The Estate of Children of Church Members and their Right to Baptism, Treatise · Part 1 · Chapter 2

The Estate of Children of Church Members and their Right to Baptism · Treatise · Part 1 · Chapter 2

p. 21CHAP. II. Sect. I. Touching the Explication of Act. 1. 38, 39.

ANother Scripture confirming the Doctrine of Federall holineſſe 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 bleſſing; [foreign] 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 onelyonly of the Meſſiah which was the promiſe to be ſent; and by children, to be meant allegoricall children, which others inlarging, expreſſe theſe two wayes. 1. That the promiſe made unto Abraham, 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 p. 22diſperſion, 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 outward 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 ſaving 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 ſpeaketh 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 otherwiſe; 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 ſecond 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 promiſe, untill they beleeve; therefore, neither thoſe children; which hee further confirmeth, that if then they were in Covenant, 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 onelyonly ſalve of guiltie conſciences, 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 fulfilled, 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 wicked, p. 23and 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 particular Mr. B. jumpeth with ſome others mentioned: as hee did in that, that this was ſpoken to comfort guiltie conſciences caſt down, Matth. 27. 25.Matt 27:25as well in regard of that bloody wiſh againſt their children, as in reſpect of other bloody acts againſt Chriſt. In theſe different apprehenſions 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 Scripture proofe, to make this ſenſe of the promiſe is to you, (i. e.) is fulfilled to you, nor yet doth that in Act. 3. 25, 26. yee are the children 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 Scripture, 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 comfort them, unleſſe alſo in and by Chriſt come in the fleſh, there bee ſome promiſe made to them, touching the removall of thoſe burdens of guilt which lay upon them. 3. The bleſſing principally propounded to them, for their reviving, healing, ſuccour, and p. 24ſupport, it was not Chriſts ſending, nor his being ſent, but remiſſion of ſinnes, verſ. 38. wherefore unleſſe the Apoſtle argue impertinently, 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 contained 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 Covenant with God, ſo much as externally, as being long divorced from God, and his Covenant, and Church-liberties, yet the Gentiles in the maine of their outlawry condition, were as one with them. Yea, but the converſion of the Gentiles was not yet revealed, till Act. 10. in that viſion. What? had not Chriſt before this Sermon of Peters declared his mind to all his Apoſtles touching the diſcipling, and In-churching of the Gentiles? onelyonly they knew not whether it might be by joyning them firſt by way of addition, as proſelytes to the Jewes, rather then by gathering them into other diſtinct Churches. 4. It's affirmed, that this promiſed 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 convert 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 uncalled perſons? is it to them, that they may bee called, yet the perſons 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 promiſe 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.

p. 25SECT. 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 mentioned, Act 2. hee doth not intend it thus, your children, (i. e.) Abrahams 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 Abraham 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 children, 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 children; 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 adminiſtration, and no more is pleaded for: and ſo much is to Gentile 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 daughters: 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 p. 26allegorically 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 onelyonly 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 fatherly precedents to others that ſhould bee called to follow their inſtant 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 exerted, after many words beſides, ver. 40, 41. But repent and bee baptized, de futuro, for the promiſe in praeſenti is to you, ſcil. in reſpect of externall right.

