The Covenant of God Entered with Mankind, Chapter 48
CHAP. XLVIII.
The Covenant in New Teſtament-times takes in parents with their children.
BUt in caſe all this be yeelded in Old Teſtament-times, that the Covenant entred was in this latitude, that the whole of Abrahams ſeed were taken with him into Covenant, and that then it ran in a race by carnal deſcent, yet it is otherwiſe at leaſt in New Teſtament-times. No childe fares now the better reſpective to any viſible Church-intereſt, for the Faith or Religion of their Anceſtours. And here is a fourth difference between the firſt and ſecond, the Old and New Covenant according to ſome. The firſt Covenant was entred in that latitude, to take in Children with their parents, Poſterity with their Anceſtours, according to the Charter ſo long infiſted upon: But in New Teſtament-times, the Covenant reaches no farther then the perſon that actually enters; He covenants for himſelf, his ſeed have no more or farther intereſt then the ſeed of Heathens and Pagans. When I firſt publiſhed my Birth-priviledge, I here expected oppoſition, and did look▪ that ſome would appeare to put this limit to the Covenant in New Teſtament-times▪ but for the ſtate of the Church under the firſt covenant I thought I ſhould not have found an oppoſite, and therefore was leſſe mindful of the confirmation of it, which I hope is now done to the Readers full ſatisfaction. As to thoſe that plead ſuch a change of things in New Teſtament-times, we might interrogate them in ſundry particulars.
Firſt,Quere's premiſed. when God by free Charter, did once vouchſafe ſuch a grant to his people, how it can be made appear that it was ever reverſed; or any ſuch limit put to it, when the Church of God hath held it in ſee from Abraham to this preſent hour, they may well look that they ſhould produce ſome plaine word from God (revoking his grant) that challenge them for uſurpation. It is true that Gods Sovereignty is ſuch that he may contract his grace at pleaſure; As he may wholly ſtrike a people out of covenant, ſo he may put what termes he pleaſes to it; but ſuch that affirme it ſhould make it appear, in which hitherto they have been ſilent. They that will eject us out of ſo long a poſſeſſion, had need to make their plea firm for our eviction.
Secondly, we might demand the reaſons why the Covenant ſhould run in ſo narrow a limit now, being vouchſafed in ſo great a latitude then▪ being once made of God as with men of yeares, ſo with little ones, Deut. 29. Why ſhould little ones be now excluded, and onelyonly men of growth admitted? when it is granted on all hands that God continues a people to himſelf, how comes it to paſſe that he admits them on ſuch new termes? That his favours are now thus ſhortened, that as a leaſe for terme of life, differs from a fee-ſimple for inheritance, ſo the Covenant in New Teſtament-times differs from the Covenant vouchſafed of God to our fathers? Where the abſurdity lies that Baptiſme ſhould be adminiſtred to thoſe that do not actually beleeve, when yet Circumciſion was adminiſtred to infants in as great an incapacity.
Thirdly, we might demand how they can avoid that great ſcandall that muſt needs by this meanes be given to the beleeving Jewes, (who waved the old way of the adminiſtration of the covenant, and embraced the new) to have their infants upon this new admiſſion ſtruck out of Covenant, A man that ſhould be ſeized on an inheritance for ever, will hardly be brought to quit that tenure and accept with limit for terme of life, God was their God, and the God of their ſeed, Gen. 17. 7. They did bring forth children to God, Ezek. 16. 20. Now they bring forth children without God. They have a ſeed, but no holy ſeed; a world repleniſhed, but not a Church or people to God continued; The ſavage Indians in a married condition have this priviledge▪ that their iſſue are not baſtards, and this is all that can be claimed by Chriſtians.
