The Plea of the Children of Believing Parents, Section 3

The Plea of the Children of Believing Parents · Section 3

p. 31SECTION III.

Leaving then the Hiſtorieal part, by which Infant-baptiſm is much confirmed: Let us come to the holy Scriptures, out of which our Divines who have laboured in this Controverſie, have produced ſo many, that I know not how more can be well added; where therefore others have been large, I will be brief.

One man I knew (though I had no inward acquaintance with him) about fifty years ſince, a Mechanick, and Head of a ſeparate Company in thoſe days; he had none but his Mother-tongue, but a very good head in Polemical Divinity. This Doctrine of Anti-paedobaptiſm then being propounded to him, he rejected, though he had other Arguments againſt it, yet I took notice of this: I obſerve (ſaith he) ever ſince God had a people upon the earth, he made a p. 32difference between the families of his ſervants, and of wicked men, even before the flood, Gen. 6.2. There is not only truth, but ſtrength in it, what-ever the Anabaptiſts ſcribble againſt it.

Two Texts eſpecially my Author pitch upon, becauſe he thinks we build much upon them; Gen. 17.7. & 1 Cor. 7.14. and ſo we do: theſe he labours to take from us. That the children of the Jews were Church-members with their Parents, the Anabaptiſts acknowledge: Then they were made ſo, by this Covenant of God with Abraham and with his Seed, and the Commandment to Circumciſe them; here then we muſt begin.

From the 17. Gen. 7. I lay the Argument thus.

A gracious Covenant made, ſigned, and ſealed by God, with a believing Perſon and his Seed, and never repealed by God; that Covenant remaineth in force, and is to be ſigned and ſealed unto his Seed.

But that Covenant of God with Abraham (to be his God, and the God of his Seed, was ſuch a Covenant, and never repealed, Therefore

This we premiſe, There is a great difference between the outward Adminiſtration of an Ordinance, and the inward Efficacy? This is clear in the Lords Supper, p. 33preaching the Word, and ſo in Baptiſm; the Scripture is plain for this, and the Anabaptiſts cannot deny it.

Or, if you pleaſe to take Mr. Tho. Hooker's diſtinction, There is an Inward and an Outward Covenant. [Cov. of Grace, p. 2.3.]

Inward, ſtanding in a ſpiritual Inſtitution of it between God and man.

When God calls a people, and with his Call gives them Faith to anſwer his Call: So that now he is indeed their God, becomes theirs by Faith, and they who are thus in Covenant with him ſhall never fall.

2ly, The outward Covenant is more large; The Diſpenſation of this God gives on his part to Chriſtians, and their Engagements on their part, is Faith in him, ſubjection to him: He doth engage himſelf to them, and if they anſwer the outward Priviledge, he will make them a choice people, Exod. 19.5. Deut. 26.17, 18, &c. too long to tranſcribe.

By vertue of this Covenant, God was ſaid, To know them above all the Nations in the world, Amos 3.2. God ſet up his Tabernacle amongſt them, and dwelt amongſt them, Exod. 25.8. Pſal. 135.1. Choſe Iſrael for his peculiar treaſure, Pſal. 135.4. Gave them his Ordinances, Pſal. 147.19, 20. God wrought for them wonderfully; and though they p. 34provoked him exceedingly, yet he bare with them, and did not for Abraham's ſake caſt them out of his preſence as yet, 2 King. 13.23. Thus was he a God to them, the whole viſible Church of the Jews; by it God gave them a great advantage to lay hold upon God, to become their God, in an outward Covenant, in Efficacy, as well as in outward Adminiſtration: This I ſay, by vertue of this Covenant with Abraham, till, they dealt moſt wickedly with God in Covenant, rejecting Chriſt, the promiſed Seed in Abraham's. Covenant, in whom they ſhould be bleſſed; then God brake Covenant with them, and caſt them off, Zech. 11.10, 14.

As a people may beſaid to be Gods people, ſo God their God.

1. When they acknowledge God to be the onelyonly true God, and their God.

2. When they worſhip him with his own Worſhip onelyonly.

3. When they profeſs his Truths, Doctrines, and take his Word for their Rule.

4. When they do Covenant and engage themſelves to God. Yet among theſe may be many Hypocrites, and but formal Chriſtians; as Branches are ſaid to be in Chriſt, John 15.2.

My Author moves ſix Queſtions here p. 35to raiſe a duſt, and trouble the Reader, when things are plain; he might have reduced them to Three, what is conſiderable in the reſt I ſhall touch.

Firſt, I call it a Gracious Covenant: We read of ſeveral Promiſes God made to Abraham, Gen. 12.2, 3, 7. and Chap. 13, 14, 15, 16. and Chap. 15.1, 4, 5. But the word Covenant we read not of till this 17th Chapter, here we have it ſeveral times: and this Covenant between Abraham and his Seed, being the laſt branch of the Covenant [for Canaan in the next Verſe, was promiſed three times before] God now adds a Sign, verſe 11. which the Apoſtle calls a Seal, Rom. 4.11. So that now all the former Promiſes, God binds them up, and ſeals them up in a Covenant. The great Promiſe of all Chap. 12.3. In thy Seed ſhall all the Nations be bleſſed, is not mentioned in this Chapter, ſince God began to ſpeak of a Covenant; but this was a part of the Covenant, the Apoſtle Peter tells the Jews, Acts 3.25. Ye are the Children of the Covenant which God made with our Fathers, ſaying to Abrabam, And in thy Seed ſhall all the Kindreds of the earth be bleſſed.

Hence that this was a Covenant of Grace, no man can rationally deny. The Apoſtle is ſo clear for it in Rom. 4. and Gal. 3.

p. 361. How can God after the breach of the firſt Covenant, now Covenant with any to be their God, but by a Covenant of Grace?

2. A Covenant in which Chriſt is promiſed, and it is confirmed in Chriſt, Galat. 3.17.

3. A Covenant wherein God preacheth the Goſpel to Abraham, Gal. 3.8.

4. A Covenant, the Righteouſneſs whereof is the Righteouſneſs of Faith, Rom. 4.11.

5. A Covenant made 430 years, before the Covenant at Mount Sinai, which Sinai Covenant could not diſanul, Galat. 3.17.

Our Divines have cleared this ſo, that I ſay no more of it; and therefore being confirmed in Chriſt, it muſt be the ſame with the new Covenant. But as Chriſt was firſt revealed but obſcurely in a promiſed Seed, but afterwards by the Prophets there was a clearer revealing of Chriſt the nearer the time this Son of Righteouſneſs ſhould riſe: So the new Covenant was comprehended in this Covenant made with Abraham, but by the Prophets afterwards God revealed it more fully, after the Jews had ſo violated the Mount Sinai-Covenant. Hence that which Divines-call the Anima faederis, the Soul of the Covenant, I will be their God, was alſo in Abraham's Covenant.

p. 37My Author denies that Abraham's Covenant and the new Covenant are the ſame; he tells us, it was a mixed Covenant; there were two Seeds, and ſo Promiſes, and of two ſorts, which muſt he applyed right to the two Seeds.

