COnsidering the present strange and dangerous spreading of the old Error of the Anabaptists; That children are not to be baptized, which in all ages of the Church under the Gospell hath been condemned, whensoever it hath beene stirred, and is now againe revived and pressed by the wor­kings of Satan, who hath prevailed to the infection of many therewith even among those that pretend unto holinesse, and have obtained a good degree in the Church of God; I could not be satisfied in my selfe till I had searched into, first, the title and claime of Infants unto this ordinance of Baptisme, and then into the barrs and pretences brought against it; and finding the claime of Infants to be by the Scriptures strong and cleere, and the batteries raised against it weake and slight, my spirit was at rest and setled in the truth and justice of the constant and generall practises of all the Churches in it, and did not so much as think of making any of my thoughts and meditations concerning these things legible, till by occasion of some debate I had with some Ministers I reverenced, and of a Letter sent unto me by one of them, I addressed my selfe to set downe in writing, solutions and answers to those things which I perceived to stick with them, whereby it comes to passe, that in this following dis­course, there is no methodicall handling of the controversie (as it well de­serves) but the stating of the question and proofe of Infants baptisme, falls in by parcels as the objections against it gave occasion. And whereas one basis upon which the Infants right is founded, is suggested by the Ana­baptists to be a promise proper to Abraham, and not to extend to all pro­fessors of the Gospell, nor to any of them: I begin with that, namely,

THis is a double Promise: First, I will be the God of thee; Secondly, I will be the God of thy seed.

The first promise is no peculiar of Abrahams, but is common to every beleever under the Law and Gospell, a branch of the new Covenant, Jer. 31.33.

[Page 4] The second being the same Promise, signifying and carrying in it the same things, and in termes the same, only varying the subject, extended to seed, his seed, as related to him, must be of as large extent as the first, and common to every beleever with Abraham: and this is plaine and mani­fest by the Grammaticall construction of this Promise.

Secondly, It is farther evidenced, by comparing this with other Scrip­tures, Deut. 28.4. The righteous shall be blessed in the fruit of their bo­dies: where blessednesse is promised to their seed as theirs, in reference to them. Deut. 30.2, 6. God promises to the true penitent, to cir­cumcise their heart, and the heart of their seed, to love him, Isa. 44 3 I will powre out my Spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thy off­spring. Isa. 59.21. My Spirit and my words shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor of thy seeds seed for even Mat. 19.14. and Luk. 18.16. Jesus Christ declares his mind concerning the children of the members of the Church, he would have them brought to him, he blesses them and saith, that of them is the Kingdome of God. Acts 2.39. The Apostles speaking to converted Jewes and Gentiles, pe­nitent beleevers, affirmeth, that the Promises belong to them and to their children.

Thirdly, That the said Promises were no peculiars of Abraham, ap­peares by that of the Apostle, Gal. 3.16. that the Promises made to A­braham, were made to Christ, and so to Abraham as interessed in him, in whom Abraham and all the nations of the earth are blessed. All pro­mises of grace are made to Christ, and to Abraham, and to beleevers un­der the Gospell in him, in respect of our interest in him. In him are the promises yea and Amen unto us. Abraham was an antecessor in the faith, whose steps the faithfull follow, Rom. 4 12. but neither father of our per­sons nor of our faith. God honoured him to be the first to whom this pro­mise was expresly made (after the same made in the beginning to Jesus Christ the seed of the woman) and so he was a father, and not otherwise, more then any other beleever. There was also another speciality in this Pro­mise to him, that of his naturall seed should proceed a people that should have the honour, till Christ came, to be the only visible Church on earth; but the Scriptures make this rather a peculiar of Isaack, then of Abra­ham, and made to him in Isaack, and not generally, Gen. 17.19. Rom. 9.7. The Promise to Abraham comprehended Ishmael also, whereupon the seale of it was given to him by Gods appointment; cleerely declaring the extent of that Promise to all in the visible Church, and so it belonged [Page 5] to Ishmael, till for his mocking of Isaack (by which he forfeited it) he was justly excommunicate.

