The Covenant Sealed, Treatise · Chapter 12 · Section 4
SECT. IV. A further Corollary from the Doctrine.
Sacraments in the time of the Law and dayes of the Goſpel are of the ſame uſe and ſignification.IT further followes, that Sacraments in the time of the Law, and in the dayes of the Goſpel were of the ſame uſe and ſignification: the Sacraments of Iſraelites and Chriſtians are all one in ſubſtance. This is clear. Circumciſion was a ſeal of the righteouſneſſe of faith; and in caſe, Sacraments in the dayes of the Goſpel ſeal not this to Chriſtians, we muſt then leave the Apoſtles, and ſeek a new way of happineſſe. Yea, if then there were any Sacrament properly ſo called, (as ſome argue) that Sacrament muſt neceſſarily be of the ſame, and no other uſe and ſignification than theſe, which followed after in the time of the Law, and dayes of the Goſpel, ſeeing thoſe Fathers were under the ſame promiſe of the righteouſneſſe of faith, That was Noah's inheritance, Heb. 11.7. This further appears from the Apoſtle,1 Cor. 10.1, 2, 3. opened. 1 Cor. 10.1, 2, 3. I would not that ye ſhould be ignorant, how that all our Fathers were under the cloud, and all paſſed through the Sea: and were all baptized unto Moſes in the cloud, and in the Sea. And did all eat the ſame spiritual meat, and did all drink the ſame ſpiritual drink: for they drank of the Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Chriſt. The Apoſtle here firſt gives the very name of our leading Sacrament unto theirs; they were all baptized unto Moſes (ſaith he) in the Cloud & in the Sea. 2dly, he declares that the thing ſignified was the ſame in theirs, as it is in our Sacraments. They ate the ſame ſpiritual meat, and they drank the ſame ſpiritual drink, and ſo from hence this Argument is obvious. Where there is the ſame name, and the ſame thing, there is the ſame Ordinance in ſubſtance; But here is the ſame name and the ſame thing (as we have ſeen); and therefore the Ordinances are in ſubſtance the ſame. The Apoſtle gives no greater excellency (ſaith Calvin) to our Sacraments then to theirs, when he ſaith, that the fathers ate the ſame spiritual meat with us, interpreting himſelf, that that meat is Chriſt. Bellarmine here finds ſeverall difficulties (as he calls them) ſeemingly making for us againſt him, and preſſes them further then he can find ſtrength to anſwer. 1. If the Jewes ate the ſame ſpiritual meat, and drank the ſame ſpiritual drink as we do in the Lords Supper, then there was the ſame vertue in Manna as in the Lords Supper. To this he anſwers, that they all are of the ſame meat one as others among themſelves, but not the ſame with that which we eat. But, I had rather follow the Apoſtles own Comment then Bellarmines: and he interprets this meat to be Chriſt: and unleſs we feed not on Chriſt, we and they have the ſame ſpiritual food. For, as the Apoſtle tells us, they fed on him. 2. If it were ſpiritual meat, ſpiritual drink, wherewith they were fed, it had the ſame efficacy as our Sacraments. Ours have no efficacy above that which is ſpiritual. 3. He ſaith, we urge the ſtate of the queſtion which the Apoſtle there handles. The Apoſtle there warns Chriſtians not to reſt too much in their fruition of Sacraments, ſo as to think themſelves ſafe, becauſe they were baptized and admitted to the Lords Supper, ſeeing Sacraments like to theſe, little availed the fathers that did not abſtain from ſin. And laſtly, Auſtin is produced on our behalf, who, Tractate on Joh. 16. ſaith, That the Sacraments of the Jewes and ours were different in their ſignes, but the ſame in the thing ſignified. They were different in outward viſible appearance, but the ſame in their divine vertue. Theſe he makes it his buſineſſe to anſwer, lib. 2. de effectu Sacram. cap. 17. Which anſwers of his are ſo fully taken off, by Ameſius, Bellar. enervat. tom. 3. cap. 4. And by Whitaker, praelect. de Sacram. Quaeſt. 5. cap. 3. that I need not cauſe this work to ſwell any bigger with it. And this Text, I doubt not, is clear for it.