4. It would rather have diſcouraged then incouraged; ſtumbled, 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 downward, 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 p. 27deale ingenuouſly, is that all which in Act. 3. 25. 26. is underſtood, 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 onelyonly ſuch children, and not the Gentiles, 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 Prophets, 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 promiſe 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 himſelfe 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 p. 28doe ſtretch it to the future, with others, ſcil. that it is to them upon that limitation that they be called, namely effectually; ſurely he will not ſay, that the promiſe, i. e. the meere offer thereof is to beleevers. 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 adminiſtration 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 another reſpect of eſſentiall ſameneſſe of Covenant priviledges, wee have now proved and yeelded them to bee equall, yet ſo, as it maketh 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 onelyonly condition of obtaining theſe promiſed gifts, thoſe that caſt out devills in Chriſts name, &c. might have had ſomething 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 p. 29is partly occaſioned, verſ. 39. And for further diſcovery of this miſtaken 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 promiſe 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 neither 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 (onelyonly) ſhall propheſie. 3. The ſubjects inſtanced in Joel 2. are not reducible to the notions, as here mentioned, [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 children are put in the ſame skale with thoſe afar off, &c. The promiſe 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 foreign in the preſent tenſe, but not alike to all. The notion of the other as perſons afarre off, intimateth 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, p. 30made 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 intentionally, and quoad deum. And this promiſe here mentioned, Act. 2. 38, 39. containing in it remiſſion of ſinnes, and ſo the righteouſneſſe of faith, on which faith pitcheth, Rom. 4. 7, 8. with 11. what was it other, then that which by circumciſion was viſibly ſealed unto them and their children, by Gods owne appointment? Circumciſion 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 Covenant, 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 juſtification, 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 promiſe 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 onelyonly are the children of the promiſe, and the choyce ſeed in that generall Covenant, ſcil. in reſpect of the ſaving efficacy of the Covenant upon 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 onelyonly, 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 repent, p. 31and be baptized, not becauſe then the promiſe ſhould be theirs, but becauſe the promiſe was theirs already, in the ſenſe mentioned, repent and bee baptized: for the promiſe is to you, or belongs 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 Covenant 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 repented: 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 adultmembers under offence, and admoniſhed thereof by Peter: they might for their obſtinacy againſt ſuch an admonition notwithſtanding 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 obſtinacy 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 internally in the Covenant, it is not that we plead for: it of being externally, or quoad homines, we have proved, they were ſo in Covenant and Church eſtate alſo; as being yet in the Olive and kingdome 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 intereſted in the Covenant of Grace, the ſubject of the Goſpell, and the ſame eſſentially with that Goſpel, or Chriſtian Church; unleſſe, whilſt the Jewiſh Church ſtood, any will ſay, there was no p. 32Evangelicall 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 Evangelicall Church: ſince it was Gods onelyonly viſible Church, in the time of Chriſts incarnation, of which hee lived and dyed a member: and none will ſay, hee was no member of any Evangelicall Church, but of a legall; nor was it becauſe the ſeale of Baptiſme 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 diſpenſation or adminiſtred onelyonly 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 onelyonly 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 perſons, which were the reformed part of that Jewiſh Church, continuing 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: Matth. 10. 6, 7. and 16. 24. Iohn 10. 16.Matt 10:6Matt 10:7Matt 16:24John 10:16either gathering into diſtinct Churches, or calling to them other ordinary Church-officers; which yet were not actually given by Chriſt, untill upon his aſcenſion, Epheſ. 4. 8. 11, 12, &c. but the reaſon rather was partly becauſe (as was ſaid) they were under ſuch offence: and partly becauſe 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 members: and partly becauſe it was now requiſite, not onelyonly to acknowledge the promiſed Meſſiah of Abrahams loynes, to be hee alone, p. 33which 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 witneſeth, 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 Churches, 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 ſubjection 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 withall being deſirous, not to bee with us barely, as tranſient members, by vertue of Communion of Churches, but being to be of us, as fixed members, wee reſt not in their former Church ingagements; 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 therefore 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 p. 34turned from their ſinnes, as if this were quoad homines, their onelyonly rule of judging of perſons viſible intereſt in the Covenant of grace, or viſible right to the initiatory ſeale thereof: or at leaſt the onelyonly 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 forthwith baptized, albeit an Indian or Black a more; but calling as taken 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 mentioned 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 cumbers 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 Abrahams 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 circumciſed 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 cenſures from the Church; as of old, Ezek. 16. 20, 21. is mentioned of thoſe Idolaters. Now if not ſo when their Parents are p. 35wrought upon by Peters Sermon, as the parents were thus farre loſers, 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 Covenant, 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 revealed 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 according 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 onelyonly limitation, that they be effectually 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 ordinary 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 publiquely 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 circumciſe 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.

p. 363. If Peter ſhould intend by that clauſe, ſuch an excluſion at preſent, of the Jewes babes from that externall intereſt in the Covenant 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 divine 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 promiſe 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.