Fourthly, Another thing manifests this truth, namely that God gave Abraham the seale of the Promise, not as Abraham, nor as a Jew, but for and in respect of the righteousnesse of faith he had before circumcision instituted, in his uncircumcision: by that it appeared he was in Christ, capable of the Promise, and intituled unto it: and this is common to Chri­stians of the uncircumcision as well as to Abraham that received circum­cision, Rom. 4.11.

Fifthly, This further appeares by the thing contained in this Promise, namely, the appropriation of God to beleevers by a free Covenant of pe­culiar grace above and before others, and this grace, (as believing) is ei­ther outward, for and concerning visible Church priviledges to be mem­bers of the visible Church, partakers of Baptisme The visi­ble Church is called Christ, 1 Cor 1 [...]. 12. And the Kingdome of Christ, Mat. 13., &c. or inward and meerely spirituall, which none but true Saints in whom the new creature is formed have Covenant-right unto: Cleerely all the naturall seed of Abraham while they continued members of the visible Church and were not excommunicate, had Covenant-right to Church-priviledges for them and their children, and though some of them had not true faith and so at­tained not an interest in the invisible grace of the Covenant, yet that un­beliefe made not the Covenant and faith of God without effect, Rom. 3.1, 2, 3. So it is under the Gospell; Ʋbi eadem ratio, idem ju [...] & de similibus idem est judicium.

And lastly, This is further evinced by the whole tenour of the Scrip­tures in the Contr [...]io­rum eadem est ratio. contrary, which is the portion of the wicked and of their children that are not in the Covenant of grace, or being once within the outward and visible grace thereof, deprive themselves thereof by becom­ming degenerate and prophane, and are justly therefore excommunicate. The curse is alwayes extended to their seede as well as to them, Deut. 28. 18. Exod. 20.5. and though this be not executed upon all their seed, but that free election manifested by their regeneration restores them to be vessels of mercy, yet that makes not the curse of God of no effect, neither doth the generall revealed will, hinder the operation of the secret free grace of Gods election, or of reprobation.

Abrahams seed, Rom. 4.16. is distinguished into the seed which is of the Law, and the seed which is of faith; and neither excluded, but both included within the Promise. And Rom. 9.6. the distinction is betweene the naturall and the spirituall seed, among the naturall as well as others, [Page 6] and none of them are excluded from interest in the Covenant, but first all are included in the outward grace of the Covenant, vers. 4. all Israe­lites, to whom pertained the adoption and the glory and the Covenant and the Promises: Secondly, Some are excluded the invisible grace of the Co­venant by the secret counsell of divine preterition, as others were included by election, vers. 6, 11. all which further confirmes and cleeres what I have said; and both parts of the Covenant are free grace, even the out­ward, Psal. 147.19, 20. God shews his word, statutes and judgements to Israel, he hath not dealt so with others.

Ob. It is objected by one, That this Promise is made to Abraham, not as any believer, but as a person chosen by God freely.

Sol. To which I answer, That which is spoken to Abraham as a be­liever, is common to all believers, because they all are subjects capable of it, they all are persons chosen by God freely, and have the same hand of faith to receive it; and there is no colour to assert, that God is not the God of every believer as well as of Abraham, or that the children of every believer are not beloved for their fathers sake as well as Abraham: And it is a Promise made, not to believers as a species, but to individuals, beleevers as acted with faith. The Promises of God are not notions, nor predicable of universals, but actuall, but whatsoever generall Promise is made to any man as a believer, is made, intended and applicable to all, to every, to any believer. That they are beloved for the fathers sake, is true of every believers children as well as of Abrahams, for if the roote be ho­ly so are the branches, Rom. 11.16, 28. though some of them be broken off by personall unbeliefe, as it was with Abrahams seed, vers. 17.