Col. 2.11, 12. The Apoſtle makes Circumciſion, and Baptiſme one and the ſame, and calls Circumciſion by the name of Baptiſme, Circumciſion of the heart (which is the putting away the body of the ſins of the fleſh) was ſignified (and in the right uſe of it effected) in circumciſion, Deut. 10.16. Jer. 4.4. Rom. 2.28. And the ſame is ſignified, and in the right uſe of it effected in Baptiſme, as appears in the text quoted, as alſo, Rom. 6.4. We are buried with him by Baptiſme into death, that like as Chriſt was raiſed from the dead by the glory of the Father, even ſo we alſo ſhould walk in newneſſe of life. Reaſons aſſigned.This alſo appears in reaſon.
1. Sacraments have their eſteem and excellency, according to promiſes. They have no efficacy, or excellency in themſelves; but as they relate to promiſes: but the Fathers were under equal promiſes with us, they were under the ſame promiſes as we may ſee, Gen. 17.7. I will eſtabliſh my Covenant between me and thee, and thy ſeed after thee, in their generations, for an everlaſting Covenant to be a God unto thee and thy ſeed after thee. And the Apoſtle, Heb. 11.16. ſpeaking of the Fathers, ſaith, God is not aſhamed to be called their God. This promiſe is interpreted by Chriſt to include mercies for eternity, Matt. 22.31, 32. Temporal promiſes will not evince a reſurrection: But theſe promiſes, as Chriſt lets us know, do evince it. Goſpell promiſes are the greateſt: but they enjoyed Goſpel-promiſes, Gal. 3.8. Heb. 4.2. They were therefore our equalls in promiſes.
2. Children of the ſame father, are fed at his table, with the Reaſ. 2 ſame food; at leaſt ſo farre the ſame, as to work to the ſame life: But they were children of the ſame Father, Rom. 9.4. To them pertained the adoption: Ergo.
Reaſ. 3 3. Subjects of the ſame kingdome enjoy the ſame ordinances: But they are ſubjects of the ſame Kingdome, Matth. 8.11. I ſay unto you that many ſhall come from the Eaſt and Weſt, and ſhall ſit down with Abraham, Iſaac, and Jacob in the Kingdome of heaven. The ſame Kingdome in which Abraham, Iſaac and Jacob were, Gentiles that are called in Goſpel-times are Ergo.
Explicatory Rules.This we muſt underſtand with theſe rules.
Firſt, Theſe Sacraments, theirs and ours, are not in that manner Rule. 1 one; but that there are many circumſtantial differences between them. 1. They differ in their outward ſignes; appearing to us, in ſeveral ſhapes. That which was ſeen in Circumciſion, differed much from water in Baptiſme; and a Lamb, whether of the herd or flock, differs much from bread and wine. 2. Ours are of greater eaſe then theirs. There was pain and ſmart in Circumciſion; which the new Circumciſed Shechemites felt to their coſt, Gen. 34.25. which happily might occaſion the neglect of circumciſion of Moſes his ſonne, through the Mothers tenderneſſe, as may be gathered from her words, Exod. 4.25. Neither was the Paſſeover without coſt and pains; eſpecially to them that lived at a great diſtance from Jeruſalem. 3. There is farre more light accompanying our Sacraments then theirs, not in themſelves; for as much might be gathered, if not more, for ſignificancy from their outward ſigns, then from ours; but by reaſon of the clear diſcovery of the promiſes, and open, full manifeſtation of their uſe. 4. Ours were without blood, theirs were accompanied with blood, one of the perſon receiving, the other in the ſign received. 5. Old Teſtament-Sacraments had their period, and others follow in their place: Ours muſt not ceaſe until all time ceaſeth, Baptiſme muſt hold to the end of the world, Matth. 28.20. And the Lords Supper until Chriſt come, 1 Cor. 11.26. But none of theſe make any ſubſtantial difference, nor any more then that which is circumſtantial, or gradual; The outward dreſſe in which they differently appear, can make no difference in ſubſtance. A ſeal is one and the ſame, whether the wax be red, green, or yellow, yea, whether the impreſſion be in wax, or dough, whether the ſignet have the Letters of a mans name, or the Arms that he gives. Men look at the grant to which the ſeal is put, and not at theſe circumſtances. Neither matters it whether they be done with trouble or eaſe, and where their worth is not known, they are not therefore in themſelves of leſſe value. And though they do not endure alwaies, their efficacy is yet no leſſe, whileſt they laſt. If we eye circumſtances of this nature, ours may be advanced; But if we eye the ſubſtantial work, theirs will be equal. Hereupon ſo different ſpeeches are quoted from Austins pen; Some highly advancing our Sacraments above theirs, and others parallelling theirs with ours, which with this diſtinction may be fairly reconciled, and (as we have heard) the author himſelf thus reconciles them.
