The Covenant Sealed, Treatise · Chapter 7 · Section 9 · Subsection 1
A Digreſsion for Vindication of Chap. 32. of the Treatiſe of the Covenant, from Mr. Baxters Exceptions touching the Faith that entitles to Baptiſme.
HEre I am put upon it to take into conſideration,The occaſion of this Digreſſion. that which Learned Mr. Baxter in his Apology hath been pleaſed to oppoſe againſt me. Though he be large, I ſhall make it my buſineſſe (if it may be) to be more brief. I entitled the two and thirtieth Chapter of my Treatiſe of the Covenant, in this manner, A dogmatical Faith entitles to Baptiſme: being a Corollary, naturally (as I yet think) inferred from the Doctrine, that I had before delivered, of the latitude of the Covenant; explaining my ſelf, that I meant ſuch a faith, that aſſents to Goſpel-truths, though not affecting the heart, to a full choyce of Chriſt, and therefore ſhort of that Faith which is juſtifying, and ſaving; ratifying it with ſeveral arguments. In which I might well have thought, that I ſhould have found my ancient friend, my Second, rather then an Adverſary, conſidering what he had delivered, pag. 224. of his Treatiſe of Infants Church-Memberſhip. This opinion, Mr. Baxters conceſſion.that the Covenant of grace which Baptiſme ſealeth, is onelyonly to the Elect, and is not conditional, is one of the two maſter pillars in the Antinomian fabrick: and afterwards, If any ſhall think that this affirming [that Chriſt hath brought the reprobate alſo into a Covenant of grace conditional] be any part of the Arminian errors, as the whole ſcope of Scriptures is againſt them, ſo Mr. Blake hath ſaid enough to ſatisfy: He that will deny reprobates to be ſo farre within the Covenant of grace, muſt not onelyonly denye infant Baptiſme, but all Sacraments, till he be able infallibly to diſcern a man to be Elect. I did never riſe ſo high in words for my opinion as the Reader may here ſee my adverſary hath done for me, and I ſhall have more occaſion to obſerve his conceſſions in this thing. But how to reconcile all, with that which, pag 327. of the ſame Treatiſe he delivers, I know not. If men be taught once that it is a Faith ſhort of juſtifying, and ſaving faith, which admitteth men to Baptiſme, as having true right in foro Dei, it will make foul work in the Church. This he aſſerts with five ſeveral arguments, to which in the Chapter quoted I gave a brief anſwer, not once naming the Author, that (if it might be) ſuch conteſts with a man that I ſo much honour, might not have been obſerved, and yet the truth not deſerted. Before he enters upon any refutation of my arguments, or vindication of his own, he is pleaſed to ſpend nine full pages, to ſhew how farre he takes unregenerate men to be in Covenant, and to diſcover (as he ſaies) my mind in this point. Neere to the cloſe of that diſcourſe, he ſaies, that what I mean by Covenanting, he deſpairs to know; which ſurely will be the Readers wonder, that knowes what he hath ſaid, pag. 224. before mentioned, I speak impartially, according to my judgement, I think there is more true worth in thoſe two or three leaves of Mr. Blakes book in opening of the Covenant, then in all, &c. And as he deſpaires to know my meaning, ſo I as much deſpair ever to make it known to him. He quotes very many expreſſions of mine, and knowes my meaning in none of them, and ſome that I borrow from others, as Dr. Preſton and Pareus, and he knowes neither my meaning nor theirs in them. And in caſe I ſhould make attempt, if it might be, to make it further clear, he hath ſtill an art, to render it obſcure. He obſerves, that I ſay, (that which I think all ſay) that the accepting of the word [preacht is the note of the Church] and gives his cenſure that that is a more laxe, and ambiguous terme, then the former. And ſeeing that I am not able to ſatisfie him with any notions that I can reach, I ſhall endeavour at preſent to help his ſight, in pointing out to him, men in Covenant with God; that when he lookes upon the men, and the character given of God himſelf, of them, he may (if he pleaſe) gueſſe at the Covenant it ſelf.Scripture-characters of men in Covenant. Do's Mr. Baxter know what Covenant that was, that the Captains of tribes, Elders, Officers, with all the men of Iſrael, little ones, wives, ſtrangers, from the hewer of wood to the drawer of water entred into? Deut. 29. and what kind of men they were that avouched the Lord to be their God, and whom God avouched to be his peculiar people? Deut. 26.17, 18. Do's he