Anſ. 1. How many Covenants ſhall we have in the Bible, by this Author? Camero is blamed by ſome Divines for making Three Covenants, but by this Author we ſhall have Four. 1. Adam's Covenant, or Covenant of Nature; 2. Abraham's Covenant; 3. The Iſraelites Covenant at Mount Sinai; 4. The New Covenant.

2. Are there not outward Promiſes alſo annexed to the New Covenant, as well as to Abraham's? Do we not read them plainly?

3. Are there not two Seeds in your Adminiſtration of Baptiſm, to Adult Perſons by Dipping; Real, and Formal? I am ſure they are not all Real Christians; and do not your Baptiſm belong to the New Covenant, a Sign and Seal of the Grace threof? Yet this you Adminiſter to ſuch, as prove Notorious Hypocrites.

4. Did not Abraham's Seed by this mixed Covenant, enjoy beſides outward Corporal Bleſſings, thoſe Bleſſings I mentioned before, in the Church, with more I might have mentioned?

p. 385. Did not God engage himſelf to be the God of all the Seed? and did not Circumciſion Seal up his Covenant and Engagement to them, if they did perform the Condition? and had they not a great advantage by God's engaging himſelf thus to them to lay hold upon God, for their God and Eternal Portion?

2ly, This Covenant was made with Abraham as a Believing Perſon, and the Father of Believers; it was not made with him as a Man, nor with his Seed as Men, but as the Seed of a Believing Father. Circumciſion was the Seal of the Righteouſneſs of Faith. Rom. 4.11. in which Chapter twice he is called, The Father of all Believers, both Jews and Gentiles; and Gal. 3.29.

Here a Queſtion might be moved, why Abraham ſhould be called, The Father of Believers; my Reaſon is, were there no Believers before Abraham? was he the Firſt and Eldeſt Believer? The Father in the Family is the firſt in the Family; ſo Abraham, if the Father, ſhould be the firſt. But was not Abel a Believer in Chriſt, Enoch, Noah, &c. ſurely there were Believers in Chriſt a Thouſand Years before Abraham was Born, what may we think of Adam and Eve in Charity, may we not think they Believed p. 39in the Promiſed Seed? why then ſhould Abraham be the Father?

Aquinas Anſwering to a Queſtion, Why Circumciſion was commanded firſt to Abraham, and to none before? [Serm. Doct. 3. q. 70. Act. 2.] Anſwers, That Abraham was the firſt that received the Promiſe from God of Chriſt to be born out of his Seed, and the firſt that ſeperated himſelf from the Society of Infidels. If this were true, it would ſerve to Anſwer our Queſtion. Tho' A La ide labours to defend the Vulgar Tranſaction, Gen. 3.15. She ſhall bruiſe thy Head; yet he ſaith it come all to one. For it is the Woman by her Seed, that is Chriſt, that bruiſed the Serpents Head; Do we think the Lord did not teach his Servants then the uſe and end of the Sacrifices? So that Chriſt was promiſed before, and there were Believers before, if there were a little more revealing of Chriſt to Abraham now, that is all. I do more admire his Act in ſacrificing his Son Iſaac, though that is given to his fear of God, Gen. 22.12.

I cannot think of any better reaſon than this, though there were Believers in Chriſt, and Abraham might be a ſtronger Believer, but with none did God make an expreſs Covenant, a Believer and his Seed, and ſeal the Covenant to his Poſterity, but with Abraham only.

p. 40I ſhall add a few more words preſently.

3. This Covenant was made alſo with, and ſealed to his Seed.

The great Queſtion is, who are this Seed? my Author tells me, His Spiritual Seed: Whence I meet with this once and again, That Abraham's natural Seed was a Type of the ſpiritual Seed; Elect, Regenerate. Thus in anſwer to the queſtion, Whether not baptizing Infants makes not the Priviledge under the Goſpel, leſs than under the Law? He anſwers, The natual Seed of Abraham was a typical ſhadowing thing— as the Antitype exceeds the Type, the ſpiritual birth the carnal birth; ſo much are we better.

Anſ. 1. What do you mean by, ſo much are we better? Were none of theſe who were Circumciſed being Abraham's natural Seed, alſo his ſpiritual Seed? Your words carried it as if not. Beſides here would be a queſtion, How the Elect-regenerate, the ſpiritual Seed, are Abraham's Seed; how is he a Father to them, as ſuch? I am ſure they are Chriſt's Seed, Iſa. 53.10, 11. And we can give reaſons, why they ſhould be called his Seed. he is the meritorious and efficient cauſe of them, but Abraham neither way: You would have done well to have ſhewn us this. Abraham is not ſo much a p. 41Father to us, as Paul was to the Corinthians, 1 Cor. 4.15. neither I am ſure in this reſpect he was Father to Iſaac, he did not convey Faith in his Generation of Iſaac; how then is he a Father to us now? That there were Believers before Abraham, the Apoſtle, Heb. 11.4, 5, 7. Inſtance in Abel, Enoch, and Noah; (and more I doubt not) but yet in the Hiſtory written by Moſes, Abraham is the firſt perſon who is called a Believer, upon a ſpecial Promiſe given to him, Gen. 15.6. if any cauſe, he was but Cauſa exemplaris, which is Cauſa adjuvnans to the principal: By his example we ſhould be ſtirred up to believe the Promiſe of God, as Abraham our Father did; (a)(a)An example how God will juſtifie us.but he had ſuch an advantage as we have not: he knew the Promiſe was made to him immediately, without any diſcourſe, which we cannot know, but muſt firſt prove the Condition. But this I think alſo is a reaſon, He was the firſt perſon ſealed, that received the Seal of that Promiſe or Covenant, and all his Seed after him commanded to receive and obſerve the ſame. This Sign and Seal being viſible, I conceive Abraham is to be conſidered, as a viſible-believing Father, and all his viſible Seed muſt be ſealed as the Father.

p. 422. As to what you ſay, the natural Seed are the Type of the ſpiritual Seed; was not Iſaac his natural Seed, and was he not alſo his ſpiritual Seed; then it ſeems Iſaac was a Type of himſelf. So all the godly Jews after, that were Abraham's Seed after the fleſh, were Types of themſelves. I pray tell us how the Type and Anti-type meet in one individual perſon? To what Topick in Logick will you refer the Type and Anti-type?

