The Estate of Children of Church Members and their Right to Baptism, Treatise · Part 1 · Chapter 3 · Section 11
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 viſibly 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 nature, 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 nature children of wrath. But take nature for a birth eſtate of covenant-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, inchurched 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 covenant 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 ſinners 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 promiſe 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 covenant 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 adminiſtrations, 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 never out. And beſides Gods covenant of ſaving grace, being abſolute and undertaking to give▪ ſaving grace to ſuch as are in covenant 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 unborne intentionally, verſ. 14, 15. as well as with thoſe then preſent actually: So that when they were borne, they were born in that covenant 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 himſelfe 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 followed not, that therefore it took no effect at all, and that God was unfaithfull: 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 cannot 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 Apoſtle 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 bleſſing indefinitely, even Abrahams bleſſing to his ſeed, the ſame bleſſing, 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 withall to ſpiritualls, and eccleſiaſticall good alſo, whence the Apoſtle 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 reſtipulation, 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 covenant 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, before 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 covenant, 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 Abraham 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 covenant 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, covenant 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 acknowledged 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 promiſing life to the wicked, and ſo keeping of him from returning. I.S. C.B. I.S.C.B. C.B.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 beleeve 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 covenant 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 together 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 doctrine 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 covenant right of Abrahams ſpirituall ſeed, on the ſameneſſe of that covenant with us in the eſſentialls of it: then there was ſuch a particular 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 children, 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 ordained the Jewes children to bee his, and his Church covenant children, 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 account 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 expreſſed, 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, whereof 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 Prophets, 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 Teſtament, 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 Teſtament.
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 Teſtament 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 onelyonly; and hee maketh Abraham 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 onelyonly, the Apoſtle calleth all thoſe inchurched Jewes of old our fathers, fathers to him and to the Gentiles, 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 neither 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 Abraham in that conſideration of ſuch a faithfull man, with whom the covenant was made, and with his ſeed ſo diſtinguiſhed from all beleevers, whether of Jewes or Gentiles, was therein a patterne to all beleevers actually, whether of Jews or Gentiles, yea that he was eſpecially 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 becauſe 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. elſewhere, yea in the ſame place as followeth.
Object. All beleevers, and onelyonly 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 onelyonly 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 whether 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 promiſe 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 onelyonly, 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 baptized? for all that were baptized are ſaid to bee one in Chriſt as having 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 children 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, onelyonly the elect amongſt them were ſuch, in the latter ſenſe, all in common, 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 concluding 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 before 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 being made with Abraham and his ſeed, Abraham ſuſtaining the perſon of all beleevers, Jewes and Gentiles, which in a ſenſe alſo were his ſeed in that covenant, hence therefore the covenant ſtill is onelyonly between Abraham and his ſeed.