The Covenant Sealed, Treatise · Chapter 7 · Section 1
SECT. I. The adaequate ſubject of Sacraments.
THe next thing here to be conſidered in this definition of a Sacrament laid down by the Apoſtle, is the ſubject of it, grounded upon the perſon that here received this ſign of Circumciſion and conſidered, as accepting of the Covenant of God, as we have heard: He entered the Covenant in his own name, and in the name of all them that were confederates with him: And he received Circumciſion the ſign of it: and they in their time reſpectively were alſo circumciſed: and from hence theſe Concluſions may be drawn.
1. The Covenant-people of God, are the adaequate ſubject of the Sacraments; They, and they onelyonly, have their right and intereſt in them
2. Sacraments are not arbitrary, but neceſſary; they are not only priviledges, but duties: The Covenant-people of God may, and they muſt receive them.
3. Their efficacy depends upon their uſe; They are no Sacraments to thoſe that do not partake of them. Of theſe in their order.
The Covenant people of God are the adaequate ſubject of Sacraments.Firſt, The Covenant-people of God, are the adaequate ſubject of the Sacraments; They, and they only, have their right and intereſt in them. There can be no truth more clear then this, in caſe we look into the Scriptures, and for full proofe of it, I ſhall lay down theſe Poſitions.
Propoſitions evincing the truth of the Point.Firſt, It is upon the account of the Covenant, that any among the ſons of men are of the people of God; that they have any relation to him in order and tendency to their everlaſting welfare. Where the Covenant is not, all relation-intereſt in God is wanting; theſe are without God, Epheſ. 2.12. Deut. 29.10, 11, 12, 13. Ye ſtand this day all of you before the Lord your God; your Captains of your tribes, your Elders, and your Officers, with all the men of Iſrael; your little ones, your wives, and the ſtranger that is in thy Campe, from the hewer of wood, unto the drawer of thy water: that thou ſhouldeſt enter into Covenant with the Lord thy God, and into his Oath which the Lord thy God maketh with thee this day; that he may ſtabliſh thee to day for a people to himſelf, and that he may be unto thee a God, as he hath ſaid unto thee, and as he hath ſworn unto thy Fathers, to Abraham, to Iſaac, and to Jacob. They that were no people, by Covenant are made a people, as he that was no ſervant, by Covenant is made a ſervant; and ſhe that was no wife, made a wife: Theſe are nigh, when others are afar off, Epheſ. 2.17. Hereupon the Jewes to whom the Covenants pertained, Rom. 9.4. have this glory, Pſal. 148.14. A people neare unto the Lord. A wife is called by the name of her husband, Eſay 4.1. And the whole of the family, by the name of the Maſter of the family, ſo all of the people of God in Covenant, are called by the Name of God. He owns them as his, Epheſ. 3.15. God mentions it as a motive taking with him, to hear prayers, 2 Chron. 7.14. If my people that are called by my Name, do humble themſelves and pray, I will hear: And the people of God urge it, as a motive to prevail that they may be heard, Jer. 14.8, 9. O the hope of Iſrael, the Saviour thereof in time of trouble, why ſhouldeſt thou be as a ſtranger in the land, and as a wayfaring man that turneth aſide to tarry for a night? why ſhouldeſt thou be as a man aſtonied, as a mighty man that cannot ſave? yet thou, O Lord, art in the midſt of us, we are called by thy Name, leave us not, Eſay 64.18, 19. Our adverſaries have troden down thy ſanctuary: we are thine: thou bareſt not rule over them, they were never called by thy Name; upon termes of Covenant onelyonly they are the Lords.
