The Grounds and Ends of the Baptism of the Children of the Faithful, Chapter 13 – Chapter 15
CHAP. XIII.
YEs,Silveſter. beſides all the former Arguments which I have alledged (as I finde them) againſt the Baptiſme of Infants, I have met with ſundry evill conſequences, which doe unavoidably attend your Doctrine of Infants Baptiſme.
Firſt, it makes void the ſtability of Gods Covenant it ſelf, thus, If the Covenant of Grace bee abſolute and ſtable, then all within the ſame muſt bee ſaved. But all within the ſaid Covenant were not ſaved: Ergo, the Covenant of Grace is not abſolute and ſtable. The Major is confeſſed, that a beleevers ſeed is in the Covenant of Grace without exception. The Minor is proved from Iſmael, Eſau, and the rejected Jewes: all which were the ſeede of beleevers, and yet all not ſaved.
If all the evill conſequences,Silvanu…. which you ſay doe unavoidably attend our Doctrine, bee all of them as eaſily avoidable as this, I hope you will ſee no cauſe to judge of them, as you doe, ſo unavoidable. For this evill conſequence is eaſily avoided by ſuch as maintaine the Baptiſme of Infants two or three wayes.
1. There bee ſome that will deny that which you call the Major, though indeed it be not the Major of that Syllogiſme, which your ſelfe propound; For that Major was this, If the Covenant of Grace bee abſolute and ſtable, then all within the ſame muſt bee ſaved. But I will not ſtick with you upon termes, though they bee your owne. If you call it a Major, let it goe for a Major: But this which you call a Major, there bee ſome who will deny it, and tell you, that all the ſeed of beleevers without exception are not in the Covenant of Grace, but the Elect ſeed onelyonly. They will grant you, that Iſmael and Eſau, and all ſuch Apoſtates, as doe fall off from the Covenant, and grace offered to them, they were never under the Covenant of grace, but of works onelyonly. And yet as all the children of the faithfull, were circumciſed then (Iſmael as well as Iſaac, Eſau as well as Jacob) ſo ought they to bee baptized now. In this caſe they conceive the Apoſtles words ſtretch ſo farre, Gal. 4.29. As it was then, ſo is it now.
But 2. Others will anſwer you another way, that though the Covenant of grace bee ſtable, yet it is not abſolute: ſtable to the faithfull ſeed, but not abſolute, but requiring the Condition of faith, which condition alſo God will worke in the elect ſeede. And therefore though Iſmael and Eſau were not ſaved, yet it is no impeachment to the ſtability of the Covenant, becauſe the Covenant is onelyonly ſtable to the faithfull ſeed, which theſe were not.
A third Anſwer ſomewhat like to this, and yet different, may be this, That though the Covenant of Grace be… abſolute, and ſtable, yet it will not follow, that all within that Covenant muſt bee ſaved, for the Covenant though it bee abſolute and ſtable to all the elect ſeed, yet not to all the ſeed, becauſe all of them are not Elect, to whom onelyonly the Grace of Chriſt is abſolute and ſtable. And yet ſuch as are not elect may bee truely ſaid to bee under this Covenant. For wee doe not reade in Scripture of any Covenant which is everlaſting, but onelyonly the Covenant of Grace, Jer. 32.40. And yet you read of a wicked generation, that have broken this everlaſting Covenant, Iſa▪ 24.5. which argueth they were under the bond of it, or elſe how could they bee blamed (as there they bee) and curſed, for the breach of it? They therefore who were not Elected but accurſed, were under this Covenant, and yet they making it void unto themſelves, it is evident it was not abſolute and ſtable to them. The unbeleeving Jews (of whom the Apoſtle ſpeaketh, Rom. 11.) who were broken off from Chriſt (as branches from the fat Olive tree) they had beene in ſome ſenſe in Chriſt, or elſe how could they bee ſaid to bee broken off from him? And if they were in him, and not by faith, then were they in him ſome other way, and yet not by Election: therefore onelyonly by Adoption, or admiſſion into the Covenant of their Fathers, which was a Covenant of Grace.
CHAP. XVI.
Silveſter.A Second evill conſequence, which I finde to bee gathered from your doctrine of the Baptiſme of Infants, is this, that it is a ground of falling from Grace, thus. All that God tooke into his Covenant of Grace, were in an eſtate of Grace. But all that God tooke into his Covenant of Grace, did not therein continue, Ergo, Such fell from an eſtate of Grace.
An eaſy and common diſtinction will eaſily avoid this evill conquence. For all that God tooke into his Covenant of grace,Silvanus. may bee ſaid to bee in a ſtate of Grace, but what Grace? either of common, or of ſaving Grace. If your meaning bee, all that God tooke into a Covenant of Grace are in an eſtate of ſaving Grace: wee deny that Major propoſition, as utterly untrue. But if you meane it of common Grace in the carnall ſeed, and of ſaving Grace in the Elect ſeed, then indeed your Major propoſition is very true: but no evill conſequence will follow upon it. For the Elect and fai…hfull ſeed that are in an eſtate of ſaving Grace, can never fall away. And they who do fall away were onelyonly in a ſtate of commom Grace: which is no ill conſequence nor prejudice to the truth, though they doe fall away.
CHAP. XV.
3. THe Baptiſme of Infants is a ground of univerſall Redemption,Silveſter. for it maketh the Grace of Chriſt equall as well to ſuch as periſh, as to ſuch as bee ſaved. Thus all that are in the Covenant of Grace, Chriſt died for. But all that were in the Covenant of Grace were not ſaved. Ergo, Chriſt dyed for ſuch as were not ſaved. The proofe of this is the ſame with the former: If God tooke Abraham and his ſeed into his Covenant of Grace without exeception.
Though God did take the ſeed of Abraham and of all other beleevers into the Covenant of Grace without exception:Silvanus. yet not without diſtinction. The Elect ſeed hee taketh them all into his Covenant of Grace, and into all the ſure and ſaving mercies of the Covenant. But the carnall and unfaithfull ſeed hee taketh them alſo into his Covenant of Grace, yet giveth them not the ſure and ſaving mercies thereof, but the common graces onelyonly, and the outward diſpenſation of the Covenant, and the ſeale thereof, together with ſuch ſpirituall gifts of the Covenant, as Judas, or Demas, Saul, or Jehu, might partake of. And even thoſe common gifts the Apoſtle doth acknowledge, that Apoſtates are ſanctified with them by the bloud of the Covenant, Heb. 10.29. The Covenant ratified by the bloud of Chriſt, was doubtleſſe the Covenant of Grace. And yet it was by the bloud of this Covenant by which they were ſanctified. But to apply my anſwer more punctually to the termes of your Syllogiſme; your Major propoſition will bee denyed, all that are in the Covenant of grace Chriſt dyed for them; If you meane hee dyed for them out of Grace to ſave them, it will utterly bee denyed you. That Chriſt ſhould die for any out of his grace to ſave them is a ſure and ſaving mercy of the Covenant: which is not granted to all the ſeed within the Covenant, but to the elect and faithfull ſeed onelyonly. The very common gifts which ſuch receive from the bloud of his Covenant and ſo from his death, they flow not from the death of Chriſt out of his ſaving grace to them, but out of his grace to his Church and choſen people, for whoſe ſake hee beſtoweth ſuch gifts upon Hypocrites.