Anti-Paedobaptism Part 3, Section 39
SECT. XXXIX. Animadversions on Sect: 4. of the same Chapter: whereby the Co…ceits of Mr. C about external being in the Covenant of grace are shewed to be vain.
Sect: 4 Mr. C. sets down this conclusion, that there is a bare external being in the Covenant of grace of persons who possibly never shall be saved. But he no where shewed in Scripture either the term Covena… of grace, or the phrase of being in the Covenant of grace externally or in…ernally. Did Mr: C. and other Paedobaptists distinctly set down 1. What th…y mean by [the Covenant of grace] 2. What they mean by [being ex…ernally in the Covenant of grace] whether it be any o…her thing than to be Baptized or Circumcised, and what it is distinct from one of these or Title to one of them. 3. By what act …t is that a person is externally in the Covenant of grace, whether Gods or his owne, or others as v. 9. The administra…ors, parents, or the Churches, we might more easily judg of his position. If he mean no more than this, that there is a being in the Covenant of grace in respect of men, that is, men as administrators and others do think or judg some to be in the Covenant of grace, that is, that God hath promised saving grace to some to whom he hath not, I grant it, and I might say in the like manner, some are excernally elected, regenerated, justified, adopted who are not so savingly. And I should grant that such as are taken to be in the Covenant of grace by reason of th…ir own profession of faith in Christ are rightly judged by us to be in the Covenant of grace and may be baptized, though perhaps they shall not be saved. But such as are taken by us to be in the Covenant of grace without Gods promise or act of their own Profession of faith, by an administrators of baptism and others mistake. Concerning the promise Gen: 17. As if it were made to every believing Gentile by profession inchurched, and his natural seed as Abrahams Church seed (as Mr. C. calls them) are not therefore rightly judged to be in the Covenant of grace, nor rightly judged to be fit subjects of baptism which appears to be Mr: C's. meaning by his words Pag. 51. when he saith, the Covenant is theirs externally and quoad homines considered as invested with Church Covenant, and in reference to Covenant-ordinances whereof they are capable as of old they were of Circumcision and are now of baptism. Let us consider what Mr. C. brings to this purpose.
what he saith the promise is said to belong to those Jewes Rom: 9.4. on whom yet the word took no saving effect v: 6. is not right. For v: 4. is not meant by [the promises] he promise by excellency called the promise of the spirit Gal: 3.14. given to Abraham v: 17. distinct from the Law v: 18. But the peculiar promises which are made to the Israelites upon the obeying of the Law that they should possess Canaan, liue long in it, and prosperously as Deut, 5.16. and 28.3, &c. For all that which is said Rom: 9.4. is meant of what was proper co the Israelites after the flesh. But the Covenant of grace is established or made a Law on better promises Heb: 8.6. And the phrase Rom: 9.6. [not as if the wo…d of God had taken none effect, which is word by word, not as if or foreign it may not be, that is: it is not possible, or it may not be yeelded that the word of God fell or was not verified] is meant not of the promises, v: 4, but of the promises mentioned v: 8. to wit that Gen: 17.7. Which he doth not say did belong to any exte…nally on whom it had no saving effect: but supp…se it to have been verefied and made good to all to whom it was made, who in Go…s intention were only the elect, ca…led therefore Children of the promise v: … that is those that were bego…t…n by the promise, not to every child of Abraham by natural generation, in particular not to Ishmael, nor Esau. Nor is it right which he adds, Hence Rom: 9.4. By opposition to the Gentiles, hey (the Jewes meant v: 4.) where those which were not strangers to the Church, but of it, if he mean it of the Christian Church.
I grant the Jewes were not strangers to the covenants of promise, but in the same, Eph. 2: 11, 12. But that all the Gentile believers and their children were then that which they were not before, is not a …ight collection. For as they were foreign, uncircumcised in the flesh, so th…y were still; nor were they ever of the polity of Israel. And if the Covenants of promise be meant of the Tables of the covenants, and if the word [promise] be placed thus (as some place it) not having hope of the promise, they might be still said to be strangers from the Covenants. However, if then they were acquainted with, and partakers of the Covenants of promise, this can be understood of none but true believers and the covenant as it was spiritual, which is nothing to the being externally in the covenant of graces.
Mr. C. adds, Hence God makes his covenant with them all, Deut. 29:10, 12, 13, 14, 15. speaking there of that solemn renewall of the covenant of grace, as Deut. 30:6, 10, 12, 13▪ 14. compared with Rom. 10, 6, 7, 8. evinceth.