Secondly, It is upon the ſame account that they have any intereſt in the Sacraments, which are the badges and markes of a people of God in profeſſion. When the Covenant was entred with Abraham, and his ſeed, Gen. 17. Circumciſion was forthwith inſtituted; Theſe therefore were called the Circumciſion, & all others the Ʋncircumciſion, Epheſ. 2.11. The title Jew did denote the people of God, Thou art called a Jew, (ſaith the Apoſtle) and reſteſt in the law and makeſt thy boaſt of God, Rom. 2.17. and Jew and Circumciſion are the ſame, Rom. 2.25, 26, 27. Rom. 3.1. And hereupon, as Abraham entring Covenant was circumciſed, and his ſeed: ſo proſelytes joyning to them and their ſeed, were circumciſed. And the ſelf ſame that had their title to Circumciſion, had their intereſt in the Paſſeover, and onelyonly theſe, as to males, Exod. 2.43, 44, 45. This is the ordinance of the Paſſeover, there ſhall no ſtranger eat thereof: But every mans ſervant that is bought for money, when thou haſt circumciſed him, then ſhall he eate thereof; A Forrener and an hired ſervant ſhall not eat thereof. Rivet on the words concludes the Ergo Ben necar eſt homo alterius populi qui neque in populo Dei natus eſt neque aſcitus.ſtranger to be every one that was not borne among the people of God, nor taken in into them, Exod. 12.48, 49. And when a ſtranger ſhall ſojourne with thee, and will keep the Paſſeover to the Lord, let all his males be circumciſed, and then let him come near, and he ſhall be as one born in the land; for no uncircumciſed perſon ſhall eate thereof. One law ſhall be to him that is home-born, and unto the ſtranger that ſojourneth among you; whence we ſee that as the Covenant did entitle to Circumciſion, which is called the Covenant, Gen. 17.10. Acts 7.8. ſo Circumciſion did entitle to the Paſſeover. Hereupon there were ordinances enacted in Iſrael, for obſervation of it through Iſrael; as, Levit. 23. Numb. 28. may be ſeen. After a long time of intermiſſion of it, we ſee a proclamation by Hezekiah throughout all Iſrael, to invite to it not onelyonly thoſe of his own ſubjects, but all the reſt of the revolted tribes, 2 Chron. 30.5. The invitation reached to all in Covenant, and onelyonly to thoſe in Covenant, cleerly ſhewing that all Covenanters, and Covenanters alone, are inrighted in the priviledge of Sacraments. In New Teſtament times, it is as cleer, diſcipling and baptizing go together in Chriſts commiſſion: Diſciple Nations, and baptize them, Matth. 28.19. as it did before the enlargement of that commiſſion, Joh. 4.1. When the Lord knew that the Phariſees had heard that Jeſus made, and baptiſed more diſciples then John. Being made diſciples, we ſee they were baptized. And a diſciple of Chriſt, converted to the faith, and in profeſſion a Saint, was never doubted to be in Covenant with Chriſt, being of thoſe that belong to Chriſt and bear his Name, as the thing it ſelf ſpeaks, and the Evangeliſts compared ſhew, Matth. 10.42. Mar. 9.41. Upon converſion there was no delay of Baptiſme, as appeares through the hiſtory of the Acts, Chap. 2.41. Chap. 8. ver. 12, 13.38. Chap. 9.18. Chap. 10.48. Chap. 16. ver. 15, 33. Chap. 18.8. Baptiſme inheriting the roome and honour of Circumciſion. As the Covenant gave immediate title to Circumciſion in the former diſpenſation: Now it gives the like title to Baptiſme. For the Lords Supper, it was never doubted but Chriſtians made up into Churches by this Ordinance of Baptiſme, were inrighted in it; and the Apoſtle plainely ſhewes it, 1 Cor. 10.17. For we being many are one bread, and one body; for we are partakers of that one bread. And therefore Ravanellus in verbum Sacramentum, inquiring into the terminus cui, and cujus, for which they are appointed, ſaies, The terminus cui, the end for whom they ſerve, is ſoli foederati, alone perſons in Covenant; and then explaines himſelf, thatbInter foederatos autem Dei cenſentur omnes illi quiſunt in externa Eccleſiae Communione, et profitentur ſe in Chriſtum credere: ar vero, cum inter nos quidem poſſunt eſſe Hypocritae et impii, ideo Sacramenta in Eccleſia communia ſunt piis et impiis, ita tamen ut impii pro piis probabiliter habeantur. All theſe are reckoned within the Covenant, that are in the external Communion of the Church; and profeſſe to beleeve in Chriſt. And ſeeing that among thoſe there may be many hypocrites and ungodly, therefore the Sacraments in the Church are common to the godly, and ungodly; quoting 1 Cor. 1.27, 29. and giving inſtance, that Circumciſion was thus conferred on Iſhmael, Gen. 17.23. on Hemor, Shichem, and the men of their Cities, Gen. 34.24. Baptiſme on Simon Magus, Acts 8.15. and the Lords Supper on Judas the traitour, Luke 22.21. When he ſaies that the Sacraments are common to the godly and wicked, he preſently inſerts indeed by way of parentheſis [So that the wicked are probably judged to be godly;] In which he ſeems to meane no other, but that their very profeſſion is the probability, (as ſome ſay none can conclude any profeſſour of Chriſtinity to be ungodly; there may (ſay they) be ſome ſparkes of grace under aſhes, and ſeed in due time to ſprout out, yet lying under the clods, and not appearing) elſe he contradicts himſelf in diſtinguiſhing ungodly and hypocrites aſunder, and the text alſo that he quotes; There was but little outward probability of godlineſſe in thoſe that ſo prophaned the Lords Supper, as in that chap. is held forth. And though few in their Treatiſes of the Sacraments in general, ſtand much on this particular, who they be that have their intereſt in theſe priviledges, nor do explicitely put it into the definition; yet we have it almoſt from every penne, and ſounding out of every pulpit; Are not Sacraments called ſeales, and that of Gods Covenant? are not arguments drawn in behalf of thoſe, that ſome would exclude from Sacrament priviledges, that they are Foederati, and therefore ſhould be Signati? They are in Covenant, and therefore are entitled to the ſeales of the Covenant, which is an argument of undenyable ſtrength. So farre as a man is veſted in a grant, ſo far he is entitled to the ſeal, for ratification of it, and may require it; why is there a phraſe borrowed from theſe proceedings among men, in caſe it be not ſo here as it is in their proceedings? Look into all Grants, Patents, Charters, Deeds, Leaſes, Bonds, Teſtaments, you ſhall ſtill ſee the Covenant, and ſeal of equall latitude.
