j&F'TT 
 
 BAP 
 S568 
 
 &Wk 
 
<ar 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 £* 
 
 Q_ 
 
 
 
 .# 
 
 «5 
 
 
 
 -^_" 
 
 lc 
 
 
 
 ^f 
 
 Q. 
 
 
 
 * 
 
 -o 
 
 JO 
 
 ! 
 
 
 ■^ 
 
 IE 
 
 
 
 XS ^ 
 
 0. 
 
 
 
 
 w 
 
 ^_ 
 
 
 
 
 *S> & 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 ta 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 
 c 
 < 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 l^ g 
 
 Zi 
 
 
 
 
 fc 
 
 £ 
 
 
 
 
 
 t'5 
 CO 
 
 
 
 ^* PM 
 
 
 cq 
 
 
 %** 
 
 
 55 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 >> 
 -Q 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 % 
 
 -o 
 
 0) 
 ■•-• 
 
 c 
 
 (D 
 V) 
 0) 
 
 s 
 
 So 
 
 
 t» 
 
 
 ^ 1 
 
 
 — - 
 
 S^ 
 
 1 
 
 /n3^.^~~ 
 

 •* 
 
A &) 
 
 
 {CHRISTIAN,? 
 
 Sober & Plain 
 
 EXERCITATIOH 
 
 Sober & Plain jf 
 
 | ON 
 
 | The two grand practical Con- % 
 troverfics of thefe Times 5 
 
 t N F AN T-B A P T I S M,f 
 
 * talis 
 
 
 * AND 
 
 t SINGING OF PSALMS** ffl 
 
 4 Wherein all the Scriptures on both Rdci^ 
 & are recited , opened and argued , with bre- 4» 
 ^ vity and tenderneft ; and whatever hath been 
 <& largely difcuffed by others, briefly contract- 
 
 us* 
 
 ed in a fpecial method for the edifica- 
 
 ^ 
 
 tion of the Skint s. 
 
 <$*• . *£" I 
 
 _ — . ; ; _ , , __ y - 
 
 5 By Cuthbm Sidenham, Teacher to a ChtirC.H % 
 
 * of Chrift in Nemaftle upon 77/^. 
 
 * LONDON .. ... $ 
 ^, Printed for ifo&r* ff&V*, and are to be fold by «£ 
 
 ^ trantisTyton at the three Daggers in Fleet- (lreti 3 MK tie X 
 ^ l»ner-Temple»gate. i 6 $ 4* 
 
a 
 
 > - ; 
 
To his dear and honoured Bro- 
 ther Mr. William VurMt, my faithful 
 fello w- labourer imhe Gofpel •• And the 
 Church of Chrift, over whom the Holy 
 Ghoft hath made us joync-overfeers. 
 
 Dearly Beloved , ^ *?. 
 
 ■-* Prefem jott thefe firft- fruits of 
 mi por labours, as a fledge if 
 my love, and teflimony of mf 
 unfeigned de fires and longings 
 after jour fettkmtnt^ and coin- 
 fort together. I am indeartd ts 
 you in the bowels of Chrift, and for his fate 00 
 myMfuntopu • CMyhigheft ambition in this. 
 pcrldis, to fee you fiablijhed in truth , and 
 ffourilhwg in the glorious graces of the CoffeL 
 1 have treated on thefe two fubjetfs, becaulel 
 Uow they are the fimping errours of thefe 
 Times, andhavethefaireftgloffesfeten them, 
 and have too much influence tedifturbthe Peace 
 md Order of Churches : Thefrfi efpeiall-j. 
 
 '.■ 
 
The Epiitic Dedicatory, 
 which eats out mem affeiHons , and creeps at 
 the hurt Itke a gangrene infenflbly % an opinion 
 which hath been always? ominous, and of a won- 
 deYfttl jlrange infiit'enM> accemfanitd with tht 
 moft dangerow mirmoferrours y fince the frjt 
 Bmb\io *of : it was: brought fart b^ whether by a 
 jttdgemvt ofGod y or from its natural and Je- 
 er et connexion with other principles of dark* 
 nefs, 1 will not determine 5 only G$d hathfbew- 
 edfome black characters on it m every Nation 
 tebe?e it hath prevailed t, though we cannot but 
 fay, many Saints are innocently under the power 
 ofiu 
 
 Fvrthefccond, I hope when mens hearts come 
 mTnne, their voices mill likewise : The former 
 denies more Fundamental Principles^ as the Co- 
 venant in its extent, andfubjefys • thefreenefs 
 tf Grace $ the riches of its workings in the Jttew 
 Teftament • and contracts the Gojpel^ leaving 
 more Grace vifibleinthe Legal and old Tejlt* 
 man difpenfation, then in the New. 
 
 I lhave only fummed up what others exprefs 
 more at large, with fomething new, and never 
 pt toncbed, that t know of : And as to the me- 
 thod, 
 
The Epiftlc Dedicatory. 
 thody all is new, and made fit for par life, if 
 Cbrifi fet it home on you. 1 have nothing elfe to 
 add, hut to tell you you have been jet kept pure 
 in the midfl of many Diflr affions % and the vio* 
 lence of defperatc Opinions : Take heed of 'plan* 
 fib le err ours that come painted to yon with the 
 name of the moft glorious truths : Loft not your 
 glory at laft * try and weigh every tittle that is 
 propounded : It's mj defire you may have the 
 glorious Titlegiventoyou the Bcrcans/W, to 
 he {ivyivi&&r) men of better breeding then to 
 take up atiy thing on truft, though from the A- 
 pofiles thtmfelves , untill you know how they 
 wereinfpired : Compare Scripture with Scri- 
 pure; donotdi/lraffyourfehesintke Gofpel$ 
 lay truths together, they willjhine in their proper 
 glory : Part not foeafily with antient entaitd 
 priviledges : Have fo much pity to your ChiU 
 drtn\ & not to blot their names out of Heaven 
 by your own hands, until God do it by fever aign- 
 ty • do not bury them alive : Thofe that know the 
 riches offuch a priviledge, will not eafily part 
 with it upon fuch poor terms as moft propofe. 
 1 plead for poor Infants $ and it's but charity to 
 /peak for thofe whofe tongues are tied. I intend 
 brevity in thti^s in all the following Dihourfc. 
 
 Wi The 
 
The fcpiftle Dedicatory ~. 
 The Lordfiil you with wifdom and under- 
 stand ing,and give you to know w«hat his per * 
 feft will is 3 and hearts to obey k : And thrive 
 like Saints of the New Tefta went, that lie 
 at Chriftsbreafts night and day. Tbefe are 
 the de fires of 
 
 Your unworthy Teacher, 
 
 Cuthhert Sifynhaw* 
 
 C HAP. 
 
o> 
 
 H A 
 
 P. I. 
 
 :. 
 
 an en- 
 
 Sever d Confider attorn premifed, as 
 trance to the THfcourfe. 
 
 £ F O R E I enter on the main que- 
 stions handled in this Difcourfe , it 
 will not be unneceffary to prernife 
 fomething in general concerning this 
 Contr overlie, which is fuch a bone off 
 contention among the Saints, for to make our way 
 clear before us. 
 
 And i. Let this be confidered, that there is no- 
 thing in all the N.T.againft the baptizing of Infants, 
 not one hint from any exprefs word dropt from 
 Chrift or his Apoftlesj not one phrafe, which though 
 never fo much ftrain'd, doth forbid fuch an acl ; but 
 there is much for it in divers Scriptures compared to- 
 gether ; and what is wanting in the one, is fupplyed 
 in another abundantly, as hereafter will appear. 
 
 A 4 a. The 
 
ft) 
 
 l 2 ' J bC fum ° f aH *" our °PP°& es have to fa y, 
 T hough they mike a great deal of noife in the World, 
 "only this, that they can find no fyliabical precept, 
 «r word of command in terms, faying, Qo baptize 
 Wants ; or any positive eximple where ic is faid in (o 
 many words, Infants were baptized ; only aclual be- 
 Itevers, as they believed, were baptized : ail that 
 they fay befides, is only to quarrel with Qur argu- 
 ments, and make Qiift to £vjde the ftrength of them, 
 put this is their onlyargumenr, and their AH; for 
 however they talk of the Covenant, and fleOily and 
 ipintual feed, yet this is the qoliabs [word, none like 
 to it I would therefore fairly encounter with ic in the 
 Portal, that I may fee all their ftrength before me. 
 Concerning which, taie in the'econfiderations; 
 Firft, th:s argument is bu.ic on thisfaife- principle, 
 That nodireclcotifcquences from Scripture are man- 
 datory, arid fo obliging, nor of Divine Authority, 
 which all Orthodox Profi-ffors and Divines grant, 
 butchefe which are a^amft Infants bap.ifro; and ic 
 « moft clear .- for, 
 
 i. The way to know Scriptures, is by com- 
 paring them together ,i Cor. 2. 1 3. and this mutt 
 needs be by their Harmc/me-, sad by deduction from 
 one to another. 
 
 2. Without Trne confequeflce were as c cripture; 
 no one could fptak trbth t>uc thefe that fneak jult 
 the very express of Scripture. 
 
 3. There could be no fpifitual reafons nor argu- 
 ments ufed in any Difcourfeto be of any force or 
 
 con- 
 
(?) 
 confequence, though from the Scripture ; forthere 
 can be no arguing from Saipture,but by confequen- 
 ces add dedu&ion; for in ail arguments there muft be 
 a medium and a conclufion, a proportion and an in- 
 ference. 
 
 4. Nothing upon this account can be Scripturc 
 buuhe very letters and fyllables in the Bible j no- 
 thing of the meaning or fenfe is Scripture ; for you 
 muft draw out the fenfe and meaning from the let- 
 ters by rational confequence , as the condufion from 
 a proportion by a fit medium; and how abfurd 
 would this prove , that letters (hould be Scripture, 
 and not the fenfe / and fo it muft be according to 
 that Maxim of theirs. 
 
 5. This is againft all preaching, and expounding 
 Scripture ; nothing muft be read but the very bare 
 characters for to draw any deductions from • it is to 
 no purpofe, though never fo direcland full ; for if 
 they be not Scripture, they cannot bind confcienccs ; 
 and co what end is preaching, but to open and sup- 
 ply Scripture ? 
 
 6. The fearchings of the Scripture were the mod 
 ufclefs undertaking that could be imagined ; for 
 what need I fearch, but read ? for no confequence, 
 by comparifon of Scripture, is of authority to fatisfie 
 my conference* if I draw a conclufion from a text, 
 and perceive the meaning of it to be thus; if nothing 
 without it be laid down in fo many fyllables, how 
 many fuch ftrange abfurdities would follow the de- 
 nying conferences from Scripture, which a,re purely 
 
 de« 
 
(4) 
 deduced > and by this principle, that where there 
 are not fo many letters put together in one fentence, 
 there is no command, men would foon draw Reli- 
 gion into a very narrow compafs. 
 
 7. This would be as much againft themfelves • 
 For, 
 
 Firft, They have no command in fo many words, 
 Go and baptize a&ual or vifible believers : if they 
 hy fuch were baptized : h's anfwercd,that is not to 
 the purpofe : lor it's a verbal command required by 
 them to give warrant to an ordinance. 
 
 Secondly, That they muft prove by confluence 
 alfo, believers were baptized, £rgo there was 1 com- 
 mand : Neither, 
 
 Thirdly, Can rhsy prove oneacl concerning tfjeir 
 own form of baptizing by any comrmnd,bjit bycnn- 
 fequences : When they lay Infants are not to be ba- 
 ptized, they draw it from confrquence thus,becaufe 
 there is no command 'in their fejife $ When they af- 
 firm the Covenant i? ru>t made with. believers now, 
 and their feed, 5s with Abraham, it's drawn by con- 
 fequence, becaufe, (ay they, Abrabtw is no natnral 
 father to us, as to thf jewsaod becaufe that covenant 
 was a mixc Covenant^ &c When they come to 
 prove baptizing to be by plunging, they argue by 
 confequence, becaafe the wtjrd (igniries ir, becaufe 
 they went where much water was, and went down 
 into the water,, &:. though they ate miftaken ia all 
 their confluences, as I lhail hereafter (hew; yet 
 this is full ad hommw*. and againft themfelves, 
 
 who 
 
(5) 
 who deny confequences to warrant infiirution*, 
 and yet have nothing for to prove their own wvy, 
 -butivhat is by confequeneefroTn Scripture. 
 
 8. It's common among the Apoftles to argue id 
 fuch a method, and to deduce one thing from an- 
 other, to make out what they intended ; 2 CV.5. 
 1 4. We thus judge , ;/ Chrift died for all , then 
 all are dead; if the firft be true, then the latter; fo 
 l Cor. 15. 13, 14, 15,16,17,18, ip, 20. and all 
 that Chapter, arguing out the refurre&ion by fit me- 
 diums : fo about the Ordinance of Baptifm,^^?j 10. 
 47. Can any man for bid w at er y Why thefe Jhould not be 
 baptized , who have received the holy Ghofla4 well as 
 We ? There was never any command to baptize thefe 
 that had received the holy Ghoft, nor any example 
 of any baptized on thefe terms ; but the ApoftJe 
 argues from the equivalency of the mercy, and the 
 Teafonoftheftate they were in* the fame method 
 he ufes 1 Cor. 10, 1$, 16, 17, 18. 1 Tim. $* 
 17, iS. 
 
 9> There will be hardly found a definition of the 
 moft do&rinal and high myfteties of the Gofpel, 
 but by comparing Scripture with Scripture, and fo 
 making it forth by confequence ; what perfect de- 
 finition of juftification, or of juftifying faith, info 
 many formal expreffiors in all the N. T. but what 
 mud be deduced by comparing Scriptures together 
 (to make one refuk? where are women either by 
 fuch a wordy exprefiion commanded to receive the 
 I-ords Suppcrfor any example?if they fay (*rsp»w»0 
 
 fig- 
 
■ (?) 
 
 figmfies both fexes, yet it's ftill by confluence, no 
 
 command or example .- and why not (Zy,&) u 
 
 ft tofigmfie Infant Saints, as grown Saints, Infint- 
 
 r°^ ' ■ W 68 ho,inefe ? ''« »PPlyedto both • 
 
 io. Deny confluences to have the fireoathof 
 commands, and you wiiJ leave very few duties to be 
 refit? f r t<,be , av L oide d, in the OJd or New 
 IS?' Xp T d the tc " Commandments, the 
 <«n of the Law, without confequance*, and very few 
 S , VrVf" 1 , « an, 8refl-ors, but , ft0 ft y de! 
 fperate douched perfens. Af<*, 5 . Cbrift expounds 
 the whole law, and by confequences from ihe in- 
 ward me^mng, draws out neweonfiderations of du- 
 ties; and .fince the Bible is but a W.fyfteme of 
 
 S, a f °*l by *«'«»l-fpiria«l compart 
 {om «nd m erene^sj butenough tptheM confide, 
 ration on thu head of commands and confequences 
 .?' W ^ wehaue apromife; laid as tbe&un-' 
 dat.onof.duty, that i» equivalent to anyexprefc 
 command ; for as commands in the Gofpel do fup. 
 po/e promife.*, to encourage us to ad them.and help 
 nsinthem .- Jo promifes made to perfons do include 
 commands efpecially when the duties commanded 
 are annexed to the promifes, a , a || New Tefiament 
 Ordinances are, as well as Old. 
 
 tJt'wlu-'f * smucnin theN.T. to prove In- 
 tant-oaptifm, from the true principles of right to 
 
 Ordinances, 
 
Ordinances, is they have for tbefe whom they ba- 
 ptize; for they baptize grown perfons on fuch and 
 f«ch confiderations : and we (hail hereafter fhew^ 
 we baptize on as ftrong and equivalent grounds; and 
 thatYenotfgh to warrant a command,todemonftrate 
 the tame fubftantial grounds of the command CO 
 reach the fame cafe* 
 
 -'4,-If we can find no pofitive command in fo many 
 words for their baptizing (fhewing the fame fcn- 
 damental grounds) it's reqnifite they fhould (Lew 
 as fome exprefs command to, the contrary, and fome 
 *uthentique repeal, feeing Infants fo long enioyed 
 fuch a like Ordinance ; upon the fame grounds 
 Chrift would not have taken away foch an antient 
 priviledge , when his grace abounded , and fuper- 
 abounded,but he would have left fome characters of 
 it in the Gofpel* and entred fome formal discharge 
 in his Word of fuch perfons^ and given a warning of 
 ft to the Gentile believers to expect it • but he hath 
 both by his words and carriages left clear demon- 
 fhations, that he is fo far from repealing, as he con- 
 firms ir to Infants ; let the Scriptures opened here- 
 after fpeak to this. 
 
 The third confideration premifed is this, as all 
 that they urge as to examples of aclual believers, bee. 
 ing baptized, all along the New Teftamentj efpeci- 
 aliy the^#/, and that if thou bdieveft thoumayft, 
 &e. we can freely grant without any damage to 
 this truth : For, 
 
 i. We fay as they* profeffiog believers grown 
 
 men 
 
(*) 
 
 men were fide baptized, and (a they augbuabr, 
 who are tobethefoftfabjecVofbhe a^awniflurjon 
 of anOrdinaflavpeffomabletogivean account of 
 Ihei r own faith ^ it was fo wi ch Ahr^m^ Qw. J 7. 
 24. hewaaop years old when he was circumcifed, 
 snd he rauft be rirft circumcifed before he could con- 
 vey a right to his feed -, now you, may a* well argue, 
 AbtAhtrnvite firft circumcifed when fo ©14, there- 
 fore old perfons ate to be circumcifed, and none 
 t\k\ asbeeaufe grown perfons were baptized, there- 
 fore not Infants* when they muft be foil baptized 
 rhemfelves ; for Chiidrerraiebaptized by the pro- 
 ft firft co them, and in tbemco -theic teed. 
 1 . ftfl affirmative pofrion is net exclufive of fub- 
 0><!Rnares ; becanfe belkvens were laid to be ba- 
 pc^ed, Ergo nor iheir ked, is not true reaioning ; 
 1 r heir fetd were comprehended with them in the 
 fame promifc. 
 
 3 A non&Be ad Hon fafttsm, non valet confeqHBn- 
 f&i 1$ Divines fay; becaute it'^ncc eapreft in fo man 
 *Wrirf$,the eforeit was not done, is no argument: 
 e^c i3i-ly when there ia enough to Shew it was done, 
 though no^ written ; Chrift i'peaks fhorr,. shac we 
 irwy feareh • he expe&s N.T. Saints to be fo ingenu- 
 es to take more by a hint, then thofe of the Old 
 who were not fobred as we now ; they had every 
 plnof the Tabernacle appointed; it's. not fo putv 
 dually fee down now, either as to Churchts, or Go- 
 vernment, but only the main Subftantiah laid down. 
 3rd b?$ left to the mgeroiiry of else Saint* to draw 
 forth the tonfequencc*," Laftljr,- 
 
(?) 
 Laftty,to premite no more; God hath alway* 
 ordained fomeOrdiriar*ce$ • in rtie udminiftration of 
 which, for the moft part, the it^^hath been pure- 
 ly paflive, to expreis his own free grace modem?* 
 nently, as Circkmclfion on Infants 5 And can we 
 think he hath left no Ordinance now as avifible cha- 
 racler, only to hold forth his meer grace in the N.T. 
 where he reigns by grace ? And there i*no fign fo 
 fit to exprefs it as Baptifm, and no fubjeel fo capable 
 as poor Infants. 
 
 — — 
 
 Chap. IL 
 
 Jhout the nature of theCoyenant made with 
 Abraham. 
 
 E fird great tfting in this Controvert i$> to* 
 confidmhe nature of the Covenant, which is, 
 the firtY foundation of the priviiedge to believer^ 
 and their feed,as it ws? frft n^ade with Abraham and 
 hVs fjed, in the orfmfe of all belt- vers 2nd their feetf 
 bbth J c ws and Genciks • fotio large is the extent ctf 
 that Cov rum to both, as hertafter (hill be proved 
 firoft New lefts meikexpreffioris -j and if w* fmd the 
 fame Covering reaching Gentile-believers , and 
 their Children, as Abraham a*d his, we cannot be 
 denied the new external fign and fcal of the fame 
 
 Covenant^ 
 
(10J 
 
 Covenant; for though the outward figns may be 
 changed, yet (here is no change of the priviiedges, 
 if the Covenant remain entire. For the opening of 
 Which we fhall confider, 
 
 1. Ihe naure of Abraham* Covenant. 
 
 2. How perfons may be faid to be in that 
 Covenant, 
 
 For the firft, we muft begin with that place r </#w. 
 17. where God began not only to exprefs the Co- 
 venant in larger terms then formerly, but to add a 
 yifiblefeaitoit, vi*» that of Circumcifion '.There 
 be many conje&nrcs about this Covenant; thole 
 that differ, conceive it to.be a mixt Covenant, made 
 up of fpiritua! and temporal biemngs together, and 
 not of the fame purity with the Covenant ip theNew 
 Teft ament, and To make a carnal par<^ and»a fpiri- 
 tual part ofir,and Circumcifion to be f annexed efpe- 
 cially to the former, not fo to the latter ; this is the 
 true relation of their judgement about this. Ltt us 
 review the Covenant, and its terms, and we Ihall 
 foon find she miftake. 
 
 Firft i and chiefly, We affirm this was a Covenant 
 of pure grace, the fame in fubftar.ee with the Co- 
 venant adminiftred now under the Gofpel, fines 
 Chrifts coming in the fliili and fpirit. 
 
 i , Jt was founded upon pure grace, Gods love to 
 'Abraham^ and 'cis not any thing in ^Abraham* Qt 
 his, to move God more then to the Gentiles. 
 
 2* It was a Covenant without works, therefore 
 of pure gr&ce, Rom. 4.* ,2>3> 4*5 • *°d *^ along the 
 €hap:er* $. It 
 
fli) 
 
 3. It was a Covenant made only with a believer 
 upon Gofpel terms; the fame the New Tefhment 
 holds forthin rhe 3,4, and 5. v. of that Chapter ; 
 now faith is the only condition of the Covenant of 
 grace. 
 
 4. It was a Covenant made in Chrift, and there- 
 fore a pure Covenant of Gracf , as any can be in the 
 Gofpel, Gal.$. 16,17,18, and 20. 
 
 5. Confider the tenure of this Covenant, Gen.ij* 
 7. 1 W*// eftablifb my Covenant heme en me and tbte 
 and thy feed after thee in their generations) to be a Cjod 
 to thee^ and thy feed after thee. Here is the fabftance 
 and ftrcngth of this Covenanr,to be a God to Abra- 
 ham and to his feed^and what can be more then to be 
 Jehovah to him ? can there be any esprefiion more 
 high, or that can let forth more graced purity then 
 this? It's more then can be expreft, that God in- 
 gagethhis Deity to him 5 and ic is as much as if God 
 had laid, whatever I am in mine own Godhead, I 
 will be to thee and tfw ^d, to make you happy and 
 bleffed ; this is the firftand main thing premifed^ 
 and it comprehends Chrift,grace,glory, all bleffinas 
 above imagination ; the Apoftle in Heb.%*io* ufeth 
 tfae fame expreffion as the ium of all, when he fpeaks 
 of the new Covenant, Imtt be to them a god, and 
 tbeyjkall be to me a people. We need adde no more, 
 ifthatwerenota Covenant of pure grace, the Go- 
 fpel knows none other. 
 
 That whkh they have to fay why it's a mixt Co- 
 venamr ? snd a temporalis forne of the moft ignorant 
 
 B affinnj 
 
affi 
 
 rflij is from the following expreffion of GW.17.8. 
 
 And I will give unto thee^andto. thj feed after theejhe 
 Land wherein thou art a ftr anger, all the LandbfCz- 
 minfor an ever lofting yoflejfion>&c* Now fay they, 
 if the promifes be mixt, fo is the Covenant. 
 
 To which I anfwer, that the Land of Canaan, and 
 fuch like promifes, were but additional, and added 
 exfuperabundanti, to the firft promife, not at all in- 
 corporated to the bulk and body of the Covenant 
 which was made in Chrift,and confided of more pure 
 confederations • thefe promifes were but fitted to 
 the oucward administration of the firft promife of 
 gracf , and the ftate of Abrahams family, but there 
 was no mixture; For, 
 
 i. The Covenant with Abraham is repeated in 
 the New Teftsment entire, without any of thofe ad- 
 ditions, as is proved formerly. 
 
