Baptism, Part 2 · Arguments
The Arguments from Circumciſion Examined.
Another, and none of the leaſt Arguments that is urged to prove Infants Baptiſme by, is from pretended Conſequences, from the Covenant made with Abraham, Gen. 17.
From whence it is thus argued.
THoſe to whom the Goſpel Covenant belonged, The Argument from Circumciſionto them the Seal thereof appertained; but to Believers and their Seed, the Goſpel Covenant belonged; as Gen. 17.7. I'le be a God to thee, and to thy Seed; and Acts 2.39. The Promiſe is to you and your Child…en.
Therefore to them the Seal thereof Circumciſion ſo called, Rom. 4.11. did appertain, Gen. 17.10. For the Foederati were to be Signati, thoſe in the Covenant were to have the Seal thereof. And therefore by Conſequence it naturally followeth; That if Circumciſion, the Seal of the Goſpel Covenant belonged to the Seed of Believers under the Law, then doth the Goſpel Seal, Baptiſme, much more appertain to the Seed of Believers under the Goſpel, which comes in the Place, Room, and Ʋſe of Circumciſion, otherwiſe the priviledge under the Gospel, would be leſs then that of the Law; ſhould Children be denied ſuch a benefit.
Anſwer. That this is falacious, and falſe reaſoning, (and that there is …o natural Conſequence at all from this Scripture, to infer the Baptizing of Infants; nor any ground to build the Goſpel-Ordinance Baptiſme, upon the command of the Legal-Ordinance Circumciſion) may fully appear by examining the following particulars, which are begged, but not proved in the Argument.
1. Whether Circumciſion, called here the Goſpel Seal, did of old belong to all in Goſpel-Covenant.
2. Whether the new (or Gospel) Covenant, and that mentioned Gen 17. be one and the ſame.
3. Whether the Seed mentioned was Abrahams Natural or Spiritual Seed.
4. Whether Circumciſion was a Seal of the new Covenant to the Children under the Law.
5. Whether Circumciſion was adminiſtred to Believers as Believers, and to their Seed only.
6. Whether Baptiſme did ſucceed in the Place, Room and Ʋſe of …ircumciſion.
7. Whetheo the not baptizing Infants makes the priviledges under the Goſpel, leſs then the Circumciſing them under the Law.
To the firſt,Circumciſion, not the Seal of the Goſpel Covenant to all Believers. Whether Circumciſion called the Goſpel-Seal did belong of old to all in Goſpel-Covenant.
'Tis anſwered, that the contrary doth manifeſtly appear upon a double account; 1. Becauſe ſome that were in the Goſpel-Covenant were not Sealed; and 2dly. ſome that were out of the Covenant were Sealed therewith.
1.1. Many in Covenant not Sealed with it. There were many perſons in Covenant that were not Circumciſed, that were Foederati, but not Signati; as for inſtance, all the Believers from Adam to Abraham, who received no ſuch Seal; nor 2dly. did any of the Believers out of Abrahams Family, as Lot, Melchiſedeck. Job, that we read of, received any ſuch Seal; neither 3dly. did any of the believing Families in any Age receive it.
2. Many out of the Covenant they were Sealed.And 2dly. there were ſome to whom the Covenant did not belong, that received that called the Seal of Circumciſion: For of Iſhmael God had ſaid, that this Covenant was not to be eſtabliſhed with him, but with Iſaak, and yet he was Circumciſed, Gen. 17.20, 21, 25. Gal. 4.29.30. And the ſame may be ſaid of Eſau, Rom. 9.10, 11, 12.13. And as to all the Strangers in Abrahams Houſe, or bought with Money in Iſrael, that were Circumciſed, it may well be doubted whether the New Covenant Promiſes did belong to them.
2. The Covenant in Gen. 17 a mixt Covenant as the Seed was.To the ſecond, Whether the Ne… Covenant, and that mentioned in Gen. 17. be the ſame.