Here indeed is ſomewhat objected which hath over and over been anſwered.
Firſt, That ſervants bought with money, and taken into Abrahams family, were to be circumciſed, Gen. 17.12, 13. and ſo alſo into the family of others in Iſrael, Exod. 12.44.
Anſw. 1. This is ſtrangely brought to prove that men out of Covenant, ſhould be circumciſed, when the text ſaies, even of them, My Covenant ſhall be in their fleſh. Is the Covenant of God in the fleſh of thoſe that are out of Covenant?
Secondly, It is no where enjoyned to compel them to Circumciſion, nor yet is there any Example of ſuch compulſion.
Thirdly, Every Maſters duty was (as Abrahams practice) to Catechize their families, and ſo, not to compel them, but to invite them into Covenant. Cajetan, cCajetanus ergo qui neceſſitatem hanc ſuppoſuit, cum videret non convenire Sacramento qua tali, ut ab in vito ſuſciperetur, exiſtimavit invitos qu…dem fuiſſe circumciſos ſervos, ſed ad fidei profeſſionem non fuiſſe adactos: notam vero iſtam fuiſſe, iſtis, etiam in vitis impreſſam quatenus erat ſignum Reipub. politicum ſeu externum, quo Iſraelitae ab aliis gentibus diſcernebantur.as he is quoted by Rivet on Exod. 12.43, 44. (ſuppoſing that the words ſound towards a compulſion) underſtands, that ſervants were compelled to receive Circumciſion, but onelyonly as a mark to diſtinguiſh them in a political way from other Nations; ſeeing it agrees not with a Sacrament as a Sacrament to be received againſt heart. Rivets own thoughts about it may be brought into four heads. 1. That as to the cutting off the foreskin, and the ſmart ſuffered in it, it was no injuſtice in Maſters to compell them, ſeeing they were their Money. 2. That he beſt approves of their opinion, That hold that the Law of circumciſing of Proſelytes was on that condition, that they were willing to be circumciſed. 3. That Maſters ought to make it their buſineſſe to perſwade them; but not againſt heart to circumciſe them. 4. If that any think that a neceſſity lay upon Maſters to circumciſe all ſervants, it is ſafeſt to be of Cajetans mind, to deny it to be any note of profeſſion of the Jewiſh Religion.
Secondly, It is objected on the other hand, that ſome in Covenant were denyed Circumciſion; as, 1. Infants before the 8th. day: But that is unworthy of any anſwer. A ſtated day for it, is not any denyall of it. 2. Females were not to be circumciſed, ſeeing the inſtitution is onelyonly for the males. To which three things may be anſwered. 1. For thoſe that make uſe of this objection, they have authors of their own, namely, Walafridus Strabo de rebus Eccleſiaſticis (as he is cited by à Lapide on Geneſ. 17.) affirming that they were circumciſed. 2. The reaſon of their excluſion from any actuall participation, was their incapacity of it. And thirdly, they were circumciſed virtually, and ſo reputed of that number, as appeares in that they were admitted to the Paſſeover, when the law was expreſſe, no uncircumciſed perſon muſt eat of it, Exod. 12.48. And Samſon was charged that he took a wife of the uncircumciſed Philiſtines, Judg. 14.3. So that I ſay, a Covenanting people of God, and they onelyonly are entitled to the right of Sacraments; when they are given to a people out of Covenant, a ſeal is put to a blank, which muſt needs be an horrid prophanation of the ſeales of the Covenant of God. And when they are denied to thoſe in Covenant, (as not their right) they are injured from whom they are thus detayned.