2ly, When the Anti-type comes, the Type ceaſe: When then Iſaac, Jacob, and the Iſraelites, that are the natural Seed, come to be the Spiritual Seed, then they muſt ceaſe to be his natural Seed: But how is this poſſible? When Chriſt came, the Types ceaſed.

3ly, When you Dip your Regenerate perſons; actual Believers you think they are: then they are the Seed of Abraham you judge; then Abraham is their Father; then God is their God: but divers of theſe are Hypocrites, we know they have proved ſo, and we ſhall hear an Anabaptiſt anon acknowledge it: they profeſſed they took him for their God, and worſhipped him, &c. while they then lived in your Churches, and did not as yet openly diſcover themſelves; was God in no ſenſe their God?

p. 434ly, To whom Chriſt is a Head, to them God may be ſaid to be a God: But Chriſt is the Head of the viſible Church, in which are many unſound Members; Branches in him that bear no fruit, John 15.2. Then God in ſome ſenſe is their God, if Chriſt may in ſome ſenſe be their Head.

5ly, Is there not an external and an internal Adoption? Rom. 9.4. to them pertained the Adoption: Were they not called God's children? Deut. 14.1. Is not God then the God of his children? Do not God ſay, They are mine? Ezek. 16.20, 21. and yet is God no way their God?

6ly, If the ſpiritual Seed be there onelyonly meant, then all the Iſraelites in the Land of Canaan were the ſpiritual Seed; which I anſwer is falſe. That they muſt be ſo according to your interpretation, the next Verſe proves it; Gen. 17.7, 8, 9. At the 8th verſe, I will give unto thee and to thy ſeed after thee, the I and wherein thou art a ſtranger, all the Land of Canaan for an everlaſting poſſeſſion. And I will be their God: Thou ſhalt therefore keep my Covenant, thou and thy ſeed after thee in their generations. Can the Holy One ſpeak plainer than he doth? Doth he not tell you, that that ſeed of Abraham which ſhall inherit the Land of Canaan [where his Tabernacle and all p. 44his Inſtituted Worſhip was ſet up] and there kept the Seal of his Covenant, that he will be their God? Doth not God ſpeak the ſame, Deut. 29.10, 11, 12, 13. to the men, women and children, who then entred into Covenant with God. That he may eſtabliſh thee to day for a people unto himſelf: And that he may be a God unto thee, as he hath ſaid unto thee, and as he hath ſworn to thy Fathers, &c.

When Peter would draw the Jews to believe in Chriſt Crucified, who as yet were Unbelievers, and not turned from their iniquities, Acts 3.25, 26. Do he not uſe this Argument, You are the children of the Covenant which God made with our Fathers; Abraham in thy ſeed ſhall all the kindreds of the earth be bleſſed. This part of the Covenant was moſt proper to the thing Peter had in hand. But if they were now the children of that Covenant God made with Abraham, then God was their God, though as yet they were not a ſpiritual ſeed.

As to this Seed the Jews tell us, The Seed of Iſhmael is excepted from Circumciſion; as it is written; For in Iſaac ſhall thy ſeed be called to thee, Gen 11.12. And Eſau is excepted, for lo, Iſaac ſaid to Jacob, and he give to thee the bleſſing of Abraham, to thee and to thy ſeed, Gen. 28.4. Iſhmael was caſt p. 45out of the Church. Profane Eſau deſpiſed his Birth-right, and is caſt off.

As to the Sons Abraham had by Keturah, though the Scripture doth not ſay they they were circumciſed, yet we may rather think they were. But whether after Abraham had ſent them away, they kept up Circumciſion in their Families, [Iſhmael and Eſau kept up Circumciſion we know] and taught their Children the ſpiritual meaning of it, the Scripture is ſilent. So that from them we can draw no Argument pro or con. This is enough for me, that when God ſaith, I will ſtabliſh my Covenant between me and thee, and thy ſeed after thee, —To be a God unto thee, and to thy ſeed after thee. And the very next words, God promiſeth to give the Land of Canaan to his ſeed, and will be their God there. And theſe were the Seed of Iſaac, the Seed of Jacob; and as the Martyr Stephen calls them, Acts 7.38. the Church of God in the Wilderneſs, [that is, Eccleſia inſtituta, vel organica, though God might have ſome belong to him that ſprung from the other Sons of Abraham.] This is plain and clear, but I am ſure all theſe were not the ſpiritual ſeed.

7ly, Elect-regenerate ſtand upon even ground with Abraham, but here God puts p. 46ſome honour upon Abraham, that his ſee ſhall have a bleſſing for his ſake.

8ly, If Elect-regenerate be only mean by the Seed, then there needed not th… word Seed to be put in, unleſs you will ſay, God is not the God of Elect-regenerate, unleſs they be Abraham's Seed; wa… he not of Abel, Enoch. Noah, &c.

9ly, This Covenant with Abraham and h… ſeed was ſigned and ſealed, Gen. 17.9, 10, 11, 12. What Moſes calls a Sign, or Token the Apoſtle Rom. 4.11. calls a Seal.

My Author tells me, Circumciſion was … Seal to Abraham only, not to Believers, no… their ſeed. To Infants it was a ſign put i… their fleſh, &c. too tedious to tranſcribe all.

A. You tell us, it ſealed to Abraham onelyonly the Truth of that Promiſe, That in his ſee… all the Familes ſhould be bleſſed. But the ſame Promiſe was made to Iſaac, Gen. 26.4. and to Jacob, Gen. 28.14. Did it not ſeal to them as well? Yea, the Apoſtle Peter, Acts 3.25. tells the Jews, they were children of the Covenant God made with our fathers, ſaying to Abraham, And in thy ſeed ſhall all the kinreds of the earth be bleſſed. Did dot Circumciſion ſeal this to them as well? The end of Seals is to confirm Faith: had not they, have not we need to have our Faith ſtrenthned? Is the Anabaptiſts Faith ſo p. 47ſtrong, that they need no Seals?

2ly, I took God's Signs to be Seals, by the Apoſtle's Authority: I look on the Rain-bow which God calls, Gen. 9.12, 13. the Token, foreign [the ſame word uſed, Gen. 17.11. of Circumciſion] of his Covenant, to be not only a Sign, but a Seal of his Covenant, that he will not drown the World.