 2. The promife of Canaan was typical of Heaven, 
 and fo did but more open the fit ft promife, to be 
 their God;(bewing them that God would bring him 
 and his to Heaven , and the fulnefs of his glory, as he 
 would bring them to an outward Canaan; and this 
 was fuited to Gods defigty in admimftring that vail: 
 promife by types and outward figures : fo ^Abraham 
 clofed in with it by faith, as a promife expounding 
 figuratively the fubftance of the Covenant , Heb. 1 1. 
 8,9,10. lb 13, 14, 15, 1 *5. Sothatthefirft promife 
 was po(itive,and (hewed the nature of the Covenant; 
 the other was typically expofitory , Canaan letting 
 out Heaven, and the eternity of their reft with this 
 
 God 
 
God in Covenant* and this will no more maSsed 
 mixt Covenant , then the type and the fubftan£e 
 when the? meet together will differ in fignifica- 
 tion. 
 
 3. We may as well fay, thefe promifes in the 
 New Teftament make up a mixt Covenant, and fo of 
 a different nature, when God faith in Mat. 6. 33. 
 Seekjirft the Kingdom ofGod> and /ill things elf e [ball 
 be added; and I Tm.\* 8. GoMintfs hath the pro- 
 mife of this life> and that which is to come \ which are 
 as much mixt as ever the Covenant made with Abra~ 
 ham was ; whereas all know, thefe are but accidental 
 appendixes of the promife ofgnc;, and difpenfed 
 according to the ufe he hath for, and the conditions 
 of his Saints : thus Qanaan was added to the Cove- 
 nant, as all other things to the Kingdom of God 
 
 4. If this be a mixt Covenant, becaufe Canaan ii 
 added, and the like, then how comes it to be the 
 fame in the N. T.and to be of force now, when no 
 notice is taken of Canaan, and the temporal pro- 
 mifes ? Sure in this mixture the promife of free grace 
 was primary,and like oyl at top 3 for Abrahams Co* 
 venant the very fame for fublhnce, is clear, and 
 without mixture in the Gofpel, though itisadmiw-* 
 ftied externally, as it was then, and the blefltngs of 
 Abraham come on the Gentiles, though not of ait 
 externa) Canaan. 
 
 If they fay that Canaan was added only for the 
 difpenfation of the Covenant to ths Jew^it's grant* 
 ed ; but that it (hould make a mixture in the Go vo- 
 
nant, is mofl: falfe,which is the fame for ever,though 
 the oucward adminiftration be different ; things 
 may be added, yec not mixt, as a mans cioaths ro his 
 body, and yet there is no mixture between a mans 
 flcfh and his cioaths. 
 
 But let us come to Circumcifion , thefcal of this 
 Covenant; i: fealed it, fay they, as a mixt Cove- 
 nant. 
 
 Then. i. It fealed the one part as well as the o- 
 ther .• take it in their own fenfe, chat is, it fealed 
 God to be their God, as fcanam ; and fo it was not 
 a feal meerly to a temporal promilc, 
 
 2. if the Covenant was fo mixt in the nature of 
 ir, then Circumcifion fealed unequally, though it 
 was added t6 a mixt Covenant, for it fealed the pro- 
 miie of Canaan to thofe that never went into £V 
 naan, as many that died before that time,and after- 
 wards many that were circumcifed died in the Wil- 
 dernefe, and under Gods wrath, and fo fealed no- 
 thing at ail,neither part of the Covenant viiibly;and 
 that is hard, that to fo many there foould be neither 
 the fulfilling of fpifitual, nor temporal part of the 
 promife. 
 
 3. Grant them this Covenant was mixt, then it 
 was either in the fubttance,* or circumftances;if in 
 the fubftance, then Abrahams Covenant was not 
 Gofpel, and believers muft feek for another Father, 
 as to the example of faith, and that were to make it 
 rather like Nebuchadnezzar s Image of Iron and 
 Clay, then made upof Gofpel materials; If in cir- 
 
 cumftances 
 
ds) 
 
 cumfhnces of adminiftration, and additamcnts of 
 external types, it's granted, and we have the fame 
 promife now, with new outward adminiftration ; 
 if this mixture were in the nature and fubftance of 
 the Covens nt,then is mult remain as long as the Co- 
 venant lafted, and 10 unto this day ; for no man is 
 fobold C though many are bold enough) as to fay 
 that Abrahams Covenant is abrogated ; if it be un- 
 der any other consideration, it's eafily waved, and 
 the truth the fame : So that Circumcifion feaied the 
 Covenant primarily in its nature, as a Covenant of 
 grace, and God being a God to circumcife their 
 hearts &c.and Canaan, and other things confequent- 
 !y and accidentally,as God made a promife of them, 
 for the better vifible adminiilration of the Covenant 
 to them in that external polity. And fareJy its beyond 
 an ordinary reach to believe, that God fhould make 
 a Covenant with Abraham* and for his faith in it 
 fhould create him the Father of the faithful in all 
 ages, arid this Covenant fhould be brought in the 
 N.T. and renewed, and the tenure of it frefhly held 
 forth to believers there, and yet at the fait making 
 of ic God fhould mix temporal promifes with the 
 fpiritualffubftance of it, and annex a feal that fhould 
 only or fpeci ally feal the temporal part of it, and 
 fb poorly confirm the main and efTential nature of ir, 
 efpecialfy when God fpeaking of Abrahams faith^ 
 iliks Circumcifion the feal of the righteoufnefs of it, 
 ^«w.4.But ofthisiqpre in another Chapter. 
 
 B 5 Ch a >• 
 
g h a p. in. 
 
 Yhe diflinBion of Abrahams feed into 
 fiejhly and Jpiritual, into natural and 
 bdk^vingy confidered • whether the In- 
 fants ofbelieajers may not he called in 
 the New Teflament } the feed of Abra- 
 ham, 
 I 
 
 T'H E next thing which muft have its place of 
 confederation, is that queftion of Abrahams 
 feed, with whom the promiie was made ; and upon 
 this hinge hangs all the main weight on both fides; 
 and if we make out Infant? of believers in the N.T. 
 to be in Covenant, as Abrahams ktd 9 the contro- 
 yerfie would be at end i Id make ouc thi$,the moft 
 of the following Chapters are defigned ; only in this 
 we (hall fall mOre dire&ly on the queftion it felf. 
 
 Thofe that differ from us make many diftindions 
 pfarkflily carnal feed of Abraham* andofafpiri- 
 tual feed, a believing and a natural (ced, which di- 
 ftin6l:ions are taken out of Rom. Q. 7, 8. Gal.. 4. 23 , 
 and Chap. 3. 16. and moft true, it well applyed; 
 but before I come to open the Scriptures, I would 
 premif&chefe confederations concerning Abraham 
 and his feed. 
 
 I. That 
 
(*7) 
 i. That Abrahams fpiritual feed were as much 
 his flefhly feed alfo, Ifaac as IJbmael, except Profe- 
 Jytei and Servants. _ 
 
 2. The Covenant was adminiftred to all Abra- 
 hams natural and flefhy Children,as if they had been 
 fpiritual, and before they knew what faith was, or 
 could actually profefs ^Abrahams faith. 
 
 3. It's no contradiction in different refpc&s, to 
 be a feed of the flefh by natural generation, and a 
 Child under the fame promife made with the Parent; 
 for they both agreed in Abrahams cafe ; none was a 
 Child of promife, but as he came of Abrahams flefh> 
 and as he came from Abrahams flefh, fo every one 
 had the fealof Gods Covenant onhisflefti : Thus a 
 fpiritual promife was made with Abraham and his 
 carnal feed. 
 
 4. There was no diftinclion of Abrahams fledily 
 feed and his fpiritual feed, in the O.T . but all com- 
 prehended under the fame Covenant, untill they de- 
 generated from ^Abrahams faith,and proved ihernr 
 felvesto be meer carnal, and rejected the pro- 
 mife, 
 
 5. There is a carnal and fpiritual feed of Abra- 
 ham, even under the N. T 4 as our oppofites mufl: ac- 
 knowledgers well as Infants; fo are the mod vifible 
 Profeffors which they baptize ; which may have no 
 grace; and many prove carnal indeed, through the 
 predominancy of their Jufts and corruptions. 
 
 cv When there is mention of Abrahams carnal 
 f? e <l !B opposition to fpiritual feed, it cannot be 
 
 fi 4 meant 
 
fi3) 
 meant primarily orfolefyof thofe that de Untied 
 from Abrahams fcih : for then //Wand facet? were 
 the carnal feed,yea Chrift himfeJf> who as concern, 
 ing the flefo came of Abraham $ ir mud be therefore 
 of thofe of Abrahams feed which degenerated and 
 flighted the Covenant of the Gofpd, and thefe were 
 properly the carnaUeed. 
 
 Salable to this Is that diftirftion of Abraham be- 
 ing ft natural and a fpiricual Fat her : F«fe 
 
 Fttft, HewasanwunlFathertottiefcto whom 
 he Wa$ a gtitfafal £afe, as t* &?$fc* and /W, and 
 the go% of *hdr fofterity. 
 
 Secondly, All ko whom he wa§ a natural Father 
 wereundel &fc Covenant, afldWtbe feal> *rtriil 
 tlity^e^eitlfefHrelves; cbcptetaifc wA in both 
 relation?, as to outward admtniltration; &vm. j-.i f 
 ^3:4- Aftd if rfren &m Hate tkft*s,you may a*£ue 
 as much *gifa(k Abrahams immtM&& from enjoy - 
 rng Yhefe privflc^e-, as believers natural feed now, 
 and with asrr net of tritfi. 
 
 Burner ik weigh tte%Strip:mves*h&hw bright 
 by our Oppolices : Fi.ft, confider that of Rom. 9 . 
 6>7 8 They sre wet c vl iftfcel ft*t rfj*r*f Iff ael ; mi- 
 t'jfrlrecaufe the j are the feed of Abraham arethej afl 
 'Children, bmvn thy ffedlvcafied i rfaft& 
 
 the j Vehicb are the CtxMren ohte ftefo 9 thefe are not 
 the Children ofGJ : J to the Chufcen vffromife are 
 accounted for thejefd, 
 
 The Apoftle in chH Chapter doth wirh a bleeding 
 heart begin the farfftory of the jtws t ejefifofi torn 
 
 being 
 
(19) 
 being a Church, and fpeaksas one loth to mention 
 it, and therefore brings it in with a paffionate and 
 beany Apology, V, i, 2, 3. he was in heavinefs, he 
 could Willi himfelf dvjfcfc*, accurfed from Chrift, 
 For his brethren, his Kinfmen according to the flefli, 
 that is, for thefe that we call Jews according to the 
 
 flcftl. 
 
 J^But what needed all this trouble to have a 
 carnal generation of men cut off? why doth Taul 
 rate on fo heavily ? 
 
 SoU In the 4, and $ , v. he tels you, who are 
 Israelites y to whom pertaim the adoption of glory , 
 and the Covenant y and the giving of the Law ± and the 
 fervice ofQod, Andthefromifesjvhofearethe Fathers^ 
 fifwhom as Concerning theflejh Chrift came, : Here is 
 ■a Catalogue of high priviledges which belonged to 
 the Jews,which they were to be cut off from, which 
 lay on 'Pauls heart, and was like to fink him. 
 
 Ob. Well, might fome fay, v. 6. then the promife 
 of God is in vain, if they be rejected unto whom the 
 adoption and the promifes belong. 
 
 Sol, The Apoftle anticipates that Obje£tion,Not 
 as though the Word of God hath taken no effecl; 
 no, the promife is the fame, and immutable $ but 
 they are not all Ifrael which are oflhid ; neither be- 
 caufe they are the ked of Abraham&tt they all Chil- 
 dren, &c. This is the very natural coherence of thefe 
 words ; let us now ufe our judgements to diftinguifh 
 and review the place, and we fliallfind it a weapon 
 whofe edge is turned againft thefe that count it their 
 own. 1. The 
 
I. The Apoftle is fadly troubled for his kinfmen 
 after the fiefb, for their rejeflion ; his reafon is,be- 
 caufe of the Covenant, and the prormfes made to 
 them, becaufe they were the natural feed of Abra- 
 ham : which holds forth that the promifes and the 
 priviledges of the Covenant were made indefinitely 
 toallthelfraeliies. 
 
 a. That it's a moft fad thing to be excluded from 
 the outward and geoeral adnvniftracion of the Co- 
 venant. Why foould /W thus break out in his af- 
 fections, for the lofs of outward priviledges, if 
 it were not fuch a mercy to be under them ? 
 
 3. The Apoftfe holds forth, thatperfons maybe 
 under the outward adminiliracions of the Covenant, 
 and yet not get the efficacy of it ; v.6. They are not 
 «lt Ihtel tb*t are of Mrtti -, the Covenant was made 
 with Abraham and his feed,al! that were of him:and 
 yet ail were not Ifracl, that is, partakers of the in- 
 ward life and efficacy of the Covenant ; the Apoftle 
 only in thefe verfes endeavours to takeo{£ that Ob- 
 jection, that God had broive his Covenant by call- 
 ing away the Jews, and fo tfiflingm'flhech of thefe 
 that were meeilyoi hi* &fh, whohadthe outward 4 
 adminiftraticn, but not the inwaid fruit, and thefe 
 which were ele# in the promife,in Ifaac [ball thy feed 
 becalledi the reft hecaisthe Children of the flefli, 
 the former the Children of promife, v. 8. and fo 
 though they were under the outward difpenfation of 
 the Covenant, yet God was not mutable, nor his 
 j?rouufe, though he rejccled them, fwaufe qf their 
 
(2i; 
 
 own degeneration ; fo that the torn of this place 
 
 ' i. That the Covenant was made in general with 
 Abrahams feed, to all that came from him. 
 
 2. That in the adminiftratioa of general and in- 
 definite promifes, there is a fccret diftinaton, and a 
 vein of eleflion carried through the admimftration, 
 that takes hold of fome, not of others. 
 
 q. That none are the Children of promife, real 
 Saints, but thofe that have the true effeds of the Co- 
 venant in their hearts. 
 
 4. That all Children of Believers, though the pro- 
 mife vifibly belong to them, as to Abraham and his 
 feed, yet may not folio w their Parents faith,and fo 
 not be Ifraet, though of Ifrael, 
 
 But here is nothing at all to demonltrate that 
 Infants, becaufe Children of the flefh, are not under 
 thepromife:but rather the contrary ;for wMtcfia/l 
 thjfeidbecaHed t (%\t\\God t now he wai a Child of 
 AbrahamsMn, as well as thefe which were caft oft, 
 and yet a Child of promife 5 fo God makes his Co- 
 venant indefinitely with believers and their feed, 
 and vet the efficacy of the Covenant may reach but 
 fome, an Jfaac or a Iacob, an elefi veflel, and yet the 
 other under the outward adminiftration, until they 
 manifest the contrary i But more oi this from that, 
 
 I come'now to that other place fo much urged by 
 them s ^/. 5s i0. Jty» to Abraham andbufeed were 
 the promifes made ; befaith not, to feeds, 0s of many. 
 
 bm 
 
(*2) 
 
 $ut of one, rvhlch h Chrifl : Now by Chrift here can- 
 not be meant barely Chrift perfonal: fcr then no be- 
 liever (hould'be accounted for the feed but oneJy 
 Chrift ; it muft be meant of Chrift myftica!iy,or Po- 
 litically cotifidered,as the vifible Head of the Church; 
 if to Chrift my ftica), then to ail the Elecl as in hiro, 
 and fo to Infants aswell»as grown pedbns, who 
 make tip that rnyftical body$ but thus the ptomife 
 is conveyed under ground as it were, none knows 
 the veins of it : thus in the Old Teftament fleih and 
 flc(h came from Abraham fht Covenant adminiftred 
 to them both by ks feal, yet one fle(h enjoying the 
 fpiritualblefli^^s, the o; her rejected. 
 
 Take the promife to be made to Chrift, the ktd 9 
 as the Head of a vifibk Church,then ftill it fpea&s for 
 us; for Infants of believers were never call out of 
 the viable Church sribey were once in jand the promife 
 is made now to tihem with their Patents, as (hail be 
 hereafter proved at large : but if we look no farther 
 back then the 14. v. of t&s Chapter, we {hail re- 
 ceive fome light to th« : It's faid in the 1 3 .v. Cbrifi 
 hath redeemed ttifrom the owfe of the LaVc f being 
 ■mA&e a enrfefer «*, &c that the bieffi*gtf Abraham 
 might came -en the Gentiks through Cbrift : Abrahams 
 t>!efling what was it, but the promifes,and the fruits, 
 and priviledg** of the premie aftd Covenant made 
 to him and his feed ?The fame bleflingisnovv cc5sȣ 
 on the Gentiles, but through Ctwift, who toolcaway 
 all obftru&ions in the p*#«ge ,fcf cte Covenant by 
 to death; Now, 
 
 1. This 
 
i. This blefling of Abraham was not perfonaJ, 
 but to him and his ked. 
 
 2 This very blefling is come on Gentile be- 
 lievers, is on Abraham : therefore it rnuft come 
 on believers of the Gentiles, and their feed alfo: 
 For, 
 
 3. It cannnot be called Abrahams bkfRng y except 
 it come on the Gentiles according to the fubftantiai 
 terms of Abraham* Covenant : Now this was the 
 abfolute form of Abrahams blefling, I Will be a Goi 
 of thee and thy feed ; and this very blefling is come 
 on the Gentiles through Chrift, as it came on Abra- 
 ham ; and therefore it raufi: be to believing Gentiles, 
 and their feed: elfe it will neither be Abrahams blef- 
 ling in the fornyior fatnefs of it ; Abrahams blefling 
 willdefcend on the Gentiles dipt half off, not like 
 it felf : And it mull: needs be a very uncouth faying 
 to all judicious ears, to fay, that Abrahams blefling 
 is come on the Gentiles by Chrift, as it was on the 
 Jews by Abraham, and exclude half the Subjects at 
 once from any right to it; for fo you muft, if you 
 cattout the feed of Gentile believers. 
 
 And to what end fhouldthe Apofifefay, The 
 blefling of sAbrabam^ and not the promile or Co- 
 venant is come to the Gentiles, but,that he intended 
 it to the Gentile believers and their feed,as formerly 
 it came to Abraham and his ? This (hall be further 
 cleared from «^?/2. and Rom.i 1. in their order. 
 
 But in gal. 3. lg.the Apoftle (fay they,) defcribes 
 who are the feed ; Ifjott be Ch r *ft'f* then jou are 
 
 Abrahams 
 
Abrahams /£*?/, and heirs according to promife : So 
 that now no Children born of believing Parents cad 
 be the feed ; for they muft be Chrift% according to 
 that in v. 26. fVe are all the Children of God through 
 faith in Chriftfefw. 
 
 In general, not to omit that which Beta faith 
 on the place, that CUramontanm Bible hath the 
 words thus, and as he thinks more right, ** 3 h *& & 
 Xe*r£ Ifyen be one m Chrift, then areje Abrahams 
 feed : This is (uitable to the former verfe, where he 
 faith^ There u neither left nor Greek, neither bond nor 
 free^ &c. but ye are all one in Chrifi lefts ; and if ye 
 be allone y then Abrahams/***/ : From which* 
 
 1. Unclear the Apoftle is endeavouring co take 
 away all difference between Jew and Gentile, and 
 to hold forth their unity in Chrift, where there is no 
 diftinclion as formerly : but now the Gentiles being 
 one in Chrift, are Abrahams fctd, as well as the 
 natural and believing Jews*to a 
 
 a* The Apoftle here hath no intent to (hew the 
 diftiri&ionof Abrahams feed as the fubje&of the 
 outward privikdges, and administrations of Ordi- 
 nances, bur to (hew that none are fpirtcually and re- 
 ally ^Abrahams feed, and heirs of promife, but fuch 
 as are Quid's, one in him with Abraham : For if this 
 fhould be the diftinclion of feed as the fubjeel of 
 outward Ordinances, it would be as much againft 
 profiling believers as Infants • for there is a carnal 
 profeffion as well as a fiefhly generation, the former 
 mote abominable. tiiltelojL 
 
US) 
 
 the tropofition from this expreffion, as .they 
 draw ir^s thus • None but thefe who are ChriiVsare 
 Abrahams ked, and none are Chrifts's but real be* 
 liever% and therefore none bat they muft be b*i 
 jptized. 
 
 Thus fome fayf though weakly) The fpiritual feed 
 arc now the fubjeftof Baptifm, the new Creature/ 
 the man in Chrift, Baptifm knows no flefti, with 
 many fuch like expreflions from this and other pla- 
 ces : But fee us weigh things. 
 
 i* If none but fuch are Abrahams feed, and fo 
 none but fuch the fubjeft of Baptifm,then vifible be- 
 lievers are not the fubjed of Baptifm ; for they may 
 not be Chrift's, or new Creatures,no more then In- 
 fants ; hardly one among twenty that are truly in 
 Chrift among the moft glorious of them, and fo not 
 Abrahams feed. 
 
 2. None muft be baptized at all upon this ac- 
 count; for who knows who is Chrifts according m 
 eledion and faving faith ? 
 
 If they fay, We have charitable grounds to be- 
 lievefo of vifible Profeffors, until we fee the con- 
 wary; 
 
 Ianfwer, This is nothing to the Queftion, as us 
 
 reflated, nor as it lies in the text ; the text faith, 
 If)' be thrifts, thenje are Abrahams/^ : You fay 
 none ate in Chrift but real believers, and you muft 
 baptize none but a fpiritual feed,and newCreaturesj 
 which will require not only a judgement of charity* 
 
 but infallibility to determine, 
 
 2, The 
 
(*5) 
 2. The Apsflle isi*cre deieribiog what the real 
 feed and fpi ritual feed are , as having an inwaid 
 right toChrift, and not what the apparent feed of 
 Abrahams was ; For , 
 
 1. Mark whom he fpeaks unto ; to grown pes- 
 fons, the galatkvs, who were vifible Profeffors and 
 Believer?. 
 
 2. He puts them to a trial of themfelves, whether 
 they were Chrift's or no, after they had made a pro - 
 feffion ; for they having legaliz'd, and returned to 
 look after Jewifti Ordinances and works, he 
 tells them, their Ordinances were nothing, their 
 priviledges nothing, being Jew or Greek, but as 
 they were in Chrift : The fam,e he follows cn,Chap« 
 6. l%. In Chrift neither circtmcifion nor metr-enm* 
 ciSoyt^vailetbany thing t but a new Creature ; So that 
 rhe Apoftle here puts an [" if] co the profeffing Ga- 
 Utiani , // ye be Chrifi's 9 then art ye Abrahams 
 fe*A. 
 
 S* If you have no more but the judgement o£ 
 your charity to dilUnguifo thus of meaifl Chrift|teal 
 believe4£,and Abrahams feed,then we have che ferae 
 ground of charity to act on Infants of believers; 
 for, rr ' ■- 
 
 i. They maybe Chriftsas well as grown per- 
 sons. 
 
 %. God would have us accwat them holy, as we 
 (hall prove from that, i Cor.j, 14. 
 
 3. Seeing ciiey have been taken into the fame 
 Covenant. 
 
 4. Seeing 
 
1 <*> 
 
 4* Seeing Chrift (hewed fomuch refpe^tolsio 
 fonts, when brought to him. To /udgc a tifible Pro- 
 feflbr to be Chrift's, and Abrahams feed, I have no- 
 thing but the purblind eye of my probable judge- 
 fnent.To judge a believers Infant Chrift's, I have s 
 general Scripture affertion, and the ground of an in* 
 definite promife * which is more then all my con* 
 jeclures ; So that, 
 
 i. Vifible Profeifors are not the fpiritual feed o£ 
 Abraham ; for they may not be Chrift's ; therefore 
 there is no fpiritilal feed but thefe that have faving 
 faith, which all have not . 
 