And that God doth sometimes make particular promises of particular grace (which is not applicable to all believers) to some persons that be­lieve, is nothing materiall or pertinent to this question, as the Promise to Phineas concerning the Priesthood, Num. 25.13. and the Promise of the Keyes to Peter, Mat. 16.17, 18, 19. For first, the Promise to Phineas was not made to him as a zealous man, for then it would have been common to all zelots (though God tooke occasion from his zeale, and in reward thereof to make that Promise unto him) but God made it unto him as a Priest, in which respect only he was capable of it, and by the matter it selfe appeares it was peculiar and not common; but to be the God of his people, is common and communicable to all believers as our Promise now in question; so far are these cases from similitude, as they have no resem­blance. And so the Promise to Peter is not of a thing common to all be­lievers, [Page 7] as the Promise in question, but of a matter intrusted unto the Mi­nisters of the Gospell, and made to Peter as such, not as a believer; and though made to Peter, is applicable to all Ministers of the Gospell, and common to the rest of the Apostles. And whether the inferring of such instances to prove the promise in question to be a peculiar of Abrahams, be not cavilling rather then candid arguing or seeking the truth, let the Reader judge.

And it is apparantly a like meere cavill, to say that Isa. 59. 20, 21. is not applicable to all believers, and all times, because the Apostle, Rom. 11. 26. applies it to the Jewes; for by the context of the originall place, it is a generall promise, made expressy and extended to all to whom the Re­deemer shall come, and the applying thereof to the Jewes, a branch only of them to whom he came, is so far from limiting it, as applying animal rationale to John to prove him a man, limits it to him alone excluding all other men, when that instance confirmes it to all of like case and condi­tion, and declares it appliable to them also, and upon the same reason.

And Exod. 20 6. That God will shew mercy to thousands of them that love him, is cleerely a Promise to the believer and his children, who though not expresly, yet by the antithesis of the context comparing it with the former verse, upon which it depends and is inferred, are necessarily included: and it is a Promise to every believer (as generall as the curse in the former verse, which extends to all that hate God) extending to all that love him, and not matter contingent but certaine to them. And so Psal. 112.2. The Promise that the seed and generation of them that feare the Lord and delight in his Commandements shall be blessed, is not made to John or Thomas only, but in common to all that feare and delight in God, and both these Promises are as large as blessednesse, including Heaven as well as earth.

Ob. But it is further said, That the childrens obedience is alwayes expressed or implied, Psal. 103.17, 18.

Sol. To which I answer, That God promising blessednesse to my children Isa. 54. 13. All thy chil­dren shall be taught of the Lord., undertakes their faith and obedience Isa 49.25. I will save thy chil­dren., without which they cannot be spiritually blessed; These two are some of the good things included in the Promise and Covenant, and performances thereof, and are implied as effects, not as motives or causes of the promise which is most freely made by the Lord.

The revealed will of God in this Covenant concerning the good of my children, is the rule to the Church and me, what to beleeve, hope and ex­pect [Page 8] concerning them, and what to doe to and for them to prepare and en­ter them (as much as in us lies) into and for the whole good of this Promise. The secret counsell of God how my children shall prove in the end, belongs not to us, is no rule for us to walk by towards them till it be revealed. And this Promise holds out unto us; First, A ground comfor­tably to believe and hope that God will fulfill the whole of the Covenant unto them, whence we have as cleere a ground to expect their spirituall as their temporall good, and upon this promise we may ground a prayer of faith for both for the children. Secondly, This Promise binds us to use in faith all meanes that the children are capable of for the interessing of them in the good of this Covenant, and among other to baptise them. In­fants are capable of grace, to such belongs the Kingdome of Heaven, and for ought we know, the Spirit hath sanctified the believers children, and from this promise we have ground to hope that it is so, they being within it expressely; and this Covenant gives them a right to the seale of it; and this revealed will is the rule by which the Church and we are to judge, leaving secret things to God; and therefore without incurring the guilt of infidelity, and breach of the command included in this promise of using meanes, and without manifest injury to the children, and contempt and slighting of this great mercy and kindnesse expressed and assured in this Covenant to believers, neither the Church nor they can withhold Baptisme from their children.