3ly. But why do you ſay, it ſealed that Promiſe; What did it ſeal nothing but that? That Promiſe is not mentioned in this Chapter, but in the 12th, and 22th; but in this Chapter, ſo ſoon as the Lord had made the Covenant between himſelf, Abraham, and his Seed, immediately the the Lord adds this Circumciſion, and calls it his Covenant. I am ſure it ſeals this, and I doubt not but the Jews did ſo look upon it, as a Seal of the Covenant between God and them; that God was their God, and they his people.

Sir, you muſt give me better grounds than theſe, or elſe I muſt ſtill be of the opinion of the great body of the moſt learned and pious Divines; viz. That all the Sacraments of the Old and New Teſtament, were and are Signs of the Covenant, ſealing up the Grace of God to Believers. My Author p. 48hath more Notions about Circumciſion: but of them afterwards.

In the Child, Circumciſion left a ſignal Impreſſion, ſaith he.

A. 1. That which you call a ſignal Impreſſion, God calls his Covenant. But

2ly, Though there were a ſignal Impreſſion left in the Infant, yet if when it came to years it were not taught the ſpiritual meaning of it, the Child would get no benefit by it.

3ly, What ſignal Impreſſion is left upon thoſe whom you baptize by Dipping, when Adult, more than upon thoſe who are baptized by pouring of Water upon them when Infants? True, you can remember better you were dipped; but Children, tho' they have but a moral certainty from their Parents and others, and the Teſtimony of the Book in which they are recorded, yet being taught the meaning of it, and eſpecially if as ſome Parents who compoſe ſhort Prayers for their Children, put in that Petition, for the bleſſing of their Baptiſm, as ſome Parents do; Children may keep it in mind, and in time come to make as good uſe of it, as thoſe who are dipped when Adult; and Experience I hope will prove it.

p. 494ly, If that be true which Mr. Tom…s is willing to believe out of Mr. Selden, that the Jews admitted Proſelites, by Baptiſm the female kind, the ſame Author Mr. Selden, and ſo Baxter tells us, the Children alſo of the Proſelites were admitted by Baptiſm; to what purpoſe ſaith the Anaba tiſt, ſince they underſtand it not, and there is no Impreſſion left? Let the Jews anſwer that.

5ly, Abraham's Seed being ſo numerous as the Stars in the Heavens, how could the Infants circumciſed, when they came to riper years, and living only in Canaan, know that there was any Signal Impreſſion made upon their fleſh, unleſs their Parents or others told them: might not they well think al… men were as they, or it might be proper to their Nation? If they then were certain by their Parents and others informing them, cannot we be as certain by our Parents Information, that we were baptized?

6ly, May there not be a Conveyance of a great Eſtate to a Child that lies in the Cradle, and underſtand nothing many years; but when it comes to ripe years, and ſee its Name in the Conveyance, and the Witneſſes, now it can ſue for it. Two things are very deſirable, if there were nothing to trouble the Conſcience [a thing p. 50to be lamented] and other things concur. Firſt, That Baptiſm ſhould ever be adminiſtred in the face of the Church. Secondly, The Names of all baptized Recorded; [both which I have known the conſtant practice in Independent Churches:] By both which, and Parents Education, a Child when it comes to years of underſtanding, may be as ſure of its Baptiſm, though it makes no Impreſſion as Circumciſion did in the fleſh, and now ſue out the Bleſſings which there the Lord did ſignifie, and conditionally ſeal to be mine.

7ly, Were our Churches in that order they ought to be; and were that laudable Practice [which certainly is our Duty] taken up, viz. That ſpecial care b… taken, that Children baptized be diligently Catechized, and when they come to fit years, be called before the Elderſhip, there to own their Baptiſmal Covenant, and give an account of their Faith; ſolemn Prayer made for them, and the Church now to take care of them, and inſpection over them, as being their Members; there would be no room for this Objection, and leſs ground for Anabaptiſts to cry down Infant-baptiſm. If we will keep Churches [ſo far as our Duty can reach] for Chriſt, it is not preaching a Sermon p. 51or two on the Lord's-Day, will do the work, there is more required than ſo.

Though the Anabaptiſts ſtrength lie in the incapacity of Infants to believe in Chriſt, yet becauſe this notion hath been a trouble to me heretofore, therefore I ſpeak the more to it.

5ly, This Covenant never repealed by God. Now I come to the Pinch: Mr. Tombes the greateſt Adverſary that ever the Seed of Believers had, yields two things.

1. That the Children of the Jews were Members with their Parents in the Jewiſh Church. [But then, ſay I, it muſt be by vertue of this Parental-Covenant God made with Abraham; elſe how they ſhould be Members with their Parents, I know not.]

2ly, That if the Children of believing Parents, be Members of the Church with the Parents, then they muſt be baptized. For I grant, (ſaith he) that Baptiſm is the way and manner of ſolemn Admiſſion into the Church, I mean the regular way.

Then the Queſtion muſt be thus ſtated.

Queſt. When the Jews believed in Chriſt, come, crucified, riſen, and aſcended, as the five thouſand in Acts 4.4. Did the Lord now repeal his Covenant which he made with p. 52Abraham and his Seed; admit only the Parents into the Goſpel-Church, but bar the Doors against their Poſterity, or Children?

I think I have ſtated the Queſtion right, and if this cannot be proved, then I hope believing Gentiles ſhall find a way to bring in their Children too with the Jews, and find a Title to Baptiſm by Mr. Tombes's Conceſſion.

Affirmanti incumbit probatio; This lie upon the Anabaptiſts to prove. And here though I am far from that abſurd, irrational Principle of Veronius, who lays down this for a Rule in our Diſputation with the Papiſts; That we muſt bring expreſs Scriptures to confute them, yet this caſting all the Poſterity of the Godly out of the Church, is ſo wretched a Doctrine, [as Mr. Thomas Hooker calls it] againſt the poor Infants, that as yet want a Tongue to plead for themſelves, that the Anabaptiſts muſt bring Scriptures, if not expreſs, yet as clear and ſtrong as expreſs Scriptures, elſe I ſhall little regard their Writings. And this I require upon theſe grounds.

Firſt, The Anabaptiſts require of us an expreſs Command from Chriſt to the Apoſtles, to baptize Infants. This was put upon me in the Congregation: Now it is meet the Anabaptiſts ſhould be honeſt men, p. 53buy and ſell by the ſame meaſure. If they require of us expreſs Scriptures, we may well require of them the ſame.