 2. Infants of believers are as much the fpirkwaS 
 feed of Abraham as vifible profefsing believers, and 
 we have as much ground to judge of the one as tH 
 other 9 until they manifeft the contrary ; and out 
 judgement on them may have lefs deceit in it then 
 there is in that we pafs on grown perfons. , : 
 
 3. If you will diftinguifb of Abrahams fleCbfy 
 feed and fpiritual under the Gofpel, you cannot 
 apply it to InfantS| but to profefsing believers ; for 
 the Children of believers are not the flefniy feed of 
 Abraham^ but if there be any fuch diftinclion, ig 
 muft be between vifible grown Profcitors, of whom 
 fome are fpiritual, and Chrift's; and others earn*!* 
 and born under Mount Sinai s und not Chrifts; 
 
 4. It's a true rule in Logick, that in every good 
 divifionjP^r^ s debent inter fe cpponi } Tht Parts ought 
 to be oppofite : Now to be born front Abraham 
 both as a natural and fpiritual Father, was both 
 
 C so 1a n?oftp 
 
f28) 
 
 common,through the promife in theOld Teftamcnrj 
 and not umverfally oppofite ; and fo it may be now; 
 an Infant is born of the fle(h of a believer, yetthe 
 Covenant makes the believer a fpiritual'Fatherin 
 iome ftfpe&s, as well as a natural. 
 
 5. The feed takes its denomination from the Co- 
 vertattt>and its tenure ; and if the Covenant be im&e 
 to Abraktm and his ked, and thefe were at firft In- 
 fants of hi* body, and renewed with believers in the 
 NX as we (hail prove in the following Difcoorfe: 
 then Infants of believers are the feed now as well 
 as formerly, Abraham only being the firft root and 
 Father. 
 
 6. Vifibility of profefrion doth no more make a 
 man of the fpiritual ktd^ and fo Chrift's now under 
 the New Teltamenr, then the Covertant in its out- 
 ward adminiftratioriin the Old, made all the Jew* 
 and their Children really new Crettiires, and a fpi- 
 ritual feed; for under the one, and the other, pcr- 
 fons may be carnal. 
 
 AH thefe confideratibns are to (hew that thefe 
 places of Scripture are iniftaken , and do not (hew 
 who is the kxd as td Ordinances, butwhoarfcdie 
 feed as to etedion and falvation ; and that Infant* 
 may beas well the feed, notwithstanding all thefe 
 places,as well as vifible ProfeflTors. 
 
 ^If any fay r ;Bm we have ho warrant to judge 
 of any but by vifibfe pfofefsion. 
 
 Sol 1. Let us judge as God would nave us, and we 
 (hall find as much gtotfnd to pafe fnch a judgement on. 
 
 Infants 
 
(*9) 
 Infants as them; if God call them holy, we may do 
 fo 9 and it will be dangerous then to call them un- 
 clean. 
 
 2. The promife is the furer way of Judging, feeing 
 at beft we can but judge externally, and with hopes 5 
 and it's better to rely on God* and to expeft what 
 he will do through his promife, at lead on fome, 
 then to truft my own judgement. 
 
 3. The Word owns Infants of believers vi(ibly a 
 as we own vifible PfofetTors, as the Scriptures fol- 
 lowing will demonftrate. 
 
 For the prefent, ferioufly view all thefe places to- 
 gerher, </<?». 17. 7. *Atts 2. 38,39. Deut. jp.tf.ii * 
 12,13,14. Rom. 10. 1,6,7,8. with Heb. 8.io 5 li 9 
 Ier.31. 22. Efay 65. 23. with many fuch places, 
 that hold forth the ktd to Infants as well in the 
 New Teftament as in the Old. 
 
 I end this Chapter with this confederation , thac 
 if you exclude Infants of belie vers to be Abrahams 
 feed, upon this ground,becaufe they are not the fpi- 
 ritual feedtthen dafh out the name as well of grown 
 Profeflbrs to be Abrahams feed,who are no more fo 
 really becaufe of that, then thefe Infants, and we 
 (hall quit the one with the other, and then there 
 flasll be found no vifible fubjecls of Baptrfm, either 
 of Infants or grown perfons : for they are both, as 
 to election and inward grace, unknown to us to be 
 Abrahams feed ; they were both formerly accounted 
 Abrahams leed 5 grown perfons, and Infants efpecialty 
 by thi C+wnant 5 and now the one fs to be accounted 
 C z Abrahams 
 
Abraham kzd , viz. grown perfonj profefling- 
 though they may have no tight to the inward grace 
 of the Covenant; and Infants who had fir ft right 
 next to Abraham, muft be excluded, though they 
 have never fo real an intereft, becaufe they are In- 
 fants, and cannot fpeak for themfelves: But fo much 
 of this j the next Chapter will fecond this. 
 
 Chap. IV- 
 
 How any perjon may be /aid to be in the Co* 
 <venant^the dhvers confederations about 
 
 it. 
 
 mil 3 "fl 
 
 TO the former let this be added , becaufe it 
 feems flange how any can be in Covenant^ and 
 3?et not partake of falvation : In opening of this,the 
 common diftindtions of all Divines muft be repeat- 
 ed, that according as there is an internal and exter- 
 nal adminiftration of the Covenant, fo there is a 
 twofold being in the Covenant : 
 
 i. Secundum propvfetum eleftionk, According to 
 the purpofe of ek&ion in Gods hearty and his eter- 
 nal decree; fo only the eleel, and thefe which have 
 f3ving faitb y are in Covenant ; this fome call, and not 
 improperly, to be intentionally in Covenant, God 
 principally intending the Covenant so them 5 others 
 
 cili 
 
call it (pi ritually and favingiy from the effefJ. 
 
 2. There is a being in Covenant *'» facie viftbilk 
 Ecclefit, In the face, or according to the judgement 
 of a vifible Church,where judgement and charity are 
 mixc together, Rom.94. Deut. 29, ro, 12, 13, 14. 
 hh. 15.2, John l. 11. Pfal. 50.5. wirh variety of 
 Scripture : And of fuch there are two forts. 
 
 1. Such as (land by their own vifible profefsion, 
 as all firft Covenanters do, fo all vifible Saints now, 
 and fo many Profdytes in the Old Teftament,^^. 
 12.44,45* De$tt.2g.io 9 n. Gen.i2.$. Orelfe, 
 
 2. As in a Political Moral confidcration, as in 
 the right of another through a free proraife ; as if a 
 Prince give a title of honour, or apiece of land to 
 one andjhis heirs,they are all interefted init,yet fome 
 prove fools, or traitors, and are afterwards incapa- 
 ble : It's fo in this, and was with ^Abraham and his 
 feed 1 Now that this diftinflion holds in the New 
 Teftament, I (hall thus difcover to you; 
 
 1. If men deny an external, as well as internal 
 being in Covenant, none can adrainifter an external 
 Ordinance, an outward fign to any ; for we muft go 
 by external rules in thefe a&ings. 
 
 3. Vifible Profeffors will have the worft of it.; 
 for we muft adminifter no Ordinance to thefe which 
 are not internally in Covenant ; and we have no 
 proof but their own exprefsions, and our good 
 hopes, and prefent probable judgement to warrant 
 us, and many vifible mifcarriap ?s to contradict out: 
 judgements and hopes at fpeci i times. 
 
 Cj 3- Wc 
 
(32j 
 3.Wefetafeaitoablank to all grown perfons 
 who are baptized, or receive the Lords Supper,with- 
 outw© know them certainly in the Covenant; and 
 that who knows? for our judgement will no 'more 
 hinder the feal from being a blank to grown Pro- 
 Feffoi* then to Infants, without they prove real at 
 Jaft. 
 
 4. The beft evidence you can have from any of 
 their being in Covenant, is but vifiblc exprefsion.% 
 fuppofitions, and hope?, and probabilities, ail which 
 you mnft help out by your own charity, and fallible 
 obfeivation ) for G04 hath promifed no feal on my 
 fpirit for another mans condition > it's** bleffed 
 mercy if I get the feal on ray own heart for my 
 
 So that the great Qwftion willfce anfwered from 
 this, which Mr. Tombes and they all urge, That if 
 God made the Covenant with believers, and their 
 feed, they muR all be fived, &c. With which I ftiail 
 but thus pirly. 
 
 1. Doth God make the Covenant of falvuion 
 Vvith eve?y vifible Proi'dYor whom they baptize ? or 
 with eveiyvifible Saint ? or do they baptize them 
 out of Covenant ? Then how come any to fall off, 
 and be damned ? or what rule have they to baptize 
 by? 
 
 2. Why fTiouy it be thought more hainous to 
 feta feal on Infa^s, as in the Covenant, thenoa 
 uSefe Profeffors wU$ after wards prove not co be in 
 Covenant f 
 
 z. Or 
 
(33) 
 
 $. Or do they baptize, becaufe that perfons are 
 in the Covenant ? If not, then upon no Spiritual ac- 
 count ; if upon their being in Covenant, then either 
 internally or externally ; on the fiift ic cannot be 
 abfolucely, but as manifested externally ; not upon 
 a meer external being inCovenantjfor then they may 
 feta feal to a blank : if upon both together, the 
 one externally demonftrated by the other, then it is 
 ftiil by the external being in Covenant that we judge 
 with hopes ofthe other. There is a trick that fome 
 have got> whereby they think to evade this being in 
 Covenants the fundamental ground of Baptifm,by 
 this diftinclion ? That ic is not being in Covenant, 
 but being an aflual Believer, gives right ; To which 
 lanfmr. 
 
 i. That the Covenant, take it fpintually, is the 
 ground of faith, not faith of the Covenant. 
 
 a. If the Covenant be the ground of faith f for 
 who can believe without a promife? ) it may well be 
 the ground of an outward priviledge. 
 
 3. To feparate the Covenant from the convey- 
 ance of a^ual privileges, isalmoft as dangerous as 
 to feparate acluai faith from the Covenant s for the 
 one gives a right as well as the other. 
 
 4. Infants in the Old Teftaraenc were thus as 
 really to be efteemed in the Covenant, as aftual vu 
 fible Believers are now ; and under the external ad- 
 minittration of the Covenant, as the Profely tc*,who 
 came in tothejewifib Church, and wer| tjte nut 
 
 ! Ca for 
 
(34) 
 For that there is an external adminiftration of 
 the Covenant of Abraham, or rather of God m 
 Chriit, even in the New Teftamenr, is clear 5 for 
 that many were baptized who proved hypocrite^ 
 and many believed vifibly likewife,as Simon Magus % 
 Hjmenatu, Alexander, Philetus, &c. many in all the 
 Churches; and yet thefe muft be accounted the fpi- 
 ritual feed, though moft wicked, becaufe they can 
 profefs their own prefent (udden faith: and poor In- 
 fants of believers muft be accounted the carnal feed, 
 though fo long under a Gofpel promife ; of which 
 you (hall not want proof hereafter! V r *t ?i 3»o '* 
 
 Now that alt which are baptized, or have any 
 Ordinance, have ic adtniniftred fundamentally oh 
 the ground of the Covenant externally adminiftrcd, 
 I prove thus. 
 
 I. God adminifters all his graces by Covenant, 
 much more outward Ordinances. 
 
 *. Souls can have no challenge or intereft in 
 God, but by fome Covenant or other ; God is tied 
 to none, but as he ties himfelf. 
 
 ?„ If there were not a vifibie and external admi- 
 piftration of the Covenant, none jbould know of 
 the irivifible defign of it unto any : ail things would 
 be in the dark to us, as to Gods Covenant, in a vi- 
 sible difpenfat ion. 
 
 4. If this invifible defign were not fecretly carried 
 on in an outward vifibie difpen lation, there could be . 
 none condemned by an outward rule : for who can 
 condemn thefe who are intentionally, and invifibly 
 
 in 
 
on 
 
 in Covenant* oifotRe? And if every one vifibfy 
 in Covenant be intentionally and fpiritually in Cove- 
 nant, it's jaft the fame. 
 
 The whole is this; None are in Covenant (fty 
 they ) but real believers, the Spiritual feed, fonone 
 Co be baptized but fuch : when it comes to appli- 
 cation of the Ordinance, then none are the fpirrtual 
 feed but vifible believers ; and thefe vifible believers 
 can be judged by no way but by an external pro- 
 fefliontobein Covenant; and Infants are no vi- 
 fible believers, therefore no fpiritual feed ; | when as 
 the one is as vifible by promife, as the other by pro- 
 feffion. 
 
 __ ! ■* 
 
 Chap. V. 
 Opening that place in Acts 2. 39. 
 
 'Tfjuv $ %bv \m,fyxia> xj rots Tiwoft vywv , x) **** 
 
 1,, ** 
 
 *W s fti (V. 
 
 TH I S Text I firft hold forth as (it to difcover the 
 New Tcftament application of the Covenant 
 of grace, and its continuation to believers and their 
 feed, as to Abraham and his in the Old Teftament : 
 Its the firft Argument ufed after Chrifts afcenfion, 
 
 to 
 
tm 
 
 to provoke the Jews to repent, and fufrmit to Go- 
 fpel' ordinances; and the firft open promulgation 
 of the Covenant both to Jew and Gentile, with the 
 prime priviledges of it; in which is contained the 
 Gofpel-Covenant made with believers and their 
 feed. 
 
 r. Here is f I fW>Wi*J) the promife j which 
 can be no other then the promife of remiffion offins, 
 and fo of falvation; futable to that \nGe*.ij.y.tiid 
 repeated at large in ?er. 3 r. 34. For it mnft either 
 be a promife of temporal things, Of fpiritual j of 
 temporal things it cannot be; for there is do ab- 
 fo lute promife of thefe things in the NewTtftamenr, 
 but as included in, or following fpiritual mercies, 
 as Uiiat. 6. 33 Neither is there a fy; liable itL.this 
 Chapterpreflingmentolook after temporal enjoy- 
 ments, or engaging them to embrace the Gofpel by 
 any outward emoluments. 
 
 Ob. The great and only interpretation of this 
 promife by thefe that differ, is, that ft hath reference 
 to v. i5. and is meant of the promife of the holy 
 Ghoft prophefled of by foil, Chap. 2.28. which 
 was to be poured forth in the latter daies, and bow 
 vifibly and eminently begun to be fulfilled at the day 
 ofPentecoft. 
 
 To which the Anfwer will be cleat* and fair,thou$rr 
 that be granted ; and not at ail weaken-,: but 
 Strengthen the former fenfe ; For, 
 
 1. Thatpromiieis afpiritwai prdmife, tnd.mDie 
 
 large and comprehenfive of fpiritual mwG&VA' 
 
 " any 
 
(37) 
 any other; the promising of thetpiritisas much as 
 to promife all at once, graces, gift?, yea Heaven it 
 felf, for all are but the fruits of this promife ; Chtift 
 in the Old Teftamenr, and the Spirit in the New, 
 contain all the promifes in an eminency. When Jc- 
 fus Chrift was to leave the World, and fpeak all his 
 heart at once, and leave his lad bleffing, that fhould 
 be better then his bodily prefence among them,he ex* 
 prefles all in this, that he would fend the Spirit, Job. 
 14. 16,26. Ci.15.26* 16."/, And of this large pro- 
 mife, as well according to Chrift's promife before 
 his Afcenfion, as Joels Prophefie, the Apoftles and 
 Believers received the flrft fruits in this folemn day 
 of Chrifts triumph : So that to fay it's the promife 
 of the Spirit, is as much as to fay it's the promife of 
 all fpiritual things : For this read in Gal. 3. 14. the 
 Apoftle fpeaking of the fruits of Chrift* death, faith, 
 It Was that the bleffing of Abraham might come on the 
 Gentiles through leftts C^ rt ?* f ^ at ® e might receive 
 the promife of the Spirit through faith; The fame 
 phrafe that is in this 3 8 . And in the promife of the 
 jpirit, Which is to be received by faith* is included 
 jvftification,fan5iification; yea all gr aces % and its here 
 joynedwith the bleffing of Abraham : But, 
 
 2, If they take the promife of the Spirit in a \U 
 mitedandreftriclivefenfe, for the external gifts, as 
 the moftdo, for the gifts of tongues, and miracles, 
 and prophefie, they both clip the promife, and make 
 the argument and comfort from it invalid, and of 
 no efficacy, 
 
 1. It's 
 
OS) 
 
 i . It's a mighty wrong to that famous prom ifc of 
 the Spirit, tocircumfcnbeicin thefe accidental gifts 
 which were efpecially neceffary, and almoft only for 
 that feafon : when it's a promife that reacheth all 
 the latter days, and is ftill accomplishing, though all 
 thefe extraordinary gifts are ceafed. 
 
 2. This ftrairned fenfe is expunged by the man* 
 neroftheexpreflions of that Prophetic, both in jfo/, 
 tnd this in the nAEls, I will four out of my fpirit on 
 *U fiejby and on your fervantt and handmaids will / 
 four out ofntj fpirit : Which (hews the univerfality 
 and variety of the fubjecls, and bleflings in this pro* 
 mife, that it fhili be fo large and full a mercy ; as if 
 there were to be bo limitation of its meafure. 
 
 3. If it were meant meerly of thefe gifts, why 
 then there is no more benefit of that promife after 
 the Apoftles days, but thatChrift was out of date, 
 and did expire with that age ; whereas it is a promife 
 made for all the time of the New Teftamenr, which 
 is expreft by the latter days, and the lafl days, up 
 and down the Scripture . r^rfjo oft 
 
 A parallel promife ro this you have in I/a. 44. 3. 
 I will pour water on him that is thirfty % and foods on 
 the dry ground ; 1 Will pour my fair it on tkjfeed y and 
 m) kteffing on thjoff-fpring : Now the promife of the 
 fpirit is always appropriated to the New Tcftamenc 
 day?,* 
 
 And Secondly, This cannot be the meaning o£ 
 this phrafe, if iye confider to whom the Apoftlfi 
 fpeaks, to perfons pricked itrtheir hearts, Tty**ded for 
 
 their 
 
(19) 
 
 their fins in crucifying oflefus Cbrift, trying out ^,37. 
 Otfe n and Brethren, What Jhall we do to be faved ? 
 Now what comfort could this be to tell them they 
 fhould have extraordinary gifts ? their hearts were 
 bleeding under (in, their eye was on falvation, they 
 faw no hopes of it, nor knew the way to obtain it ; 
 the Apoftle bids them repent and be baptized $ they 
 might have faid, What (hall we be the better ? why 
 (faith the Apoftle) Ton {ball receive the gift efthe 
 holy Gkoft; for the promife u unto you ; What pro- 
 mile? of gifts, of tongues and miracles : What is 
 this to our fouls ? how will this fave us? might they 
 well objecl. It would be but a poor comfort to a 
 wounded foul for to tell him of a promife of gifts, 
 not of fpiritual grace 5 and the holy Ghoft is 1 bet- 
 ter Pbyfician then to apply fuch a raw improper 
 plaifterto a wounded heart, which would hardly 
 heal the skin : this promife is brought in as a cordial, 
 to keep them from fainting, and to give them fpirits 
 to believe, and lay hold on Jefus Ghrift ; And truly 
 no other promife but that of free grace, in order to 
 falvation, can be imagined to give them comfort ift 
 that condition. 
 
 But to put ail out ofqueftion? That the promife 
 prophefied of in Joel, and quoted here, was the pro- 
 mife of falvation, and the kme with the Covenant 
 of Grace, Confult the Original in Joel, and the pa- 
 rallel in this of the Atts ; inloeli.JJ. the Prophet 
 founds all the promifes that went before, and all that 
 come after* on Shis, That he k the Lord their God^ 
 
 and 
 
(4o) 
 m&wme el/e • which was ihe very exprefs words in 
 chat Covenant made with t^brahum : And then af- 
 terwards, viz. in the New Teftament, to make out 
 this fully 9 HeVpiltpouretttbufpiritonaUfleJb, <$>c. 
 v. 32. which is a part of that prophefie, and is quo- 
 ted again in v. 21 . Whofoever fhaU caR on the name of 
 tkeLordfaillbefavedi one grace put for air; and 
 (alvation being put at the end of the promite, muft 
 needs be the aim of it. The fame exprefiio» you 
 have again repeated, Rom, 1 oi 1 3 . 
 
 And in the former v. 3 8. he exhorts them to re- 
 pent , eitapwdufyTiav^ for the renvffien of fin $ 
 th exhortation is to a Gofpelduty; the effect and 
 profit of k was to be remi(fion of fins, and receiving 
 the gift of the holy Ghoft ; and the prormfe muft 
 needs be anfwerable, by which all is enforced ; and 
 it muft needs have been a mighty low and difpropor- 
 tionable way of perfwafion, to put them upon foch 
 high things in the former verfe, and to encourage 
 them only by the narration of a promife of fome 
 temporary gifts in the folIowing,when their eye and 
 heart was kt on -re million of (ins, and falvation by 
 Jefus Chrtft ; and nothing but a promife holding 
 forth thefe mercies could have been confideraWe to 
 them. 
 
 And it's very obfervable, in chat verfe he joyns 
 remiffion of fins with the gift of the holy Ghoft 5 
 and then adds fte promife to both, as the ground of 
 one and the other, and comprehending both : And 
 for that expreffion of Receiving tb* gift of the holy 
 
 Ghoft, 
 
f (*0 
 Cjbift, it may well be noted, that it is a»4*<& # A>- 
 Zixv & -n^ixcLTzf cly\* s the free gift ; not ^^aaVf**^ 
 the gifts of the heiyfpimt ; rioting the very fending 
 ofthe fpiritasafree gift to beftow all mercies on 
 them ; and fo refpeding rather the free and bounte- 
 ous manner of beftowing the holy Ghofton them* 
 then any limited effecls of his reception. 
 
 By all which it is demonftrated, that this is no or- 
 dinary, common, no temporal promife, or of mecr 
 gifts, though never fo extraordinary, but a promife 
 of free grace. 
 
 I only add this to all the reft, as undeniable by this 
 principles of thefe that differ; it's a promife made 
 not only to thefe Jews, but it's univerfally to the 
 Gentiles, and to all the called of Cod : but all that 
 are called have not received fuch gifts of {be 
 holy Ghoft which then were given ; but everyone 
 that is effectually called doth receive the promife of 
 remtflion or fins, and the free favour of God, an4 
 therefore this promife mud be taken mainly in that 
 fenfe* , 
 
 • But the great difficulty is in the following part of 
 the verfe, and about the intereft of their Children 
 in this promife; and therefore the next work mull 
 be to make out this, that the Children as well as the 
 Parents are included in this promife, as they were in 
 the promife made with Abraham. 
 
 I. Let us confider to whom the Apoftle fpeaks: 
 to the Jews, who wereprickt in their hearts; The 
 promife U ti> jon and pur Children ; He (peaks to 
 
 them 
 
(42) 
 
 them after the wonted manner of expreffion in the 
 Old Teftament,when ever the promife is mentioned; 
 and ufeth their own language in which they were 
 trained up in from their Fathers; IVeillfathe (jodof 
 the and thy feed, Gen. 17. ThefromifeutoyoH and 
 your Children ; If the Apofte had intended to ex- 
 elude their Children from the fame privi ledges they 
 had formerly by the Covenant, he would never have 
 fpokenin fucha known diale&ofthe Old Tefta- 
 ftient : and to jews, who could take it in no other 
 fenfe but this, that the promife (hall run as formerly, 
 to them and their feed. 
 
 2. Lee us mind on what ground this is brought 
 in, viz. as an argument and ftrong inducement of 
 them to repent and be baptized,- as in the former 
 VCtfe ; for the promife is tdymandyour feed 2 He en* 
 ceurageth them from this to receive the Ordinance 
 ofBaptifmthemfelves, for the promife was ftill the 
 fame to them and their Children * only now they 
 mnft firft believe and be baptized themfelves, ere 
 their Children could be confidered in the promife ; 
 If the Apoftle had not intended to hold forth to 
 them now believing and being baptized, and theit 
 Children, the fame privi ledges they had before as to 
 the promife, it would have been the greateft delu- 
 sion inftead of an argument to perfwade them to be 
 baptized on this ground, becaufe the promife was to 
 them and their Children ; they had been rather de- 
 ceived by it then enlightned ; and (tumbled by fact* 
 a proportion more then informed of a New Tefta- 
 mem adminiftmion* 3« ^potf 
 
,^ 3 > 
 
 3 . Upon what hinge can this Exhortation turn ? 
 Where is the vertue and ftrength it hath to move 
 them to be baptized themfelves, bat on this con- 
 federation, that they fliould not only enjoy blefiings 
 themfclves, through the promife, but their Children! 
 with them ? The promife to them was enough for 
 themfelves to fubmit to that Ordinance .* but the 
 height of the enforcement is from the riches of the, 
 promife, that it was not only to them, but their 
 Children- they might blefs themfelves and theirs by 
 fubmittingto theGofpel; elfeto put in the namd 
 of their Children fpeaking to the Jews, was but to 
 Tay a temptation before them, and rather to puzzle 
 them then encourage them : And doubtlefs the Holy 
 Ghoft would never in the firft opening of the Go- 
 fpeJ, and encouraging fouls to embrace k t ufe fuch s 
 language and expreltion that might deceive thofe he 
 fpake unto i for what could the Jews imagine or 
 conceive upon fuch a difcovery , but that if they 
 themfelves did repent and were baptized, the pro- 
 mife fliould be the fame in theN. T. to them and 
 their Children , as it was formerly to Abraham, 
 upon hvs believing and being circumcifed 3 to him 
 2lnd his ke&t there being no exprefiion the Jewg 
 were fo accuftqmed to, and more delighted in, died 
 that of theptomife to them and their Children? And . 
 but to mention their Children with the ptoraife, if 
 it was not meant to hold forth that they were ftill its 
 die promife, was fufficient to have deceived thern 9 
 who were never inftrucleil in any other method; 
 
 D Ths 
 
C44J 
 The great defign of the Apoftle was to open the NX 
 promife,and by that to encourage the poor wounded 
 Jews to repent and be baptized : And that they 
 might have no cloud on their apprehenfions, ordif- 
 couragemenr, he utters it xnlingtMvernacuU, in the 
 phrafe the promife was always expreft in the Old Te- 
 ftament. 
 