Hence it appeares, that this Objection is cast in impertinently, to trou­ble the cleere waters of this sweet Promise, and weaken our faith in it. What God hath undertaken (it being his work and not ours) we are to rest upon his truth and faithfulnesse in accomplishing it, and not trouble our hearts or heads about it, but doing our duties believe in his truth revea­led, and submit to his soveraignty (the exercise whereof is unknown unto us) when he shall reveale it. It is true that the election only obtaines the invisible grace of this promise (as the Apostle saith of Abrahams seed) but what is that to us before God manifests who are in his election and who not; It ought not (being secret) to impeach our faith in this Pro­mise, nor withhold us from using all meanes to our children for the obtai­ning of that grace.

Ob. It is further objected, That Baptisme requires a spirituall use, and chil­dren cannot make such spirituall use of it, and by experience it is cleere, that many baptised in Infancy, after deny it.

Sol. To which I answer, That the spirituall use of Baptisme is either by the [Page 9] Spirit of God, and that that is done in the children of believers, we have from this Covenant good ground to beleeve; or by the Church and pa­rents in bringing the children unto this ordinance in faith, which is done in the right administration of it, or lastly by the children themselves, who being passive in this ordinance, it is not necessary that at present they ex­presse the fruits of it in any activity of theirs, no more then in circumci­sion; but this is to be beleeved and expected, that God who hath promi­sed will produce it in time. And though it fall out that some denie their Baptisme afterwards as some did their circumcision, that is not materiall in this question, being secret and therefore not considerable in the dispen­sation of the outward visible grace and priviledges of this Covenant which such children have Covenant-right unto; Which also is by this further manifested, that though many of them that receive Baptisme, at full age after deny it, and declare by their apostacy that they are in the gall of bitternesse and bond of iniquity as Simon Magus, yet that hinders not the Church to administer Baptisme to others of full age, upon their pro­fession of faith and repentance. For we are to walke by the revealed will of God, and not be hindred by future events, which being secret, are to be left and referred to God. And we are incouraged so to doe in the case in question, not only from the Covenant of God, but also from the experience of his gratious performance thereof, who hath made good this promise to the children of beleevers and professors in the uttermost extent of it, spe­cially where there hath been no fault in the believers, either in not belee­ving this gratious promise, or not using the meanes sanctified for the obtai­ning of the performance of it.

Ob. It is further objected, That religious parents have no other priviledge concerning their children then from the meanes of knowledge for them which unbeleevers have not.

Sol. To which I answer, It is plaine by what I have said, that the Scriptures speake great and excellent things of the seed and generation of the godly, which it not only excludes the seed of the wicked from, but speakes sad and dreadfull things of them: of the seed and children of beleevers, the holy Scriptures testifie that God is their God, will circumcise their hearts to love him, poure out his Spirit and blessing upon them, will shew mer­cies to thousands of them; they shall be blessed, the promises belong unto them, and the Kingdome of Heaven; they are holy, beloved for the Fa­thers sake, &c. but of the children of unbelievers, they speake no good, but contrarily that they are cursed; God will visit the iniquities of their [Page 10] fathers Num. 14.18. Deut. [...].9. Ier. 32.18. Iob [...] 19. upon them unto the third and fourth generation, that they are [...] Cor. 7. [...]4. uncleane, the seed of the serpent: farre from safety, Job 5.4. God will make their plagues wonderfull, Deut. 28.59, &c. And by this appeares that there is a broader difference between the children of beleevers and of unbeleevers, then that beleevers have the meanes of knowledge for their children: Besides, many unbeleevers, as Papists and open profane persons among us, have the meanes of knowledge for their children, and so between them and the children of beleevers is no difference, nor the con­dition of the children of beleevers better then of unbeleevers: Into what a bottomlesse pit of absurd opinions doth the spirit of error hurry men that turne from the truth and forsake it?