Answer. The more ample discussing this place, and vindicating my Exceptions from what Mr. B. replies, I reserve till I answer his Plain Scripture proof, &c. part 1. c. 17 and his Corrective, Sect. 5. For present I say, If God did make his covenant with them all, and it appears to have been the covenant of grace, as Deut: 30.6, 10, 12, 13, 14. compared with Rom. 10.6, 7, 8. evinceth, then all must be not onelyonly externally in the covenant of grace, but also internally: For the promise Deut. 30.6. is to circumcise the heart to love the Lord, cannot be expounded of the external being in the covenant of grace, but internal. Mr B. in his Friendly Accommodation, A new heart is given to the elect onelyonly, which is all one with the circumcised heart.
He goes on, So Ezek 16.8. He made a covenant with that Church and people, many whereof proved very base, as that chapter sheweth. Now this was a covenant of grace, albeit invested with Church-covenant, as appears in that v. 60. That God for that his Covenants sake considered as his, will deal so graciously with them after all their provocations, as v. 62, 63. Albeit he did not thus properly for the sake of that investure of his covenant annexed, scil. thy covenant, the Churches covenant abractively considered, v. 61. See more Ezek. 36. from v. 17. to the chapters end.
Answer. The thing that Mr. C. should prove is an externall being in the covenant of grace quoad homines. But Ezek. 16.8. neither speaks of the covenant of grace, but the covenant of the Law, which was made in mount Sinai Junius the new Annot: refer to Exod. 19. & 24. Piscat. Schol. in locum, visitari te per Mosen, educendo te ex Aegypto, & pangendo tecum fedus, atque ita ducendo te in uxorem: Nor is this meant of externall being in covenant in respect of men, but of Gods promise to them, as the words plainly import,, I sware unto thee and entred into covenant with thee, saith the Lord. As for the reason why the covenant v. 8 must be the covenant of grace, because he will deal graciously with them for that his covenant, v. 60. it goes on this supposition, that the covenant v. 8, is the same with the covenant v. 60. But Piscat. Schol. on the place reckons that v. 60, to be the covenant made in the times of Araham, Isaac, and Jacob, and Levit. 26.42, leads to it. But were it granted to be the covenant by Moses, it follows not that the covenant must be the covenant of Evangelicall grace. For in Moses his renewing the covenant in the land of Moab, there's a promise of reduction of them, Deut. 30.3. which being upon condition of their returning to God, and obeying his voyce according to all that Moses commanded that day, must be understood of the Covenant of the Law, which had its promises of such temporall favours, and not of the covenant of Evangelical grace. That which Mr. C. saith, That he did not thus properly, for the sake of that investure of his covenant annexed, scil. this covenant, the Churches covenant abstractively considered, v. 61. I know not what sense to make of it. There's not a word of Church-covenant, or investure with it. The plain meaning is either this, Not by that covenant of the Law which thou hast broken, but by the new covenant of the Gospel, as Junius in his Annot. in locum, Diodati, the new Annot. or this as Piscat. Schol. in locum, not because thou art worthy of this aggregation of the nations, as if thou hadst kept covenant with me, as if he had said, but of my grace or free favour, or as Grotius▪ It is a Metonymy as if it were said, not because on thy part thou hast stood to the covenant.
I have seen Ezek 36. from v. 17. to the chapters end, and I see nothing there to Mr C. his purpose to prove a bare externall being in the covenant of grace▪ There's not the word Covenant in all the passage: But on the contrary, there are promises, v. 25, 26, 27. of a new heart giving his Spirit, which as Mr. B. saith truly, is proper to the elect, and notes an internall being in the covenant of grace. There's little but muddiness and impertinency in the rest.
He speaks of an externall being in Christ, John 15.2. (which is not denied in respect of profession of those that are so) and of an externall partaking of Christ, for which it's likely he cites (not as it is printed, Heb. 13.14.) but Heb. 3.14. But sure that partaking is a saving partaking to which is required the holding fast to the end the beginning of our confidence. For an external partaking may be without condition.
The Jewish refusers, Ios. 1.11. are called Christs own, either by kindred or right to them from the old engagements of them to be his by their Ancestors, or by vertue of this redeeming them from Aegypt, the land of the North, or some other way. Surely not because they did externally belong to Christ, or were externally in the covenant of grace & were to be baptized. For they expresly denied Christ, and rejected the counsell of God against themselves being not baptized by Iohn, Luke 7:30.