Fourthly, we might demand if ſo great a change were made and held in the Apoſtolique Primitive times, how it comes to paſſe that there was ſuch ſilence, no man moving a queſtion about it? The pomp of worſhip and obſervation of places formerly in uſe, was laid aſide in Goſpel-times, but this we hear of, and the reaſon of it, John▪ 4. 22. The initiating Sacrament of Circumciſion had a period put to it, of this we hear, and many complaints about it? Pſalteries, Harps, Organs, Cymbals, and ſuch inſtruments of muſick, in uſe in the time of the Law, were laid aſide in Goſpel-times, and not known in the weſterne Churches till after Thomas Aquinas his dayes; As this was done, ſo it was not paſt in ſilence, but ſpoken of, (as elſewhere I have ſhewn, and given reaſons of it) by Juſtin Martyr, [or at leaſt one that beares his name,] Chryſoſtome, Iſidore, Thomas Aquinas. When none of theſe changes can paſſe, but obſervation is made, it is more then ſtrange that ſo great a change as this in the termes of the Covenant, between God and his people, can be ſo carried on without any obſervation at all, or one word once moved about it, or ſpoken in it? See Maſter Baxters Treatiſe of Infants Church-memberſhip, proving that Infants were ſometimes Church-members, page 26, 27. that there is no repeale of this grant vouchſafed of God, p. 27, 28. Waiting for ſome faire anſwer to the former demands, I ſhall proceed to thoſe texts of Scripture, where the Covenant in New Teſtament-times is held out in this latitude to beleevers and their ſeed, comprizing their parents in the ſame priviledge of Covenant and participation of promiſe.
Firſt,Acts 2. 38, 39 vindicated. let us look into thoſe words of Peter, delivered in his firſt Sermon after the receiving of the holy Ghoſt, (the firſt place in which the Covenant of promiſe, and Baptiſme the Seale of the Covenant are mentioned) to the Jewes, with whom the Apoſtles as yet held communion being not actually rejected out of a viſible Church-ſtate; Repent, and be baptiſed every one of you in the Name of the Lord Jeſus Chriſt for the remiſſion of ſinnes, and ye ſhall receive the gift of the holy Ghoſt. For the promiſe is unto you and to your children, and to all that are afarre off, even as many as the Lord our God ſhall call, The text …nalized.Acts 2. 38, 39. In which words we may obſerve. 1. An Exhortation, as, to repentance for the guilt of the blood of Chriſt; (of which they ſtood convinced) ſo, alſo unto Baptiſme. 2. A Motive ſtirring them up to embrace baptiſme in the name of Chriſt, drawn from the benefit which they ſhall reap, Ye ſhall receive the gift of the holy Ghoſt. 3. A farther encouragement to the acceptation of Baptiſm drawn from their Covenant-priviledge, which is here ſet out in its full latitude and extent (as Calvin rightly upon the words obſerveth) 1. …o the Jewes, For the promiſe is unto you. 2. To their children, and to your children. 3. To the Gentiles upon call, and to you that are afarre off, even as many as the Lord our God ſhall call, Where an effectual call cannot be meant (which the Apoſtle calls a call according to purpoſe) proper only to the elect, It is a call unto ſuch a Church-ſtate, as the whole Nation of the Jews did then enjoy, as the firſt-borne in the family; A call that puts them into a like Church-ſtate, and condition with the Jews. From whence this argument may be drawn. Thoſe to whom the Covenant of promiſe appertaines have a right to Baptiſme; But the covenant of promiſe appertaines to men in a Church-ſtate and condition, and to their children. The major cannot be denied by any that will not make themſelves the Apoſtles oppoſites. The minor propoſition is now to be conſidered, That the covenant of promiſe to men in a Church-ſtate and condition is in that latitude as to comprize their children. For which the words of the Apoſtle are full and clear, To you is the promiſe made, and to your children, on which Calvin rightly comments. Peter obſerves (ſaith he) a due order, when he aſſigns the firſt place of honour to the Jewes, That it takes in children, it depends on the words of the promiſe, Gen. 17. 7. I will be thy God, and the God of thy ſeed. Where God joynes children with their parents in the priviledge of adoption, in the inheritance of priviledges belonging to all Church-members.
