12. gave some libertie to the Church guides that way, for such strangers as more usually dwelt amongst them; yet such as 1 Kings 8, 41, 42, 43. which came from farre, in a meere transient way, for some temporary religious worship at the Temple, as that proselyted Eunuch, Acts 8. 27. those were surely circumcised, else how admitted to temple wor∣ship?

since that was counted an abomination, for any other so much as to come there, Acts 21 28. and if circumcised at any time by any of the godly Church guides consent, what gave them right to it? not the commandement, Gen. 17. 12, 13, 14. no nor that Exod. 12. what was that to an Eunuchs case and others which ne∣ver sojourned with them for any space? were they then unlawfully circumcised? no verily, no whisper of that in Scripture, God al∣lowed of that passage in Solomons prayer, touching the strangers temple service, 1 Kings 8. and 9. explained. It was then their ex∣ternall interest in Gods gratious covenant, which gave rise to that application of the seale, and not the commandment; contrary to what▪ some say, that not the covenant but the commandment of God onely, was the ground of circumcision.

Fourthly, it appeares from the nature of an initiatory seale of the covenant, which must bee as large as the covenant, and so reach all the parties comprehended actually by vertue of covenant; according as such children are, as before declared: especially since it is the seale of Gods people, and visible Church as before shewed, given first for the Church, in giving of pastors and teachers onely to the Church, which alone can administer the seales in ordinary dispensations, Matth. 28. end, and giving them withall to the Church, as from her to bee dispensed by her officers, to such as desire the same. Now Gods people are knowne, either by actu∣all personall profession and confession of their owne, as adults are; or by Gods promise, and by parents avouching God as theirs in covenant and their childrens, Gen. 17. 9, 10. thou shalt doe thus and thus, and thy seed also; to which he submitteth afterwards, and so his also with him, and after him, besides the maine in the ini∣tiatory seale to bee firstly and properly attended, as it is a cove∣nant and Church seale, is covenant and Church interest. Hence called by the name of covenant, when yet it is but a Sacramentall signe and seale of it, Gen. 17. 13. Acts 7, 8. that is first held out and sealed as the convoy of all other desired good, 2 Pet. 1. 4. But especially in that initiatory seale, the signatum of the covenant, is of more considerable weight, then the externall Symboll, ceremo∣ny and circumstance: either of cutting or washing absolutely, or relatively considered. If washing of a person in the name of the Trinitie bee a clearer, and easier Symboll then that of cutting the flesh, yet not of such weight as is the covenant sealed, both by the one and by the other, And to shew that the covenant is the maine

thing considerable therein; hence it is that the covenant is first propounded as the groundworke of the commandement it selfe, as of circumcision, so of Baptisme, and much more of the application of either, to any in covenant, Gen. 17. 9, 10, 11. There∣fore, scil. because I have said I will bee your God, I command you to doe thus and thus, not because I have commanded you, that I therefore promise to doe this for you, or doe you thus and thus at my command, and then on, therefore I will doe so and so for you. So the Gospell prophesie and promise is prefaced, and put in the preamble to that injunction of their Baptisme, by John, Luke 3. 3, 4, 5, 6, &c. Hence the Gospell, and so the covenant of grace, h••ld out as grounding Baptisme, Acts 2. 38, 39. And childrens co∣venant right, was held out as one branch of that Gospell, as wee proved; and from the same principle, that they were also to bee sealed by Baptisme; yea albeit the Apostles urged repentance, yet the seale is propounded as to the promise; Peter said, Bee baptized, for the promise is to you; and this was no meere morall motive but a Scripturall groundworke inforcing it, as it was a Scripture groundwork virtually injoyning and requiring them to repent; for the promise is to you, so Act. 10. Peter saith there is no let to their baptisme; and thereof he maketh the visibilitie of that covenant grace, although common to reprobates also in those first times, his groundworke; gathering thereby, that they were not now as formerly prophane, uncleane and outlaries from the covenant, as Ephes. 2. 11, 12. but cleane, and nigh as they themselves were. Wash∣ing of regeneration is not grounded on any thing in us or with∣out us, so much as on Gods grace, and so covenant favour, Tit. 3. 5. Hence also by Baptisme persons are not sealed into any thing in them so much as into the name of the Father, Sonne and Spirit, even into the covenant name of grace, whereby he is knowne, and into covenant fellowship with the blessed Trinitie, to which eve∣ry baptized person, prove hee elect or reprobate, yet is thus exter∣nally sealed. That fellowship with Christ as head of the visible Church by the Spirit in the judgement of veritie, or charitie such; it is all but covenant grace and blessing. Of old the consequent cause of the seale was grace in them and theirs; but the antecedent cause was Gods covenant grace to them and on them, Gen. 17. 7, 8, 9. and Deut. 30. 6. and so now, that part of Abrahams covenant was not then appliable to Infants, scil. Walke before mee, &c. but yet that was then appliable; I will bee their God, I will circumcise

their hearts, and that sufficed them, as Deut. 30. the Analogy holds now; in a word the seale, is a seale not of nor to the commande∣ment, but covenant; this therefore is the maine and principall in the application of it.

It is the covenant which hath the maine instrumentall force, in the fruit of the initiatory seale, and the application of it, Ephes. 5. 25, 26. and why shall not the externall interest in the covenant, have chiefe influence into the externall interest, as well of the ap∣plication of the initiatory seale? by externall interest in the cove∣nant, persons so interested come to have externall interest at least, to the finall causes of Baptisme, as covenant mercy and blessing, the Spirit, Christs resurrection, &c. Tit. 3. 8. 1 Cor. 12. 12, 13. 1 Pet. 3. 21. and therefore as well so farre inrighted in the initiatory seale of it, whether they are adult or Infants.

CHAP. VIII.

7. THat the covenant priviledges of grace are even to bee ex∣pounded in the favour of the principall, or lesse principall counter-parties unlesse any exception bee made of persons or pri∣viledges by him, which was the covenant maker. It's so in all o∣ther royall patents, and grants of princely grace, and bounty, and so here in this, which is of that nature: unlesse any will say it was no priviledge of divine grace to have so peculiar and distin∣guishing covenant, to bee made with first reference unto that peo∣ple of Abraham, Isaac and Jacobs race; & that it was no priviledge to have the same visibly confirmed upon them, and theirs after them; the contrary whereof hath beene granted by some which oppose us and hath been before cleared: What though they many of them made no good use thereof, yet the priviledge was peculiar, and pre∣cious; Hence Exod. 19. 16. Deut. 7. 6, 7, 8. Amos 3. 2. hence such peculiar judgements brought on them, and theirs for grosse con∣tempts and rejectings thereof, Dan. 9. 12, 13. Rom. 11. 20. Matth. 21. 43, 44. and 23. 37, 38, 39. Acts 13. 40, 41, 42. 45, 46, 47. 1 Thes. 2. 15, 16. fulfilling that prophesie, Zach. 11. from 6. verse to the end. Hence that of such peculiar use, fruit and efficacy in many others of them, Rom. 3. 1, 2, 3, 4. and 2. 25. and 9, 4, 5, 6. Royall grants, patents, crownes, immunities and heritages may bee basely used, and forfeited and lost, yet are they peculiar priviledges; so here, but of this before. As touching exceptions, wee see if God will except Ishmael and his race, for being such a Church seed, as

with whom the covenant priviledge shall abide, hee is so excep∣ted: and it was accounted a sore punishment to him and his, as if the contrary were a choyse priviledge, Gen. 21. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. with Gal. 4. 22, 23, 24, &c. by allusion; before that hee was ecclesiasti∣cally discovered, the covenant is sealed upon him personally, but before ever hee have children, hee is discovenanted, and dischur∣ched for his wickednesse, by Gods hand; &c. Gen. 21. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, &c. and that was his punishment that hee is a discovenanted, and externally dischurched and open excommunicate person when hee came to have children, and so they have no benefit. Caines exter∣nall discovenanting, and dischurching in a parentall as well as personall way, was his sore punishment, Gen. 4. 12, 13, 14. with 6. 1, 2. his posteritie have the common name of children of men, and not as those of Seth, children of God; such exceptions did God use some way or other, to expresse where hee intended not this covenant priviledge; Verily so long as Gods gracious cove∣nant made with Church reference, to inchurched confederate pa∣rents, and their generations to Abraham and his spirituall seed in their generations for an everlasting covenant, his mind of grace touching an externall initiatory sealing, establishing and ratifying the same to them, abideth: nor may any change, or repeale the same, or infringe, or curtaile the latitude of it, unlesse himselfe doe it, as it is in all other royall grants, and lawes standing in force, untill repealed by them, by whom granted and made; hence that signe is called by the name of the covenant, as virtually in it, and annexed ordinarily to it; extraordinary times as those before, infringe not the ordinary course, as before shewed; hence even that sealing said to be for an everlasting covenant; partly in that it was a seale of that covenant so induring, and partly because presidentially and in the genericall nature of it, to abide, the Church and covenant people of God combined, being never after to want an externall initiatory seale of the covenant. Hence also among other causes God instituteth baptisme, first for the Jewish Church, and so continued the use of it to, and amongst Gentile Churches; there was no interstitium, nor was it ever accounted a branch of the exhibition of New testament grace and a priviledge of covenant inchurched parents, to have their children want, and bee deprived of any externall covenant, and Church interest; but rather that initiatory sealing of inchurched parents, little ones have ever been accounted by all true visible Churches to bee an ex∣ternall

way of exhibition of the grace of God and Christ. Surely, there being so many passages mentioned formerly touching this part of Gods minde of grace once, if they were intended to bee invalid in any such way now, and yet God never expressed his minde for repeale of such substantiall branches of his minde of Grace, towards his people and Churches; there are so far stum∣bling blocks laid before them to occasion mistakes: For who will not take the same for granted, which considers the same advisedly, as indeed the Churches of old have done before? And when was it a fitter time to make exceptions of Infants, then when the in∣churching of the Gentiles is mentioned, Matth. 28. 19? Why should even then the old phrase of nations bee used, if no intent at least of the specificall parts of the nations to be inchurched? what though circumcision bee left out, yet the species of the persons cir∣cumcised are plainely included? If all nations bee to bee blessed in Christ, that sort of persons in the nations, scil. little ones, as well as that of adult persons are included: how else come any of either sort to bee blessed in Christ, or saved by him? so in this case, Matth. 28. 19.

SECT. IX.

8. THat the childrens federall interest and right; it is firstly the confederating parents priviledge. Hence, given as an incouragement to Abraham to walke in faith and truth with God, Gen. 17. 1. In that God also would bee a God to his seed, vers. 7. and the like was spoken in way of incouragement also, unto those Israelites and proselytes, Deut. 30. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, &c. And the like course is taken by the Apostles after Christs ascension, Act. 2. 38, 39. Hence, the covenant blessing of Jacob, pronounced in a pro∣pheticall, as well as parentall way upon the sonnes of Joseph, E∣phraim and Manasseh, and their children after them, scil. that the name of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as covenant and Church fathers, must bee called on them, albeit they had other personall names, as of Ephraim, &c. Now this is yet called Jacobs blessing of Joseph their father, Gen. 48. 15. hee blessed Joseph, scil. in his childrens co∣venant blessing, vers. 16.

SECT. X.

9. THat visibly beleeving and covenanting parents, they are injoyned the use of the initiatory covenant and Church seale, in reference to their childrens initiatory sealing together

with them, according as they are outwardly capable thereof. As it is their priviledge to have it so, so is it their charge and dutie to take wise, faithfull and seasonable care that it be so done. Abraham alone is not to bee circumcised, but his seed also, which are natu∣rally capable thereof, are to be so initiated & sealed unto covenant and Church fellowship. It was onely Abraham to whom God then appeared, and declared his covenant and mind of grace touching his and his seeds sealing, yet Abraham is not spoken to in the one or other respect, as to a meere particular man, but as to a com∣mon and representative person also, imbracing and owning a gra∣tious covenant, and the generall condition at least of it: As on his owne particular behalfe, so on the behalfe both of the choyce seed of his loynes in their generations, together with the rest of his Church seed by Isaac in their generations: as also with gene∣rall reference, in the essentialls of both covenant and condition of it, unto his spirituall seed in their generations, after Christs ascension, which were to bee of the Gentiles, and of the Jewes: both before their rejection, and upon their re-ingraffing into visi∣ble Church estate. Hence in mentioning that particular way of initiation by circumcision, first pitcht upon, plurall phrases are used, when Abraham onely is in presence. The covenant which yee shall keepe, And each manchild amongst you, And my covenant shall bee in your flesh, And it shall bee a token of the covenant be∣twixt mee and you, vers. 10, 11, 12, 13. Abraham must see all this performed, and hee did so, so farre as it could bee done at pre∣sent, vers. 23. Abraham enters into this holy bond, and thereby the obligation became of force upon his children which were not then present. Hence, the parents act of neglect, is temporally at least corrected in the little child, even as the parents bond was the childs obligation, Gen. 7. 14. Hence too, that God might further evince it to bee mainly the parents duty, even godly Moses the pa∣rent is indangered for the neglect of the sealing of his child, Exod. 4. 2. 4, 5, 6. where by the way, let it bee noted, that albeit upon some ceremoniall grounds, the mind of God being that way made knowne, their marriages of old with heathens became so farre un∣lawfull, that even their children also were discarded, yet was it not morally and of it selfe of that nature, even amongst the mem∣bers of that Church, that the children of such Church members, begotten upon heathen wives, not of the Church, were uncleane, and not to bee sealed by that initiatory Church seale. For God

himselfe is angry with Moses here, because his sonne by that Aegyp∣tian wife was not circumcised. And long after it was counted of∣fensive if the sonne of a Jewish wife, even by a Grecian husband, were not that way initiated, Acts 16. 1, 2, 3, which is the very con∣troverted case, occasionally mentioned, 1 Cor. 7. 14. But to returne to the proposition before laid downe.

From the same ground mentioned it was, that when Peter mo∣ved his hearers to bee baptized, hee groundeth that motion, not barely upon their owne interest in the promise, but withall upon their childrens joynt interest with them, Acts 2. 38, 39. Bee bapti∣zed, for the promise is to you, and to your children: why putteth hee that groundworke so largely, but to shew that the visible ini∣tiatory seale of the promise must bee as large as the promise? Their childrens baptisme is virtually called upon too, as well as their owne. The parents are to take care of their baptisme as well as their owne: the children being capable of externall baptisme, that new way of initiation into covenant fellowship, as well as them∣selves. As they were also to carry home, as it were, the same charge upon the same ground touching repentance; urging that upon their children, as they should bee capable of it, from the same co∣venant ground, as themselves had been urged thereto. Noah alone must not bee baptized in that extraordinary and typicall bap∣tisme, but his children with him must in like sort bee baptized, Gen. 7. 1. with 1 Pet. 1. 3. 21. God will have all these fathers, some whereof at that time mentioned were babes, yet in respect to after ages were fathers, to bee baptized in that extraordinary baptisme in the sea, and in the cloud, 1 Cor. 10. 1, 2. Exod. 12. 44. If a stran∣ger-servant bee circumcised himselfe, hee may eate the passeover: for hee was not so bound as the Jewes, by command to either cir∣cumcision or the passeover; but hee is to circumcise his males, with that reason annexed: For no uncircumcised person shall eate thereof. What is the meaning hereof? Is it thus? else none of those his males or male children; for they are most properly his, and in the case of stranger, which was an houshold servant, rea∣son will tell us, such a one had no servants of their owne, none of these being uncircumcised, should eate the passeover? No verily. For 1. That was not the case mentioned, of such a strangers de∣siring that his males should eate of the Passeover, but that him∣selfe might doe it, if hee, not if they, will eate of the Passeover: and the Text is cleare otherwise; let his males bee circumcised,

and then let him, not let them come neare and eate the Passeover. 2. The rule touching one that eateth the Passeover is there laid downe; Let him eate the Passeover, to the Lord, scil. with holy actuall obedience to the Lords mind, and aimes at his ends, &c. which Infants are not capable of performing: which by the way, note against such as tell us, the Jewish Infants did eate the Passeo∣ver, when as the law herein is expresly said to bee the same to Is∣raelites as to strangers, and what that Law was wee have now seene, verse 48, 49. compared. But who then is the uncircumcised person, which may not in this case eate the passeover, if not the male children? Verily, the stranger parent mentioned, which al∣beit hee bee circumcised himselfe, as is supposed in verse 44. yet if it bee the case of one circumcised himselfe, which hath male chil∣dren to bee circumcised; albeit as personally circumcised, he might eate, vers. 43, 44 yet in this case of desiring the Passeover, but re∣fusing or slighting the mention of circumcising his males, hee is as if himselfe were uncircumcised in that resp••ct; his contempt and disregard of Gods covenant mercy to bee sealed upon his children, maketh his circumcision to bee uncircumcision: and the covenant of grace, by which himselfe especially came to have any right to the initiatory seale: That is not wholly sealed if hee neglect the sealing of his children, joyntly interested in an externall way to∣gether with him. In which respects hee is as one uncircumcised; hee may not eate the passeover. Hence, when the Lord was to ex∣presse his covenant, in reference to the initiatory sealing of it, as on Abraham, so on his Church seed in their generations, he then and never before, that I finde, delivered the Evangelicall covenant in that form, I wil be a God to thee, & to thy seed after thee in their genera∣tions, Gen. 17. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. And Abraham now hath that propounded, as a groundwork of initiatory sealing, thou shalt therefore keep my covenant, thou and thy seed after thee. And then and not before, is his name changed to Abraham, and he hath then & not till then, the name of father of many nations. As if herein God made him as a common person, as before I said, as well in reference to us in∣churched Gentiles, as to the inchurched Jewes, and prose∣lytes: in point of covenant interest, and ingagement from cove∣nant interest, unto the receiving of Gods initiatory seale by pa∣rents and children. And the reason is consequentiall: If parents and children bee considered, as one covenant partie on the one side, admitted to covenant grace externally at least, with God the prin∣cipall covenanter, or covenant maker on the other part: Then,

if the parents onely bee signed with the initiatory covenant seale, and the children which are capable of that seale are neglected, as opportunitie is offered, to bee likewise sealed; the whole covenant of grace is not sealed unto them so farre, not compleatly, as I may say sealed on themselves. The circumcision of Abraham, his a lone, was not that covenant or the signe of it, but with respect to the circumcision of his seed also. The circumcision of his seed also, was that covenant of God, Gen. 17. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. In Abrahams ini∣tiatony sealing unto the covenant, that covenant, I will bee a God to thy seed, as well as to thee, was sealed, and so his childrens right with his owne, is thereby sealed in part, but not compleatly, and fully without their sealing also, as capable of it. So in the childrens being circumcised, not onely their owne right in that, I will bee a God to thy seed, was externally sealed, but Abrahams covenant right in that, I will bee a God to thee, was also sealed. So sweetly were they both knit up in one common girdle, and that marked with one and the same marke of God, Jer. 13. 11. As the covenant was one, & not two covenants, sealed on both, Gen. 17. 11. So their sealing was one collective and joynt condition of the cove∣nant, v. 8. And what I say of Abraham and that his seed, the same was true in Abrahams spiritual seed in their generations, those proselyted houshold servants, for such proselytes they were, as hath been shew∣ed, with their children; and such families de jure at least, the rest were to be afterwards according to that p••tterne family of Abrahams.

Some in way of reply to the answer given by some famous Mi∣nisters of Christ, to the objection about women being not cir∣cumcised, yeeld, that if a virtuall sealing or baptizing were all that they would prove:

Wee may grant that say they, wee may say Infants are virtually baptized in their parents, yet it may bee unlawfull to baptize them actually notwithstanding.

But why virtually, and not as well actually? since their interest in the cove∣nant, and generall condition of receiving such an initiatory seale as God shall appoint, and they bee capable of upon that covenant ground, doth joyntly concerne both as hath been proved: yea doe not such in their exposition, which they rightly give of ha∣ving a thing virtually, gr•…•…t as much, that if they have baptisme virtually in their parents, they have a right as well to receive bap∣tisme actually themselves? For hee is said, saith one learned anta∣gonist,

virtually to have a thing by another, as by a proxey, or Atturney, that might receive it by himselfe. Yet quoad effectum juris, anothers receiving is as if hee had received it.

It's gran∣ted,

that an Infant may bee sealed or baptized virtually in his pa∣rent, that is, as is expounded, hee hath the thing [Baptisme] by another as by a proxey, scil. by, or in his parent, which might receive the same thing, scil. Baptisme, by himselfe. Surely, all will grant, that any mans Atturney receiving in his absence such a conveyance or such a summe of money, or the like, the man himselfe doth indeed virtually receive this by his Atturney, but yet if hee himselfe were personally present, hee might very regu∣larly and lawfully receive the said conveyance, or summe, actually himselfe, so in the case mentioned.

SECT. XI.

10. THe Churches or Church officers in admission of belee∣vers children to the initiatory seale of Baptisme, one way of solemne comming into the fellowship and family of the Trinitie, Matth. 28. 19. they are not to expect a convincing ground, that this or that child to be baptized is internally & savingly inte∣rested in the covenant; but it sufficeth, that that sort or species of Infants, scil. such like Infants are in deed and in truth of Christs kingdome. For when Christ would give a reason, why those Infants offered to him to blesse them should come to him, hee giveth this, for of such or such like, even in respect of saving interest also, is the kingdome of God, Luke 18. so, when the Lord prefaceth that coven••nt ground unto the Application of circumcision to Infants, hee saith not, hee will bee a God to this or that child of Abrahams loynes, in the internall and saving interest and efficacy thereof, but to some of that sort, included in that indefinite promise, I will bee a God to thy seed, it is sufficient, that all such have assuredly an externall right in that covenant, and so to this seale of the fel∣lowship of it; wherefore wee may not exclude any of them, lest any of the children of the Kingdome, which bee the peculiar heires, thereby bee indammaged, or indangered. Better 99. who happily have not so peculiar a title thereto, bee folded up in the Church, then that one of such Lambes▪ bee left out in the wide Wildernesse; the proportion of that case, Matthew 18. holds in this.

CHAP. II. Sect. I. The Explication of Rom. 11. 16, 17, &c.

LEt us now goe on to some proofs of that generall truth propounded, removing objections intervening, and then come to the particular of baptisme. Let us then a little more fully cleare that place, Rom. 11. 16, 17. so farre as it concerneth the matter in hand. Our op∣posites in this point, would have the place onely to bee applyable to the personall estate of this or that beleever, Jew or Gentile, and of the personall way of their inserting by true faith. But wee af∣firme, that as the Chapter in other parts of it hath reference to the Jewes or Gentiles in the fruition or deprivation of covenant pri∣viledges; it is in a collective, and not meerely a distributive way, so are those Verses mentioned taken in the like collective reference. And first, as the discourse hath relation to the Jewes, either in their admission or exclusion from Church priviledge; it is in a colle∣ctive, not bare personall respect, as appeareth by these reasons.

1. In that those are intended, whose fall was the occasion of the Gentiles salvation, and their casting away was the life of the world, verse 11. 15. and on whom God shewed such severitie, verse 22. now none will restraine these to this or that particular persons casting away, but must understand it of the people, whe∣ther parents or children.

2. In that those are intended, of whom it may bee verified, that they are in such sort, and so long cast away as is from the first comming in of the Gentiles to their fulnesse, which is the space of many ages. Now none will say, that this can bee affirmed of one and the same person or persons, but must apply it to the peo∣ple, parents and children successively, hence expressed by that collective name of Israel, verse 25.

3. In that those are intended of whom it may bee verified, they are cast away, and yet to bee reconciled, verse 15. cut off, and yet to bee re-ingraffed, verse 20. 24. enemies, yet beloved, verse 28. which cannot bee verified of this or that person, but must bee ta∣ken of that people.

4. In that they are intended, whose receiving in, scil. to actuall fruition of covenant and Church priviledges from which they are

now de facto excluded, v. 24. will be to the inchurched world as life from the dead, vers. 15. which must be taken collectively of that peo∣ple, not distributively of such a person, or persons amongst them.

5. It is intended of those whom God from the first chose unto himselfe, which yet all the space from the comming in of the Gen∣tiles, till their fulnesse, abode enemies, vers. 25. 28. compared. Now none will restraine this to such or such elected persons to whom blindnesse could not happen so long, yet afterwards bee removed, as the phrase, untill, sheweth: but must bee applyed to Gods act of election of that people, as some judiciously observe upon the place; many thousand persons of this people, lived and died, and •…•…ill doe live and die in this while: The space being yet not accom∣plished in their sinnes. Then it seemes, some that are subjects of election may live and die in their sinnes. Yea verily, this absurdi∣tie must follow, if you take election, vers. 28. strictly in reference to such and such persons among them, and not largely in reference to that people. There is a twofold act of divine election, the one more generall, whereof the body of such or such people is the ade∣quate subject, by this act God subjecteth such a people from all other peoples to himselfe; and yet sundry particular persons amongst such a people may perish: Thus the people of the Jews were, collectively considered, enemies to the Gospel, yet as touching election beloved, for their covenant fathers sake, vers. 28. of this electing act of God, see Deut. 7. 6. The other more particular and speciall, whereby God maketh, as I may say, a second draught, and out of such or such selected people culleth such or such particular persons to bee saved by Christ: Now such as are the subjects of election in this sense, can never perish, and in this sense, the election among the Jewes attained it, and the rest were blinded, see Rom. 12. 5, 6, 7. see John 10. 3. 11. 14. 27, 28, 29. Apoc. 13. 8.

6. In that it was intended of those, to whom the Gentiles are opposed, and in whose stead they are inserted; and against whom the Gentiles must not boast, vers. 11, 12, 13, 14, 15. 17, 18. But it were improper to oppose in such sort, such a world as they are called, verse 14, 15. compared, to such or such particular Jewes.

As the Jewes are thus collectively considered, so the Gentiles comming into their Olive estate, are taken in a collective sense, therefore called the world, vers. 15. the Gentiles, vers. 12. notions not to bee restrained to the growne sort of them, but necessarily including the species of Infants among them. Hence also, the col∣lective

notion of Thou and Thee often used, vers. 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22. 24. And that this singular is not distributively taken of some one or other Gentile, but of the people of the Gentiles, hee there∣fore in other verses speaking to the same people mentions them plurally, Gentiles, vers. 11, 12, 13. 25. Hence, the phrase Yee, and Your, applied to them, vers. 28. 30, 31. Besides, they are still set in opposition to the Jewes which fell, vers. 11. 12. which were cast away, vers. 15. and broken off, vers. 20. 24. 28. Now none will say, that those refuse Jewes are taken distributively, but collectively, as was proved, and much lesse that the Jewish parents onely, exclu∣ding their children, were understood; so then, if the opposition bee sutable, and direct, the opposite parties must bee collectively ta∣ken also, and Gentiles children received in with their parents, as opposed to Jewish children excluded with their parents. Nay they are not onely opposed, but the Gentile body is received in instead of the Jew-body broken off, vers. 17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in ramorum defracto∣rum locum, Beza on Rom. 11. 17. and vers. 19. They were broken off, saith the collective Gentile, that I might bee graffed in. The Apostle yeelds this as truth; well, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] as if hee would say, it is true; now growne ones among the Jewes were broken off: who came in their stead? growne Gentiles. True, but Jewish babes and little ones too, amongst other branches and sprigs, are bro∣ken off, that Gentiles might come into covenant and Church estate in their stead. What Gentiles? growne ones? nay roome is made for them in the breach of the growne Jewes. Verily then such a like species of Gentiles unto those rejected Jewish sprigs, scil. Gentile babes and little ones, must necessarily bee thus inserted and admitted into that covenant and Church estate out of which the other were broken. So then, as Jewes were, so Gentiles are considered in this Chapters discourse touching communion in fe∣derall and Church ordinances and priviledges, under the notion of Olive fatnesse, &c. not in a bare personall way, but in reference to people of both kindes, and persons of all sorts, and species younger or elder, which is a strong argument that God never in∣tended to limit the benefit of his covenant grace to growne ones, or parents personally, but rather extends it to them in a parentall way at least. Hence when that commission, Matth. 28. 19. was gi∣ven, for this end, it is in the old terme and notion of nation, a large word, and subject. God delights to inlarge his grace in these times, and his very intent in Matth. 28. is inlargement of Gospel mercies.

The more crosse are their minds to Gods thoughts who from that very place would conclude a straightning such a Gospell mercy as this mentioned, was and is both to parents and children, and for which they have nothing equivalent in stead thereof. The A∣postle it's confessed bringeth in Rom. 11. 16, 17. as an argument to prove the receiving in againe of the Jewes, scil. unto actuall fruition of all covenant and Church priviledges, vers. 15. For if the roote bee holy, so are the branches, vers. 16. and so vers. 28, 29. To the same purpose now, if the covenant with godly ancestors bee so for∣cible to fetch in such Apostates after so grosse and long a time of their desperate revolts from, and contempts of covenant grace in Christ; is it not much more of force to the receiving in of the babes of next beleeving parents unto the visible fellowship of co∣venant grace? God forbid, that any should obstinately gainesay it.

SECT. II.

BY roote, I. S. saith in that, Rom. 11. 16. is meant Christ per∣sonall, and yet the same author elsewhere would have it meant mystically considered; and elsewhere, of union and communion with God in ordinances; and elsewhere of Abraham in his faith; and elsewhere of beleeving parents in part; for hee saith not one∣ly beleeving parents are the roote, &c. not onely [in part, then such parents are the root.] But indeed this author refuteth himselfe, in that hee knoweth not where to fix. Abraham in his faith as la∣therly, and eying the covenant in this latitude, as to him, and his seed of Isaac by propagation, and to the beleeving Gentiles with their seed by proportion, thus hee might bee a root in his faith; but if Abrahams faith bee considered in a meere personall respect, so neither Jewes nor Gentiles are properly, said to bee inserted into that, but rather into his faith with its object the covenant. It is improper to say of the Gentile that they stood in it, scil. in the root of faith, by faith, or that the Jew was broken off from Abrahams personall faith by unbeliefe. Abrahams faith was a saving faith, if this therefore had been in them all, or they in it, they had not fallen as many Jewes and Gentiles priviledged by externall covenant right, did and might; or supposing the root to bee meant, not of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but of Christ, as Mr. B. also affirmeth, who is elsewhere called a root, Apoc. 22. 16. and 5. 5, &c. if they had been in him, by any proper and invisible union, neither those of the Jewes had been, nor so many of Gentiles could have been

broken off, as they were, & whole Churches of these are, witnes this Church of Rome, to which the Apostle wrote this. But otherwise, if understood of impropper and visible union with Christ, scil. a vi∣sible union with Christ mysticall; thus indeed many such may fall away finally, as did these. Hence that John 15. 2. now in this sense parents and children Inchurched, whether Jewes or Gentiles, by being in the holy root of those covenant fathers, they are visibly in that holy root Christ, or Christ mysticall, as was shewed. I. S. will and doth confesse the first fruits, of whom yet the same holy effect is affirmed, Rom. 11. 16. to be these fathers, and why not then as wel the same fathers to bee the root? since the context cleareth it, that the Apostle intendeth the same of the selfesame persons under di∣vers Metaphors. Either then Christ is the first fruites, as well as roote intended, or those fathers are the first fruites, as well as the root mentioned. Verily covenanting Abraham in reference to his seed is called a rock, whence that Church, as a Church was hewen; for in that sense the Prophet speakes to them, Esay 51. 1, 2. yet is Christ the rock of the Church too in another sense; and why is not Abraham then a covenant root to such Church branches, as that from whence they in that sense doe spring? And what I say of Abraham, is as well to bee referred to Isaac and Jacob in the same respect, as being other veines, making up this one root, the Instrumentall meanes and cause of the mercy offered and exhibited both to Jewes and Gentiles, in regard that to them all this large covenant was made over in a radicall way, see Gen. 17. 2. 7. and 22. 18. compared with Gen. 26. 3, 4, 5. and 28. 13, 14. whence such fre∣quent mention in Scripture of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, in refe∣rence to covenant blessings, yea their names are pleaded in prayer for that end, Exod. 32. 13. Deut. 9. 27. see more 2 King. 13. 23. and Mich. 7. 20. &c. This was not in respect of any personall ho∣linesse of theirs, or barely in respect of their personall faith, but it was by reason of that large covenant made with them in this re∣ference, as the places quoted shew; see further for this end, Luke 1. 71, 72. Rom. 15. 8. Deut. 4. 37. and 10. 15. with other like Scrip∣tures. Hence too, they are made here a radicall meanes of the Jewes receiving in againe, Rom. 11. 15. grounded on this reason, vers. 16. compared with vers. 28. Whence also, the Jewes which are called holy branches, by vertue of their holy root, vers. 16. they are termed naturall branches too, scil. of that root, and Olive tree, vers. 24. not naturall branches of Christ as the root. Our

very opposites will say, that were improper to affirme; nor meer∣ly of Abraham, but Isaac and Jacob also; nor is it proper to call one Abraham [fathers] vers. 28. or first fruits, vers. 16. Now as to Jewes, so to Gentiles, were those covenant [fathers] and root; God saith to Abraham and Jacob distinctly that hee would blesse all nations, and families, as in their seed, so in them, Gen. 12. 2, 3. In thee [Abraham] Gen. 22. 28. in thy seed, and Gen. 28. 14. in thee [Jacob] and in thy seed How in them at all distinct from the seed Christ, who is the sole author, worker, and meritorious cause of all covenant blessing? Verily in respect of the covenant made with them, in reference as to the nation of the Jewes, and the families therein, so to Gentile nations and the families therein, to bee by virtue of that covenant partakers, at least visibly, of the covenant blessing. Hence wee Gentiles are said to come and sit downe with those fathers, Matth. 8. 11, 12. as inserted branches are in some sense seated and setled in and with the root. Hence likewise, this root is said to beare the Christian Gentiles collectively taken, and for that cause the Gentile is not to boast against the Jew branches: branches of what? of the root mentioned: what root? Christ? That were improper to affirme: but rather, of those fathers.

SECT. III.

THe Olive tree, some take it of the Fathers also in opposition to the other wilde Olive tree out of which the Gentiles were cut, vers. 24. scil. Their wilde ancestors, or ancestors estranged from the covenant, Ephes. 2. 12. The Jewes indeed are cut out of these fa∣thers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, as covenanting in respect of any present actuall benefit of the covenant, but yet are not cut out of those fathers as begetting, as it is evident, they are still Abrahams stock; which by the way observe against that distinction, by which some use to avoid our arguments in this businesse; They say Abra∣ham, Isaac and Jacob were onely a root to the body of the Jewes, as naturall and begetting fathers, and not as spirituall and beleeving fathers, or fathers by faith imbracing the covenant made with the Jewes also. Surely such men would frustrate the ground of the Apostles discourse here, supposing so sad an exclusion of the Jewes from a former sweet and sappy Church estate, yea such as into which the Gentiles could not come but by a preter-super, yea con∣tra-naturall way, vers. 24. if they were in those fathers as begetting fathers onely, so are they still their naturall children, and then

not cut off from them at all, contrary to this expresse Scripture. Others would have the Olive tree, to bee meant of the visible Church distinguished from the root, vers. 17. see Jer. 11. 16. spoken of the Jewes in their Church, as well as civill relation: into which as into their owne Olive, by that generall covenant right, Rom. 11. 16. 24. they shall bee re-ingraffed, in so farre as they are federally holy, vers. 16. scil. intentionally, in so farre is a Church right their owne; with which latter respect of the Olive I fully close; but of this more afterwards.

By [ingraffing into the Olive] seemes to bee meant, an actuall interesting, and instating into the visible Church, or into those covenant fathers in reference to the Church, whence also ariseth the actuall fruition thereof. By Olive fatnesse mentioned, vers. 17. must needs bee meant such covenant or Church blessings, priviled∣ges, and ordinances, &c. whereof all sorts of Church members, even such as may bee fatally cut off, may partake of as well as others: which are not the graces of the Spirit, for they flow not immediat∣ly from the Olive the Church, nor from any of the best of the sons of men, but rather they are the seales and other Church ordinan∣ces visibly dispensed to persons according as they are capable of them. These are the instrumentall causes of the bright shining, at least in visible profession of Christ, unto the whole Candlestick, and all the greater or lesser branches and parts of it, Zach. 4. 2, 3. 11, 12, 14.

SECT. IIII.

TO draw to a Conclusion. 1. Then looke how the Jew-bran∣ches were set into their Olive and root mentioned, so are the Gentiles which come in their stead, Rom. 11. 17. 19. But they with all their buds and sprigs, scil. children, as Esay 44. 3. and 18. 5. and 61. 9. and Psal. 128. 3. they are called, were set thereinto, therefore in like sort are the Gentiles with their children inserted. Amongst them were three sorts thus inserted. 1. Growne ones truely beleeving, as were godly proselyted Gentiles. 2. Growne ones, which did not prove truly beleeving, as many of the prose∣lytes. 3. The children of Jewes, and of both those sorts of pro∣selytes, some whereof afterwards made holy improvement thereof, others abused and rejected their covenant priviledge: and so is it with us now.

2. Looke how they were by unbeleefe broken off, so are the Gen∣tiles

taken in by faith; but they both parents and children were broken off through the unbeleeving rejection of the covenant ex∣pressed by the wicked parents onely, therefore the Gentiles are in∣serted with their children, albeit the parents onely expresse a be∣leeving embrace of the covenant. Gentiles children are not indeed expressed by name in this inserting: but yet the Gentile is collective∣ly spoken of as was proved, and so must needs include at least the children of such inserted Gentiles; as in the cutting off of the Jewes, and casting away of them, their children are not mentioned, except comprehensively, here, or in Matth. 8. 11. and 21. 42. yet all grant that they were intended, and so in this case.

3. Looke how the Gentile in case of apostasie is cut off from his Church estate, and union and communion in the Olive root and fatnesse, and looke as hee is not spared in case of his unbeleefe, so was the Gentile graffed in, vers. 20. 21, 22. But in that case of un∣beleefe and apostasie, the Gentile, both parent and child is cut off from federall grace and Church priviledge; witnesse the case of those which at first fell off, when first the Asian and other Churches, as of Rome, &c. were unchurched: Therefore so was the Gentile parent and child graffed in.

4. Looke how the better part of the Jewes, which did not thus actu∣ally & obstinately reject the covenant and Gospel of grace, & Christ the foundation thereof, did then, when the Apostle wrote this, Rom. 11. 17. remaine still in their roote: in such sort, are the Gentiles with them, partakers thereof: But those Jewes parents and chil∣dren abode in that covenant estate: Therefore Gentile parents and children so partake with them. Of those Jew parents none will make question, and of their children, is no ground to doubt: which being once in covenant in their ancestors, yea and parents right also, and not being then of yeares to reject Christ, how come they at present to bee cut out? surely not for their parents unbeleefe, for they receive Christ, not for others rejecting Christ, for what's that to them? not for their owne actuall rejecting of Christ, for they were not then of yeares to doe so.

5. Looke how the Jew shall againe bee graffed in, in such sort were the Gentiles at first graffed in, but they parents and children with them shall be graffed in; therefore so were the Gentile pa∣rents and children graffed in or inchurched. The major is evident by vers. 17. 19. 23, 24, 25, 26. compared: The minor is as evident by the same verses compared. For as they were broken off by un∣beleefe,

so are they re-inserted by faith: now the former was by the parents unbeleefe, that young and old were cast off, as was proved; therefore by faith in the parents, young and old are re∣inserted, else, as was said, parents and children lost this which was a speciall and comfortable blessing by parentall unbeleefe, which they never recover through the like parentall faith. Besides, it hath been proved, that the Apostles discourse, both of the Jewes casting off, and of their receiving in, is still of them in a collective sense, and not barely personall, and so their children cannot bee exclu∣ded, but must be included. Little ones are not indeed named in their re-ingraffing, no more then in their cutting off, yet as in the one, they are necessarily understood, so in the other. Besides wee have before proved that the Jewes children are interested in these promises of grace, yet to bee fulfilled, Esay 61. 9. and 65. 20. and 23. Their off-spring are the seed of the blessed of the Lord, with them, or as well as themselves: So Ezek. 37. 20. to the end, and Jer. 13. 19, 20. Their children shall bee as aforetime: how? in a com∣mon wealth, and civill way meerely? nay rather in a Church way, as aforetime: now aforetime, who dare deny, but their children were eyed as in covenant, Acts 2. 38, 39. And as parts and mem∣bers of the Church, Ezek. 16. 20, 21. 36. and therefore were they sealed with that seale of the covenant, Gen. 17. Hence some godly learned Divines in their Commentaries upon the Canticles, expoun∣ding that Cant. 6. 11. 13. and Chap. 7. and 8. of the Jewish Church yet to come; they expound that Cant. 7. 2. mentioned of the Chur∣ches navell, that wants not liquor, to be understood of Baptisme, as that heape of Wheate, to bee meant of the Lords Supper to bee administred amongst them. Now ••s the navell is of speciall need and use, to such as cannot receive nourishment, as growne ones doe, at the mouth, to convey secretly corporall furtherance to the Babes bodily life and welfare; so this Church navell, not wanting such an inlivening supply, it will bee amongst them accounted and improved as of need and use to bee a divine meanes, as well as seale, of conveying secretly gratious influences tending to the Churches Babes spirituall welfare.