Secondly, All the Arguments which the Anabaptiſts draw from Scripture againſt Infants Church-memberſhip, and Baptiſm, do ſtrike at the Grace and Wiſdom of God in his Covenant with Abraham and his Seed, and his Conſtitution of the Church of the Jews, as if the Lord had not done wiſely, but they will teach him how to Conſtitute Churches better. We ſhall hear their Arguments anon.

Thirdly, The holy Page tells us, how much weight the Jews and falſe Teachers put upon Circumciſion, what a ſtir it made in the Churches, while the Apoſtles laboured to remove it, though it was a painfull bloody Ordinance. We read Acts 21.21. This was the great Objection againſt Paul, and this was 21 years after Paul's Converſion: I am apt to think till the Temple [the head of all the Ceremonies] was utterly demoliſhed; the believing Jews did Circumciſe their Children; But had Paul told them, the Reaſon was, that Chriſt is come, and now the Covenant with Abraham as to his Seed, is repealed, and their Seed are all caſt out of the Church, and therefore they muſt not Circumciſe p. 54their Children: Should we not have read the Jews Clamours and Out-cries againſt the Apoſtles, in the Acts, and in every Epiſtle, and what a bar had this been againſt the reception of the Goſpel; I appeal to the Conſciences of the Anabaptiſts. But though we read of Circumciſion in ſeveral places, both in the Acts and the Epiſtles, there is not one word of this.

Fourthly, God did expreſly repeal his Covenant with Iſrael made at Mount Sinai, Heb. 8.13. That which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vaniſh away. This Covenant of God with Abraham and his Seed, is a Covenant much noted in the Scripture, and long before Sinai-Covenant: Now if the Lord doth indeed repeal this Covenant with Abraham, why ſhould we not expect clear Scripture-ground. The Jews quarrelled with the Apostles, becauſe they changed the Cuſtoms of Moſes, Acts 6.14. & chap. 21. v. 21. but if they had taught the nulling of the Covenant of God with Abraham their Father too, the Apoſtles ſhould have heard of it with both ears, and we ſhould have read it. God tells them when he repealed that Covenant, He would make a new Covenant with the Houſe of Iſrael, and the Houſe of Judah: are not Children a part of the Houſe? They were ſo when God made p. 55that Covenant with the Houſe of Iſrael, Deut. 29.10, 11, 12. then they are in the Houſe ſtill, then they are capable of the Grace of the new Covenant with their Parents; then the want of actual Faith doth not exclude them from Baptiſm.

Fifthly, God tells Abraham, he will eſtabliſh his Covenant,—and it ſhall be an ever laſting Covenant, Gen. 17.7. If God eſtabliſh, it muſt ſtand: If he ſaith, it is everlaſting, the Entail is not cut off: Nor do I doubt in the leaſt, but as when they rejected Chriſt, and ſaid, Let his blood be upon us and our children, Mat. 27.25. God did caſt away Parents and Children: ſo when God receives them again, Rom. 11.15.26. the Parents ſhall not be received, and Children remain caſt out, but they ſhall come in with their Parents.

If they ſay, the word Everlaſting, is ſpoken of their poſſeſſion of Canaan, verſe 8. and Circumciſion, v. 13.

Anſ. I know well how the word foreign for ever, or everlaſting is taken in Scripture, but it doth not at all hinder the Argument.

1. For in this Covenant is nothing Typical, it is pure Grace; and we have other Scriptures in the Goſpel will confirm it.

2. As to Circumciſion, it was a bloody Ordinance, as was the Paſſeover, all Ordinances p. 56ſo, till Chriſt came with his Blood fulfilling all, removed them: No more blood in any Ordinance after Chriſt. Zipporah calls Moſes a bloody Husband, at the Circumciſing of her Son, Exod. 4.25, 26. At this time when the Jews circumciſe their Children; they ſay they may do it from Sun-riſing to Sun-ſetting, any hour on the Eighth day: but they chooſe the Morning, becauſe the Child then being empty, it will not bleed ſo much: The Mohet, or he that circumciſeth, ſucks the Wound three times, and uſe other means to ſtop the blood, but no bloody Ordinance now. [Buxt. Synor. Iſid. p. 81.86.]

3. For the Land of Canaan, that was conditional, their abiding in it; but however, though they are now caſt out of poſſeſſion, yet they have jus ad rem, a juſt Title to it at this day. Hence Ezek. 37.14.21. & Ezek. 36.24. Three times the Lord promiſed to bring them into their own Land, ver. 28. the Promiſe runs for them. It is their own; then now to depart from the literal ſenſe, without ſome eminent abſurdity that will follow upon the literal ſenſe, we ought not.

6ly, If God will not bring an unclean Creature forbidden, into a believing Jew's Houſe, without an expreſs word to warrant it, will God caſt a holy Seed out of his Houſe, p. 57and not give as clear a ground to the believing Parent to know his mind? The unclean Creatures ſignifying the Heathen of ſeveral ſorts, [the Hebrews ſay, Babylonians, Medes, Perſians, Greeks, Romans] not eat; that is, not to have communion, Acts 10.28. Compare Levit. 11.5, 6, 7. with Acts 10.11, 12, 13, 15. and muſt now the holy Seed be caſt out of the Church, and looked upon as the Swine were then? We muſt have clearer grounds and Texts, than ever yet the Anabaptiſts have brought, I ſay as ſtrong as expreſs Scriptures.

7ly, The New Teſtament doth give us clear Texts to prove the Church-memberſhip of believing Parents; you cannot give us clearer Texts for their unchurching, unleſs you give us expreſs Scriptures.

8ly, Let me take up one of Mr. Baxter's Arguments, and improve it my way.

If God hath repeled his Covenant, and caſt the Seed of the believing Jews out of the Church, then it was either in juſtice or in mercy.

But neither this nor that; therefore not caſt out, &c. thus Mr. Baxter.

For the firſt, not in juſtice, I prove thus. Let Parents be never ſuch ſound Believers, walk in the ſteps of their Father Abraham, keep cloſe in the Covenant, yet the Anabaptiſts caſt out all their Seed; but this p. 58cannot be in juſtice: for the Text ſaith, Pſal. 25.10. All the paths of the Lord are mercy and truth unto ſuch as keep his Covenant. But theſe Jews, believing Parents do ſo; yet God repeals his Covenant with their Seed, and caſt them out of the Church.

2. In mercy the Lord doth it not; For then God gives a greater mercy in the room of that which in mercy he takes away, ſaith Mr. Baxter.