 4. If the intent of the Apoftle were not to hold 
 forth the fsmeoefs and identity of the priviiedge of 
 the promife to thejews and Gentiles now believing, 
 3s was formerly; he would never have mentioned 
 Children when he mentions Baptifm, and efpecially 
 not in the fame line with the promife made to thePa- 
 rents ; and with one breath exprefs the promife to 
 both* and make that the ftrength of his argument to 
 put them on the pradice of that Ordinance : And 
 doubtlefs it had not been fo candid a way,nor futablc 
 to the fimplicity of the Gofpel, to tell them of their 
 Children, juft when he tels them of being baptized 
 the mfelves; and name them immediatly with the pro* 
 rmtie, if the defign was utterly to exclude them both 
 from the promife and Baptifm. I have been the lon- 
 ger inculcating thefe confederations, becaufe there is 
 much in them, and engaged perfons can (lightly pafs 
 over the rnoft eminent places with a meer glance. 
 
 Ob. But it's objected, That the latter claufe* 
 (ojmav qfAsteti'tTiTctt o x^ei©- ) Js many as the Lord 
 jha/Icail, is a limitation of the verfc,and no more are 
 under the promife j and fo Child ren,if God (ball call 
 them, ftiaii alfo enjoy the promife* 
 
 Sol. 
 
Sol. For anfwer to this Jaft obje&ion, which is the 
 ftrerrgth of their confidence from this place, we muft 
 confider thefe particulars. 
 
 I. That in this verfe you have an exacl diftributiori 
 of the world into Jew and Gentile, according to the 
 ufualdiftributionin other Scriptures; the Gentiles 
 being ufually called thefe afar of ; and the promife 
 equally diftributed among 5 only he adds (as many as 
 the Lord {hall call) to thefe which are afar, as moft 
 proper in that place : but it can in no fenfe be re- 
 ferred to the former part of the verfe, either to Pa- 
 rents or Children : For, 
 
 1. He changes the tenfe in both parts of the verfe/ 
 in the firft part unto the Jews, he fpeaks depr&fenti^ 
 of the prcfent application of the promife; Repent y on, 
 
 and be baptized for the promife u to you and your 
 
 Children ; even now the promife is offered to you ^ 
 and they were then under the call of God •< But when 
 he fpeaks of the Cicntiles,becaufe they were yet afat 
 OfF,and not at all called, he fpeaks defuturo^ as many 
 as God (hall call, even of them alfo ; which is the 
 firftesprefs hint of the catling of the Gentiles m 
 all the Ads of the Apoftles. ^ 
 
 i» How unequal would the diftribntfon be of this 
 verfe, "hot futablc to the laws of exprefsion among 
 rational men? li As many as the Lord Jkall catt \ 
 flibuld b?« limitation to the former pare of the vsrfe. 
 
the word, Children, muft needs be redundant and fu- 
 perfiuous ; for Jews and Gentiles comprehend all 
 the world. Now Children muft either be one pare 
 of the world j or comprehended under one or both 
 names, or be a diftinfl world by themfelvel, neither 
 Jews nor Gentiles : And this muft needs follow on 
 fucha reading of the words*; for thedefigndf the 
 A polite is to hold forth the freenefs of the promife 
 to Jew and Gentile, and their Children ; to thefe 
 Jews at p'refent, to the Gentiles arid their Children 
 when God (hould call the Parents, as he did thefe 
 Jews. Now put Children by themfelves, as a third 
 party , and add whom the Lord Jhall call, and you ex- 
 clude them from being either Jews or Gentile?, and 
 lo excommunicate them from any hopes of calling, 
 or being faved ; Now this is, 
 
 i. Contrary to that known rule in Logick, That 
 Omnii bom diflribttiio debet ejfe bimembm ; only of 
 two members and thefe oppofite one to another 5 to 
 bring in a third mars all. So that it is moft clear,the 
 words muft be nnderftood as they are trarflated^The 
 promife is to you Jews, and your Children at pre- 
 sent, and to thole afar offalio, and their Children, 
 when GQ(hi\\ca8them] t\k calling cm with no 
 fenfe beapplied to any tittle of the formerpartof 
 the verte, without you make it monftrous, and unlike 
 itfelf. 
 
 3. ItVagsinft another rule about diftriWion, 
 
 which 
 
* 
 
 which i$,That Partes Mvifionis ambulent <zqnali pajftt, 
 That the parts of a diftribution fhculd be equally fee 
 together. Now here will be a mighty inequality* as 
 to the communication of the promife ; if the words 
 (hould be taken in their fenfe, the Jews will have a 
 greater priviledgc then the Gentiles, if Children be 
 not equally added to both ; the Jews had the pro- 
 mife made to them and their Children at prefent; 
 thefe afar off (hall only have the promife to thern- 
 felves, but not their Children. 
 
 3 . Confider how comes this word (your Children) 
 to be kept in, for what end and ufe, if it were not to 
 (hew fome fpecial priviledge they have with their 
 Parents, when God cals or converts the Parent ? 
 what (lands it for but a Hone of offence to confeicn- 
 tious hearts ? 
 
 Objection. 
 
 Ail they infwer to this, is, that the Apoftle names 
 their Children to comfort their Parents, becaufe they 
 had wi(hed Chrifts blood on their Children, and io 
 to give them hopes they might yet be faved, if God 
 (hould call them. 
 
 SOLUT ION. 1 
 
 To fee the fad (hifes of errour, is wonderful : Can 
 any man imagine, that the Parents could doubt more, 
 
 D 3 o% 
 
or fo much of their Childrens being accepted and for 
 ved,when God fhould call them who were innocent, 
 and only under the fudden raflicurfeof their Pa- 
 rents, when they faw that the promife was to them- 
 felves, and Chrift offered pardon to themfelves,who 
 were the adual murtherers of the Lord Jefus. 
 
 %. Such a confidcration would rather fadden then? 
 then refrefh them, to mention the calling of their 
 Children ; For they might more doubt of that, then 
 of any thing, whether God would call them or no, 
 and be as far to feek as ever they were,that they would 
 have but cold comfort upon this account ; this was 
 enough to break their hearts if that were in their eye; 
 the old way of conveying the ptomife is cut off, no 
 promife but to called ones ; our poor Children are 
 uncalled, and God knows whether ever they may be 
 called of God : Thus might they reafon : But when 
 he includes them in the fame promife with Parents, 
 and exhorts the Parents to repent, upon this ground, 
 that the promife is to them and their Children ; this 
 favours like a Gofpd-camforting-exhorcation, and 
 could not be but of great efficacy upon their fpirics. 
 
 4» What Qrange myfterious tautologies would be 
 in this one verfe ? if. that Uft fentence fhould refer to 
 all the former exprejfions, we rnuft read it thus to 
 make out their fenfe. 
 
 The promife is to yott Parents of th$ Jews, when 
 
 God 
 
God (lull call you fand they were then under the 
 call) and to your grown Children, when God ftnll 
 call them ; and to all which are afar off, when God 
 (hall call them : Can any man with his underftanding 
 about him think the Holy Ghoft foould faulter (o 
 much in common expreflion of his mind, i%hen there 
 was no need of adding or calling to any part, but to 
 thefe that were afar off, who were never yet under 
 Gods Gofpel call? 
 
 Laftlyi the word,Children,may and muft b$ under- 
 flood of Little Ones,Infants,not of adult and grown 
 perfons, for thefe reafons, 
 
 i. The word here (twois ) properly fignifies an 
 off-fpring, any thing brought forth, though it be but 
 of a day, of a moment old ; Thus when a woman is 
 faid to be in pain,and to bring f orth,this word is ufed > 
 John i6*« 21. Luke.1. 31. Mat. i.t6,Lukei. 57. 
 
 2. It's an indefinite word, and therefore may not 
 be retrained to grown Children, except God had 
 expreft it in a peculiar phrafe. 
 
 3. It muft needs be efpecially meant of Little Ones, 
 becaufethey are diftingui&ed from them felves, who 
 were men of years. Now when we diftinguiih be- 
 tween Men and Children, we fuppofe the one aduk, 
 the other under age,and not grown up* and it is con- 
 trary to all ways of expreflion to think other wife, 
 D4 4. It 
 
4.Xtcarmotbe rationally conjectured otberwife, 
 bccaufethe Apoftle doth joyn them with their Pa- 
 rents in the fame promife, and not leave them to 
 ftand by themfelves, as grown perfons rnult* 
 
 So that all things weighed, this Text of Scripture, 
 jf there were no more, holds forth the famencfs of 
 the promife to Believers of the Gofpel, both Jew 
 and Gentile! and their Children, aseyer it was to 
 nAbrnhAm % and his natural feed. 
 
 e 
 
 HAP, 
 
(41J 
 Chap. VL 
 
 Their great Plea from Mat. j. 8,9. con- 
 cerning John the Baptift'S Speech to the 
 Sharif ees and S adduce s } made <vain ■' 
 and that Text cleared from miftakes. 
 
 TH A T we may dill take off the main QbjeAt- 
 ons, let us view that place fo much flood on, 
 Mat. 3, 7, 8, 9. when lohn /*W «m»jj e//^ Tha- 
 rifees and S adduces come to hii Baptifm t he faith, Q 
 generation of Vipers, Who hath forewarned jou to flee 
 from the Wrath to comet bring forth fruits meet for 
 repentance ; And think^not to fay within your [elves 
 we'have Abraham to our Father ; for Ifaj that God Us 
 $kh of thefe fiones to raife up Children to Abraham: 
 From this Text they gather, that the pretence of be- 
 ing Abrahams Children could not give them aright 
 to Baptifm ; and if John denied Abrahams natural 
 feed on that account, much more would he the 
 adopted Children. 
 
 That this is no fuch ominous place againft Infant^ 
 Baptifm, Confider, 
 
 I. Who they were he fpeaks unto, the Phari fees 
 and Sadduces, men at age, and degenerated from 
 Abrahams faith, perfons that lived on their own 
 works and righteoufnefs ; therefore he cals them 
 
(4«) 
 
 $ovfpctt*lKthav, A generation of Vipers i which 
 was not as they were Abrahams Children,buc a* they 
 had not walked in Abrahams fteps, but were quite 
 degenerated : Thus he did not refufe them beeaufe 
 Abraham was their Father, or upon that account 
 thtt Abrahams feed had not right to thepromife; 
 but as only pretending Abraham to be their Father, 
 when they walkt contrary to the principles of Abra- 
 hams faich. 
 
 2. This is the fame now as to grown vifible Fro- 
 feffors, who have related their faith to the Church, 
 and fo are baptized upon that account of faith, and 
 repentance s yet if afterwards they grow carnal and 
 apoftate,*nd if fuch ftiould come to receive the Lords 
 Supper, and challenge it beeaufe they are baptized, 
 we might fay the fame as Iohnto the Pharifees and 
 Sadduces : Do not chink to fay that you are b*j*tl- 
 zed,or that you ha vs had godly Patents j for you are 
 i generation of Vipet?, you have cut off your own 
 right by contrary actings in your own perfons ; and 
 yet it doth nothing at all impeachthe truth of this 
 pofition, That believers and their Isfants are 01 Co- 
 venanted ongbt to be judged fo until they roantfeft 
 the contrary ; or that if they believed themfelves af- 
 terward* , the promife fhoufd not be unto them and 
 their Children : And that Text holds not no mors 
 then this, That when perfons are grown up to years, 
 andrcome to undemanding, they maft then ftafld oil 
 their right, and loekeomtkeoutpeifonal qaalifict- 
 tions for new Or4minces; 
 
 3i This 
 
f47) 
 3. This was at the firft inftitution of the Or di- 
 nahce, when Baptifm Was newly adminiftred : Now 
 new inftitutions (as before,) require grown perfons, 
 and aftual vifible believers to be the firft fubjecTof 
 them ; they could not baptize their Children firft ; 
 for then the Parents would be neglected $ and the 
 bririging in of a newOrdinance requites renewing of 
 fpecial a&s in thefe which partake firft of it ; as if an 
 old Leafe which is made in the name of a man and 
 his Children, be at fuch a feafon to be renewed upon 
 fome certain terms s the man himfelf muft come, and 
 acknowledge his owning thefe terms, and then it is 
 to him and his, as before : So now in the New ft* 
 (lament God renews the Covenant of Abraham , 
 adds a new initiating feal to it; it was before en- 
 tail'd in fuch a line/which is cut off • it's now of the 
 fame nature, only every one muft come in bis own 
 perfon firft, as Abraham, and enter his own name, 
 and then the promife is to him and his feed : 
 Thus it was in the former place, where when the 
 Jews came to be baptized, they were exhorted firft 
 to repent and be baptized themfelves ; then the pro- 
 mife U tojoH and your Chil&nn : So that this we %(- 
 firm, 
 
 1. That no man muft be baptized, or receive an 
 Ordinance by any fleflhly prerogative ; but where 
 there is an entail of a promife, there is a fpiritua! 
 ground of adminift ration. 
 
 2. That no perfon grown up to years of under* 
 ftanding,hath right to a fealing Ordinance, but upon 
 his own perforsal qualification^' 3, That 
 
M8) 
 
 3. That petfons may have prefent capacities, and 
 vifible right to Ordinances, and yet afterwards jcuz 
 off themfelves, and be found incapable, as Ijhmaeli 
 and here the Pharifees and Sadduces. 
 
 4. That the exception of fomeperfons upon the 
 account of their degeneration, and perfonai defers, 
 doth not hinder but the old priviledges of the pro- 
 mife may be conveyed to thefe which do really em- 
 brace the Gofpet, and to their feed $ all thefe are 
 undeniable in themfelves : And this Text reachethno 
 further then to the exclusion of thefe which hadde- 
 monfirated themfelves to be only the Children of the 
 fteft^andnot of the promife alfo : which is a demon- 
 stration only a pofteriori y from their after actings; 
 and teacheth us that thefe that boaft in outward pri- 
 viledges, without looking after perfonai qualified; 
 ons, and holy frames .within* may be as well judge4 
 carnal, as Heathens and profhane perfgns. 
 
 CffA?« 
 
Chap. VII. 
 
 That fpecial place in x Cor. 7. 14. opened, 
 and argued-, Elfe were your Children 
 unclean, but now they are holy. 
 
 THIS place of Scripture, though it feems to 
 ftand by k felf,yet hath full correipohdence and 
 harmony with all other places in the N. T. con- 
 cerning this truth. As the former did hold forth the 
 promife, the Covenant to Believers and their Chil- 
 dren, in diftinclion from all the world : fo doth this 
 leave a character of fpecial qualifications furable to 
 a fubjecl of fuch an Ordinance; and when the pro- 
 mife and the qualification fhalJ meet together, there 
 is enough for to capacitate to any Ordinance. 
 
 The Apoftle is in this verfe anfwering a fcruple 
 which might arife in the hearts of the Corinthians 
 concerning abiding together of married perfons } 
 the one being a Convert, and a Believer ; the other, 
 whether manor woman, an Unbeliever ; as ic was 
 a common cafe in the Apoftles times, the Husband 
 might be converted, the Wife not ; and the Wife 
 converted, and not the Husband ; the Word work- 
 ing on the one , not on the other 5 this begat a 
 doubt in the believing Party ,whether he or (he might 
 with t good conference live together in that ftate. 
 
 Th§ 
 
The Apoftie anfwers it, ver. U, 13- pofitively, 
 that they oughtnot to feparate, or leave each other, 
 notwthiftanding that the one was an Unbe lever 1 
 Andhegivesin this ver. 14. a ftrong and peculiar ar- 
 gument, which he makes wftar omnium^ for the un- 
 believing Husband is fanftified in the believing 
 Wife,&c. Elfe were jour Children Mclean, but now 
 
 they are holy. .. e . 
 
 The fcopeofthe ADoftle here is to hold forth 
 fome fpecial Gofpel-priviledge annesed to thcfiatei 
 and he frames his argument by no ordinary medium, 
 of the lawiulnefs of the marriage according to a na- 
 tural, moral or poficive rule, but i m*jon, from 
 an eminent advantage they had together in the Oo- 
 fpel : For, A#6 . . 
 
 1. The unbelieving Husband is fanttifted m, or, 
 
 to, or by the Wife. 
 
 2. TheChiidrenin fuchattateareholy,asitthey 
 
 had been both believers. . . pr.A. 
 
 That the Apoftie holds out a Gofpel-puviiedge, 
 not common to meet unbelievers in their marriage- 
 
 ftate, is clear ; . . 
 
 t. Becaulethe Apoftie puts the advantage on the 
 believers fide, and there feetb it ; the unbelieving 
 Husband is ianftified in the Wile, as believing* 
 and fo comrarily , the unbelieving W ifc m Jthe 
 Husband: So Beza affirms, that in two fpecial po- 
 nies he finds the words thus read, ^^%^ 
 i,n3*ityl^: neither can it bold fenfe with the 
 former words but ti thus read > And if it had not 
 
been the Apoftle* proper meaning to fhew the fpc- 
 cial priviledge the believing party hath notwith- 
 ftanding the unbeliever, he would have only faid, 
 the Husband is fanftified to the Wife, and the Wife 
 to the Husband ; that would have been the plaineft 
 and ieaft ambiguous expreffion of fuch afentence: 
 and the Apofte would never have made an argument 
 of four terms, when three could only fatisfie ; for all 
 know, that an argument with four terms is mod de- 
 ceitful and falfe. 
 
 2* The Apoftle doth ufe higher terms and phrafes 
 in this argument, then is ever ufed in Scripture to ex- 
 prefs a meer lawful or common priviledge ; as to be 
 fanilified in the Wife,and the Children to be holy ; 
 expreflions of another dialed: then to hold forth a 
 civil, or natural, or legal conjunction ; being tingled 
 out in Scripture, to hold forth the beft ftate of per- 
 fons and things, in relation to God and his ufe. 
 
 And the Apoftle ufeth two terms, both negative 
 and affirmative ; they are not unclean, but holy ; the 
 opening of the afe of which two words will clear 
 the point under consideration, 
 
 The word here (dndtep™) unclean, in the Old 
 Teftament, is commonly ufed for thofe legal polluti- 
 ons and uncleanneiTes which made men to be fepa- 
 rated from theCongregation, and excommunicated 
 from the priviledge of Ordinances, until they were 
 waihed and fanclified ; Thus in Levn. 5. 2, 3,4. 
 Chap. j. 19.& 14.7, 8. //rf.52.1. H^.2.ij,with 
 many other pkces, where unclean is oppofed to * 
 
 pre- 
 
(5*) 
 
 firefeht futable capacity for Chnrch-privlledges; But 
 hat famous place in Ms. 10. 1 4- (hews it mod cleat 
 what the proper ufe of this word is ; he loynsit there 
 with what is common or prophane : When the v.- 
 fion came to him of eating all forts of Creatures, he 
 faith, Not ft Lord; for Ihave noieattnjnj thmg that 
 iscommJor mclL (W*^ Th«sv.fion was 
 about his going to C«W to open the Gofpel ttf 
 him, and bring him into the Church who was a Gen- 
 tile and fo common and unclean, not fit for Gofpel- 
 tfriviledges, as the lews were thought to be. Now 
 fn a civif fenfe things that are common are not un- 
 clean ; but in a religious fehfc, what is common is ad- 
 judged unclean ; Now Cornell being a Gennle, 
 without the pale of the Iewifo Church, he cak h,m 
 common and unclean.as alt the Gentiles ; were ^efotf 
 they came under the promife ; but God anfwered, 
 What God hath clenfedfit fanned, call not thvcvm* 
 iJ„: Cornell was not a Baftard.no. .unlawfully be. 
 gotten ; but he was not accounted a he m ™bcr,Jhe 
 was without the Church ; therefore the ApoftleaK 
 him common and unclean : l f™.^Z$S*- 
 with the Apoftle here; when he fatch that Children 
 are not unde*«, he mult needs mean they are not of 
 c^mmonufe.brtobe eluded from outward P n- 
 viedeesof the Church : But that is not all, but he 
 pSely faith; they, are fWjl ^i "« gfe 
 
 ufed to eiprefs the Hebrew word ^ ,«h-ch j« 
 lignifies what is $* Dm* aenm^dxihn ^* 
 
An) 
 
 which is appropriated to a Divine ufe ; which Is trie* 
 proper notion of holinefs in the Old and New Tefta- 
 ment, and never taken otherwife : For the proof of 
 which, I have compared above three hundred places 
 in the Old Teftament according to the Septuaginc* 
 and all the N. T. places where the word is ufed. 
 And this all do granr^ even Mt.Tombes himfelf, that 
 the word generally is taken in Scripture to exprefs a 
 reparation of things to God, and he only brings thefe 
 places wherein he thinks there is another ufe of ir 
 I Tim. 4. 5. Every filature of God is good, and not 
 to be refufed, if it be received With thanksgiving ; for 
 it is fanUified by the Word and Prayer (wdtyj ) 
 Hence i faith he, is meant only the lawful ufe ef th$ 
 Creature , in oppofition to what is to be refufedi It is 8 
 wonder,but that God leaves men to blindnefs when 
 they leave truth$how any man of common underftan- 
 ding,finding the Word holy &/d»#*/k<J, always ufed 
 in a religious fenfe, fhould fly to this place to make 
 an exception. The Apoftle faith firft, Every Crea^ 
 ture Which God hath made is good in it f elf, and none to) 
 be refufed : that is, all may be lawfully ufed without 
 any legal pollution, as formerly : But then he goes 
 higher, fpeaking of a religious ufe of outward things^ 
 They are fanned by the VVord and Prayer ; they are 
 ail good, and lawful in their ufe to every man ; but they 
 are only fanttified by thefe holy meatfs y the FTordand 
 Prayer. And he might have as well faid, that the 
 Word and Prayer are not holy means, but only law- 
 ful to bs ufed 3 as that the faaclification which is by 
 E tfef© 
 
(54) 
 
 the Word and Frayer, is to make the Creatures only 
 kvvful to be ufed if a wicked man eat his meat with- 
 out feeking a blefling on it, of giving thanks, will 
 any one fay that he hath not a lawful ufe of the Crea- 
 tue? but any man may fay, it's not farcified to 
 him. The Apoflle in thefe 2; ver. goes ongraditim, 
 by degrees, from a lawful uie to a holy ufe of the 
 Creatures 5 All* good, and may be fifed, but they are 
 fanBifsd by the Word and "Prayer : thus you fee the 
 nature of this priviledged place. 
 
 But the main place Mr. Tombes aliedgeth for ho- 
 linefstobe ufed for what is barely civil or lawful, 
 U that 1 Thef. A- 3 ,4,7- ?** * *he m« of God , your 
 fm^f cation, that you abftain from formcatton, an* 
 Jet every onepoffefs his vejfel in fanttification and ho- 
 nor; ''fir God hath not called M to uncleannefs % but 
 holmtfs. Here mcleannefsutaken^itifotei fir for- 
 nkation.andhotinefs forchaftity. 
 