In anſwer whereto it muſt be underſtood, That as Abraham by Promiſe ſtood in a double Capacity, viz. The Father of a Nation, viz. the Natural Iſraelites; ſo to be alſo a Father of many Nations, comprehending the Spiritual Iſrael, whether Jews or Gentiles throughout the world; and ſo accordingly the Promiſes were of two ſorts, ſometimes reſpecting his Natural Seed, whether Domeſtick or National, who were Typical of the Spirtual, as the Birth of Iſaac, the deliverance of his Poſterity out of Egypt, the poſſeſſing of the Land of Canaan, with many outward Temporal Bleſſings, and benefits annexed thereto, as Gen. 15.13, 18.17.8.15, 16. Acts 7.3, 4, 5, 6.
And others again reſpecting in a peculiar manner the Spiritual Seed, the Family, of the faithful, viz. the Elect, of whom through Chriſt he was Father, and which are Evangelical, and in an eſpecial manner belonging to the new Covenant, as Gen. 12.3.18.18. In thee ſhall all Nations be bleſſed, which is called a Goſpel-promiſe, Gal. 3.8, 9. ſo Gen. 15.5. So ſhall thy Seed be, Gen. 17.5. A Father of many Nations. And Verſe the 8th. To be his God, and the God of his Seed. And therefore muſt the mind of Wiſdom rightly diſtinguiſh, and truly apply the Promiſes that are many times ſo mixed, that the one may be taken for the other, and ſure I am, much of the miſtake and error lies here in this very thing, by applying that to the one, which belongs to the other.
3. The Seed in the 7th. Verſe the Spiritual Seed only.But 3dly. What Seed of Abraham is it to whom the Promiſe doth belong? In the 7th. Verſe, Whether the Natural or Spiritual, and who thoſe Children of Promiſe, Acts 2.39.
To the clearing the firſt, namely, That of the Seed, Verſe the 7th. I ſhall refer you to the Expoſition it ſelf, the Scripture hath given us hereof, with the concurring ſence of many judicious Expoſitors, and all of them parties themſelves.
1. The Scriptures expounding this Text are Gal. 3.16.Gal. 3.16 Now to Abraham and his Seed were the Promiſes made; he ſaith not to Seeds as of many, but as of one, and to thy Seed which is Chriſt; And therefore ſaith Ver. 29. If you be Chriſts, then are you Abrahams Seed & Heirs according to Promiſe, and farther, Rom. 9.7, 8.Ro. 9.7, 8 Neither becauſe they are the Seed of Abraham are they all Children, but in Iſaac ſhall thy Seed be called; that is, they which are the Children of the Fleſh. Theſe are not the Children of God; but the Children of the Promiſe are counted for the Seed. And Rom. 4. 13, 14.Rom. 4.13, 14. For the promiſe that he ſhould be the Heir of the World, was not to Abraham, or to his Seed through the Law, but through the Righteouſneſs of faith; for if they which are of the Law be Heirs, faith is made void, and the Promiſe made of none effect.
Which ſo fully confirms the Seed here mentioned, to whom the Promiſe belonged, not to be the Carnal but Spiritual Seed, and in farther confirmation thereof, you have theſe following Authors, and all of them Paedobaptiſts, viz.
Calvin Calvin,upon Gen. 17.7. ſaith, That it is manifeſt that the Promiſe underſtood of Spiritual bleſſing, pertaineth not to the Carnal Seed of Abraham, but to the Spiritual; as the Apoſtle himſelf ſaith, Rom. 4. & 9. Chap. For if you underſtand the Carnal Seed, (ſaith he) then that Promiſe will belong to none of the Gentiles. but to thoſe alone who are begotten of Abraham, and Iſaac according to the Fleſh, Eſtius Ann. Gen. 17.7.
Ainſworth on Gen. 12.7.Ainſw. [thy Seed] That is, all the Children of Promiſe, (the Elect) who only are counted Abrahams Seed, Rom. 9.7, 8. And in Chriſt are Heirs by Promiſe, as well the Gentile… as the Jews.