6. Looke of what Olive fatnesse in the substantialls thereof, and in what sort those branches did partake of the same, and in the same sort doe the branches taken out of the wilde Olive partake. But those branches did partake of the fruit causing fatnesse of Olive, and Church ordinances and priviledges, not as shut up, or

residing in the greater boughes, parents, but thorow them and by them passing to their lesser sprigs or children springing from them. Therefore of such fatnesse doe and must Gentiles partake. And this way was their fall an inriching of the Gentile in-churched world, Rom. 11. 12. scil. as this was to bee conveyed, as a covenant heritage, from beleeving parents to children. Else were it poore and sad with beleevers. As with other parents in other heritages, if what they have in such sort, they cannot leave with, or instru∣mentally convey unto their children; as godly Joseph is a fruitfull bough in reference to his flourishing branches, not in a meere ci∣vill and naturall, but in a covenant and Church respect, Gen. 49. 22, 23. so is it with other such parents as hee. It's contrary to na∣tures Law, that any communicable sappe should be ingrossed to, or shut up within the greater boughes, and not to bee withall con∣veyed instrumentally to those sprigs that are upon them; so is it here, in respect of this communicable sappe of federall and Church right in Church Olive boughes; It is contrary to the Law of the tenure of the covenant of grace made to parents with respect to their children in and with them, that this Church fatnesse should not bee conveyed to them. So farre as the greater boughes are in∣graffed into this visible Olive Church estate, their sprigs also which are on and in them, are set in with them, by the same Church act of ingraffing. If Olive roots as such, should not convey instrumen∣tally their sap and fatnesse to the Olive boughes, as such, and those boughes in like sort to their sprigs, Olive trees would faile in an ordinary way: so in an ordinary way must Churches faile: if this ecclesiasticall conveyance instrumentally of Church and cove∣nant sap from parent to child be denied.

SECT. V.

Object. 1. THe Jewes being federally holy, as Rom. 11. 16. sheweth, and yet not having right to Church pri∣viledges, baptisme, &c. as is evident in these refuse Jewes at this day; it shaketh your foundation, that persons because federally holy must have a right to Church priviledges.

Answ. Federall holinesse is ascribed to persons two wayes, ei∣ther as they are collectively or distributively taken. Collectively, and so it is here ascribed to the body of the Jewes, as one whole nation, which if considered distributively of all the parts, and of each person in that nation, so it is not intended of them. That we

may a little illustrate this, from what is here said in this Chapter, they bee said to bee broken off, scil. from the rest, vers. 20. cast away, and so uncleane, prophane, and not holy, vers. 15. yet are they said to be holy by vertue of the roote, in and of which they bee bran∣ches: so are they said to bee cast away, and yet such as shall bee re∣ceived in, vers. 15. they are said to bee enemies concerning the Gos∣pell, and yet beloved of God, vers. 28. What? are the selfe same persons said to bee holy, and not holy? rejected, yet to be recei∣ved? enemies, and yet beloved? no verily: But when they are said to bee holy, and beloved of God, &c. it is true of the whole body of the Jewes collectively taken, in respect of the choycer part which is federally holy, properly so called, and beloved of God, by vertue of the covenant made with their fathers; as on the other side, when it is said of the whole body, that they are cut off, cast away, and that they are enemies, it is meant of the whole collectively in re∣spect of the refuse part, for not all wholly were cut off in the Apo∣stles time, but some of the branches were broken off, vers. 17. And blindnesse did happen to collective Israel, but not wholly, but in part, vers. 25. In both which, that which is proper to the parts, is applyed to the whole of which they are parts, by a synecdoche. To come then to argument, it is true, that the Jewes, collectively taken for the whole nation, containing the choicer part intended, they are federally holy, scil. in respect of that choyce part, and yet it followes not that the Jewes distributively taken, for those Jewes living at this day, supposed to bee a refuse part of that whole, should bee properly said to bee federally holy, and so neither to have right to Church priviledges; so that the instance crosseth not us, who speake of persons federally holy, as well distributively, and not meerely collectively considered. There is therefore a fallacy, a dicto secundum quid, ad dictum simpliciter.

Rep. Suppose we take this of the whole in respect of the choycer part of the Jewish nation, this choyce part then, at least, is federally holy, yet they have not right to Church priviledges, as being not yet ingraffed into the olive, nor possibly, in actuall being in the world.

Therefore persons may bee federally holy, which yet have not right to Church priviledges.

Answ. Wee againe distinguish, persons may bee said to be fede∣rally holy, either seminally, & preparatively, or actually: in the for∣mer sense, persons not yet existing, may bee said to bee in cove∣nant with God, or such as God makes a covenant with, and con∣sequently

to bee federally holy, Deut. 29. 14, 15. neither with you onely doe I make this covenant, but with him that standeth here with us before the Lord our God, and also with him that is not with us, this day. Marke it, God saith not, I [will] make this covenant in the future, but in the present tense, I [doe] make this covenant with him that is not here this day, that is, with persons unborne; these being expresly taken into covenant with God, and their covenant right laid up and included therein, in such sort, as that which in its season should actually bee exerted, these persons albeit unborne, and not actually existing, yet in this seminall and preparatory respect of the covenant, they have thus far a co∣venant right, and so farre also a Church right together with it: so here in these unborne Jewes as they are federally holy in that se∣minall respect. Hence, the Olive or Church here, is called their owne Olive, Rom. 11. 24. How is the Church now their owne, but in respect of this seminall Church right?

Federall holinesse actually taken is that which is actually sub∣jected and exerted in a person existing, whether parent or child in which sense God made his covenant with those Jewes, and with their children that were before him that day. Deut. 29. 14, 15. And in this sense, the Apostle speaking of the federall holinesse, especi∣ally of children actually borne of covenant in-churched parents, saith they are holy, scil. actually, 1 Cor. 7. 14. Now therefore to ap∣ply the Argument, it is defective in the consequence of it, thus, Per∣sons not in being which are federally holy, onely seminally and in∣tentionally, they have not actuall Church right, nor can actually bee baptized; therefore persons existing and living which are fe∣derally holy, actually, they may not bee baptized; this followeth not: one may as well reason thus. Those with whom God made a covenant, Deut. 29. 14, 15. who were not borne, not there that day, had not actuall right to circumcision, could not be uncircum∣cised: Therefore those children which were there that day with whom also God made his covenant, Ibid. they had not actuall right to circumcision, might not, could not bee circumcised: this every rationall man will say is a non sequitur.

Object. 2. This Rom. 11. 16. is spoken of the naturall branches, which have an hereditary covenant right, as naturall branches of that roote, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. And therefore not perti∣nent to the Gentiles, and their children which are not branches of that root.

Answ. Albeit the beleeving Gentiles, and their children are not of that root by nature and propagation, yet they are in that root by grace and by proportion. The Jew-branches were broken off that the Christian collective Gentile might by grace be graffed in, scil. in their stead, Rom. 11. 19. Looke then what covenant and Church right the Jewish parents had for their children in an here∣ditary way, the same hath the inchurched Gentile for his chil∣dren through grace.

Repl. This were to make way for all children of Christian Gen∣tile nations to have right to Church priviledges.

Answ. It sufficeth that thus farre it holds, that as all and onely Church-members children were ecclesiastically priviledged among the Jewes, so all and onely Church-members children are eccle∣siastically priviledged among the Gentiles.

Object. 3. The Gentiles are said to bee ingraffed, not by a na∣turall way, as being of such parents, but by a way contrary to na∣ture, and therefore what is this to the federall estate of Gentile Infants, as comming of beleeving parents? and so in a way of na∣ture?

Answ. It is most true, if applied to the first parties amongst any Gentile people, which in the Apostles time or since, enter into Church estate, living formerly in a Pagan estate, and not having any of their ancestors other then Pagans, or such as were cut out of the wilde Olive tree, scil. Ancestors pagan or outlawry from all covenant and Church estate. Rom. 11. 24. Ephes. 2. 12. But if it bee applyed to other, which come of such persons, so transplanted from that wilde Olive, to this good Olive estate, as branches or sprigs of such Olive boughs, or gratious ancestors, then is it not fully verified, that these are onely in a way contrary to nature, partakers of the fatnesse of the Olive. As they are considered toge∣ther with their gratious ancestors, as all of them of other pagan ancestors, so they are all ingraffed in a way contrary to nature, even meerely by divine Grace, but as they and their gratious fa∣thers are considered apart, their fathers as nextly descended of pagan ancestors, these their children as nextly springing from fa∣thers visibly beleeving, and inchurched, so their covenant and Church estate, comes to them principally by a way of divine grace, and instrumentall by birth descent from inchurched ancestors: and in this latter respect therefore such children may bee said, to bee in∣serted by a way of nature: for looke as the Israelites of old, before

their cutting off were, and others of them hereafter will bee, by virtue of their holy root or covenant fathers, holy branches as naturall branches: scil. branches springing naturally from them, or borne of them, Rom. 11. 16. 24. compared: or as those Israelites, were not sinners, or outlawries from covenant or Church, as were those of the Pagan Gentiles, but Jewes, or ecclesiastically privi∣ledged, even by nature, or naturall descent of such ancestors in∣churched, Gal. 2. 15. so must the proportion hold in the children of Gentile in-churched parents. Though even this also is of grace, that they should naturally descend from such parents, Gen. 49. 26.

Object. 4. The Gentiles come into and abide in Church-estate by faith, Rom. 11. 20. But children have not faith. Therefore this Scripture concernes not them.

Answ. 1. The Gentiles that so stand by faith, are collectively taken as including also their children with them so abiding, untill that these their children come to reject, as did the children of those godly Jewish ancestors, their covenant right: And observe it by the way, how tender God was of covenant children: They were ne∣ver excluded, untill they came, after many generations, so wholly to degenerate, as Rom. 11. 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 25, 28. sheweth, and then, but not till then, they are rejected, so is it still. God is ten∣der of unchurching and discovenanting any that come of godly ancestors, till they grosly and obstinately reject their owne mercy. But if they grow up to that obstinacy, then they cut off the grati∣ous covenant, entailed as from themselves personally, so to their children parentally, as did those of old, Rom. 11. 20. and as those of Rome, Corinth and Ephesus, &c. have done since.

2. This faith mentioned is not a bare personall faith respecting this or that particular Gentile, but such as is in direct opposition to that unbeleefe of the Jewes, by which they were broken off, as that opposition, Rom. 11. 20. sheweth; now it is evident that their unbeleefe was the obstinate rejecting of the covenant of grace, as it was held out in Christ to them, and theirs joyntly, and not as barely made to themselves personally, Acts 3. 25, 26. and 13. 46, 47. Matth. 21. 41. 42, 43, 44. Rom. 9. 31, 32, 33. and 10. to the end: see Rom. 10. 21. with 11. 1. &c. and vers. 20. So verily is it in the faith of the Gentile opposed thereunto. It is a faith that lookes to Gods covenant, as in reference to families and kindreds of the earth so imbracing it, and so being quickned, and comforted

by it. That pretious fruit of faith must hold proportion to the na∣ture of the seed thereof, scil. the words of promise, 1 Pet. 1. 23. now the words of promise run not barely in a personall way, but in a parentall, oeconomicall and plurall way, as well, Jer. 31. 1. Acts 3. 25, &c. our faith is, or de jure should bee inlarged according to the latitude of covenant, as was before proved, Rom. 10. 8 &c. By what hath been said, their grosse mistakes appeare, which say, that none are the subjects of this lumpe but elect ones: That the branches were such onely which were in Christ by faith, and hee in them by his spirit; for neither Jew nor Gentile branches, many of them were such, as appeares by their being broken off: nor is that assertion sound, but absurd, and crosse to the very text: that the Jewes owne naturall root and Olive tree whereof they were naturall branches, onely by faith was union with God, &c. since that way of being branches onely by faith, is no where called na∣turall; nay in the same verse, Rom. 11. 24. speaking of the first growne Gentiles inserting by faith▪ it is said to bee contrary to nature, nor is inserting which is onely by faith, more naturall to Jewes, then it is to Gentiles. Neither is that true and sound, that no other holinesse inrighteth any in any priviledges of grace, if understood of Church priviledges now in question, then holi∣nesse of justification or sanctification: since many of those naturall branches, which as naturall branches of that holy root, were holy federally, and did partake of the root, and fatnesse of the olive be∣fore their rejection, as well as some better Jewes did afterward, yet they were not justified; for which compare, Rom. 11. 16. 24. 17, 18, 19. so likewise the Gentiles, which came to partake of that Olive fatnesse in their stead, ibid. yet were fatally cut off many of them, which had never bin, if they had been justified and sanctified.

Object. 5. Doth not the Apostle only speake here of the invisible Church, under the notion of the Olive, which sometimes was amongst the Jewes, and therefore called their Olive; the Apostle reasoning about the elect remnant, Rom. 11. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, &c. and making the tree to bee the Church of beleevers, still standing, and some branches broken off, and others graffed in, and so it might seeme the graffing in to bee inserting into the invisible Church, by election and faith?

Answ. I deny not but that the Apostle discourseth about the elect and invisible members of the invisible Church, vers. 1, 2, 3. &c. and therefore proveth fully enough one principall thing propoun∣ded,

scil. that the invisible elect membes of it, or the elect seed, and branches of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, did not, could not fall away finally: but it will not therefore follow, that hee speaketh onely of the invisible Church in the whole chapter; or that he discourseth not, as well of the visible Church, & of the Church seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Yea it wil appeare by good reason, that in that part of the Chapter, where hee discourseth of the Church, as an Olive, communicating its fatnesse to all the branches of it, hee principal∣ly intendeth the visible Church, as visible.

For 1. The objection acknowledgeth, that it is the Church of beleevers still standing and some branches broken off, and others graffed in: now none that were in the invisible Church, by election and faith could ever bee broken off: Yea but they might bee in the Church in appearance, or visibly, as branches may bee said to bee in Christ, and after broken off, John 15. 2. Not to answer this with an exposition of that according to some to bee meant of Christ considered with his body the visible Church, as 1 Cor. 12. 12, 13. here is more said of these, scil. that others came in their roome, and place, Rom. 11. 17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in ramorum defractorum locum, as Beza noteth on that particle, they had then a reall place there, and a reall breach was made: neither did the Gentiles come into an imaginary place in the Church but a reall: and yet they came into no other place, then into the place of the broken branches; there∣fore theirs was a reall, not a seeming place in the Olive: the Olive then must bee the visible Church, where hypocrites may have place, and not the invisible Church, where they can have none. Besides, they were such branches of the Olive, as did partake of the fatnesse of the Olive; not like withered branches, seemingly in Christ, which are saplesse, nor did ever partake of the sap of Christs saving grace, as these did of Church sap, hence the Gentile is said to partake in common with them, Rom. 11. 17. Greeke 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. and thou partakest in common with them in the fatnesse of the Olive: What did the collective Christian Gentile partake in com∣mon with them, in shewes and semblances? nay in realities, in the very fatnesse of the Olive, of which they partooke, else it was not a partaking in common: as both partooke also in common in the root, Ibid. scil. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob: not as naturall fathers: for so Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, albeit they were naturall fathers unto the Jewes, yet not in any respect naturall fathers unto the Gentiles; but rather as they were Church fathers: if they had not

beene Church fathers to the Jewes as well as to the Gentiles, how did Jew and Gentile partake in common in them as a root; and what common Church fathers were Abraham, Isaac and Jacob▪ those fathers, vers. 28. of the invisible Church? nay verily but of the visible, of which even the the refuse Jewes sometimes were.

Which may bee a second argument that the Olive tree of which Abraham, as some say and yeeld, or Abraham, Isaac and Iacob, as others: where the roote is considered here under the adjunct of the visible, and not of that of the invisible Church, and so it's plainely ly verified that Jewes and Gentiles were 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, partakers in common in the root and fatnesse of the Olive, Rom. 11. 17.

A third reason thereof is in that the Olive here intended is that whose fatnesse it is that is communicated to the branches: yea to such branches as were broken off, as were many refuse Jewes, or might bee broken off: as sundry of the Gentiles which came in their stead might bee: whence that, vers. 21. yea ver. 22. otherwise thou shalt bee cut off; and so many have beene witnesses that Apo∣state Churches of Asia and other Churches. Now saving graces peculiar to the elect, flow not from any company of men, no not from the invisible Church, nor is it theirs but Christs to convey, and communicate, they cannot spare that oyle for others, Matth. 25. 9. but the ordinances, and they are the Churches properly: and such as from the Church are derived, and communicated to others whether elect, or reprobate that are members of her. Yea but what Church is that which holdeth forth, and dispenseth Church ordinances to others: not the invisible Church: all the members being homogeneall, the invisible Church properly hath not officers, if you suppose officers, you must suppose some calling, others called, and then they cease to bee meerely invisible, for in this act they become visible: now a Church without officers cannot administer all Church ordinances; not communicate that Church fatnesse of the seales: so then the Olive Church communicating all Church fatnesse indefinitely, and so the seales too, must bee the visible, not the invisible Church. Besides since no Olive or Church fatnesse is to bee had, but in, and from the Church: no Church ordi∣nances ordinarily to be dispensed, but in, and from the Church: if the Olive here bee supposed to bee the invisible, not the visible Church, no ordinary communication of Church ordinances to any is possibly to bee had since the invisible Church, being a

Church onely of elect and savingly called persons, and no hypo∣crites or reprobates being in, or of that Church: whither shall any repaire for Church ordinances? there being no Church in the world, dispensing ordinances by ordinary officers, which a∣lone can now dispense them in a Church way; that consists onely of elect ones: but there are some chaffe, and tares and trash and vessels of dishonour in it, Matth. 3. and 13. 2 Tim. 2. yea that Church being invisible as such is not obvious to the sense of any, which being brought to the faith would desire to bee joyned to this Olive thereby to partake of it's fatnesse: hee cannot see where, nor what that Church is, for it is invisible, this will drive us all to become Seekers, not till new Apostles come, as some fondly ima∣gine, but perpetually, yea hopelesly.

Fourthly, it's not denied by such as oppose us herein, that the Jewes had this priviledge, to bee reckoned in the outward admi∣nistration of the covenant of grace, as branches of the Olive by birth, by virtue of Gods appointment, which cannot bee true but in reference to the visible Church.

C.B. Object. 6. You will hereby set up a Catholique visible Church.

Answ. If that should follow hence touching a Catholique Church, as noting Aliquid integraliter universale, as eum dicimus orbis uni∣versus; which is not really distinct from all the particular Chur∣ches in the world considered in one: this universall integrum, the Church albeit not visible at once to any ones eyes, yet in its parts it is visible, both divisim in its particular visible members, as also conjunctim in visible congregations, Ames medul. Theolog. lib. 1. cap. 31, 32.

CHAP. III. Sect. I. Touching the Explication of Matth. 28. 19, 20. and Marke 16. according to our opposites.

HAving laid downe such conclusions as make way: let us now addresse our selves to some further considera∣tions of Pedobaptisme it self, according as other Scrip∣ture grounds hold it forth.

And first because, Matth. 28. is much controverted, let us try whether it make more for us then against us therein, and withall take in the consideration of Marke 16. 16. which our op∣posites

pleno & uno ore cry up as quite overthrowing our do∣ctrine of Pedobaptisme. And herein I am content that they should speake. First, Mr. Blackwood maketh the commission to be even for the very order of the words so exact, that Ministers, as com∣missioners must stick to them: and giveth reasons to prove the very order of the words to bee morall in both places: and brings Mark. 16. for his proofe, that without all distinction of Churches gathe∣ring, or gathered, thus it must bee: beleeving in Christ must pro∣ceed baptisme; this hee maketh his second argument, and the same also his fourth, onely varying the words a little, but the proofe is, Mark 16. 16. to which, Acts 8. 12. 37. is added for proofe: from which proofes also of Act. 8. 12, &c. he rayseth his sixth argument, so that all those three arguments together, also with his eighth and last they all turne upon one hinge, and have all one bottome. A. R. hee also explaineth the same, in the same way applying Marke 16. as an explication of Matth. 28. the Scriptures, saith he, hold forth that Disciples, that is, beleevers onely should bee bapti∣zed: so Mr. B. upon Marke 16. onely beleevers are to bee baptized, and unbeleevers by that affirmation are forbidden.

And further to prove the same, the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Matth. 28. is ur∣ged by Hen. Den, A. R. and Mr. B. as in reference to Disciples, not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in reference to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the nations. Besides, in that Christ ad∣ded [teaching] them; as if the persons to bee baptized are present∣ly to bee taught, and so not Infants. And that also preaching is to goe before baptisme upon the same ground. And as by that plaine and well grounded treatise is added: that baptizing into the name of the Father, &c. that is, invocating the name of the Father, Sonne and Spirit, bringing Acts 22. for their proofe, Paul is bid to bee baptized, calling upon the name of the Lord: now Infants cannot call upon the Lord when to bee baptized.

Now let us consider the weight of what hath been said.

1. For the order of the words as morall, in Matthew, because al∣so in Marke, and so morall in both; for saith Mr. B. it reacheth to the worlds end, it was Christs last commission, and it were absurd to thinke a man baptized before preached to, and so baptized in∣to hee knowes not what. And indeed this is urged as an argument distinctly against Pedobaptisme; because children understand not the mysteries of Baptisme: and what hath God to doe with such as know him not, nor what hee offers them, or doth for them, &c? Whence I. S. urgeth it as an absurditie that wee will have

children baptized which know nothing of it, and so must build their faith upon humane testimony. We shall now answer to these particularly.

SECT. II.

1. THen some things in this order of Christ were perpetuall, as that preaching the Gospel should goe before Baptisme, that baptisme is to bee administred by such as preach: that disci∣pled in-churched persons, are to bee baptized: that in founding Churches, the first members are to bee visible professors of the faith in reference to Church estate: that baptisme is with water to bee ap∣plyed to the persons baptized, and that into the name of the Fa∣ther, Sonne and holy Ghost. Yet non sequitur, that all which here Christ held forth, is so strictly to bee attended to the end of the world, as that which is to indure to the end of the world, or that what in Matthew and Marke hee propoundeth it is presidentiall in all Church cases of persons to bee baptized, as alike, and that with∣out distinction of Churches then, or now, gathering or to bee ga∣thered. There is a commission given to Elders or Churches, as here was to ministers, James 5. 14. that they are to pray over the sicke, and to anoint them with oyle: wee must now then without all distinction of times or Churches doe so too by Mr. Blackwoods argument; wee must stick to Scripture commission of the Lord; as this was by his spirit, according as the other was viva voce.

And let our opposites that urge Matthew and Marke, as presi∣dentiall to all Churches and times, attend what is said in Marke 16. 16, 17, 18. if Marke 16. be the rule to us what persons should bee baptized onely, scil. beleevers, then few are to bee now bapti∣zed, but such whose beleeving is attended with signes, that can cast out devills, speake with strange tongues, take up Serpents, drinke deadly poyson without hurt, or if any other are yet at least some amongst the baptized beleevers now as well as then, will have such miraculous gifts. For Christ speaking of some of those bapti∣zed beleevers, at least, albeit not of all, for all had not then gifts of miracles, and tongues, 1 Cor. 12. saith, these signes shall follow them that beleeve, &c. Marke 16. 17. and it was one continued speech, and touching some of the persons spoken of, vers. 15, 16. hence Mr. B. will never deny, unlesse his reason faile him, but that such kind of persons were proper to bee found in those first Churches, and times of first foundings of Churches amongst the heathen na∣tions,

And therefore, will hee nill hee, must he make a distinction of first Churches gathered, amongst such as never heard of Christ, and other Christian Churches in these dayes.

Secondly, bee it that it was Christs last commission, yet it suffi∣ciently appeares already that what he here held forth in this graci∣ous order about Gentile Churches, it was not therefore morall, and applyable to all times; no such signes now following any belee∣ving baptized members of Churches as did then. And if that very order of Christs last words were so morall, and strictly to bee ob∣served: why doe the Evangelists, and Paul so vary in expressions, of those last words of Christs order touching the Lords Supper? Matthew expresseth the Sacramentall actions of Christ, about the bread and cup, to bee as they were eating, Matth. 26. 26, 27. and so Marke, Chap. 14. 22, 23. but Luke and Paul say hee tooke the cup after supper, Luke 22. 20. 1 Cor. 11. 25. Matthew, Luke and Paul make the Sacramentall promise, to bee uttered before the Disciples dranke, even whilst Christ gave order for their drinking: but Marke mentions the promise, This is my blood of the Testament, &c. as spoken after they had all drunke of the cup, Marke 14. 23, 24. Luke addeth to what Matthew and Marke say, This is my body which is given for you: Paul otherwise, which is broken for you: Matthew, Marke and Luke say of the bread, that Christ gave it to them; yet Paul, which affirmeth what hee had received, and did deliver accordingly to the Church of Corinth as from the Lord, he leaveth out that act of giving the bread; Matthew and Marke say as much expresly of the giving of the cup to them, which Paul omitteth. Matthew and Marke expresse that thus: This is my blood of the New Testament, which Luke and Paul expresse thus, This is the New Testament in my blood: Matthew and Marke say, which was shed for many, Luke which is shed for you; Paul wholly omitteth it. Luke addeth in mention of the bread, Doe this in re∣membrance of mee; but not in mention of the cup; Matthew and Marke omit that passage in both, Paul addeth it to both, and addeth that in the latter, as oft as yee drinke it. What varietie is here, additions, omissions, variations, &c. in the mention of Christs last commission about the other Sacrament? surely, Mr. B. and others will confesse, that if it had beene so morall, and inva∣riable, because Christs last commission, holy men inspired, would not, had not, could not have so placed them, before, or after one another, something before, as mentioned by one, something set

after the same words, by another analogie of faith, and compa∣ring Scriptures with Scriptures, must regulate in such things here, and in this Sacramentall order, and so in the other.

And because so much is put in order of phrase, and words to conclude thence, without compare thereof with other Scriptures; the order of things in acting, because in those two places, such in order of uttering, and expressing, I would argue hence. If because beleeving is set before baptizing, none is to bee baptized, but such as beleeve, then because being baptized is in the same place, Marke 16. 16. set before being saved, therefore no beleevers are saved but such as are baptized, and so baptisme is absolutely necessary to sal∣vation, and a man may bee a true beleever, but for want of bap∣tisme, which yet was the case of some of old which were martyrd, may bee damned: yea then since Christ when preaching, Marke 1. 15. saying, Repent, and beleeve the Gospel, it must bee concluded it is in the order of things acted, as uttered, that repentance goeth before faith, and that a man actually may repent, before hee actu∣ally beleeveth the Gospel; and so Rom. 10. 9. If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth, is placed before the other, if thou shalt beleeve with thine heart. Ergo, a man may make a saving confession of Christ, before hee savingly beleeve with the heart: yea if the place it selfe in Marke, must bee so closely stuck to, without compa∣ring it with the Scriptures of the old Testament which were then when Marke writ, the onely Scriptures, besides Matthews Gospel, existing, it would follow in the reason of persons then living, that the Gospel must bee preached to Dogs, and Cats, Fowles and Fishes, &c. since it's expresly said, Preach to every creature.

Thirdly, I demand of Mr. B. whether it bee absurd to say the Gospel is preached to little ones, which understand not what is said, if so, then what thinkes hee of that speech of Christ in the presence of the little ones which hee uttered concerning them, Of such is the kingdome of God; and, hee that receiveth not the king∣dome of God as a little child, &c. was this Gospel, or not? surely yes to Mr. B. it is so which holdeth that Christ spake it of their in∣terest in glory it selfe: here was then Gospel preached to little ones, to Infants, yet not absurdly. Hee dares not say that was not Gospel which Moses on Gods behalfe uttered, Deut. 30. 6. as hath been shewed, yet spoken to little ones then present, Deut. 27. 14. and that was such, Act. 2. 38, 39. to so many as might bee present, as well as touching so many as were absent. Zacharies speech, spoken as

to his babe Luke 1. And thou child shalt bee called the Prophet of the most high, &c. it was Gospel preached to a babe.

But to come to the core of the objection, as if absurd to bee bap∣tized unto one knoweth not what; or as others, when one un∣derstands not the mysteries of such an Evangelicall act and ordi∣nance; I answer, Isaacs circumcision was an Evangelicall ordinance as a signe of Gods covenant of grace with him, and to confirme the promise of God, to bee a God to him, scil. to fulfill such pro∣mises as Luke 1. 73, 74, 75. and hee to walk in his father Abrahams footsteps, &c. as some acknowledge it did signifie sanctification of the spirit, justification by Christs blood, and faith in him as to come, &c. and so of an Evangelicall nature, if to any, to him who was the child of promise: yet did not hee then understand these things; did God then in injoyning his circumcision so young injoyne an absurditie? surely no. Christs act in blessing those Infants, Marke 10. and Luke 18. as that also of his imposing hands on them, and imbracing them, or taking them into his armes, these were no legall, nor ceremoniall, but truely gracious and Evangelicall acts of Christ, and very mysterious, yet not absurd, because they knew not, nor understood what hee did for them, in blessing of them; Peter understood not at present that Evangelicall act of Christ, in washing of his feet, yet must it bee done, or it had beene worse for him, John 13. 7. 9. 12. will Mr. B. challenge this act also upon the former grounds to bee absurd? As for that whim of I. S. I say wee lay not foundations of building faith upon humane testimony more then they of old, in holding out the Doctrine of circumci∣sion, Infants circumcised knew not more that they were circum∣cised in way of an ordinance, then children now doe of their baptisme, when they come to bee growne up, both sorts know it as it is testified to them by others. Yea but there was a visible mark to bee seene, which is not in baptisme; grant it so, yet how knew they that it was not given them in ludibrium by enemies, or unto some false God, and worship, by some Idolatrous Priests, amongst whom they might bee as captives, and they could not know that it was administred to them in a Church way and according to Gods rules but by hear-say by friends, or parents? And therefore in the maine of knowing both, as ordinances administred upon them, they are one.

Fourthly, Disciples onely, that is beleevers, are to bee baptized, according to Marke 16. 16. the affirmative including the negative,

therefore not Infants. Let us examine this principle and principall ground worke of our opposites.

1. Then it seemes Scripture Disciples of Christ are onely such beleevers, as Marke 16. 16. speaketh of, and such beleevers onely, as that verse mentions are to be baptized: which I deny. First, the beleever mentioned, Marke 16. 16. is one that shall surely bee sa∣ved and not condemned, as the opposition sheweth, but neither is every one which is called a Disciple such a one, witnesse that, John 6. 66. and Act. 20. 30. no true beleevers can so fatally bee rent a∣way as members cruelly torne from the body, as the Greek word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth, they were but externally in the body of Christ, not efficaciously. Mr. B. saith, a Disciple is in English a Scholler: yea but all that are Schollers at schoole come not to good: nor do they effectually learne what they are taught.

Secondly, if Marke 16. 16. bee the rule of baptizing, then none are by rule to bee baptized, but such as savingly beleeve, for of such a one hee speaketh, in opposition to such a one as is damned. And then the Apostles which baptized so many, John 4. 1, 2. where∣of sundry, Chap. 6. 66. proved apostates, and came no more at Christ, breake rule, as also did John in baptizing sundry of the multitude amongst whom hee knew, were many chaffy hypocrites, Matth. 3. 9, 10, 11, 12. but of that more else where.

And whereas Mr. B. challengeth us, to shew an Example of one baptized without faith. It's evident many a one was baptized be∣sides such a one, as beleeving, and being baptized should bee saved, as Marke hath it: many a baptized person being never saved, as sun∣dry of them, John 4. and 6. compared; yea if hee meane it of some speciall personall confessing of faith in Christ, it was propounded to them as a future thing, which afterwards rather they were to attend, Act. 19. 4. John said to them that they should beleeve in him which was to come after him, and of those scribes, and no mention of so much as their confessing of sinnes before their bap∣tisme, John sharply reproved them, &c. and minded them what they should doe afterward, bring forth fruits of repentance, &c. Matth. 3. 7. 8, 9, 10. and yet hee expresly saith, hee doth baptize them, &c. I indeed, saith he, baptize you, &c. but as Mr. B. urgeth us in that matter of shewing any baptized without faith, the Scrip∣ture saith hee is silent, so say I here, the Scripture is silent touch∣ing these Scribes confession of faith, and in Act. 16. 15, 16. the Scripture which saith Lydia's houshold was baptized; saith not that

any more beleeved but Lydia; and because this example is diversly controverted, I shall indeavour to cleare it, as for, and not against us, the story is so exactly in all the circumstances of it, set downe, that as I wonder of that evasion, that wee are to seeke the explica∣tion of this, by that other distinct story, as distinctly and indepen∣dently set downe from this, as this from that. The holy Ghost is exact in setting downe many particular passages in mentioning the occasion of this here expressed from Acts 16. 6. to 14. and in the particular circumstances of this passage of the first successe of Pauls ministery at Philippi. The person wrought upon is described: shee was no meere Pagan, but a worshipper of God before, albeit not one that beleeved in Christ Jesus as the promised Messias, which then was the great article of faith, and full of difficultie to bee beleeved, in all likelihood a Jew, or one of the best sort of proselytes ven∣turing hard for Religions sake, they were not allowed the libertie of a Synagogue at Philippi: as in some other places under the Romish jurisdiction: but they withdrew to a remote place, from ordinary concourse & view: and though Sabbath solemnities were loathsome to the Romans there, yet shee, with some other women adventure to spend the time in Prayer. Thither Paul repaires, and amongst them all shee is wrought upon, and no other mentioned: God ope∣ned her heart that shee attended, &c. if any of her houshould too, had beene then, or presently after that, brought home to Christ; the holy Ghost so exact in the circumstances of this story, as in that other afterwards of the Jaylour; it's very unlikely that he would have omitted the same here, more then in the other place. Yea af∣ter shee and her houshold were baptized, the Text expresly saith, If yee have judged mee, not if yee have judged them also faithfull come into my house. If there bee but one seeming example for re∣baptizing, and neither rule nor example to colour that wrested sense of Acts 19. 4, 5, 6. that must be currant and warrant, for that innovation, and we upbraided, if there were but one example so good for Paedobaptisme, as that for rebaptizing they will yeeld the cause to us, and so may wee to them, if this bee not fuller for us, then that for them. Yea but saith Mr. B. would you baptize a Turke in his Masters faith? and what of that? therefore here were none baptized but beleevers unlesse that bee granted? Non sequitur: is it not rule for us herein to make use of a Synecdoche, as well as you, when wee urge you with families baptized, and so children in them? you tell us it is a Synecdoche, of the whole put for the

part: the whole were baptized, that is, the growne part capable of being preached unto in the house, Acts 16. 31, 32, 33, 34. Yea but here was none preached to of this house that is mentioned but Lydia only, yet the houshold baptized, that is say we a part thereof by a Synecdoche, even that part w^ch might most properly be bap∣tized in her right more then in their owne, as were her children. For so house in Scripture is oftentimes used for children of such, or such a person onely, as Judg 9. 16. 18. dealing ill with Gideons house that day, is expounded to bee murdering of his 60. sonnes: so the poore widow, and her house, that shee was providing for, and which after lived of that meale and oyle, was but the widow and her sonne, 1 King. 17. 12, 13, 15. compared: Davids house which at that time was not so orient, 2 Sam. 23. 5. was but his children, many whereof proved badly, and came to sad ends, witnesse Ab∣saloms, Ammons act and end, &c. If Noah onely beleeving, and up∣right, yet all the rest with him are typically baptized for that ground, Come thou, and thy house, even wife, sonnes, and sonnes wives, and all into the Arke; For thee, not, for them have I found righteous, Gen. 7. 1. with 1 Pet. 3. 21. if Abraham alone bee a beleever, yet hee and his have the same seale, of the righteousnesse of faith of the covenant, Gen. 17. Rom. 4. if the growne Israelites have faith, it furthers that extraordinary baptisme in the Sea. Lesse then this herein is not to bee denied; yea but the rule is plaine otherwise, Matth. 28. 19. Marke 16. therefore the Apostles did baptize none, but beleevers and Disciples: Nay verily by their leave I conclude that that restriction of that word Disciple onely to one, that is an actuall beleever in Christ, was never there intended, in Matth. 28. nor was that in Mark. 16. ever intended to bee a rule of baptizing persons, excluding every other person, then such a one as there is mentioned from being baptized: and I further adde to that; that it pointeth out what a kind of person shall bee saved, rather then bee baptized. Wherefore it is not said, hee that shall bee baptized, hee must beleeve: but, hee that doth beleeve and is baptized shall bee saved: hence contrâ, hee saith not, hee that be∣leeveth not, shall not bee baptized, but rather shall bee damned, or not saved. If children bee excluded from baptisme, because of the former clause, hee that beleeveth, and is baptized, they must bee excluded salvation, because of the latter clause, hee that beleeveth not shall bee damned: will not our opposites themselves say, that the latter clause is taken de adultis, and not as any rule of exclusion

of Infants from salvation; and I say as much in that other, as no rule thereby to exclude Infants from baptisme, it is the same in Act. 2. 38, 39. if Infants because not beleeving, and effectually called, are excluded the promise, then by the same reason excluded remission of sins promised: yea salvation promised to them that cal upon God, v. 21. & if not therefore excluded these, why therefore excluded bap∣tisme, in defect of actuall faith? if the promise of justification, & salva∣tion, be not denied, which are the signats for want of actuall faith & repentance, why is baptisme the signe denied them? is the signe more then those things signified? is not faith and repentance more simply required to salvation, Luke 13. 5. Heb. 11. 6. then to baptisme? As for what C. B. addeth that that, Gal. 3. 27. excludeth Infants: I deny it, if that be taken, as if each baptized person had really & effectually put on Christ: then none of the Galatian members had bin such, as Gal. 3. 3, 4, 5. and 4. 11. 19. 21, 22. and 5. 3, 4, 5. he speakes thus in a Sacra∣mentall sense, as 1 Cor. 10. 4. 6. Heb. 10. 29. and such like, and so each Infant too Sacramentally puts on Christ, are buried with Christ, Rom. 6. 3. that is that which is visibly signed and sealed thereby, and that is the doctrine of the visible word of the Sacrament, holding forth what baptized persons are called upon as they are capable to attend: hence the baptisme of John is the doctrine thereof: hence the doctrine of baptisme, Heb. 6. 1, 2. but specially holding forth what they may expect from God; so Deut. 10. 16. and Jer. 4. circumcision, called upon them for heart circumcision, as capable of improving it, and incourageth them what to expect, especially that way from God, Deut. 30. 6. Ezek. 36. 25, 26, 27, 28, &c.

As for what C. B. addeth touching the rule of baptizing, from Act. 2. 38, 39. albeit the place hath had its distinct consideration, yet I shall here adde a word of answer to this which is C. B. his third argument, that if this bee a rule, then none are to bee bap∣tized, but such as truely repent. For to no seeming, and visible re∣pentance did Peter then exhort them, but to true and saving re∣pentance, all will grant: and then unlesse wee know mens hearts, and principles, their confession of sinnes cannot satisfie us when wee are to baptize them, as being doubtfull, and not certaine, that the rule is fulfilled in that our act, and wee must either doe things doubtfully, and adventure to transgresse rule, yea oft breake rule, as by this argument John did, Matth. 3. 11, 12. and Philip, Acts 8. Yea but they professed it: suppose they did, that was not that which Peter saith, make confession of or professe your repentance,

and bee baptized, but repent and be baptized; therefore if that be laid downe as the rule by which men must, or else must not be bap∣tized; hee that is baptized otherwise, hee was never regularly baptized, as possibly it's the case of many in your churches. That which John Spilsbury hath this way I find not in the rest: hee ma∣keth use of John 3. 5. as a repeale of the Law of circumcising of In∣fants, and as the new law of admission, &c. but if that washing of water bee meant of baptisme, it will then bee of as absolute ne∣cessitie to bee externally baptized, as to bee regenerate, both, if spo∣ken of two severall things, being made as one in point of necessi∣tie: nor let any say that ordinarily it is so that none else are saved: For Christs serious speaking, yea protesting, shewes hee intends more, yea more then a supposed neglect, or contempt of baptisme, but simply thus, verily, verily, unlesse, &c. according to vers. 3. he had to like effect spoken, and taking the kingdome here, for a particular visible Church, not that of glory, which hath no ordinances, 1 Cor. 15. 24. and 13. 8, 9, 10. how stands this with his principles, that a man first bee discipled and inchurched ere baptized, when as rather hee must bee from this ground first wash∣ed with water, or baptized ere hee can bee in; yea so much as see a visible Church, and so baptisme is rather the forme of the Church, then the covenant of grace, as I. B. elsewhere affirmeth, and reason suggesteth a Church first to bee, ere Church seales to bee administred to, or by it: nor need this bee urged in this sense upon Nicodemus, as the way of his entrance into Gods kingdome, of a true visible Church. For of such a Church was hee already a member, even of the Jewes Church: yea if thus meant, then not onely unregenerate persons should not bee of visible Churches; but it is not possible that they can get into them: for Christ saith, verily, and unlesse, &c. hee cannot, no hee should not, or ordina∣rily hee doth not enter into the kingdome of God.

As for what was said of preaching the Gospel, to goe before baptisme, wee hold it, wee preach it, the doctrine of the covenant is first opened, and then sealed: wee hold forth to parents that Gospel covenant of Abraham as to them, and their children, and the Apostles did as much, Acts 2. 38, 39. Rom. 10. 6, 7, 8. they prea∣ching the Gospel, wherein all sorts of nationall creatures were con∣cerned, they held forth that of Gods mind of grace, to that spe∣cies of Infants of Gospelled Gentiles, and so by the Gospel they as well as the other sort of adult Gentiles came to partake of the

promise, in the initiatory seale at least, Ephes. 3. 6. and what Gos∣pel they held out in the audible word preached, that they sealed by the visible word of baptisme.

Fiftly, to that straine touching the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as not in refe∣rence to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 because of the masculine gender, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the neu∣ter: if C. B. A. L. and Hen. Den had searched Scriptures, they would have found this enallage, or change of gender, very frequent, Rev. 2. 26, 27. and 19. 15. it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, see Acts 15. 17. and 26. 17. see more of the like Acts 21. 25. Ephes. 2. 11. and 4. 17. masculines joyned with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: and I would aske A. R. and the rest, whether when it's said in the neuter gender, before him shall bee gathered 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 all nations, with the masculine annexed, and hee shall separate them one from another 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, hath not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 reference to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉? if not, then it seemes some nations shall bee gathered at the last day, which shall not bee separated one from the other; if it have reference to it, then 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 [them] in the ma∣sculine here in Matth. 28. may very well have reference to the na∣tions albeit in the neuter gender.