I grant there is an externall being called, Matth: 22.14, but this not competent to infants: I doubt whether Heb: 10, 29, be to be interpreted of an externall being sanctified quoad homines in respect of others by the blo…d of the Covenant. The New Annot: say thus, In regard of the meritorious sufficient satisfaction purchased by it. Piscat: Schol. in locum per quem vide batur esse sanctificatus quamdiu, scil. Christum confitebatur. Dictum foreign, I think it is meant of the same sanctification of which he speaks in the same chapter, v. 10.14. ch. 13, 12, to wit, an effectuall sanctification by remission of sins, and purging their consciences from dead works, chap: 9, 14, (which alone, and not an externall sanctificacion I find ascribed to the blood of the Covenant) and the person there said to be sanctified with this sanctification not in reality but according to his profession and opinion of himself, as Luke 15.7. some are said to be just persons that need no repentance, that is, according to their own profession and opinion.
The purging from sin, 2 Pet. 1.9. was externall I grant, not inward in the heart, yet it was not a mere purging by the outward ordinance of baptism, but their own profession, and partiall reformation of themselves not competent to infants.
2 Pet: 2. … It's doubt…ful whether it note an external being purchased by Christ, or a purchase by Christ onelyonly sufficient, or an effectuall purchase, yet said of them onelyonly according to what they professed and conceived of themselves, as Luke 15, 7, Heb: 10, 29, or others conceived of them.
That Deut: 33, 3, should be meant of an externall Saintship, is supposed, not proved, though it it were applied to the body of Israel, yet it might be understood in respect of the better part, that the people were called Gods Saints.
Psa: 50, 5, The Saints of God, and those that had made a covenant with him by Sacrifice were Israel. vers 7, & it is true there were many hypocrites; but as the new Annot: God in respect of his elect calleth the whole body Holy, Saints, and his people, not meerly from an externall Saintship. To which I add, if it be referred to the covenant, Exod: 24.8. to which Mr Ainsworth in his Note on the place directs▪ it was the covenant of the law, not the covenant of grace which is meant, Psal: 50, 5,
It is true, There are invisible Churches, which are as Isaac was, Children of the Promise, Gal: 4, 28, Children of the Gospel-church, v. 31, & 26. But that this should be verefied in all the members of the Galatian Churches, unto whom Paul wrot that Episte, Gal: 1, 2, is not true, nor is it proved by Mr C, that the Apos…e spake what he saith, v▪ 28, 31, of every member of the Churches of Galatia. It is true that Ierusalem above is the mother of us all: but that [us all] should signifie every profession of the faith in the Churches of Galatia, is false: for then every one of them should be born after the spirit, v: 29. and inherit, v. 3…. The new Annot: on Gal: 4.24.6. therefore say, The Christian Church is the mother of all the faithfull who are heirs of the kingdom of Heaven whether they be I…wes or Gentiles. So that to be mother of us all, Gal. 4.26. is not to be mother of every professed Christian in Galatia, but of so many as held the right faith with Paul, and were born after the Spirit. Thus in like maner Rom: 8, 3, 21 when it is said, who spared not his own Son, but gave him up for us all, it is not meant of every professor of Faith in Rome, but all the elect and true believers, as that which follows in the same verse and verse 33 shewes: So that we need not assert ei…her that every professor of faith in the Galatian Churches was a child of the Jerusalem above effectually and savingly, or that there were some particular visible Churches in which were no hypocrites (which yet may be true notwithstanding the Parables Matth: 13 and 25. or 1 Tim: 3, 15. compared with 2 Tim: 2, 20) o… that such as are savingly interessed in the Covenant of grace, should fall from grace, or that all were externally and according to men children of the promise, as Mr C▪ speaks.
Heb: 4, 1, 4, proves not that the promise of grace and glory may be to one as his legacy or portion externally and according to men, of the saving good whereof it is possible one may fall short. For though there be mention of a promise left, yet not of a promise left to any that come short of it, unless by being left be meant propounded or tendered onelyonly.