Dr. Owen Dr. Owenin his Book called the Doctrine of Saints perſeverance, in Chap. 4. arguing from the Covenant of Grace, to prove the unchangableneſs of the love of God, begins with Gen. 17.7. ſaying, That the effectual diſpenſation of the Grace of the Covenant is peculiar t… them only, who are the Children of Promiſe; the Remnant of Abraham according to Election, with all that in al… Nations were to be bleſſed by him and his Seed Jeſus Chriſt; Iſhmael though Circumciſed, was to be put out; and not to be Heir with Iſaac, and a little after he writes thus; what bleſſing then was here made over to Abraham. All the bleſſings ſaith he that from God are conveyed in and by his ſeed Jeſus Chriſt, i… whom both he and we are bleſſed, are wrapped therein, what they are, the Apostle tells you, Eph. 1.13. They are all Spiritual bleſſings, if perſeverance, if the continuance of the love and favour of God towards us be a Spiritual bleſſing, both Abraham and all his Spiritual Seed, all faithfull ones, throughout the world are bleſſed with it in Jeſus Chriſt, and if Gods continuing to be a God to them for ever, will enforce this bleſſing, (being but the ſame thing in another expreſſion) it is here likewiſe aſſerted.
Ameſius Ameſius.de Praedeſt. Chap, 8. Ser. 6. ſaith, There are many of the Seed of Abraham, to whom the word of Promiſe doth not belong, as Iſhmael and Iſhmaelites. But if ſo, there be many of the Seed of Abraham; to whom the word of Promiſe doth not belong: Then the rejection of many Jews who are of the Seed of Abraham doth not make void the word of Promiſe. From whence may we not ſafely conclude, that if the natural Posterity of Abraham, were not within the Covenant of Grace by vertue of the Promiſe, Gen. 17.7, Then much leſs are our natural Poſterity; but the former is true, Rom. 9.6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. ſo is the latter.
To which we might add divers others, but let theſe ſuffice.
And from the contrary perſwaſion what diſmal Conſequences would ariſe.The evil Conſequences of the contrary: For if God made his Covenant of Grace with the Poſterity of Believers, as this Doctrine aſſerts. Then all the Poſterity of Believers ſhould certainly have Crace beſtowed upon them; for it is the Covenant of God which doth convey Grace, Rom. 4.16. 2 Cor, … 30. None miſſing of Grace from Go… faithfulneſs, which Mr. Blake doth … confidently affirm,Mr. Bla. P. 6. ſaying, Th… Chriſtianity is hereditary, that as t… Children of a Noble man is Noble, t… Child of a Free man Free, of a Turk Turk, and of a Jew a Jew; ſo the Chi… of a Chriſtian is a Chriſtian, in contr… diction not only of Scripture, whic… ſaith, we are Children of wrath b… Nature, but of all former and latter experience.
Then would Grace be a Birth, Pr… viledge, and Regeneration (as before tyed to Generation, contrary to J… 3.3. & Jo. 1.12, 13.
Then muſt all the Poſterity of Believers be ſaved, without you will neceſſitate the Doctrine to be true, th… men may fall from Grace.
Then muſt we tie up and confine th… Grace of Gods Covenant to the Children of Believers only, and then wha… hope for the Children of unbeliever… contrary to the Experience of all Age… For was not Grace extended to th… Gentiles, who were not the Children o… Believers when the natural Branche… the Children of believing Abraham were …ut off.
Then is the Covenant of Grace it ſelf overthrown, concluding an Intereſt without faith, Rom. 4.14. deriving a Ti…le by natural Generation.
And as to the other Scripture of the 2. Acts 38, 39.Act. 2.38. anſw. urged as a Parallel to the other. It is ſo indeed, rightly underſtood, but not at all in the ſence ſuppoſed.