Sixtly, to that argument raised hence from what is added: tea∣ching them, that is, presently teaching them, &c. & so not Infants, it is not cogent: As much is said in effect of Abraham presently after hee had circumcised the males in his house, and before Isaac was borne and circumcised, that hee would command his children, and his houshold after him, and they shall keepe the way of the Lord: yet none will conclude that therefore, no children of his houshold ser∣vants were already circumcised, and that Isaac and others should not bee circumcised; in that Abraham will take this course with all of his family: Are the baptized Gentiles to bee taught the com∣mands of God, that they may doe them? so are the proselyted per∣sons circumcised, and others also circumcised to bee also taught. Yea Infants circumcised notwithstanding that part of Gods coun∣sell, touching such teaching; yea but Infants circumcised were not capable of teaching: true, nor are ours which are baptized, yet both to bee taught, and so are, and were, according as capable thereof; and the Text in Matth. 28. 19. evinceth, that it is not a present teaching them that are there mentioned simply, but secun∣dum quid, scil. according as the baptized persons were capable of being taught, otherwise it must bee concluded, that they were presently to bee all and each of them taught the whole mind of Christ, and then it will follow that that could presently be done,

by the dispensers of the word, which is impossible, and likewise that the hearers were presently capable of all points of the doctrine of Christ, which is most unlikely; Christ himselfe did not take such a course with his owne Apostles, nor were they capable of it, John 16. 12. Yea by the leave of the objectors; since they were to hold forth by this solemne injunction of Christ, whatsoever Christ had commanded indefinitely which were not meerely per∣sonall commands; they must amongst other such commands of his, hold forth the doctrine of his touching the interest of the lit∣tle ones, of pious minded persons pressing after, and prising of his blessing of their children. The kingdome is of such, not meerely of those very persons, or babes, but of others, of like parents, &c. and his solemne command upon that ground of their interest in Gods kingdome, that his Apostles should not hinder them, but suffer the approach of such unto him in any externall way, whereof they are capable, and for which they are fit, as many of our Di∣vines have pleaded thence, that they are for baptisme.

Seventhly, to that argument from the exposition of baptizing into the name of the Father, &c. scil. in invocating his name, as Paul was bid to doe, Act. 22. to this I say, if Paul was bid to doe so, yet doth not that prove that that injunction was ever intended to bee the explication of being baptized into Christs name, that is, being baptized so, as then personally, and actually to call upon his name into which the person was baptized; when Paul in 1 Cor. 1. 13. saith, were yee baptized into the name of Paul, will it thus bee expounded, that is, when you were baptized, did you call up∣on Pauls name? if any doe so, it is new light, as they call it. For I never yet heard of that explication of it, albeit of others; but if that bee the rule that the persons baptized must make their prayers personally and particularly to God, when they are baptized: then did those women of Samaria, Acts 8. make their personall prayers before the publique assembly, which I suppose none will affirme, and if they will not, then the rule of baptisme was not atten∣ded by Philip, which were as absurd, or that was no rule men∣tioned: nor was it possible that those 3000. baptized in one day, should arise each of them, and call upon the name of the Lord as they were baptized. Some would bee longer in prayer, if others would bee short, and who would limit or confine them just to such an expence of time, and no more: and if Peter would have par∣celled out the time for that end amongst them, yet he wanted much time, for all and each of them to arise, and call thus on Gods name.

SECT. III.

THe coast being thus cleared I may I hope now passe on the more freely from interruption to what I intend concerning Matth. 28. And first I say in the generall, the strict of th••se words had reference to the inchurching of the first Gentiles: and so Marks relation which our opposites make parallel herewith evinceth: as Marke 16. 17, 18. doth shew, unlesse any will say those signes and miracles endured ever since as of use in particular visible Churches; and so now hold, and will hold to the worlds end. Secondly, I say, this had reference in the generall, to the Jewish nation, that when as they onely were of the visible schoole, and under the doctrine, & discipline of Christ the Prophet of his Church as speaking by his spirit in their Prophets, and Teachers, and as acting in the Church guides and officers by some influence of his authoritie, &c. now not one nation and people, but all nations, the partition wall being broken downe, are to bee called unto the fellowship of the promise or covenant, and the initiatory seale of it; Acts 1. 38, 39. not as formerly circumcision, but baptisme, not males onely, but without distinction of sexes, not of such a strict day, and age, as eight dayes old, but indefinitely whether elder or younger, but that our opposites make bold to goe so farre as to say, not now, In∣fants, but onely adult persons, they were best be on better grounds then yet I see lest the rebuke of Christ light on them also, so far forth to hinder the approach of beleevers Infants to him; nor will their rule of beleevers, Ergo, onely such, hold; as before we shew∣ed: or that of the affirmative including the negative; no more then the affirmative, Hee that calls on the name of the Lord shall bee saved, or, Hee that labours must not eate, includeth each its nega∣tive, that hee which calleth not on Gods name, as no Infant doth, or hee that laboureth not, as no Infant can, shall not bee saved or eate, and so all Infants must perish, and famish. And when I say it hath reference to the Jewish nation, I intend it onely thus far; that looke as none but covenant, and inchurched parents and their children were initiatorily sealed then by circumcision, so no others are now in ordinary Church administration to bee baptized then the inchurched parts in and of the nations. Thirdly, I say, Christ prefacing that ground to this commission, scil. his soveraigne power over not his generall kingdome of the world, but over his speci∣all kingdome of his Church, especially that, which is or shall bee in the whole earth; hee intendeth the execution of this commission

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

to have reference to all such as may at least externally bee brought under that estate and account of members in that his kingdome, according to their severall capacities of either, or both the bran∣ches of the particulars in the commission. Fourthly, Discipling I take in a Scripture latitude: by nations discipled, I understand not all the numericall and individuall persons in every nation where the Gospel commeth, but the specificall parts of the nations, scil. all sorts of persons in that nation, albeit not all, and every person of each sort.

SECT. IIII.

THese things premised, whereas Anabaptists doe affirme, that no Infants but adult persons onely are to bee baptized accor∣ding to any rule of Christ; I say that that sort of persons, scil. the Infants of inchurched beleevers are to bee baptized, as well as that sort of persons, scil. Adult persons making personall and parti∣cular profession and confession of their faith, &c. and that from the force of Matth. 28. 19, 20. My reasons are,

First, Taken from the subject to bee discipled, and baptized, by commission, scil. all nations, and therefore at least all the specificall parts of the nations, all sorts of persons in the nati∣ons, but not all of every sort. If it bee denied that neither all in∣dividuall persons, nor yet so much as all sorts of persons, scil. some little ones, and babes male and female, as well as some adult persons of both sexes: I would know why the col∣lective nations are mentioned under that title of nations ra∣ther then under that of growne persons of the nations: when God, Gen. 12. promiseth that all nations shall bee blessed in Christ, all sorts of persons, albeit not all of every kind are included, else I cannot see how any Infants can bee saved, unlesse either some are saved which are not blessed in Christ, or if blessed in Christ, yet such as God never promised should bee blessed in Christ: and if so, they have a mediator of Christ to them, but such an one as is not in respect to them, a mediator of the new covenant, yea and so have Christ, a Savour to them, to whom hee is not a covenant, as Esay phraseth it: Chap. 42. and 49. so every man for every sort of men, Heb. 2. 9. and all men, for all sorts of men, Rom. 5. 18. which are not simply all but many rather, vers. 16. compared: so the world for all sorts of persons in it, 1 John 2. 2. how usuall an acceptation, and why should it here in matters of lesse moment be scrupled?

Secondly, taken from the nature of the commission, scil. a charge of Church dispensation of the Gospel, or dispensing of it with Church reference, Marke 16. 15. it is Gospel they are to preach, and this being Gospel, that children of inchurched covenant pa∣rents, were to bee with them also taken into the fellowship of the covenant, and people of God, externally interested in it, as was proved before: and the initiatory scale being a branch of the Gos∣pel, as well as the promise, as baptisme is reckoned, Luke 3. 34. 5, 6. compared with Marke 1. 1, 2, 3, 4. such Infants federall interest in the Church, and initiatory Church seale must needs bee inclu∣ded.

Thirdly, from the latitude of the Church reference to which this commission relateth, albeit with some different respects had to those times and ages following, according as then the Mini∣sters were extraordinary, and Apostolicall, and those succeeding were to bee ordinary Pastours, Teachers: and withall with various respects had to the first foundation, members strictly considered, as such, and others: now that latitude it appeares was such, as tooke in all the visible Churches throughout the world, unto the worlds end: From which if such Infants bee excluded, an actuall and pri∣viledged interest, they are excluded, as was proved in ordinary course from salvation: there being ordinarily none saved, but such as are in the visible Church, or some visible Churches in the world. And if not excluded an actuall interest in some visible Church or other, in the earth; why are they excluded baptisme which is here given to distinguish the inchurched parts of the world, from all other, as well as to ratifie and seale up the cove∣nant to them; there is no time set now to limit them to such a day as of old to the eighth, that that should suspend their jus ad rem, which they had as Abrahams seed, so soone as borne, from be∣ing elicited till the injoyned day.

Fourthly, from that latitude of the nation disciple which taketh in such Infants as well as others, and consequently they are rea∣ched in the commission of being baptized: For Disciples are to be baptized, as our opposites confesse. For proofe of their disciple∣ship I argue thus. All those to whom the thing signified by a di∣sciple as explained in any place of Scripture, is appliable, they are Scipture Disciples: but the former is true of such Infants, ergo the latter. The Major is evident, in that in reason significant names cannot bee denied to persons to whom the thing signified is gran∣ted.

And the spirit of wisedome would not in any place expound the name by the thing: if that thing it selfe did not give ground worke, to bee so named. If any reply, that it sufficeth not to have the thing signified by the name in one place, unlesse withall, the p•…•…ty bee qualified with the signified thing in another: as for in∣•…•…ce, in many Scriptures it signifieth a beleever, &c. this must bee 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in too: to this I answer.

•…•…irst, I speake of significations of the name, as explained by the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Ghost himselfe, and if any will refuse that they presume to 〈…〉〈…〉 holy Ghost to expound his owne words.

•…•…ly, if wee may not rest in one, or other such a place, but 〈…〉〈…〉 another way, why not another to that, and so ano∣•…•…〈◊〉〈◊〉 •…•…arroweth yet more the signification then that did: yea why 〈◊〉〈◊〉 •…•…ke in all such places where in any sense it is mentio∣ned? where 〈◊〉〈◊〉 wee stop? and so that exposition of a disciple, Luke 14. 26. must bee taken in as requisite to, according, as Hen. Den. urgeth it, a••d th••n Judas and Demas, and divers others, which forsooke Christ, never hating their owne lives for his sake, could not bee his disciples, yet they were so: and so doth the holy Ghost call Judas, and many others, John 6. yea many that never be∣leeved in Christ himselfe, but did after a sort approve his doctrine, and followed him, albeit for base ends, &c. yet these were di∣sciples and baptized as such, John 4. 12. It's spoken of disciples of Christ in the Pharisees sense, scil. persons addicted to his doctrine, &c. as Disciples of John, of Moses, &c. signifie, and not of persons beleeving in him or them, John 9. When they asked so oft touch∣ing Christ as if they pretended to desire to learne of him, &c. saith the blind man to those Pharisees, Will yee also bee his Disciples or Schollers, &c. vers. 27, 28. Bee thou his disciple, say they &c. not meaning that either should beleeve in him; those many Disciples never beleeved that heavenly doctrine of his, John 6. yet called Di∣sciples, vers. 66. Yea if the latitude of the signification of a Scripture disciple, must all meet in one, to make a compleat definition: then Disciples must bee Apostles, because some were so called which were such. The names of the 12. Disciples, Matthew 10. 1. and the names of the 12. Apostles, vers. 2. are one, see more, Matth. 28. 16. The eleven Disciples, (i. e.) Apostles. It is then enough to attribute that name Disciple to any, to whom the rea∣son and explication of that name, any where in Scripture mentio∣ned, is by the Spirit of God applyed: wee neede not feare to fol∣low

such a leader, and speake after him, the minor then is to bee proved; that such a signified thing by that name Disciple is appli∣able to such little ones mentioned. For proofe hereof I must take up that wherein I perceive I am prevented by others; yet shall not desist to speake the same thing in substance with them; one to whom drinke or water is given, in Matth. 10. 42. in the name of a Disci∣ple, is expounded by the Spirit, Matth. 9. 41. to be one, to whom it is given in the name of one belonging to Christ. Whence I argue. All such as belong to Christ externally, they are externally his Di∣sciples: such Infants mentioned, belong to Christ externally: there∣fore they are externally Christs Disciples. And the same descripti∣on of a Disciple which shall bee saved holds thus, such as savingly belong to Christ are Disciples which shall bee saved; but it's not needfull to goe so farre in this case: To the saving interest and effi∣cacy of Baptisme, it is required that one savingly belong to Christ, and bee a Disciple savingly in that sense: but to the externall and Church interest in the use of the seale, it's not of necessitie, for then none ought to bee baptized, but such as are in a saving estate, which to us is a secret, and so no ordinary proceeding in mans Court; yea the very place speakes of the case: as one that giveth drinke to another, because to him and in his judgement, hee is a Disciple; for infallibly hee doth not know him, but taketh him rather to bee such a one; and therefore refresheth him. The major therefore of the Syllogisme is in substance the very Text, the minor is evident, such as externally belong to the Church of which Christ is the the head, they doe externally belong to Christ, &c. hence to bee in his Church by externall profession and to bee in him, are put for one, John 15. 2 now that such Infants belong to that Church wee formerly proved, in proving both that they belonged to Christs visible Church and kingdome, and that he was head there∣of also. Mr. B. frameth two answers to a like objection hence, his first wee have already disproved, scil. that Infants also belong to Christ in respect of visible and Church constitution, which hee denyeth. His second is as impertinent, hee saith Christ speakes in Matthew and Marke of Adult persons: true: I never intended to urge it otherwise; but my argument runs, that the signification and reason of the name of Disciple there given, though to growne persons, yet since what is there in that Scripture applied to such; is also appliable to such Infants also, therefore they are Scripture Disciples. So Acts 11. 26. the name Disciples and Christians are

made Synomyna, in way of distinction from Pagans not of the Church; alike to what is here intended for distinction sake from the rest of the Pagan world, amongst which since the breaking down of the partition wall, I hope Anabaptists will advise better how they place beleeving Gentiles Babes, unlesse they will leave a piece of the old wall standing. Discipled persons in the Text as in refe∣rence to baptizing, implyeth persons externally in the Covenant of grace, unlesse our opposites thinke other then such should bee baptized. Also persons in the visible Church are baptized, unlesse they thinke persons out of any visible Church fellowship may bee in ordinary dispensation baptized: for which extraordinary calls and cases our times meddle not, nor have not, as of old there were some, which yet impeach not our rule of the Church seales given to the Church, for her use and by her preaching Elders to bee dispensed; he then is discipled for Baptisme, which is inchur∣ched, which is in the Schoole of Christ and in peculiar fellowship with the other Schollers there, and in speciall relation to Christ the Teacher of his Church; yea such as to whom in some sense hee preacheth Gospell, as to those Babes in Luke; and howsoever hee teacheth the lowest formes, as I may call them, that sort of per∣sons in his Church, that is some such, he so promiseth to teach them inwardly, that hee doth so appeare in saved Church children; yea so hee may teach Indian Papouses now too. I answer, if wee speake of his absolute power, hee can doe more then he ever will, as to make many other worlds, &c. but to speake of his ordinate and regulate power, so hee can doe but what hee willeth to doe, what his secret will is, not for us, Deut. 29. but according to his revealed will, wee may say that those children being estranged actually from the Covenant and Church they are actually without God and Christ, and hope, but beleevers Infants externall estate is ecclesiastically of another nature. So much for clearing Matth. 28. and confirmation of Paedobaptisme thence.

SECT. V.

A Second Argument is this. All those which are the Church seed of Abraham they are to bee baptized. Infants of inchur∣ched beleevers are the Church seed of Abraham, ergo are to bee bap∣tized. The major is not denied I thinke by our opposites; but if it bee Gal. 3. 16, 17. 27, 28, 29. proveth that all such were baptized in Apostolicall Churches, and therefore are to bee in ours. The

minor hath beene formerly proved in the conclusions touching fe∣derall interest, and is evident by the Apostles argument: if Christs, then Abrahams seed. Whence I argue, All such as are Christs or be∣long to Christ, they are Abrahams seed: Such Infants belong to Christ, ergo, they are Abrahams seed. The Major is true both waies, such as savingly and efficaciously belong to Christ, they are so farre also Abrahams elect seed, such as ecclesiastically are Christs, in which sense the Apostle here speakes of it, as hath been proved, they are so farre also Abrahams Church seed. The Minor is true of the species of such Infants, if taken in an efficacious way of saving interest: that sort of persons as well as the other of adult persons are such; else none of them could ever bee saved: unlesse some are saved which neither belong to Christ nor are elect; either of which would bee absurd to affirme, but that is a secret, wee are to looke to visibilitie thereof as the rule of dispensation of Church ordinan∣ces. If therefore taken in an ecclesiasticall sense as here it is, as was proved, so all such Infants doe belong to Christ as hath beene pro∣ved, and consequently are ecclesiastically Abrahams Church seed.

SECT. VI.

A Third argument is taken from Acts 2. 38, 39. thus. Those to whom appertaineth any principall ground upon which any of the Apostles have moved and encouraged growne ones to bee baptized, they are according to Apostolicall encouragement vir∣tually given to bee baptized. But to the Infants mentioned doth appertaine the forenamed ground, therefore there is virtually an Apostolicall encouragement for them also to bee baptized. The Major is undeniable, unlesse any suppose that any of the Apostles as Apostles, as here Peter is considered, should give an insufficient ground to any thing unto which they encouraged others. For to give a chiefe ground of encouraging and putting any upon this or that which will not universally hold where the same ground was to bee found, it is to give an insufficient ground. If a Pastor mini∣sterially urge a member thus, Brother looke you, watch over your brethren, &c. for you are a brother, if this bee not cogent with any other brother as a brother unto the like watch, it is an in∣sufficient principle and groundworke, so here in the case mentio∣ned, none will doubt but it was a sufficient groundworke to en∣force the former as a dutie scil. their repentance to whom hee spake; and why not of the like force in the other? yea and so you will

say it is where both are joyned. Nay verily it must bee of force, if sufficient, to enforce either apart: if both bee distinct duties as rea∣son will evince, and this be the common enforcing reason to both, it must hold as well in either of them considered apart, as in both of them joyntly taken. And I would know if the Apostle had from such a ground of the promise urged one already baptized to repent onely, had it not beene sufficient? or suppose hee had to deale with one that in his judgement had repented already: urging him onely to bee baptized, because the promise belonged to him, had not this been of sufficient force thereunto? no rationall person I thinke will deny it. The minor will appeare by declaring the groundwork upon which the Apostle urged them to bee baptized. Now this was the onely ground upon which Peter urged them as to the former dutie of repenting, so to the later of being baptized: For the promise is, or belongs to you, scil. the promise of grace, of remission of sinnes, &c. as before was cleared. Yea but repen∣tance is called so too from them on this ground, and that Infants are not capable of; To this wee have formerly answered, why it was meete to require as we doe, some testimony of repentance in offensive members of a corrupt Church, albeit a true visible Church as was that of the Jewes, if they will bee fixed members of purer Churches, as was that Church of Christians, vers 41. and as mem∣bers thereof partake of the seales; yet wee doe not expect the same of their children too, under no such actuall scandall, but baptize them in their confessing parents right also. Besides it appeareth before that it was a sufficient ground on which to urge the baptisme of such or such a person as considered in it selfe apart.

Now that the groundworke, scil. interest externall at least, was that interest of those persons not yet savingly wrought upon in the promise of grace that appertaineth to such Infants of inchurched and externally covenant parents, it appeareth in this very Scrip∣ture, the persons spoken to were members of that true visible Church of the Jewes visibly in the covenant as wee proved; the persons spoken of also were their owne naturall children, as was likewise proved, and of them also Peter avoweth even after Christs ascension, and in reference to participation in the seale of baptisme in a Church of Christians: That the promise [is to your children] so that the conclusion followeth that the baptisme of such chil∣dren is virtually called upon as well as of adult persons.

SECT. VII.

Object. YEa but the Jewes children were not then baptized, Acts 2.

Answ. It's more then such as so speake can prove from the Text.

No, will some say, but it is not. For they that gladly received the word, saith the Text, were baptized, vers. 41. And they conti∣nued in the Apostles Doctrine, and fellowship, and breaking of bread and prayers, vers. 42. and 44. All that beleeved had all things common, 44. and sold their possessions, &c. vers. 45. and continued daily in the Temple, &c. vers. 46. which are not appliable to In∣fants. And what then? therefore other things there mentioned were not so too? non sequitur; what more usuall in Scripture then to speake of things in a collective way of persons which are not all and each of them appliable to all and each particular person of that company, but by a Synecdoche some things are spoken of the whole wholly, but others are onely appliable to some parts of that whole. It's said in this place all that beleeved were together, and had all thing common, and sold their possessions, vers. 44, 45. will any take this of the whole company in all the parts of it? all were not capable of such an act applied to all, as not all having possessions to sell, for some were in need rather of supply from others, vers. 45. It is therefore a Synecdoche so in the other, so all are said to continue in the Apostles doctrine and prayers, &c. as be∣fore this Infants were not capable of, and therein it is as in the other Synecdochicall, for of other things mentioned they were capable, and they were appliable to them, they had things in com∣mon too, and had supplies of clothing or food, &c. according to their need; unlesse any will say, that these persons spoken of had no children needing such supplies as well as themselves, or else if they had, yet their needs were not supplied, so when they all eate their meate in severall houses, &c. what were the children shut out of doores if they had any, or had none of those families any children in them? Suppose they could not eate meate with such singlenesse of heart, yet were they not of them that did eate their meate and were refreshed with them: there were doubtlesse some hypocrites in heart amongst them, and they could not eate with them with a single heart, but were rather spots in their feasts of charitie, as Judes phrase is, Jude 12. yet by a Synecdoche, all did eate with heart singlenesse, in that some which were capable of the

act doing, did so among them, all added were such as should bee saved too by a Synecdoche, and in a Church sense; yea their In∣fants some of them were such really, and all of them in an exter∣nall and ecclesiasticall respect of covenant and Church interest: they were capable of that adjunct, albeit not of some others, so were they capable of being added to the visible Church of Christians, as they were of that true visible Church of the Jewes before. And as all the Infants of covenant and inchurched Parents which stand right in the Church, are also in that right inchoatively members of that Church, albeit not perfectly. And inchoative actuall mem∣bership of a true visible Church, doth externally inright to the initiatory Church and Covenant seale of baptisme; of which two these members children were enrighted, as well as others then pre∣sent. And for further clearing of this way of application of some common acts to an assembly where are children, which are not appliable to the whole company, wholly, see Acts 21. 5. bringing on the Apostle and his company is appliable to all those of Ephe∣sus, men, women and children, but that act of praying not so pro∣perly appliable to the little ones, but rather to the growne persons present. Weeping and swearing is applyed to the whole company assembled, whereof many were children, Ezra 10. 1. 5. compared, yet proper to the growne part; albeit the other of being assembled before the house of God, &c. were common, as that sinne confessed on the behalfe of the whole assembly, vers. 2. was understood of the whole figuratively. In respect of that part of the assembly which had so sinned, which were not the children as is evident; no nor all the growne ones, but some onely amongst them, as vers. 18. 23, 24, 25. declare, so Deut. 31. 11, 12. men women, and children must bee all gathered to have the Law read in their hearing, that they may heare and learne, and feare the Lord, and observe all the words of his Law: it is all applyed to all indefinitely, yet sense and reason tells us, that sundry of the children were neither capable then of such observing of all Gods words, no nor so much as hea∣ring the words read at that time in such sort, as thereby at pre∣sent to bee stirred up to feare or obey the Lord, but some things onely are appliable to the whole assembly wholly, other things now mentioned to the whole at present onely, in respect of the growne part, and to the others no other th••n as involved in any such acts of their parents at most, so Joel •• 14. ••. solemne assembly of all the inhabitants of the land, is to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 convented for fasting,

so chap. 2. 1. againe repeated, and ver. 15, 16, 17. instance is given in the sucklings, as to bee a part of that assembly for that end, and the maine dutie vers. 13, 14 is laid forth as required of them all, which are called to this solemne fast, scil. not meerely to abstaine from food, or to expresse sorrow by rending their garments, but to rend their hearts by godly compunction and sorrow, &c. all will yeeld that such things are not properly applyable to sucklings, but to some of the assembly: nor yet will any in reason exclude Infants from being of that Church assembly, for such Church use according as they were capable of any thing mentioned, albeit not capable of all mentioned, Jer. 43. 4. 6, 7, disobedience to Gods voyce is applied to all the people, yet not properly verified in all the children which were of that people and company, Deut. 29. 1. All Israel is said to have seene those wonders in Egypt, and yet ma∣ny of them that were then growne, it being 40. yeares after their comming out thence, vers. 5. never saw the same, much lesse did the little ones, which were a part of that assembly, vers. 14. yet who will conclude, because little ones were not Israel seeing the••e wonders, that therefore they were not Israel entring into Covenant, vers. 11, 12. and marke the phrase applied to the little ones, that they also entred into covenant with God, ibid. as well as God is said to make his covenant with them, vers. 14, 15. this was a covenant of grace, as hath been proved, so that Hen. Dens notion holds not concerning God being in a sense in covenant with Infants, but they may not bee said to enter into covenant with him, that by the way. To returne to that in hand; nations baptized, Matth. 28. are to bee taught to observe Christs comman∣dements, but non sequitur that Infants are no part of the Churches in the nation to bee baptized; so here, Infants beleeve not actually, &c. non sequitur, ergo, not to bee added to the Church in a solemne way of initiation to Church estate inchoatively by externall bap∣tisme. Both may stand together and have their truth of the whole in some things wholly, wherein they are capable as of Church estate and baptisme, in others true of the whole in respect of some part thereof as actuall beleeving. To like purpose C. B. argueth weakely in his sixth argument, that the whole citie was baptized men and women mentioned, not their children too, as if therefore excluded; I may as well argue from Gen. 14. 11, 12. That those Kings tooke all the goods of Sodome and Lot, ergo, they tooke no people besides contrary to vers. 16. or if they did take people and

women, yet not children too. And if Lot were first taken and then redeemed by Abraham with others, yet not ergo his children or daughters, or if then under the notion of women, yet not a word of children, wherefore either they were left behind in the Citie without their Parents when they were taken, or if taken with the Cities and persons, yet not brought backe againe, which would bee absurd to affirme.

Secondly, suppose the beleeving Jewes children were not just at that time baptized, when their Parents were thus solemnly admit∣ted to that Church of Christians, yet non sequitur that they were not baptized afterwards. When members are solemnly admitted to compleat and fixed membership in our Churches, wee baptize not oft times their little ones the first day of that their admittance, yet doe it afterwards as occasion is offered, and their desire thereof signified.

SECT. VIII.

YEa but neither then nor in any other Text in the Acts is it ever mentioned, that any children of any beleeving Jewes were baptized. A. Non sequitur that therefore they were never baptized. Many things of great weight were done by Christ, and so by his Apostles which were not recorded: yet not therefore never acted by them, John 20. 30, 31. of which see more before touching con∣sequences of Scripture. But doe our opposites indeed conclude, that none of the beleeving Jewes children were ever baptized by Apostolicall approbation? Is it imaginable that among so many thousand beleeving Jewes, at least ecclesiastically, such which are so moved and touched in the case of their childrens being not cir∣cumcised and sealed that way to the covenant, that it would not much more startle them to suppose such a tenet or practise as to de∣ny them to bee sealed any way by initiatory sealing at all, as nei∣ther by circumcision, so not by baptisme. Are they so ready to move contentions in that point, Acts 22. 21. and upon but a sup∣posed deniall of it, and are they no way moved so much as to put the case, & state the question to be satisfied from the old Testament, for no other Scripture was then extant, why their Infants w^ch were ever used to bee reckoned in Abrahams covenants, & so sealed there∣to by the seale then only in use, but now they are either wholly ex∣cluded any Church interest and any covenant interest actually; or if owned yet as such, yet why denied of that w^ch is now the initiatory

seale of such interest in the covenant. Yea doth Peter expresly mind them of the interest of their children as well as themselves in the promise, wishing them therefore to be baptized; and this occasi∣oned no stirring of questions and cases why on the same ground their children must not be also baptized? other contentions about other things are mentioned, and other differences in points contro∣vertible in those times, as Acts 11. 2, 3. and 15. 1. 2. &c. and 21. 11. and 6. 1, 2. and 15. 38, 39. and Gal. 2. 11. Surely then either the beleeving Jewes which when worse men had that priviledge of their childrens covenant and Church estate and right to the initia∣tory seale: the case is so soone altered with them, that they thinke it no matter of scruple to call the deniall and omission of it into question, or to assay to desire satisfaction in it for matter of judge∣ment and practise in the case, or if starting it, why is not so great a controversie mentioned as started by some at least, that could not so wholly forget their childrens good when solicitous about their owne, and when so gladly accepting Peters word, especially the gladding word of promise, which was the joyfullest word hee spake as belonging to them, and to their children: yea when accep∣ting so gladly that injoyned dutie upon the ground of baptisme? surely controversies of farre lesse weight are not passed over in si∣lence, witnesse that Acts. 6. 1. and 15. 38, 39. and Gal. 2. 11. and 21, 22, &c. mee thinkes to common reason and rationall heads and hearts as well as gracious. It should bee rather concluded as a mat∣ter out of question, and that no such new distance and difference was put of parents in covenant and Church estate, but not now the children as formerly; of parents to bee sealed by the initiatory Church and covenant seale unto Church and covenant fellowship, but not now their children as formerly.

SECT. IX.

A Fourth argument followeth, scil. In that the Infants of cove∣nant inchurched parents which were externally interested in the covenant of grace, as invested with the covenant of a politicall visible Church, to whom the Seales were appointed, they were sea∣led as they were in bodily respect capable to bee sealed in that ini∣tiatory way of circumcising, therefore Infants now according to their capacitie in bodily respects of the like initiatory appointed seale, are to bee sealed in the initiatory way of baptizing. For clea∣rer proceeding in the argument, I shall lay downe a few propositi∣ons.

First, that the old testament is avowed by the holy Ghost in the new, to containe all things necessary for faith and practise for substance; and that so fully, that a minister of the Gospell, ordi∣nary or extraordinary, might bee furnished thence with ground∣worke and generall rules, upon and according to which to pro∣ceed, in holding forth any thing necessary to bee beleeved, or practised. Of the Scriptures of the old Testament is that full testi∣mony, 2 Tim. 3. 14, 15. See Cartwright in locum, see Luke 16. 29. 31. Secondly, that the Apostles in all other things used to hold forth Gospel services with analogy to legall Types, Rites, and Sacrifices, &c. testimonies are plentifull for it. Thirdly, that it was the Apostles use to hold forth and confirme things of most weight from the old Testament, Act. 2. from the 14. to 41. and 3. 22. to the end, and 4. 10, 11. 24. to 29. and 8. 12. 25. 35, 36. compared with Esay 52. 15. and 53. 1, &c. So Acts 21. 38, 39. old Testament grounds, yea from the promise are given them for baptisme it self in the new; yea for the dispensation of all the Gospel ordinan∣ces unto the Gentiles, as thereof capable, Acts 13. 46, 47, 48, &c. Ei∣ther then they had no ground, or if any, they urged them not, which is contrary to those places, or if any, they urged them from the old Testament then onely extant, to establish their practises. Fourthly, that Christ himselfe gave them patterne in this way of proofe. Fiftly, that the people with whom they had firstly to doe, were beleeving Jewes in that way, and they were zealous for the old Testament in the generall. Sixtly, that the ancients of the pri∣mitive Churches have rarely, if at all denyed the comming of bap∣tisme in circumcisions stead. Seventhly, that where a commande∣ment of God doth injoyne any one thing upon such a ground, there the command doth require all things w^ch are of the same na∣ture, as helpefull to the same thing; as the Commandement, Thou shalt not kill, forbids anger also as tending to the same end, scil, to murder, and as well forbidding striking, rash speaking, &c. on the same ground, as tending to murder: yea but Christ expresly for∣bids it. Answer, Christ doth not put any thing thus upon the com∣mandement which was not virtually in it before; hee urged it, but not legislatively, as then making a law in such particulars; but, declaratively, as expounding that law and reducing particulars to their generall heads of commandment. Yea but there was his san∣ction thereof in that reducing: True, but when explained, yet so as things in the commands before, onely then clearely understood to

be so; so here, looke as God commanding Abraham circumcision in the flesh for that end and on that ground, that it might be an initia∣tory seale or Sacramentall signe of the covenant, so also in the same doth hee virtually command baptisme with water, as being of the same nature, scil. such as fulfilleth that end, scil. initiatorily to seale the covenant, therefore albeit circumcision cease, yet the commandement thereof reacheth and partly authoriseth that baptisme in the appli∣cation of it to Infants for that end, as of old to those Infants for that end. Baptisme is a signe I say of the covenant, and therefore ei∣ther naturall, and then any washing uninstituted had sufficed this way, but that such washing of water should bee that signe needed an institution, and being instituted, it is now of the old use to seale initiatorily the covenant to adult or Infant externally initia∣ted in it. Yea but Christs institution gave a rise both to the signe that baptisme should bee that, and that such and such persons should be signed with it, therefore not the command of circumcision gave rise so much as to the application of that signe, to such or such persons. Answer: it followeth not, that Christs institution gave warrant therein, therefore not the commandment of circumcision, since both consent in the maine ground of both, scil. that wee shall apply our selves to the use of such signes as hee shall appoint, and that in both should bee the same moralls or spiritualls signified, the Lord knowing that wee needed some solemne externall way of sig∣nification of his mind of grace, by some signe, as well as they did. Eighthly, as none may adde to, so neither may any detract from any words of Gods grace, wherein hee hath expressed himselfe, unlesse hee himselfe repeale the same: hee once would have his co∣venant of grace to bee to the whole Church and Church seed, and once would have it initiatorily sealed on them; hee hath repealed the way of sealing, but the covenant hee hath not, the extent of it to parent and child hee hath not, the ordinary dispensation of it in, and from, and by the visible Church hee hath not: the sea∣ling use of an initiatory covenant and Church seale hee hath not: the things mainely to bee sealed even covenant and Church right. at least externall and the like, both of inchurched covenant pa∣rents and children, hee hath not, as in former conclusions hath been shewed.

SECT. X.

HItherto that knowne and much controverted place, Col. 2. hath reference; the Colossian Church and members of it, as the

Apostle urgeth against the circumcision teachers, are as compleat in Christ without circumcision, as ever any other Church or the members of it, yea as even the best of them were with circumci∣sion; that is the proposition hee layeth downe, Col. 2. vers. 10. if they had objected Abrahams, and Isaacs, and Jacobs, and Davids compleatnesse in covenant respects and Church respects: Gentile Churches and members are as compleat in the substantiall, and most materiall parts or branches of it, had the one a covenant and Church blessing and heritage as to them, so to their children; so are these compleat that way too; if the ratification thereof by a so∣lemne covenant and Church initiatory seale bee the great thing they have to boast of; these are compleat in Christ in that respect too: Christ hath not left his Churches and the members of them without such covenant priviledges, nor without a solemne way of initiatory sealing thereto and ratifying thereof: whether as Chur∣ches or as members of it in particular, or as such members who have children to partake thereof with them; doe the false Apo∣stles then urge against them their incompleatnesse without circum∣cision? It's answered in the generall, v. 10. they are compleat in Christ; how? as fulfilling the types which were in any Jewish ceremonies onely? no verily, not onely so; albeit firstly and prin∣cipally so; for Christ nailed them on his crosse, and tooke them away, as such, by his death. And what need then any Church or∣dinances at all? wee have all in Christ might some say, as 1 Cor. 1. I am for Christ, I care not for Paul nor Apollos, nor Cephas, nor for their dispensation of the word or seale of the covenant, I have enough in Christ; such a spawne of our seekers there was in those times, v. 12. Yea but the Lord Jesus in wisedome and faithful∣fulnesse will have his Church and people to bee graced and perfect as of old they were in substantialls of the same Church ordinan∣ces and the like. The beautie of the Church was perfect through that Church comelinesse, which God did in this respect put upon them, Ezek. 16. 14. not a comelinesse of outward possessions, in a tem∣porall land, in temporall jurisdictions, kingdomes, cities: what had the Church, quà Church, and as in covenant with God, as his covenant Spouse, to doe with them? nay the heathen might vye with them, for as good land, as large possessions, territories, riches, honours, dominions, &c. yea but not for Church ordinan∣ces; hee dealt not so with any nation besides, Psal. 147. 19, 20. Christ had as mediator and as a Priest compleated all ceremoni∣ous

types: yea, but as Prophet hee will have it held forth and clea∣red by that dispensation of the Gospel, and as King of the Church hee will have all also exhibited in such a way, and by such evange∣licall meanes, 2 Tim. 1. 10. the Word and the Seales, they are parts of the Gospel in the dispensation of them and by them all is brought to light: yea by them as by pipes is Christs fulnesse con∣veyed as head of his visible body the Church outwardly, as it is by his spirit to his elect inwardly, Zach. 4. 11, 12, 13, 14. Col. 2. 19. hence the Church hath such officers given it, whose proper work it is to exhibit and communicate such things as tend to make them every way compleat, Ephe. 4. 11, 12, 13. wee are compleat in Christ, as the signatum, but yet in baptisme too as the signe. Yea but regeneration and sanctification, both in respect of mortify∣ing and quickning grace, &c. signified by circumcision, is conferred on us by Christ. And so it was of old in him, in whom, Ezek. 36. 25, 26, 27. and Deut. 30. 6. was yea, and amen, 2 Cor. 1. 20. and by his Spirit as hee held all forth then in the ministry of the Pro∣phets of old, 1 Pet. 3. 18, 19, 20. so hee exhibited the same to his elect among them; yet then hee had covenant and Church Sym∣bols to confirme the same and instrumentally to convey the same, and so now, Ephes. 5. 25, 26. As by the word of covenant, as the principall instrument, and the Spirit maketh baptisme it selfe to become efficacious: so by washing too hee sanctifyeth his Church both as that whereby hee ratifyeth it so to their faith that they have the more strength of hold and influence for that end; and as that which he blesseth as one ordinary meane also, in respect of the word of promise; to which baptismall washing is annexed as the Seale. Sanctifying and purging is the signatum and end: washing with water through the word, is the ordinary Seale, and meane; whence here, in Col. 2. 10. when hee had laid downe that thesis, he declareth it by two instances: partly in that wee are circumcised by the circumcision of Christ, which is the fulfilling of the type, v. 11. partly by applying the benefits of the circumcision of Christ, to them and theirs, by the like, or an equall ordinance to that of circumcision which the Jewes injoyed, to wit, of baptisme; else were not the Church and Saints now as compleat as those of old; which as they had virtually all fulfilled in Christ to their faith, Act. 15. 11. and 26. 6, 7. Heb. 13. 8. Revel. 13. 8. Heb. 12. 1, 2, 3. So had they withall sealing ordinances, applying the spirituall circumcision of Christ to them and theirs. And so Aretius, which

maketh Christ the perfect organon of our salvation, without any other equall externall cause joyned with him, in that respect it was by him alone, that all was fulfilled, Col. 1. 19, 20. and by himselfe he did that worke, Heb. 1. 3. yet in point of externall application, hee denieth not any thing wee say; for in the same place in his notes upon Colos. 2. within foure or five lines, hee addeth it as an observe∣able thing from the place, that baptisme comes in the stead of cir∣cumcision, as is evident in that the Apostle calleth it the circum∣cision of Christ; scil. in a Sacramentall way: under the name of the signe in whose stead baptisme is set, comprehending the spiri∣tuall thing signified by a metonymy, as the covenant, scil. the Sa∣cramentall signe of it, Gen. 17. 11. 13. Act. 7. 8. the testament, scil. the visible seale of it, 1 Cor. 11. 25. So his body and blood, ibid. the Sacramentall communion of it, 1 Cor. 10. 16, 17. or commu∣nion of it in a Sacramentall sense. So that the Apostles answer is full to prove the uselesnesse of circumcision, which the false Apo∣stles would have intruded upon them as necessary to the Gentile Churches, Gal. 1. 6, 7, 8, 9. and 4. 21. and 5. 11. Acts 15. 24, & 24. 25. It was a generall false doctrine troubling all the Gentile Churches, ibid. but it's now uselesse in respect of the maine thing signified, Christ to come, who hath fulfilled it as ceremonious and in re∣spect of the externall signe, and meane of application of Christ, scil. circumcision supplied by baptisme: whence Gentile Philippians as well as Paul a Jew are of the circumcision, Phil. 3. 3. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were inwardly circumcised, so are they at least ec∣clesiastically judged to bee, they were externally circumcised: so are they in their baptisme, ergo, now circumcision is wholly use∣lesse. Yea but what is this to Infants? the Apostle directs his speech to growne ones: Suppose he did, yet this speech is of, and reach∣eth to their children as well. Else therein had they not beene so compleat, as those formerly which had a covenant made with, and externally sealed both to them and theirs: yea the sealing of the covenant, as wee have shewed, by baptizing of such as have chil∣dren, is not so compleat in ordinary dispensations, unlesse as oc∣casion is offered the same bee sealed initiatorily on their children, according to their outward capacitie of the externall signe. The whole covenant is as well sealed on Abrahams seed, as on himselfe, and not wholly sealed on either, without other, as not wholly made with the parent, but with respect to the other. It were else to cut off a great part of Abrahams Church seed, & so make Church

parents more imperfect, but especially unto the false teachers ar∣gument, the answer was not else so full. Be it that Christ is the An∣titype of circumcision now: So hee was to the faith of them of old. Bee it that Gentiles are inwardly circumcised, so were they of old: yea bee it that inchurched parents are externally circumcised in their externall baptisme actually, and so circumcision is so far use∣lesse to that sort of growne persons: yet what is this to the other sort of persons, which used, yea they mostly, to bee circumcised; and it was their parents dutie to indeavour their circumcision as well as their owne. If now there bee no such persons to bee ex∣ternally circumcised also in baptisme, and that their parents are under no tie in that respect, then at least circumcision in respect of them may bee usefull and necessary, there being no initiatory signe appointed for them. To say they have the internall circumcision, our opposites will deny, and if they have had sundry elect Infants of Abrahams seed of old. To say they are antitypically circumcised in Christ, our opposites will not affirme of all the Churches chil∣ches children, and if onely of some, as much was virtually in Christ to come for the elect Jewish babes, yea for those parents and children belonging to grace before ever circumcision was of use; to say they are externally circumcised in their parents baptisme, as much might have been said that way if rightly said of the Jewish children in their parents circumcision: yet they were actually cir∣cumsed also. The Apostle argueth of a compleatnesse in Christ with reference to baptisme, which is therefore here named, as an outward meane whereby inchurched Gentiles, especially, come or∣dinarily to have communion with Christ, and to bee compleat in him, yea and as an outward way of holding forth manifesting, and proving the uselesnesse of circumcision to them, for it is an an∣swer to circumcision teachers as Mr. Blackwood rightly hath it, un∣lesse therefore our opposites will exclude them all Church interest contrary to what wee have proved: or that they would have be∣leevers children denied of one initiatory outward meane of com∣munion with Christ, whence that of baptizing into his name; (or covenant followship) unlesse also they would have us want one Apostolicall way of arguing to prove the uselesnesse of circumci∣sion to all sorts of persons, which used personally to bee circum∣cised of old, or unlesse they will deny that baptisme is of the same spirituall use, as circumcision was, scil. to bee a Sacramentall signe, or seale of the covenant, and the visible interest of persons in it;

which Hen. Den denyeth, but others doe not, and if they doe wee have formerly proved the contrary, I see not how the force of Gal. 2. 10, 11, 12. will bee avoided in this point of Paedobaptisme.