 To which I anfwer with Mr, Marjbal , That cha- 
 tty among the Heathens is never called ianaifica- 
 tion but among Believers it is, being a part of the 
 new Creation, and one branch and part of then fan- 
 aification wrought by the Spirit or God. And 
 tbouah 'Mr. Tombes faith this isbuc alMt, yet he 
 lm*! fee it demoftfttative, if he obfetve thephrafes 
 in the Text, and the nature of fina»ficatton ; in the 
 3 &i ver. the Aooftie befeechech and exhorteth 
 them to walk as they had received from b'm^to 
 walk* and to fleafe god according to the rules of fejus 
 fhrifti and he urged* ir in ver, the 3; with ch«; 
 
($5) 
 
 h'stbeVoillofGoh even yonr finEiification, thatis^ 
 that yoHfbQHttvedkjnallholinefs, futab/etatheb/ef- 
 fed rules of the gofpel, and as one part and eKpreffiofc 
 of hohnefs,. toabftainfromfin; And he inftanceth 
 fpccialfy in fornication, which was the common and 
 reigning fin among the Gentiles: So that if you 
 view the place you (hill find, That, 
 
 I. Hefpeaksoffanclificauon in genera!, in its full 
 latitude, ver. 3 as futable to ail the will and mind of 
 God ; This is the VeHlof God^venyourfanmjicauoni 
 that is,it is Gods command, and Gods delight to fee 
 you fanclified: then he brings in abftinence from 
 fornication (the fin of the times) as one part of tfiac 
 holinefsGod requires; For fan<Sihcation may b@ 
 considered as it lies in vivification , orinmortifo*/ 
 tion, which for dtftinclions fake we may call the two 
 pares of fanclifkation. Now chafticy in it felf, as in 
 the Heathens and natural men, is not properly a part 
 of fenaification ; fome other tpithite becomes ic 
 better: Would Mr. Tombs call all the abftinencies 
 and admgs of the Heathens by the name of fandifi. 
 cations, and fpeak like a Chriftian and a Divine? 
 Would it be proper to fay in his Pulpitf when he was 
 fpeaktng of the nature of holinefc and chafticy) fan- 
 cied Socwtesfroly Arises} And can he think the 
 Apoftle would exprefs chat which is common among 
 Heathens , in fuch a high Gofpel-dialea as fanclifi- 
 cation is appropriated aiwayes in Scripture to God, 
 Angels, Satncs, and their higheft graces and work- 
 sngv and to things railed above common ufe, de- 
 £ 2' dlcmi" 
 
dilated to God and his fervice, but that he meant it 
 according as the whole tenure of Scripture defines 
 holinefs . ? How much will the phrafe of holinefs and 
 fan&iflcation be debafed and made cormnon, if that 
 fenfe ftiould be admitted, contrary to the Scripture 
 ufe of the Word ? But that is a weak cafe that puts 
 men to fuch extraordinary fhifts to maintain. 
 
 But to go on a little further ; The fame word is 
 ufed-by the Apoftle in all his falutations, and infer i- 
 pcions of his Epiftlcs to all the Churches ; **'f *#**§ 
 to the Saints or holy ones at Rome, at Corinth, Cja- 
 latia % Ephefm , &c. which when appropriated to per* 
 fons, always fignifies a vifible Saint : So here, when 
 he calls Children of believing Parents holy,he cannot 
 but mean they are to be accounted as vifible Saints f 
 until they do profefs the contrary ; and I know no 
 reafon can be given why the meaning of the Apoftle 
 in his Epiftles, when he writes *w*«k*Wj to th* 
 Saints, Qiouid not be as well underftood written 
 only to the legitimate.and thofe that are not baftards 
 at Rome, Corimh % &c as well as for them to inter- 
 pret the farrie word fo in this place : Tor *7<«'i when 
 applied to grown men,mutt (ignifie vifible and Evan- 
 gelical holinefs, and mult be tranflated Saints : but 
 when- applied to Children, it muft only fignifie legi- 
 timacy, that they are not Baftards ; when ail men 
 know, that magis & minmtae* variant f pec iem 5 and 
 the word is of the lame import in every place of che 
 New Teftament. 
 
 Ok If any (hall be fo critical as Mt.Tmfosis , 
 
 to 
 
($7 J 
 to enquire how they can be faid to be holy:what ho- 
 linefs is heremeant,whetherinherenr,or imputative, 
 or vifible > 
 
 Sol. I anfwer , It's a holinefs of fpecial fepara* 
 tion to God, and his ufe, as a peculiar people : Some 
 call it a federal holinefs, from the ground of the pri- 
 viledge ; others an Ecclefiaftical,or Church holinefs, 
 from the account and efteem the Church ought co 
 htveof fuch Children.but the firft more fully anfwers 
 the largeft ufe of the word in Scripture. As for In- 
 fants, 
 
 i. They are capable of inherent holinefs. 
 
 2. They are in Covenants we have proved, and 
 fo have a holy relation on them > 
 
 3. They are capable of feparation to Gods ufe 
 from the womb, and fo of being holy to God. 
 
 4. By the fame reafon we account grown men 
 holy, we may account Infants of believers holy ; for 
 thefe that make a profeffion,may have no inward and 
 inherent holinefs ; and a bare profeffion is not ho* 
 linefs; we only account them holy by a judicious cha* 
 rity • and we are often deceived, and have caufe to 
 repent of our judgements s Infants may be inwardly 
 fanclified, and God hith taken them into the Cove- 
 nant with their Parents, and would have us look on 
 them as ieparated to himfelf; which is ground e- 
 nough to build our charity on, as to efteem them 
 holy, as grown perfons. There is no difference buc 
 this in it ; That concerning the holinefs of perfons 
 at age.we truft our own judgements j and in judging 
 
 £ 1 of 
 
of infants we truft Gods Word, who hath com- 
 prehended them under the promifewith their Pa- 
 rents ; there hath been as many deceits in the event, 
 in oar judgement of thofe of riper years, p in that 
 which is a&ed through a mixture of faith and charity 
 on Infant*. And Gods promife, though never fo in- 
 definite, is a furer ground for hope, then my pro- 
 bable judgement- which is the moft \ can have of 
 the generality of ProfrfTors of riper years. 
 
 j^ But if any one fay further, What is this to 
 Baptifm? here is no mention of it in this place. 
 
 Sol. It's true, baptifm is not mentioned here ; 
 but here is mention of a qualified fubjecl for Baptffm, 
 which is all that is contended for: And if the Apoftle 
 bad faid they were believers, then thefe of the con- 
 trary opinion would conclude, here is enough for 
 Baptifm; but its all one in that he calls them holy, 
 which you fee is more then legitimate; and you may 
 tranflate it with as much propriety, 8lfe were your 
 Children impure, but now t before Saints ; that is, fo 
 to be efteemed through Gods Covenant, as if they 
 had profeffed their own faith. 
 
 Laftly, As k would be moft abfurd to imagine 
 the Apoftle (rioqld ufe a pure religious word to ex- 
 prefs a common and ordinary priviledge : fo there 
 would be no confiderable medium for augmentation 
 in that fenfe^and no fuch force in &#**& (elfe were, 
 &c.) which hath force from the fpecialnefs of the 
 toriviledge to their iffue, not only to be lawfully 
 begotten, as the Children of unbelievers are, when 
 
 lawfully 
 
(59) 
 lawfully married : but to be in a peculiar ftate of fe- 
 parationtoGod, and to be accounted fie members 
 with the believing Parent of the vifible Church of 
 Chrift. 
 
 And what a poor and cold anfwer, as to comfort, 
 would it be, when the believer was fcrupled about 
 abiding with his or her unbelieving yoke-fellow, to 
 tell them,Continue together; for your Children (hall 
 not be Baftards : but how full of ftrength and fweet- 
 nefs muft it be, if taken in the contrary fenfe ? Re- 
 main with your yoke-fellQws, though unbelievers ; 
 they are fandified to you , and you (ball notwfch- 
 ftanding bring forth a holy feed ; a feed of God, as 
 the Old Teftament expreffion ; in Covenant, as if 
 you were both believers ; this founds like a medium 
 mod demonftrative and confolatory , both for fa- 
 tisfaclion and comfort; What plainer teftimony, 
 or fairer character can be written to die w the qua- 
 lification of Infants of believers, then to write them 
 holy, and give them the fame name that is given to 
 Chrift, and Saints in Heaven and Earth ? 
 
 rsn 
 
 . 
 
 E 4 Chap, 
 
 *-ir, ; <* 
 
t Chap. VIII. 
 
 The Harmonie that notable Chapter ,Rom. 
 11. hath with the former Scriptures . 
 the \j y \6] \7> <verfes efpeclally o- 
 peneL 
 
 THAT the Adverfaries of this truth may fee 
 we want not a harmonie of Scriptures to con- 
 firm our judgement, the next place to be considered 
 Ofisthat 3 Rom n.efpecially ver. 15,16 17. of that 
 Chapter; which if well weighed, will demonftrate 
 the holinefs and Church meroberfliip of theChildr^en 
 of believing Gentiles , as much as of the Jews 
 Children that defcended naturally from *Abr& 
 ham. 
 
 The fcope of the whole chapter is to difcover 
 the breaking off, or cafting away of the lewifh Na- 
 tion from being a Church, and the priviledgethe 
 Gentiles get by thi?, & their ingrafting into the fame 
 root; and the promjfeof the reftauration of the 
 lews again, when the fulnefs of the Gentiles ftiould 
 come in; and every one of thefe expreft with va- 
 riety of notions, and interlined with many cautions 
 concerning Gods aclings in this great difpenfation. 
 Concerning the full explication of this Chapter , 
 tylt.Cc£fa$ mdMf< Btxter have done worthily, and 
 
 have 
 
(6t) 
 
 have with much clearnefs argued for Infants Church- 
 memberfhp from ir. I (hall oneiy for methods 
 fake, and your fatisfadtion, open the main and moft 
 controverted terms in this Chapter concerning this 
 fubje^. As, 
 
 1. What this breaking off, or cafting away of tha 
 lews imports, and from what they are broken off; 
 from the vifible or invifible Church, v. 15. 
 
 2. What is meant by the fir ft fruits, and the lump, 
 and the root, and the branches ; and how it can be 
 affirmed , that if the root be holy, fo are the 
 branches, v. 16. 
 
 3. What this ingrafting is, and how the Gentiles 
 are /aid to be ingrafted, and to be partakers of the 
 fatnefs of the Olive, v.17. For the fMt, This cafting 
 off, and breaking off, is not from the invifible, but 
 the vifible Church. 
 
 1. This will maintain falling away from grace, 
 and pleafe the Arminians, the great Enemies of the, 
 Gofpel of free grace : but this the Apoftle prevents, 
 ver. 1,2,3,4,5. by anticipation of that Objection, 
 diftinguifliing the EIe#, and himfelf as one 01 them, 
 from being caft off : I fay then, hath God caft away his 
 people Whom he foreknew ? God for hid. 1 alfo am an 
 I/raelite, &c. If the cafting off meant here was from 
 the invifible Church, then IWand the other Elecl 
 among the Jews were caft off from that Church; but 
 God forbid, faith Paul, v. 5. there is a remnant at this 
 prefent time according to the ele&ion of grace, 
 whereof Pml was one 5 therefore it rauft be from 
 
 . the 
 
{6%) 
 
 the vifible Church they were broken off : But here 
 iht Armenians and Pelagians agree with thefe that 
 are againft Infant-baptifm, as they do in many other 
 opinions. Mr. Tombes hath nothing to fay in his 
 Examenoi Mr. Marfoals Sermon, to avoid this ab» 
 furdity, but only this, pag. 64, 
 
 The meaning is not (faith hz)offome of the branches 
 in the invifible Church\but as When our Saviour Chrifi 
 ufing the fame fwilitude Jays ^q\\ 1 5, 2. Every branch 
 in me not bearing fruit,he taketh tw&y.The meting 
 u t not that any branch in him could be fruit lefi s or tak$n 
 away ; but he calleth that a branch in him t which Wai 
 fo in appearance : fo the slpoftfe Jpeakjng of branches 
 broken of, means it not of fuch m Were truly fbjtut fo 
 in appearance. Thus far he. 
 
 Which is a granting of what he denies ; for to be 
 a branch in appearance,i§ only to he a vifibtebranch; 
 and no branch that \$ meerly in appearance fo, and 
 not realIy,t5one of the invifible Church, nor caj* ever 
 be faid to be broken from it, but only from bis vi- 
 fible ftate which he hath,but £** ****** ) y* i$.i& 
 as a branch in outward priviledges , andfeeming 
 graces. . m^,. - 
 
 2. The breaking off, &c. it was of the Jewifh 
 Nation, of the collective body, though not of every 
 individual, arid therefore it muft needs be from the 
 yifiblc Church ; for as a Nation they were a Church, 
 and the whole Nation was call: away and rejected • 
 pow as a Nation they were not all members 0? the 
 invifible Churcfe, vcr. 7, 8. witk-ver. 17. 
 
 3« ItS 
 
3. Its a vifible breaking off, therefore cannot be 
 from the invifible Church, ver. 3,4, 5. 17,18,19. 
 For as Mr. Baxter well obferves, There can be no vi- 
 fble removing from an invifible term. 
 
 4. Its a breaking off the natural branches, fo he 
 calls the Jews : Now the body of the Jewifh Church 
 were not natural branches in a fpiritual fenfe ; for 
 they believed not as Abraham did ; but only called 
 fo as they were naturally defcended from his ioyns, 
 and were members of the vifible Church, and flift 
 partakers ofthe outward priviledges of theCovenanc 
 made with him : 1 has the Apoftle diftinguiflhech of 
 the body of the JewiOi Nation, Rom. 9. where after 
 he had reckoned up al the priviledges of the Ifraelites 
 in general, ver.4, Who are lfraelhesjofthom pertains 
 the adoption andthe glory, and the Covenant s^&c, ma- 
 king way by this to (hew the fadnefs of their rejecli- 
 on, in ver. the 6. to prevent the fame Obje&ion, the 
 Apoftle in this Chapter faith, They are not all Iirael 
 which are of Ifrael ; that is, not all fpiritual, though 
 all natural branches; and thefe priviledges did vifibiy 
 belong to all. As for that diftinftion of Abrahams 
 being a natural and a fpiritual Father, it may go for 
 currant until they come to apply it, and then it is 
 moft vain ; for all that came from Abraham as a na- 
 tural Father, had a title to all thefe priviledges fore- 
 mentioned , which belonged to the vifible Church 
 until they did degenerate, and call: themfelves out, 
 as Ijhmael and Efau^&c. But of this formerly. 
 
 Laftly 3 If they were broken off from the invifible 
 
 Churchp 
 
f*4) 
 
 Church, it muftbe either from union with Chrift,or 
 communion wirh Chrift and his Spirit; for this is 
 the true definition of the invifibie Church, that in it 
 fouls have real union and commmunion with God in 
 Chrift through the Spirit : but none of the Jews that 
 were broken off had fucha union or communion , 
 and therefore could not be broken off from it : But 
 fo far they may be faid to be brokrn off from the in- 
 vifibie Church , as by remote confequence , as they 
 were excluded from all the means of grace, and the 
 Ordinances ; which are the ufual ways and methods 
 of Ood to bring fouls into communion with him- 
 
 feif. *m: 
 
 a. Let us confider what is meant by the firft fruit*, 
 and the lump,and the root,and the branches : There 
 be many opinions concerning this, efpecially two 
 mud be debated ; fome think it Chrift, 
 E&aliamfkn. as thefe that follow Origen , and the 
 atmraikcm allegorical Fathers : But tha* firftly 
 nefcwpfiDQ- and priraari | y ^ the fi r ft fruiK an( i 
 
 varum no. . . \ 1 L j t. V 
 
 prhm, Orig. tne l um P> and the root, and the bran- 
 ches, cannot be irieaqt Chrift neither 
 perfonally not myftically, is mod: clear if we con- 
 sider, 
 
 i. Iefus Chrift was not the firft fruits in regard 
 of the whole lump of the Icwifh Nation,and fo can- 
 not anfwer to the firft fimilitude. 
 
 2. Iefus Chrift cmnot be Taid to be root unto 
 thefe which were caft away ; no branches really in 
 him arecut off, but fo were they; for that place of 
 
 the 
 
(65) 
 
 the 15. of Jdhn, ver. 2. which feemeth tofpeakof 
 fome branches which are in Chrift, and yet are taken 
 away for not bearing fruit : it may be better read , 
 and according to the Syriackj thus ; Every branch 
 that brings not forth fruit in me, he takes aVvay j that 
 is,that do bring forth fome kerning fruit, but not as 
 in Chrift as root and principle. 
 
 3. In ver; 24. the lews when they fhall be called* 
 its faid, They {ball be graffed into their own Olive: 
 Now Chrift is not properly their own Olive, but fo 
 is Abraham, &c. 
 
 4, T4ie lews are laid (as formerly ) to be rja* 
 tural branches of this root, but fo they were not of 
 Chrift ; but Chrift was a natural branch from that 
 ftock, Rom.9.$. tvhofe are the Fathers } of Whom as 
 concerning the fie Jh Chrift came. 
 
 Mr. Tombes himfelf ingenuoufly confelTeth this < 
 page 67* of'his&Mxff**, That by the root cannot be 
 meant £hrift ; and gives us the hint of another ar- 
 gument from thofe expreffions, v.24. of fome bran- 
 ches, wild *? &w 3 according to nature ; and of in- 
 grafting in, *k£.$vn9 t contrary to nature^ into this 
 OJive ; he concludes the root cannot be Chrift : for 
 Chrift bath no natural or preternatural branches in 
 him ; all are wild ere they be ingraffed into him as s 
 living root : And the other expreflion , v. 1 8. of 
 our not bearing the root* but the root us, if we boaft 
 againft the lews, doth evidently demonftrate, thac 
 the root here is not properly meant of Chriftjthough 
 he bg the eternal root of all fpiricual happinefs* 
 
 f?t 
 
(66) 
 
 fee forth gloriouily in many other places of Scrip- 
 ture. 
 
 Others by the root mean the Covenant : But the 
 bell and moft genuine fenfe is to interpret ic of Abra- 
 ham ; with whom, and with his feed, as To many 
 bianches,che Covenant was made ,and by which both 
 the root and the branches were made holy : And 
 this anfwers fully to both the fimiiitude? . For? 
 
 j. It's an dilution to the Legal rights about the 
 fiift fruits which were to be offered up to God ; and 
 by that all the whoie rnafs, all the fruits that came 
 after were accounted holy: Thu> Abraham was the 
 firft fruits of che jews : he believing firft, and being 
 in Covenant, aii che lump^ the whole body of the 
 Jewiih Nation were taken in to be a Church, and 
 were accounted holy. 
 
 ?. As a root it anfwers to him from whom all 
 the jews (prang up, and from whom they drew all 
 their Church pnviledges, as their breath; Thus the 
 Lend by the Prophet in J fa. 51=1, 2. bids the Jews 
 to lopbi to the rock^ont of which they Vvere hewen, and 
 the pt cut of which the) were digged : he means it of 
 jtf&r&baw&t&i as appears by the iecond verfe^ Look^ 
 to Abraham your Father^ and to Sarah that borcjou ; 
 for I called him alone \and blejfed and increafed hiwfitQ* 
 
 Qb« But what kind oi onfequence isthis? and 
 how doth the A pott k make u(e of this ? // the firft 
 ffms bs hly y fo id the lamp j and if the root b* holy, 
 fo are the branches i Ftom what prktcpk doth the 
 Ap*>$)e ar$ue ?' 
 
 Sol 
 
(&7) 
 
 Sol. Tfae Apoftte in the former verfe fpeaksof 
 a receiving in again of the Jewifh Nation,and brings 
 in this as a ground to hope for it, There is yet a holy 
 root Which hath an influence on the brunches ; andar* 
 gneu that if the root be holy, When the branches broken 
 off [ball be re-ingraffedjhey /hall be holy likitoife* The 
 like phtafe you have in v.28. As touching the Gofpel, 
 they are enemies for your fake 5 but as touching the 
 JEletlion, they are beloved, A* w>* »»7»#tf, for their 
 Fathers Jake; G W having focafl his EleElion^ as to 
 run in that vein mofi eminently : And forne do render 
 it, They are beloved through their Fathers : But this 
 is clear ; 
 
 1. That Abraham, or as Tome fay, Abraham , 
 Jfaac and Jacob were the root. 
 
 2. That he argues from the hoiinefs of the rooty 
 totheholinefsof the branches: that is, from them 
 as Parents, to their pofterity as Branches. 
 
 3. That this was an ufual and common principle 
 of arguing in Scripture, from the Parent to the Po* 
 fterity ; for elfehe had fpokenin the dark, and had 
 proved notum fer ignotins^ if they could not uni- 
 verfally reafon fromlt ; and if you obferve,he writes 
 it as an Axiom of the greateft demonftration % and 
 never (lands to prove it further, 
 
 4. It had been an argument of no force for to 
 prove the calling in of the Iews,and their happy ftate 
 upon re-ingraffing, to tell them, If the root be holy^ 
 fo are the branches ; and they are beloved for the F&* 
 tbersfake , if there were not a virtue ftill in the root 
 
 to 
 
(62) 
 to derive holinefs to them, when they fhoufd be re- 
 ceived in, and ingraffed to their own Olive ; he Jays 
 ail the weight on the root,being ftill holy and frefh, 
 chough the branches be broken off. And what can 
 you make of this as to argumentation ? If the root be 
 holy % Ergo the branches \ and apply it to PerfonSj 
 and Parents jbuc in a moral and imputative confedera- 
 tion. 
 
 Ob. But holinefs is not propagated by nature,, 
 from the Parent to his Child ; and we all derive fin 
 by nature from our Parents; and are, as the Apoftle 
 faith, Eph. 2.2. by nature the Children oflfrrath, &c. 
 and as David fakh, Conceived in Jin, 
 
 Sol. 1 • It's true, we are (0 ; and there is no ho- 
 linefs propagated by nature, take it for internal ha- 
 bits 5 as a wife man doth not convey his wifdom, 
 or a venuous man his venues to his Chiid,neither carr 
 a Believer convey hisfairhand other graces to his 
 Child ; and in this fenfe Abraham is not a roor^he 
 begets no believer; and under thisconftderacion the 
 argument cannot bold j Abraham in this fenfe is 
 only a root, ■&&&*yp*iuu»s ^exemplary only $ Chrift 
 IS fcrtfta**ftj| efetlaally , to convey (itn-Uar graces : 
 Bur, 
 
 2. There is a holinefs by gracious eftimationoc 
 imputation, which flows from Gods Covenanr, or 
 fome fpecial privi ledge given to fuch a ftoek, or kin- 
 dred, or Nacion 5 God taking fuch a family* fuch a 
 (lock, znd feparates it to Ikhtifclf for fome holy ufe, 
 and fobkffcth them: And thus k was with Abra- 
 ham. 
 
<6 9 ) 
 bsm, and is molt common in the Scriptures, and ac- 
 cording to the nature of privileges among men i 
 where the fon <&f a Freeman is free, and the fon of 3 
 Nobleman a Nobleman * and by way of allalion 5 
 ( though it doth not hold in all particulars) as in ju- 
 stification, Ghrifts righteoufnefs is imputed, and we 
 accounted holy by it : So as to fome fpecial privi- 
 ledges, the root, the Parent being holy, and in the 
 Covenant, his Child hath the advantage oi it ; not 
 meritorioufly from the Parents faith, but virtually 
 through Gods gracious promife to the Believer and 
 his feed. But, 
 
 3. This is not by natural generation, for then k 
 ftiould be to all Children; but by grace and pre- 
 portion 5 its Gods good pleafure thus to derive the 
 priviledge, and out of fpecial refpeft to the Parents! 
 and to encourage them in their own faith , and 
 ftrengthen them in their hopes concerning their ktdi 
 thus did God choofe out Abraham and his family 
 from all the world, and bleffed him ; yet it was noc 
 from nature his ktd were more bleffed then all the 
 world beddes. But as Dr. Willet faith well on thrs 
 place, The branches are holy becaufe ef this holy root 5 
 not fa an aEtnal and inherent holinefs^ but by a pre- 
 rogative of grace grounded on the promife efGod made 
 to Relieving Fathers and their feed ; Which is the fame 
 in the New Teftament as in the Old ; and in this fenfe 
 the argument is Ctrong, and enforcing the fcope ok 
 cheApoftle. So that though the generation .be na- 
 suraljthe derivation of a Title to Church priviledges. 
 