For firſt it is to be obſerved, that the promiſe there made, is the giving the Sperit, called the promiſe of the Father, prophecied of by Joel 2.28. and doth follow the receiving of Chriſt in the Goſpel, Eph. 1.13. Gal. 3.14. and the obeying his commands, Acts 5.32. Therefore in the 38. Ver. Peter exhorts them to Repentance, and faith in order to the receiving of it; becauſe the Promiſe is to them and their Children, viz. to the Jews, and to them that are afar off to the Gentiles alſo, e…even as many of both as the Lord ſhould call, therefore the Promiſe is not made but upon condition of Calling, and Faith, and Baptiſme.
Secondly, It is remarkable that the Apoſtle doth firſt exhort to Repentance, then to Baptiſme, ſhewing the order that Chriſt had directed to in the Commiſſion; neither is the Promiſ… mentioned, as though of it ſelf it gave right to Baptiſme without Repentance but as a Motive why they ſhould repent and be baptized, that they migh… alſo as others had done, before the… Eyes be made partakers of the Hol… Spirit, which the Prophets had foretold, and Chriſt had promiſed, where in Infants [neither capable of Faith▪ Repentance and Calling] are not concerned in the Text, and by Childr… spoken of are no other meant, then th… poſterily of, the Jews, for who know not that they are ſo called, and that m… Child is my Child, though 40. or 50 years old; upon which Text Dr. Hamond in his Reſolution concerning Infa… Baptiſme, Dr. HamSect. 81. hath to this purpoſe. In the next place, ſaith he, … attempted the diſproving of all Arguments brought in defence of Pedobaptiſ… from Peters words, Acts 2.39. T… which ſaith the Dr. I anſwer, That … any have made uſe of that unconclude… Argument, I have nothing to ſay in defence of them; I think the practiſe is founded upon better Baſis then ſo, and the word Children there is really the poſterity of the Jews, and not particularly their Infant Children.
And Dr. Talor upon this Scripture, Dr. Tal.Page 233. ſaith, That the words mentioned in St. Peters Sermon, (which are the only Records of the Promiſe) are interpreted upon a weak miſtake. The Promiſe belongs to you and your Children, therefore Infants are actually receptive of it in that capacity; that is, the Argument, but the Reaſon of it is not yet diſcovered, nor ever will; for [to you and your Children] is to you and your Poſterity, to you and your Children, when they are of the ſame capacity, in which you are receptive of the Promiſe. But he that whenever the word [Children] is uſed in Scripture, ſhall by [Children] underſtand Infants, muſt needs believe, that in all Iſrael there were no men but all were Infants, and if that had been true, it had been the greater wonder they ſhould overcome the Anakims, and beat the King of Moab, and march ſo far, and diſcourſe ſo well; for they were all called the Children of Iſrael.
The fourth thing to be inquired into, is, Whether Circumciſion was a Seal of the new Covenant to the Believers, and their Seed?
To which I anſwer in the Negative, that it was neither a Seal to them,Circumciſion only a Seal to Abraham not to Believers, nor their Seed. not much leſs a Seal to them of the new Covenant. It is true, it was a Seal, Confirmation, or Ratification of the faith that Abraham had long before he was Circumciſed; but ſo could it, not be ſaid of any Infant that had no faith. It was a Sign put into the Fleſh of the Infant; but a Sign and Seal only to Abraham witneſſing to him that he not only had a justifying faith, but to the truth of the Promiſes, viz. That he ſhould be the father of many Nations, Gen. 12.23. 2dly. The father of the faithful, Rom 4.11. Heir of the World, Rom. 4.13. That in hi… all the Families of the Earth ſhould … bleſſed, viz. in Chriſt proceeding fro… him which was no wayes true of any Infant that ever was Circumciſed; for none had before their Circumciſio… ſuch a faith, that intitled them to ſuch ſingular Promiſes; the ſcope in that place in the 4. Rom. being to ſhew, That Abraham himſelf was not juſtified by Works, no not by Circumciſion, but by faith which he had, long before he was Circumciſed, and ſo but a Seal or Confirmation of that faith which he had before, and to aſſure him of the truth of thoſe ſpecial Promiſes, made to him and his Seed both Carnal and Spiritual.