This is true what Mr. Baxter ſaith, I prove what he ſaith, the believing Jew ſhall ſay, though God hath repealed his Covenant with my Seed, and caſt them out of the Church, yet he hath given my Seed a better mercy, both my ſelf and my children, if they could ſpeak, would ſay, We would not be under Abraham's Covenant with our Parents, nor Church-Members with our Parents, as we were before Chriſt came, for Chriſt hath left us Infants a better Bleſſing in the room. As it was a great favour to the Iſraelites, that God gave his Oracles to them, Pſalm 147.19, 28. That God was in Covenant with them, Epheſ. 2.12. But God will null that Covenant, Heb. 8.13. It ſhall vaniſh away: But God will make another Covenant, new, a better Covenant, having better Promiſes in the room of that old vaniſhing Covenant: So that if Iſraels eyes be opened, they would ſay, they would by no p. 59means be under the old Covenant, this new is ſo much better. Thus let the Anabaptiſts tell us what God hath left better for the Infant-Seed of a Jew now believing in Chriſt, that now it would not be Church-member with the Parents, nor under Abraham's Covenant, nor would now be baptized, as before Chriſt they were circumciſed: For my part I can conceive nothing; keep to the ſtate of the Queſtion.

9. There is ſo much evil in this Doctrine and Practice of the Anabaptiſts, that we muſt have clearer Scriptures than ever were produced as yet to prove it, and clear it from that evil.

As 1. For the bleſſed God; How doth … diſhonour him in ſtraitning his Love and Grace now under the Goſpel, over it was under the Law. Moſes tells the Jews, Deut. 4.37. The Lord loved thy Fathers, Chap. 7.8. & chap. 33.3. So it appears, that he would not only take the Fathers, but their Children alſo into Covenant, and conſtitute his Church of them alſo. But now whatever the Goſpel ſaith of the Philanthropie of God, Tit. 3.4. and God ſo loving the world, Joh. 16.3. when that Seed promiſed to Abraham is come, in whom all Nations ſhall be bleſſed, he nulls the Covenant with his Seed, caſt them out of the Church, and leaves no bleſſing for their p. 60Infants, when their Parents believe in the promiſed Seed come.

Before the Lord calls the little children under the Covenant, and in the Church, (Mine) Ezek. 16.20, 21. But now the Jews believe in Chriſt, God calls none of their Children Mine, though now they do more gladly bear them unto him than they did before.

2ly, It diſhonours Chriſt; He took upon him indeed the Seed of Abraham, Heb. 2.16. and turned the Seed of Abraham out of the Covenant, and out of the Church, if the Anabaptiſts Doctrine be true.

Though he ſeemed to have an affection to Children, and was much diſpleaſed with his Diſciples, when they rebuked the Parents when they came to ſeek his bleſſing for their Babes, Mark 10. 13, 14. and bad them bring their children to him, and told them, of ſuch is the Kingdom of Heaven. If our ſweet Lord meant as he ſpake, and we believe he did, then they are ſtill Members of the Church, he doth not ſhut the Door againſt them, now he is come. But the Anabaptiſts tell us a contrary Tale to the diſhonour of our bleſſed Saviour. When the believing Jews now carry their children to Chriſt, Dedicate them to him with earneſt Prayer in Baptiſm, and ingage to bring them up p. 61for him, the Anabaptiſts forbid them, and tell them, the Kingdom of Heaven doth not conſiſt of ſuch little Ones.

Per abſurdum vero eſt, ut per Meſſiae adventum imminutum ſit foedus ſanctu, Voſſius. Gen. 17.7. That the bleſſed, and bleſſing, Meſſia, by his coming, ſhould null the Covenant with Abraham, it is not only abſurd, but very abſurd, a great reproach is caſt upon Chriſt.

Doctor Thomas Goodwin pleading the Infant's caſe againſt the Anabaptiſts, ſaith, In a manner half the Church of God, the pureſt part of it; Elect Infants die in their bud and infancy, and grow not up to partake of the dews and influence of any other outward Ordinance; and were they deprived of this, [i.e. Baptiſm] ſhould go out of this world [into which God only ſent them to receive that which ſhould make them meet for the common Inheritance of the Saints] without any outward owning them, or viſible way of bleſſing from him, &c.—yea and the other half that grow up to glorifie God in their riper years, whereof many alſo are holy from the Womb; theſe alſo ſhould, during their years of nonage, want an outward badg, and any outward acknowledgment of what they are, even Fellowheirs of the Kingdom with their Brethren, which even in the Infancy of the World, whilst all were under Tutors and Governours p. 62was their priviledge. Thus this Goſpel-Divine ſpeaks, and that to the purpoſe.

3ly, As to Parents, be they never ſo godly, what grief muſt it needs be to them, if their children die out of the Covenant and viſible Church; what hopes can they have of their Salvation, more than an Indian hath of his being both in the ſame ſtate? An Indian-child may be Elected as well as a ſound Believer. 2ly, nor can a believing Parent pray for his children upon any grounds more than an Indian: the Covenant and Promiſies ſcattered in the World to the Godly and their Seed, they cannot plead upon them. 3ly, Whereas the Covenant and the Engagement of the children to God in Baptiſm, is the Infant's Circumciſion, might be Arguments to whet upon their children, and encourage them: now no ſuch Arguments are in date. 4ly, The Jews before Chriſt came, in the day of their circumciſing their Infants, did uſe to give thanks to God, and bleſs him for Abraham's Covenant, and his Ordinance of Circumciſion, the Seal of his Covenant: but when the Jews believe Chriſt's come, now Thanksgiving and bleſſing of God ceaſe; for the Govenant is nulled, children caſt out of the Church.

4ly, As for the Children of believing Parents, if they come to years of diſcretion, and p. 63God bleſs Parents inſtructions ſo as to keep Conſcience awake, though they play the wretches, and have cauſe to be humbled all their days; yet I ſay, if Conſcience be kept awake, and God begin to open their Eyes more, and make them in earneſt to mind the Salvation of their Souls, then they will underſtand what a wretched Doctrine, this Doctrine of the Anabaptiſts is, by denying that to them by which they may take hold of God in the time of their fears. Quare patet non prorſus vanum eſſe atque inane ex pio genere naſci, ſaith Peter Martyn, [Hoc Com. p. 8.] It is not a vain empty thing to be born of godly Parents: this is true which he ſaith.

Here, tho' it was far from my thoughts to ſpeak, much leſs to write what benefit I have experimentally found from a Parental-Covenant, and Infant-Baptiſm; yet becauſe the Lord's Providence hath engaged me in this Controverſie, which I never intended, and becauſe it may be a help to others, Children of good Parents, I ſhall declare.