know who thoſe be, that throughout the Old Teſtament-Scriptures, the Lord calls his people, his inheritance, his portion, his ſonnes and daughters? And who thoſe kinſmen of Paul according to the fleſh were, to whom pertained the Adoption, the glory, and the Covenants? Rom. 9.4. Do's he know who thoſe were in New Teſtament-times, that were converted by thouſands, myriads of thouſands? then he knows who God lookes upon, as his in Covenant, and to whom Covenant priviledges appertain. And doubtleſſe thoſe hearers that Iſaiah deſcribes (and from him all the Evangeliſts) of fat hearts, dimme eyes, heavy eares, whileſt God had not removed his Candleſtick, were included: They were in Covenrnt with God. If it be ſaid that theſe are ſaid to be in Covenant equivocally; I anſwer, 1. I dare not charge the conſtant language of the Spirit of God in Scripture with equivocation. 2. I am ſure that they upon that account, really enjoyed the priviledges under diſpute, were called by the name of a Church, Acts 7.38. and had that elogy, a people near unto the Lord. And to ſay that theſe were in Covenant with a quatenus, aliquo modo ſic, aliquo modo non, when God teſtifies that they avouch him to be their God, I think is too great boldneſſe. That thoſe that roſe no higher, then theſe mentioned, have no right to the great bleſſings of the Covenant, as Chriſt, pardon, Juſtification, Adoption, glory, upon that account, that they come not up to the faith called for in Covenant, I freely with Mr. Baxter grant; Thoſe are too high Favours for Covenant breakers, yet I ſay, as all Iſrael did de facto enjoy, ſo all of the like faith in foro Dei have their right of his free bounty to all thoſe Church-priviledges that ſerve to fit for glory. He is pleaſed to ſay, Mr. Bl. had done better, if, with that moderate, reverend, godly man Mr. Stephen Marſhall he had diſtinguiſhed between thoſe two queſtions [who are Chriſtians, or Church-members?] and [whom we are to judg ſuch and uſe as ſuch?] and to bring in the latter rank onelyonly. I know not where Mr. Marſhall thus diſtinguiſhes. If he ſpeaks of members of the Church inviſible, it is not at all to our purpoſe, we are not ſpeaking to them: And if he mean members of the Church viſible, I know no uſe of ſuch diſtinction, we can well enough know ſuch members, otherwiſe they were not viſible. Let Mr Baxter look upon thoſe notes of a Church-member which he mentions, where he intended a confutation of my 31. chap. in caſe I had not ſpoken to his mind, and the ſame things with him, and then ſee whether ſuch cannot be known? I think thoſe of the Worceſterſhire combination, may know who thoſe be whom they take into Communion. In a parentheſis he is pleaſed to tell me, that herein I joyn with Mr. Tombs. To which I reply, what animoſity ſoever he hath againſt me, I ſhall not leave any one truth to ſhunne agreement with him, when Mr. Baxter himſelf affirms, that Mr. Tombs and he are agreed in that particular that he there mentions, pag. 92. though moſt Divines, (as he there ſaies) are againſt them both; ſure I may boldly joyn with him, when moſt Divines are for us. He tells me, Thoſe that profeſſe to fear God, and love him, we muſt love and honour as men, that do fear and love him: yet in different degrees, as the ſigns of their graces are more or leſſe probable. In ſome common confeſſing Chriſtians, we ſee but ſmall probability: yet dare we not exclude them from the Church, nor the number of true believers, as long as there is any probability; Others that are more judicious, zealous, diligent and upright of life, we have far ſtronger probability of: and therefore love and honour them much more. All this is true, in caſe we were to enquire after the fear of God in its power, or the image of God, renewed in ſincerity; But when it is applyed to viſible Church-memberſhip, I know not what to make of it. Muſt I more or leſſe honour a man, accordingly as he appears more or leſſe viſibly in Congregations? After a long diſcourſe about the Covenant, and faith dogmatical, which I ſhall have occaſion further to touch upon, he concludes thus, The words which Mr. Bl. queſtioneth, I confeſſe are mine, againſt Dr. Ward,The Author vindicated from ſingularity. and I did not think in ſo groſſe an opinion Dr. Ward would have found any ſecond to undertake that cauſe. How this paſſage fell from his penne, may well be to every intelligent Reader matter of admiration: not that he chargeth an opinion from which he diſſents, to be ſo notably groſſe, (which