Antipaedobaptists do grant they admit false brethren to baptism and the Lords Supper, called by Mr Cobbet seals of Church and Covenant fellowship, but it is not in them to admit them into the fellowship of covenant, meaning the covenant of grace; for that is Gods peculiar. We admit them to baptism on this ground, not because to us they are in covenant (we suspend any judgement about their interest in the covenant, as being out of our cognizance, and no Rule for us to admit or keep back from baptism) but because we know them to be professors of faith in Christ.
If by Blanks be meant such as to whom the promise of the covenant of grace is not made, and by Seals, Baptism and the Lords Supper, we think we do ordinarily put seals to a blank, nor do we make scruple thereof, or think it true that the seal must follow the covenant, or that Gen: 17.9 10, 11, 13. Acts 2, 38 39. 1 Cor: 11, 25 prove it. That it is not taught Gen: 17.7, 10, 11, 13, Ast: 28, 39, is shewed in the fore part of this Review, Sect 5▪ and in this part, Sect 5 8, 13, 20, 21, 22, 23, 37, and elswhere, 1 Cor. 11, 25▪ the cup in the Lords Supper is called the new Testament in Christs blood; but that all, or onelyonly those who are in the covenant of grace must have the the cup, is not proved thence, and the falshood of it is shewed above often.
We do not say when we admitted persons to baptism, we judged them to be in the covenant of grace, else we had not admitted them; but we knew they professed faith in Christ, and so were Disciples of Christ, and thereupon admitted them according to our Rule, Matth. 28, 19 leaving it to the Lord whether they be in the covenant of Grace or no, we being not directed to enquire whether they were in the covenant of grace, but whether believers and disciples by profession.
I for my part agree not to it, that either according to Scripture, or the best Protestants any are said to be children of the promise, or that the covenant of Evangelicall grace in the N. T. confirmed by Christs blood, is made to them, or belongs to them besides the elect. Such Doctrine gives great advantage to the Arminians, undermines perseverance in grace, and the Polemicall Doctrine of our choice Divines, as I shewed Ex…men part 3. Sect. 4. and elswhere in this part of the Review. Mr. Norton, Mr C. his Colleague, commended by Mr Cotton with Mr Cobbet, as a prime writer in the New English Churches, Resp. ad syl. quaest. Apollon. p. 30. saith, Objectum faederis gratiae sunt soli electi, objectum faederis Ecclesiastici sunt tum electi tum reprobi
My own Tertulli…n in his book de Anima, chap. 21, 22, when he urgeth that Tex…, 1 Cor: 7▪ 14, for a peculiar cleanness of believers children by privilege of seed, means not the federall holiness Mr C. teacheth, but holiness by reason of the freedom from that unholiness in their procreation, which the Infidels children had from the many gross idolatrous superstitions, by which they were defiled, and as it were ded…cated to the Divell, as I shew in my Apologie, Sect 16, page 85. Paraeus, Peter Martyr, Bucer, Melancthon, Mr. Philpot, are all Neotericks. Cyprian, Gregory, Nazianzen, Jerom, Austin, though they did plead for Paedobaptism from the Argument of Circumcision, yet did not m…in…ain Infants covenant-estate, as Mr. C. but a necessity of baptism to Infants ready to die, because of the Text, The soul that is not circumcised shall be cut off from his people, Gen: 17, 1…, Instances whereof in Augustine and others are many cited by Chamier Pausir. Tom: 4, l: 3, c. 3, Sect 39, 40 41. And they thought the Infant dying baptized was infallibly saved, whether believers child or not: As for others, they denied their entring into the kingdom of heaven, as I shew you in my Examen, part 1. Sect 7, 8, 9, 10.
I have often considered Zech: 11, 10, and I conceive the sense as Mr C. makes it of the covenant of grace in respect, at least, of the externall administration thereof amongst them, as verse 9, and their externall right in that his covevenant, to be very vain: For if it be meant of the covenant of grace, then it is as much as to say, That I might not write my Lawes in their heart, forgive their sins, &c. as I …romised them, Jer. 31.33. and then God should break his promise, the…e should be falling from the covenant of grace, &c. If the sense be of the covenant of grace in respect of externall administration thereof amongst them, and their externall right in that his covenan…, then it is as if he had said, That I might take away Circumcision, the Passover, and the rest of the Temple-service, and the peoples right to them. (For what is the externall administration of the covenant of grace; but the seals, as they call them, and the rest of the service of the Sanctuary?) Now this neither agrees to the phrase; for Circumcision is never called Gods covenant with all the people, and to break circumcision, what is it but either to draw up the fore-skin, and to forbid circumcision? If this be referred to the time of Christs coming, this had not been a prediction of an evill to them, but of a benefit to be eased of that yoak, verse 9, mentions not externall administration of the covenant of grace, or externall right there o. But whenever it was accomplished, whether at the siege of Jerusalem, or at some other time, it was the taking away of some who might be their protectors, whereby they were exposed to destruction; which whether they were the Maccabees or some others, may be doubted. However, it is so frigid an interpretation to interpert it as Mr C. doth, that methinks he should be ashamed to blot paper with it.