Ob. It is further objected, That this ordinance is not appointed for chil­dren.

Sol. To which I answer, First, That God includes the children of beleevers in the Covenant. Secondly, To whom the Covenant belongs the seale belongs They [...]hat have the th [...]g signifi [...], may not be de­nied the signe [...]f ca­pable of it, [...]. 47. & A [...]t. [...].7 They hav [...]ng the lik [...] [...] and promise as we to deny th [...]m bap­tisme is to withstand God., all Gods Covenants are sealed Covenants. Thirdly, The chil­dren of beleevers are capable of this seale of the Covenant, being meerely passive in the administration of it, both in respect of the outward element and inward grace of it, and it is a strong ingagement of them to devote themselves unto God when they attaine discretion that from the begin­ning they are consecrated unto God, and have such excellent promises 2 Cor. 7.1. sealed unto them, and what then hinders them to be baptised?

It is yet further objected, That baptising of children hath no founda­tion in Scripture.

To which I answer, There is a two-fold testimony of Scripture ex­presse in termes, and that is not to be had for some principall truths: Se­condly, by necessary cleere deduction from cleere Scriptures; and such grounds Scripture abound withall for Pedobaptisme, and some of them I have above opened and cleered.

Ob. It is further said (and but said) That Baptisme cannot be administred Infant baptisme. to infants, as John the Baptist and the Apostles did administer it.

Sol. To which I answer, That it may be, and that sufficeth in an answer ex­pecting the proofe of the objection: But because I desire to drive the ad­versary of this truth out of all his coverts and seeming strengths. I an­swer further, That in the administration of Baptisme, according to the institution of it, and the use of it by John and the Apostles, and others re­corded in Scriptures, there are some things essentiall and necessary in all cases; and some things accidentall that are not necessary nor usefull in all, [Page 11] but only in some cases. The essentials are three only, first a Minister of the Gospell to administer it, Mat. 28.19. they only have commission and au­thority for it. Secondly, A person that hath right unto it, either by his own personall profession of faith and repentance Mat. 3.6. Acts 8.37., or otherwise, upon whom it is to be conferred: Thirdly, To baptise in the Name of the Fa­ther, Sonne and Holy Ghost. And that such personall confession is not ne­cessary, where it is otherwise apparant the person to receive it hath right unto it, is plaine by Johns baptising of Jesus Christ who had Co­venant-right unto it, and could not confesse sinne, Mark. 1.9. and by Ananias baptising Paul without confession of sinne or profession of faith, Acts 9.15, 18. God telling him he had a right unto it being his chosen vessell, and Peters baptizing the Centurions friends upon whom he saw the Holy Ghost in extraordinary gifts to fall without their per­sonall confessions, Acts 10.47. and yet those extraordinary gifts were not certaine evidences of election to eternall life. And by Pauls baptising of all Lydias houshold Act 16 1 [...]. meerly upon their submitting willingly unto it, without distinct personall confessions, for ought appeares, and so the Jaylors Act. 16.31, 33. houshold, and Stephanas 1 Cor. 1. [...]6. his houshold; and it cannot be reasonably imagined that there were no children among them; And 1 Cor. 10.2. All the children of the Israelites (being within the Cove­nant) were baptised in the cloude and in the sea as well as those that were of full age.

Ob. But it is further objected, That by what I have said, children are to partake in the Lords Supper also, being another seale of the Covenant, and by it Infant-Communion may be as strongly inferred as Infant-Baptisme.