is not very unuſual) but that a man of ſuch multiplicity of reading, ſhould think that Dr. Ward in this opinion would not have found a ſecond, when if he hath peruſed our approved Authors about the queſtion, eſpecially ſince it came to a punctuall juſt debate, he may ſoon ſee that he hath almoſt every one to appear for him if this which he mentions be his opinion, unleſſe perhaps he hath been ſo held in reading the Fathers, and other Writers for the firſt thirteen, or fourteen hundred years (in which few will, I think, come out and vye with him,) that he hath not regarded what hath been ſaid this hundred and fifty years, in this corner of the world, when his book came firſt out, I received a letter from as learned an hand, as any I have to converſe withall, noting this, as a ſingular tenent; and when upon occaſion I have mentioned it, that Mr. Baxter holds that no faith that is ſhort of that which juſtifies, gives title to Baptiſme, it ſounded ſo ſtrange that I could not gain credit to the report of it. He that hath ſpent ſo much pains in that Scripture, 1 Cor. 7.14. cannot be ignorant of that uſual diſtinction, of Covenant holineſſe, and holineſſe habituall, and perſonall. The former, (according to Divines and Mr. Baxter himſelf) is an holineſſe of relation to God, and ſeparation for him; which was found in all the Nation of the Jews, and now is in all profeſſed believers, and their ſeed. The latter is an inherent quality, infuſed by regeneration, by which the man is brought into conformity with the Law of God. The former (according to them, and him in that Treatiſe) gives title to Baptiſme, even where the latter is wanting. Thoſe words therefore were more then needed: [If men be once taught, that it is a faith ſhort of that which is ſaving and juſtifying, which admitteth to Baptiſme] ſeeing it is in reformed Churches generally, and univerſally taught, Mr. T. very well knowing, (as all do know) that in theſe laſt ages it is a doctrine generally received: and ſetting himſelf to oppoſe it, ſaith, that he can derive its pedigree no higher than Zwinglius: but he hath heard of thoſe that were Zwinglius his ſeniors, to be of the ſame mind, as the Reader may ſee in my anſwer to his letter. The Jeſuites generally charge it upon Calvin, and Beza, and thoſe of that party; and well they may, as their opinion, but not as their invention. As to that charge, they ſtand acquitted by their adverſaries: Suarez in Thom. part. 3. tom. 3. q. 69. art. 8. diſ. 27. Sect. 1. ſpeaking of this opinion, ſaith, It is ancienter then Calvin, as appears by Waldens. tom. de Sacram. tit. 3. cap. 53, 54. yet Calvin (ſaith he) either encreaſed or revived it, as appears by Ruardus, Lindanus, Prateolus and others. This eaſily may be yielded, and if Chamier may be heard, all Proteſtants embraced, it. Mr. Baxter in the words before may ſee the opinion of that Divine, whom he ſo deſervedly magnifies, Mr. Cobbet full againſt him; notwithſtanding he lives where the greateſt ſtrength of that party is, that are his oppoſites. Let the Reader obſerve his fourth concluſion, pag. 52. The Church in diſpenſing an enjoyned initiatory ſeal of the Covenant of grace, looketh unto viſibility of intereſt in the Covenant, to guide her in the application thereof; nor is it the ſaving intereſt of the perſons in view, that is her rule, by which ſhe is therein to proceed. And compare with it the cloſe of his whole diſcourſe upon it in theſe words: And I the more wonder, that any which confeſſe, that it's not to be denyed that God would have infants of believers in ſome ſenſe to be accounted his, to belong to his Church, and family, and not to the Devills, as true in facie Eccleſiae viſibilis, &c. yet do oppoſe us in this particular now in queſtion. If he pleaſe to peruſe Pareus, 1 Cor. 7.14. as he ſhall find Stapleton, in objections there produced, his friend, ſo Pareus fully his adverſary. And I ſhall adde one teſtimony that carries many more in the belly of it, in which the Reader may ſee that Dr. Ward in this thing now in agitation, hath the generall vote of reformed Churches for him, and againſt Mr. Baxter. Apollonius ſpeaking to the queſtion,Quaeſtio quarta, An infantes quorum parentes proximi ſolenni & Eccleſiaſtico foedere alicui particulari Eccleſiae ſeſe non adjungunt, in Eccleſia non ſint baptizandi, ſed ut baptiſmi in capaces & privilegiorum Eccleſiae expertes ſint aeſtimandi? Resp. Exiſtimant Reformati, quod federalis quaedam ſanctitas, qua jus habent illi qui hoc modo