But this clear text wants not wits that ſtudy to cloud it; Objections anſwered. Some except againſt the word [children,] and will have them to be the ſame as the ſons and daughters mentioned, v. 17. of that chapter, from Joel, chap. 2. 28. and conſequently the promiſe to be meant of the Spirit of prophecie, and to appertaine to none but thoſe of age and capacity for prophecie. To this I anſwer, 1. The extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghoſt in this viſible way cannot be the promiſe here by Saint Peter mentioned, ſeeing it is enlarged to all that are afarre off, even to as many as the Lord ſhall call. But all theſe have not the holy Ghoſt in that way extraordinary, nor any promiſe of it; Baptiſme with the holy Ghoſt and with fire, is a baptiſme proper to thoſe primitive Saints, wherewith they were told that they ſhould be baptized not many dayes after▪ 2 Howſoever the promiſe be interpreted ſo, as to belong to all that are beleevers, and call on the name of the Lord, as there followes, yet that promiſe is on condition of their baptiſme; The meanes are to be uſed in reference to the end, Baptiſme is the meanes, receiving of the holy Ghoſt (there ſpecified) is the end; And the Apoſtle confirming them in the promiſe of the end, doth likewiſe encourage them to the uſe of the meanes, in Baptiſme to expect the gift of the Spirit, and ſo (according to this interpretation) that place is an encouragement to baptiſme. The promiſe is the fitteſt encouragement to the Signe and Seale of the promiſe. Baptiſme is the Signe and Seale to which they are here encouraged, and in that latitude as they had formerly known the command of Circumciſion. 3. Neither are the children here mentioned the ſame with ſonnes and daughters ſpoken of by the Prophet, nor limitted to ſuch ſonnes and daughters as are of growth, and capable of the gift of propheſie. 1. The Apoſtle urgeth the promiſe in the way, as in the Scripture it is delivered, which is to men and their poſterity, to them and theirs. So God promiſes to be a God in covenant to his and their ſeed, and this the Apoſtle holds out, to draw them on to the Seale of the covenant to accept Baptiſme on the ſame terms that Abraham did circumciſion. 2. It is without reaſon to beleeve that the Apoſtle ſhould inſtance in one peece of the diſtribution of the Prophet there, and to leave out the reſt; to put in alone ſons and daughters, when we have in the Text young men, old men, ſervants and handmaids. 3. Children here are mentioned under a promiſe to the parents, to you and your children is the promiſe made, but not ſo in Joel, nor in the quotation of the Apoſtle. That Scripture hath only an enumeration of the ſeveral ſorts and conditions of people in any Nation, on all which the ſpirit is promiſed, without any reference made to the parents of thoſe ſonnes and daughters, more then to the maſters of thoſe ſervants and handmaids; not the ſonnes and daughters of their fleſh, but the ſonnes and daughters of the Nation. A Language uſual in our ordinary expreſſions ſpeaking of men of any ſort or condition, as your Lawyers, your Merchants, &c. ſo here, your ſonnes, your daughters, your old men, your young men, &c▪ Others ſay, That the promiſe made, is the ſending of Jeſus Chriſt, and bleſſing by him as is expounded, Acts 3. 25, 26. Act 13. 32. Ro. 15. 39. I anſwer; it is true, that Jeſus Chriſt is the moſt eminent mercy promiſed, and may be called the promiſe virtualiter, being the ground of all promiſes, and therefore ſome interpreters have mentioned the gift of Chriſt on this occaſion. But it is plaine that Gods Covenant, and this gift are to be diſtinguiſhed; Chriſt is promiſed in priority to the Jew, before the Gentile; The Jew then is taken into Covenant before this gift of Chriſt can be of them expected: It is therefore the Covenant it ſelf (entered with parent and child, root and branch) that is here meant (as Calvin in the words before obſerves) from which the giving of Chriſt in the fleſh follows. And therefore Diodati fully pitches upon the true ſenſe of it, Seeing as you are Abrahams children, you are within the Covenant, you ought to acknowledge Chriſt to be the head and fountaine of the Covenant The Covenant, I will be thy God, and the God of thy ſeed, is here meant, which from Abraham had been the Jewes priviledge, Rom. 9.