Secondly, Thoſe undervaluing phraſes of Old Teſtament-Sacraments, Rule. 2 which are ſometimes found in the Prophets and Apoſtles, and brought by adverſaries to put them at a great diſtance behind ours, are either ſpoken, as they were abuſed and miſobſerved by Jews in unbelief, and impenitence, and not according to their inſtitution, or lawful uſe; in which caſe we might ſay the ſame of Baptiſme or the Lords Supper. Or elſe we muſt underſtand them, as having an end by Chriſts coming in the fleſh put to them, and ſo in their uſe dead, if not deadly to the obſervers.
Rule. 3 Thirdly, Though Bellarmine makes it one of the particulars, wherein we and they agree, that the Sacraments of the Jewes are types of ours, in the daies of the Goſpel; Yet in caſe the word type be taken in that ſenſe, as it is ordinarily uſed, we utterly diſclaim it. There are indeed very many, and different acceptations of this word, as may appear to any that will conſult John 21.25. Act. 23.25. Act. 7.43. Rom. 6.17. Rom. 5.14. with Heb. 9.24. Phil. 3.17. Act. 7.44. 1 Cor. 10.6. 1 Pet. 3.21. And, as it is uſed in that one place in Peter, where Baptiſme is ſaid to be the antitype to the Ark (which according to Interpreters implyes onelyonly a ſimilitude, or correſpondence) we may well grant that their Sacraments were types, that is, theirs and ours carry a full reſemblance; but taking the word as it is ordinarily uſed, for that which ſhadowes out, ſomewhat that is to come, by Divine inſtitution, whether perſon or thing; as Adam, Rom. 5.14. is ſaid to be a type, or figure of him that was to come; and the holy places made with hands, are types and figures of the true, which doubtleſſe our adverſaries intend, ſo it is to be denied; and Proteſtant Writers unanimouſly deny them to be any ſuch types, wholly diſclaiming that doctrine, that the Sacraments of the Jews did onelyonly ſhadow out grace, and ours do conferre it. And therefore when the contents affixed to the reſpective Chapters in our laſt tranſlation, ſeem otherwiſe ſingularly exact, ſo that that great Critick, Ainſworth (who cannot be ſuſpected to do it out of any humor of imitation) in his tranſlation of the Pentateuch and the Pſalms, very rarely differs from them, it is wonder how that ſlip came into the contents affixed to 1 Cor. 10. thus expreſt, 1. The Sacraments of the Jewes, 6. are types of ours, 7. and their puniſhments, 11. enſamples for us, when it ſhould rather have been 1. The Sacraments of the Jewes are the ſame with ours, 5. their puniſhments are enſamples for us. The four firſt verſes making the Sacraments there mentioned to be of the ſame uſe with ours, and the ſeven following verſes to v. 12. ſhew that their ſufferings for ſin, are our examples for admonition, that we run not upon like practices. See Ravanellus in verbum Typus, Whitaker praelect. de Sacram. quaeſt. 5. cap. 1. pag. 109. Pareus in 1 Cor. 10.6.