Apology Against the Exceptions of Black and Kendall, Section Baxter 41 – Section Blake 43
§. 41.
R. B. WHat Abſurdities follow ſuch a reſtraint of it to ſound believers, as I have aſſerted, I ſhould be willing to know, though with ſome labor I ſearched for it. Bear with me therefore, while I examine what you refer me to. It is pag. 209. where you charge thoſe Abſurdities. And the firſt is this, 1. This reſtriction of the Covenant (to ſhut out all the non-regenerate) makes an utter confuſion between the Covenant it ſelf and the conditions of it: or (if the expreſsion do not pleaſe) the Covenant it ſelf and the duties required in it; between our entrance into Covenant, and our obſervation of it, or walking up in faithfulneſs to it. All know that a bargain for a ſumme of money, and the payment of that ſumme; the covenant with a ſervant for labor, and the labor according to this covenant, are different things. Faithful men that make a bargain, keep it; enter covenant, and ſtand to it: But the making and keeping; the entering and obſerving are not the ſame; and now according to this opinion, Regeneration is our entrance into Covenant, and Regeneration is our keeping of Covenant: before Regeneration we make no Covenant, after Regeneration we break no Covenant, there is no ſuch thing as Covenant-breaking. All this makes an utter confuſion in the Covenant.
Reply 1. I have ſeldom met with a complaint of confuſion, more unſeaſonably, where the guilt of it in the plaintiffe is ſo viſible as to marr all the work ſo much. 2. I cannot give my judgment of the intolerableneſs and great danger of your miſtake here manifeſted, without unmannerlineſs. I will therefore ſay but this; It is in a very weightie point, neer the foundation, wherein to erre, cannot be ſafe. In my Aphoriſms I gave my reaſons (pag. 265) for the contrarie. It is a truth ſo far beyond all doubt, that our own Covenanting is a principal part of the condition of the Covenant of Grace, as that it is, in other terms, a great part of the ſubſtance of the Goſpel. 1. The conditions are impoſed by God, and to be performed by us; the ſame act therefore is called our conditions as the performers, and Gods conditions as the Impoſer and Promiſer, giving his bleſſings onelyonly on theſe impoſed conditions. Moſt properly they are called the conditions or Gods Covenant or Promiſe, rather then of ours: for our own Promiſe is the firſt part of them, and our performance of that Promiſe but a ſecondary part. For 2. Gods Covenant is a free gift of Chriſt and Life to the world on condition of their Acceptance: this our Divines againſt the Papiſts on the Doctrine of merit, have fully proved. OnelyOnly this Acceptance muſt have theſe neceſſary modifications, which may conſtitute it ſutable to the quality of the object, and ſtate of the receiver. It muſt be a Loving, Thankfull Acceptance: and it being the Acceptance of a Soveraign, and Sanctifier, it contains a Reſolution to obey him. Our Acceptance, or Conſent, is our Covenanting, and our faith. So that our Covenanting with Chriſt, and our faith is the ſame thing: that is, our accepting an offered Saviour on his terms: Or a Conſent that he be ours and we his on his terms. And who knows not that this Faith, or Covenanting, or Conſent, is the condition by us to be performed, that we may have right to Chriſt and Life offered? 3. Indeed there is herewith joyned a promiſe for future duty: but mark 1. what; 2. and to what end; 1. It is principally but a promiſe of the ſame conſent to be continued, which we already give: and ſecondarily, a promiſe of ſincere obedience. 2. It is not that theſe future promiſed acts ſhall be the condition of our firſt Juſtification, or right to Chriſt; but onelyonly the condition of the continuance of our Juſtification, it being certainly begun, and we put into a ſtate of favor and acceptance, meerly on our firſt conſent or covenanting, that is, believing or receiving Chriſt.
That all this is no ſtrange thing, (that our own Covenant Act ſhould be alſo the Primary condition of Gods Covenant) may appear by your forementioned ſimilitudes, and all other caſes, wherein ſuch Relations are contracted. If a King will offer his Son in marriage to a condemned woman and a beggar, on condition that ſhe will but have him, that is conſent, and ſo covenant and marry him: here her covenanting, conſenting or marrying him, is the performance of the condition on her part, for obtaining her firſt Right in him and his: but for the continuance of that Right, is further requiſite, Primarily the continuance of that conſent; ſecondarily the addition of ſubjection and marriage-faithfulneſs. Yet though conſent begun, and conſent continued, be both called conſent, and are the ſame thing, it is only the beginning that is called marriage: ſo is it only begun faith, which is our marriage with Chriſt, and conſtitutes us Regenerate, or converted. And therefore you do not well to talk of Regeneration being the keeping of our Covenant. If by Regeneration you mean not Gods Act, but our repenting and believing, then it is our keeping Gods Covenant, by performing the condition, i. e. Our obeying him in entering his Covenant; but it is not the keeping of our own Covenant: for our making or entering Covenant, is our principal condition, on performance whereof we are juſtified; yet in ſo doing, we promiſe to continue that conſent or faith: and ſo the continuance is our Covenant-keeping.