And to which purpoſe you have both Chryſoſtome and Theophylact, Chryſoſt. and The.as Mr. Lawr. P. 168. viz. It was called a Seal of the Righteouſneſs of Faith; becauſe it was given to Abraham as a Seal and Teſtimony of that Righteouſneſs, which he had acquired by faith: Now this ſeems to be the priviledge of Abraham alone, and not to be transferred to others, as if Circumciſion in whom ever it was, were a Teſtimony of Divine Righteouſneſs; for as it was the priviledge of Abraham, that he ſhould be the Father of all the faithfull, as well Circumciſed as uncircumciſed, being already the father of all uncircumciſed, having faith in Ʋncircumciſion, he received firſt the ſign of Circumciſion, that he might be the father of the Circumciſed. Now becauſe he had this priviledge, in reſpect of the Righteouſneſs which he had acquired by faith, therefore the ſign of Circumciſion was to him a Seal of the Righteouſneſs of faith: But to the reſt of the Jews it was a ſign that they were Abraham's Seed; but not a Seal of the Righteouſneſs of faith, as all the Jews alſo were not the fathers of many Nations.
Secondly, Much leſs was Circumciſion a Seal of the new Teſtament, as before; for nothing is a Seal thereof, but the Holy Spirit, Eph. 1.13.4.30.
Thirdly, Neither is Baptiſme more then Circumciſion called a Seal; It i… called a Figure, 1 Pet. 3.21. And … is a ſign as before: But a ſign and figure proper only to men of underſtanding, repreſenting Spiritual things and Myſteries: And not as Circumciſion, which was a ſign not improper for Infants; becauſe it left a ſignal impreſſion in their fleſh to be remembred all their days, but ſo cannot Baptiſme be to any Infants.
5. Circumciſion not adminiſtred only to believers & their ſeedThe fifth thing to be examined it, Whether Circumciſion was adminiſtred to Believers as Believers, and to their See… after them; as ſuch, to which Baptiſme was to Correſpond.
It is anſwered by no means; for it was an Ordinance, which by the inſtitution belonged to all the natural Linage, and poſterity of Abraham good or bad, without any ſuch limitation, as was put upon Baptiſme, If thou believeſt with all thy Heart thou mayſt, Acts 8. or any ſuch qualification to an Infant capable to receive it, that he ſhould have a believing Parent; but will you deny Abraham to be a believing Parent? and was not he a Father to them all? What then! he was a publick common Father, which reaches not the caſe in hand; for he was no ſuch father to them; neither have they any other in his ſtead, therefore the Analogy holds not; yet if they had would it avail? for that Priviledge would not ſtand the natural Children of Abraham in any ſtead to admit them to Baptiſme; which though they claimed upon that account, Mat. 3. John rejects them upon it calling them a Generation of Vipers, bidding them bring forth fruits meet for Repentance, and which only would give them admittance to the Baptiſme of Repentance, and that it was not enough to ſay they had Abraham for their father. And to the ſame purpoſe doth our Saviour tell Nicodemus a Mr. in Iſrael, that without the new Birth his Birth-priviledge would not avail him in the Goſpel-priviledges, Joh. 3. and with more ſeverity doth he tell the Jews, that however they bore up themſelves, as the Sons of Abraham, yet without believing in Chriſt, who could only make them free, 6. Baptiſm came not in the room, place, & uſe of Circumciſion. 1. Not in the room and ſteadthey were Bond-ſlaves to ſin, and the Children of the Devil.
The ſixth thing to be ſearched after is, Whether Baptiſme did ſucceed in the Room, Place and uſe of Circumciſion. To which I anſwer by no means, for the following Reaſons.