SECT. XI.

VVHereas therefore divers things are brought to invalidate any binding reference to circumcision, if it bee intended of any type to the substantialls of it, and in it, or any forcible ana∣logy in divers materiall things deduced thence, wee deny the co∣gency of such arguments, as when Mr. B. tells us of a many diffe∣rences betweene baptisme and circumcision, and so I. S. the like, and Hen. Den the like, it will not thence follow, ergo, in nothing a∣like still, that one as the other is a seale of the covenant, that one as the other distinguisheth the visible members of the Church from Pagans: and this followeth not, and wee assay not to make the proportion runne of foure feet, as the proverbe is, nor to prove proportion in sundry circumstantialls, peculiar to that ordinance. It sufficeth us that they agree in their common author, Sacramen∣tall nature and end. They are both institutions of God, Sacra∣mentall initiatory signes in their natures, to bee applied to per∣sons of all sorts, as they are outwardly capable thereof, which are visibly interested in covenant, &c. albeit in their particular man∣ner of administration, and the circumstances of time, place, sex, nation, member of the body, &c. they differ; successors are not successors if every way the same if no way different; yet I would not create differences as some do, which never were. As first, that the circumcised Babes did eate the Passeover: when yet the Law to all that came thither, strangers or Israelites was one, scil. to keepe it to the Lord, with spirituall respects to Gods ends and rules, as Exod. 12. 48, 49. to bee in heart prepared as well as to bee cere∣monially cleane, 2 Chron. 30. 18, 19, 20. the children in that family celebration of it, asked not what meane [wee] by this service, as if they actually partooke thereof, but what meane [yee] by it, Exod. 12. 26. or if such children capable of instruction, were ad∣mitted as some authors have thought, yet not Babes which could not goe up to the Temple, Deut. 6. 16, 17. Nor doth the mention of the house, or congregation, which some who will not allow us that latitude of like plea urge, as keeping it, evince it; but is an usuall Synecdoche: such rost, parched meate and soure hearbes, &c. Exod. 12. were too harsh to goe downe with such Babes, Numb. 9. 3.

they in the Wildernesse kept the passeover according to all the rites of it, yet none will say the uncircumcised males therein; for circumcision was not used in the Wildernesse, Josh. 5. did eate con∣trary to expresse rule, no uncircumcised person shall eate. Second∣ly, that circumcision sealed Canaan, as if that were all Gods co∣venant mentioned, Gen. 17. 7, 8. 11. 13. but of this formerly. Or thirdly, that reprobates as well as elect were then sealed, as if none but elect are now sealed: as for Esau and Ishmael, in what sense they by extraordinary revelation to this or that person being discove∣red and yet after sealed, how it might bee and was, as was that of Judas to Christ administring the Supper and sop, a knowne de∣vill, yet admitted, &c. and no crossing of ordinary rule; we formerly spake to it. Fourthly, circumcision bound, say some, to the law; What, not I hope in the rigour of it, and as the substance of the co∣venant of workes made with Adam? was Abraham and Isaac, &c. bound thus thereby, and not rather to it as to an holy rule of life? and so are wee, yea by our baptisme, Rom. 2. 25. if any will Ido∣lize circumcision or baptisme to make it ex opere operato availeable to salvation, they then legalize it, and if that way they looke for life, they must keepe the whole Law, or else they perish. For in this legall sense they urged circumcision, Gal. 5. 3. a•• that by which to bee justified, vers. 4. As for the essentiall difference suppo∣sed by Mr. B. in the covenant, Gen. 17. 7. wee have formerly dis∣proved that: that also is an imaginary difference of Mr. B. that circumcision gave right to the Church, and that of I. S. It brought them into covenant; when it confirmed rather a precedaneous right in both, and seales of God use not to bee appointed to bee put to blankes but to the covenant, and that was with Church re∣ference as before. Whence that Gen. 17. 7. 8. 11. nor was this any meere outward covenant sealed, but the very covenant of saving grace (as some expresse it) even that, I will bee a God to them, or as I. S. hath it, fulfill my promise to them, naming Luke 1. 73, 74, 75. and of the nature it was on both the seedes, if I may use his phrases, even elect or reprobate: nor was there no faith required in adultis as Abraham and proselytes. Yea all sorts were thereby bound to, and called upon to indeavour after faith in Christ, a new heart, power of godlinesse, &c. hence Deut. 10. 16. and Jer. 4. 4. and Rom. 2. 25. 29. and 3. 30. Nor doth circumcision as it was given to Abraham belong to another covenant, but as it was given by Mo∣ses, Levit. 12. 3. betweene which Christ distinguisheth, John 7. 22.

Nor doth the father of the families hand in circumcision, when as now it is the minister of the Gospell which baptizeth, argue that baptisme belongs to another Priesthood: as long as both of them belonged; that to the ordinary appointed Minister for this time, and this to the ordinary and appointed Minister now. Nor will it follow, that the forementioned obliging reference had to circum∣cision will bring on us a yoak insufferable, Acts 15. 10. unlesse wee urged circumcision it selfe, in the very symbole and manner of ad∣ministring of it, in such sort, as urged by those legalists, as ne∣cessary to salvation, and as a worke by which persons are to expect to bee justified, Gal. 5. 3, 4. which none will challenge us for: nay even circumcision it selfe was not that yoake, as Gods instituted seale of his covenant; even dissenting brethren some of them (for such I should call some of them) acknowledge as much in effect, but to urge it on the Gentiles or on their children, as simply necessary to salvation, Acts 15. 1. and adding therewith a necessitie to keepe the whole law, vers. 5. 24. this was that yoake vers. 10. without which both the choyce Jews of old, & those at that time, and con∣sequently others of the Gentiles might bee saved, as Peter acknow∣ledgeth, vers. 11. As much may bee said to the objections made a∣gainst this way of arguing from circumcision, as if there may as well follow other analogies of Priests and their garments, &c. It followeth not unlesse wee make analogy every way parallel, which we decry. So when it is urged that circumcision don away in Christ is an handwriting, is enmity against us, is an unprofitable rudi∣ment, is a partition wall, proper to the Jewes, overthroweth Christian libertie, is that without which wee are in Christ com∣pleat, &c. and therefore not binding; it is true of circumcision as urged in a legall way, hence Gal. 5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, &c. and in respect of it ceremoniously considered in the proper way of administring it, but if considered in the generall nature of it as an initiatory seale of the covenant of grace, so it was not against them, nor un∣profitable, &c. and wee Gentiles that are compleat without cir∣cumcision in the symboll and circumstantials, yet are not so with∣out the substantials of it in baptisme, which is of like nature and use so farre forth as before was proved. As for the grand objecti∣on against this and against the whole doctrine of Paedobaptisme, scil. That we have no command for baptizing Infants as they had for circumcising of them, nor have wee any example of it: wee have in the former conclusions given answer thereunto, and even

in injoyning that initiatory seale of the covenant as made with such persons, God did virtually injoyne the application of such an initiatory seale as hee should appoint to seale his covenant to per∣sons externally in it, which should bee declared to be of like na∣ture and of like use in the maine, as was shewed.

SECT. XII.

ANd besides former Scriptures opened, as Matth. 28. Acts 2. Gal. 3. Act. 16. 14, 15, &c. wherein this objection is taken off, wee may adde other virtuall commands and examples thereunto. When God in Acts 10. presents the present outlawry estate of the Gen∣tiles, from Covenant and Church, according to Eph. 2. 11, 12. but now to be eaten; or such as were to bee taken into fellowship, not barely civill, but sacred: as the issue of baptizing some of them shewed in the end of the chapter in reference to this Gospel and Covenant or cleansed estate; what God hath cleansed, (speaking of it as already in actuall existence, because as sure as if already, God calling things which are not, as if they were) I say in re∣ference to this estate of Gods externall owning of them at least, Peter is commanded not to count them uncleane. Acts 10. 15. Now to count them uncleane, or prophane, is to count them stran∣gers from all Covenant-fellowship with the people of God, &c. All sorts of beasts, little and great, dogs and whelps, gentiles pa∣rents and child, as the Cannanitish woman and her daughter are called, Mat. 7. and Mat. 15. Whom God shall cleanse, are not to bee counted common. If God therefore make an holy Covenant with such as wee have proved, if Christ himselfe affirme such like, even such babes as are of such parents, and are devoted to Christ to bee of his kingdome or Church: if hee take them within his ju∣risdiction as Prince of his people, as was prophesied; hee will take the outlawry Jewes, &c. Ezek. 37. Surely hee so farre forth cleanseth them, and severeth them from the rest of the outlawry Pagan world, as hee doth the Infants of inchurched beleevers, as wee have proved: verily the Apostles are charged not to carry it towards the cleansed creatures of this sort, as if uncleane, by refu∣sing to admit them to such religious priviledged fellowship as they are outwardly capable of, and consequently not to refuse them from baptisme, the initiatory Seale of that fellowship. So Ezek. 47. 22, 23. which all will confesse, and Scripture evidence will cleare, hath reference to these times after Christs incarnation, the

strangers or proselyted Gentiles, with their children where ever they are cast amongst the tribes, even the Churches of the Christi∣an Jewes in the latter dayes, they all by the charge of God, must have lo•• and inheritance with them in Canaan; What in the earth∣ly Canaan meerely? verily there is no cause of such a limitation: even with our opposites Canaan is typicall also, typed out Gospell mercies covenant blessings, and priviledges, Heb. 3. and 4. 1, 2, 3, &c. Surely then it's the charge of God in reference to the cho•…•…ce dayes of Gospel Churches, that where godly strangers are cast, and desire to fix and to incorporate themselves as into one people to in∣joy one and the same spirituall possessions, and mansions under one and the same spirituall government of their Prince, that such strangers together with their children should bee joynt inheritors with the Churches, in the Churches heritage of the fellowship of such ordinances, or priviledges, as they are severally capable of, as at least they are of the initiatory seale of baptisme. And if others which hold with I. S. against us in this point, are of his minde, his p••inciples will further administer answer to that objection; he citeth Ezek. 16. 8. Jer. 31. 33. Heb. 8. 10 Gal. 3. 18, 19. Heb. 6. 17. Deut. 26. 15, 16, 17. Deut. 29. 12, 13. Rom. 9. 8. with Gal 4. 28 by which

it appeareth (saith hee) that it is the promise or covenant of grace which produceth a Christian and giveth him a being in such an estate of grace as in Church fellowship, and after∣wards hee useth arguments to prove the covenant of grace to bee the forme of the Church, &c.

which how it will stand with o∣ther things elsewhere held forth by him and some of his minde is considerable. As first, that the command of God was the onely ground of circumcision, confessed to bee the seale of the covenant; yea but the Jewes had Church fellowship in their circumcision, all will yeeld as being a Church ordinance, and then the command of God gave them not alone a being in that fellowship since, ex concessis, the covenant of grace which was ever the forme of the Church, &c. it's said it gave them such a being. Secondly, that the covenant wherein the Jew Church was interested, was not a covenant of grace, yet this author produceth, Ezek. 16. 8. Deut. 26. 16, 17, 18. Deut. 29. 12, 13. to prove that this covenant of grace was the forme of the Church, and that by this argument amongst o∣thers, because it was ever so. Surely this Church of old was a true visible Church, to which these places have reference, and yet the whole body of the people are spoken of, as the places declare:

So then the covenant made with them, by this authors grounds was the covenant of grace. Thirdly, that the little ones of the Jewes were not in the covenant of grace; yea but whence then had they that Church being and right to that Church fellowship in the seale of circumcision? whence called that covenant Churches children? Ezek. 16. 8. 20, 21. 23. whence else are they of that num∣ber which were to enter into that covenant? Deut. 29. 11, 12. Al∣beit the author politiquely leaveth out that v. 11. in citing the place, which is here produced to prove the covenant of grace to bee the forme of the Church, and that which giveth one a Church being, and as hee argueth that to be the forme of the Church, be∣cause it was of old so: so say I of the covenant of grace as invested with Church covenant: that which was of old the forme of the Church, giving being to Church membership and fellowship in Church ordinances, the same is now such; but the covenant as made with respect to parents and children was of old the forme of the Church giving being to such, scil. in circumcision, as of pa∣rents so of children, therefore the same is now in such sort the forme of the Church to give a Church being to parents and chil∣dren in respect of Church fellowship in baptisme, and so I conclude against that. Fourthly, that children of persons visibly in cove∣nant with God and his Church have no right to baptisme; when yet as hath been proved they have interest in the same covenant, and so consequently by this very principle laid downe unto this Church initiatory seale of baptisme. Yea but Infants have not the law written in their hearts, and so it's a seale to a blank: A. No more had they of old, no not Infant Isaac, nor those, Deut. 24. 11. with 30. 6. they are not therefore such as have not the cove∣nant made to them, because they have not such a power of grace actually in their hearts; that is the execution of Gods covenant, which oft times is long after, but the very 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Berith or cove∣nant it selfe is the promise of it, Deut. 29. 11. 14, 15. and 30. 6. compared: hence that promise called the covenant as being the most substantiall part of it, ibid. and Gen. 17. 6, 7. 11. 13. they are present actuall subjects of the promise of future grace, I will cir∣cumcise their hearts, I will bee a God to them, &c. and that ini∣tiatory seale is to this especially, Gen. 17. 7. 11. 13. Acts 13. 8. So are not Turkes and Pagans children, in foro ecclesiae; besides Judas and Ananias his baptisme was in Gods institution, and in respect of the Church court, and their Church right no seale to a blank;

albeit Gods Law was never written in their hearts, and they shall finde it to their cost, both Gospell words and seales will worke one way, if not a savour of life, then of death; the cup in the Lords Supper is to all Sacramentally the testament or a visible seale of the very covenant of grace in Christs blood, 1 Cor. 11. 25. yet some drinke of that cup unworthily, and because it is Sacramen∣tally of that nature, thence are they guilty of Christs blood, ver. 27. 80. circumcision on all sorts was Sacramentally the Covenant of grace, albeit not savingly and efficaciously such, Gen. 17. 7. 11. 13. as before was proved.

SECT. XIII.

AS for that objection of supposed absurdities, of making Christs body to consist of dead members; forcing Christs spouse up∣on him, destroying Gods Church, holding people in blindnesse, bringing reproach upon religion, filling consciences with scru∣ples, making men rest in their baptisme, &c. I answer, they follow not exnatura rei, from the initiatory sealing of Infants with the Church seale; for if so, then without distinction of times or Chur∣ches, &c. it must universally hold: and so reflects upon the wise∣dome and faithfulnesse of God, who once at least ordered such a thing, scil. putting the appointed seale of his covenant, circumci∣sion, to such Infants, they were members of the visible body of Christ, a true visible Church, &c. yet God did not thereby de∣stroy his Temple, force a Spouse on Christ, fill his Church with dead and rotten members, hold people in blindnesse, lay a foun∣dation of persons resting in their circumcision, kill them with scruples by it, or destroy the markes of a true visible Church: which are according to Mr. B's. profession, and the initiatory seale of the covenant, (then circumcision) now baptisme: and so Mr. B. his ninth argument is answered; his second, third, fourth, sixth and eight argument hath been elsewhere answered, his se∣venth argument from a mistaken exposition of Acts 19 is else∣where answered in what is briefly spoken to that place, his tenth argument from the taking up of Paedobaptisme from corrupt principles, is abundantly answered in the whole discourse; where∣in better principles are held forth, and if any hold it out upon weake and unwarrantable grounds, it weakens not a good cause in it selfe, that it is ill handled. His last argument from univer∣sall practise to the contrary, is elsewhere answered, and amongst

others, the practise in baptizing Lydia's house is one exception; nor doth that which Mr. B. would pretend as an argument to the contrary, evince what hee would have, they are not said to bee the brethren of the house, which Paul there comforted, Acts 16. ult. doth Mr. B. which would make all the jaylors houshold to bee actually beleevers, thinke, that they attended not Paul and Silas from prison? for hee was now to depart the citie, and hasted out of the jaylors house by the comming of the Magistrates thither for that end, vers. 39. so that there was no opportunitie before to ut∣ter what they had to say at parting, but another house as that of Lydia in their way out of the citie, is a fitter place for that pur∣pose, there therefore they make a little pause for that end; after which they departed.

SECT. XIIII.

ANd to adde here to consideration of 1 Cor. 10. 1, 2. which to mee hath been long of validitie to prove this practise of Pae∣dobaptisme as then in use, nor can I yet bee removed from those thoughts, the Apostles scope there was to take downe their pride in priviledges, and resting secure in ordinances, &c. by shewing them the hazard to which they lay open, notwithstanding, if they provoked God, by an argument from a like example of Church members interested not meerely in ordinary, but extraordinary priviledges, yet by reason of such provocation comming to a sad end; and thus lyeth the Apostles argument: Where there are like priviledges of grace, there (if abused) will bee like punishments inflicted: but with you and with them of old are like priviledges of grace: ergo, if alike abused, there will follow like punishments. And because they might glory in those peculiar Church ordinan∣ces of the seales, which yet they were so apt to abuse, hee singles out parallels to them, and therein doth not take instance from the ordinary Sacraments of the Jewes, but from two extraordinary ones: wherein, if in any thing, they might seeme to bee priviled∣ged above others. Now if there were no parallel in that materiall businesse of the childrens baptisme in Corinth Church; a great part of the Apostles scope of urging them from a ground of pari∣tie of priviledges failed; nay this had been a good argument to have taken downe their pride another way, scil. that the members of that Church had their children with them, in a glorious man∣ner baptized in the cloud and sea, yet God dealt so with them in

his judgements, and you Corinthians that have nothing any way parallel to such a baptisme of your children, doe you thinke to escape?

Object. 1. But you will say there is no proportion betwixt them, in that this was no Sacrament at all, but an extraordina∣ry providence.

Answ. An ordinary Sacrament it was not, but a Sacrament it was though extraordinary.

SECT. XV.

FIrst, in that the other of the Manna and rock was not else spiri∣tuall meat and drinke, and Christ to many of them really; it was then Sacramentally so, or no way to them. Secondly, why else doth the Apostle single out but these two; to the one giving the name of baptisme, to the other of spirituall meat and drinke and Christ agreeable to that mentioned in the end of this argu∣ment? vers. 16, 17. Thirdly, why else doth hee having mentioned their being under the cloud vers. 1. come over it againe, vers. 2. and adde the name of baptisme to it? It were a tautology if in∣tending it of a bare providence. Fourthly, else the Apostle had much failed in his scope of deterring the members of this Church, considered as such, from Church sinnes and wantonnesse under and against Church priviledges. Fiftly, else why is not the same ascribed to all the rest, to the mixt multitude which were with them, yea to the very beasts? for all shared in this as a provi∣dence, all passed thorough the Sea with them, &c. yet none but the Church have this ascribed to them; All our fathers were un∣der the cloud and baptized, &c. the Church fathers to Paul and Gentile Church members (as such) were those Jew Church mem∣bers: whether parents or children; the very babes, as then, yet in respect of after ages of the Church, to whom afterwards they were Instruments to convey Church truths and blessings, they were fathers; Paul spake this to the brethren of the Church, yet not excluding the sisters, but including them in his admonition and argument; but it's usuall, that Church admonitions and Epi∣stles doe runne in the name of the brethren, as being principall actors in all Church matters, and hence also, albeit the females of the Jew Church as such bee by proportion included in this matter of Church priviledge, yet hee nameth onely the males; but onely members of the Church did share in it in that respect.

Sixtly, hence also the phrase, baptized into Moses, not personally but ministerially considered in his doctrine; hee gave them from God both a precept for it and a promise encouraging to it: or into Moses typically considered, as a type of Christ, Act. 3. 22.

Object. 2. Was not this onely a type of saving preservation from sinne, &c.

Answ. All the Corinthians had no antitype thereof in their bap∣tisme really, no more then many of them, and in a Sacramentall way, that baptisme to them was as that to the Corinthians, a visible seale of salvation.

Object. 3. Doth hee not speake of a samenesse therein betwixt the Jewes themselves, and not in reference to the members of the Church of Corinth?

Answ. The scope of the Apostle being what was mentioned, will not beare other sense then of comparing them with the Jewes in like priviledge for substance, to deterre them from like sinnes, lest they incurre like punishments.

Object. 4. By this argument wee set up nationall Churches now.

Answ. No more followeth hence, ex natura rei, but, as onely Church members according to their severall capacities were so priviledged and not others: so onely Church members now are to partake of Church Ordinances, wee are to consider it herein quà Church, which is continuing, and not quà nationall Church, wherein was some circumstantiall peculiaritie which vanished.

Object. 5. You may then pleade for Infants comming to the Lords Supper, since all our Fathers did eate of that spirituall meat and drinke of the rock, &c.

Answ. The least male childe of a day old, or two or three houres old at that instant (of which there were many scores its likely in that numerous Church) were in respect of succeeding Churches, fathers; yet none will imagine the word (all) to take them in, in the latter: as if they gave them water out of the rock to drink, or Manna cakes to eate so young; but a Synecdoche must needs bee yeel∣ded therein: So I say (all) in the former is taken, for all the fa∣thers simply; but in the latter for all Synecdochically: or for all such which were capable of making a spirituall use thereof.

SECT. XVI.

TO draw to a Conclusion, one argument more used by A. R. and which is Mr. B. his first argument against Paedobaptisme,

would bee cleared it stands thus, the Baptisme of Christ is dipping, the Baptisme of Infants is not dipping, ergo, the Baptisme of In∣fants is not the Baptisme of Christ. Now what hee meaneth by dipping, hee sheweth in his answer to that of washing of cups, &c. which saith hee is not by sprinkling but dipping, yea not onely dipping but totall dipping, washing all over. The weaknesse of the Minor we shall consider in the latter end, and beginning with his Major. The Major of this Syllogisme is fallacious, for baptisme of Christ is washing, Ephes. 5. 25, 26. Heb. 10. 22. 1 Pet. 3. 21. and washing is as well by sprinkling, or powring on of water, yea Christs Baptisme is such a washing as is in way of powring out or sprinkling. Hence Tit. 3. 5. washing of regenera∣tion and renewing of the holy Ghost, which hee hath powred out on us, Vers. 6. Greeke, and in urging their proofe from the diffe∣rence of the Greeke word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which signifieth sprinkling properly, Heb. 9. 13. 19 21. they forget how the holy Ghost termeth all those divers sprinklings, Vers. 10. namely divers 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which are after named in the followings, Ver. scil. sprink∣ling the blood of Bulls, &c. Vers. 10. 13. 19. 21. compared. So then by the interpretation of the holy Ghost which is more then a thousand Authors, baptismes are sprinklings, and sprinklings are baptismes. Hence speaking to the inchurched Hebrews, as allu∣ding to their legall sprinklings, hee calleth baptisme, baptismes (Heb. 6.) in the plurall number; yet Ephes. 4. there is but one bap∣tisme: & it's observable how the Author to the Hebrews in speaking of baptisme alludeth and relateth to their legall baptismes or sprinklings, and therefore calleth them baptismes. Now who knoweth not, that children were sprinkled with that typicall blood as well as others, to note the necessitie of the sprinklings of them also with that blood? Yea since the Hebrews in Church estate; for such they were, witnesse that Heb. 10. 24, 25. and 13. 17. had such baptisme amongst them of persons suitable to the legall baptismes with blood, why should not we conclude baptizing of their chil∣dren too as well as of growne persons to bee in use with them ac∣cording to the type of that ceremoniall sprinkling?

A. R. his reason makes rather against him too, if [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] joyned with baptisme signifie [in] and never [with] then baptizing (saith hee) must bee dipping and not sprinkling. To which I re∣ply, if [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] joyned with baptizing, signifie [with] and not [in] then by way of contrary, baptizing is sprinkling and not dip∣ping:

now in the very places quoted by A. R. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 put after the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifyeth [with] and not [in] Matth. 3. 11. Hee shall baptize you 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with the holy Ghost and with fire, and not in it; which is expounded by Acts 11. 16, 17. the holy Ghost fell on them, and Acts 1. 5. compared with 2. 17. it is expoun∣ded by powring out of the Spirit; nay Luke in mentioning the very signe, leaveth out [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] Luke 3. 16. and Acts 11. 16. I baptize you 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which (if grammatically rendred) is not [in] but [with] water. Besides, it's most suitable to Sacramentall actions: which are signes to hold proportion to the thing signified; where∣fore also it is so rendered in mentioning the signatum; hence men∣tion is made of sprinkling the Nations by Christ, Esay 52. 15. and of the blood of sprinkling, Heb. 12. 24. 1 Pet. 1. 2. See more Ezek 35. 25, 26. Esay 43. 3, 4. Joel 2. with Acts 2. Sprinkling or pow∣ring of water most fitly expresseth the maine thing properly sig∣nified and sealed visibly 〈◊〉〈◊〉 baptisme, scil. first grace; wherein the Spirit applyeth, not us to the Word, or to Christ, (as in dipping the party is applied to the water, and not the water to him) but the Word and Christ to us, as first in order of nature, 1 Cor. 12. 13.

Object. But baptizing is burying with Christ?

Answ. It is not necessary the resemblance should hold fully un∣lesse as none is buried before they are dead, so wee should bee first dead with Christ in baptisme, and then afterwards buried, which if in baptisme too, and so to be twice baptized; but if the allusion bee urged, it is for us rather, wee use not to bury men by throw∣ing them downe with their faces downeward, as when persons are dived with their faces under water, but by laying them in with their faces upwards; nor doe wee plunge them into the dust and earth, but powre and sprinkle dust and broken earth upon them. When Christ was baptized of John in Jordan it's said hee went downe, &c. but was hee therefore by John dived into the water? Yes say you, what in his clothes? then his clothes too were bapti∣zed with him, as I may say, but how then is it said he came straight∣way out of the water, Marke 1. 10. and vers. 1, 2. immediatly the spirit drives him into the Wildernesse? what in that dung wet case as wee say, is that probable? Luke saith, Chap. 3. 21. when all the people were baptized, hee also was baptized: women also then were baptized openly, for it was a Church action, and if they were dived were they not stript? how improbable is it that they

were ducked in all their clothes, & if they were stripped in whole or in part, would Christ be present at such immodest spectacles? That women were baptized by John, see Matth. 21. 31. 32. compared with Luke 7. 39. and Matth. 3. 4, 5, 6. Nicephorus his story, lib. 13. chap. 19. of the flying of the women naked being beset with armed men as they were to bee baptized; and that sad story of a Priest defiling of a woman when to bee baptized; besides the sad plunges which they were of old put to, when they tooke up this course of diving baptized persons in such sort, witnesse that order of the fourth Carthage councell, Can. 4. touching widowes bap∣tizing of women and other like acts mentioned in Justinian, be∣sides the mischiefe of restrayning baptisme to certaine times of the yeare in cold countries, and sundry other sad consequencies of such a course, might bee propounded, but thus much for the Major. The Minor of Mr. Bs. Syllogisme is weake also; since some which hold paedobaptisme, yet baptize by dipping; therefore wee shall thus retort Mr. Bs. Syllogisme. Baptisme by dipping is the bap∣tisme of Christ: but with sundry Ministers, baptisme of Infants is baptisme by dipping; therefore with them at least, baptisme of Infants is the baptisme of Christ: so contradictory are Mr. Bs. rea∣sonings to his own principles. And thus much bee spoken from the solid grounds of Scripture to that part of the controverted case touching Infants Baptismall Right.

PART III.

CHAP. I. Sect. I. Generall consideration of the eight Propositions.

HAving seene before what defensive and offensive weapons the Armory of the Scripture affords us, for the just vindication of the controverted Title of the little ones of inchurched visible beleevers unto the Covenant and Baptisme, the initiatory seale thereof, the globe of contention is againe cast by sundry, and a challenge is made, that laying by a little those spirituall weapons of our warfare (which indeed are mighty through God to cast downe all the specious Logismes, reasonings of the sonnes of men against Christ in the doctrine of his free grace and Covenant and initiatory seale thereof) wee should try it out at other weapons, even humane testimonies and authorities. And besides other darings of us this way; the Author or Authors of that Pamphlet entitled The plaine and well grounded treatise concer∣ning Baptisme, give out great words this way, and even conclude the victory before the fight. For my owne part I must confesse my selfe a very puny, and too too unskilfull at such weapons; yet I shall (God willing) adventure to accept the challenge, and make a little tryall of their skill; not doubting, but when an essay shall bee made albeit by a learner, there will bee some able seconds to take up the cause when I have laid it downe.

But to leave Prefacing and fall to worke.

The substance of the booke is laid downe in these eight Pro∣positions.

1 That Christ commanded his Apostles and servants of the holy Ghost first of all to preach the Gospel and make Disciples, and afterwards to

baptize those that were instructed in the faith, in calling upon and con∣fessing the name of God. His proofs out of Scripture are, Matth. 28. 19. Mark 16. 15, 16. Luke 24. 45. John 4. 1, 2. Acts 22. 16.

This proposition might passe for the most part as current, al∣lowing a latitude in the word Disciples: and understanding it of such as were baptized meerely in their owne right, and taking that phrase, calling upon the name of God, as not alwayes the pre∣sent act of the persons baptized at the instant of their baptisme, but rather of the Minister baptizing; nor doth the instance of Paul, Act. 22. 16. prove this latter. It being absurd even in adult persons to suppose it thus in that example of the Samaritan woman that they should in the open face of the Congregation when they were bap∣tized make their personall and particular prayers, Acts 8. 12. or that every one of those 3000. baptized that day, Acts 2. 41. made their severall prayers; for if it wer•• essentiall to the Ordinance to make such personall prayers; since there is no stint how long, or how much they should utter in calling upon Gods name, the Apo∣stles had need to have spoken severally to them, that you must not bee long, the time is short, and if they had taken that paines, yet many dayes would have beene needfull to such a worke: It was not possible to bee dispatched that very day. As for the other Scriptures they have been else-where considered.

The second Proposition that the Apostles and servants of the Holy Ghost have according to the Commandement of the Lord Jesus Christ, first of all taught, and then afterwards those that were instructed in the my∣steries of the Kingdome of God were baptized upon the confession of their faith. Proofes out of Scripture, 1 Cor. 1. 17. How this is a Proof I see not, for if hee alwayes preached before hee baptized, it might easily have been replyed, Yes Paul if God sent you to baptize any he sent you also to preach, for you are to preach alwayes to all per∣sons that you baptize, before you doe baptize them: why there∣fore doe you say you were not sent to baptize, but to preach the Gospel, since with the one you do the other? The other proofs, 1 Cor. 3. 6. and 4. 15. are somewhat farre fetched and strained, but I will not stick there. Heb. 6. 1, 2. is as well applyed by Authors, Calvin, Beza, &c. as grounds of Paedobaptisme, those being the heads of Catechising, containing the summe of Christian Doctrin, scil. profession of faith and repentance, of the articles of which Doctrine an account was demanded of adult Pagans and Jewes at the time of their baptisme, and therefore called the Doctrine of

Baptismes (alluding in the plurall word to the many typicall washings in use of old among the Hebrewes or Jewes) but from baptized Infants the same was called, for when they were solemne∣ly admitted to full Church Communion and declared so to bee by the Elders, commending them therein to God by prayer. And hence the same Doctrine is called also by the name of the Doctrine of Imposition of hands. Amongst which articles of that Doctrin two are singled out as containing the rest, scil. the resurrection of the flesh and eternall judgement; See Calvin and Beza, in Locum. His next proofe, Heb. 10. 22. I let passe. In the next proofe Acts 2. 36, 38. 41. I observe how craftily the 39th. Vers. is left out unmen∣tioned, wherein the strength of argument on our part doth consist, Acts 8. 36, 37, 38. and 10. 47, 48. and 16. 31. to 34. But why is that example of Lydia here left out, and her houshold, but that it speakes too broadly, that albeit the Apostles sometimes required confession of some persons which they baptized, yet not alwayes of all sorts of persons, as that one example witnesseth? His other Scripture is that Acts 18. 8. but of all these consideration is elsewhere had. This Proposition with the limitations former∣ly mentioned may passe, supposing it not understood exclusively, that such as they baptized were such, therefore they baptized none other but such, which is a non sequitur.

3 Proposition: That after the Apostles time by the ancient fathers in the primitive Church, who observed and followed the Ordinance of Christ, and the example of the Apostle, the people were commonly first instructed in the mysteries of faith, and after that they were taught they were bapti∣zed upon confession of the same.

This Proposition, sano sensu, might passe also, understanding that that was the Ordinance of Christ, and practise of the Apostles so farre as concernes growne persons baptisme: but yet that was not all intended in the one, nor practised by the other. And the Pro∣position it selfe implyeth as much, saying commonly it was so, the people being not as now many are, in a manner wholly professing Christ, but rather wholly Pagan and Prophane and Idolatrous; but alwayes it was not so even then; for their little ones which were not brought to the faith were also baptized.

4 Proposition: That by the ancient Fathers of the Primitive Church, the children both of the faithfull and others, were commonly first instituted in the faith, and afterwards upon acknowledging and confessing of the same they were baptized.

This Proposition is full of equivocall termes, it may not there∣fore passe without some Animadversions: for it may so be interpre∣ted as to stand with truth, yet so also as to bee utterly false. [Pri∣mitive Church] may bee understood of the Church in the same im∣mediatly following the Apostles time, or as in some of his Au∣thors, for the Church that succeeded more then an 100. yeares, yea possibly 200. or 300. afterwards. Rupertus Tiuliensis saith it was the custome of the Church of old that they administred the Sacrament of regeneration onely at Easter and Pentecost, &c. which if it begun in Victors time, to whom that restraint of the time of baptisme, unlesse in case of necessitie, is attributed as the Author of it about the yeere 290. Albeit Rivet in his first Book Critici Sacri, cap. 8. citeth the Magdeburge historians centur. 1. cap. 8. as proving the Decretalls ascribed to Victor to be spurious; or if not then, but some time in the third Centurie, yet it sufficeth to shew in what Latitude of time Rupertus his expressions runne when hee speaketh of what was the use in the Church of old. And in the primitive Church, in this Latitude, it's probable there might bee sundry which upon corrupt grounds might deferre both their own and their childrens baptisme too, as appeares by the Orations of Gregory Nazianzen stirring up as to come more speedily themselves to bee baptized, so to offer their little ones at the most, if no dan∣ger bee towards, (in which case hee adviseth the same sooner) when three yeeres old, if so long deferred, yet then to offer them to bap∣tisme, which was before they could bee able to make such an ac∣knowledgement of the faith, or confession of their sinnes. But more of him afterwards. [Children of the faithfull] if hee intend such children as were knowing and able to understand truth taught them, so as to bee apprehensive of their sinnes, &c. It's true, they used when any were received into Church fellowship, which had such adult children at that time, those to instruct in that way before those children were baptized. But if understood of little ones not capable of such an issue and effect of such instruction, those they used also then to baptize before such instructions. And for this let the Authors owne testimonies which hee quoteth, Proposition 7. of Origen, Austin and Gregory the fourth witnesse. For wee now speake not to that, whether it were onely a Church custome and tradition, &c. wee shall speake to that afterwards. But suppose it were onely a Church custome and tradition, yet its proofe sufficient that it was so anciently in use as there is men∣tioned,

that even children were baptized before they were thus instructed, as the cited places declare, of which more here∣after.

5 Proposition: That according to the institution of the Lord Christ, and the Apostles and ancient Fathers right use, the Teachers required faith with Baptisme, and that hee that was baptized must himselfe acknowledge and confesse the same, and call upon the name of the Lord: for which Matth. 28. Marke 16. Acts 8. are againe urged, of which before; so Acts 19. 2, 3, 4, 5. 1 Pet. 3. 21. not now to speake how perti∣nently this last place especially is brought or not. The propositi∣on if understood as adaequately expressing all that Christ ordai∣ned, or the Apostles practised, and the Fathers after them, which baptized regularly, as if none else were baptized but such as came in such a way, is denied as false.

6 Proposition: That Christ neither gave commandement for baptizing of children nor instituted the same, and that the Apostles never baptized any Infants: this Proposition in the termes of it is false, as before hath appeared when wee proved, that a consequentiall command of Scripture is Christs command, and that such a command there is for the baptisme of children. The other part also, that the Apo∣stles never baptized any Infants, is as rash and false.

7 Proposition is of the same stamp, scil. that the baptisme of Infants and sucklings is a ceremony and Ordinance▪ of man brought into the Church by Teachers since the Apostles time, and instituted and commanded by Coun∣cells, Popes and Emperours.

8 Proposition, labours of the same Frenzie, sc. that young children or Infants ought not to bee baptized, and that none ought to bee brought or driven, or compelled thereunto. Proved by Scripture, Matth. 28. 19. Mark. 16. 15. These three Propositions might have been all put into one, but that the Author or Authors would speake many things; so might the other five Propositions have been reduced to fewer heads.

The unsoundnesse of these Proprositions in the Authors sense I hope hath been cleared to humble and pliable minds in the for∣mer discourse.

CHAP. II. SECT. I.

WEe shall now trace these Authors in their quoted Au∣thorities.

Proposi. 1. Hierom upon Matth. 28. 19. is quoted Proposition 1. and 8.

The Lord, saith he, commanded his Apostles, that they should first instruct and teach all nations, and afterward should baptize those that were instructed in the mysteries of faith; for it cannot bee that the body should re∣ceive the Sacrament of baptisme, unlesse the soule have recei∣ved before the true faith.

This whole testimony is intended by the Author of growne ones, in what way adult Pagans are to bee baptized, and of their receiving of baptisme, so as to have the saving benefit of it. But to make it his mind to intend exclusion of Babes is to make him worke and practise things against the light of his owne judgement and conscience. The Author con∣fessing in the eight proposition, that his proofes are out of anci∣cient & later teachers, who have and do maintaine the use of bap∣tizing children, and Hierom is one hee quoteth. As for Hieroms judgement this way, see his first Tome, his 7th. Epistle, scil. ad Laetam, where having said before that the good and evill of little children is ascribed to the parents, hee addeth,

nisi forte existimes Christi∣anorum filios, &c. unlesse thou thinke that if the children of Chri∣stians receive not baptisme, the children onely are guilty of the sinne, and that the wickednesse is not also imputed to those that would not give the same to them; especially at that time when the children which were to receive baptisme, could not contradict the same; as on the other hand the salvation of the Infants is the Ancestors gaine.

Hee reckons that there is wick∣ednesse in it carelesly to neglect such an ordinance, that tendeth to their spirituall gaine in their childrens good thereby furthe∣red. Now if Hierom thought there were no Law for childrens bap∣tisme, why is there any transgression, yea so deepe charged upon the neglectors of it, that it is scelus in his account? So in his second Tom. 1. 3. Dialogorum adversus Pelagianos ad finem; hee proveth infants baptisme to bee for remission of sinnes, as well as for entrance into Gods kingdome; so that this Authors words are wrested against his owne intention.

Let us see whether the next be better dealt withall, scil. Athana∣sius in his third Sermon contra Arrianos:

Our Saviour did not slightly command to baptize, but first of all hee said, Teach, and then baptize, that true faith might come by teaching, and baptisme bee perfected by Faith.

If Athanasius had said thus in the Authors sense, yet the fallacy had still beene the same to conclude à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter. But let us look upon that place and weigh the words of Athanasius, there speaking of the unprofitablenesse and vanitie of Baptisme by Arrians; hee proceedeth thus.