God bleſſed my godly Parents Education of me, to keep my Conſcience awake, as I ſaid, though I have cauſe to abhor my ſelf all my days; but above fifty years paſt, I began to have more ſerious thoughts p. 64about an eternal ſtate, and how to get an Intereſt in Chriſt and the Promiſes. I found ſeveral qualifications that did prepare hearts for Promiſes, Iſa. 61.1. Iſa. 55.1, 2. Mat. 11.28. Luke 19.10. My trouble for ſome years, now how to make out theſe qualifications: I would have them, prayed for them, but could not ſatisſie my ſelf that I had them as I ought to have them. While I was writing my Copy, theſe very words, there comes to me a good chriſtian woman, who I know for many years had walked with God, and ſhe puts this Queſtion to me, How ſhe might know whether ſhe ever had theſe qualifications, in Mat. 11.28. and engaged me to ſend one Exerciſe upon it, as I did: I could not but take notice of this Providence.

While I was thus troubled about making out theſe qualifications, there comes a motion into my mind; What ſay you to your Father's Covenant? You know your Parents were godly, and God promiſed to be the God of Abraham and his ſeed; will you ſtand to your Father's Covenant, and chooſe your Father's God for your God? I began to think of it, my heart anſwered, Yes, I will ſtand to my Father's Covenant: But how do you take your Father's God to be your God? I anſwered, As he was my Father's God. My teaching …od, my heart-humbling p. 65God, my reconciled God, my juſtifying God, my ſanctifying God, my God to lead me all my days; for thus he was my Father's God. Here my qualification was the choice of my Father's God, who was mine before by an external Covenant-adminiſtration; but now to have him my God, my portion, by an internal Covenant and efficacy? Here now I was pent up; Will you chooſe him, or refuſe him? Bleſſed be God who gave me this advantage to lay hold upon him, by virtue of this Parental-Covenant.

Further, to clear my meaning, Ido not by this Diſcourſe about Qualifications of Promiſes, intend that Chriſtians ſhould not regard them. I am far from that: if they be ſound Chriſtians, I'le warrant them they ſhall regard them. Nor do I think but Chriſtians reflecting upon themſelves, the good Spirit aſſiſting, may find them certainly wrought.

But this I mean, Young perſons brought up under the droppings of good Education, upon whom God works more gradually; that cannot tell the time when, nor the manner how God works; as ſome Adult perſons upon whom God many times breaks in with his Terrours; theſe uſe to be much troubled about the making out the qualifications p. 66of Inviting Promiſes, becauſe they cannot find them ſo ſenſibly as they would, though they have them in truth, but cannot diſcern it: the queſtion is, Whether now Abraham's Covenant may not do ſuch a Soul a pleaſure?

Queſt. When God made this Covenant with Abraham and his Seed, did not God intend good to Abraham's Seed? If not, it was a vain Covenant? God forbid.

To ſay, it ſignifies no more than that, when he gave them his Oracles, Rom. 3.2. Was not that a Priviledge, if his Seed would improve them?

But this Covenant was diſtinct from the Oracles, made before the Oracles were given: and may not Abraham's Seed? ought they not to improve it to their ſpiritual good and advantage: who will deny it?

God in Iſa. 56.4. ſpeaks of taking hold of his Covenant. I ſay, by this Covenant God puts forth his hand to Abraham's Seed to take hold upon him, ſo as to become their God for ever.

1. Suppoſe we two ſorts of perſons under the Conviction of a miſerable ſtate: One ſort is under Abraham's Covenant, the other not; There are Inviting Promiſes to all ſorts, whether without, or within the Covenant. They who are within the Covenant, p. 67can make uſe of all the Inviting Promiſes offered to others, and Abraham's Covenant too: But they who are out of the Covenant, cannot make uſe of, or lay hold upon God by Abraham's Covenant.

2ly, God is nearer to his Covenanted-ſeed than to others, Pſalm 148.14. Iſrael a people near unto the Lord: Iſrael is in Covenant with him: God loved their Fathers, Deut. 4.37. By this he puts forth his hand to them to lay hold upon him more immediately, than to others out of Covenant. The chooſing of their Father's God for their God in ſincerity, is the Condition, and he becomes their God, and his Covenant gives them a ground for the aſſurance of it.

3ly, This Covenanted-Seed may plead with God in Prayer for many Promiſes made to the Ʋpright and their Seed, Pſal. 112.2. Prov. 20.7. with divers other Promiſes, fetching the ſtrength of their pleading from the Covenant and Promiſes, which others out of the Covenant cannot do. And ſince God hath promiſed bleſſing to this Seed; the Seed may chooſe their bleſſing, any ſpiritual bleſſing in Chriſt, and have his Promiſe to warrant it.

4ly, When their hearts are in fears, troubles, doubts, and cannot make out the qualifications of other Promiſes, as they p. 68would, they may come hither: here is no winding out, but anſwer Catagorice, will you have your Father's God, or refuſe him? You ſee he offers himſelf, and is in Covenant with you one way already, by an external Covenant-adminiſtration; and if you will ſtand to that Covenant, and take him for your God indeed, and yield up your ſelf to him, he will be your God in a ſaving manner, and portion for ever.

5ly, Since all the Word and Promiſes are then efficacious when the Spirit will pleaſe to work with them; and it is free for him to make this or that Word efficacious to us: I doubt not to ſay, Abraham's Covenant, is as fit as any inviting Promiſe, and it is as rational for the Seed of godly Parents to lay hold upon God by it, as by any other Word.