1. Not in the room and ſtead.
1. Becauſe then only Males, not Females, would be baptized; becauſe no other Circumciſed, but all believing women, as well as men, were to be baptized, Acts 8.12, 16.14.15.
2. Becauſe then ſome, not all Believers, ſhould be baptized; becauſe not only women, as before, were not admitted; but all Believers out of Abrahams Family, to whom he was a Spiritual father; becauſe he was a Believer before he was Circumciſed, Rom. 4.11, 12. Whereas all Believers according to the Commiſſion were to be baptized.
3. Becauſe then the Circumciſed needed not to have been baptized, if they had been already ſealed with the new Covenant-ſeal: But Chriſt himſelf, and all his Apoſtles, and ſo many of the Churches were Circumciſed, yet nevertheleſs were baptized.
2. Not to the ends and uſes2. Not to the ends and uſes. neither as ſuggeſted upon the following grounds.
1. Becauſe Circumciſion was a ſign of Chriſt to come in the fleſh; and Baptiſme, that he was already come in the fleſh, witneſſing to his Incarnation, Death, Burial, and Reſurrection.
2. Circumciſion was to be a partition Wall betwixt Jew and Gentile; but Baptiſme teſtified the contrary, viz. That Barbarian, Scythian, Bond and Free, Jew and Gentile, Male or Female, were all one in Chriſt. Cornelius the Gentile muſt be baptized, and have the Spirit given to witneſs, that nothing muſt be called common or unclean, where God had purified the Heart by believing.
3. Circumciſion initiated the Carnal Seed into the Carnal Church, and gave them right to the Carnal Ordinances; but Baptiſme was to give the Spiritual Seed an orderly entrance into the Spiritual Church, and a right to partake of the Spiritual Ordinances.
4. Circumciſion was to be a Bond and Obligation to keep the whole Law of Moſes's; but Baptiſme witneſſed that Moſes Law was made void, and that only Chriſt's …aw was to be kept.
5. Circumciſion was adminiſtred to all Abrahams natural Seed, without any profeſſion of Faith; Repentance or Regeneration; whereas Baptiſme to be adminiſtred to the Spiritual Seed of Abraham, was only upon profeſſion of Faith, Repentance and Regeneration, and which appears more fully by the following Inſtances compared.
1. Becauſe a Carnal Parent, and a fleſhly begetting by the the Legal Birth-priviledge, gave right to Circumciſion; whereas a Spiritual begetting by a Spiritual Parent, gave only a true right to Baptiſme.
2. Becauſe a Legal, Eccleſiaſtical, Typical Holineſs (when Land, Mountains, Houſes, Birds, Beaſts, and Trees were holy) qualified for Circumciſion; whereas only Evangelical and Perſonal Holineſs was a meet qualification for Baptiſme.
3. Becauſe Strangers and Servants bought with Money, and all ignorant Children of Eight days old, yea Trees were capable of Circumciſion; whereas only men of underſtanding that were capable to believe with all their Heart, and to give an account thereof with their mouths, were to be eſteemed capable Subjects of Baptiſme.
6. Circumciſion was to be a ſign of Temporal Bleſſings and Benefits to be enjoyed in the Land of Canaan; whereas Baptiſme was to be a ſign (as before) of many Spiritual benefits, viz. Remiſſion of ſins, Juſtification, Sanctification here, and Eternal Salvation hereafter.
It is granted there are in ſome things an Analogy betwixt the one and the other, both ſignifying Heart-Circumciſion, and an initiating into the Church, though as a different Church; ſo different Subjects, and Church Members, upon different grounds, and to different ends, as before, and in a far different manner; one to be done in a private Houſe, and by a private Hand, and the other in ſome publick place, and by the hand of ſome publick Miniſter appointed by the Church to adminiſter the ſame.