For (saith hee) the Arrians doe not give Baptisme in the Father and Sonne, but in the Creator and crea∣ture, in the maker and workmanship: As therefore a creature is a diverse thing from the Sonne, so is the Baptisme supposed to bee given by them diverse from true Baptisme. Albeit because they see the names of Father and Sonne in Scriptures, they doe faine to name them, for it is not hee that barely nameth the Lord which giveth lawfull Baptisme, but hee that expoundeth that name and holdeth the right faith. And therefore our Sa∣viour doth not command to baptize after any fashion

(the Au∣thors render the word quovis modo by slightly)

but first hee said Teach and then baptize (in the name of the Father, Sonne and Holy Ghost)

(this clause the treatise leaveth out) that by teaching a right faith might arise (the treatise saith true faith might come)

and with the faith of Baptisme the intire initiation might bee perfected;

by initiation hee meanes baptisme as the words before these shew. In these words.

The Arrians hazzard the losse of the integrity of that mystery. But I speake of Baptisme. For if perfect and full initiation bee given in the name of the Father and Sonne, and they hold not forth the true Father, &c. how should the Baptisme which they give bee true, &c.

So that that speech, with the faith of Baptisme the intire initiation might bee perfected, is that with the faith or doctrine of faith rightly held out, the Ordinance of Baptisme might bee perfect or valid, which hee calleth the right faith, as the words before mentioned shew: So that hee doth not here intend fidem quâ credit aliquis, sed fidem quam credit, hee meaneth it of the object, not the habit of faith; and of the qualifications of the persons baptizing, to make their act valid, not of the parties baptized. For none will say that an hypocrites Baptisme, because hee hath not true faith, is not true Baptisme: The essence of the Ordinance not depending

upon mans faith but Gods word. And that hee intends no other thing as it appeares by the premises, for if you take his next words following the same, it will bee evident. Truely, saith he, even other heresies, and those not a few, doe in seeming words pro∣nounce that rite of baptizing, but being not right in judgement, nor retaining the sound faith, they possesse and bestow an unpro∣fitable water, as destitute of the Deity of Religion, so that they which are sprinkled by them, are rather polluted through corrupt Religion, then redeemed. Here therefore is an ancient Authors words wrested to another sense then the scope of his discourse ten∣ded, and some words left out which served to declare his meaning, and other words so palpably mistranslated that the Reader is grossely abused thereby as well as the Author.

SECT. II.

THe next testimony is of Haimo upon this Text of Matthew.

In this place is set downe a rule how to baptize aright, scil. that teaching should goe before baptisme; for hee saith, Teach all nations, and then hee saith, and baptize them; for hee that is baptized must bee before instructed, that hee first learne to beleeve, that which in baptisme hee shall receive; for as faith without workes is dead, so workes when they are not of faith they are nothing worth.

This labours of the same fallacy as that of Jeroms testimony, à dicto secundum quid, ad simpliciter, what the Author spake in reference to Adulti, it's applied as his mind thereby to make baptisme of children besides or against rule; when yet the same Author upon the 14. of Romans, speaking about the case of their dipping of children, hee mentions Cyprian as practising dipping of children in baptisme but once:

but after (saith hee) hee being corrected of God, hee abounded in more sublime knowledge, dipping them thrice.

Hee looketh then at that way of baptizing Infants as a lesson which Cyprian learned of God. Hee then surely thought baptisme it selfe of Infants to bee taught of God, and no breach of a rule of God: Wee speake not this as allowing Haimo's judgment about Immersion, and much lesse that of trina Immersio, but to cleare the Author from that intention which the treatise would father upon him, or at least by producing the mans writings in one place, would make him against h•…•…s owne light to write things contradictory in

another: Thus is this Author and the Reader with him abu∣sed also.

SECT. III.

THe next Author cited in this Treatise is Erasmus, both upon Matth. 28. and Marke 16. to like purpose.

When you have taught them, if they beleeve, &c. and repent, &c. then let them be baptized, &c.

and Proposition 3.

those who in times past were to bee baptized were first of all instructed in the mysteries of the Christian faith, and were called Catachumeni, &c.

This later one would thinke might have expounded the former, that hee in∣tends it of adult Pagans, and not of others in Christian Chur∣ches, such as ours are whose foundations are already laid and established. And Proposition 6.

It's no where expressed in the Apostolicall writings that they baptized children.

Hee doth not say, it's not so much as probable nor is it to bee gathered by consequence that they did so: wherefore his testimony is no proofe that the Apostles never did baptize Infants, because it's ne∣ver mentioned expresly. It's never expresly said, that I remember, that the Apostles or Evangelists when they Baptized those in Acts 2. and 8. and 16. 18. that they called upon God for a bles∣sing upon the Ordinance, but will it follow that they did not sanctifie the Ordinance by Prayer? Proposition 7. hee is quoted as a proofe of that Proposition, Lib. 4. de ratione concion. saying

that they are not to bee condemned that doubt whether chil∣drens baptisme was ordained by the Apostles, and thinke that the same is to be received as the placita Scholasticorum Theologorum, which cannot bee proved by Scripture.

Here the Authors use their old art of substraction and addition. His words are thus.

It is probable that to baptize Infants was instituted by the Apostles, and yet they are not to bee condemned which doubt thereof; With the same moderation many tenents of Schoole Divines are to bee received, which cannot (evidently) be proved from the Scriptures.

The first speech of Erasmus is wholly left out, which is crosse both to that peremptory if not impudent con∣clusion expressed in the 6th. Proposition, and this set downe in the 7th. if even Erasmus his judgement bee adhered to, for if it bee probable that Paedobaptisme was of Apostolicall institution, then it is not so peremptorily and with such plerophory to bee asserted that it was never ordained of Christ, or practised by the Apostles,

but is an ordinance of man. And whereas it is rendred, and think that the same is to bee received inter placita Scholasticorum, &c. there is no such connexion or expression. But it is a distinct sentence. With the same moderation, &c. many Schoole tenents are to be re∣ceived, &c. scil. they are also not to bee condemned which doubt of some Schoole tenents which are not so expresse and cleare from Scripture. Hee doth not say that Baptisme of of Infants is to bee thought placitum Scholasticorum, but speakes of other instances of things probable. Nor doth hee speake of bare Schoole Notions which have no bottome at all in Scripture, and which cannot at all bee proved from the Scripture as the Treatise saith; which cannot bee proved, but which cannot evidenter probari per Scriptu∣ras. True it is, Henry Denne hee saith that Bellarmine taxeth Eras∣mus with that opinion of denying childrens Baptisme; but in Erasmus his preface to his Paraphrase on Matthew, hee rather con∣demneth the carelesnesse of Priests, in so much that many Chri∣stians are in respect of knowledge rather as Pagans; and at best are rather in titles, customes, and ceremonies Christians then indeed: And adviseth that children after they have been baptized, and come to riper yeeres, that they bee well instructed in what their sureties have promised for them, and called to account how they profit thereby, and whether they doe avouch and owne the promise made by their sureties, and if so, then at some time or other that they in the open Congregation expressing it, bee then with some solemnitie approved. And if they reject this motion, then to be debarred the Eucharist, untill they change their mind: So that hee seemeth not to disallow Paedobaptisme, but carelesnesse after∣wards. This I speake that none may bee rendred worse then they are, bee they Papists or others. Albeit I would not much weigh the expressions of Papists this way, to whom bare Church tradi∣tions are equivalent to Scripture commands, expresse or virtuall.

SECT. IIII.

THe next Author is Bullinger in his Decads expounding Matth. •…•… 28. Docete omnes Gentes, &c. make Disciples of all Nations, &c. What then doth Bullinger intend baptizing Infants as not here enjoyned? Nay in the place quoted in his Decades of Sermons, Tom. 5. Decad. 5. Serm. 8. hee brings this as an Argument for Pae∣dobaptisme, God hath commanded to baptize all Nations, and therefore Infants, for these are comprehended in the words all

Nations. Bullinger is againe cited as a Testimony for the proofe of the second Proposition in the same place speaking upon the words of Paul, 1 Cor. 1.

God hath not sent mee to baptize but to preach the Gospel. Hee is quoted to say. This must not so slightly be understood, as if hee were sent not to baptize at all, but that teaching should [goe before] baptisme.

For the Lord com∣manded his Apostles both to preach and to administer the Sacra∣ments. Bullingers words are,

Non quod negaret absolutè (which our present translators render; this must not so sleightly bee un∣derstood. Negaret is in their English not to bee understood, and absolutè is in their English, slightly. If they had transla∣ted it simply it would have hit it, but I thinke sleightly fits them indifferent well) se ad baptizandum non esse missum, sed quod doctri∣nam praeferret: utrumque enim, &c.

That clause is expounded, but that teaching should goe before baptisme, &c. Here I want my construing booke; but I will follow my translators; sed quod, but that, doctrina, teaching, praeferret should go before — Risum teneatis amici? But if the translators had learned common rules and read the place, they would have clearely discerned Bullingers meaning to bee farre wide from their purpose, scil. To prove rather the prioritie of the Gospel to baptisme in dignitie and excellency, then in order of dispensation. For besides that the common Gram∣mer construction of that passage, sed quod doctrinam praeferret, will beare no sense so well as that mentioned, his words immediatly preceding also cleare the same.

Evangelium majus est baptismo, the Gospel is more excellent then Baptisme, or greater then Bap∣tisme: For Paul said, the Lord sent mee not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel, not that hee denied it absolutely, &c. Sed quod doctrinam praeferret.

And it is yet more strange that this which Bullinger brings as his third Argument to prove Paedobaptisme to bee of God, the Authors of this Pamphlet bring as a testimony to their purpose against Baptisme; for Bullinger subjoynes to the words before:

That children are received in the Gospel doctrin, — they are not refused of God, who therefore unlesse he were besides himselfe would exclude them from the lesse? In Sacra∣ments are considered the thing signified and the signe, the former is the more excellent. Infants are not excluded from that, (scil. the Gospel, the promise) who will deny then the signe? for truely the Sacraments of God are rather to bee esteemed by the word (scil. the promise) then by the signe.

As for Bullingers ex∣pressions

out of Austin, contra Iulianū quoted in the 7th. Proposition they prove that the Carthaginian councell did indeed ratifie Bap∣tisme, but not that it came in first by that councell. Nay the testimony cited of Austin against the Donatists, lib. 4. cap. 23, 24. useth that as an argument, that it was of Divine authoritie, because not instituted by any councells. And Origens testimony there cited, Proposi. 7. proveth it to be in his time, which was 200. yeeres before that Carthage councell, in the time of Innocent the first: Yea Origen proveth it to bee at least a Church custome long before from the time of the Apostles. Bullingers testimony in his Decads as pro∣ving the 7th. Proposition, scil. that Paedobaptisme is an humane ordinance (when in that very Sermon of his there quoted in this Treatise, hee by many arguments from Scripture proveth it to be of divine authority) is also abused, and shamefully misconstrued and perverted, as is evident. The next is Beza who is also quoted Proposition 7. in his annotations upon Matth. 28. 19.

Baptize them in the name of the Father, that is, in calling upon the name of the Father, or rather the name of the Father, &c. being called upon;

for they are Beza's words, Invocato nomine Patris, &c. And these Translators should have done well to have rendred the Latine properly. But all is in the meaning of the words. The authors of the Treatise urge it for a proofe of the persons bap∣zed calling actually upon the name of God, when they are bapti∣zed according to Christs institution, & bring Beza for their proofe. Quaeritur therefore whether ever Beza intended that in his words. Surely no, for it's known well that Beza stoutly maintaineth Paedo∣baptisme as an ordinance of Christ. Now Infants when they are baptized cannot actually call upon the name of God; therefore if Beza say the former, that the rule of Christ requireth it of all that are to be baptized according to his mind, that they should call upon God at the time of their Baptisme; he must affirme the later against his owne light and conscience; which to doe with so much deli∣beration as hee that writeth things upon studie must doe, were a crime of a very high nature, and God forbid any should charge so worthy a light in the Church with that.

SECT. V.

BEza is againe cited for confirmation of the third Proposition in his Annotations upon Matth. 3. 6.

John taught those that were to bee baptized▪ (this clause is not in my Beza upon

the place) and admitted none to Baptisme, but those that gave testimony that they beleeved the forgivenesse of their sinnes. In my Beza's Notes it's rather thus, that John admitted not others to his Baptisme, then those which seriously professed that they did imbrace the doctrine of free remission of sinnes;

which how different from that of these translators let others judge. It follow∣eth in the booke,

Such confession was also required of the Cate∣chumens in the primitive Church before Baptisme, for in that the Sacraments are seales, it is requisite that doctrine or instru∣ction should goe before the use of those things by which the do∣ctrine it selfe is to bee sealed.

Those words before Baptisme, and that reason annexed, for in that the Sacraments, &c. is not in my booke, scil. Beza's Annotationes majores in N. Test. Printed Anno. 1594. But to returne to the testimony, Beza intended that John baptized no other of that species of persons Adult, then such as made that confession — but not simply the Baptisme of any other persons of another sort, scil. babes; hee that is so carefull that any should take advantage to deny that children are not rightly bapti∣zed, because not dived wholly under water, that hee the rather (as hee saith upon Matth. 3. 11.) doth note such things about the par∣ticle [In] omitted Luke 3. 16. surely hee intended not, by affirming such things in reference to Johns hearers thereby to exclude chil∣drens Baptisme. Hence that added that such confession was requi∣red of the Catechumens in the ancient Church. Now then what manner of persons they were which hee affirmeth made such con∣fession of old, such like persons for age he here intendeth. And no more doth he intend exclusion of Infants from Baptisme, by affir∣ming the necessitie of confession in Johns hearers unto Baptisme, then by affirming that the same was required of those Catechumens mentioned. Let us then see Beza's mind further therein, which wee may readily doe in the third place of Beza quoted in this Trea∣tise Proposition 4. where Beza upon 1 Cor. 7. 14. But now your children are holy, he is thus cited as saying:

Out of this contra∣dictors of the truth are revealed. As first, all those that make Baptisme to be the first entrance to salvation: and secondly, those that permit all children to bee baptized, which was unheard of in the primitive times, whereas [every one] ought to bee in∣struct••d in the faith before hee were admitted to baptisme.

And this testimony is brought to prove the Proposition that in the pri∣mitive Church the children both of the faithfull and else (scil. and

of Pagans or Jewes) were commonly first instructed, &c. and then baptized; so that Beza's mind in that clause, whereas every one ought to bee instructed, &c. is made, and every child whether of the faithfull or Infidell should bee first instructed before hee be bap∣tized, and in that sense, his second errour he blames of such which permit all children to bee baptized, is as much as if hee should in∣tend it as an errour to permit any children at all whether of faith∣full or infidell persons to bee baptized before instructed: So that Beza is by this made a direct Andipedobaptist, as they terme it now for modesty sake. But you shall not have Beza thus on your side before wee heare him in his owne words, who having before spoken touching the cause, why wee admit the Saints children to baptisme, scil. because they are comprehended in the Covenant, &c. he addeth,

Now from hence are confuted not onely Catabaptists which doe reject Infants from baptisme as uncleane, but those which make baptisme the first entrance to salvation, and so ex∣clude all from salvation which are unbaptized, and also those which admit all Infants whatsoever to baptisme,

(scil. whether of visible Saints or Infidels as appeares by what hee said before, and by what followeth, which thing (scil. such promiscuous baptizing of all sorts hand over head)

was not heard of in the ancient Church. As this at least doth declare, in that all adult Infidells were first to bee Catechumens before they were baptized.

Beza refuteth three things from that clause mentioned and explai∣ned — now your children are holy, and one of them is this fourth Proposition of the Authors, and yet by the Authors he is brought to refute onely two things. First, hee refuteth Catabaptists denying baptisme to beleevers children. Secondly, he from the same ground refuteth them which maintaine the baptisme of all children what∣soever, scil. that are not children of visible Saints, for if they bee such children hee counteth it rather an errour to deny their bap∣tisme. Againe in citing the last part of Beza's words, the Authors craftily make it as an opposite sentence to that before. Thus se∣condly, those that permit all children to bee baptized, &c. where∣as every one, &c. as if it were a contrary speech to the former, per∣mitting (all) children, &c. whereas none (at all) were to bee bap∣tized of old, but such as were Catechumens: when Beza maketh this later a reason of the former, as before wee shewed. Besides the Authors shamefully change and mutilate the last words: where∣as every one ought, &c. intending every particular person, Infant or

Aged, when Beza's words are expresly — in that all adult Infi∣dells ought first to bee Catachumens before they were to bee bapti∣zed. Now who is there which doth not even feele this palpable guile and falseshood in the setters forth of this Treatise in this particular? But not to forget what wee noted touching Beza's other testimony on Matth. 3. this place cleareth Beza's intent. There speaking of adult persons it may bee affirmed such must bee as the Catechumens of old in point of confession before baptisme, and yet the same Author never intend by that assertion to ex∣clude children of such as doe make such confession of faith and re∣pentance from baptisme. Beza which holdeth this forth here, yet here also refuteth that as errour in Catabaptists to deny Paedobap∣tisme: So that still here is the old fallacie, à dicto secundum quid ad simpliciter dictum.

SECT. VI.

THe next Author quoted Proposition 1. scil. Strigelius upon Acts the 8th.

(as saying that to bee baptized in the name of Jesus is to bee baptized in acknowledging and confessing the name of Jesus)

I have not, and therefore cannot examine the same: Albeit this sano sensu hinders not us; in that when parents offer their children to baptisme, the name of the Lord Je∣sus is confessed and acknowledged.

The next testimony is of Luther, Proposition 1. whereupon Gen. 48. hee is said to affirme —

before wee receive the Sacrament of Baptisme and the Lords Supper, wee must have faith;

and in another place as quoting Heb. 2. 4. Rom. 1. 17. Heb. 10. 38. Mark 16. 28. Act. 8. 36. and Rom. 10. 10. to prove that

faith is required to baptisme, and that without faith the Sacra∣ments profit not, but hurt rather the receivers:

and Propositi∣on 3. hee is quoted againe in his book of the Civill Magistrates as speaking like words, and saying,

wherefore wee hold our selves to the words of Christ, He that beleeves and is baptized: So that before or else even then present when baptisme is admini∣stred, there must needs bee faith, or else there is contempt of the Divine majesty, who offers present grace, when as there's none receive it.

And Proposition 5. Luther upon giving and recei∣ving the Sacrament, Tom. 3. is said to write,

that in times past it was thus, that the Sacrament was administred to none, ex∣cept it were to those which acknowledged and confessed their

faith and knew how to receive the same, &c.

and Proposition 7. in his booke of Anabaptisme, hee is said to acknowledge, that

it cannot bee proved by Scripture that childrens baptisme was instituted by Christ, or begun by the first Christians after the Apostles, for a 1000. yeares since it came to bee in use in the Church, and was established by Pope Innocentius.

This place also doth A. R. quote in his second part of childish baptisme, pag. 8. And Proposition 8. Luther is againe quoted as speaking thus in his Postils.

Young children heare not, nor understand the Word of God, out of which faith commeth, and therefore if so be that commandment of Christ bee followed, children ought not to bee baptized.

Now as for these testimonies of Luther, I not having nor being able to procure neare hand the sight of all his Tomes, I shall not bee so able to discover the leger∣demaine which I verily suspect in citing his testimonies as well as those of some others. Yet Luthers meaning in the words menti∣oned Proposition 1. may well bee expounded by that mentioned Proposition 3. and so according to his judgement rather establish∣ing Paedobaptisme then weakning it; for hee holdeth that God at present, when they are baptized, worketh faith in them, and therefore the rather such are to bee baptized. Luther in his 4th. Tome expounding that Hos. 12. 3.

Hee tooke his brother by the heele in the wombe — scil. by a secret instinct and moving of the Spirit, as John also by the same moved in the wombe upon Christs approach, of which hee giveth this reason, because God is not onely the God of growne ones, but even of such babes. And what wonder is it, saith hee, that the Spirit is effi∣cacious in Infants in a way we understand not, as having also flesh and bones in the wombe as wee have, but yet not nourished as wee are? And therefore that tenent of Anabaptists is impi∣ous and odious, who therefore deny baptisme to Infants be∣cause they want sense and understanding, nor doe they know what is done about them. To us they understand not, by us they are judged to want sense and understanding, but it's not so to God whose worke they are: for God as hee nourisheth them otherwise then hee doth us, so doth hee otherwise move their hearts, &c.

Another answer of his see in his second Tome, lib. de captiv. Babyl. title of baptisme. Hee saith (having spoken before of faith as requisite to the application of the promise)

opponetur for∣san iis, &c. It may bee to the things before spoken, the bap∣tisme

of Infants will bee opposed, which receive the promise and yet cannot have the faith of baptisme, and therefore either faith is not required, or Infants baptisme is null. Here (saith hee) I say that which all say, that Infants are helped by the faith of others, even of them which offer them. For as the Word of God is forcible whilst uttered to change the heart of a wicked man, which is not lesse deafe and uncapable then any little one; so by the Prayer of the Church offering and belee∣ving, even a little one having faith infused is changed, cleansed, and renewed by him to whom all things are possible.

For con∣formation whereof hee brings that example, Marke 2. 3, 4, 5. And in his 7th. Tome in his Homily of baptisme, hee reckons that

erroneous interpretation of Marke 16. 16. is the ground of that dispute against Paedobaptisme; because if baptized, say some, when an Infant and not beleeving, then not rightly baptized, and so that baptisme is nothing

— to which saith Luther —

this is nothing else then if it should bee said, if thou beleevest not when thou partakest of the Word or Sacrament it is nothing. And so they onely that truely beleeve are truely baptized, and others baptized which doe not beleeve, they are againe to bee baptized when they doe beleeve,

(scil. albeit growne ones, when baptized if then hypocrites.) As for Luthers other two speeches mentioned Proposition 7. and 8. I somewhat wonder if hee should utter them as here expressed, that in that booke stiled Lutheri Anti∣lutherana opera fratris Joan. Apobolymaei alias Findeling Minoritae, they are not mentioned; the scope of the booke being to gather up all Luthers (seeming) contradictions. And hee instanceth in the other de captiv. Babyl. before mentioned; it's strange that hee misseth those if thus written, since it's evident both by that expression in Luthers greater Catechisme, Tom. 3. when hee saith,

After the same manner doe wee when wee give baptisme to little ones. Wee bring the child to the Minister of the Church with this mind and hope that verily it may beleeve. But wee doe not bap∣tize it for those things, but rather because God hath command••d us so to doe.

So in that famous story of the concord betweene Luther and the Divines which followed him, and the Divines of upper Germany at a meeting at Wittinberg, Anno 1536. according to a certaine forme of Articles of agreement together with the expli∣cation thereof annexed by Martin Bucer, and after the agreement subscribed, about the presence of the body of Christ in the Lords

Supper: the next Article to bee so composed and explained to all their content was that about baptisme. The Article was this:

touching baptisme of Infants, all without any doubting agree, that it's necessary that Infants should bee baptized, for since the promise of salvation doth also belong to Infants, and it pertai∣neth not to those which are without the Church, it is therefore necessary that it should bee applied by the Ministery, and to conjoyne them to the members of the Church.

The explica∣tion of the Article annexed.

This is to bee understood of a ne∣cessitie in respect of Ministery and by command of God, and not of necessitie in respect of salvation, &c.

unto which as to the rest subscribed Martinus Lutherus, Doctor Witebergensis, Johannes Bugenhagius Pomeranus, Doctor Philippus Melancton, Justus Menius Isenacensis, &c. And on the other side M. Martinus Bucerus Mini∣ster Ecclesiae Argentinensis, Wolsangus Musculus ecclesiae Augustanae Mi∣nister in verbo, and divers others. I have set downe this story the fuller as it's mentioned amongst Bucers workes in that I shall have frequent occasion to referre to it.

But to returne to Luther, hee is one that holdeth baptisme not simply necessary to salvation, as that without which one cannot bee saved, (as is further expressed in the explication of that Article) but as necessary unto Infants by vertue of divine precept. Surely if hee had no scruple in this point, as it's said all agreed herein without doubting, &c. he never imagined that which the Authors of this Treatise would make him to affirme, that baptisme of In∣fants came in foure or five hundred yeers after Christs time as an institution of Popes or councells.

I might have mentioned that passage of Luthers (to the former two testimonies touching faith required to baptisme) which hee hath in his Preface to his Commentary upon the Galatians.

Ana∣baptists (saith hee) teach that baptisme is nothing except the persons beleeve, out of which principle it will follow that all the workes of God are nothing, if the man bee nothing, for baptisme is the worke of God, &c.

But this is certaine that Lu∣ther taking the Doctrine of baptisme of Infants as unquestiona∣ble rather argueth thence to prove that Infants have faith (which was a tenet of his owne) then that faith is required in them to their baptisme. Thus Infants unlesse that they have faith it will bee said they are not to bee baptized, but all grant that Infants are to bee baptized, therefore Infants have faith.

CHAP. III. SECT. I.

BEda is the next Author cited Proposition 2. upon Acts 19. as speaking thus:

As those that came to the Apostles to bee baptized were instructed and taught of them, and when they were instructed and taught concerning the Sacrament of baptisme, then they received the holy admi∣nistration thereof.

I looked on the place, and there is no such thing there, and supposing it might bee misquoted, I looked him upon the 9. 16. 18. yea 2. and 8th. (as well as my time would per∣mit) and I could find no such testimony of Beda's, so that this is a forged testimony. And as for Beda's judgement in the case; in this second Tome lib. 4. fol. 50. expounding the place, Marke 16. qui vero non crediderit condemnabitur —

What, saith Beda, shall wee say of little ones which by reason of age are not able to beleeve? (for of growne ones there is no question.) In the Church there∣fore little ones doe beleeve by others: even as from others they have derived the sinnes which are remitted to them in bap∣tisme.

SECT. II.

AƲgustinus is the next quoted Author, and first Austin ad Sal∣cotinanum is cited Proposition 2. as speaking that

a man must repent before baptisme, &c.

As Peter saith to the Jewes Acts 2. &c. but as for the name of the Booke or Epist. I find not. The Authors or Printers I suppose mistake the name; I finde re∣ference made in the Decretalls set forth by Petrus Albignanus Tre∣cius (for as for those set forth by Gratian, I neither have them nor can meete with them) unto Austin ad Salectinanum, as using these expressions, Omnis qui jam suae voluntatis, &c.

Every one that is at his owne free dispose when hee commeth unto the Sacra∣ment of the faithfull, unlesse it repent him of his old life hee may not begin the new: from this penitence onely little ones when they are to bee baptized, they are freed, for they cannot yet make use of a free choyse of their owne, &c.

If there bee any other passage of that nature as is mentioned in this booke of Austins, yet by this his intention therein is cleared. Among Au∣stins Epistles I cannot light of any such under that name mentio∣ned there in his 108. Epist. Seleucianae, but that rather doth

strengthen then weaken the Ordinance of Paedobap∣tisme.

Austine is cited againe in confirmation of the 4th. Proposition in his Sermon ad Neophytos, that is, say these Authors Juniores or young men, but they misunderstand the word. It is neither of the single words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but its compounded of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and as for one whom they call 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is according to Suidas 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, one that is newly com∣ming from Gentilisme (or Judaisme, saith Cornelius à Lapide) and having embraced the Christian Religion is by baptisme planted into the Church of God, albeit neither yet sufficiently established in the doctrine of the faith, nor so fully approved in life. The like description others give of such in reference to 1 Tim. 3. 6. but to come to the matter of the testimony which is as followeth

[before wee ducked or dipped their body in the sacred water, we asked, Be∣leev'st thou in God the Father Almighty? and they answered, I beleeve, &c. and we asked them, Beleeve yee in the holy Ghost? unto which every one of them answered, I beleeve: and thus have wee done according to the command of our Lord, Matth. 28. 19.]

and what of all this? because persons which were converted from Paganisme, or Judaisme, were asked such questions, there∣fore none other were baptized but such, and in such a way; non sequitur: or because this was commanded by Christ, therefore this was all hee commanded in Marke 28. 19. it followeth not. Au∣stin who was of another mind never imagined such a conclusion would ever bee drawne from his words. The author not naming the Sermon nor the season when preached, I will make bold to helpe out therein, that such Sermons used to bee preached at Ea∣ster, one of the solemne times then set for baptizing of persons; but that it may appeare that onely such were not then in the assem∣bly, albeit the growne persons were those to whom especially such speeches were directed; compare this with that of Austin in his 4. Serm. in octav. Paschae adneophytos, where hee saith,

To day are celebrated the octaves of Infants, their heads are uncovered in token of libertie, &c. Those children, Infants, little ones, suck∣lings, hanging on their mothers breasts, and ignorant of what grace is bestowed, as you may perceive, because they are called Infants, even they also also have their octaves to day.

And these old men, young men, striplings, all are also Infants. By this te∣stimony we may perceive a larger interpretation of the word Neo∣phytos,

scil. any one newly planted into the Church, whether In∣fant, youth or other, any one who was as new borne Sacramen∣tally in baptisme of what age soever. And that at the solemnitie of Easter and Pentecost: Of which Rupertus and Boemius speake, baptisme of Infants was not brought in for mortalities sake upon the change of the old use of baptisme at Easter, and Pentecost, but was in use while yet those limited times stood, and long before, this corrupt use of limiting the time of baptisme was in force, of which more anon. Yet also this I deny not but that corrupt ad∣dition to Paedobaptisme being in use in those times of asking que∣stions to the child by the sureties, &c. this answer might suffice that even Infants too were in that number of young plants men∣tioned, which did answer as is there said by their sureties.

Austin is againe quoted for proofe of the 7th. Proposition, de baptismo contra Donat. lib. 4. cap. 23. & de Genesi ad literam lib. 10. cap. 23. now then let us examine what Austine saith there, and how pertinent a proofe it is of the proposition, hee calleth it there, saith the Treatise,

a Church custome

— and thence concludes by the witnesse

that Paededobaptisme is an ordinance of man brought into the Church by Teachers since the Apostles time, and insti∣tuted by councells, &c.

but let us heare Austin speake for him∣selfe at the first hand, and not take a report of his words at second hand, lest it prove a slander: thus he speaketh in the former place,

the which the whole Church holdeth as delivered to it, that even little Infants are baptized, which truely yet cannot be∣leeve with the heart unto righteousnesse, nor confesse with the mouth unto salvation as the Thiefe (he meanes the converted Thiefe) &c. and yet no Christian hath affirmed that they are baptized in vaine:

and immediatly (Chap. 24.) addeth —

And if any seeke divine authoritie in this matter (scil. of Infants baptisme) although that which the whole Church holdeth, neither was instituted by councells, but alwayes retained, wee assuredly beleeve that it was not delivered but by Apostolicall authoritie, yet wee may truely conjecture (opposing this to all false and uncertaine conjectures) of what authoritie or force the Sacrament of Infants baptisme is from circumcision, &c.

where first in the very place quoted hee saith not, that it was a tradition of the Church onely, or from the Church, but was delivered to the Church: and least any should imagine that this was delivered to the Church by any corrupt teachers since the Apostles times,

Austin in the next Chapter within five or six lines of that in the 23. Chapter mentioned, giveth his arguments to prove that it could not bee delivered to the Church, but by Apostolicall authoritie; first, in that it was never instituted by any councells; secondly, be∣cause it was ever held by the Churches, scil. since there was any Church planted by the Apostles: and I thinke his arguments are weightie, other things which were of such note (as this of Paedo∣baptisme was if innovations) either they may bee proved that they came in by such or such councells or authors, or it may be proved, that there was never any such thing in use before such or such a time, which in this case will be hard for any to undertake to make the same good by convincing testimonies or arguments.

But to returne to our Authors, they bring in this testimony to prove that baptisme of Infants was instituted by councells, what forgery is this? they make him their witnesse to prove it to bee an ordinance of man, the witnesse proveth that it's of divine autho∣ritie: What notable jugling is this? Will they never leave this trade? Let us examine the other place where Austin saith that it is a Church custome, if our Authors speake truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth of the place quoted, the words there are as followeth,

the custome of our mother the Church in bapti∣zing Infants is not to bee despised, nor by any meanes is the same to be thought superfluous.

Yery good then will they say, this place is full for us. Nay stay Sirs, be not too hasty to interrupt the witnesse, whilst hee is speaking; let him speake all hee hath here to say, scil. nor were it at all to bee beleeved, unlesse it were an Apostolicall tradition, &c.

So you heare Sirs, hee tells you; it's such a Church custome, as withall, it is an Apostolicall tradi∣tion;

and that in the other place quoted, is of Divine authority hee makes account, which is delivered to the Church by the Apo∣stles. As indeed it is, unlesse that any thinke that the Apostles in their Apostolicall ministry erred, and delivered that to the Church, as the mind, meaning and intent of Christ, which hee never meant. And Austin hath the very same words, as here in his third Epistle ad Yolusiam: Nay lest there should bee any stick in the words, traditum ab Apostolis, and Apostolicall tradition, hee peremptorily affirmeth, (speaking of the Churches authority in this case of Pae∣dobaptisme) lib. 1. de peccat. merit. & remiss. cap. 16 —

proculdubio per Dominum & Apostolos traditum, that without all question it was delivered by the Lord and his Apostles.

But our Authors here will not leave Austin thus, but they will make him speake for them ere they have done, therefore hee is quo∣ted againe in the 28th. Epistle to Jerom, to confirme their 7th. Pro∣position; Content, wee will heare any thing hee can say. What saith Austin there? Nay pag. 32. our Authors are silent, and one∣ly quote the place, not the words, and leave us to finde the sense out, as Nebuchanezzar did his dreame and them to interpret it. But let mee assure them Austin doth rather confirme the contrary, in that Epistle, then otherwise; clearing both the spirituall ends of Christian parents, in hastning with their children to Baptisme: and ratifying Cyprians judgement touching the case of Paedobap∣tisme, that hee therein did not frame some new decree, but held the most firme beleefe of the Church that way. And possibly the Authors by adding this testimony of Austin to that of Cyprians E∣pistle, and on this say, that Cyprian ordeined children should bee baptized, they bring this to confirme it, which doth indeed confirme it, that Cyprian held this, and ratified this — but not as the first Author of it, (which perhaps the Treatise would make the world beleeve) but rather as that which the Christian Church had ever firmely beleeved. According as Austin in his 10th. Ser∣mon of the words of the Apostle speaking of Paedobaptisme, saith,

this the Church (meaning the Christian Church) hath alwayes had, alwayes held, this it hath received from the faith (or do∣ctrine) of the ancients, this doth it keepe most constantly unto the end.

Yea but pag. 33. our authors ci••e some words of his in his 28th. Epistle to Jerom,

therefore doe men hasten so with their children to baptisme, because they beleeve they cannot otherwise be made alive in Christ, and to the like purpose in his Enchiridion, from the young to the old none are to bee denyed baptism, for salvation is not promised to the children but through baptisme, &c.

and to the same purpose Austin and the Bishops of the Milevitan councell, wrote, as condemning such as thinke In∣fants can bee saved, without Baptisme. All this if they intend it, of the necessitie of Baptisme in respect of Gods precept, in oppo∣sition to contempt and neglect: and of salvation promised in such sort, as with reference to this, as one ordinary helpe and seale thereof, leaving extraordinary wayes and secrets to the Lord; Charitie would thinke favourably of their words, especially since as much in effect is in this sense held forth, Ephes. 5. 25, 26, 27. But bee it that Austin superadded his owne Stubble and Straw,

yet that hinders not, but the bottome and foundation of that Ordinance was good and sure; you will not say because Papists hold baptisme to bee of necessitie to salvation, that therefore bap∣tisme of growne persons is no Ordinance. That other speech of Austins — that as those were circumcised which were borne of circumcised parents, even so should they bee baptized which are borne of parents that are baptized, is sound and good, and no proofe of that 7th. Proposition, that Paedobaptisme is an hu∣mane Ordinance. Thus wee see Austin hath sped no better then his neighbours.

SECT. III.

MElancton is the next witnesse, who is called in to give evi∣dence to confirme the 2d. 6th. and 7th. Proposition. I am sorry that these bookes cited are not at hand, so that I cannot so well discover the ill dealing, which I suspect; upon the 1 Cor. 11. 15. hee is said to affirme;

In time past those in the Church which had repented them were baptized, and it was in stead of an ab∣solution: wherefore repentance must not bee separated from baptisme.

For baptisme is a Sacramentall signe of repentance. It's evident that Melancton here speakes of the baptisme of growne ones; those in the Church which had repented were baptized — and so in like case of baptizing adult persons, repentance should not bee separated from baptisme. But to Melancton himselfe, it is a non sequitur, that therefore Infants ought not to bee baptized, because they cannot repent; witnesse the answer he maketh in his Common places unto that objection against Paedobaptisme. Loco de Baptismo Infantum. It is most true saith hee,

that in all adult per∣sons (Baptisme) faith and repentance are required, but in the case of Infants this sufficeth, that the holy Spirit is given them by baptisme, &c.

As for that definition of Baptisme, that it is a Sacramentall signe of repentance it is imperfect, nor yet will it follow thence, that none else should bee baptized, but such as actu∣ally repent; no more then in that circumcision was a signe of Heart circumcision, and therefore of repentance, Deut. 10. 16. Jer. 4. 4. Deut. 30. 6. that none but adult persons were fit to bee circumcised.

Melancton is againe quoted Proposition 6. for saying there is

no plaine commandment in Scripture that children should bee baptized.

And if hee did say thus, doth this prove, that there is

no command at all, because not plaine or expresse, scil. in so many words: you shall baptize children? there is a command to bee deduced from Scripture, by necessary consequence, in Melanctons judgement; witnesse the foure arguments which hee drawes from necessary consequence of Scripture to prove it, Loco de Baptismo Infantum: and witnesse his hand subscribed at Wittenberg, amongst others, to that Article with its explication touching Paedobap∣tisme, as necessary in respect of divine command, as before wee mentioned, Proposition 7. Melancton in his answer to the Anabap∣tists Articles is quoted, but no words mentioned, that hee should speake, unlesse the Authors cite him for mentioning the story of Cyprian and the other Bishops determinations about Paedobap∣tisme, which were impertinent, in as much as Origen is here quo∣ted for saying, that Paedobaptisme was a tradition of the Church. Now Origen was before Cyprian, and the Church whose tradition it's supposed Origen saith it was, was long before Origen, so that Cyprian did not first ordaine Infants Baptisme, the Authors them∣selves being Judges. I have not that booke of Melanctons, and I cannot divine what his words were, unlesse they were mentioned. And I wonder if they were for their purpose, they set them not downe. I conclude then of Melanctons testimonies, as of the rest, that they are wrested.

CHAP. IIII. SECT. I.

IƲstin Martyr (as the Authors of ignorance, or the Printer by oversight calls Justin Martyr) in his oration ad Antoninum Pium;

I will declare unto you, how wee offer up our selves to God, after wee are renewed though Christ — those amongst us, that are instructed in the faith, and beleeve that which wee teach them is true, being willing to live according to the same, wee doe admonish to pray for the forgivenesse of their sinnes, and we also fast and pray with them, & then they are brought by us to the water, and there as wee were newborne, are they also by newbirth renewed, and then in calling upon God the Father, the Lord Jesus Christ and the holy Ghost, they are washed in water

— Mr. Blackwood addeth — that of Justin also,

That wee do bring the party so washed (not the beleever, as hee expresseth it) and joyned to the brethren, as they are called, where they are gathe∣red

together (to common prayers and supplications, is not ex∣pressed as Mr. Blackwood hath it, but thus) that wee may pray both for our selves and for the party newly enlightned, &c.

Now whereas the Treatise brings this to prove the third Proposition, that the people were commonly first instructed, and then baptized, &c. Mr Blackwood is more peremptory in that matter, making this testimony contrary, and so inconsistent with any other testimony in the questions ascribed to Justine, and concludeth hence, that in Justines time Paedobaptisme was not in the world. Let us there∣fore consider whether this apology and that which is recorded in it, bee so demonstrative a proof of such a conclusion.

It's said that whosoever were perswaded and beleeved, &c. they were brought to the water and washed

— that proveth that all such persons were received to Baptisme, but what? Ergo, none but such were baptized? non sequitur. It's said, Rom. 10. 13. Who∣soever shall call upon the name of Lord shall bee saved, therefore all such shall be saved: True, but not ergo none other shall bee saved. For Mr. Blackwood grants Infants may bee saved. One might better have concluded from Justins speech in that apology —

wee be∣leeve that God doth love those (onely) which imitate his vir∣tues

— moderation, love, righteousnesse, &c. that they beleeved that God loved no Infants, for they could not imitate — God in justice and love, &c. yet I suppose Mr. Blackwood would bee loth to thinke so of those beleevers in Justins time. And so when hee there saith:

But wee have learned that immortalitie (scil. of bles∣sednesse) is onely theirs who live honestly and holily before God;

therefore they had learned, that the kingdome of glory be∣longed to no Infants: For they could not live so: here Mr. B. will not thinke that exclusive particle [onely] concluding against babes, to whom hee holdeth the kingdome of glory doth belong, and why then is a particle farre lesse exclusive, so conclusive against In∣fants? When Justin in that Apology commeth to speake of the other Sacrament of the Lords Supper — hee saith,

unto which none is admitted, but hee that doth beleeve our Doctrine, ha∣ving been washed in the Laver of regeneration unto the remissi∣on of sinnes, &c.

but hee saith not so in the other — none but such as beleeve what wee teach to bee true, &c. are washed or bap∣tized, &c. Mr. B. might have considered that the occasion of this Apology was to take off aspersions cast upon growne Christians, as for their babes they were not eyed by the adversaries, as capa∣ble

subjects of such crimes charged on their Parents. Hence that speech in this Apology —

you when you heare mee expect a Kingdome, rashly suspect it of some humane kingdome, when wee speake it of the kingdome of God. So they endeavour to make us daily infamous by objecting impious crimes against us — and — heinous things are divulged of us through the peo∣ples tales of putting out light, and then lying promiscuously to∣gether, & of devouring mans flesh, &c. and that at our sacred my∣steries we promiscuously commit filthinesse, &c.