It is farther ſaid, that the limitation, as many as the Lord our God ſhall call, ſhewes that the promiſe belongs to them, not ſimply as Jewes, but as called of God; which is more expreſſely affirmed, Acts 3. 26. To you firſt God having raiſed up his Sonne Jeſus, ſent him to bleſſe you in turning away every one of you from his iniquities. I wonder how it came into any mans head to call this amplification, a limitation, it plainly enough ſpeaks their boldneſſe in dealing with the Scriptures; Had the Apoſtle ſaid, To you is the promiſe made, and to your ſeed, in caſe God ſhall give you a call, he had ſpoke to their purpoſe; but ſaying, To you, and to as many as the Lord your God ſhall call; it plainly ſhewes that he does not limit, but amplifie the mercy, extending it not barely to the Jewes (who in preſent by reaſon of fruition of Ordinances were a people near to the Lord, Pſal. 148. 14.) but alſo to the Gentiles, who Epheſ. 2. 17. we affare off. 2. In that he ſaith, this promiſe belongs to them not ſimply as Jewes, but as called, is a full contradiction: A Jew uncalled (at this time before the Kingdome was taken from them) is as much as a Convert unconverted, or a Gentile diſciple undiſcipled: In caſe they think to come off by limitting it to an effectual call, the Scriptures by themſelves quoted, doth evidently contradict it, Chriſt came to give them, that effectual calling, and not onelyonly to thoſe that were thus called. It is yet ſaid, Peter doth exhort to repentance, and Baptiſme together, and in the firſt place perſwades to repentance, then to Baptiſme, which ſhews repentance to be in order before baptiſme. To which I anſwer, that theſe who had crucified Chriſt as a blaſphemer, a ſeditious perſon, an impoſtour muſt needs repent before they would accept Baptiſme in his name, or hope for remiſſion of ſinne by him, I had been loſt labour for the Apoſtle, to have preſſed thoſe, that had crucified Chriſt, and retained their former opinion of him, to become diſciples to him, and to look to be ſaved by him, To perſwade them to look for remiſſion of ſinnes in his blood, who took themſelves to be without ſinne in ſhedding of it; Yet notwithſtanding this guilt (of which the Apoſtle would have them to repent) he ſhews that they and their ſeed are under the promiſe of God, and puts them into a way, in acceptation of Chriſt in the Goſpel-tender, in his preſent way of adminiſtration, to be continued his people ſtill in covenant, and that (as is plainly enough ſignified) that they might enjoy it in their former latitude, to them and to their children. The promiſe (of which they were not yet diſpoſſeſt, but ſtood as a people of God in viſible Covenant, and their children) is here brought as a motive to encourage them to hold correſpondency with God (as his covenant-people) embracing the way which their long expected, and deſired Meſſiah had now inſtituted & appointed. But this promiſe was to them and their children. Here is yet another evaſion, The text ſpeaks not expreſſely of Infants, but of children indefinitely; And if infants be not children, we will be content that they be caſt out of covenant, and will hold no more plea for their Church-memberſhip nor Baptiſme. God in the Covenant with Abraham did not expreſſely mention infants, but ſeed, yet infants were his ſeed, and, as his ſeed, by Gods command to be circumciſed, And all our infants are our children, and conſequently to be baptized, Acts 20. 7. is an expreſſe Text with ſome of this party (without any help of conſequence) to prove that women received the Lords Supper, Becauſe it is ſaid that diſciples came together to break bread, as though woman, and diſciple, were ſynonyma? But here the promiſe being made to children, infants muſt neither be comprized in the letter, nor yet by any favour of conſequence included.
It is further objected, that the text ſpeaks not of the children of the Gentiles at all (of whom we are) but of the children of the Jews, and therefore if that promiſe be extended to infants, which doth not appear, the promiſe is to be expounded ſo, as to note ſomething peculiar to the Jews infants. If the Goſpel held out any ſuch tranſcending priviledges appertaining to the ſeed of the Jews above the Gentiles, they may do well to produce a Text for it, otherwiſe we ſhall take it for granted from Saint Paul, that there is none at all, that in Chriſt there is neither Greek nor Jew, Circumciſion nor uncircumciſion, Barbarian nor Scythian, bond nor free. And when the Apoſtle addes, To thoſe that are afarre off, even as many as the Lord ſhall call, he plainly meanes the Gentiles, as appears, comparing Epheſ. 2. 13. and though I take not the boldneſſe to adde to the words, as ſome ſtand charged, yet it is cleare, that he ſame is underſtood there in reference to the children of the Gentiles, that is expreſt before to the children of the Jewes. If any ſhall grant an inheritance to Titius and his heires for ever, and to Caius, every one will underſtand that the heires of Caius are meant as well as the heirs of Titius, eſpecially if it can be proved out of the Grant it ſelf, that the priviledges conveyed to Caius, are as ample, as that to Titius. We can prove the priviledges granted to the Gentiles in the Goſpel to be equal to thoſe granted to the Jews; when the Jews children then are under the promiſe with their parents, the children of beleeving Gentiles cannot be excluded.