(7*) 
 5 nd the characleriftical note of holinefs is given them 
 by grace in the Covenant,which takes in the branches 
 ivuh the root. In no fenfe befidescsn this argument 
 be true, without you make the rootChrift: which 
 you fee cannot be meant in this place without great 
 abfurdities. 
 
 The third and fpecial term to be opened, is, wha* 
 rhising^ffingisof the Gentiles into the root, and 
 how they are ingraflfed ? v. 17, 19, 
 
 For the underftanding{>f this, Mr. MarfiaHhmh 
 laid down a fare pofition, which neither Mr.Tombes, 
 Who is the mo ft learned Adverjary of this Truth, nor 
 any other hath or can (hake ; and that isjTkat them- 
 ^raffing in of the Gentiles muft be fut Able to the break- 
 ing off the J eves ; as they were broken ojf,fo are We in- 
 graffed : This the Apoftle clearly proves in every 
 tfeiie.In v Ay. Thou being a Voilde Olive, fpeaking of 
 the Gentiles collectively confidered, wert ingrafted, 
 h&vTzit^ lYiyamongHthem 3 fo Grotius trarvftates it, 
 Pofitus es inter ramos illius arboris. Thoaart fee a- 
 rnong the branches of that tree ; and fo referring to 
 the ftrft words of the verfe, which is implyed, that 
 fome remained ftill ; for bu: fome of the branches 
 were broken crT, and the Gentile- believers were in- 
 oculated among them , and by a fpecial adoption 
 were partakers of the fame priviledges 5 according 
 to that of the Poet Ovid 4 . 
 
 Venerh infitio : fa ramtsm^ ramus adoftet, 
 
 Bm the beft referenceis to the former part of the 
 
 verfei 
 
wife* as it fpeaks of thefe branches wh<eh were bro- 
 ken off; the believing Gentiks were ingraffed* 
 ( w a'w) chat is, as 2fc^<aand the ^W^trantlatef 
 it,praipfis, for them, that is, i* ramorum defraUonm 
 locum, in the room or ftead of the branches which 
 were broken off; they were taken away, we ingraf- 
 fed ; Others cranflate \x,cum illts, with them, which 
 remained when we were inferced : but either inter- 
 pretation will become the fenfe of the place. 
 
 Now the reafons which flow from this Test con- 
 cerning the fubjeel which we have in hand, may be 
 eafier flighted then anfwered : This pofition being 
 laid down, We believingG entiles are ingraffed into 
 Abrahams Covenant, in the room of the natural 'bran- 
 ches Which Were broken ojf: Now 3 
 
 i. The Jews and their children were Broken off 
 from the Church, their children bdng members as 
 well as the mfelves; therefore believing (gentiles and 
 their children are ingraffed in, the ingrafting in is 
 finable to the breaking off : they have nibbled abpue 
 this reafon ; but the beft of the Adverfaries have 
 never iai'd any thing yet , as to fatishe a rational 
 Sainr.i^rij 
 
 2. Some branches were not broken off ,• for fo. Its 
 implyed 9 in that he faitb a If fame were broken off- 
 and if they were not broken off, then not their 
 children ; for ic was not only a breaking off per- 
 Tonally, but of fucceffion,and of their poftericy witfi 
 themfelves ; Now if we be ingraffed among chefe^ 
 otwitfuhsfe that are not broken off, we and our 
 
 t i CUMku 
 
(7*) 
 CrTifdren mutt iikewife be ingrafted in; elfe there 
 will be a fchifm between J< w and Gentile, in en- 
 joying the pnviledges naturally flowing from the 
 fame root : No man will be lo bold as to fay, chit 
 the believing Jews were broken off$ and if not they, 
 then not thd Children which were then Infanrs, 
 and had not afhd unbelief : For either they muftbe 
 broken off for their own fins, or their Fathers ; not 
 for their Farhers, for fomc of them were believers , 
 and not broken off$ not for themielves, for fome of 
 them were Infancy therefore fome Infants were not 
 broken off ; for their Fathers continued in the faith $ 
 and we believing Gentiles are ingrsffed in among 
 them $ therefore our Children alio. 
 
 3. In the latter end, when the Jews fhall be in* 
 graffed in again to their own Olive, which is pro- 
 rntfed in ths Chapter, they and their Children (hall 
 t*e taken m,v.26. And fo all Ihzd/hallbefaved ; and 
 cur ingrafting »o is ffiill iutabla to theirs. 
 
 4. The Gentiles are faid to partake of the root, 
 and the fatnefs of the Olive tree 5 in the tame verfe .• 
 this (^vfyJomnsfpitys) fignifles the full participa- 
 tion and fellowfhip in all the pnviledges and advan* 
 tegeWftferoor, as the lews had. Nowiheirpii- 
 vtlejge was not perfonal co chemlclvts, but to their 
 p< ILnry , and therein lay the a nets of tnar Olive, 
 in he 'Ulnelsand large ext^n of it< pnviledgeand 
 ferninal verrue, char, k corr.prenendtd Parent and 
 Ch>ld. So hf a* the lews catting off was not only 
 pcrional, but Politique* that is, of them and theirs 3 
 
 fo 
 
fo our ingraffing in their room is • and as they had 
 the farnefs of the root and Olive once, fo have we I 
 Now we could not be <aid rp be, ( ^hotvovU # l\^ y 
 %£mhn\&'%\h9ii£) To haze a mutual felIoVefhip 
 with the Jews m the root and fatnefs of it , if w be 
 orly perfonally ingraffcd,and they and theirs brokin 
 off economically $ if there be a fellowfhtp, itmuft 
 be at lead in fubftantials : And this was the moll: 
 eminent and fubftantial privilcdge of the lews, that 
 they and their pofterity were taken into the fame 
 Covenant:The Apoftle opens this further in 276.3. 6. 
 And efpecially, if we remember, that their break- 
 ing off, and our ingraffing, is into the vifible Church, 
 as is formerly proved, and muft needs be granted ; 
 for all that were broken off , were not broken off 
 from election, and the invisible Church ; neither are 
 all the Gentiles which are ingrafted in, elected, and 
 really of the invisible Church. So that the refultts 
 this ; 
 
 1 . That there is a real ingraffing of the believing 
 Gentiles into the fame root from which the unbelie- 
 ving lews were broken off. 
 
 2. This breaking off was from the vifible Church, 
 and its priviledges, not from the in vifible j io is the 
 ingraffing of us into the vifible Church. 
 
 3 . Aa th^ir cafting out was of chem and their po- 
 fterity, fo is our grafting in of us and our Children • 
 Thefe conclufions flow nacurally from the Tex: ; and 
 all other deductions will be but as dregs after the 
 fpirits are exuafied* 
 
 4. And 
 
r?4; 
 
 4. And to add to the reft this confederation , 
 That if the pofterity of the Gentiles be not taken ih s 
 *s the Jews were, there will be the greateft inequa- 
 lity of the communication of the fatnefs of the root 
 that can be imagined; and the Jews may rather 
 boaft againft the believing Gentiles,?hen theyagainft 
 them • feeing the root conveyed privileges tothem 
 $nd their pofterity, but only perional priviiedgesco 
 she believing Gentile • to the oneadouble mercy, 
 £0 the other only a (ingle. 
 
 Ob. But this great Objection may be made •; Mb 
 believer is now a root $3 Abraham, he is but only a 
 branch y and therefore its not to be conceived how 
 It can be argued from this to evety believer, Iff the 
 root be holj^fo are the branches^ as it may be to Abra* 
 bam. 
 
 Sol. It's granted, every believer, nor any, cannfct 
 properly be called the root, as A,brah#w. Was* and 
 snaftridfenie : Yet, 
 
 1, They are ingrsftVd into the fame root, -and 
 convey the faftie priv ledges vo their branches, H 
 if^c % and facob 3 and the twelve Tnbes'did toctoetr 
 poftericier. who were not property nor absolutely 
 the root, but branch-:* oi it ; and we sll know, that 
 a Slip well inoculated or ingrafted, becomes after- 
 wards a natural branch ; and receives as much from 
 £he root, as thefe wh'ch gre& nacuialiy On it : So 
 lEhac its as ftrong to argue on the Gentiles fide after 
 Ingrafting 3 // the root be holj^ fo are the brattchei.; 
 a$ from Abraham to the Jews, who were natural 
 
 branches 
 
f75) 
 
 branchcsjAs an adopted fonjhim and his have as full 
 a title to the inheritance as a natural fon. 
 
 There is only this difference between the convey- 
 ance of priviledges of the Jews as natural branches ,' 
 and the ingrafted Gentiles ; That fhe whole body 
 of the Jews, good and bad, were called branches; 
 now only Believers of the <j entiles jWho are called by 
 theGofpel, with their children, are ingrafted into 
 that root. 
 
 2. Though every Believer is not the proper root, 
 but only a branch of that root 5 yet for being in- 
 grafted, he is naturalized as the Jewifh branch, and 
 fo muft have the fame privi ledge. 
 
 3. There are branches of branches; and the poor- 
 est branch hath fome twigs, and fpteading fprigs 
 growing from them which are of the fame confidera-' 
 tion, and do receive of the fatnefs of the root as well 
 as the main branches ; and in this fenfe every branch 
 may be faid to be the immediate root of the lefler 
 twi£s; Thus believers ingrafted into the root, are 
 holy, and their Infants that are branches of the 
 branches immediatly fprouting forth from rhem,aie 
 holy alfo,and under the fame confederation ; and the 
 argument holds dill for the ingrafted branches, as 
 for the natural. 
 
 And as Mr. Blake faith well, The branches of An* 
 cefiors are roots ofpofterity ; being made a holy branchy 
 in reference to their iflue jhey become a holy root. This 
 might be much more enlarged , but that I would 
 not be voluminous 5 its enough that believers are 
 
 F 4 ingrafted 
 
(16) 
 jngraffed with cheir Children into the fame roor, « 
 is formerly proved. 
 
 And then the argument holds firm,T hat thefe that 
 lire in the roo^routt partake of the fatnefs of it 5 and 
 ehey which are ft\ the Coyenant,cinnoc be denied the 
 ptiviledges of it. 
 
 Ghab. IX. 
 
 Wherein Mr. T ombes his eight Arguments 
 in his Apology agamft AfhMarfhal;, 
 
 for the tngrafjing injnentioned v. 17 . to 
 he of the Gentiles into the in^vijihle 
 fhw ch hy election and jawing faith ] are 
 
 examined and anfwered. \ 
 
 >5tff 
 
 npHE great endeavor qi thefe who are of the 
 A contrary opinion in opening this Chapter, is, 
 Toprovetharihe insffrMfttg of the Gentiles into the 
 root is by election and faving faith , and fo in r o the 
 jnviGble Church j for they fee their cafe is in hazard 
 if itfhouldbe meant of the viable Church: And 
 therefore,though enough be fpoken before to prove 
 what we affirm ; yet becaufe hdz.Tombes hath laid 
 down eight Arguments with (omuch confidence on 
 
 the 
 
(77) 
 theotherflde as unanswerable ; I think it riot ami fs 
 to beftowone Chapter in rhe difcovery of the un- 
 foundnef&of hisreaions, that the truth may have a 
 fairer pafTage into your understanding without 
 clouds or demurs. 
 
 His firft reafon is, Apologie />. 71 . That ingrafting 
 'tyhtch is by Cjods fole poVeer , tt is into the invifibh 
 Church : but fo is the ingrafting of the Jews, ver. 3. 
 Ergo. For god is able tp graft them. 
 
 SoL 1. As to argue from Gods power to his will, 
 is always unfound in Divinity and in Reafon; God 
 is able, therefore he will : So, 
 
 2. To argue from power to ekclion, is of the 
 fame nature ; for election is feldom or never at- 
 tributed to Gods power, but to his will or good 
 pleafure. 
 
 3. To argue from Gods power in general, to 
 the putting of it forth abfoluteiy in fuch a determi- 
 nate ad, is as ltrange ; God is able to grarT them in, 
 Ergo it muft be into the invisible Church 5 as if God 
 flhewed nothing of his power, but in the workings 
 of faving grace ; efpecially if we confider what a 
 power it is, and only from God : But to take the 
 very prejudice the lews have even from the letter of 
 the Gofpel to bring them but to confefs Chrilt,after 
 fo long a darknefs, as it was in the beginning of the 
 Gofpel i but to make the Gentiles but outwardly 
 own and profefs the Gofpel, andyec not members 
 
 of 
 
(78) 
 
 of the invifible Church; to tike away the very 
 grofnefs of natural! darknefs and ignorance , is a 
 work of mighty power; And to an outward con- 
 verfion, where perfons have been long under the 
 power of darknefs, there needs the fole power oi 
 Cod. 
 
 4. The Apoftle may well put in rathet Gods 
 power then his will, when he fpeaks of the ingrtffing 
 in of the Jews 5 for it will require an a& of power to 
 gather them but vifibly oncaagain, and bring them 
 into one entire body to make a vifible Church,when 
 they are (o Scattered up and down all Nations ; and 
 at fuch a diftance one from another, that it is as the 
 gathering of the bones of dead men ; and fo its 
 likened to the refurredion from the dead, v. 15. So 
 that we need go no further to enquire why their in- 
 graffing (hould be attributed to Gods power, feeing 
 there is need enough of a Divine power but to ga- 
 ther them together from the four winds, to make a 
 collective body, and fo to be a vifible Church. 
 
 Befides, when the Apoftie fpeak; of power ia 
 working of faving faith, hedoth put other Epithites 
 to fct k forth : and not only barety fpeaks of power 
 which God puts forth in all afh,but exceeding great* 
 nefs of power, Eph, 1.21,21. 
 
 Arg^ a. His fecond Argument is, That ingraffing, 
 Which u called reconciliation, oppofite to cafiing dtoay % 
 that is bj eleUion anA giving faith 1 bnt fo it-the m*. 
 ^v.15. 
 
 Sol 
 
(79) 
 
 SoL If he means reconciliation in the ftritTefl: 
 ferife, as it denotes pardon of fin?, and being made 
 friends witk God by Chrifts attonement and me- 
 diatotfihip : which muft be his fenfeif he fpeaklike 
 himfelf : Then many abfurdities may follow. 
 
 i. That the Jews and their rejection was the 
 ground of the Gentiles reconciliation unto God. 
 
 2. That no reconciliation was obtained for the 
 Gentiles before the lews were broken off. 
 
 3. That thofe which are reconciled, and their fins 
 pardoned, may be caft off- for fo were the lews ; and 
 the Gentiles threatned with the fame mifery on the 
 fame ground, v. 20. 
 
 4. As there is external and eternal falvation fyo- 
 kenof, 1 Tint. 4. jo. fo there may be an outward 
 and inward reconciliation ; the Gentiles were caft 
 out from the vifible Church for fo many hundreds of 
 years, without any hope or promife, *An& ftr anger $ 
 to the Commonwealth of Ifrael, Efbef.i.xi ,12. and 
 fo vifibly caft off; and it was a great reconciliation 
 but to break down the middle wall of partition be- 
 tween lew and Gentile, as to vifible priviledges and 
 Ordinances: And foby the reconciling the world may? 
 be mote properly meant the bringing them in under 
 the means of the Gofpel, and the outward difpenfa* 
 tions of the Church 5 which is Gods common wsy 
 and method of falvation ; and which to fome is real 
 arid effectual unto inward grace, unto others only to 
 outward priviledges. 
 
 And the very phn-fe^tfc reconciliation of the Vvorld^ 
 
 to 
 
(So) 
 to Orthodox ear*, deafens and dafhe th the other in- 
 terpretation ; for the body of the Gentile. world 
 ( which he mean ) are nor fo reconciled as by ext- 
 ern and favim; grace- though the found of theGoipe: 
 hath gone through all the world. 
 
 Ob. 3. Thirdly faith he, the in?raffing mud be 
 meant of th*t aft whereby the branch /Und* m theJree 
 as a branch: but that is by giving of faith. The minor 
 ^P^vedalfo v.20. they Veere broken off by unbelief, 
 and We ft and b) faith, &c. . J ' 
 
 Sol. Irs true, the ingrafting is by fa th, as their 
 creaking off was by unbelief : but as their unbtl.ef 
 was (hewn in a publquerejeaionof the GofpeJ,ind 
 by k they and their Children were broken off fo 
 the Gentiles are ingraffed in by pub] ique prof eflion 
 Of faith, and acceptation of the Golpel for chem- 
 ielves and thetr Children ; and this rnuft needsbe the 
 Apoltfes meaning : For, 
 
 i. Ver.iS. He bids the Genriies not to boaft a- 
 gainfr the branches that were broken off. Now how 
 could they boaft againft them but for vifiblepr ivi- 
 ledges ? invifible, are out of cognizance to others : 
 Do Saints boal> againft one another for election and 
 reprobation? chefe fecre.s of- the Almighty : This 
 Argurnen: Mri?^^urgeth with much advantage, 
 in his Book. * l 
 
 2. Inp.rp. he explains further what the nature of 
 their boafting might be 5 . thou wilt (ay/The branches 
 
 were 
 
 I 
 
were broken off, that I might be ingraffed : nowcm 
 *riy man conceive they fhould boaft: bccaufe the bran- 
 ches the Tews were broken from election and true 
 faith, char they might begraffedin by a new a£ of 
 Gods election, and by true and faving faith I So in 
 /er 20,21,22,23. he exhorts the Gentiles to look, 
 o their flanging, and to t*k* heed left the; be broken 
 yff alfo ; For if God fpared not the natural branches 
 ire, much lef will he /pare thee : What, are they 
 shorted to look leaft they be cut off from Gods 
 jle**ion &c? Will Mr.Tombes turn a downright 
 Arminian that he may have any plea againft the ba- 
 pcizmg of poor infants/ 
 
 * There is a twofold way of ingraffing, either by 
 jpintualimplanrationintoChrift, or by vifible pro- 
 ^efljon of tairh ; aad both thefe ihould meet in one 
 perfon, rhowgh they may alL be feparated ; a vifibla. 
 Profcffor may noc have faving faith within, yet may 
 bave t So here, the ingrafting in is into the vifible 
 Church by v.iiblc profeflion; among which fome arey 
 orne are not in vifible members;but the very terminus 
 ^f ingrafgng is not into the invifible, but the vifible 
 Church,- fur neirhc r rhc Apottle, nor an Angel could 
 fell who were ingraffed into the invifible Church,nOE 
 yho broken off , buc only from the vifible Church* 
 trft as the^ proper term, and then by confequencg 
 From the invifible ; for from this Church none were 
 ibfolutely broken off that ever were in, and into it 
 few ingrafted. 
 
 So that' if theingraffingbe vifible, the term muft 
 
 be 
 
be viable alfo ; but the ingrarnag is viftale, &£* the 
 term is fo : This is according to MtTombes his own 
 form of argumentation, from the term to the in- 
 grsffing ; the major is proved before. 
 
 Ob. Fourthly, That ingraffng is meant y v. 17. 
 Whereby the wild OUve is wpar taker of the root and 
 fatnefs of the Olive ; hut fitch is only eleclion and fa- 
 ying faith; he proves the minor, by diftinguifrung 
 who the root is, which he well affirms to be ssibra- 
 ham. 
 
 SoL To wrficrt there needs no other Anfwer then 
 what Mr Blake hath given him < If the root be Abra- 
 ham, arid the in gracing in be only by e left ion 9 and deri- 
 vation of faving graces ( whi» ;:h he means by the fat- 
 nefs of the Olive) then it muft be that wears all 
 ehbl in Abraham as a common root • Abraham may 
 fay. Without me you can do nothing. 
 
 To which Mr.Tomkes only 3niwers by confeflion, 
 That it wsuld follow tf he made Abraham a root m 
 Chtift, communicating faving faith : Butlmakth- 
 br ahara a root as the Father of Believers , not by be* 
 getting faith 7 but as an exemplary caufe. How poor 
 an evsfion is (his of lo confident a man in his opinion, 
 I iubroix to judgement. 
 
 Let him mind his Argument, and the force of it r 
 That txgraffing is meant whereby the wild Olme is 
 pari/ik^r of the fatnefs of the root % but that is$nly 
 MeFtioti tifid f&ving. gr$c$j &§* 
 
C8 3 ) 
 
 t. Were not the natural branches which were 
 broken off partakers of the fatnefs of the root ? and 
 were they all elecled and partakers of faving grace*, 
 or outward priviledges only?and why then (houidtc 
 be thought abfurd for the Gentiles by ingrafting to 
 partake of the fatnefs of the root only in outward 
 priviledges, feeing it was fo with the natural bran- 
 ches, and they all grow on the fame root ? 
 
 2. The old abfurdity will arife Hill from this , 
 That Saints may fall away from eleUion and faving 
 grace. 
 
 3. How can he imagine Abraham to be the root, 
 and the fatnefs of the root to be ektlion and faving 
 graces , and chat engrafting the way of being co- 
 partakers with the root, and yet deny Mr. Blake s 
 Argument, Thai We are eleUedin Abraham ? 
 
 1 . Its improper to call a root an exemplary caufe ; 
 there is no harmonie between them ; an example 
 cooveyes nothing * here is a conveyance of fat- 
 nefs. 
 
 2. How unfutable to good language is it to fay, 
 That luch are partakers of the fatnefs or fulnefs of 
 an example > can we think the Apoftle would fo fas 
 over* reach? 
 
 3. Were the lews partakers of the fatnefs of A, 
 braham in the Covenant 3 meerly as from an Exempla- 
 ry caufe ? had not they it from him as a natural Fa- 
 ther, God making the Covenant with him and his 
 feed ? and do not inguffed branches afterwards be- 
 come as natural ? 
 
 He' 
 
(84) 
 He only adds, p.7$. That if it were meant of out- 
 toard priviledges, it V?£re falfe • fur the Cj entiles 
 Were not partakers of the outward priv Hedges ^Abra- 
 ham. 
 
 Sol. ^Abraham is a root in the New f eftament as 
 well as in the Old, and ftill (lands by virtue of the 
 Covenant to Believers and their Children: And 
 though Old Teftament Ordinances were taken away 
 with the lews, and that Church ftate, yet the root is 
 not taken away$ but the New Teftament priviledges 
 grow on the fame root ; and our ingrarling in gives 
 us to be pattakers of the facnefs of them, as we Has 
 it gave to the lews the participation of former pri- 
 viledges until they were broken off. 
 
 All the reft of his Arguments are much of the fame 
 natsre j only a touch further of each of them. 
 
 Ob. 5. From v. 25. If the breaking offthe.fews be by 
 blinding, then the ingraffing is by giving faith ; but the 
 former is true, fo the Utter* 
 
 Sol. This is the fame in cffetl, with the. third Ar- 
 gument : Yer, 
 
 , 1 There is not the famereafon, feeing He takes 
 it of giving faying faich ; their blinding was judicial* 
 apunifh'nunt lor their unbelieving, rejecting of the 
 Gofpel,though they had not faving faith to embrace 
 the Gofpel 3 the giving of laving faith is not on 
 fneh terms j neither is faving fairh fo abfolutely 
 
 antecedent 
 
( K ) 
 
 antecedent to make a viran a member ofthe viflbte 
 Church, as blinding is to Gods hnaf rcjefliofi. 
 
 2. Blmdnefs came btr inpan'on Ifrael ■ it fell 
 Onely on rhe meerv.fibjr members, not the inv<(ible 
 and cleft : therefore the ingraffin^ muft be onely of 
 vifible members into che v Wok tStoiA, v. 7 The 
 elcaion hath obtained ft- buc the rctt were 
 blinded. 
 
 ATg.6jfrt-i*gr4ffing of the Jem pofoceth frf- 
 vatton, u by tuning them from their in am t), &c. 
 then it u to the inmfible Church : but fo it U; V.26V 
 *7- Ergo. ' ' 
 
 a ft£ r T ° which r § ive thJs fai r Anfwer , That 
 doubdefs according to chofe romifeswhen the Tews 
 Oia be called in to be a vifible Church again, there 
 (bill be abundance of more glory be brought in with 
 them, then ever yet the w<>rJd faw 5 and the new 
 Heavens and the new Earth,the coming down of the 
 
 new Jer*fatem % *nd all chdft- glorious things are firted 
 
 to fall in with that time. And from thefe confiders- 
 
 tionsmany do interpret v 26. h.*i\\ h Atififi*ll' 
 
 all lfraei be faved. But yet, 
 
 1 They (hall be ingrsfled in as a vifible Church i 
 
 elie <L*f£rrfWand the Fathers would never be men- 
 
 tioned as roots. 
 2. Hfey (hull be ingraflcd in as they were bro- 
 
 Ken off : nbwr they were broken- off as a vifible 
 
 Chuich, 
 
 G ' I kit 
 
cm* 
 
 *. AJ! that can be gathered is this, That the ful* 
 mfi offal vat ion, and the virtues of the promife? # 
 (hall more fully and univerially taie effed: en the 
 Jew? , even to the falvation of all of them ; and fo 
 
 the invifibie and vifible Church be mote, puce, 
 and as one in the earth ' but this fulnefs (hail be to. 
 them as a vifibte Church, and on the earth. 
 