So that it were impertinent to mention their religious way of devoting and offe∣ring up their children to God, they were not accused, no apo∣logy is needed for them; but it's meet to apologize onely for the persons accused, and declare what manner of persons they are, and how they devote themselves to higher and holier uses, &c.

Let the reasons bee weighed which Justin here urged, why they baptized persons adult, and with him that urgeth those for rea∣sons, it enforceth more then probable grounds to convince, that Baptisme of their Infants was in use. For having spoken of that their being new borne, as they were, (that is Baptized) hee gives these two things as reasons: Dixit enim Christus, Nisi renati fueritis, non intrabitis in regnum caelorum; & addes — rationem ejus rei hanc accepi∣mus ab Apostolis, quoniam prima nativitas, nec scientibus, nec volentibus nobis ex complexu parentum, humoreque, genitali, &c. First, the necessitie of regeneration in and by Baptisme (as the ordinary way.) [For so hee understands Iohn 3. 5. whether rightly or no, I dispute not, but to him it was so and that sufficeth.] Secondly, the native pol∣lution and originall sinne (for that hee intends by nativitie] re∣ceived from their parents; which are reasons valid as well for baptisme of Infants as growne ones too, and with any, to whom they are reasons for Baptisme, and are the very reasons used by Origen, Cyprian, Ierom, Ambrose, Austin, and others, whose judge∣ment was for baptisme of Infants, as well as adult persons.

Yea but there is no mention made here of Infants baptisme, no nor was it suitable to the occasion of the Apology, as wee said be∣fore, and yet it followeth not, that it was not practised then, be∣cause not expressed. Mr. B. saith, hee sets downe here the practise of the Church, both for word, prayer and administration of the Sacraments, and that ex professo. Yet Mr. B. may perceive that there is no mention of any doctrinall instructions held out at the baptizing of persons, or at the administration of the Lords Sup∣per,

occasioned by the joyning of new members to them at other times. Afterwards indeed when hee commeth to speake of the manner of their carrying it on the Lords day, hee mentioneth something that way, but nothing in speaking of occasionall meetings for solemn closing with baptized persons at other times. Yet I thinke Mr. B. would bee loth to conclude the word was not taught, when the Sacraments were administred to any. If he omit a thing which is professo, hee was to mention, what wonder if he passe over in silence a matter of which hee had not then occasi∣on to speake? Tertullian de corona militis saith almost as much in substance as Iustin, and it is as well urged against Paedobaptisme, be∣cause hee saith, when wee come together to the water, wee doe promise there to renounce the Devill, &c. Yet it is evident Bap∣tisme of Infants was in use in his time; why else doth hee con∣demne it, and would not have their Susceptors runne hazzards by becomming sureties for them? So that this is but a fallacious way of concluding à dicto secundum quid, ad dictum simpliciter. Some∣thing more wee shall adde of Justin occasionally afterwards.

SECT. II.

RAbanus is the next witnesse to Propos. 3. which saith

the Catechisme which is the doctrine of faith, must goe be∣fore baptisme, &c.

hee was Anno 840. when none questions the constant use of Paedobaptisme, and so the intent is not touching what is to goe before their baptisme, but what was to precede the baptisme of Pagans or Jewes turned to the faith. Rabanus de institutione Clericorum hath that passage of the 4th. Carthage Coun∣cell;

Those which are to bee baptized are to give in their names, and are to bee long under abstinence of Wine and Flesh, &c. and yet in the same place saith, Whether Infants or young men come to the Sacrament of regeneration, they no sooner approach to the Font of life, but the uncleane spirit is driven away from them by the exorcising of the Priests, &c.

These are no contra∣ries but may very well stand together with Rabanus, that those that are to bee baptized bee so prepared thereto, scil. if adult, and yet Infants also not capable of such preparation may and are to bee baptized, wherefore this is still but racking of Authors to make them speake that which they never intended.

SECT. III.

BAsil is the next Author brought in, Contra Eunomium l. 3. say∣ing,

must the faithfull bee sealed with Baptisme?

Faith must praecede and goe before. Mr. Blackwood inlargeth the testi∣mony in words to like purpose.

For Baptisme is the seale of faith, faith the confession of the Deity: For first hee, (scil. that is made godly by grace of whom hee before spake) must first beleeve and after bee sealed with baptisme — and — baptisme is the forgive∣nesse of the debt of prisoners, the death of sinne, the regenera∣on of the soule, — How can this, saith Mr. Backwood, bee affirmed of Infants? And againe — I will roule in mire — walke deceitful∣ly — sweare and lie, and then when I am full with evills, I will cease and receive baptisme

— which shewes saith Mr. B. at what time persons were wont to bee baptized, not in their Infancy, but when they were men, if the faithfull — if one that is made godly▪ by grace bee to bee baptized — hee must first professe his faith: ergo, none other is to bee baptized, if brought to baptisme in any other way — non sequitur; yea but that doth plainly resist the tradition of wholesome baptisme — For baptisme is the seale of faith, &c. saith Basil. What doth resist the wholesome tradition of baptism? Paedobaptisme without actuall faith expressed? — Basil intended it not, but if one that is made godly by grace (being changeable by nature) sometimes by negligence fall from grace, &c. and so hold forth any other thing then is consonant to the doctrine of the Tri∣nitie confessed in Baptisme; This is resisting that tradition of Baptisme, he doth not intend by tradition of Baptisme a rule that onely actuall confessors of the Trinitie must bee baptized. Let him expound himselfe; for in his fifth booke against Eunomius pag. 119. speaking of that forme of baptizing in the name of the Father, Sonne and Holy Ghost, hee calleth that the tradition, scil. touching baptisme, if by his description hee intend the seale of faith, scil. the Covenant and doctrine of faith, it hurts us not, if of faith whereby wee beleeve, it is an imperfect description of baptisme. Baptisme, saith hee, is the forgivenesse of sinne, &c. if he meane it, that it is so really to all that are baptized, then Simon Magus and Ananias had not perished in their sinnes, if hee speake it, that it is so Sacramentally, that may bee affirmed of Infants Baptisme. As for Mr. B's exposition that Basils other speech, I will lie and sweare, and when full of evills &c. then receive Bap∣tisme,

sheweth the time when persons were wont to bee baptized; I wonder at his collection, doth hee thinke men should sinne to the full, till they are even weary, and then come to bee baptized? is that a fit time, when they have served the Devill to the utmost, and been his old sworne trustees, then to list themselves under Christs command? Verily if Mr. B. thinke so, Basil did not, for hee rather reproveth persons for deferring their Baptisme, as if a man might bemire himselfe in sinne as much as hee would, and then at last one washing in baptisme would make all clean, which hee thus sarcastically derideth.

Aretius had no such thought of Basils judgement in this case, who yet had reason to know Basils mind, better then Mr. B. or I. And hee in his Commentary on Luke 18. brings in Basil as using this argument amongst others — Infantes capaces sunt 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ergo etiam participes sunt ipsius Baptismi. — Basil then had other arguments for Paedobaptisme: but this was one, Infants are capable of salvation sealed in Baptisme, therefore are they also partakers of Baptisme.

SECT. IIII.

EƲsebius testimony lib. 6. hist. eccl. touching Origens and others being Catechists at Alexandria, might have been spared: none denying but that Adult Pagans, or the adult children of persons baptized, were to bee so catechised (thence the name of Catechumeni in Authors usually so taken.) But that hindred not, but that children also were baptized in Origens time, witnesse Ori∣gens words in his second Tom. Hom. 14. upon Luke: little ones (saith hee) are baptized unto remission of sinnes, &c. The Authors stories to confirme the third, fourth, and fifth Proposition might have been also spared, as not concluding what they intend, that in those times no Infants were, or were to bee baptized. Some were adult Pagans, which came in upon their owne right onely, and were amongst the number of such Catechumeni, whose baptisme were prevented by Martyrdome, as the woman the Treatise men∣tioneth, Proposition 3. and Evirenitana the Virgin, Proposition 5. and sundry others mentioned by Cyprian de baptismo haeret. quoted by Mr. B. in his Preface. Some adult Pagans, which after instructi∣on, actually came to receive baptisme of which the treatise menti∣ons examples, as Clodoveus king of France with his 3000. Soul∣diers, also those learned men, Virinus Marcellinus and Justinus in

the time of Decius Quirinus the Roman Captaine under Trajan Hermingildus, Anno 700. in the dayes of Tiberius the second, Tor∣pes in the dayes of Nero, Nemissius in the time of Pope Stephen "and of Valeria•…•… and Gallienus Emperours and Basilica in Gallie∣nus his time, Mauro, Honoratus, Ragatianus, Hilarius, Victorinus, Apronianus, Tobia King of Persia, Claudius the Roman, and his wife in Pope Gayus his time; they might have more instances too, but these are more then enough, unlesse pertinent, proving what is not denied, that adult Pag••ns were first catechised ere baptized. But what then? ergo none else but such baptized? Non sequitur. If we were now to deale with Indians in such sort, wee would take the like course, yet maintaine Pedobaptisme to bee an ordinance of Christ. Cyprian which mentions that of the Catechumeni, yet who more strong for Paedobaptisme then hee? Austin who l. 8. Confessionum writeth of Victorinus his open confession before his baptisme, yet who pleads more for Paedobaptisme then hee? some were children of Christian parents, which yet were not baptized, till growne, as Ierome, Ambrose, Austin, Gregory, Nazianzen, (added by Hen. Den) Constantine the Emperour, Theodosius the Emperour, Lu••gerus, Pancratius, Pontius, Nazarius, Tecla and Erasma Tusca, a certaine brother mentioned in Eusebius.

And what of all this? ergo, children of inchurched Parents ought to stay unto adult yeers, before they bee baptized, because these did so: Non sequitur. A facto ad jus non valet consequentia. Nay then they should stay, till neere their death, because Constantine, Theodosius and others did so; which to our Authors would bee a non sequitur. Yea, or at least wee must stay till 30. yeeres old, be∣cause Jerom, Austin and others did so, or what is the sequell here∣of? Is it this, ergo none other which came of Christian Parents were in those times baptized, till grown up to full yeers of dis∣cretion? — I wholly deny it, if the Authors had brought as many more instances,, unlesse they could say and prove it, and so it was with all other children of Christian Parents, their induction is not regular. It is evident that the baptisme of such persons was deferred through corruption in the persons, whom it concerned. Some out of groundlesse supposals of a necessitie to conforme to Christs baptisme, who was baptized at 30. yeers old. Whence it is that Gregory Nazianzen refuteth that ground of deferring bap∣tisme. Others thought it might bee some defilement, yea defacing to their childrens baptisme, as well as their owne, if they sinned

after baptisme, and therefore thought it good to bee deferred. O∣thers had a superstitious conceipt of an excellency of being bap∣tized in Jordans waters, above others which occasioned Constantius deferring his Baptisme, Euseb. lib. 4. de vita Constantini, Theodoret lib. 1. Hist. Eccles. c. 35. some parents were discouraged from bring∣ing their children to baptisme through the covetousnesse of the Ministers, requiring (as then the use was) so much for an offering from and for any persons which were baptized, which occasioned delayes in many. Whence that Canon of the Councell of Ell••∣bertinum cited in Trecius his Decretalls;

that every Bishop should looke to it, throughout the Churches, that those which bring their Infants to Baptisme, if they offer any thing freely of their owne accord it should bee received of them. But if otherwise through povertie they have nothing to offer, the Priest should not violently take any pawnes of them, because many of the poorer sort fearing the same did withhold their children from Baptisme.

SECT. V.

BEsides many other causes mentioned by Gregory Nazianzen in his 40th. Oration de baptismo, where hee blameth not onely the deferring of elder persons that are at their owne dispose, but the deferring of the baptisme of children by their Parents, and be∣cause Gregories testimony is made use of by the Treatise in confir∣mation of the fourth Proposition. Its meet it should bee cleared, whether hee bee more ours or yours. I deny not but hee giveth his advise out of case of danger of death, the childrens baptisme bee deferred, till they are three yeers old, this was his peculiar fancy in this particular, but yet this is not to speake for the Ana∣baptists tenent, which say a man must first bee of yeares of dis∣cretion, able to hold forth his knowledge in Articles of Religion, besides his faith in Christ, and repentance of his sinnes, &c. this a child of three yeeres old is not able to doe, wee say that unripe children before capable of professing their knowledge, faith and repentance are to bee baptized, and such a one is a child also of three yeers old. And I wonder our adversaries urge not a speech of his in that oration speaking of persons that cannot receive baptisme, hee reckons as some growne ones that cannot through some suddaine exigent albeit they desire it: so others which can∣not by reason of their Infancy, but hee intends that of such as

cannot come of themselves, unlesse by others helpe: and especially Infants, which cannot come meerely in their owne right. And he speakes of persons who if not baptized, they themselves are exemp∣ted, from guilt of neglect or contempt, albeit not of losse by it; as his words evidence speaking of them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which being unsealed or unbaptized are without sinne, although they suffer losse or hurt, but doe not act: it unlesse they are not without originall sinne, that is not his meaning, but they themselves sinne not therein personal∣ly in neglect or contempt of Gods Ordinance, (and therefore al∣beit he had inveyed so much against the sinne of those whose bap∣tisme was deferred, hee hereby cleareth them from that blame) but hee accounteth that even those babes are sufferers in this omission, and at a losse, that in others right, and by others helpe they are not brought to baptism, albeit by reason of Infancy they cannot of themselves receive baptisme▪ and that this is his meaning let his words declare; ibid. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c.

Hast thou an Infant? Let not wickednesse take occasion (scil. to cause a deferring of it's baptisme) let it bee sanctified from Infancy, and consecra∣ted to the spirit from its tenderest age, yea but by reason of the weakednesse of its age thou art affraid to have it sealed? how art thou a mother of a feeble mind, and of a very little faith?

where he toucheth upon another cause why Christian Pa∣rents sometimes deferred their childrens baptisme, scil. a distrust∣full feare of hazzarding their babes health if dipped, as amongst many the use then was in baptisme; so then hee chargeth the mat∣ter not upon the child but upon the parent in point of guilt if not baptized: and observe hee accounteth it a wickednesse, not thus to devote them from their tenderest yeeres, their first birth (ab ipsis un∣guiculis, as the word is) unto the Lord in baptisme, and that sinne taketh occasion to put it selfe forth very much in case of Infants, whence Parents are tempted to deferre their childrens baptisme, and imputeth it to the weakenesse of their faith) which if stronger might arme Christian parents against any seeming discourage∣ments, hee maketh the practise of Infants baptisme a matter of faith in Christian parents, if they had faith enough they would not deferre the same, and ibid. answering the query about Infants baptisme, that it were better they should bee sealed without know∣ledge

then die without baptisme, hee giveth his reason from cir∣cumcision, which was wont to bee administred the eighth day after the childs birth, and in the same Oration hee said,

that al∣beit other things had their definite seasons, yet all times were fit for washing or baptisme, because no time was free from haz∣zard of death, and that the time of our salvation was at all times to bee attended — 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; eve∣ry season is a time for thy baptisme:

and speaking of preten∣ces to put off baptisme hee addeth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; it reacheth all degrees of ages, all kinds of life, it armes one against assaults which may bee occasio∣ned by any of them, scil. by Satan: and ibid. speaking in answer to such as pretend Christs age when baptized;

hee was pure in and of himselfe, and needed not purging as thou dost, there was no danger to him in the delay of baptisme, but no little hazard impendeth over thee, if but from hence, that thou art borne onely in sinne, and being not immortall must die.

Hence his description of baptisme under divers notions, calling it a gift, be∣cause saith hee its given to them which have contributed nothing before hand thereto: grace, because its bestowed on such as are in∣debted: baptisme, because sinne is buried in the water, scil. Sacra∣mentally: and now let all judge to which side Gregory Nazianzen most propendeth; hee himselfe was baptized at above 30. yea but he approveth not of it as lawfull in any case to deferre it to above three yeeres, and in some cases, scil. of hazard of life, to be ad∣ministred before; surely if hee had thought baptisme of a very babe unlawfull as Anabaptists doe, hee could not bee ignorant, that upon no pretence of any hazards of life any sinne was to bee committed. Austin, Jerom, and Ambrose were baptized when grown up men, yea but when they better understood the point they disallow neglect of childrens Baptisme, as the parents sinne, as Je∣rom in his Epistle to Laeta, and Austin frequently, and so Ambrose all one for Paedobaptisme as an ordinance of God, and so as counting it sinne to neglect it.

SECT. VI.

BUt to returne to our stories, wee know what Origen, and Austin have said, what was the use of the Churches from the Apostles time as well as what was done in their time; wherefore if wee had no instances of children baptized that would suffice; But story

will furnish us with instances of children baptized within the com∣passe of time wherein this Treatise presenteth us with instances.

Polydore Virgil in his second book of the History of England spea∣king of King Lucius, saith,

that he Anno salutis 182. regni vero 13. being moved out of a love of Religion, dealt with Eleutherius Bishop of Rome by letters, that hee would admit him and his people by baptisme unto the number of Christians. Upon which Fugatius and Damianus (men of eminent pietie) were sent into Britaine, who baptized the King with his house, and his whole people, and therefore the Brittish children too,

un∣lesse no part of Lucius his people, which Johannes Balaeus more ful∣ly cleareth, in his booke of Brittish writers, Centuria prima cap. 27. where hee reciteth the occasion why Lucius sent Eluinus and Me∣duinus (two prime men) unto Eleutherius to bee this — And Lucius sent thither the more speedily, because hee heard that the name of Christians begun every where to be inlarged, and that many of the Nobilitie, (especially at Rome) together with their wives and children, had sworne unto that Christian faith (scil. were bapti∣zed;) for that was that hee writ about as before wee had it, that hee and his, might bee reckoned amongst the number of Christi∣ans; and baptisme is a solemne obligation of the party baptized unto the Christian faith.) Afterward when the Pagan Saxons had overrun Brittaine and Religion began to be worne out againe, Gre∣gory the first sent over Austin, Anno 596. where after he had preached amongst the heathen Saxons, hee baptized 1000. men, women and children in a River. History of Brittaine pag. 214. Inas also King of the West Saxons with his Counsell made Lawes touching the orderly living of Ministers and Infants being baptized within 30. dayes. Beza's hist. Dr. Ʋsher also in his booke of the Religion of the ancient Irish, cap. 5. saith that the Irish did baptize their In∣fants, without any consecrated Chrisme; and that corrupt use of Chrisme wee know was very ancient indeed. And before Clo∣dovius King of France was converted, whilst hee was yet Pagan, his gratious wife Cleotild daughter of the Duke of Burgoine, having a sonne by him, it was baptized by the same Remigius Bishop of Raines, (which afterward baptized him being converted as the Treatise saith) at which Pagan Clodovius was at first displeased. Afterward shee brought forth another sonne, which by the Kings consent was in like sort baptized; after which Pagan Clodovius being put to the worse by the Almaines, vowed, if hee got the

victory he would imbrace the Christian faith, to which his wife had so oft perswaded him, and proving conquerour did so, and was baptized by Remigius. Fabian, 1 par. of his History c. 97. the Centurie writers give other Instances Cent. 6. cap. 6. mentioning out of Gregorius Turocensis, the young sonne of Chilperick: also of Theodebert borne to King Childebert as baptized, as also Theodorick another child of his baptized, also of a young sonne to King Egilolph baptized; other instances might bee given out of Nau∣clerus, the authors of this Treatise mention Constantines baptisme, when so old; but why doe they not mention also his sonne Crispus too, which was baptized as well as hee by Sylvester Bishop of Rome saith Nicephorus hist. Eccles. l. 7. c. 23. the authors mention Clodo∣neus his Baptisme but not his children, and Constantius, but not his sons baptisme, doe either discover their ignorance or guile.

SECT. VII.

THe next Authors testimony to the third Proposition is that of Polydor Virgil de Inventoribus rerum, li. 4. cap. 4.

It was the cu∣stome in old time to baptize those for the most part which were come to their full growth apparelling them after baptisme in white, which was done at Easter and Pentecost, &c.

yea but before the old time of baptizing grown persons at Easter, (which was cer∣taine hundred yeeres after Christ ere that custome began) children were baptized (as is confessed they were) in Origens time, and be∣fore, by a Church custome; for then it was the custome before this custome came up here mentioned to baptize children. And let us heare whether Pollidor Vilgil in the very quoted place will not say as much, for hee there expressing his judgement for Pae∣dobaptisme doth quote Cyprian as speaking of it as [from the be∣ginning]

that albeit Infants could not make confession of their faith by reason of age, yet others confession should bee instead thereof in baptisme;

now if that were à principio, even from the beginning of the Christian Church; Paedobaptisme was ancien∣ter then this old custome, and for this also Polydore there citeth Ambrose lib. 2. de vocatione gentium.

SECT. VIII.

BEatus Rhenanus upon Tertullian is next, who is said to write

that the old custome was that those that were come to their full growth at Easter, &c.

they leave out the word [ferè] almost,

or for that most part, &c. and the reasons hee gives why it was so, scil. because thousands of Pagans daily flocked then to the Chur∣ches, then the Infants being compared to those Pagan parents, and children which could conceive of what was taught them, yea and those adult Pagans thus flocking in by thousands daily, no wonder that it bee said that it was then the use for the most part that those who were baptized, were at their full growth, and ad∣ding the other causes of deferring baptisme, no wonder Shamier (who yet speaketh of Paedobaptisme) speakes of so few children of old baptized.

CHAP. V. SECT. I.

TErtullian lib. de baptismo cited also by Mr. Blackwood more amply, thus:

for every persons condition, disposition, and age, the delay of baptisme is more profitable, especially about little ones: for what need is there (if there bee need as some copies have it, which Mr. B. leaveth out) that sureties should bee hazzarded, who by their mortalitie may faile of their promises, and bee deceived with the going for∣ward of an evill towardlinesse?

but herein the treatise dealeth more plainly then Mr. B. who leaveth out that saying cited in Tertullian; Suffer little children to come to mee; upon which hee glosseth, as followeth in Mr. B. —

Let them come when they are young, when able to bee instructed, let them become Christi∣ans when they know Christ, &c.

Ibid. for no lesse cause are un∣married persons to bee delayed in whom the tentation is prepa∣red, &c. the Treatise urgeth this testimony to prove that de facto children before they were instructed were not baptized. Mr. B. seemes to urge that de jure they ought not: As for the first, it's ra∣ther a strong proofe that Paedobaptisme was in use in the Church; in Tertullians time: for supposing Tertullian against Paedobaptisme, his testimony is the more valid, enemies will not flatter us; if they were not baptized, why doth hee mention their susceptors or sureties — which ran hazzards by being their susceptors? Tertulli∣an was not so sottish to oppose an Imaginary abusive practise; if no such thing were in rerum natura in his time; why doth hee affright persons from being susceptors by the hazzards they runne in their childrens liablenesse to death, and to distempers, and by

the latter, their outbreakings into sinne to deceive their suscep∣tors expectations, if no such thing? it had been dangerous to start such a novellisme: if never before practised. And indeed Ori∣gen contemporary with Tertullian (according to Osi inder and Func∣cius account) hee saith in the place quoted in his 14th. Hom. on Luke that little ones were in his time baptized.

All the question is then de Jure, how farre the testimony is valid to prove that Infants should not bee baptized; some make ac∣count that Tertullian was not simply against baptisme of Infants, scil. if of beleevers, but of baptizing Infidell Infants, then offered to baptisme, as it might be supposed of unmarried persons, if In∣fidels, to delay Baptisme; others thinke hee intends to deny the absolute necessitie of Baptisme in case children are like to die, then to baptize them out of an opinion of such necessitie of it, albeit afterwards that hazzard of mortalitie being over, they might bee baptized, and it's probable enough out of their doubling of the word necesse (si tamen necesse fit) &c. and truely if Tertullian was against it in his judgement, it was one of the dotages of his age, as was Montanisme, denying second marriages, witnesse his booke de Monogamia: and hee forgot himselfe if that was his intention, to deny childrens right to baptisme; since that in his booke de anima cap. 21. speaking before that every soule hath an evill spirit in it, he addeth,

so that the nativitie of none almost is cleane (at least if borne of Pagans) for here it is that the Apostle saith, that one borne of either sex being sanctified, hee is holy as well by the prerogative of the seed as by the discipline of instruction, but (saith hee) else they were borne uncleane: but now not∣withstanding hee would have it to bee understood that the children of the faithfull are devoted to holinesse, and conse∣quently to salvation, that in respect of these pledges of hope, hee might patronise marriages which hee had judged to bee re∣tained, otherwise (scil. if that had not been his meaning) hee would have mentioned that definition of the Lord: unlesse any one bee borne againe of water and of the Spirit hee shall not en∣ter into the kingdome of God,

that is, shall not bee holy, and then addeth immediatly cap. 22. as his conclusion,

so that eve∣ry soule is so long reckoned to bee in Adam, till they be recoun∣ted to bee in Christ,

and so long unclean untill recounted scil. in Christ. And in his booke against Marcion lib. 4. p. 92. but behold how God loveth little children (sc. of the Church) in that he teach∣eth

that those which would bee for ever great, must bee such as they are,

and brings that as another argument of it: that God was so gratious to the Aegyptian Midwives for sparing of the Jewes children, so that hee speakes not this of all children but of those of the Church, as also that which hee saith de anima, hee speaketh it not of all sorts, but of the children of the faithfull, as is evi∣dent. And hence I will make bold after Master Blackwoods exam∣ple to make some observations. 1 That Tertullian accounted not all children alike in point of birth — cleannesse, but some cleane, others uncleane. 2 That hee accounted that holinesse of children mentioned 1 Cor. 7. to bee no civill holinesse of legitimacy, or crea∣ture holinesse of holinesse to use, but a holinesse of a higher nature: such as implyeth right, at least externall, of entring in Gods king∣dome: making this of being holy to be one with that, or to in∣clude it (scil. according to men) and to include as much as to bee accounted in Christ, cap. 22. the beginning. 3 That children, of beleevers come to bee holy in this sense mentioned, not by instruction of discipline meerely of which they are capable when they come to yeers: but by being borne of either parents sanctified or the faithfull, or persons laying hold on Gods covenant, &c. (for hee maketh being borne of either parents sanctified and chil∣dren of the faithfull, &c. one) they are holy as well by prerogative of seed (saith hee of which they are partakers as soone as they are borne) as by institution of discipline. 4 That he maketh this the force of the Apostles argument to perswade to retaine marria∣ges in question in regard of such pledges of hope, children thus holy springing from married persons whereof one at least is a be∣leever, &c. 5 That therefore Zwinglius was not the first author as some say of that interpretation, that by the sanctifying of either Sex by that other being faithfull, children come to bee holy with holinesse of priviledge, hence that of being holy by prerogative of seed, scil. quat. covenant seed. And from the other place it appeares that Tertullian judged the children of the Jewes to bee not in a bare carnall covenant, or beloved with a meere common respect of God as others, but in the judgement of his charitie hee accounts them beloved, with a speciall love of God: so as to be∣come patternes to such as are alwayes great in Gods favour as well as otherwise. Now how these things will stand with Tertullians denying them baptisme, I leave to all judicious and sober minds to determine: hee may forsake his owne principles in this as in

other things, hee did; but if hee hold to the same hee must bee ours and not yours.

But let us suppose Tertullians judgement against paedobaptisme: hee is not the first that gave erroneous counsell, and held erro∣neous tenents: though he bee the first that ever advised (so farre as I finde in authors) that infants baptisme should bee delayed, and his judgement may not carry it, but the grounds of his judgement if they are Scripture proofe; and first he acknowledgeth the argu∣ment, taken from Mat. 19. Suffer little children to come unto me, to enforce baptisme of these there intended: albeit hee expounds that of their comming to Christ by baptisme to bee under∣stood of their comming, when they are growne up, when they know Christ, when they aske it, when they understand the right of Baptisme, and can pray and fast. But Mr. B. (which cleaveth to Tertullian) and others of his minde, denye it to bee any ground of baptizing any. 2 Hee counselleth (as the trea∣tise hath it) that unmarried folke should have their baptisme also deferred, whilest they yet suffer tenttaions; the Treatise indeed saith, young unmarried virgins: but Tertullians word is, Innupti, unmarried persons, of what age soever, now how doe Anabaptists like Tertullians counsell herein? Suppose a person never marry, what, must he never bee baptized as never yet suffering this tenta∣tion? or suppose young persons of 20. or 30. yeares old, judged to be beleevers, but yet not married; they belong to Gods kingdom, but have not yet suffered such tentation, must their baptisme now be deferred upon this ground of Tertullian, because not married, or not yet going through such tentations? I trow not; then Tertul∣lians counsell about delay of baptisme is not good it seemeth.

3 Hee counsels delay of baptisme of any to Easter and Pentecost (albeit therein hee speaketh not so peremptorily as in the other) Was this good counsell to put baptisme to such set times of the yeare, when yet no time is set in the Scriptures, both John and Christs Disciples, and the Apostles baptized at any time of the year. I suppose this counsell will not downe with them.

4 Hee counsels delay of Infants baptisme (for it was but his counsell at the most as it was in the other) answering therein that argument, which even in his time was used for paedobaptisme (not first by Zuinglius) scil. Suffer little Children to come unto mee, and forbid them not, &c. Yea (saith Tertullian) let them come indeed, but dum Adolescant, &c. when they are growne up, &c. hee yeeldeth it to

bee a ground of their comming to Christ, and that by baptisme as one way of their comming to him; but not of their comming so soone, but rather when they themselves could aske it, &c. this is his glosse upon the place: but how absurd is this glosse, as if Christs intent in rebuking the Disciples for hindring those babes from comming to him, were thus? Yee do very evill to hinder those babes from comming now to me for my blessing (like them in like case) because they (and others like them) should rather come when they are more grown up, when they know mee, when they them∣selves (and not as now their parents onely) can aske and desire it at my hands, &c. But why then are these Disciples rebuked for seeking to put by their comming so young, and not themselves desiring to come? nay then verily the Disciples rather were in the right, which would have had them staid longer, and not Christ which urgeth it as an argument for comming at that time, and accordingly at that time fulfilleth the parents desire in blessing of the babes: but none herein surely will owne Tertullian. Another testimony of Tertullians is urged to confirme the fifth Proposition, scil. that de corona militis.

When wee come together to the water, and a little before wee doe promise there in the hand of the Minister, that wee will renounce the Devill and his pompe, and bee ducked three times, and say no more thereto then what the Lord com∣mands in the Gospel; and as we goe out of the water, where∣in wee are baptized, we eat milke and hony together, and refraine that whole weeke from washing and bathing.

So far in the Trea∣tise, but the Authors leave out what followeth, ibid.

wee make oblations for the dead, for our birth-dayes yearely, and a little after, wee crosse our selves at every step, and in every place, sitting downe, and rising up, &c.

All this proveth what the Adulti did, and what was required of them at their baptisme, but this dispro∣veth not, but that infants baptisme was in use, and that they did promise as much by others: for why else did Tertullian give his counsell (as is supposed) against the same? Yea, that (not∣withstanding Tertullians argument there) baptizing of infants with∣out requiring from them personall confession of faith, was a right use of the institution. Yea I wonder the Treatise bringeth this Testimony to prove the right use of baptisme according to Christ and his Apostles: what were those oblations for the dead by the persons baptized, and those superstitious crossings, forbearing of washings and speech, eating milke and honey, &c. were these ac∣cording

to the institution of Christ and example of the Apostles? Surely no.

SECT. II.

THe next testimony is taken from Counsells and Decretalls, ei∣ther ex concilio Gerundensi concerning the Catechumeni (or those that are instructed in the faith (saith this Treatise) It's ordai∣ned that they should all come at Easter and Pentecost. This is the proofe of the fourth Proposition, that the children of the faith∣full, &c. as if the Catechumens were onely the children of the faithfull, when all adult Pagans were such: and say that Adult children too of persons joyned to the Church, but formerly Pagans were amongst the Catechumens, yet not their babes, babes were baptized both before the superstitious [limiting] or order of limi∣ting the time of baptisme as wee proved, and whilst it was in force too as wee proved out of Austin, Sermon foure in Octavo paschae ad neophytos; yea the concilium Gerundense Can. 3. hath these words, de parvulis, &c. concerning little ones new borne, its ordained,

that if they bee weake (as is usuall) and that they desire not to suck;

that even the same day they are borne, they if they bee brought may be baptized; so that this is the old trick of conclu∣ding à dicto secundum quid ad simpliciter, neither is any other con∣clusion to bee made from the next proof ex concilio Laodicensi,

The Disciples or Schollers in the faith, who are to bee baptized must before learne the faith, and then upon the Thursday the last weeke in Lent must acknowledge the same before the Priest or Bishop:

which is repeated in confirmation of the fifth Proposi∣tion, and the former answer is full to this objection, which was even now mentioned: so ex consilio Martini, and Nicolai Popes (which is againe urged, Proposition fifth) the Catechumeni must first learne the Creed, what is intended to adult Pagans by your counsell is prevented, to conclude against the children, babes and all, contrary to Martins intent who was Anno 646. long after the unquestionable use of Paedobaptisme, and Nicolaus was after him. No more was intended by that quotation in the Decretalls

ex Au∣gustino ad Fortunatum, when a Catechumen is baptized he makes confession, &c.

as appeares by Austin in the places formerly quoted. Concilium Bracharense is quoted, but not which, first or second, &c. nor what words; and so concilium Anterse in like fashion, but why are not the words mentioned, if for their purposes? but lest such

blind whisperers, and items beget suspition, it's likely the authors if they ever saw the Canons intend it of that Canon Concilii Bra∣charensis primi, that 20. dayes before baptisme let the Catechu∣men all and severall learne of the Priest,

Credo in Deum, &c.

to which the former answer sufficeth. Trecius in his Decretalls urgeth as much, ex secundo Concilio Bracharensi, yet the same councell also ratifieth Paedobaptism, ordering (Canone septimo)

that each Bishop should in all the Churches take care about the baptizing of In∣fants, brought to baptism, &c.

The like answer sufficeth to that quo∣tation of the fourth Carthage councel in confirmation of the fifth Proposition; those that are to be baptized are to give in their names, & after long abstinence from wine and flesh, and frequent examina∣tions, with laying on of hands, they are to be baptized. It is the 75th. Canon. Now that the Councell never intended, as if Infants baptisme were not valid, and warrantable which could not bee thus examined, see the 48th. Canon of the third Carthage Coun∣cell (which according to Isiodore in his summe of the Decretals, was the yeare before this) wherein the Councell doth ratifie, even the Baptisme of children by Donatists (for so the Canon is ex∣pounded in Caranza his summe of the Decretals, and in Albigna∣nus tertius his edition of the Decretalls) this sinne being rather in the parents (not that they offered them to baptisme, but) to offer them to be baptized by such Heretiques, & the fifth Carthage coun∣cell (which according to Isiodore, was two yeers after the 4th. coun∣cell; but according to Johannes Wolfius de rebus memorabilibus, centur. quarta, both the fourth and fifth Carthage councell was kept the same yeere, scil. Anno 399.) wherein there were 74. Bishops (as in the other there were 97. Bishops) Aurelius Bishop of Carthage, being President, in which councell Canon 6. they ratifie Paedobaptisme (as this treatise also mentioneth Proposition 7.) It's not then ima∣ginable, that the councell that the other day (if our Authors guesse right) was against Paedobaptisme, and yet presently bee so quite altered, as to establish it; yea but Mr. Blackwood, in his pre∣face [to storming the two Garrisons of Antichrist,] would seeme to make an argument against paedobaptisme, as then in use from the 14. Can. Concil. Nic. and Can. 4. and 6. Concil. Ancyran. in which Canons the Assemblies were divided into hearers, Catechu∣meni, and Offerers, or persons in full communion, till cut off by death, on censure, yet hee cannot tell hee saith, whether this di∣vision were in use before the first Nicene Counsell; probably its

thought, since the Apostles time; so that to conclude that accor∣ding to his exposition of the Offerers, children being not of that sort, nor of the Catechumeni, they must bee of the third sort, of the profane rabble of hearers; this is farre fetched, and hee suspe∣cteth the foundation of it, scil. that division, whether so ancient, as from the Apostles; so that hee can build nothing thereupon; nay by his leave, hee must thrust out Infants, little children not capable of being called Auditors, in the Language of the ancient (which hee cannot bee ignorant, understand it of adult persons) nor of being Catechumens, if not amongst the third sort of Offe∣rers, where are they then? Surely, no part of the Congregation, when yet in Joel 2. Assemble the Congregation, gather such as suck the breasts, &c. children then are upon Scripture grounds, as well as common reason, parts of the Church Assemblies: nay hath not Mr. B. made a rod for his owne back, since the Assem∣bly being divided onely into those three parts, and Scripture, and reason, making little ones part of the Assembly, and yet neither hearers, nor Catechumens (as reason will tell him) therefore they must needs bee of the third sort, scil. Offerers in those times, they were then in full communion, witnesse Cyprian (as some urge it to enseeble Cyprians testimony for Paedobaptisme) and Cyprian was above 70. yeeres before the first Nicene councell: yea, children were Offerers too in respect of that which was offered at their baptisme, witnesse the Canon of the Elebertine councell, as the little ones of old were said to bring an offering in their hand, when their parents onely did it for them, Deut. 16. but Mr. Blackwood urgeth the seventh Canon of the Councell at Constantinople, declaring how they Catechise them they are to baptize; hee telleth us not what Councell it was, but saith it was in Theodosius his time, so it might bee, and yet wee not know by what Character, which it was, divers of them being then called there, Wolfius puts Theodosius at Anno 383. and Anno 382. the third Constantinople Councell Anno 383. the fourth Anno 402. the fifth the same yeere that the Milevitan councell was; and Anno 403. the 6, 7, 8. now the 6th. councell of Constantinople provideth that none should have chrisme and bap∣tisme administred to them, unlesse it bee such as firmely hold forth the Lords Prayer, and the Creed, &c. excepting such, who by reason of age cannot speake, and provideth, Can. 7. that such as bee witnesses to Infants in Baptisme should bee sound in the faith. Councells use not to bee crosse to themselves, in so little

space as to order contrary things, that onely adult persons should bee baptized, and no Infants, as Mr. B. expounds them, and yet againe, not onely adult, but Infants shall bee baptized, that is not square dealings. And I wonder that Mr. B. foreseeing the ra∣tifying of the 46. Canon of that Laodicean Councell before men∣tioned by that at Trullo (which was the Emperours Palace, at Con∣stantinople, where the Councell used to sit) in Justinians time, Can. 78. a Councels that was for Paedobaptisme expresly, would enfeeble his argument from thence in that a Councell of such Fa∣thers judge that Canons establishing both this and that, scil. cate∣chising before baptisme, and baptisme before catechising, are not contraries, that hee which holdeth the one denyeth the other, but subordinate, which may both stand together, according as the persons to bee baptized are either adult or Infants. This Mr. B. foreseeing maketh him (its likely) frame such a poore excuse, as that its like, upon some abuse or neglect it was reestablished by that Councell of Trullo, but its like not, rather if it were any thing of the controversie. Yea, but some object the Covenant of Theodor Balsamon, and Zonaras upon the sixth Canon of that Grecian coun∣cell at Neocesarea Anno. 315. concerning a woman with child, that shee ought to bee illuminated (or baptized) when shee desireth it, because in that matter (scil. of baptisme) shee that brings forth hath nothing in common with the babe which is brought forth, which may bee shewed in confession, that it is proprium uniuscujusque institutum, ac propositum; which they are brought in as so expounding, or rather inferring thence, that an Infant might not bee baptized, because it hath not power to choose the confession of divine Baptisme. Zonaras I have not, but I looked upon that Patriarch of Antioch, Theodor Balsamon, who hath these words in his Scholia upon that Canon. Some (in the councell) said that women with child which came from the Infidels, to joyn with the Church ought not to bee baptized, but to stay till the babe they went with were brought forth, lest that when shee were baptized, it might seeme that the child in her wombe was bapti∣zed with her, as being altogether united to her; whence it will come to passe, that after the babe is borne, either it may bee not left unenlightned (or unbaptized) or if it bee baptized, it may bee thought that it is rebaptized. This hee maketh the occasion of the Law of that antient, not Latine, but Greeke councell; which was a good while before the first Nicene Coun∣cell.

And it is very remarkable what was the occasion, it was dou∣ble, as is evident. 1. That they might avoyd the mischiefe of leaving babes unbaptized. 2. That they might avoyd the other of rebaptizing; two grand hinges of Anabaptisme: these were such mischiefes (as it seemes) in their eyes, that they would not have expressions, let fall by them, that might any way occasion the same, so that both these in those times were rather inter borrenda then recipienda. But let us heare what Balsamon addeth further there, speaking of such Infants, that they could not make promise, &c. for how it is with the babe in the wombe none can enquire, nor be suretie for them (saith he) but Infants (scil. that are borne) doe affirme by those which are their susceptors, and are accounted to bee actually enlightned (or baptized) with divine illustration, or divine baptisme, they then accounted baptisme of Infants no An∣tichristian baptisme (as the Authors of this Treatise, and (as John Spilsbury, Mr. Blackwood, and Henry Denne doe) but divine Bap∣tisme, the Baptisme of the Lord, wherefore I conclude that this testimony is grosly abused by Hugo Grotius.

SECT. III.

THe next Author quoted, is Rupertus Tritiensis l. 4. de divinis Officiis c. 18. both for the confirmation of the 4th. and 7th. proposition, the same is urged by A. R. also to like purpose: but by this authors leave, that there bee no guile hid, I shall make bold to transcribe the very words of Rupertus Abbas Tritiensis, of which the Treatise mentioned some pieces, scil.