But now becauſe there is ſome Analogy in ſome things, is there therefore ground to conclude, it cometh into the room, ſtead, and uſe thereof? by no means; for by the ſame Argument we may as well conclude, that it cometh in the room and ſtead of the Ark, Manna, Rock, &c. And from ſuch like Arguments drawn from Analogies what Jewiſh Rites may not by our wits be introduced, to the countenancing the Papiſts in their High Prieſthood, National Churches, Orders of Prieſthood, Tythes, and all other their innumerable Rites and Ceremonies, that without any Inſtitution of Chriſt, or pretence of new Teſtament-authority, they have intr… duced or impoſed upon the account of Analogy with old Teſtament-Rites and Services. Concerning which you have the Lord Brooks in his Treatiſe of Epiſcopacy,L Brooks P. 100 ſaying very well, viz. That the Analogy which Baptiſme now hath with Circumciſion in the old Law, is a fine rati…nal Argument to illuſtrate a Point well proved before; but I ſomewhat doubt (ſaith he) whether it be proof enough for that which ſome would prove by it, ſince (beſides the vaſt difference in the Ordinance) the perſons to be Circumciſed are ſtated by a poſitive Law, ſo expreſs that it leaves no place for Scruple; but it is far otherwiſe in Baptiſme, where all the deſignation of Perſons fit to be partakers, for ought I know, is only ſuch as believe; for this is the qualification which with exacteſt ſearch I find the Scripture requires in Perſons to be baptized, and this it ſeems to require in all ſuch Perſons; now how Infants can be properly ſaid to believe, I am not yet fully reſolved.
And very full and moſt excellently you have to this point Dr. Taylor, Dr. Taylp. 228. Who ſaith, That the Argument from Circumciſion is invalid upon infinite conſiderations: Figures and Types prove nothing, unleſs a Commandment go along with them, or ſome expreſs to ſignifie ſuch to be their purpoſe: For the Deluge of Waters, and the Ark of Noah, were a Figure of Baptiſme ſaid Peter; and if therefore the Circumſtances of one ſhould be drawn to the other, we ſhould make Baptiſme a Prodigy, rather than a Rite; the Paſchal Lamb was a Type of the Euchariſt, which ſucceeds the other, as Baptiſme doth to Circumciſion; but becauſe there was in the manducation of the Paſchal Lamb no preſcription of Sacramental drink, ſhall we thence conclude that the Euchariſt is to be adminiſtred but in one kind? And even in the very Inſtance of this Argument, ſuppoſing a Correſpondency of Analogy between Circumciſion and Baptiſme, yet there is no Correſpondence of Identity; for although it were granted, that both of them did conſign the Covenant of faith, yet there is nothing in the Circumſtance of Childrens being Circumciſed that ſo concerns that Myſtery, but that it might very well be given to Children, and yet Baptiſme only to men of Reaſon; becauſe Circumciſion left a Character in the fleſh, which being imprinted upon Infants, did its work to them when they came to age, and ſuch a Character was neceſſary, becauſe there was no word added to the Sign; but Baptiſme imprints nothing that remains on the Body, and if it leaves a Character at all, it is upon the Soul, to which alſo the word is added, which is as much a part of the Sacrament, as the Sign it ſelf: for both which Reaſons it is requiſite, that the Parties Baptized ſhould be capable of Reaſon, that they may be capable both of the word of the Sacrament, and the impreſs made upon the Spirit; ſince therefore the Reaſon of this Parity does wholly fail, there is nothing left to infer a neceſſity of complying in this Circumſtance of a…e, any more then in the other Annexes of the Type; then the Infants must alſo preciſely be Baptized upon the Eighth day, and Females muſt not be baptized, becauſe not Circumciſed; but it were more proper, if we would underſtand it right, to proſecute the Analogy from the Type to the Antitype by way of Letter and Spirit and ſignification: and as Circumciſion figures Baptiſme, ſo alſo the adjuncts of the Circumciſion, ſhall ſignifie ſomething Spiritual in the adherences of Baptiſme; and therefore as Infants were Circumciſed, ſo spirial Infants ſhall be Baptized, which is Spiritual Circumciſion; for therefore Babes had the Miniſtry of the Type, to ſignifie that we muſt, when we give our names to Chriſt become Children in malice, and then the Type is made compleat, &c. Thus far the Dr.