The Covenant ch 10. whether it were that Gen. 17. or that Exod. 19. or 24. or Deut. 29. …t is certain it is meant not of the Covenant of grace common to all believers Gentiles or Jews, but of the covenant which he made with the Israelitish nation, which he brake by taking away their Leaders whether Governors or Teachers Maccabees or some other, and so exposing them to ruin by the Grecian or Roman Lords or some other.
Psal. 44.17. Dan. 11.30, 31, 32, 33. to deal falsly in Gods Covenant, and to forsake the holy Covenant, and to do wickedly against the Covenant, do not intimate that Mr. C. would infer that there are some said to be in the Covenant of grace only externally. For to deal falsly in Gods Covenant is no more than not to keep Gods Commands, as the term Covenant is oft put Synecdochically Psal. 25.10. and 131.12. To forsake the holy Covenant, is to forsake the Law, to do against it, is to do against the Law, as Anticohus had imagination against the holy Covenant, that is the Law of the Jews. And that this is the meaning is apparent Psal. 44.18. where v. 17. is thus explained, our heart is not turned back, nor our steps declined from thy way. This Covenant then was no other than the Law of Moses, the Covenant made in Horeb, specially the Decalogue, whence the Ark called the Ark of the Covenant 1 Kings 8.1. the Decalogue the words of the Covenant Exod. 34.28. And it is apparent in that Antiochus endeavored to compel them to break that Law, as to sacrafice to Idols, to eat Swines flesh and now this Covenant was not the Covenant of grace. For the Apostle plainly distinguisheth the Law from the promise 400 years before Gal. 3.17. and the Covenant at Sinai is opposed to that of grace called the Jerusalem above Gal 4 24. Nor is there any difficulty in that which Mr. C. objects, that believers then might be in a free Covenant of grace, and at the same time under the contrary Covenant of bondage. For the believing Jews to wit David and the rest of those that believed Heb. 11. were under the command of the Covenant in Sinai. yet under the Ceremonial part, yea were not under the sentence or judgment of the Covenant of the Law so as to be justified or condemned by it.
The everlasting Covenant Isai. 24.5. is no other than the Law as is proved above. It is said Rom 3.3. (not 7. as it is printed) If some believed not, shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? But the inference of Mr. C. is frivolous, the faith of God was plighted to them, and they were externally in the Covenant, though the faith of God took saving effect only in the elect and in the believing. For I would know what the faith of God was whether it were the Covenant of saving grace, or the outward Covenant? If it were only the outward, how did it take saving effect in the elect? Did the faith of God take effect in that which was never promised? The outward Covenant me thinks Mr. C. should not say did promise saving grace, but externall right and administrations, therefore saving grace is not the effect of that Covenant.
And indeed the outward Covenant is but a meer notion (except understood Metonymically as Circumcision is called the Covenant as being the sign of it) there being no faith of God plighted to any Gentile believer and his seed, wherein God promiseth that they shall be accounted visible Church members, and as having external right or enjoyment of Church administrations. If he should it would be false, many of them never attaining them or having right to them. If it were the inward Covenant in which God plighted his faith, then it took effect only in the elect and they only were in covenant.
Nor doth Rom. 9.6. intimate what Mr. C. dreames; that the word, or Covenant of grace, took effect in all the Jews, in some externally, in the elect savingly. But as the stream of Protestant writers (whereof some are alleged in my Examen part. 3, Sest. 4. and others before in this part of the Review) and the very words shew it took effect only in the elect, who are therefore call…d v. 8, the Children of the promise distinguishingly from others, and the Apostle plainly resolves that the seed Gen. 17.7. as not Ishmael but Isaac, not Esau but Jacob, and consequently no believers natural seed, except elected.