ſancti ſunt, ad media ſalutis & Sacramentum Baptiſmi, & qua ab Ethnicis, Turcis, ſimilibuſ que aliis infidelibus ſeparantur, 1 Cor. 7.14. toti nationi ſeu populo communicetur, cui Deus tabulas ſui foederis ita impertit ut eaſdem ſuſcipiant, & profiteantur, quos ad ſtatum viſibilis Eccleſiae ſuae vocat & ducit, Rom. 11.16, 17, 18, 19, 20. Haec foederalis ſanctitas transfertur ad poſteros non per proximorum parentum ſanctitatom inhaerentem, qui ſua fide vel infidelitate eam poſteriis proximis vel tollerent vel ſtabilirent; ſed miſericordi Dei voluntate, qua foederis illius privilegia externa parentibus etiam remotioribus promiſſa extendit & conſtanter impertit in multas generationes poſteris fidem profitentibus etiam iis quorum parentes proximi impii, & in foedere Dei perfidi fuere. Whether infants whoſe immediate parents do not joyn themſelves by any ſolemn Eccleſiaſtical Covenant to any particular Church, are not to be baptized in the Church, but are to be eſteemed incapable of Baptiſme and void of Church priviledges? anſwers the queſtion in theſe words: The reformed hold that a certain foederall holineſſe, (whereby thoſe that are in this manner holy, have right to the means of ſalvation, and whereby they are differenced from Heathens. Turkes and other like infidels, 1 Cor. 7.14.) is communicated to the whole Nation or people to whom God do's ſo impart the tables of his Covenant, that they receive and profeſſe them, whom he calls and brings to the ſtate of his church viſible, Rom. 11.16, 17, 18, 19, 20. This foederall holineſſe is tranſmitted to poſterity (ſaith he) not by the inherent holineſſe of immediate parents, which either their faith or unbelief ſhould take away, or eſtabliſh, to their immediate poſterity: but by the good and gracious will of God, whereby he extends and conſtantly beſtowes the outward priviledges promiſed to more remote parents, for many generations to poſterity, profeſſing the faith; even to thoſe whoſe immediate parents have been found wicked and falſe in their Covenant, quoting theſe texts, Pſ. 106.35, 36, 44, 45. Iſa. 63.10, 11.51.1, 2, 3. Ezek. 20.8. And confirming this aſſertion with ſeverall arguments, the laſt of which is this;cQuia adulti omnes in Novo Teſtamento à Johanne Baptiſta & Apoſtolis ſunt baptizati, telonarii, milites & quicunque ex Judea & circumjacentibus regionibus ad Baptiſmum devenerunt abſque longiore examine, ſi modo fidem profiterentur & peccata confiterentur; et ſi hypocritae, genimina viperarum & homines malae frugis iter eos eſſent, proinde & infantes eorum ad baptiſmum admittendi. Cauſam hanc pro praxi Eccleſiarum Reformatarum multis diſputat Cl. Walaeus, in locis communibus, operum in Folio, pag 494, 495. Becauſe all of years in the New Teſtament were baptized by John Baptiſt and the Apoſtles, as Publicanes Souldiers, and whoſoever out of Judea, and the regions round about came to Baptiſme, wit hout any further tryal: provided that they profeſſed their faith and confeſſed their ſins, though there were many Hypocrites, generations of vipers and men of diſſolute courſes amongſt them: and therefore (ſaith he) their infants are alſo to be admitted unto Baptiſme, adding that learned Walaeus largely defends this cauſe for the practice of reformed Churches in his Common places, pag. 494, 495. adding yet further,dRejicimus igitur Antitheſes eorum qui denegant Baptiſmum filiis eorum qui impie vivunt & vita ſua improba efficatiam baptiſmi ſui irritam erga ſe reddunt. Hiſce opponimus judicium Leydenſium in Synopſi Theol. ubi ſic diſſerunt, diſput. 44. theſ. 50. We therefore reject the contrary opinion of thoſe which deny Baptiſme to the children of thoſe who live wickedly, and by their wicked life render the efficacy of their baptiſme to themſelves as null and vain. To thoſe we oppoſe (ſaith he) the judgement of the profeſſors of Leyden in their Synopſis of Divinity, diſ. 44. theſ. 50. If the Reader pleaſe to conſult this quotation from theſe Authors, he ſhall ſee it very full to the purpoſe; as alſo Walaeus in the place before mentioned. So that Mr. Baxter may ſee that he hath not onelyonly me to oppoſe, together with the aſhes of Dr. Ward, (whoſe memory yet is to be had in reverence) but ancient Writers within theſe 1300. years, together with the concurrent voice of Divines in the generality of them in theſe 150 years laſt paſt, which in other Points he confeſſeth are his adverſaries, on whoſe ſide the truth is, whether on his few, or the Churches many, is further to be enquired.