Sol. To which I answer, the case is wholy unlike and followes not; for there is in the institution of the Lords Supper required necessarily and as essentiall unto it, such things as Infants are not capable of and are not re­quired in Baptisme: In Baptisme (the Sacrament of regeneration) the receiver is passive both in the outward and inward administrations there­of: But in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper (the Sacrament of cor­roboration and increase) the partaker of it must be active: An infant cannot examine and judge himselfe, discerne the Lords body, doe it in re­membrance of Christ (all expresly required in the receiver of the Lords Supper, 1 Cor. 11.25, 26, 28, 29, 31.) But an Infant can receive the sprink­ling of water, and is capable of the Spirit of life and grace, and if he be a child of a beleever and member of the visible Church, nothing in the insti­tution of Baptisme excludes him, and the Covenant includes him expresly which is to be sealed by it.

Some other arguments are brought against Pedobaptisme, but because they are from humane testimony negatively, (a way of arguing exploded by all Logitians) I will not mispend pretious time in dealing with them, but leave them as of no weight or value. But I shall subjoyne some few considerations of some further absurdities and mistakes of the opinion of those that deny Baptisme to the children of beleevers, by which the truth in this question will more cleerely appeare.

Besides that, by their opinion the children of beleevers under the Gos­pell are in as bad a case as the children of infidels, strangers from the Pro­mises and Covenant of grace, strangers from the wombe, which is the condition of the wicked, Psal. 58.3. so (as one observes) Gods holy lambes should live like straies, not marked with his brand, ordained to distinguish his from those he will not owne; which is expresly against the Scriptures, as I have above cleerely evinced: But they be also in a worse case then the children of the Jewes under the law were, they were within the Covenant of grace, and had the seale of Circumcision, a Sacra­ment, the same in substance with Baptisme, of the same spirituall use and end in the place and stead whereof Baptisme succeeds: which is also cleerely against the Scriptures, which informe us that better things are re­served for us under the Gospell, a better condition then they had under the Law, Heb. 11 40. Yea the children of the Christian Jew, are by their opinion put in a worse condition then the children of the Jew be­fore Christ were in, and yet they grant them to be within the said Pro­mise made to Abraham first above-mentioned; The children of the cir­cumcised Jew might have the seale, but the children of the Christian Jew may not; whereby the comming of Christ is made to turne to the dispa­ragement of the children of the Christian Jewes, to depose them from the hereditary dignity they had under the Law, contrary to the Scriptures, Heb. 7.19, 22. & [...].6. which testifie, that Christ Jesus hath brought us a better hope, a better testament, and his Ministery to be more excellent, and established upon better promises.

Secondly, These men would have the Church and the Ministers of Christ refuse, and refuse to blesse those whom Jesus Christ himselfe in per­son received, embraced and blessed, as those to whom the Kingdome of Heaven belonged, contrary to the Scriptures, Ephes. 5.1. Be ye followers of God as deare children; and the Scriptures call upon the children of the Church, even those that suck the brests to partake in the extraordinary duties of the Church, namely fasts, Joel. 2.16. Ezra 10.1. for which they are more unfit then for Baptisme.

Thirdly, These men breake the constant rule of right interpretation and construction to support their fancy; The Scriptures are one intire body of truth, Joh 17.17. Thy word is truth, and therefore construction must not be made by fraction upon any part of it, touching any question raised out of it alone, but upon all matters concerning it compared toge­ther, and therefore we are to search the Scriptures, and compare spirituall things with spirituall things. Take all the holy Scriptures together con­cerning Sacraments, and it cleerely appeares that when God instituted them in his Church, he declared his mind, that the children of the Church should be partakers of them, as Gen. 17.7, 10. of Circumcision, the Sacra­ment then of initiation and regeneration; and of the Passeover, Exod. 12.16, 47. the then Sacrament of edification, every soule in the house, all the Congregation were to eate it. After by the Gospell in the institution of Baptisme, there is no change made, save only in the outward element, wa­ter washing, for the fore-skins circumcising, no word of altering the per­sons to partake in it, as appeares expresly, Joh. 1.33. God sent John to baptise with water; Here the element and outward matter of the Sacra­ment of regeneration is altered, but no more by the institution, no word of altering the persons, so as they remaine as before, to be determined by the generall rule at first common to all Sacraments: But in the institu­tion of the Lords Supper, there is made not only a change of the outward matter, but also an alteration and limitation of the persons, and children ex­cluded, and all that examine not and judge themselves, and discerne not the Lords body; Certainely if the Lord had intended any alteration or re­straint of persons in the institution of Baptisme, he would have spoken it out, as he doth in the institution of the Lords Supper; and his silence there­in may satisfie any sober spirit that it never came into his mind.