As for Rom. 9.4. it is often shewed that the Covenants there are meant of the Tables of the Covenant and the promises, the special promises made to the Israelites after the flesh, as is manifest v. 4.5. expressing peculiar privileges to them distinct from what the Gentiles, though believers, have.
which Mr. C. saith, the Covenant of grace and an outward Covenant are not two distinct Covenants: but the Covenant of grace made with the elect in respect of their saving interest in that, I wil be a God to them, the same is made with others in respect both of visible interest and the visible administration of it, I see no truth in it. For there is no Scripture that ever expounds, I will be a God to them, that is, they shall have visible interest, and the visible administration of it, that is, they shall be circumcised &c. many have the promise of saving intrest who neither have, nor ever had visible or visible administration as their language is of the Covenant of grace, and on the contrary many have no saving Interest, yet have the visible intrest and administration Mr. C. speaks of which in truth follows the command, not the Covenant. Nor is it consistent with Mr. C's. own suppositions, that a man may be in the external Covenan… who is not in the Covenant of grace savingly, that the one is only the visible interest and administration, the other the promise of saving grace, if they be not two distinct Covenants, For they must needs be distinct Covenants which are made to different persons of different things, as these are supposed to be by Mr. C▪ himself. Nor doth Mr. C. prove by any text that there is any other w…y of entring into the Covenant of grace ordinarily, but by a true and lively faith. It is true Ezek. 16.20, 21, 23. the children of the Israelites were Gods children by special right as his servants Levit. 25.55. because he redeemed them out of Egypt, and he had entred a special Covenant with them, and they the whole nation had also engaged themselves in a special Covenant to be his, and it is true the Covenants and promises were theirs Rom. 9.4 and they were the children of the Prophets, and the children of the Covenant which God made to Abraham Act. 3.25. that is, the people among whom and out of whom Christ came, to whom he was at first made known, to whom the Prophets were sent▪ but this doth not prove that they were all internally or externally in the Covenant of grace. They had no right to be babtized, yea the greatest part of them (for this is spooken of the people of the Jews whether believers or not, even of them that offered their sons and daughters to Divils▪) denied Christ, and were broken off by unbelief Rom. 11.20.
Gal. 4.28. is impertinently brought to prove a bare external being in the Covenant of grace. For it is meant only of believers born after the spirit v. 29. who by the spirit do wait for the hope of the righteousness which is by faith Gal. 5.5.
It is not true that any of the … members from the Churh of Ephesus Acts 20.30. are said to be purchased by the blood of Christ. It was judged an abuse in Stapleton by Dr. Rainold, Apol. Thess. Sect: 20. to interpret the flock of God redeemed by his blood, of any reprobates. Of 2 Pet. 2.1. I have spoken before.
An externall being in the covenant of grace, quoad homines, by the parties profession, I never denied, but an externall being in the covenant of grace of believers infants by vertue of the parents faith in the New Testament, I still deny.
Mr C. takes upon him to answer my Dilemma, Examen pag. 52. and tells me, The covenant is theirs externally and quoad homines, considered as invested with Church-covenant, and in reference to covenant-ordinances▪ whereof they are capable, as of old they were of Circumcision, and are now of baptism. Thus it is theirs at present in respect of the visible faith and interest of the parent or parents in the covenant, and for the future it's theirs in the further grace of the covenant upon condition of their believing if they do live to years of discretion.
Answer. The position I intended to prove by the Dilemma, was set down page 48. That the Covenant of saving grace in Christ expressed Gen 17 7. in these words, I will be thy God, and the God of thy seed, is not made to a believer and his na…urall seed, to which Mr C. his answer is, by telling me▪ The covenant is theirs externally &c. which is to answer nothing to the Argument which proceeded against the asserting Gods Covenant, Gen. 17.7. as a promise of saving grace to belong to a believers naturall seed. Nor doth he prove, but dictate that Gen. 17.7. Ther's a promise concerning the externall covenant, or to any Gentile believers naturall seed, or that there is any mention of Church-covenant, or that …itle to Church-ordin…nces, as Baptism and Circumcision is derived from interest in the promise Gen▪ 17.7. Or that the parents visible faith or interest in the covenant, makes it the childrens: or that the covenant is such an ambulatory or revocable contract, as to be the infants for the present in respect of the parents faith▪ but for the future it's theirs in the further grace of the the covenant upon condition of believing if they live to years of discretion.
These Dictates are hatched in Mr. C. his nest, but have nothing in the Text for them, nor doth he attempt to prove them in that chapter which is termed, The Explication of Gen. 17.7, &c. In like manner he dictates in that which follows.