7. Whether the not Baptizing Infants makes the priviledge under the Goſpel leſs then under the Law, who had then Circumciſion.
7 Not baptizing of Infants, makes not Goſpel-Priviledges leſs then Legal.To which I anſwer, not at all, for the Reaſons following.
1. Becauſe they were not Circumciſed, becauſe they were Children of Believers, or Sealed with a new Covenant Seal, as being in the new Covenant thereby, as before proved; but upon the account of a Birth-priviledge as being of the natural Linage and Seed of Abraham, as a Typical ſhadowy thing; all whoſe poſterity were to he marked therewith, to diſtinguiſh them from the Nations, and to keep that Line clear, from whence Chriſt according to the Fleſh ſhould come, and to oblige them to keep the Law, &c. But no ſuch thing in the Goſpel; the Body and Subſtance being come, the Shadow was to vaniſh and paſs away, no common Father then but Chriſt, and if Chriſts, then Abrahams Seed, and Heirs of Promiſe, no Birth priviledge, but the new Birth; therefore to go back to the national Birth priviledge, is ſo far from being a Priviledge, that it i… a Bondage rather, to return to the Type and Shadow, the Antitype and Subſtance being come.
2. Neither ought ſuch a thing to be any more eſteemed the loſs of a Priviledge, then our not enjoying literally a Holy Land, City, Temple, a ſucceſſion of a High Prieſt, and a Prieſthood by Generation or Lineal deſcent, (for y…u know their Children were Prieſts ſucceſſively in their Generation, a …evite begat a Prieſt or Miniſter, as well as the other Tribes begat Church-Members) ſince all thoſe Types are Spiritualiſed to us the Believers under the Goſpel, who are now the Holy Nation, the Holy City and Temple, the Royal Prieſthood, and all Church-Members by Regeneration, not Generation. Therefore we are ſo far from being looſers by the Bargain, that as far as Chriſt exceeds Moſes and Aaron, the Goſpel, the Law, the Antitype, the Type, the Spiritual Birth, the Carnal, the Extent of all Nations, the Confines of Judea; ſo far are we better, and not worſe.
Nor thirdly, if it ſhould be taken for granted, that Circumciſion was a Seal of the new Covenant belonging to all the Children of Iſrael, then would not the Baptizing of the Children of Believers anſwer it; Neither amount to ſo great a Priviledge, no… be equivalent to it, for theſe Reaſons.
Firſt, there were all the Families and Tribes of Iſrael (and all Proſ…lyted ſtrangers) with their Children without diſtinction of good or bad, to be Circumciſed: But here only one of a City, or two of a Tribe; for Believers are but thin ſown, and the Children of unbelievers, and wicked men are to receive no ſuch benefit in the judgment of ſo many.
And Secondly, you …ould be very ſhort in another reſpect, as being at an utter uncertainty when you had a right Subject; for if the Parent was a Hypocrite, or no Elect Perſon, which is out of your reach to underſtand. you cannot know whether the Child be fit for Baptiſme; for the Seed of a wicked man you muſt not meddle with by any means, whereas there was not the leaſt doubt or ſcruple in Iſrael as to the Subject; for the Father being Circumciſed, it was an infallible mark they were right.
And Thirdly, neither can the Child (when he is grown up) have any certain knowledge, that ſuch a Ceremony hath paſt upon him in Infancy, he having no Infallible mark thereof; whereas the Circumciſed Infant had an indelible Character and mark in his fleſh, to aſſure him that he had received that Rite.
By all which demonſtrations you may underſtand; that we looſe no Priviledge under the Goſpel for not Baptizing our Infants, though they were Circumciſed under the …aw.