But these men looke only upon the actuall dispensation of this Sacra­ment of Baptisme by the Baptist, and by the Apostles upon persons of full age expresly recorded, and not upon the rules of the Scriptures compared as afore-said, nor doe they consider the reason and rule of those practises. It appeares expresly that those recorded practises were upon proselites, new converts added to the Church, and newly brought to the faith of the Gospell, and with them they proceeded by the rule concerning proselites, set downe Ezek. 47.22. they gave them a portion in the inheritance of the Church, and made them partakers of the priviledges thereof; can any conclude hence, that they intended hereby to disseise the children of the Church, and to disinherit them and divest them of the Covenant or seale to [Page 14] which they were borne? Certainly no: There is enough in the Covenant of grace and priviledges of the Church for both, the natives and the stranger, that by his profession and conversion is added to the Church: To preach to infidels before they be baptised is necessary, because else a seale is put to a blanck, but to baptise the infants of beleevers, is to put the seale to the Co­venant, as much as it is to baptise professors of full age, such infants having the same right as professors. These men cleerely erre by not observing the difference between natives of the Church, and those that are forreiners and strangers to be received into the Church: and by not conferring the whole body of the Scriptures concerning Sacraments, to find out the mind of God in this businesse; what is the ground whereupon the Church under the Gospell receives women to partake in the Supper of the Lord, for which they have neither precept nor example in the new Testament, no more then we have for Infant-baptisme? Certainly none but that God commanded their partaking in the Passeover Exod. 12. [...]. [...]., and thereby declared them to be persons to whom he would have Sacraments administred if they were capable thereof, and of this they are capable, and nothing in the new institution and alteration induced by the Gospell excludes them.

Ob. But some object further, That there is an expresse declaration of Gods will concerning persons in the institution of baptisme, Mat. 28.19. G [...] teach all nations, baptising them, &c. from which they inferre, that none are to be baptised but those that are taught, and therefore only persons of discretion.

Sol. To which I answer, That cleerely here is no institution of Baptisme which was instituted long before, Joh. 1. 33. God sent John the Baptist to baptise with water, and Jesus Christ that gave this command, was him­selfe before this baptised, Mat. 3. 16. and the Apostles to whom he spake this had baptised before, Joh. 4. 2. Secondly, It cannot be intended that these two duties of the Ministeriall office, preach and baptise should be insepe­rable, in regard of the persons in whom they determine; that the same per­sons that partake not in the one, should not be partakers of the other, or that those that partake in the one, should necessarily partake in the other. John baptised Jesus Christ though he did not preach unto him; and it is ap­parantly absurd, that Ministers must baptise all they preach unto whether they receive their preaching or not; and it is as manifestly absurd, that Mi­nisters must deny baptisme to them that by the word have right unto it, be­cause they have not preached unto them, for it is the right unto it, not prea­ching to them, that determines to whom it is to be given, and such expo­sition [Page 15] is to be made of Scripture, and of all writings as absurditie may be avoided. Thirdly, The true sense and scope of this place of Scripture is plainly no more, but first to inlarge the Apostles commission which was given them before, Mat. 10.5. to all nations; at first limited to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and secondly to injoyne them to attend prin­cipally and with great care and heed the two principall duties of their of­fice, preaching the word, and administring the Sacraments, and whosoever extends it further, apparantly wrongs and abuses it.