It was the custome of old in the holy Church, not to celebrate the Sacrament of regeneration at any other time (scil. then Easter and Pente∣cost, of which hee spake before) [unlesse in those, unto whom possibly danger might accrue by the comming of some infirmity or danger of death upon them] [this exception which is in his the very quaesitum; the Treatise, and A. R. leave wholly out; how candidly they deale herein, let all judge.] All the off-spring of the Church (almost) which throughout the whole yeare, it could beget anew by the preaching of the word, the solemni∣tie of Easter approaching, gave in their names this day, and throughout the following dayes, unto the very solemnitie it selfe of Easter: each one hearing the rule of faith, whence also such an one was called a Catechumen, [for a Catechumen faith Rupertus is by interpretation a hearer] both the suckling and

the growne person: at length at the full time, after the full of the moone in the solemnitie at the holy Font, repeating the symboll with full beleefe: It (scil. the off-spring of the Church) did die, and rise againe with Christ, but after Christianitie in∣creased, and that net of the Gospell was filled with Fish, be∣cause that it was dangerous to delay so great a multitude by reason of the casualtie of death, which in a multitude of men is manifold; especially in regard of a company of Infants of Christian Parents, much encreasing, whose tender life is very oft by a small occasion cut off; it seemed good to the holy Church: leave off baptisme being granted every where, yea, offe∣red, to prevent all dangers; and yet in a few to celebrate the solemnitie of baptisme, with the resurrection of the Lord, to which it is like, &c.

by this that hath been said, that which the Treatise, and A. R. intend to disprove is rather confirmed, and the guilefull wresting of the testimony discovered; for besides what hath been before shewed, that Infants baptisme was before this custome of baptisme at Easter and Pentecest came up, and like∣wise whilst it was held up, Infants being then, and there bapti∣zed, as well as at other times, as by Austins testimony, Serm. 4. ad Neoph. appeared, this testimony also tells us, 1 That baptisme of all sorts of persons, in case of weakenesse and danger, at other times was in use of old. 2 That sucklings as well as growne ones were accounted under the notion of the off-spring of the Church, begotten by the word, scil. in their parents, which being begotten thereby, in their right also their children were in churched with them. 3 Confession of faith with full beleefe by others in stead of sucklings, was counted as their confession; the lactati, as well as the grandescentes are said to make such confession of faith, which they could not doe, but by others. 4 That there were present at this solemnitie a multitude of Infants, as well as growne ones, which did Sacramentally die, and rise with Christ of old. 5 That they baptized not of old all sorts of children at such times, but onely the Infants of Christians, and that upon the grounds of mortalitie and other weakenesse, and hazzard, was there made a change as well in respect of the growne part of the multitude, as the Infants onely. 6 That the change that was made upon the grounds of mortalitie, and increase of the multitude, was not in respect of the subjects; that afterwards Infants should bee bap∣tized, whereas onely growne ones before were baptized (for both

sorts were before and after that custome came up, baptized as wee proved) but it was onely in respect of the place where, and season when, that whereas of old they used to come to some one great Citie, and that at these seasons of yeare onely; now passim every where, and at any other time they might bee baptized, onely some few that were borne a little before these solemne times, (as Rupertus in his other bookes mentioneth) were reserved to bee then baptized, to grace as it were the solemnitie. And this may fully answer that testimony which this Treatise Proposition 7. and A. R. also urge out of Joannes Beemius de moribus Gentium speaking to like purpose. So then Rupertus Tritiensis, and his companion are both as much abused herein, as other witnesses produced, or rather traduced.

SECT. IIII.

THe next witnesse is Cassander a stout adversary to them, yet fetched in by the Authors of this Treatise to prove the 4th. and 7th. Proposition, Cassander in l. de Infantium baptismo is said to say:

It is certaine, that some beleevers in times past have with holden baptisme from their children, untill they were growne, and could understand, and remember the mysteries of their faith, yea, also counselled not to administer baptisme,

as by Tertullian and Gregory Nazianzen appeareth. And Proposi∣tion 7. Cassander in his booke de Infantium baptismo saith, that

it came to bee used by the Fathers that lived 300. yeers after the Apostles,

as much saith A. R. in his Childish baptisme. But say Cassander spoke as Proposition 4. hee is said to doe; yet that pro∣veth not that children of the faithfull were commonly first in∣structed ere baptized, because some beleevers deferred baptisme, or Tertullian, and Gregory counselled it, much lesse that this was well done according to Christs mind, for wee have seene upon what unsound principles they did it: and as for the Councell of Tertullian and Gregory, it hath been before weighed of what force herein. As for the other speech of Cassander that Pedobaptisme came in use by the Fathers 300. yeeres after the Apostles time, it maketh mee stand and wonder at the impudent forehead of er∣rour, and yet I might wonder the lesse since it's but just with God that they which hold lies should also tell lies. I read Cassander with as much heed as I could, to finde out whether there might bee any colour of ground of such a speech of him, but could not

finde out any like it, unlesse that which hee saith bee this way wrested, scil.

that the Apostles in the beginning by the com∣mand and charge of the Lord, set up their worke, and did eve∣ry where constitute Churches, gathered of the Gentiles to the Communion of the Gospel; growne ones which consented to the Apostles doctrine after confession of the faith, were with∣out any distinction of times, or places knit unto the Church of Christ by the Sacrament of Baptisme administred by the Disciples of the Apostles. [But saith also in the next words] al∣though even at that time it is to be beleeved that Infants also, and especially sickly ones, were offered to bee consecrated by the baptisme of Christ:

but clearely to evince the falsehood of that speech before cited to confirme Proposition 7. the very title of this booke contradicteth the same. George Cassander of Infants baptisme.

The testimonies of the Ancient Ecclesiasticall writers, which flourished within the 300. yeeres from the times of the Apostles, that is, from the departure of John the Apostles being more then the hundreth yeere from the birth of Christ.

And according to this his worke that hee propoundeth, hee bringeth in very notable testimonies of the antients, both Latine and Greeke, that lived in that space for the proofe of Paedobap∣tisme, that any that had not s••ene authorities before might have been thence well furnished for this purpose, and after the testi∣monies produced Cassander closeth thus.

These are the testimo∣nies of ancient Fathers which wee suppose are sufficient for the deciding of this controversie of childrens baptisme, which hath been raised up by certaine wretched persons; for in as much as all these whose testimonies wee have produced in a continued series from the Apostles, were Orthodox teachers, and guiders of Churches of Christ at severall times and places, there is no question, but that this Tenent being held forth by them all se∣verally, as with one mouth, it was the very doctrine of the whole Church which the Church had received from the Apo∣stles, and transmitted the same to those in after times, and up∣on the speech of Austin, l. 4. contra Donat. c. 13, 14. addeth: To this Apostolicall doctrine of baptisme of Infants, all the Apo∣stolique Churches, planted by the Apostles throughout the whole world, they doe give testimony, &c.

Who seeth not now the grosnesse of this falshood in fathering that upon Cassander, the very contrary whereunto is his businesse there to evince?

SECT. V.

THe next testimony is of as grand an adversarie to Anabap∣tisme as any, and that is Zuinglius, who is quoted to con∣firme the 4th. and 6th. Proposition, hee is said to affirme that there is no plaine word in Scripture whereby childrens baptisme is commanded: his meaning is no more then thus; that it is not in so many words said, you shall baptize children, as, neither the first day of the weeke shall bee to you the Lords day, or Chri∣stian Sabbath, &c. but the principall place, (and for the other two quotations, they are to no purpose) is that mentioned in his booke of Articles, Act. 18. whose words, because the treatise is so often tripping, wee shall set downe verbatim, who there spea∣king of Confirmation saith, although I am not ignorant (as it may bee gathered out of the Ancients)

that of old time Infants were baptized (this is rendred otherwise in the Treatise) and yet not so common as now it is, but the children were al∣wayes instructed openly, and when their faith had made im∣pression upon their hearts, and they confessed with their mouthes, then they were admitted to baptisme;

this custome of teaching I wish were used, and recalled now [namely that baptisme being given to Infants, they may bee afterwards taught when they come to age as they are capable of instruction from the Word of God] this the Treatise leaveth out. Zwinglius his judg∣ment was, that the maine in the childs right to baptisme was the Parents Covenant estate, whence the child being federally holy, which else had been uncleane, had its maine title to baptisme, so that in case both parents were visibly Pagans, or Idolatrous, &c. they were not to bee baptized, when yet in his time many such were baptized. And thus I take it is that which hee intendeth, that since in Ancient times, albeit sometimes every little children of Infidels, (as may appeare) were baptized, yet not so common∣ly as now such like children are baptized promiscuously hand over head, (for which some as it appeares by Beza upon 1 Cor. 7. 14. have pleaded, albeit hee counts it their errour, ibid.) and since in those times Catechising (as it appeareth) of children was too little in use; Zwinglius maketh that use of the Catechising of children of old, both of persons joyned to the Church (which were capable of instruction when first their parents joyned in Church estate) before their baptisme, which was one sort of

children so catechised, and of the exposititious children of Pa∣gans also, those children of their Pagan captive or slaves, which were another sort of children catechized before baptisme: Zwin∣glius wisheth that albeit it were not in his time used, as neither before baptisme to such like children, so neither after the baptisme, neither of such children, nor of others of visible beleevers, which ought in Infancy to bee baptized: yet now catechizing of chil∣dren might bee in more use. Assuredly Zwinglius was strong for this, that baptisme of Infants was no practise taken up after the Apostles, but by the Apostles: no bare old custome taken upon humane grounds: but his judgement was directly crosse to the Proposition, hee is brought as a witnesse to, that Christ did not institute Infants baptisme, &c. witnesse his many arguments from Scripture for it, and his judicious answers to the evasions of the adversaries, to that truth. And as much may bee said of Oecolampadius his companion, who is cited to confirme the 6th. Proposition; whereas in the first and second booke of the Epistles of Zwinglius and Oecolampadius they give grounds from Scripture to the contrary. See l. 1. Epist. Zwingl. ad dilectos fratres. I will now tell you from what grounds of Scripture I judge Infants to bee baptized, &c. and l. 2. in his Epist. Bercktold and Francis, Preachers at Berne, hee saith peremptorily; contra Scripturas ergo fecissent Apostoli si Infantibus negavissent baptismum, the Apostles therefore had done contrary to Scriptures, if they had denied bap∣tisme to Infants. See more of Oecolampadius his mind too herein in his Epist. to Zwinglius, and in that to the Preachers at Berne: here therefore are two more witnesses abused in this Treatise.

CHAP. VI.

HEre the Authors forget and mistake their owne wit∣nesses names, they are in such a hurry they bring in proofes that the Teachers according to the ancient Fathers right did so, and so making the Fathers, and those Teachers distinct, as persons of whom the testimony is brought, and as witnesses by whom, and yet in the proofes, the ancient Fathers themselves are the witnesses of what was done by those Teachers after them, as Hilary, Tertullian, Arnobius, Ambrose, &c. these might say what was in their time, but cannot say what

Teachers after them will doe or practise, unlesse the Authors can by a spell play the Witch of Endors trick to fetch up old Samuel in his likenesse to speake after he was dead.

SECT. I.

BUt let us heare what any of them say, if wee have not heard it before; As for Hilaries testimony of his owne baptisme, it's not materiall, wee mentioned him among the Authors instan∣ces of Adult persons baptized, Proposition 3. as for his interpre∣tation of baptizing in, or upon the name, that is, upon confession of the beginners, it's as easily rejected, as urged, unlesse his grounds were shewed or were Scripture proofe.

SECT. II.

THe next witnesse is Ambrose de spiritu Sancto. l. 2. in our Sa∣crament there are three questions propounded and three con∣fessions made, without which three questions no man can bee washed, if Mr. B's answer bee good to that part of Tertullian in the beginning of his booke de baptismo, mentioning, that a man without cost, or pompe, is let down into the water: Observe saith Mr. B. that hee speakes of a man, not of an Infant, so I might as well say here, hee speakes of a mans baptisme, not of an Infants, which then also was in use, but that I feare some body would sit upon my skirts presently, and aske mee whether an Infant be not sub genere isto subalterno hominis, whether an Infant bee not homo, and I ever thought before Mr. B. helped me with that distinction, that when the Scripture saith it's appointed to all men once to die, &c. Heb. 9. that Infants also were there counted men to die as well as others, not to mention other places of Scripture, or au∣thors for the use of the word that way; and I wonder Mr. B. when hee supposeth Rom. 5. 18. makes for his fancy of generall re∣demption of children, whether of Pagans or Christians, then In∣fants are men, on whom the free gift commeth, and yet here homo demissus in aquam in Tertullian must bee onely a growne man, not Infants, as if Infants now were not homo: but this answer must bee better grounded, or else I shall keepe my opinion, that as an Infant is homo; so Tertullians testimony there speaking indefinite∣ly of any baptized person, man or woman, Infants, youths, or ri∣per persons, &c. hee doth beare implicite testimony in that very place to Paedobaptisme, as in his time. But to returne to Ambrose,

I say that in Ambrose his time such confessions, and questions were, and Infants were baptized too, that corruption being then in use of adding to Infants baptisme interrogations to them that brought them to baptisme, which answered in their names, and made con∣fession in their stead. For others were baptized in Ambrose his time and before, then such as could personally answer or make confession, yea, and that it was Ambrose his judgement, that it was the mind of God that others should bee baptized, then could make such confessions, witnesse that among other places of Ambrose, which hee hath in his 5th. Tom. in his Homilies upon Luke.

Jordan was turned back, signifying the future mysteries of sal∣vation in baptisme, by which little ones in their Infancy are cleansed from the wickednesse of their natures: (namely in a Sacramentall way.)

SECT. III.

BUt it will bee here objected, that that custome of susceptors in Infants baptisme, and the interrogations, and questions that were put to them, or others in their stead, doth shew, that of old none but growne persons were baptized upon confession of faith, for that when Infants are baptized they must also make confession by others. I answer, if the very use of susceptors in baptisme were an argument of force against Infants baptisme of old, it might as well bee of force against the baptisme of adult persons too upon the same ground, as then in use; since they also had of old their susceptors: when Pagans desired to be baptized, they had those which instructed them before hand, and when they were baptized they presented them to baptisme, and undertooke for them also. Stories are plentifull in instances, that after that cor∣rupt custome of susceptors in baptisme came up, adult persons had susceptors as well as Infants. Epidophorus at Carthage of the Church of Fausty had the Deacon of the Church to bee his susceptor. Magdeb. hist. cent. 5. c. 6. Justinian the Emperour was surety for Gethes King of the Herulians, when baptized, and divers others the Centurists mention as do other Historian; nor doth it follow because such confessions, and answers were made by such as brought Infants to bee baptized, that therefore it argues onely adults used to bee of old baptized, rather it argues that of old it was the doctrine of the Church, that Infants were baptized prin∣cipally in others right, which offered them to baptisme, namely,

their godly parents, or such as tooke them as their owne adopted children, to bring them up in Gods feare. Hence even after the corrupt and abusive practise of susceptors came up; Stories are not wanting to tell us of Christian parents which were susceptors to their owne children: witnesse the Story mentioned by Fabian in his 5th. book c. 114. Andovera wife to Chilpericus having a little daughter born in her husbands absence did by the perswasions of the Bishop Fredegrand become witnesse to it her self at its baptisme. The Centurists mention the same Story out of Ganguinus. Hence also Austin in his 14th. Sermon upon the words of the Apostle, speaking of Infants Baptisme saith, if baptisme profit the bapti∣zed, I demand whom it benefiteth, the beleeving or the unbe∣leeving? but God forbid I should say that Infants are not belee∣ving, I have but now disputed it before. Hee beleeveth in ano∣ther which sinneth in another, scil. in the parents which alone con∣vey sinne to the Infant: It beleeveth then and it's baptisme is valid, and it's joyned to the faithfull formerly baptized. This the au∣thoritie of the Church our mother holdeth: This doth the sure Canon (or rule) of truth obtaine.

Thus far forth then it was looked at as a doctrine not onely which the Church had in it, but which the Scripture, the rule of truth contained in it: that in the businesse of Baptisme at least the faith of such as conveyed sinne to the child, even of the pa∣rents, was in stead of its owne personall faith, so farre as to make its baptisme valid and beneficiall to it.

SECT. IIII.

THe next witnesse is Arnobius upon the Psalmes, which Perkins putteth at the yeere 290. but because Perkins in Praepar. ad Demon. Probl. and Rivet in his Crit. sac. makes it a spacious booke as mentioning on Psal. 119. the Pelagian heresie which came up above sixscore yeeres after Arnobius his time, I shall not attempt to fight against a shadow. Albeit the place being of the way of Adults Baptisme concludeth nothing against what wee main∣taine.

Ludovicus Vives is the next who in his notes upon Austin de Ci∣vitate Dei l. 1. (cap. 26. saith the Treatise, but it's rather) cap. 27 as Hen. Den. more truely quoteth it, affirmeth that in times past

no man was brought to bee baptized but those that were come to their full growth,

who having learned what it concerned de∣sired

the same: But whether hee that lived but in Henry the eighths dayes, or Austin whom hee expounds which lived above twelve hundred yeares agoe, had better reason to know what was done of old, let any sober minde judge.

To the same purpose Walefrid Strabo who lived about the yeare 800. seemeth to speake, but Origen who was in the yeare 201. ac∣cording to Osiander, or 230. according to Perkins and Ʋsher, hee mentions Paedobaptisme as from the Apostles, as well as Austin doth. And so doth the Milevitan councell in the yeare 402. (ac∣cording to Wolfius) say as much, that the Catholique Church hath alwayes understood Infants to bee defiled with Adams sinne, and according to the rule of faith to bee on that ground (name∣ly amongst others, for it's knowne sundry other gounds were of old urged for Paedobaptisme, as that Matth. 19. 13, 14, 15. Suffer, &c. For of such, &c. urged in Tertullians time 200. yeares before, as appeares by his assaying to take off that ground in his booke De Baptismo before mentioned) baptized. See the 1. Tome of Councells.

SECT. V.

THe next witnesse is Bucer in his Annotat. upon the 4th. of John, set out Anno 28.

So much as in the Apostolicall writings are written of baptisme, is apparent that baptisme was administred to none by the Apostles, but to those of whom concerning their regeneration they made no doubt, &c.

I have looked that very booke (and a booke distinct from his greater booke on the Evangelists) and there is no such words; It's a meere forgery. Bucer is againe cited Proposion 6th. saying that Christ hath no where plainly commanded that children should bee baptized. If the speech had been just thus, yet it's evident his Intent was not that children ought not to bee baptized by vertue of Gods command, which is the direct conclusion subscribed to in the explication of it at Wittenberg by him and others, as be∣fore: but that the command was not in so many words expressed, but by necessary consequence to bee concluded. His booke inti∣tuled The groundworke and cause, I have not, though like testi∣monies have been answered before.

SECT. VI.

THe next is Ruffinus in his exposition upon the Symbol, that those at Rome and Aquila that were to bee baptized must

first acknowledge and confesse the 12. Articles of the Creed. Here Ruffinus is as one against Paedobaptisme. By others when Origens authoritie is urged upon Rom. 5. for Paedobaptisme, then it is spu∣rious and the words of Ruffinus. Now how should one behave himselfe amidst this contradiction of the antipartie? Well, wee shall ward off both Blowes as they come God willing. As for this testimony, as much is in the Treatise and the same place brought out of Austin in his 8th. Booke of Confessions, that albeit the Au∣thors conceale the name of the place where Victorinus was to have made confession of the faith, as the custome was; namely, at Rome. Yea but how then saith Austin lib. 4 cont. Donat. cap. 13. 14. that it was ever the use of the Churches, and that delivered from the Apostles to baptize Infants? Verily both are subordinates and not contraries. According to the subjects mentioned, if spea∣king of Adults, then the former is true; if of Infants, then the latter is as true. Albeit it's as true after the custome then in use in Ruffinus his time that Infants did make confession by their sure∣ties; as according to God they did and doe now confesse their faith (so farre as concerneth their baptisme) in their parents: even as every man (Deut. 16. 17.) giving as hee was able, their males which personally there appeared came not before the Lord empty, not any of them but gave, scil. in their parents offering for them.

CHAP. VII. SECT. I.

HIs proofes out of Popish writers, as Eckius mentioned in proofe of that and of the 7th. Proposition; Rossensis, Cocletus, Ennusius and Staphylus to which some adde Bellarmine, I doe not much regard, because they can play Legerdemaine, fast and loose with a trick that they have. If they dispute against Calvinists about the sufficiency of Scripture, or validitie of humane traditions, then Paedobaptisme is a tradition of the Church: If against Anabaptists, then Eckius in his En∣chiridion here cited▪ hath his foure Scripture arguments to prove it to bee of Scripturall authoritie and foundation. For Bellar∣mine, hee hath in his book of Baptisme cap. 8. 3 arguments from Scripture for it. And although, saith hee, wee doe not find it commanded expresly that wee should baptize Infants. Tamen id

colligitur satis aperte ex scripturis ut supra ostendimus — Yet it is to bee gathered plainly enough from Scriptures (saith Bellarmine) as wee have before shewed. Wherefore of such if I may say as hee bluntly once spake to his companion: If they can with the same breath blow hot and cold, let them even eate porridge with the devill if they will, I like not their falshood.

SECT. II.

OF Lutherans, Pomeranus is quoted whose booke of children un∣borne I cannot meet with, and so cannot trace my Authors here: And in such a case as they say, Travailers and Souldiers may lie by authoritie when none can contradict them. But yet what sayes Dr. Pomeranus? that for the space of 1200. yeares men erred concerning children, the which wee cannot (yet willingly would) baptize; what his intent is by these words of his cannot well bee gathered. If hee intend it of all sorts of children, that it is an errour to baptize all without regard to their parents, Church or covenant estate: yet was it an old errour: albeit not so old, so farre as I can finde. But if it should bee taken in reference to children visibly in the covenant, I wonder if hee should speake any such thing in that sense having so solemnely subscribed to the contrary in that famous meeting at Wittenberg formerly men∣tioned.

SECT. III.

CAlvin that grand opposer and stigmatizer of Anabaptists is quoted to confirme Proposition 6. and 8th. lib. 4. Instit. cap. 16.

Hee confesseth that it is no where expresly mentioned by the Evangelists, that any ones child was by the Apostles hands baptized.

Now Calvin having said Sect. 8. that there is none which seeth not that Paedobaptisme is not of humane devising which is established by such Scripture approbation, brings it in by way of objection, that it will bee said, it's no where expresly mentioned where the Apostles baptized children, which giving albeit not granting hee saith,

Bee it so, &c. yet because neither were they excluded as oft as mention is made of baptized families, who unlesse hee bee mad will thence reason that they were not baptized? they may as well reason on that ground that women were forbid to receive the Supper, when notwithstanding in the Apostles time they were thereunto admitted.

Yet our Authors are so madde to bring this very place to prove their 6th. Proposit.

that the Apostles never baptized any Infants. And upon Matthew, Calvin is said to say, Christ hath no where commanded to baptize Infants. But on what place in Matthew, Calvin saith so is not said; but this I can say that in the most likely places where that Argument of baptisme is handled, Calvin no where speaketh in these words here expressed as farre as I can finde.

Dathenus in his Colloquie is the next witnesse, confessing; It's no where plainely in such words written that Christian children shall in the New Testament bee baptized — and yet wee have no expresse commandement of it, scil. as before in so many words; You shall baptize children: and that there is no evident — or ex∣presse example (scil. in so many words recorded that the Apostles baptized (such or such) children) and what then? therefore Christ never instituted, the Apostles never practised Paedobaptism, according to the 6th. Proposition? Non sequitur. Here then are three more witnesses abused.

CHAP. VIII. SECT. I.

ORigen calleth childrens baptisme a ceremony and tradi∣tion of the Church, Hom. 8. in Levit. and in Rom. 6. lib. 5. What, doth Origen say so in both places? that is false. In the former hee saith baptisme is given to In∣fants according to the first observation of the Church. But if any boggle at that, in the other place quoted hee telleth you the groundworke of that observation of the Church: For this also the Church hath received a tradition from the Apostles to give baptisme even to Infants. If it were an Apostolicall tradition, then not a bare Church tradition: if the Church received it from the Apostles, then was not the Church the Author of it, but the Apostles rather. Yea but others perceiving the force of the Testi∣mony of so early an author in the matter of the practise of Paedo∣baptisme, casheere it as a spurious testimony of some other rather then of Origen. Some stumble at the word Tradition, when yet it's no other then what Basil speaking (as before quoted) of the forme of Baptisme calleth it a tradition; and in his 73. Epistle speaking of the Spirit the comforter as placed in equality with the Father and Sonne to bee a thing which they had received as deli∣vered to them. So Justin Martyr another author formerly cited

maketh the forme of that manner of worship mentioned in his second Apology to bee that which they had received from the Apostles. So Gregory Nazianzen another quoted Author here: in his first oration against Julian the Apostate, hee inveigheth against that abusive imitation of the Church traditions (the manner of administration of the ordinances) for Pagan uses. Clemens Alex∣andrinus a speciall Author quoted by Mr. B. yet hee counteth it a metamorphosing of a Christian to kick against the tradition of the Church, and warpe to opinions of humane heresies, lib. 7. Stromaton. Hee meanes not bare Popish superstitious Church cu∣stomes, but such as are opposite to meere humane conceits and devices, yet calleth them Church traditions. Yea but those cor∣rupt exploded Canons are yet called the Apostles Canons. They are so by Papists, not so by Protestants. Such, all those orthodox Divines may explode them; yet maintaine this as an Apostolicall tradition, which is genuine and divine — Yea but it may bee said that Erasmus noteth in his Praecognita unto the Booke of Le∣viticus that hee which readeth this worke (scil. the Homilies up∣on Levit.) and the Enarration upon the Epistle to the Romans, hee is uncertaine whether hee reade Origen or Ruffinus: And the peroration of the Translator annexed to the commentary of the Romans saith that hee added something defective (whereof yet hee had the fundamentalls from the Author) and abbreviated other things too largely expressed in the Commentaries upon the Ro∣mans, Leviticus, Genesis, Exodus, Joshua and Judges. Suppose these additions of things defective by Ruffinus; yet hee saith hee had the foundations of what hee added from Origen. So that Origen gave such foundations of Paedobaptisme, if Ruffinus added that as gave occasion to it; but why is not this particular mentioned as Origens rather then Ruffinus his notion? Because Origen was somewhat Pelagianisticall, and this place touching baptizing In∣fants in respect of originall sinne was too crosse to Pelagianisme. This is new to mee that Origen held that errour, albeit hee were not free of others: but I have read more said of Ruffinus that way, scil. that hee was the forerunner of Pelagius. If on that ground it was not Origens, much lesse was it Ruffinus his owne dictate. And Erasmus denieth not but all there mentioned must bee fathered upon either Origen or Ruffinus. But to put an end to this dispute, the Homilies on Luke are not questioned to bee Origens; neither doth Erasmus nor the Translator in the peroration mentioned

acknowledge either additions or detractions in setting forth of those Homilies on Luke. Yet there Origen affirmeth to the sub∣stantiall•• mentioned in that place of the Romans; for in his 2. Tom. Hom. lib. 14. on Luke hee saith; parvuli baptizantur, &c. and little children are baptized unto remission of sins; of what sins, or when did they sinne, or how can there bee any occasion of washing in little children, unlesse in that sense of which wee spake a little before? None is cleane from blemish, no though but a day old in the earth, and because the defilement of our Na∣tivitie is put away by baptisme; therefore even little children are baptized: Nor doe I finde in our Criticks, or the Authors quo∣ted by them, that these Homilies of Origens on the Romans are doubted of, to bee genuine: Albeit both Perkins and Rivet doe reject those on Leviticus, as spurious, and his Commentaries on the Romans as not faithfully translated by Ruffinus.

The next witnesse is called upon to come in, but miscalled and therefore may chuse whether hee will answer to his name. It is one Pope George the fourth who should call it a Tradition of the Fathers; and to shew it is no scape of the Printer hee is called out in the Roman Language, Georgius quartus Bonifacio; let children bee baptized according to the Tradition of the Fathers. Of Pope Gregory I have oft heard and read, but cannot light of one Pope George. But it's supposed the Authors meant Pope Gregory the fourth; albeit the Translators mistooke their Authors. This Pope flourished Ann. 842. and it's not much what hee had called it, in those corrupt times. Wee have heard of others which gave better Language that were his Seniors; and if you would beleeve but the Testimony of Gregory the first, who had more honesty in him then all the rest of that name, but wee have witnesses enough besides, and shall forbeare him.

SECT. II.

THe next Author called in is Cyprian, which is rather challen∣ged as an Author of Paedobaptisme, Anno 248. Epist. lib. 3. Ep. 8. for in the Margin it's said, Cyprian ordained children should be baptized: and yet also it is said in the Margin over against the men∣tion of the Carthaginian Councell, Baptisme Instituted; & again above: Baptisme ordained by Pope Innocentius, scil. the first, and yet over against Pope Innocent the third Baptisme ordained in stead of Circumcision, and yet over against the mention of the

second Bracarensian Councell it is said Anno 610. was childrens Baptisme ordained as a necessary thing; so that I am at a stand. I thought wee should have heard who instituted or ordained bap∣tisme of Infants since it is cast as a mystery of the man of sinne in the preface, and made a humane ordinance Proposit. 7. And it hath so many first fathers, and so many are challenged for beget∣ting this pretended Bastard, that with all the skill I have, I know not at whose doore to lay it. If that Cyprian were the father of it, then not Innocentius the first, or the Carthaginian or Milevitane Councell gathered in his time above 150. yeeres after; If the fifth or sixth Carthage Councell, then not the second Bracarensian Councell above 200. yeeres after that: If either of these, then not Innocent the third 600. yeares after the Bracharensian Councell. The like might bee said of the Constitutions of Justinian and Leo the Emperour, which hee mentions. But if the Treatise intend that these all or any of them did reestablish Paedobaptisme; al∣beit they were not the Authors of it: wee are agreed. But this proveth not that what they doe ratifie, or because any of them doe anathematize such as deny it as the Milevitane Councell did, that therefore it is an humane ordinance. The Milevitane Councell in the Anathema they pronounce, they mention that as another ground: Of such as deny that Infants derive any origi∣nall guilt of sinne which needeth expiation by baptisme, as well as denying that Infants baptisme is for remission of sinnes: Now none will say, originall guilt in Infants is a meere humane in∣vention and device without warrant from Scripture, because that Councell anathematizeth such as deny it. Or that because that Justinian ordaines that those that are come to their full growth should bee taught before they were baptized, as well as hee doth order Paedobaptisme to bee; that therefore the former is an hu∣mane ordinance. Surely if that such a ratification bee a formalis ratio to make the former an humane ordinance, it is as well such in the latter. Wee speake not now in reference to Scripture grounds of the one or of the other, but of the validity of argu∣ing from decrees of Councells or Emperours or Popes. And this mindeth mee of such like Testimony of witnesses examined a lit∣tle before. Cassander hee must say, Paedobaptisme came in 300. yeeres after Christ. Luther, that it came in 1000. yeeres before him, scil. above five hundred yeeres after Christ. Pomeranus 1200. yeeres before him (who was contemporary with Luther) and so

more then 300. yeers after Christ; and yet Cyprian at Ann•• 248. ordained it. Witnesse Austin, Epist. 28. to Hierome. Justus Me∣nius too I thinke commeth in for the same purpose, albeit he saith nothing in the Booke, (the same Justus Menius which with the rest subscribed to Paedobaptisme, as commanded of God, at the Wittenberg Concord before mentioned.) But where shall wee fa∣sten but conclude that in as much as the witnesses disagree, their Testimonies are not valid, but the one weakneth the other, since if one speake nothing but the truth, the other doth not? If the Authors intent bee that some of these Authors or Councells pro∣pounded some unwarrantable motives to ratifie Paedobaptisme: I goe not about to cleare any of the sonnes of men from corrup∣tion in what they attempt, nor in the motives which stirre them up oft times to things in themselves warrantable. But this will not reach their maine ayme, s••il. to prove that because of some corruptions in the manner and way or motives of ratifying this ordinance of God, it should bee no ordinance of God. Non sequi∣tur. But because Cyprians Epistle to Fidus where the 66. African Bishops did in a solemne Councell agree to the ratifying of Paedo∣baptisme; it is many wayes undermined thereby to invalidate our proofes from antiquitie for Paedobaptisme: I shall indeavour to cleare it from such aspersions. First, Mr. B. attempts to make the judgement of the Councell invalid because of the weaknesse of their grounds, and the Errors annexed. Weake grounds. 1 That Luke 19. 10. as if lost if not baptized, which was also an errour. 2 That God is a like father to all — and so all to bee baptized as well as any, which was an errour too. 3 That they had onely sinned in others. Errours also then held; that the holy Ghost was received by baptisme, that Infants were to have the Lords Supper in Epist. de Lapsis, they held signing with the Crosse, Un∣ction, that Originall sinne was done away by it; that onely bap∣tized persons escaped Damnation, &c. By all which hee would have it evident that no heed is to bee given to Cyprians time when there were such grosse errors about baptisme. To which I Answer, if that the times were so grosse and darke, then no wonder they might hold forth such weake arguments for the truths they held. If Mr. B. had well traced antiquitie, and should in his reading still keepe this principle by him, to reject all hee reades of as unsound in Authors or councells because of weake grounds they give; hee would soone reject the most of what many approved Authors

for soundnesse amongst the antients doe hold forth, and what ma∣ny councells have ratified. Hee that would weigh their wild ex∣positions of Scripture, and Allegories and Judaizing notions which oft times they bring, would as well question from thence either baptisme or the Lords Supper to bee any ordinances now at all to us, as the Sectaries doe. Let us blesse God for clearer times, but not despise any truth from any for the weaknesse of those earthen vessels which hold it out to us. You would thinke him too censorious it may bee which comming to heare some Coblers or Taylours in England to preach, who having good Texts and being happily honest in the maine, yet make very sim∣ple worke of it both in their wild expositions of Scriptures, and weak, yea erroneous grounds which they make use of to confirme the Text or doctrine truely gathered from it. As for their errours it doth not appeare from all Mr. B's quotations that all the 66. Bishops held them all, if Cyprian himselfe did. But what if Ter∣tullian adde prayer for the dead to the baptisme of adult persons, as in the place quoted De Corona Militis before appeared, yea un∣ction, crossing, &c. (as Crispin in his booke of the estate of the Church fathereth these upon him) yet will it follow that ergo baptizing of adult persons upon confession is no ordinance of God? no you will say because the Scripture warrants it; so say wee it warrants paedobaptisme. But wee are now without re∣ference to Scripture upon a Topick place of argument drawne from humane testimony. If the errours of the witnesse to the one makes his testimony invalid, then doe the errours of the other. Yea even those errours which Cyprian held about doing away sin by baptisme, unction and crossing in it, damnation being lost without it: the receiving of the spirit by baptisme, &c. they held them in the point of baptisme indefinitely, whether of growne persons or others: so that Baptisme of adult persons for those errours may bee denied as held out in Cyprians time in the maine, or any ordinance as well as Paedobaptisme. And Cyprians testimo∣ny is vaine in the one as well as the other, as also his Mr. Tertulli∣ans was. Yet Mr. B. urgeth in his preface Cypr. De Baptis. Haeret. for his purpose. If hee held that all sorts should bee baptized, so have our fathers held that all sorts should come to the Lords Sup∣per, when yet onely visible Saints should. Yet the Lords Supper is an ordinance to adult persons visibly in Covenant with God and his people, and not scandalous, and so is baptisme of Infants

of Parents in visible covenant with God, &c. notwithstanding the errour superadded, or that other of Infants comming to the Lords Table, &c. As men may superadde to Christ the foundati∣on, wood, hay and stubble of their owne, which will all bee con∣sumed, yet the foundation remaine pretious and supporting, 1 Cor. 3. So men may and have superadded to the ordinance of baptisme both of adult and Infants, and so to that of the Lords Supper and other ordinances much Stubble of their owne vaine spirits and mens inventions, yet that hinders not but that such things were in use in their Times, and rightly, in respect of the maine held out by them; and as sitting in Moses chaire wee may and ought to heare them, notwithstanding their owne errours an∣nexed.

But Mr. Blackwood hath another evasion, as if this Epistle of Cyprianus to Fidus bee upon some grounds to bee suspected to bee supposititious. As 1. In that Pamelius mentions not of what place Fidus was. Answ. No more doth hee mention there of what place Victor or Therapius was; yet Therapius of the three being a chiefe man and called to the Carthage Councell is mentioned by his place De Bulla. Hee was reckoned with men therefore in that Epistle whose place is described, and that sufficeth. He was known to them, albeit not to us. 2. In that there is such weaknesse in the arguments not likely to come from 66. Bishops. Answ. What wonder if their grounds were so weake (if so they bee) since Mr. Blackwood hath before told us what an evill time Cyprians was? and if they were so full of errours as hee said before about baptisme, is it wonder that they are so weake in their principles about it? I could answer this weake reason otherwise, but since Mr. B. giveth us that answer, let him take that; and I cannot but minde him of that Councell at Carthage a little after which assembled to esta∣blish rebaptizing of persons led aside into heresies, yet againe re∣turning to the orthodox Churches; but upon what weake gounds let even Mr. B. consider and judge, yet none therefore questions whether ever there were such a councell. 3 Mr. B. saith there is no mention made at what place this Synod met. Ans. As if sto∣ries mentioned no Synods and those genuine, but such as the ve∣ry place where the councell met is also mentioned, I shall there∣fore give amongst others one instance, out of Osiander in his Exit. hist. eccles. centur. 4. li. 3. c. 13. where hee citeth out of Hillary an orientall orthodox Synode, of Bishops gathered against that Ser∣miensian

and more then Semi-arrian Synod, whose Canons are there recorded of which they did agree; but as for the place or Citie where that Synod was held, that is not to be found. 4 Saith Mr. B. it appeares that it was fained because so contrary to the minde of Tertullian, which was in such request with Cyprian. Ans. If it were Tertullians mind which Mr. B. supposeth, yet Jerom who could speake as much as Mr. Blackwood mentioneth, and doth (as I remember in his booke of Ecclesiasticall writers) affirme from a very aged mans mouth living in his time who had beene in his younger dayes Cyprians Scribe how deare Tertullians workes were to him, yet Jerome did not thinke that therefore this Epistle was none of Cyprians: For hee himselfe (who yet in that booke menti∣oned leaveth out bookes then accounted spurious of severall au∣thors) quoteth this very Epistle in his 20. Tom. lib. 3. Dialog. con∣tra, Pelag. ad finem. And lest (saith hee) thou shouldst thinke mee in an hereticall sense to understand this (speaking before of the use of Paedobaptisme) that blessed Martyr Cyprian whom thou boastest thy selfe to imitate in expounding Scriptures, in the Epi∣stle hee wrote to the Bishop Fidus (Jerom calls Fidus a Bishop, he treatise stileth him but a Priest) concerning baptisme of Infants; hee maketh mention of this, &c. Paedobaptisme. 5 Saith Mr. B. it appeareth from Baronius that Cyprian was against Paedobap∣tisme, who saith if Cyprian had been so that that had been an apostolicall Tradition (speaking saith Mr. B. of Infants bap∣tisme) and not contrary to holy Scriptures by sound and sin∣cere opinion, without doubt hee had rested.