 Ar£. 7* If the re-ingraffing be by vertue of Gods 
 eft ft ion and love J hen it is to the invijttt Church • but 
 the former is true p. i%* Ergo. 
 ■ 
 
 Sol. i. It's Taids That as touching election, the 
 Jews are beloved for their Fathers fake; hence it 
 follows , God hath a love of eleclion tq ikliever?, 
 and their natural kcd ; for fo the Jews were the na- 
 tural feed of Abraham. Bur, 
 
 2. It's granted that the calling of the Jews (ball 
 be according to Gods ele&ion and firft love - y and 
 that Gods election (hail more fully take hold of the 
 Jews at their re-calling, then of any Nation : but 
 yet (till the Argument h of no force to prove that 
 their re-ingrafting, and fo ours, is only or firftly into 
 the invifibie Church ; for they are elected as well to 
 be a vifible Church, as to be partakers of inward 
 graces ; and their re-ingrafting muft be fpecially and 
 firftly into the vifible Church from which they were 
 broken off, or elfe there will be no correfpondence 
 between their rejection and re-ingtaffing. 
 
 The 
 
(87) 
 The laft and weikeft Argument is this ; If the in- 
 gaffing of Jews and (J entiles be the fruit of gods mer- 
 cy r the breaking off by fhutting up in unbelief i then it 
 is into the invtfikle Church by elettion, &c* butfo it 
 is- Ergo. 
 
 Sol. You fee he hath fpent his flock and ftrength 
 to be fo low at laft : This Argument needs no An- 
 fwer,but by (hewing you the unfoundnefs of this 
 univerfal proportion on which the Argument is built. 
 Whatever i* a fruit of gods mercy \is from eleclion 9 and 
 iagraffng into the invifible Church .* Which propor- 
 tion is moft falfe, univetfally confidered : Are not 
 bea!th,raeat and drink,prefervition, all outward pri- 
 viledges,fruits of Gods mercy i Is not long-furTering 
 to thefethat perifh, and the affording the means of 
 grace and falvation, the inftitution of Ordinances, 
 fruits of Gods mercy ? and yet muft they be given 
 onclytp eleclones? and do they ingraffto the in- 
 vifible Church ? but fatis eft repetere : you have feed 
 the utmoft ftrength of the greateft Antagonift to the 
 Truth we hold out. 
 
 Chap: 
 
Chap- X- 
 
 The tiarmonie of Mat. 19. 1^14. with 
 Mar. 10. 13. and Luk. 18. 15,16,17. 
 
 concerning the bringing of Infants to 
 thrift } hu afis to them , how far it 
 contributes to prove Infant-baptijm. - 
 
 YO U have feen how the Scriptures agree in 
 holding out fome fpecial priviledges in tbeNJew 
 Teltament,as in the OJd,to Believers and rheir kcd: 
 Let us now come to view Chnfts own carnage and 
 a&ions to Infancs • which (Ik ws both the Special re- 
 jfpeft he had to them, and would have his Mmifters 
 and Churches to have like wife. Foi thi«, compart 
 Mat. 19. 13, 14. Mar. 10. 13, 14,15, 1(5. with 
 Luk: 1 8. 1 5 , 1 6, 1 7. Where Jtehen little C hddren Were 
 brought to Chrift,and his'Dtfctples did fyrbid them, 
 Chrifi Vim angry ^and charged them not to hinder them y 
 for theirs Was the Kingdom of Heaven ; and he tool^ 
 them up in his arms, laid his hands upon them^ and 
 bleffed them. For the opening this place more clear- 
 ly, Confider, 
 
 1 . Who they were which were brought to Chrtft. 
 
 2. Who brought them. 
 
 3. Why the Difciples Hi forbid them to be 
 brought. 
 
 4*Chrift9 
 
(8© ; 
 
 4 Chrifts reafon why he would have them not 
 hindred. 
 
 5. Chrifls anions to and on them, what they %- 
 mount unto. 
 
 For the firft, who they were which were brought 
 to (Thrift ; in CMarl^ they are called vnufl^ and well 
 Mandated little Children, or Infants ; the word is a 
 diminutive word, and is fpecially to be applied to 
 Infants, Lul^i.j6.Zacharia4 ufeth the fame word 
 of John, when he was newly born; sAnd thou Child 
 (iwf'uv ) /bait be called the Prophet of the Highefi , 
 SccVidetureffe allqua emphafis dimintttivijooc fzltem 
 loco mtmme negligenda^ taith Beza. The fame word 
 is given to Chnft when he was in the manger, Mat. 
 2. 1 1. The Wife men found w Mop 9 the young Child* 
 or infant, With Marv, &c. Htl.11.23. ^Mofesh 
 called vnuJiov, when he was hid among 
 XUufht, tefie the Fl a g S> This word, faith Hippocra- 
 5SK£- T " ,S S«ventothefewh l ch are under 
 vnnio did* the age ofleven years ; and us moftly 
 tnr, iwt an- ufed among he Evangelifts fortoex- 
 tm defecundo. p re f$ the tendered age of man , which 
 Gurti> is Infancy : So Spanhem.dub. Svang. 
 
 put in Luke the holy Ghoft ufeth another wood of 
 full figniflcation for Infants (^ £%iw) which word 
 is ufed for a Babe in the womb, an Embryo, Luk. 1. 
 qi.fVhen Elizabeth heard the falutation of Mary, the 
 Babe leaped in her Vpomb > 3 Igtc'i^o^ to a?«V©- h t» 
 xo/Atct dv7n$ ; it's the fame word ; but more properly 
 it is ufed for a Child newly born, a fucking Babe thac 
 
 G 3 we 
 
cm 
 
 we carry in our arms : Thas 2 Tim $.i$:Timoth] 
 is laid to know the Scriptures from a Cutely &* #«#*$ 
 fromhis Infancy ; not when he was an Infant , but 
 from his Infancy ; chat is, as foon as ever he was pafl; 
 a Babe, and came to underftand any thing, he was 
 learnt the Scripcures.The fame word, £pe'p©- 4 ts given 
 aifo to Chrift, when the Wife men found him in 
 fwadling clouts, La^.n. So that this is moft clear, 
 that they were Infants, tender young ones, Babes 
 which were brought to Chrift; And if the two words 
 did not properly (Ignifie Infant?, yet in that it's faid 
 ghey were brought to Chrift,wotf id prove it; for the 
 word &&C<?4?i&> , properly (ignifies to carry, as k's 
 ufed moftly in Scripture for. But, 
 
 2.Who thofe were that brought them , it's moft 
 probable that their Parents brought them 5 and thefe 
 had believed rhemfelves,or madeforrie proreffion of 
 fatth ; for they bring them to Chrift to be under his 
 bieflingj for fomc Special favour to be fhewn by 
 Chirft to themjit wis for a fpiritual end they brought 
 them, to be touched by Chrift. &c. to have fome 
 virtue from him ; and who could have fuch bowels 
 to bring Infants to Chrilr,butrheir own Parents ? 
 and to abide the frowns ot the Difriples, and their 
 checks, but Parents , who love their Children next 
 themfelves, and would have them ble {Ted together 
 with them? fo that its more probable it was their 
 Parents which brought them then any others ; and 
 that they were Believers,who had fuch a fenfe ot their 
 Infants condition?, and of Chrifts refpetSs. 
 
 And 
 
And befides.they were then m the Coafts otjvdtj^ 
 where many had profeft their faith, and were bapti- 
 zed by -fob*, and longed to have their Infants con- 
 firmed by Jefus Chrift ; efpecially when we look on 
 ^,19.15, They brought them to Chriji to lay h^ 
 hands <m them, and pray over them. 
 
 r . If we confider why the Difciples fliould for- 
 bid them,and rebuked thefe that brought thern/urejy 
 it could not be out of any cruelty to Infants ,. or that 
 the Difciples had no bowels to Infants,6r deiire they 
 might not be happy with their Parents ; their af- 
 fections could not be fo ftraightned and bound up in 
 unnaturalnefs : but it mud be from forae fuch prin- 
 ciple which thefe of the contrary judgement take up, 
 That they were not capable , and were firft to be 
 taught j That onely grown men, and ProfeiTofcs cf 
 faith, were fit for Ordinances ; and therefore they 
 rebuked or chid them, and forbad them to do io any 
 more : As if they had faid, What have we to do wish 
 Children, as to outward Ordinances ? they are not 
 capable, they cannot profefs their faith; and we 
 muft have perfons able to hold forth the Gofpel, 
 which muft be vifible fubje&s of Chrifts Kingdom : 
 Doubtlefs fome fuch grounds they muft needs goon, 
 or elfe they muft (hew a ftrange kinde of paffion 
 againft Children, moft unbecoming thefe which had 
 but the rags of natural affeclion left in them.. 
 
 4. See Chrifts affections to them, and the reafon 
 of it; When Chrifi fa\\> it (nywfoi&l) he Vffds much 
 difpleafed: It's a word that is ufed to exprefs fuch a 
 
 C 4 kinde 
 
kinde of ibrtow as breaks the heart • aifo to llornach 
 any thing, and to have die ipirit raited in contcmpc 
 of an unworthy adion or perfon : Thus Chrilt was 
 grieved at them, and he looked with contcmpc on 
 his Difc^-Ici, as dealing moft unworthily wirh poor 
 I$Tants, in forbidding them to be brought to Crinft ; 
 and therefore he commands them to i'uffcr them to 
 bring Infants to him, and not to forbid trpem. Thefe 
 £wo words (hews how vehement Chr ft was and how 
 'xnuch his heart was let towards infants., You finde 
 Sometimes that Chrilt gave fo me (harp wordstohfs 
 Difciples, and to Peter efpecialiy ; but never to have 
 bis fpiric to rife in indignation againft them,as when 
 they would forbid Infants to be brought rohim • 
 and that which makes drift fo earneft, mud needs 
 be pf« great weight; he was never to moved when 
 they all forfook him, and Peter did forfwear htm, as 
 when they der-yed Infants to come to rum. 
 
 I c ujd wiih chat the ie which with l^rnuch con- 
 tempt and fcurnlous ianginge forbid Infants to be 
 baptized, might resd this place jwjthi obfervant fpi- 
 rics , and at, lead: grow more. fober and kfc violent 
 in' iheir e^pffl^qns concerning poof Infants ; doubt- 
 !efs it's a warning to all Ciuiifo Difciplqs. 
 
 Npv the reaion which Jefus Chnft gives, is, Of 
 fuck & the Kingdom ofuoa ■ The reafonfhews what 
 the ptivilepge was they would exclude Infants 
 from, vfa t being vifibly judged to bcl&gig to the 
 Kingdom of God; and Chr.iHaith, Of fuchuthe 
 Kingdom of God- Now take tfee Kingdom or Qod 
 
 cither 
 
(«; ; 
 
 either for Heaven and Glory ; or fecondly, by way 
 of allufion, for the Church, and the ftate of the Go- 
 fpeJ, it will ferve as a full reafon ; Of fuch, that is, of 
 Infants, is Gods Kingdom made up, as well as of 
 grown men, and they are as fie fubjecls as you are : 
 But doubclefs he efpecially means by the Kingdom 
 of God, as well the Kingdom of Grace in a vifiblc 
 Church, as the Kingdom of Glory ; becaufe elfethis 
 could be no reafon to convince the Difciples of their 
 errour, for they were againft the vifible bringing 
 Infants to Chrift for to get fome outwsfrd (ign of 
 favour to them ; and Chnft tels them, they may be 
 as well brought to Chrift , and receive a vifible figi^ 
 as grown perfons » for the Kingdom of God is made 
 of Inch, as of others. 
 
 i. Chrift (hews their intereft inoneofthehjgh- 
 eft priviledges, The Kingdom cfGed, and chat vi- 
 (Sbly. 
 
 2. He fpeaks it de prafenti ; not onely refpeSing 
 their future eftate, what they may be ; but that even 
 new the Kingdom of God is of fuch. 
 
 5 . He ufeth this as a common inftru&ivc principle 
 for the future , never to forbid not onely thefe, but 
 fuch like Infants to be brought to him : For ™W • 
 Of fuch it the Kingdom of Gob , Chrift would have 
 them take it as a conftant principle, That wherever 
 they found fuch like Infants, they fhould not reje6l 
 them, but look on them with Gofpel refpect. 
 
 Ohj. Ihefe that differ have nothing to fay to this, 
 but, That Chrift means it of fuch as children for hu- 
 mility, 
 
mility, and mecknefs , and lowlinefs ; and therefore 
 in the following verfe he faith, He that (hall not re- 
 ceive the Kingdom of Gad as a little Child , Jhallmt 
 enter therein, 
 
 Sol. Ir/s true, Chrift takes an occafion to fcxhort 
 them to humility and meeknefs, from the pattern of 
 Ihefe little ones. But, 
 
 i. Chrift (hews Infants right to the Kingdom of 
 God, as well as the Difciples, and grown perfons, 
 who can profefs their own faith. 
 
 i. If Chrift had mejrtt onty to mike an example 
 andrefemblance, he might have taken Sheep , and 
 Doves more property ; for they are more meek and 
 gentle then Children , who are commonly froward 
 and peevidi. 
 
 3. This croflfeth the end of Chrift* reafon, which 
 wis, That Infants ftiould not be kindred from being 
 brought to Chrift, For of fuch is the Kingdom of God. 
 Now if he had mianr or fuch as were onely like them 
 in forhe qualities , nor of themfeives, there was no- 
 thing at all in Cbrifts reafon : And thusmuft the 
 words be rcndred on that account ; Suffer Infants 
 to come to me, and d* not for bid them ; for not of them % 
 hnt of humble per fans that refemblethm, is the King- 
 dom of God. Men will rather make Chrift fpeak non- 
 fenfe, then lofe their opinion*. 
 
 4. Can we think Chrift could be fy difpleafed with 
 his Difciples for hindring little ones to be brought 
 to him, meerly to fbew them as refemblaneesand 
 patterns to grown men; iftt MM ehfeftafon, For 
 
(95) 
 offuch u the Kingdom of God, when he had examples 
 more fie to that purpofe, even among the meer Jen- 
 fible Creatures r No, Chrift (hews the priviledge of 
 fuch Infants ; and checks his Difciples pride , who 
 would have none but themfelves and grown perfons 
 to be eftcemed as having any vifible inter eft in the 
 Kingdom of God. 
 
 Laftly, Let us view Chrifts carnage and aclions to 
 thefe Infants; he did not onely fhew them as 
 examples, but tookjhem up in his arms, laid his hands 
 on them, and blejfed them j all expreflions of the mod: 
 fignal love, and favour, and of great import, if duly 
 confidiered. 
 
 ii He took them up in his arms, httymutm^^- 
 dvTzt . the W ord fignifies to embrace with fpecial af- 
 fections; fo the French Tranflttion Embracer 
 Ti/cator embrachiare , amplexabttnde geflo , Bud. 
 Chrift took them up in his arms, and held them forth 
 as Monuments of his love ; and doubtlefs to (hew hi:? 
 Difciples, that he would have fome outward fign and 
 charafter of peculiar refpeel fet on them by his 
 Church and Saints : Such a carriage was not out of 
 a natural afTeclion only to thefe that could not pity 
 themfelves, but from a heavenly ftrain of love which 
 he bore to thefe little ones, as to the higheft pro- 
 feffing Difciplc ; and muft needs be fyfflbolical to 
 his Churches , to take heed how they reject them 
 Wholly from any vifible right to the Kingdom of 
 God : Chrift was to leave the world (hortly , but 
 he leaves it as a rule to his Difciples 
 
 2. Chrift 
 
(96) 
 
 2. Chrift laves his hands on them ; which was ufed, 
 among the Jmtii as a form of fpecial biefling, and in 
 the N.T. for eminent ends. 
 
 1 . For to cure all forts of difcafes by a miraculous 
 power, Luk 4.4^. 
 
 2. For confecration of any to a Divine work and 
 fervice ; thus Church* Officers were folemnly fepari- 
 ted to Chrills work, as peculiarly fie for it, <4£l s 6%6. 
 tsfftslis* 1 Tim.q 15, and5.2i. iTVwi.6. 
 
 3. It was ufed tor confirmation after Saptifm, 
 and as an outward way whereby the holy Ghoft was 
 conveved; and this is the moft common ufeof it in 
 the A£b of the Apofties, %dtts% 17 18, 19. and 
 1 9. c. where thofe that were baptized had the Apo- 
 ftles hands laid on them, and they received the holy 
 Ghoft s And to this purpofe may we apply Chnfts 
 acStothefe Infants, toconfirm the promife folemnly 
 after Biptifm. For, 
 
 I, It was ever ufed (except to lick perfons) after 
 Baptifm. 
 
 3. As it prefuppofeth Baptifm to precede , fo it's 
 an outward fign of a iptcial fignificancy, and holds 
 forth as much as if Chrift had baptized them ; for in 
 that outward rite the holy Ghoft was conveyed; and 
 by laying on of hands others received the holy 
 Ghoft, as the former Scriptures exprefs; and why 
 not in this acl of Chrift on them ? Take all the cir- 
 cumftances together, and you cannot imagine it to 
 be a complemental a# : And if ths were as am out- 
 ward fign of their receiving the holy Ghoft, wha$ 
 
 Jboald 
 
(91) 
 
 JhouldhinierJtoater that Infants Jhould not be baptized, 
 feeing they have received the holy Ljhofi as Weil as Voe ? 
 Adfcjo.47. Ch» ift laid his hands, on them , Bene- 
 diUas fcilicet manus in quas a Patre [ho accepetat 
 omnia bona Cceli & 7 err *, faith a learned Divine on 
 this place j Helaidthofe bleffed hands on them jn Which 
 he had received from the Father JI good things in Hea» 
 yen and Earth. This aclflhews, 
 
 1. That Chrift would have fomc ourwtfrd yifible 
 fign of favour fet on fuch I nfants by C burehes : And 
 Impofition of Hands being one of the cho^feft , 
 Chnft ufeth that as moft proper to fbew his Au- 
 thority. 
 
 2. That holds forth, That if they be capable of 
 impofition of hands, they are of an Ordinance of 
 like nature,which efpecially looks ac a fubjecl: purely 
 paflive. 
 
 Ob]. If it be ObjecledjWhy did not Chrift baptize 
 them as well as lay his hands on them, if he meant to 
 hint out their right to Baptifm ? 
 
 ; SoL It's eafily anfwered, That Chrift baptized 
 none at all; but he did that which was an Ordinance 
 ufuaily in thofe Primitive times adminiftred aitec 
 Baptifm, and equal to it,as to its dignity ; and fo far 
 above Baptifm, as it was more extraordinary in its 
 practice: And fo we may argue from chis to Baptifm, 
 either inclufivelyjor amajori f from the greater ; and 
 I have more from this place to confirm me,' that if 
 Chrift baptized any, he would thefe Infants ; feeing 
 he (hews fo much re/peS to them,more then to any 
 
 grown 
 
(98) 
 grown perfon ; ami did to them thofe afts which 
 were equivalent, if not fupcreminent to them, then 
 any can have againft it. Let any that differ frpm us, 
 (hew anywhere in the Gofpel where Chrift laid his 
 hands on any but defperate difeafed perfons to 
 (hew his power , or on Infants to (hew his love, 
 and confirm their antient priviledges, or upon any 
 perfon in this latter fenfe unbaptiz,ed. 
 
 Ob). 2. If it be faid , This was an extraordinary 
 acl of Chrift, and no ordinary pattern may be drawn 
 
 Sol. I anfwer ; Grant it to be extraordinary, yet 
 it argues more ftrongly, if Chrift ufed an extraordi- 
 nary acl to (hew his affe&ion and love to Infant?* 
 much more may the Church (hew ordinary aSs to 
 them. 
 
 2. Chrift (hewed this extraordinary carriage, the 
 more to check and convince his Difciples for their 
 extraordinary contempt of poor Infants,who would 
 not allow them an ordinary intereft in vifible pri- 
 viledge?. And kVconliderable, that Impciitionof 
 Hands was not an ufual Ordinance,or adminiftred by 
 any but Chrift.before the afcenfion of Chrift, and the 
 tending of the holy Ghoft. 
 
 3. Though Chrifts acl: fhould be extraordinary, 
 in regard of the imitation of that .acl by us ; yet he 
 grounds it on an ordinary rule and principle ; For of 
 [uchii the Kingdom ojGod$ which he lays down as 
 a fundamental rule. And this is the lead that can be 
 gathered from it 5 That if Chrift on this ground fee 
 
 an 
 
(99) 
 an extraordinary fign on infants , becaufe the King- 
 dom of God did vifibly belong to them ; we may on 
 the fame principle fet an ordinary initiating ligri on 
 them, as vifible members of chat glorious Hate , as 
 well as on grown vitible Profeflbrs, who are but 
 probable members, according to the moil judicious 
 charity 5 efpecially if we will think Chrifts judge- 
 ment in fuch cafes equal with our own* 
 
 But left all this (hould be thought but a meer out- 
 ward a& of Chrifts, that carried nothing of any in- 
 ward defign of grace, bebleffed them after all, as 
 the fulleft cxpreftion of his heart ; and to demon- 
 (hate, that whatever grace he had (hould be theirs 
 as others ; for fo the word, Ivhoyei Jura, , fignifies, 
 either to fpeak well of, or to any concerning perfons 
 or things; and thus Chrift may be thought to fpeak 
 much of the ftate and priviledges of thefe Infants^or 
 ehe to blefs them, by defiring for them , or com- 
 municating to them all forts of mcrcie?,as ble flings ; 
 according to that Epb. 1.3. And what can be more 
 then for Chrift to take up Infants in his arms, lay 
 his hands on them, ss an outward fign, to confecrate 
 them to himfelf, and to (hew their capacity of re- 
 ceiving the holy Ghoft , and then to blefs them ; 
 which comprehends the communication of all gra* 
 ces, and good things? And yet we muft with fcorn 
 (poor probable Difciples our felves ) deny them a 
 little water; and think it too much to have them 
 named among the ioweftfort of vifible Saints, when 
 Chrift owns them publickly, and faith, that of fuck as 
 
 thefe 
 
(1 00) 
 
 ~tkfe is the Kingdom of God; and they may have more 
 incereft in that Kingdom, then thefe rhar exclude 
 them : but I (hall rather believe Chrifts teftimony, 
 then any mans froward opinion .* It's only a wonder 
 how Saints, that have felt Chrifts bowels themfelvts, 
 and read this Text, can be fo rigid to Infants of Be- 
 lievers, to Whom Chrjft hath been fo kinde, and ex- 
 emplary in hrs carriages ; and ftampt fuch vifiblecha* 
 raelers of his lave on, even in adminiftration or out- 
 ward figns. To what end fhouid Chrift do all this 
 in fuch a high and peremptory ftrafn of affclion , 
 if it were not to teach us charity and refpeel: to In- 
 fants, in thsfe ordinary adrriiniftrations they are ca- 
 pable of; and to confirm their old ftate in the 
 Church, by fuch a new and unwonted carriage; 
 Chrift abounding to them who were mefl: under- 
 valued, and could fay nothing for themfelves? And 
 bow harfti is k to conceive, that Chrifts intent was 
 hereafter to caft them out of the vifible Church, and 
 from the participation of all outward figns of fa!- 
 virion , when hi* carriage was thus tranfeendently 
 loving to them ; and fo only to give them a light- 
 ning before death ? Let mens confeiences , not 
 gulph'd in prejudice, judge : This Text, if there were' 
 no more, will fly in the Confeiences one day of the 
 moft confident Contemners of Infants, and their 
 B^ptifrn. 
 