Ob. It is further objected, That the words, Mat. 28.19. where the Apostles are commanded to teach and baptise all nations, in the originall tongue import, that they were to baptise none but whom they made disciples; and then Infants are excluded.

Sol. To which I answer, The words upon which this cavill and criticisme is grounded are two, the one translated ( [...]. teach) which they would have to meane (make disciples) and pretend that it ought to be so translated, and the other is (them) which is of the Masculine gender, and cannot in Gram­maticall construction agree with the word Nations going before, being of the Neuter gender, and therefore must refer to the word disciples, implied in the Verbe usually translated (teach:) In both which it seems to me very evident, that they are greatly (if not wilfully) mistaken.

For though the word may signifie to teach and to make disciples also, yet by the subject matter which it is here taken and used to expresse, it must be here taken for the first, and not for the other: because to make disci­ples was not in the power of the Apostles (upon whom this command lay) it being the peculiar of God Psal. [...]9. [...]. to frame the heart to submit unto, en­tertaine and embrace the Apostles teaching, and to cast them into the forme and obedience of it, and so to make them disciples, but to teach, and thereby endeavour as much as in them lay to make disciples, was in their power and duty, and is all the whole of the meaning of the word here, therefore properly and rightly rendred teach, and not to make disciples. Semper f [...]n­da interpre­tatio secun­dum subi [...] ­ctam ma [...] ­riam. It is evermore the safe way to make exposition of the words of the Scrip­ture, not according to our fancy, to wrest them to the opinion we take up, but according to the matter and meaning of the Scriptures themselves, appearing in the context thereof.

And for the word [Them.] though Nations in Grammaticall constru­ction [...]. cannot be the Substantive unto it, (the Evangelist in changing the gender following, not the letter but the sense of the word nations) yet [...]. men (that were to be baptised) a word comprehensive of all ages and [Page 16] sexes, and understood in the text, must be the Substantive unto it, rather then [...]. disciples, which is only of the Masculine gender in the originall tongue, and excludes women from Baptisme contrary to the Scriptures, (which expresly mention the baptizing of Lydia.)

By which appeares, that this text according to the matter and true pro­per meaning of it, is thus in substance: Goe teach all nations, endeayour to make them disciples, and baptise every man of what age or sex soever that have right to that Sacrament.

The scope of the text, is to inlarge the Apostles commission, and there­fore the words of it are to be expounded in the most large, liberall and comprehensive sense that the holy Scriptures concerning Sacraments ta­ken together will beare, and are not to be restrained to the objectors erro­neous conceit, which Psal▪ 78.41. limits the glorious grace of the holy one of Israel, and restraines it to the great dishonour thereof, and prejudice of his people.

Ob. It is further objected, That Lot in Abrahams time was a beleever, and yet was not within the said Covenant to Abraham nor circumcised.

Sol. To which I answer, God made three severall Covenants to Abraham, Gen. 17. The first, that he should be Father of many Nations, vers. 4▪ The seconnd, to be his God, &c. vers. 7. The third, to give him and his seed the land of Canaan, vers, 8. The first Covenant is peculiar to Christ, and Abraham as his Father, Gal. 3.8, 14, 16, 17. The second Promise is common to all beleevers with Abraham (as I have proved) even to Lot. And the third Promise was a peculiar of Abrahams naturall seed, as ap­peares in it selfe.

And for Circumcision, there was a speciall reason why Lot had it not, expresly set forth in the text, namely for that it was restrained by God to Abraham and his naturall seed, and such as were among them, Gen. 17. 10. so as none were to partake thereof but the Jews and such as did live among them and adjoyne unto them, though they were believers: They being appointed to be the Church to whom the oracles of God were com­mitted, Rom. 3.2. till the Messiah came, upon whose breaking downe of the partition wall, the said first Promise was accomplished, and Abraham made heire of the world, Rom. 4.13.