As for your inſtances of the Covenant of paying money, and doing work, had I uſed ſuch inſtances, what ſhould I have heard from thoſe men that already charge me with giving too much to works in …uſtification? you ſhould have conſidered, that our Covenant 1. is not principally to pay, and to labor, but to receive. 2. nor is it onelyonly de ſuturo, but de praeſenti: A conſent to have Chriſt for our Lord, Redeemer, Saviour, Head and Husband in preſent and for the time to come, though the very relation conſented to, doth indeed oblige us to the future duties of that Relation. By this time, I leave it to the Reader to judge, who it is that introduced confuſion about the Covenant, and whether this be an error of the lower ſize?
As for that you adde, that then there is no Covenant-breaking; I Reply, 1. Q…oad eſſentiam & poſsibilitatem there is. 2. Quoad exiſtentiam, there is a breaking of meer Verbal and of Erring half Covenants, But if you think that ſound Covenanting may be utterly broken, then you are againſt the certaintie of perſeverance. As for the texts you cite, I ſay 1. The Iſraelites broke Gods commands, which are called his Covenants. 2. They broke their particular Covenants, about reforming Idolatrie and ſuch particular ſins. 3. They broke their Verbal and equivocal Covenant or Promiſe to God, whereby they ſeemed to Accept him on his terms, but did not; and therefore had not his obligation again to them, but yet thereby obliged themſelves.
Your 2. Abſurditie is, that then there are no Hypocrites. Reply; Rather, Then all unregenerate profeſſors are Hypocrites. They pretend meerly to real proper Covenanting, and they do Covenant but Verbally, and equivocally. Your Anſwers to the objection therefore, pag. 211, 212, have not the leaſt ſtrength, where you ſay, The Covenant which they enter is their pretence for God; I Reply, they do therefore but pretend to take God for their God, which is the proper Covenanting. How elſe could you next ſay, that they are guiltie of hypocriſie? Doubtleſs they had hypocriſie as well in entering the Covenant, as after in pretending to ſtand to it. Is it not you rather, that conſequentially ſay, There is no Hypocrites (among theſe at leaſt) in Covenanting, who make them all to Covenant truly and unfeignedly? And where you ſay, that then they do but pretend to the ſtage, and to hypocriſie: It is a ſtrange feigned conſequence, without the leaſt ſhew of proof. What! is he but a pretender to Hypocriſie, that takes on him a Chriſtian, when he is none? (Suppoſe he never Covenanted) or he that takes on him to conſent or covenant in heart, when he doth it but in words, and wilfully diſſembles? Yea, if they think they Accept Chriſt, not knowing what Chriſt is, and ſo do not Accept him as he is offered them, and yet go on in a ſuppoſition that they are Chriſtians; theſe ſeem to have done what they did not, and to be what they are not: and therefore are Hypocrites, though not purpoſely diſſembling.
For your 3. Abſurdity, I have ſaid enough againſt that charge to Mr. Tombes, which ſhall ſtand, till you confute it, as the confutation of yours. And ſo much for your feigned Abſurdities.
§. 42.
Mr. Bl. TO make the Viſible Seal of Baptiſm, which is the Priviledge of the Church Viſible, to be of equal latitude with the Seal of the Spirit, which is peculiar to inviſible members, is a Paradox.
§. 42.
R. B. BUt you take it for granted that we do ſo; which is too eaſie diſputing. We give the Seal of Baptiſm to all that ſeem ſound Believers, and their ſeed; and we ſay, the Seal of the ſanctifying Spirit, is onelyonly theirs that Are ſuch Believers. But if you ſpeak onelyonly of Covenant-Right to Baptiſm, Coram Deo, by his gift of Covenant, then I make them of the ſame extent: ſuppoſing that by the Seal of the Spirit, you mean ſomewhat common to every true believer. 3. But if it be the formalis Ratio of Sealing that you look at, I ſay, God ſealeth to the wicked his Covenant or Promiſe as it is made to them, (of which before): He ſealed the conditional Covenant, which they ſeemed to Accept, (which if they had not ſeemed to Accept, he would not have commanded the annexing of the Seal): and ſo God may be ſaid to do it, in that he commandeth his Miniſters to do it. But it is not ſuch a ſealing, as leaves God actually obliged to fulfill the promiſe, as he is to them that perform the condition. But of this more in its own place.
§. 43.
Mr. Bl. THe great conditon to which Baptiſm engageth, is not a prerequiſite in baptiſm. This is plain; no man is bound to make good his condition, before engagement to conditions: no ſervant is tyed to do his wook, before he hath received his earneſt: no Souldier to fight before he is liſted, or hath given in his name. But faith that is Juſtifying to Accept Chriſt, is the Condition to which Baptiſm engageth.