I had said, if the covenant of grace to believers seed be absolute, then either God keeps it or not: …f he do not keep it, then he breaks his word, which is blasphemy; if he do keep it, then it follows, that all the posterity of believers are saved, contrary to Rom. 9.13. Or if some are not saved though they be in the covenant of grace, there may be Apostasie of persons in the covenant of grace.
In answer to which he tels me, God may be said absolutely to covenant with believers seed collectively and specifically considered, and yet all the individuall children not saved. It is absolutelely made, and made good that, that sort of persons shall be and are saved by virtue of Gods covenant, for some of them are infallibly saved: the covenant is to the indefinite collective seed or children in respect of internall saving interest: else none of them dying Infants should be saved.
Whereto I reply, The promise is to Abrahams seed, Gen. 17.…. But that the promise is to be a God to any Gentile believers naturall indefinite collective seed in respect of the internall saving interest, as such, is not true. The promise is not made indefinitely but definitely to Ahrahams seed, under whom none but believers of the Gentiles, or elect persons are meant, nor is it made specifically to a sort of men, but to such and such numericall persons as were Abrahams seed by nature or grace: Nor is it made collectively to any of them as part of the whole number of Gentile-believers naturall seed, but as Abrahams seed by grace, and if any of them be elect, it is made also to Gentile unbelievers naturall seed under the same consideration. It is true, some of the believing Gentiles seed dying infants are saved; nor can we say that none of the unbelievers infants, dying in infancy, are saved, notwithstanding the Arguments brought to prove their perishing. But none of them are saved by virtue of a promise made to that sort of persons, that is, believers naturall children (for there is no such promise) but by vertue of Gods election, conformable to which is the promise of saving grace, Gen. 17.7. as the Apostle expresly determines, Rom. 9.6, 7.8, and consequently as election is of individuall persons (not of a collective indefinite specificall seed as Mr. C. speaks) so is the covenant. M. C. goes on thus.
Supposing they are the Israel of God, a part of the elect seed, yet the means of saving effect in and upon them, is the word of the Covenant, Rom. 9.6. It's through the effectuall word and engaged truth of God that that part of the Church are savingly purged, Eph. 5.25, 26.
Answ. I grant this to be true, yet conceive that Eph. 5.25, 26. speaks of the word of promise, not barely as made, but also as accomplished in Christs performance, and published by preaching, whereupon baptism follows, by both which Christ sanctifies and purgeth his Church savingly by the one as the means, by the other as the sign.
He adds, The covenant is to the individual seed of all and each of them in respect of externall interest, and yet many of them not saved.
Answer. This is an exposition which is without proof, or example of the like, 1. That where God saith, I will be a God to Abrahams seed, he means other believers, even Gentiles naturall seed. 2 That he means this in respect of externall interest onelyonly to some. 3. That some of those to whom he promiseth to be a God according to the covenant of grace in Christ, may not be saved. 4 That by Abrahams seed he meaneth in respect of saving effects, the indefinite collective seed of Gent…le-believers, so as that it is onelyonly made good to that sort of persons (which were true if none but Isaac and Iacob were saved; For if the promise of salvation be onelyonly to the sort of persons, it is made good in one or two of believers seed) but in respect of externall interest to the individual seed all and each of them, yea though the parents be but hypocrites, and not savingly in the covenant of grace themselves. He goes on.
Nor yet is Gods faithfulness impeached or impaired, nor need the faith of believers be shaken, if this or that child should prove, live and die wicked, the force of the covenant is not to be measured by the fatall miscarriage of many of Abrahams Church-seed.
Answer. Neither is Gods faithfulness impeached, nor need the faith of believers be shaken, though all their chidren die wicked. It is not true, That the Apostles reasoning, Rom. 9.4, 6. compared mentions any such Church-seed of Abraham, or takes them in as such, but onelyonly the elect. Mr C. doth falsly charge his adversaries doctrine, as denying any interest at all to any believers infants in the covenant. I have often granted it to the elect, but to none as believers infants. Mr Baillee charged me with this thing, to which I answered in my Letter to him, Sect. 1. our doctrine is as comfortable as theirs when they speak truth. It is no Gospel but a dream to affirm what Mr. C. doth of Abrahams fancied Church-seed, though it be Gospel to say, God will be a God to Abrahams spirituall seed elect and true believers.