My Parents then looking upon me as being in Covenant, and a Church-member with them, they did Dedicate me to God, and brought me under the Seal of his gracious Covenant in Baptiſm. And what our Lord ſaid to Peter when he waſhed his Feet, John 13. 6, 7. What I do thou knoweſt not now, but thou ſhalt know hereafter: Was truly verified of me. What the Lord did then, when he poured clean water upon me in my Baptiſm, I know not, p. 69but now I do know, and did many years ſince. What was the opinion of the ancient Fathers, and many Divines now, about the Efficacy of Baptiſm, I did not then know, nor do I now concern my ſelf about it, to diſcourſe it. But this I took for a Truth, It doth not conſiſt with the Infinite wiſdom and holineſs of God, to Inſtitute any Ordinance in his Houſe that is of trivial concernment, whatever they ſeem to be to a carnal heart: they are things of great weight; Where the great God engages himſelf to a Creature, and therefore to be attended with great reverence, and as diligently improved. Now when I came to reflect upon my Baptiſm, how God was firſt with me, before I underſtood him, he was afore-hand with me, took hold of me, brought me under the Seal of his bleſſed Covenant; and when I read over the ſeveral Texts, which tells us what bleſſings are there ſignified and ſealed, God was engaged for his part; if I will look to my part, to anſwer the Condition, then theſe ſhould be mine; this gave me encouragement. As for my Dedication to him, I was willing to ſtand to it, I did like it very well: but both for the Condition, and to anſwer my Dedication, I went to him, whoſe Covenant it is, and who was firſt with me, that p. 70he would pleaſe to perform his part, and in the ſtrength of his performance, I would perform my part. Why would that bleſſed One be firſt? Why did he begin with me, when I did not know him? But ſince he will be a God, and Triumph in his Grace, ſince I came to underſtand it, by his Grace I have held him, and will hold him. And though as I ſaid, I have not attained what I ſeek after, yet I have found in my diſmal Temptations, wherein I have had as deep a ſhare as moſt Chriſtians ever had, when I could not tell where to lay hold, my Parent al-covenant and Infant-baptiſm, which I am ſtill improving now my Head is gray, have been a ſupport unto me. So that I bleſs God, 1. for Abraham's Covenant, 2ly, I bleſs God that I had godly Parents: 3ly, I bleſs God my Parents were no Anabaptiſts, but that while I was an Infant they brought me under the Seal of the bleſſed Covenant, a ſtay and comfort to me in my old age, and I hope improved, as well as they who were Dipped yeſterday.

When people do either not underſtand things, or if they do, yet they do not mind and improve them, ſo get no good by them; no wonder though they talk againſt them, when others bleſs God for them, and daore his grace in them.

p. 71Let the Children of Godly Parents look to themſelves, they have a price in their hands, if they have wiſdom and hearts to improve it; it is a fearful thing to hear of the Child of a Godly, Praying, Parent to dye in an unconverted State.

Only a word, ſome may think you had Godly Parents, mine were not ſo; it may be I had a Godly Grandfather, or a Mother: had you ſo? no doubt but you may improve the Covenant from him. The ſecond Commandement will help you.

David pleaded 86 Pſal. 16. Save the Son of thy Hand-maid: he pleads the Parental-Covenant (ſaith Mr. Hooker.) Born thy Servant of Godly Parents, who were thy Servitors (ſaith Ainſworth?) Inſignis est priorum praerogativa, qua etiam David, hic animum ſuum in precibus fulcit, quod ſciunt ſe in Eccleſia a fidelibus Parentibus, qui fuerunt ſervi, & ancillae Domini, natos eſſe. Saith Geſnor on the Text, and ſtirs up Parents to learn this Treaſure to their Children; and Children of ſuch Parents to make uſe of it. Junius alſo ſpeaks well to this Head.

Others it may be will ſay, Baptiſed I am, but my Parents bad enough. Well, art awake, and art in earneſt for Chriſt, and the ſaving Bleſſings come by him? you may improve your Baptiſm. When the Gibeonites p. 72by Craft got Iſrael into a Covenant with them, and confirmed it by an Oath. 9 Joſh. 15. the God of Iſrael would not ſuffer them to deſtroy them; They were made Servants indeed; the breach of this coſt Iſrael dear. 2 Sam. 21.1, 2, 3. If you be got under the Seal of the Covenant, it was not by Craft, but God's Providence ordered it; and now you are under it, prize it, and improve it; do not you fear, the God of Iſrael will hold to his part.

Theſe being the Evils that ariſe from the Anabaptiſts Doctrine, we muſt have very clear Texts, for the nulling of Abraham's Covenant, and caſting Children out of the Church.

10ly, If Bleſſed Jeſus upon his coming doth repeat Abraham's Covenant, and ſo the Children of the Believing Jews be no Church-Members, then Jeſus Chriſt by his coming doth null the Promiſes made to the Fathers. But the Text ſaith, Rom. 15. 8. He confirms the Promiſes made to the Fathers. I am ſure this was one made to the Fathers, I will be a God to thee and thy Seed, then it is not nulled, but confirmed. Chriſt confirms Abraham's Charter, Act. 3.26. God ſent his Son Jeſus to the Jews firſt, to Bleſs them: one great Bleſſing he mentions, but it ſeems by the Anabaptiſts, Chriſt, takes away a Bleſſing; p. 73tell us I pray what Bleſſing doth Chriſt leave the Seed of the Believing Jews, while Infants in the Room of it.

11ly, We read Gal. 3.16. of Promiſes made to Abraham and his Seed; Promiſes in the Plural Number, Seed in the Singular, not Seeds; the Jews a part, and the Gentiles a part, not ſo, but Seed; that is, Chriſt Myſtical, not Perſonal: the Promiſes were not made to Chriſt, but Chriſt was Promiſed to Abraham; So that it is Chriſt in Aggregato, the Jews and Gentiles make up one Body, and one Seed.

There were ſeveral Promiſes made to Abraham, ſome concerned him alone, ſome concerned himſelf and his Seed, according to the Fleſh alone; The Gentiles had nothing to do with them: That all Nations ſhould be Bleſs'd in Abraham's Seed; This belongs to the Gentiles, as well as the Jews, This is one Promiſe. But we muſt have Promiſes in the Plural Number made to Abraham, that belong to the Gentiles, if you take away this, I will be the God of thee and thy Seed, I know not how to make the Text true.

But if this be granted, then this Verſe and the fourteenth Verſe are both true; now the Bleſſing of Abraham is come upon the Gentiles through Jeſus Chriſt.

I have inſiſted long upon this Branch, p. 74becauſe the pinch of the Controverſie lies here, and theſe Grounds are to me ſo ſtrong, that unleſs the Anabaptiſts bring Texts as ſtrong as an expreſs Scripture for the Repeal, I ſhall not regard them: nor am I come yet to the Texts in the New Teſtament, to prove the Church-Memberſhip of Infants, though it may be inferred from ſome I have named already.

The laſt Branch in the Sillogiſm is, That if this Gracious Covenant be not Repealed but ſtand firm, then it muſt be Signed, and Sealed to them who are under it; this I ſuppoſe will not be denyed. The Bleſſed God makes no Covenants, but he Seals them.

That the Tree of Life, and the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil, were Sacraments and Seals, belonging to the firſt Covenant, I ſee is the Opinion of very Learned and Godly Divines. When God makes a Covenant with Noah, and all the Creatures, God Seals it; when with Abraham, God Seals it; and though the Seal be changed, yet it hath another Seal added in the Room of it. Our weak Faith hath need of ſtrengthening, and all too little, if God's Spirit doth not ſtep in.