Ans. I shall let Mr. B. please himselfe a little in this fancy: suppose then Cardinall Baronius saith so, yet Mr. B. hath a∣mongst other exceptions here charged against Cyprian: that in Cyprians time Infants did partake of the Lords Supper, and will any follow that? Cyprian in his Epistle de lapsis, speaking of the wickednesse of those w^ch sacrificed at the heathen Altars, he aggra∣vates their sinne that their Infants they carried in their armes or led in their hands, lost that which they had gotten in the begin∣ning of their birth: when the day of judgement comes they will say wee have done nothing: neither did we leaving the meate and the cup of the Lord, hasten willingly to profane defilements, &c. Thus farre Mr. B. out of Cyprian. Then it seemes in Cyprians time Infants were partakers of the Lords Supper as well as of baptism, that birth wherein they had first got that which at the heathen

Altars they lost, scil. that good they got by it, which Sacramen∣tally was their birth, that is, new birth, for they rather added to what they got in their naturall birth, scil. sinne, then lost at these sacrifices. If in this Epistle Infants baptisme bee thus intimated, why saith Mr. B. a little before (as a ground of his challenge of his Epistle to Fidus) that he findes it mentioned but once; he found what was in this Epistle de Lapsis too, why else mentioneth hee the same? and if both were the errours of Cyprian, and the rest then Cyprians judgement was for it surely albeit it is supposed hee erred in it; and why then is Baronius brought in to prove it was not Cyprians judgement, when Mr. B. hath assayed to prove it that it was his errour? was that the errour of Cyprians judge∣ment the which he never held? but yet let us heare what Baronius can say to it. Now I confesse Baronius hath this passage verbatim which Mr. B. quoteth; onely he hath not Mr. B's Parenthesis (that it was spoken of Infants Baptisme) the Page is a little mistaken, it is not Page 398. but Page 415. but Mr. B. is quite out in this ap∣plication of that passage, which is mentioned in reference onely to the controversie about the baptisme of heretiques which hee wresteth grossely as if intended of the matter of baptisme of In∣fants; and if Mr. B. had but read Baronius a few lines before, hee would never thus have in print falsified an authors Testimony. Baronius discoursing about Traditions brings in Pope Stephen using that weapon in the case of baptisme of heretiques against Cyprian, who erred therein, scil. that it being by tradition received that the Baptisme of heretiques might in case bee valid, nothing should bee acted contrary to that tradition; as it was by Cyprian and the other Bishops with him (nihil innovetur nisi quod traditum est) aga∣tur, scil. (saith Baronius quoting Stephens words) and after sub∣joyneth. If Cyprian had been sure (that) scil. that doctrine menti∣oned about the validitie of Heretiques baptisme) had been an A∣postolicall tradition (as Stephen urgeth it to bee) and not con∣trary to holy Scriptures, according to sound and sincere opini∣on, without doubt (saith Baronius) hee had rested in it, and for this end hee quoteth Cyprians 74. Epistle ad Pompeium contra Epist. Steph. as opening the case intended, where Cyprian himselfe wri∣teth that fragment of Stephens Epistle nihil innovetur, &c. as urged against him in the businesse of the baptisme of Heretiques, and Eu∣seb. lib. 7. eccles. cap. 2. and 3. speakes of the case betwixt Stephen and Cyprian out of Letters of Dionysius Alexandrinus about it; citing

it as the great question then moved, scil. whether such as returned from any heresie should bee purged by baptisme. In that the cu∣stome was to receive such onely by prayer and imposition of hands. And addes cap. 3. that Cyprian hee held that such as retur∣ned from errour were no other way to bee purged then by bap∣tisme: But Stephen mentioned that nothing in this case should be innovated besides that old tradition, scil. of receiving such againe onely by prayer and imposition of hands, where Mr. B. compa∣ring the place in Baronius with this in Eusebius, may fully satisfie himselfe in his printed errours. But to come yet closer, verily Stephen Bishop of Rome that was so inraged against Cyprian, for that he brought in that innovation of rebaptizing persons that were baptized by heretiques: that hee writ hee would have no Church communion with such as did rebaptise all sorts of here∣tiques (as you may perceive by the Epistle of Dionysius to Xistus Ste∣phens successour, Euseb. l. 7. c. 3, 4, 5.) hee would have expressed as much violence against Cyprian and his Bishops with him for that which they determined in the case of Paedobaptisme if that had beene accounted an innovation in those times, or contrary to Apo∣stolicall tradition as hee thought the other was: or that as the treatise would assay to prove from Ruffinus upon the Symboll, that the custome at Rome was to baptize such as made confession of the articles of the Symbol; and so not Infants; no assuredly it was otherwise in Rome, then they baptized Infants as well as others, else Cyprian had heard of it to purpose from this Roman bishop, and besides the story of Lucius and Elcutherius long be∣fore Stephens time sheweth, what was the practise at Rome: surely how ever some snapper at Origens Testimony (who was about 20. yeeres before this) for saying Infants baptisme was delivered to the Church from the Apostles, yet if it had beene thought other∣wise in Cyprians time, within a while after; other Bishops would have withdrawne the right hand of fellowship for innovating contrary or besides Apostolicall Tradition.

But to returne to Mr. B. if hee scruple Cyprians Epistle to Fidus, hee may I thinke satisfie himselfe if hee consider Jeroms testimony, for it in the forequoted place. Also that testimony for it from the fifth Councell of Carthage, viz. Chap. 6. citeth this Epistle of Cyprian ad Fidum; so doth Austin often not onely in his 28th. Epistle to Jerome, but Sermon the 14. upon the words of the A∣postle, so in his first booke de pecc. merit. & remiss. and in his third

booke also c. 5. hee citeth that Epistle against Pelagius; verily if there had been any such question imagined in those dayes of the spuriousnesse of that Epistle, Pelagius and his followers would soon have blunted that weapon as oft as sharpned against them. But some will say here is just the proverb fulfilled, Aske my fellow whe∣ther I am a theefe. Austin was as rotten and corrupt in his prin∣ciples about Paedobaptisme as was Cyprian. Cyprian looked at them as incurring eternall judgement that were not baptized, so did hee oft urging Iohn 3. 5. 6. 53. hee thought all were to bee baptized whether of beleevers or otherwise, so did Austin; hee thought Infants had faith and that because of originall sinne con∣veyed, therefore to bee baptized according to that testimony of Origens, Propter hoc, &c. For this (even because of originall sinne) they must be baptized, &c.

To this I answer as before, admit Austin held out that upon Cor∣rupt grounds, so did he hold the administration of Baptisme to adult persons upon grounds of necessitie thereof to salvation and purging away sin, yea & the Lords Supper too as so necessary to growne persons (John 6. 53.) also, yet none will make these or∣dinances therefore nullities or no ordinances; truth is no lesse truth, because a weake scholler taketh unsafe mediums to confirme or prove the same.

Yet I adde two things, 1. That the authors urged by Antipaedo∣baptists use like language and argument. Justine calleth it new birth, and saith wee bring them to the water and they are New∣borne as wee are, that is baptized, (and per hoc lavacrum remissionem peccatorum praeteritorum adipiscamur, fiamus filii scientiae) and that wee become the sonnes of knowledge and obtaine remission of sinnes past by baptisme, &c. Clemens Alexandrinus calls it a washing whereby wee wipe away our sinnes, grace whereby the punishments due to our sinnes are forgiven paedag. l. 1. Gregory Na∣zianzen calls it baptisme, because sinne is buried in the water: so he calls it the key of heaven, the casting away of the flesh, the loo∣sing of our bonds, the taking away of slavery, &c. in his 40. orat. de baptismo: So Basil, yea these authors use like grounds for baptisme. Justine useth that from the necessitie of it from John 3. 5. and this hee speaking of baptisme addes.

Rationem ejus rei hanc accepimus ab Apostolis: Quoniam prima nativitas, &c. Wee have received from the Apostles, this as a reason of this thing; because that our first nativity (scil. native corruption) commeth

upon us neither knowing nor willing it, from the fellowship of our parents and from their seed, &c.

Justine and those with him lived not in the Apostles times, yet he received this he saith from them that is delivered by them to others after them, and from those others to them. And what reason is that delivered thus as a ground of baptisme? even that native estate of children in their parents. What is this but in effect what the author of those ho∣milies on the Romans urgeth, speaking of Davids being conceived in sinne, &c.

Propter hoc & ecclesia traditionem ab apostolis accepit parvulis baptismum dare, &c.

and the same is used by Origen, hom. 14. on Luke by Cyprian Epistle ad Fidum, by Austin, Jerom, Ambrose. The same used by Gregory orat. de baptismo, thou (scil. art to hast to baptisme) as being in danger if not more but from hence: being borne onely in corruption or in sinne. The same urgeth the Milevitan Councell. Tertullian de baptismo urgeth John 3. 5. for baptisme also. So as Austin and others urge it upon the ground of danger to unbaptized persons; so doth Gregory Nazianzen, orat. 40. not to stay to Christs yeares because of danger of mortality. Yea better Infants bee sealed without sense thereof, then die with∣out the seale. And hee also as well as Austin makes the case of In∣fants dying without baptisme to bee punished with paena damni albeit not with paena sensus, ibid. Basil in his exhortation to hast to baptisme useth the same argument taken from the danger of death without baptisme; yet in them any naevi in this way are overloo∣ked, and their testimonies not therefore invalid. 2 I say that al∣beit that Austin and others for Paedobaptisme used some unsafe grounds, yet others they used were to us solid, as that from cir∣cumcision, l. 4. cont. Donat. c. 23, 24. and Epist. 108. Seleucianae l. 2. de peccat. merit. & remiss. c. 25. that of their parents faith, whence notwithstanding want of faith in themselves, it became a bene∣ficial ordinance, Serm. 14. upon verb. Apostoli: that of their interest in the Covenant which Christ came to fulfill in the flesh; hence that in the Epistle of the Carthaginian Councell (in Austins time) unto Innocent the first; Nos quia credimus parvulos in peccato nasci, &c. prae∣terea quia credimus filium dei pure ex illibata virgine natum ad implen∣das confirmandasque dei (promissiones) quae Infantes non excludant a sa∣lute, sed in faedere includunt, deo eos baptizandos esse contendimus. This that I have here recited may serve further to evince the guile of the treatise, quoting this Epistle Proposition 7. adding the words (much rather) thus [but much rather includeth Infants]

which is manifest injury; likewise it appeares by Tertullians answer, in way of glosse upon Matth. 19. 13, 14. Let them come to mee, &c. that that was of old held forth as a ground of Paedo∣baptisme. In a word, the command, mind, and institution of Christ and his Apostles was also held out of old by Austin and others as the ground thereof; which they meane when they say, the Church received it from the Apostles, Homil. in Rom. 5. & Austin contr. Donat. lib. 4. cap. 23, 24. Milevitan Councel, Can. 2. and Austin de Genesi ad literam, lib. 10. cap. 23. saith,

else it were not to bee credited or received if it were not an Apostolicall tradition.

So hee saith againe in his third Epistle ad Volus.

Therefore then they baptized persons because to them it was an Apostolicall Tradition. That is it which was without all doubt delivered by the Lord and by his Apostles;

As Austin further openeth himselfe, lib de pec. merit. & remiss. cap. 26. Charitie then I think should over looke other their more unsound tenents, or arguments, touching Paedobaptisme. But to return to Cyprians Epistle and adde one word more for Mr. B. and others satisfaction. Let him looke upon Erasmus his owne edition of Cyprian, Anno 1541. and hee shall see that Erasmus who was very Eagle eyed to espy spurious writings, or passages of the Ancients, and there excepteth against many things going under Cyprians name, yet no word of his against Cyprians 59. Epist. ad Fidum: No more doth Mr. Perkins in his Problemes, nor Rivet in his sa∣cred Critick; nor any critick which they quote, except against it. And here I might end these Annotations upon the 7th. Propo∣sition in this Treatise.

SECT. IIII.

BUt I meet with an old Threadbare objection to the same purpose, as if Paedobaptisme was first ordained by Higinus Bishop of Rome who lived about the yeare 1444. but all I can find in Authors is a certaine decree (ascribed to him at least) that In∣fants comming to Baptisme need not have but one god-father or god-mother, as they call them. And so much witnesseth Fascicu∣lus Temporum, and Nauclerus, vol. 1. Generat. 6. besides what I find quoted out of Gratian: but none say that he first ordai∣ned, that children should bee baptized. A like Decretall is ascri∣bed to Ʋrban Bishop of Rome, touching Childrens confirmation, about the yeere 227. Nauclerus, but not of their Baptisme, yet if

they made any such Canons it rather confirmes what wee say then weakneth our cause, scil. That Infants baptisme was in those times of use in Rome, and elsewhere: why else any orders about their Susceptors or their Confirmations?

CHAP. IX.

THe Treatise hath but one lie more to shake out of its Budget, and it's a merry one (if I may so call it) if the Reader spare a little more patience hee shall heare it. It is concerning Dyonisius in his Ecclesiasticâ rarchiâ, they would say Hierarchia, who they say confirmeth their 8th. Proposition thus.

It is ridiculous (or as the Author for expli∣cation sake addeth to bee esteemed as a jest) that the bath of regeneration should bee communicated to young children, which neither can understand nor can heare to learne the my∣steries of God.

I doe not here dispute whether this were Dyonisius the Areopagite under whose name the booke goeth, it is most like∣ly it was some other Grecian Dionysius, whether Dionysius Alexan∣drinus (Origens scholler, as some probably thinke) or some later Dionysius in the fourth or fifth Century, (as Dr. Ʋsher thinketh in his catalogue of Ecclesiastick writers) yet a Greek Author hee was and ancient: As for his words recited, they are most vilely wrested. And that which the Author of that Church Hierarchy in the 7th. Chapter ad finem brings in as an objection of another rea∣soning according to corrupt nature, the Authors of this Trea∣tise bring in as his mind; his words are these:

But that children not yet able to understand divine Mysteries should bee made per∣takers of divine generation, &c. it seemeth as thou sayest to the profane, to be worthy of blasphemous laughter, and so on:

hee doth not say it deserveth laughter, but seemeth so to doe: And that not to the godly, but to the profane. And this hee said not as his owne, but as anothers objection (as thou sayst.) And if the Authors ever had seene that booke and but read on; the Author of the Booke would presently have cleared himselfe from their er∣rour: For a little after hee addeth.

But yet of this matter, scil. Paedobaptisme just before propounded, wee also say that those our Divines and Holy Prefectors brought to us from divine and ancient Tradition. For they say that which indeed is,

that Infants according to the Law or Word of God are brought to the sacred habit (scil. to put on Christ in Baptisme) to bee purged from all errour and uncleane life, &c.

Who seeth not by this and by all the former falsehoods and lies which the Au∣thors of this Treatise have vented, that they are some Mountebank deceivers, and probably some Jesuited cheaters which would send this pack of knavery abroad to deceive the simple and unlearned Reader? And it may bee seeke to make the sad breach wider be∣twixt the professors in England by strengthning the hand of the weaker partie, the Anabaptists; so that what the authors or tran∣slators of a booke of some unknowne Author or Authors say of their Preface, scil. A mystery discovered, they meane of the man of sinne; but they have made it good rather to bee a mystery of the body of sinne, and a mystery of iniquitie discovered in them∣selves, and breaking out from them to open view, which before lay hid. And let the Treatise hereafter Ironically onely be called, The plaine and well grounded Treatise concerning Baptisme.

CHAP. X. SECT. I.

I Might now have breathed a little and rested my selfe, but that Mr. B. boldly challengeth any man to prove Infants Baptisme out of Justin Martyr, Ireneus, Origen, Clemens, Alexandrinus, or Tertullian, and after professeth hee regar∣deth no authoritie after the first 300. yeeres. And others also call for Greeke authors and Testimony out of the Greeke Churches for it. I am of small reading, I confesse, yet shall endeavour if it bee satisfaction onely that is herein sought, to present some few things this way unto the consideration of godly, sober and lear∣ned mindes, and then draw to a conclusion of the whole dis∣course; onely premising that in speaking from any of these Au∣thors; whether touching the jus or fact of Paedobaptisme; it sufficeth if either expressely or by consequence the same bee held forth by them: for this in Scripture course is allowed; when we are to prove any thing that ought to bee done or was done, either way of proofe, literall or collaterall and consequentiall sufficeth. To begin with Justin Martyr, hee in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, having spoken in way of vilifying circumcision in reference

to Jewish Idolizing of trusting in, and urging of it upon the Gen∣tiles, hee hath these words, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c.

and you indeed which are cir∣cumcised in the flesh, need our circumcision, (that is baptisme.) But we having this, have no need of that, namely as having ours (scil. Baptisme) in its stead, and addes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. wee in that wee were sinners (opposing the Gentiles to the Jewes) have by reason of the mercy of God been received, and so it is but equall to all, that all should equally receive it,

scil. Circum∣cision or Baptisme spoken of, hee maketh our Baptisme to bee in stead of their outward circumcision, and this to bee received by the Gentiles, in that sinners by reason of mercy, and this to be equall to all to bee received by them equally, meaning either all Gentiles simply: and that I think he intends not; or at least all, scil. all sorts of Gentiles, high, low, rich, poore, bond, free, male, female, babes, youths and elder ones.

Ireneus supposing the place quoted lib. 2. adversus haeres. Valenti∣niani similium cap. 39. Magister ergo existens Magistri babebat aetatem, &c.

Christ being a Master had the age of a Master, neither rejecting nor surpassing man, nor dissolving in himselfe his owne law of mankind, but sanctifying every age, by the like in himselfe, for hee came to save all, scil. (all sorts) by himselfe; all I say which are new borne unto God by him, Infants and little ones, lads and youths, and elder ones, &c.

Ireneus his judgement is, that Christ is a Master to all sorts of men, to those of all ages, Infants, youth, or elder persons, and by force of Relata then in his judge∣ment, Infants as well as adults are his Schollers or Disciples, that species of mankind, Infants as well as growne ones, albeit not all individuall Infants whatsoever, come under relation to Christ as a Master; therefore in his judgement, that sort of persons being actually Disciples (not meerely capable of it) the priviledge of Disciples, scil. Baptisme, is their due. 2. Hee judgeth that species of mankind Infants as well as others to bee actually partakers of sanctification by Christ of the new birth, &c. the thing sealed in Baptisme: therefore supposing his judgement, thus in the one; it is regular for him to judge, that that sort of mankind are to bee visibly Baptized as well as that other sort of growne ones.

Origen is next and wee have already proved supposing any ground of jealousie against that quoted place in the Romans, yet that of Luke, is of unquestionable credit touching both his judge∣ment

and practise of Paedobaptisme. Clemens Alexandrinus is next, where in his fourth booke of his Stromat. alluding to that of Job, returne, saith hee, not naked of possessions, that is common, but of sinne, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. for this is it which is said,

Unlesse being conver∣ted, ye become as little children; cleane indeed in body, but holy in soule, by abstayning from wicked workes; shewing (saith Clemens) that hee would have us such like, as hee hath begot out of the Matrix or wombe of the water, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c.

for generation meeting with or receiving of, or closing with generation, scil. in baptisme, will make us immor∣tall by progresse, viz. in good, &c. I deny not but Clemens allu∣ding to this place of little ones hath sometimes other applicati∣ons of it not crosse but subordinate to this, but I see not how it can otherwise bee understood, but that hee maketh a very child here the patterne as cleane in body and holy in soule (scil. Sacra∣mentally in Baptisme) according to that description in washing bodies with pure water, and heart sprinkling from an ill consci∣ence, scil. guilt of sinne, Heb. 10. 8. A periphrasis of Baptisme, un∣lesse any say, Infants are Innocents, cleane from sinne originall, and expounding whom hee meanes which here hee sets as the patterne to growne ones; hee saith, such like as are begotten in or by Baptisme (as Gensianus Hervetus on the place noteth) comparing Baptisme to the wombe out of which an Infant is borne; and so here new borne, and so the little one is the pattern to such as will bee saved: not as an Infant meerely, but as such a little one that is pure in body and soule, which here hee further explicateth, that is, such an one as is begotten againe in Baptisme. Hee speaketh not this of adult ones: they are the per∣sons that must bee such like; they cannot bee both the Patternes and the persons resembling them too, the little ones thus holy and thus new borne are the patterne which as soone as borne in a man are new borne Sacramentally in baptisme. Their generation and that their new ganeration doe as it were joyne and hang and hand together.

Concerning Tertullian if his judgement bee in some case for deferring Baptisme, yet his glosse upon that ground upon Matth. 19. (which according to him requires baptizing of the Persons so invited) is absurd, and his other expressions de Anima mentioned seeme crosse thereto, but for the practise of Paedobaptisme in his time beside•• what Origen about his time testifieth to evince it, his

own words mentioned before in the beginning of his book de Bap∣tismo, and his arguing against the practise of hasting Infants to bap∣tisme doth prove it to bee then in use.

Cyprian was within this 300. yeers, and therefore his testimo∣ny may not be slightly put by as before wee shewed, his 59. Epi∣stle ad Fidum so opposed in our cause is yet authoritative with some opposites to prove the typicalnesse of the eighth day. A∣mongst the Greeke authors called for that which is recorded to have beene urged in the councell by one of the members of that councell of Neocesarea before mentioned, touching the occasion of that Law of baptizing the woman with child come from Paga∣nisme to the faith, is of much weight, other Greek councells, as the 6th. councell of Constantinople, and Trullo, &c. are of moment also.

As for Ignatius his testimony, I doe not remember when I read it somewhile since, that hee speakes of baptisme of adult or Infants purposely; and if hee had, so many of the Epistles fathered upon him, being spurious, and the rest that may bee his, being so mix∣ed and corrupted, much heed would not bee given to his testi∣mony.

Eusebius it's knowne omitted many things of note, as where and when Justin was baptized: and the story of that famous wri∣ter Theognostus, of whom and his workes Athanasius makes menti∣on de Synod. Nic. decr. contra Arrianos, quoted by Baronius in his first Tome.

Athanasius (himself if that Question be his which some have scru∣pled) his testimony quest. 125. is full for it; for in that we thrice dip the child in water and lift it up againe it signifieth the death of Christ and his rising the third day againe, &c. the sentence be∣fore being the similitude stands thus: as Christ died and rose the third day, so wee in baptisme die and rise againe, for in that, &c. as before.

But that is undeniably his owne upon Luke 10. All things are given to mee, &c. pag. 197. hee makes baptisme to succeed cir∣cumcision, urging that proofe, Col. 2. 12. wherefore, saith he,

when that was come unto which the figure did denote, that note and figure ceaseth and resteth, for circumcision was the note (or fi∣gure) the laver of regeneration (or baptisme) is the very thing which was signified,

this is no other then the Doctrine wee hold forth: and whence by Analogy wee deduce the doctrine of Paedo∣baptism. The same also teacheth Epiphanius.

Epiphanius contra haereses, contra Epicuraeos,

there was circumcisi∣on of the flesh which served unto the time of the great circumci∣sion, scil. Baptisme, which circumciseth us from our sins, and sea∣leth us into the name of God:

and contra Corinth.

Circumcisi∣on lasted as a servant for a time untill the greater Circumcision, namely, the laver of regeneration came in stead,

and Tom. 2. l. 1.

Christ came and fulfilled circumcision, having given a perfect circumcision among his mysteries, not in one member onely but of the whole body, being sealed and circumcised from sinnes, and not saving one part of his people,

that is, men onely, but the whole people of Christians (scil. men, women and children) hee compleateth circumcision by all their circumcising from sinne in baptisme. Yea, but why then did not Epiphanius use that argu∣ment of Paedobaptism against the Collirydians as well as that taken from their interests in Gods Kingdome, &c. The answer is ready; it's likely that all those heretiques might as well as some others deny Paedobaptisme in a sense, if not wholly, and what then the argument from Paedobaptisme had been invalid; besides it's not necessary that a man in disproving errour or proving truth should use all the arguments hee hath by him; or that it bee con∣cluded hee hath no more arguments that way because hee useth them not.

What Basil said this way as I finde him quoted by Aretius on Luke 18. I have mentioned formerly, I have not time to search him and read him exactly.

What Gregory Nazianzen hath this way for us, yea if strictly ex∣pounded: how hee is ours we have seene before.

John Chrysostome which Mr. Blackwood makes his owne in his 21. Homil. to the people of Antioch, (which if not spurious as sundry of them are, see Perkins and Rivet) yet not understood exclusive. And it's much that Mr. B. that saith, pag. 31. hee regards not any authoritie after the first 300. yeares, will yet quote the Nicene Councell 325. the Laodicean Councell 308. the Constantinople Coun∣cell about 400. Basil 380. and Chrysostome 405. yeers after Christ, as of much use on his part in way of authoritie, yet saith hee will not regard any authorities (which the other party at least bring) above the limit of time. But to returne to Chrysostome, who in his 40. Homil. upon Genesis saith,

But our circumcision or grace I say of Baptisme hath cure without griefe, and brings innumerably good things to us, &c. and it hath no limited

time set as there was: but it is lawfull to receive this circumci∣sion made without hands either in our first, or middle, or last age,

and so in his homily ad Neophytos, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for this cause wee also bap∣tize little ones which have no sinne (meaning of their owne, have not committed actuall sinnes) that to them righteousnesse, holi∣nesse, adoption, inheritance and fraternitie of Christ may be com∣municated, that they may all become his members and an habita∣tion of his Spirit.

Theodoret in his Epitome of divine decrees and Cap. of baptism.

for baptism is not like a razour, as the frantique Messalians say, taking away (onely) sinnes that are past: for that God giveth in superabundantly; for if this only were the effect of baptisme, why doe we baptize infants which have not yet relished sin? for the Sacrament doth not promise onely those things but grea∣ter, for it is the pledge of future good things, and a type of future resurrection, and it is the communication of the Lords death and participation of his resurrection, the garment of sal∣vation and gladnesse. For as many as are baptized into Christ have put on Christ, and as many as are baptized into Christ are baptized into his death, that as Christ was raised from the dead, so wee should walke in newnesse of life, and adding, haec nos de sanctissimo baptismo sentire docuit Apostolus, and the Apo∣stle hath taught us thus to hold concerning baptisme;

and makes those speeches, Gal. 3. and Rom. 6. to bee verified in Infants baptizing as well as others; and that they are baptized in respect of future good rather then present, and that the Apostle taught them so to thinke hereof. Nor is that Dionysius Graecus, who ever hee were, (albeit not the Areopagite, yea albeit having sundry mixtures in his booke) to bee wholly slighted or neglected.

SECT. II.

As for the Easterne and Greeke Churches, Cassanders testimony is very round and full, (albeit their discipline may well bee gathe∣red by their teachers and councells doctrine) speaking of testimo∣ny of Paedobaptisme he saith,

but especiall and chiefe testimo∣ny and weight of authoritie to this baptisme of Infants, is fur∣ther added, from the universall and constant custome, which unto this day in the Churches which are extant in the world, and there are many such without the limits of the Roman

Church is retained, for the Churches which are yet remaining in Greece, Asia, Syria, Aegypt, and India, and the Russians and Muscovites which follow the Greeke orders; lastly, the Aethio∣pians under the government of Prester John; I say all these Christians professing nations, although differing in some opinions, and rites, yet in the custome of baptizing In∣fants, they all of old agreed among themselves, some stating the 8. and the Aethiopians the 40. day for baptizing them, un∣lesse in the case of danger or those of the female Sex. The Russi∣ans, and Armenians baptize Infants as they doe Adults, un∣lesse that when they baptize Infants, there are witnesses; and the Indian Christians doe so likewise, for which hee quotes Jo∣sephus Judas in his Aethiopian navigations, and Franciscus Alva∣res, and it's not credible that such Churches so averse from the Latines, would yet buckle to their customes of consecrating the unleavened bread, or eating thngs strangled, or blood, that they did borrow this of Paedobaptisme (so much abhord for∣merly by them) from the Westerne Churches;

and Paget in his Christianography citeth a speech of the Bishop of Bitonto in the Councell of Trent, acknowledging of the Greeke Church thus:

ea igitur Graecia mater est, that the Greeke Church is that mo∣ther to whom the Latin owneth whatever it hath; see the acts of the Councell of Trent, pag. 18.

and hee mentions the forme of the Russians baptisme,

the Priest when hee dippeth the child useth these words in the name of the Father, Sonne, and holy Ghost, and as oft as the God-fathers are asked whether they renounce the Devill, so oft they spit on the ground, Guag∣niny relig. Muscovit.

In the Greeke Church the Priest having said certaine prayers, taking the child in his armes, putteth him three times into the water saying: The servant of God N N. is baptized in the name of the Father, the Sonne and Holy Ghost.

Jerom the Patriarch pag. 103. and the same doth Thomas Aquinas observe in his third part, Quest. 6. Artic. 8. Quest. 67. Artic. 6. and Quest. 66. A•…•…tic. the 5th. And the same doth Dominic. a Sot. in quest. 1. Art. 8. te∣stifie, and let mee adde two things more; First, that the doctrine of Paedobaptisme was never ex professo opposed by any Orthodox Churches, or Christians in all the times of old, as farre as I can finde; of Tertullians mind wee have spoken before, and Gregory Nazianzen; how farre they went Auxentius the Arrian Bishop of

Millain, as Bullinger in his Decads hath it, did so, and so indeed did the Samosatenian Heretiques. The Donatists they baptized In∣fants, witnesse the 48. Canon of the third Carthaginian Coun∣cell in reference to Siritius and Simplicianus. So did other African Councels in Austins time ordaine that children baptized by Dona∣tists should not bee rebaptized; the Pelagians themselves denied it not wholly. Austin in his 14. Sermon de verbis Apostoli. baptizand•…•… esse parvulos nemo dubitet, &c. none need to doubt of baptisme since even those here doubt not, which in part doe contradict (scil. the Pelagians:) there are cases, and times wherein some one of the servants of God saw much more then many, and most did; as Athanasius, and some few more in the point of the Divinitie of Christ in that Arrian age, and Paphnutius the Confessor in the point of Ministers marriage to which the Fathers of the Nicene Councell had like to have gone contrary, and yet before and af∣ter these times, whole Churches and Councels held out as much as these Saints did.

SECT. IIII.

Object. NO such example in the opposers of Paedobaptisme; Yes, (you will say) Berengarius about a 1050. and afterwards Peter de Brucis, and the Albingenses and so the Walden∣ses, (for they had such diverse names according to places and countries in which they were scattered, &c.) they denied it, and some of them appealed to the Scriptures, and to the Greeke Church for warrant.

Answ. I deny not but that the Popish writers (as their manner is) use to brand the servants of God with some odious tenents, for which all would hate them, when that they never held the same; but that old accuser of the Brethren casteth on by his in∣struments that dirt, wash it off who can. Plateolus, Abbas Clu∣viacensis and others traded this way, concerning Berengarius and his followers. Dr. Ʋsher de successione & statu Ecclesiarum Christia∣narum, Cap. 7. pa. 207. quoteth Tbuanus accusing him and them thereof, but evinceth the contrary both in that: In all the Sum∣mons of Berengarius before the Synod wee never read hee was charged with Anabaptisme, and that hee rather denyed baptisme to profit Infants to salvation, ex opere operato, for which hee quo∣teth Alanus in his first booke against the Heretiques of his times; as saying: that baptisme had no efficacy either in Infant or grown persons, &c. and in p. 195. citeth Serarius in Triharesio — as

saying, qui hodie sunt Calvinisti, olim dicti fuerunt Berengariani, & qui hodie Protestantes dicuntur, Johanni Wendelstino (praefat. in Cod. Canonum,) novi sunt Waldenses. They then acknowledge their and our doctrine to bee the same, and therefore no Antipaedobaptists, and Gretzer prolegom. in Script. edit. contra Waldenses cap. 1. citeth this as one of their Articles of confession, credimus etiam qu••d non salvatur quis nisi qui baptizatur, viz. ordinarily, and parvulos salva∣ri per baptismum, and wee beleeve that little children are saved by baptisme, and so in the same cap. 8. doth Dr. Ʋsher cleare Peter de Brucis, and his followers from all such aspersions. They were accused too for rejecting the Old-Testament, and Evangelists, yet by Gretzer and others they are cleared as those that translated; and taught the same; and Reiner the Inquisitour said, they were so well acquainted with the old and new Testament, as that they could say much thereof by heart: the history of the Waldenses men∣tioneth this accusation of them, as if denying Paedobaptisme, but citeth a booke of the Waldenses intituled the spirituall Alma∣nack, fol. 45. to the contrary, ordering that though no time or day bee set, yet the charitie, and edification of the Church must serve for a rule therein, and therefore they to whom the children were nearest allied brought their Infants to bee baptized as their parents, or any other whom God had made charitable in that kind. True it is saith the Author of that story (scil. John Paul Peruin. of Lyons, l. 1. c. 4.) they being forced by the Popish Priest to bring their children, would delay their baptisme out of detesta∣tion of the superstitious addition: and their owne Ministers (cald Barbes) being very often (and sometimes very long) upon the Churches service, they would deferre their childrens baptisme to their returne; which delayes of theirs being observed by the Popish Priests they thence raised that report, and charged them with that imposture: they appealed to the Greeke Church, not as denying Paedobaptisme, for they held and practised it as before was shewed, but as to a Church that was not so corrupt in di∣spensing it, as not using Chrisme, crossing and exorcising; as the Latin Church did in baptizing any: See Flaccus Illiricus Catalo∣go testium veritatis, pag. 434. Waldenses semper baptizarunt Infantes, &c. the Waldenses ever used to baptize their Infants: nor doe they now hold against it; they spake not against baptisme of Infants simply, but as not administred by those of Rome in the vulgar tongue; nor doth Aeveas Sylvius in his Bohemian Story of the

Waldensian tenents, although hee bee an exact sifter into the suppo∣sed errours of the Waldenses, charge them with Antipaedobaptisme.

SECT. IIII.

BUt to returne to that first consideration, let it bee weighed ••hat as Austin long agoe said of it, Nullus Christianorum, &c. No Christians (orthodox and godly) had ever denyed Paedobap∣tisme, l. 4. Con. Donat. c. 13. Secondly, adde also this, that if it had been any way justly suspicious, why did not the Messalians whol∣ly deny it, and the Pelagians also? what need had they to use that shift of Infants to bee baptized to the kingdome of God, but not to the remission of sinnes? this argument Austin useth Serm. 14. de verb. Apost. Yea but they were affraid of the authoritie of the Church being great therein, that is strange that Heretiques that regarded not so directly to goe against, in their opinions, as well expresse letter of Scripture, as the doctrine of the Church in fun∣damentall matters, should yet bee affraid of the Church in a mat∣ter circa fundamentalia, and not so expresse in so many words as Paedobaptisme was, who will imagine such an unlikelihood? A have done with this dispute for present, onely I could advise that Mr. Blackwood, and others would bee more sparing of such printed blaspheming of the name and tabernacle of the Lord, as to stile this (which to all the Saints (in a manner) of old, and to the most that now live is of precious esteeme and use) an Antichristian Garrison, and the doctrine of the man of sinne, or of Antichrist. Mr. Blackwood I am sure doth know what is the judgement of all Orthodox Divines touching Antichrist, and who, or what it is that is so; and where hee hath his seat, and when hee had his rise. And cannot bee ignorant wholly that Paedobaptisme was of universall esteeme, and use (in a manner) long before those prophesyings and pointings out of Antichrist by many of the ancients; the Greeke Church which had not what doctrine and worship they had, and held from the Latin Church, but the La∣tine Church had it rather from them (as in the Councell of Trent was before acknowledged) and which was averse from Romish cu∣stomes; yet they held Paedobaptisme, as before was proved. It is dangerous speaking a word against the Sonne, (much more wri∣ting) albeit not so irrecoverably as to speake against the Holy Ghost; hee had need bee on good, sure and cleare grounds (if it were supposable hee could bee so) that assayes to charge God foo∣lishly

with the reasons of his covenantings, or dispensations, and so palpably as to deny that God made a Covenant of Grace with Abraham, Gen. 17. and such like inaudita. It's dangerous preten∣ding an imaginary Garrison, and in fighting against that as a supposed Garrison of Antichrist, whereon a man hazards the name and doth the worke of one which will bee found a fighter against God: wee know who would not bring a rayling accusa∣tion against the Devill, and how dare any so boldly revile such a received and ratified truth, as that of Gods exhibition, and dis∣pensation of his grace in a preventing way to those whose seed af∣ter them in Scripture Language are counted blessed. The Saints of old were very tender of speaking any thing in such a sort as tended to the condemnation of the just.

CHAP. XI.

Ʋse 1.

TO winde up all in a word of Use to all; 1. in way of in∣struction. 1. See the riches of Gods grace which thus is en∣larged to all the sorts of the sons of men younger and elder; if God would amplifie grace hee sets it out as extended to his people, as in the case of an helplesse and despicable babe, Esay 49. 14, 15. Hos. 10. 1. 3. especially Ezek. 16. 6, 7, 8. and what hath Satan here to object, Psal. 8. 1. 2. when even that sort of persons are made presi∣dents not onely of electing but calling (in way of Covenant and promise) grace? Rom. 9. 7, 8, 9, 10. To all hee is rich, and free, hence all enterers into the kingdome, must here take patterne, Luke. 18. 17. how plentifull is that sap that fills such twigs, that liquor that fills all sort of vessells of greater and lesser capacitie? how strong is that pin on whom all are hung?

2. See what honour God puts on his Saints thus to intaile the visible ordinary administration of his grace on them, and theirs, 2 Sam. 23. 4, 5.

3. See how cruell unbeleevers are to themselves and theirs in excluding themselves and theirs of the ordinary meanes of their welfare even covenant grace administred.

4. See their desperate ingratitude that being children of such hopes, despise, and sell their birthright with Esau; these doe vex their father most, Deut. 32. 19, 20.

5. See the danger and detestablenesse of Anabaptisticall tenents,

giving God and Christ (in part) the lie, vayling the glory of his preventing grace of Covenant, Numb. 11. 18. (giving such a Co∣venant call before we knew, or sought it, Esay 65. 1, 2.) framing a Covenant of God with beleeving parents which hee never made, scil. a Covenant not respecting their children; denying the ordi∣nary dispensation of the fruit of Christs death to the Infant part of his Church, Ephes. 5. 25, 26. making the Churches opposite to Christ in their administrations to those of his, in their charitie to that of his; as if hee were looser in his charitie to owne such babes as of his kingdome which his Church will not, may not doe; condemning the judgement and practise of former Chur∣ches, Jewes and Gentiles, Act. 2. 38. 39. Rom. 5. 14, 15. and 11. 16, 17, 18, 19. Ephes. 2. 11, 12, 13. 1 Cor. 7. 14. and 10. 1, 2. as preached all over Mark. 16. 15 Rom. 10. 6, 7, 8. and Deut. 29. 29. with 30. 6. 10. 12, 13, 14. compared, see Austin l. 4. contr. Don. cap. 23, 24. undermining the validitie of all which God hath done by vertue of his Covenant to babes, or to any of the Saints occasio∣ning from the initiatory seale thereof, Ephes. 5. 26. evacuating all that Red-Sea-like triumphant Incouragement thence unto Gods baptized Israel against their spirituall Aegyptian enemies pursuit of them; and that Cloud-like Influence of their baptisme in scorching temptations — and Arke-like succour thereof in drow∣ning times. David did not more effectually make use of his cir∣cumcision which hee long before received (even when an Infant) against that insulting Philistim — (whence that 1 Sam. 17. — this uncircumcised Philistim is come, &c.) then many of Gods faith∣full ones have of that preventing grace of God sealed to them in baptisme when very babes, in their spirituall conflicts. But all such spirituall workings either in parents or in the Churches of the Saints (where children have beene offered to baptisme) which have beene occasioned by the administration of Baptisme to In∣fants, are made here by delusions; God not using in such sort so generally, commonly and constantly to breath in Antichristian inventions. Yea all their prayers are thereby made so many pro∣fanations of Gods name and taking the same in vaine as oft as powred out upon occasion of baptizing of Infants, whence that prophane trick of some, to turne their back upon the Churches at such time, as if all their persons, and prayers, and fellowship were uncleane, whence the stiling of it Antichristian, &c. what is this but to blaspheme the name and tabernacle and Saints of God,

Rev. 13. And how doth such doctrine undermine all the Churches of the Saints which differ from them? witnesse their new foun∣dings of their Churches in renouncing their former baptisme as antichristian and receiving another baptisme; yea how doe such cast stumbling blocks unto the comming of the Jewes by undermi∣ning of Abrahams Covenant in the latitude of it and the binding force of the old Testament, which they stick to, as if all were in∣valid unlesse come over againe in the new Testament, which they reject, and when ever dealt withall doubtlesse old Testament prin∣ciples will bee the choyce instrumentall wayes and meanes of get∣ting within them.

Ʋse 2.

Second Use of direction, 1 To Church Officers; to looke after the Churches children being children of such hopes. 2 To gracious parents; 1 Admire much at the bounty of God who is not content to ingage his grace to you, but to yours with you; you and yours are all Traytors, yet his royall word is for your and their acceptance. If that called for a Behold! Psal. 128. 3, 4, 5. and if that caused in him such holy wondring, 2 Sam. 7. 18, 19, 20. may not this also doe the like, 2 Renue your faith in Gods Covenant in the latitude of it upon occasion of the bap∣tisme of others, or your owne children in speciall sort. 3 Ac∣quaint your children with, & urge Gods mind of grace upon them as they are capable of Instruction, Psal. 78. 4, 4, 5, 6, 7. 4 To chil∣dren of pious parents; looke you doe not by abuse or contempt forfeit and reject your owne mercy, as they did, Matth. 8. 11. 12. And such as now feel & finde the force of Gods ingaged grace, for ever do you adore and admire his preventing mercy and truth.

Ʋse 3.

Third Use of comfort to beleeving parents; 1 If God overflow thus in grace to yours, will hee not extend grace to your selves? Conclude it, that hee will assuredly, against all gainesayings of Sa∣tan and unbeleefe. 2 Bee incouraged to set faith on worke for your children, as they did, Psal. 102. last; yea albeit at present vile enough; since the force of Gods covenant is such, as it can fetch them in, even when farre removed by sinne from the Lord, wit∣nesse that Ezek. 16 60. 61, 62, &c. 3 You need not feare then touching divine protection of, and provisions for them sutably and seasonably, Psal. 25. 12. Prov. 20. 7. 4 When you are to die and leave them fatherlesse and friendlesse otherwise, yet here is a Covnant Father and friend to whom you may comfortably leave them, Gen. 48. 15, 16.

Tri-uni Deo sit laus in Ecclesia.

FINIS.

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

Notes

• Me thinks these words do savour much of the Popish Ar∣minian Te∣net of fore∣seen faith.
• Matth. 27. 25.
• Matth. 10. 6, 7. and 16. 24. Iohn 10. 16.
• Gen. 17. 7. and 26. 3, 4 and 28. 13, 14.
• See Ge∣neva Bible notes on the place.
• I.S. C.B. I.S.C.B. C.B.
• Gerhardi loc. com. loc. de baptismo.
• See Bullin∣gers Com∣mentary on 1 Cor. 17.
• Bucers ope∣ra Anglica∣na.
• Infants & sucklings were bapti∣zed as well as elder ones even before that change of the limitatiō of Baptism to Easter, and —
• The first witnesse saith flatly it was not instituted by Coun∣cells.
• Mr. B. in his Preface u∣seth the same argu∣ment.
• Anno 170. according to Balaeus, others say, Anno 173.
• Beda hist. l. 3. c. 7.
• Rupertus Tritiensis.
• Cassander.
• Zwinglius.
• Hilary.
• Ambrose.
• Arnobius.
• L••do Vives.
• Strabo.
• Melivitan.
• Bucer.
• Ruffinus.
• Greg. 4th.
• Lib. de Bap. ad finem.
• Of Iustin.
• Of Irenius.
• Of Clemens Alexandri∣nus.
• Anno 330.
• Of Athana∣sius.
• Anno 396.
• Of Epipha∣nius.
• Anno 369.
• Anno 380.
• Anno 405.
• Of Chryso∣stome.
• Anno 430.
• Of Theodo¦ret.
• Cassander de baptis. Inf. Of the Ea∣sterne and Greek Chur∣ches.