 I (ball only add, to fatisfie the learned, the con- 
 fer^ of godly and eminent Authors on this Scrip- 
 cure* 
 
 2V> 
 
NoneftuJUhiftoriain toto cohice Ev^ngelko, qui 
 frequent ins in Templo legator, quam b$c ipfa. Quoties 
 enim Infant ad facrum baptifmatit fontem ajfertur^ 
 toties etiam ex agendis Ecclefiaftkis h<zc hiftorU recitar 
 tur ; fed admodum raro eadem in Scclefia recitatur. 
 Chemnitius '& Polycarpus, Lyferus in Harm, Evan- 
 gel. 
 
 Anddoubtlefs it's no ordinary note, that three of 
 the Evangeliftslhould fo punctually relate thisftory, 
 without any considerable change of words or ;fen(e<> 
 All the Obje&ion is,becaufethe word Baptifm is not 
 infertcd, when as much as that comes to is ; and tint 
 Chrift baptized no grown perfons. 
 
 Hinc jam illud eft quod dixijfe Dominant omnes 
 trei momorant, talium enim eft regnum ffcslorum % 
 N on fane adult or urn tantum % qui ut Infantes fife hu- 
 miliarunt^ quod Anabaptiftdt, contendunt. Hoc enim 
 finfu^ quod dixerat fibi Infantes apportandos effe 9 
 tanquam fubjecla, ratio minim} cohzreret, &c Fa- 
 cejfat igiturftulta iftaveftrafapientia $ Smite In fax** 
 tes mihi adduci, aio enim nonfolum horum ejfe Regnum 
 Cwlorum '.fed nullum omnino Regni loujusfare particU 
 pern, mft Infantibm his ftmilis evadat. 
 
 Si jam ad Ecclefiam pertinent, & ipforum eft Me* 
 gnum Coslorum : cur eisftgnum Baptifmi, quo in Mc~ 
 clefiam Qhri^i^qui ad earn pertinent, recipi filent^ ne- 
 garemus > Siqui hcedi inter eos funt, turn excludendi 
 neks erunt, cum id ejfe fife prodidemnt ; inter ea n% 
 H first® 
 
(roi) 
 
 Jimus fever tores Chrifto- ant eft nofirum bapti- 
 
 zare plujquam Domini amplelli, imponere mantis er 
 bene dicer ejtiit ? qm fia >ei ant char it at is jattstra , per 
 Baptifmam Chrijto adducere qms addnci ftbijujjlt f 
 
 Much more then this hath Bucer on Mat. i 9. 1 $, 
 14, 15. full of fpintuai consideration. 
 
 To this doth Mujcnlus, Calvin, Heza, add their 
 holy teftimonies ; But 1 fpare thefe quotations, be- 
 caufe it's ad homines, to men like our ielves : Let 
 thefe which difTent read impartially, andconfiderif 
 this place (hcutdftand alone, without any harmony 
 of other Scriptures, whether there be not more in 
 ic for Infant-baptifm, then any thing they have a- 
 gainft iz : I would be fo ingenuous with them, as to 
 deal with any of their awaked Consciences. 
 
 Mi £ 
 
 »xs ■ 
 
 HO t? 
 
 .IfJt* 
 
 Chap: 
 
Chap. XL 
 
 Wherein is conjidered the method of God iti 
 the Old Teftament, of admtntfiring Or- 
 dinances in Families jj arid haptt^img 
 Houfliolds in the New-Teflament j and 
 how far it contributes to Infant-baptifm* 
 
 ITS not a flight thing to cohfider, how tha£ 
 everfince the Fall this hath been anufual method 
 of God in adminiftration of the Covenant, and pri- 
 viledges of grace, to make it run through families 
 and houfholds of Believers, as the fpecial veins | 
 Hence families, as they were the firft natural focieties, 
 fo they were the full Churchesjthe Covenant and the 
 privileges of it was among thgm- from vfdam to 
 Abraham it went on thus : And when the Co- 
 venant in Abrahams time came to be more ex* 
 prefly opened, and fairer expounded, God goes on 
 fttll in the fame method, makes the Covenant with 
 Abraham and hishoufhold; only the family wa§ 
 enlarged ,' it became a greater houflhold , accord- 
 ing to the vaftnefs of the exrent of the Covenant;, 
 yetftillitwasdifpenfedastoafamily. Now if yon 
 come to the New Teftament, there you fee God go- 
 ing on in the fame method, as if he had caft by art, 
 H i eternaif 
 
rio4j 
 
 ererna! decree this platform : Baptifm,the New Tc- 
 ftament Ordinance, is adminiftred according to the 
 fame de.fign.ro families and houflbold?; Let us con- 
 fide* what Chrift himfelf faith toZacheus, Luke 19. 
 who was a Gentile, and one of the chief Publicans, 
 upon occafion of this mans converfion, to open the 
 nature and continuance of the Covenant to the Qen- 
 tiles in the fame form as ic was to Abraham $ This 
 day isjalvation come to they hoitfe y forafmuch as he alfo 
 it a fin of Abraham : Hereis the iame language ufed 
 in adminifiracionof Circumcifion in the Old' Tefta. 
 merit ; and the fame reafon, for a/much as healfo 
 ( tectSow tcjctvTv's fo'i* : ACgta(i '6hv J is a fin of Abra- 
 ham : What can be drawn from this place more 
 proper then the/e conclufions ? 
 
 i.< Tha" as foon as ever he was converted and be- 
 lieved, Quill applies the promife to hishoufe ; if 
 there were not fornething more in ir, he would have 
 only faid, Solvation is come to thee. 
 
 2. ItV clear that he opens the Covenant made 
 with Abraham ; not only to himfelf, but his houfe j 
 and argues from his being a fonof Abraham^ that 
 therefore the Covenant is not only made with him, 
 bat with his houfe, that is, his feed: it were enough 
 for co call' him the fon of Abraham, and to fay, fal- 
 vatio's fs come to himfelf : but to mention his houfe, 
 together with himfeF, and give this as a reafon, be- 
 daufe he is the fon of aAbr,iham, is as much as to fay, 
 the priviledgesof the Covenant is the fame to you 
 arid your houfe,3s ic vi&sto-Jfaacvcii Jacob for a/much 
 
 as 
 
m healfo is a [on of Abraham, as well <u they. Now 
 for Chrift to fpeakin this diak£,and to tell them of 
 their houftiofds, and of favour to them m the begin- 
 ning of the GofpeJ, and yet at the fame time exclude 
 thetr Infanrs from all outward Hgns of rhe promife, 
 which they ever had in the darkeft days of grace, is 
 aftrange policy, unfutabletothe fimplicityof Jefus 
 Chrift.- 
 
 Concerning this continued method of God, 
 though this Zacheus be a lingular, yet he is not the 
 only example, it you read all along the ACls of the 
 Apoftles;thde which had houftiolds,the promtfe runs 
 with a gracious entail. Atls n, 14. Cornelius hath 
 the promife to him and his houfe. ABs 16. 1 5. Lydia 
 was baptized, and her houfliold. Ver. 31. rhe A- 
 poftle exhorts the Jaylor to believe, and hefhould 
 be favedj and his whole houfe ; luft as Cod made the 
 Covenant with Abraham , Walkjbefore me^andbe thou 
 perfeftfien. 1 7. 1 , 2,7. And I Will be a god to thee, 
 andthjfeed } ot houfliold. In ver. 3 3 . its faid, be was 
 baptized, and all his (Jv-w 4) 0/ *w?j he and all that 
 were of him ; a moft emphatical expreffion to fee 
 forth his Children, who are the natural on>fpnng, 
 and who are properly a mans own • he changes the 
 general phrafc of a houfe,which may fometimes con* 
 prehend more, aed comes more clpfe home ; ween 
 he faith, he was baptized, he faith, all his (*>£} of 
 him , which cannot be meant of fervants, who are 
 our own as goods and lands are, but not of a man : 
 but mud firftly and primarily refer to his Children, 
 
 H 3 who 
 
(io6) 
 
 who are begotten of htm ; and it may be fecondarily 
 to his kindred ; in the fame phrafe you have it tran- 
 flated, Rom. 16. xo, n. The Houfbold of Ariftobulus, 
 the houjhold of NarciiTus ; but it is* t^ U t 'Ah&~ 
 J&a*, & a*} mt tftfxfapi . xbefe of Ariftobulus and 
 NarciiTus -.which mutt efpecially be meant of their 
 Children, and thefe that defended frora their 
 Joyns. 
 
 The only Obje&ion is from the following v. 3 4« 
 where it is faid, That the fajlor believed With all his 
 
 Joufe $ and fonone were baptized but Btiiev^rs. 
 To which I anfwer, That is not a reftriclion or 
 exception of ail that were baptized, but a ddcripti- 
 on of Che power the Wordhad upen all his houfe 
 withhimfelf j for he faid in the former verfe,thac he 
 was baptized, and with his thofe which were begotr 
 eenofhim; and in this verfe he (hews the adual in- 
 fluence of the Word on all his boufe likewi/e .• So 
 £hat the words are an after defcription of the mighty 
 Workings of the -Gofpel, not only to himfetf, who 
 was baptized 3 and fo his; buc on all hisboule be- 
 tides. 
 
 s, Qihers, and men of good account, do relate 
 ttv'qiMi, with afl hi* hufe^io the j aylors rejoycing, 
 not to his believing ; ana fo read it thus, And when 
 he had brought them into hid houfe, he fet meat before 
 lhem % and rt\o)ced y believing Cod^ with ail his houfe j 
 And it may be as well [dared to the one as to the 
 other. 
 
 However it-s very obfemblejbat wh$n he fpeaks of 
 
 the 
 
fx°7) 
 the Apoftles preaching, and their bdieving,h<* names 
 his houfe nuheiargelt term ; v. 32. They preached 
 the Word to him, and all that were foiimt.Wm 
 to all that Vw em his houfe : But when he fpeaks of 
 bapnzmg, hefaich( that you may be fare his Chil- 
 dren were baptized) that he, and all of him, or all 
 his, -were baptized. Now he doth not fay, all that 
 believed, but all his Were baptized J though there 
 is no doubt but all that believed were baptised 
 
 alfo. 
 
 But if there were no fuch emphatical expremon, 
 as is by the holy Ghoft in the baptizing oj: the 
 Jaylors houfe; yet there is enough to make forth an 
 example of Infant- baptifm from the very notion of 
 baptizing whole houftiolds, fo frequent in the 
 Gofpei. 
 
 1 . It will be very Grange confidence to affirm , 
 that in all thefe houfes there were no Infants, or 
 little Children. 
 
 2. There is greater probability, and Ctronger 
 grounds to believe, when he names houfholds that 
 there were little ones in them, then that there were 
 
 not. 
 
 3. Efpecially when the word, houfe, in all lan- 
 guages in the world is moft ufually put tor Children 
 of the houfe, who maintain and keep it up : and (o 
 often in Scripture, Qen> 30. 30. and 45, 18, 19 2\£ 
 3.15. ffaU 115.12,13' x Tint. 5' 8 - 
 
 4. Where whole houfes are baptized, there In- 
 fants are not excluded, if they be in thehcufe ; and 
 
 H4 if 
 
if not excluded, they are included; they cannot be 
 excluded, for they are ptincipal parts of the houfe; 
 and if only' adult> y or grown perfons fhould be 
 meant, when Children are named, thst would be to 
 exclude Infants from being Chikjren, as well as front 
 being parts of the houfhold. 
 
 When Abraham and his houfe* were circumcifed, 
 Abrahams Children were the principal pares of the 
 houfe ; and they were fir ft circumcifed, and then his 
 fervant?, and alt in hi* houfliold were circumcifed 
 alfo, being ProfefTors of the fame faith ; for <*Abr*- 
 ham had a godly family : Yet upon a different ac- 
 count; the one by vertue of Abrahams Covenant, 
 which was made primarily with him and hisChil- 
 dren,wkh aljhkfamilyT«kewife,as they profeft A- 
 brahams faith, and ferved Abrahams God ; and foit 
 may be eafiiy conceived; how whole houftiolds were 
 baptized in c he New Teftament , the Children as in 
 theFachersCuvenan: $ the Servants and others by 
 Venue of r he fame profeffion ; And in this fenfe there 
 will be no ambiguity in the phrafe of baptizing 
 whole houfhold*. 
 
 Laftiy, That the Apoftle fhouid borrow an ex- 
 ^reftion alway> nfed in the Old Teftanent to include 
 ^Children tipccially, and make ufe of it in the New 
 to exclude them,vrou!d be Strange but co conjecture: 
 Now when ever the houfhold is f poke 9 of in the Old 
 Teftamenc, i: always includes Children, This is ftill 
 more for the biprizing of Infants, then anything 
 they can fay againftir ; «nd compared with all the 
 
 former 
 
(IQ9) 
 former Scriptare«,may make up a full demonfiratjoo 
 to a judicious conlcience. 
 
 ' 
 
 Chap- X II. 
 
 C'trcumcijion and fBaptifin compared; that 
 they harve both one fpiritual fignifica- 
 tion ; the true nature of them both open- 
 ed, and what influence this confideration 
 hath toprorue lnfanubaptifm. 
 
 IT 'S well known among thefe that are agalnft 
 baptizing of Infants, what weight they put on 
 that Ordinance of Baptifm, that all other feern light 
 in their eyes, and of no account in refpecYofthar. 
 When they fpeak of Circumctfion, th^y ufualiy call 
 that a carnal Ordinance, fealing only carnal and tem- 
 porary things, and only reaching the outward man • 
 the one requiring only the flefh for its fubjeft, the 
 other a fpiritual man, a new creature, &c. And fo 
 much do they idolize(fotfoIfear it is among many) 
 Baptifnvhat even faith it felf feems little without it; 
 But that I may wa(h off this paint, and make Ordi- 
 nances look like themfelvesjet us compare thefe Or- 
 dinances together, and view them in their dignity* 
 and worth, and fignifications. And, 
 
 i. In 
 
(no) 
 
 I. In general for Circumcifion ; We all know 
 how much it was prized among the lews above all 
 other Ordinances, and that it was the laft that was 
 taken away with the gresteft difficulty ; about which 
 the Apoftles had more ado, then about the taking 
 iway all the Ceremonies ; whereby we may judge, 
 the lews did look on it as the great feal of all their 
 priviledges ; which when that was loft, all was loft. 
 Read the Epiftle to the Romans, Chip a. 3. when he 
 would fpeak all their outward priviledges at once, 
 he faith,. What advantage hatha Jtw} what profit of 
 Circumcifion 9 &c ? So in the Galatians., Phthppians^ 
 JZphefians 9 Colojftans. many. Chapcers are (pent to 
 take them oft from Circumcifion. 
 
 2. Circumcifion was that Ordinance which was 
 immediately annexed to the Covenant, and a con- 
 firmation of it, ^7^.27.7,10. therefore called the 
 Covenant. 
 
 3. It was an Ordinance inftituted long before the 
 Legal and Mofaical Ceremonies of an elder date : It 
 was not a type oi Canaan , but of Chrift to come in 
 the flefti of the ked of Abraham, and of rhe circum- 
 cifion of the heart, which Chrift was moft fully to 
 perfeclin the Gofpel. 
 
 There is or;iy one Gentleman that writ a Book of 
 Baptifm, printed in the year 1646 will have Cir- 
 cumcifion to be a typ* of Baptiim, which cannot be : 
 For, 
 
 1. Types mnfthave fomeching in their outward 
 face to reprefent another thing more eminent and 
 
 real? 
 
real °. Now Circumcifion hath nothing in the out- 
 fide to fee fonh Baptifm. 
 
 2. It is not fo handfom to make one outward (igq 
 the antitype of another. 
 
 4, Circumcifion was as holy an Ordinance as 
 Baptifm in the New Teftament • for they are both 
 in themfdves outward a6ts, and no holinefs more in 
 one then in another, but as they have from inftitu- 
 tion : only Baptifm is more eafie to the fkfh then 
 Circumcifion ; and yet not more eafie, if that way of 
 dipping ftiould be the only way of baptizing, efpeci- 
 ally at fome feafons, and to fome bodies. 
 
 5. TheN.t. gives as large and honourable cha- 
 racters of Circumcifion, as it doth of Baptifm ; thus 
 the Apoftlecals it in Rom.q The Jed of the right eouf- 
 mfs of frith : A character fo refplendent and glo- 
 rious, that the Gofpel can give no higher to an Or- 
 dinance. And as much as he faith of Baptifm in ef- 
 fect, 1 pet* 3.*i.that baptifm faves through the an- 
 fwer of a good confeience, the contrary Opinionifts 
 are put to hard (Lifts to avoyd the ftrength of this 
 place j and therefore fome would evade it thus , 
 faying, That the Apoftle doth not call it a feal of the 
 Covenant or Proraife, but of the righteoufnefs of 
 faith. 
 
 Sol. A miferable evafion I as if the righteoufnefs 
 of faith were not included in the Covenant, or there 
 were any righteoufnefs of faith but what comes by 
 the Covenant, and fo would make a feparation be- 
 tween the promife of righteoufneft, and the righte- 
 oufnefs promifedo Others 
 
Others would cloatli the Text with this difguize,. 
 That it fealcd it only to Abraham, whereas it was fo 
 to lfaac % and Jacob, and Dawd, and-ail that were in 
 the Covenant. 
 
 This is held forth molt clearly in that verfe, 
 
 i. That Circurneifion was a Teal of the pure Co- , 
 venant of grace,in Which righteoufne (s was promifed 
 to Abraham and his feed indefinitely. 
 
 2 That this feal was applied to all the feed that r 
 were but externally and vifibly in Covenant, to In- 
 fants ; and the fame fign that Abraham received 
 upon profeflion of his faith, rm Child received ; and 
 therefore He is faid to be the Father of Circurneifion, 
 as of Faith; ver. xz 
 
 5. Doctor wilkt from this place holds fo?th the 
 fsrhenefs of the fbbftance of the Sacraments of the 
 Old and New Teftamenr, both wfiich do feal the 
 righteoufne fs of hith ; and lays it asagreaterrour 
 on the Romanics, who affirm, That the Ofd Teita- 
 ment Sacrament's did not exhibite the graces of the 
 New. - • • 
 
 4. This cannot be denied from the place, with- 
 out men will -wilfully put out their own eyes, that 
 Circurneifion had as glorious a ufe as Baptifm, vizXQ 
 , feal the righteoufnefs of faith ; which muft be as well 
 to others that had the tjuetflicacy of the Covenant; 
 as to Abraham himfelf; and no higher mercy can 
 sny Ordinance of the New Teftarnenc feal to 
 any. 
 
 * There were mam/ other circumftan'tial and acer- 
 
 dent*! 
 
f"3) 
 
 dental ufes of circumcifion according to the Jewidi 
 ftatc,as we will grant Mr. Tombes, a«, 
 
 i . To engage to the performance of the whole 
 Law, gd. 5.2,3. tAfts 15.10. 
 
 2. To be a partition-wall between Jew and Gen- 
 tile, Eph. 2. 14. 
 
 But when the Apoftle would give circumcifion his 
 true character, and (hew what the primary, and fub- 
 ftantial ufe of it was, he calls it a fcal Of the 
 righteoufnefs of faith. 
 
 6, Circumcifion and baptifm fignifie one and the 
 fame thing, and fo agree in being figns of the lame 
 grace,- compare Colof. 2. 1 1> 12, 12. with Rom, 6* 
 3,4. and c».v. circumcifion fignjfies the putting oft the 
 body ofthefinsoftheflefhjbaprifm is into Chriftsr 
 death, and to teftifie the crucifying the old man with 
 him, that the body of death might be deftroyed, 
 as by the comparing thefe two places it is moll clear, 
 and ^.v.and 6.ver. of /?0*»*6.chap.oneiy baptifm hath 
 this larger confederation in it, as that it takes in 
 Chrifts refurreclion with it, and alfo the quickning of 
 the Foul together with him,which was not fo fully fig- 
 nifiedin Circumcifion, but implied, according as the 
 Apoftle argues in the fame place, Rom t 6- S-y. for if 
 we have been planted in the likencfs of his death* 
 we fhall be alfo in the Jikenefs of his refurreclion; the 
 one being a confequence of the other; and as circum-* 
 cifion didcuteffthe foreskin in token of the de- 
 ftruclion of fin, fo baptifm by wafhing, fignifies the 
 taking away the pollution of fin ; thus God whenh* 
 
 would 
 
( H4) 
 
 would ptomife to kill fio, and work all grace, he e* 
 meffeth it by eircumcifion s / will etrcumcifi thy heart, 
 lultbe hem oftbjftd. Deur jo.6. And the Apoftle 
 TW/.J.4. faith, fViaretfthtctrcuaictfio^ttM is, 
 we have the true work of grace in us. 
 
 Thereafon why I urge thefeconfiderationj, is to 
 hold for the capacity of Infantas well foi : baptifm 
 „circumcifion ; there is noreafon why they fliould be 
 thought more uufir and incapable for the one then 
 
 ^nMSilSSte were a ieal of the righteouf. 
 nefcof Faith, and yet applied to Infants, and ba- 
 Jtifm can feal nohighe, mercy, why (hould it be 
 Sought fuch a ftrange and unmeet thing to _ bapfze 
 ihemmore then to citcutneife them I • thej , ufual ly to 
 vou put a feal to a blank in bapt.ztnglnfantsjthe fame 
 8$ be faidas to Circumcifion , yet they were ,c£ 
 eumcifed as well as Abraham ttet profefth.sown 
 S I muft acknowledge I never could yet under- 
 End why Infants (hould be thought fit to have that 
 KppSd to them in the Old T«^£g* £ 
 Ww calls a feal of the righteoufnefs pf Faith, and 
 «' be denied it in the New Teftament .as incapacious, 
 Sten Sprite, can feal nomore. I with it were fan, 
 
 ^at^ond.y, when Baptifm (hall Ggnifie 
 the fan* ttung in ^fiance, be both figns of the fame 
 grace; the one cutting away fin as with a kn.re, tne 
 other watbing it away with water ; and yet Infant, 
 upland ™ft * <° h " e tbe » dminift ""° n ° f ^ 
 
one ordinance*, not of the other; ifthefe of the dif- 
 fering judgment, did with more fobriety weigh fuch 
 confederations as thefe, they would not with fo much 
 foolifh contempt write and fpeak of Infants Ba- 
 ptifm. 
 
 A knife may be applied to an Infant, as to Abr&~ 
 ham, though old , and in the heigth of his Faith, and 
 fcal the righteoufnefs of it ; but water muft one- 
 ly be pouted on actual believers, and grown perfons, 
 fuch as Abraham, but not on Infant?, though it hath 
 no more to fealj as if there were fome ftrange excel- 
 lency and vertue in the nature of water, that it were 
 too precious to wafli the Infants of believers : For, 
 if there be no more vertue in the water that ba- 
 ptizeth, then in the knife that circumcifed, you fee 
 there is no more glorious uie of the one then the 
 other. And what end God (hould have to put fuch a 
 Seal on Infants in the Old Teftament, and exclude 
 them in the New, when tht Ordinances both fignifie 
 the fame fubftantial grace, let any Christian hear!: 
 imagine. : f ?^ 
 
 
 Chap, 
 
(II*) 
 
 Chap. XIII. 
 TbatfatnotM place, Colof.z.i), \i r opemd: 
 the correspondence between Circumcifion 
 and Baptifm further cleared. 
 
 THe fcopeof the Apoftlcin the former veries is 
 to diffwade the Chriftians from Jew.ifh cere- 
 mon?e$,efpe<:ially from Circumcifion ♦ and he doth iz 
 efpeciafly frocn the difcovery of Chritis fulnek, and 
 our being compleat in him^that is, you need nothing 
 cut of Chrift now 5 but they objeot we wane Cir- 
 cumcifion 5 he tells them they are circumcifed in him, 
 i i. v. where the Apoftle diftinguifheth of a twofold 
 circumcifion, one ^^Wtm^ made with hand?, the 
 other ^«£ 2 ^'"'?©", made without hand?, which he 
 calls the Circomcifion of Chrift, but it h wrought by 
 Wm, and is byuniqn with himjand you beingcifcura- 
 riftd in Chrift, and have the grace fignirkd t>y out- 
 ward Circurnafion, you need no mote i but there be 
 two things they might ebjeel ; > £4f*ql 
 
 ^iifljthar this is nothing to the qiuftion:you would 
 take us eff from outward Circulation, by telling us 
 we are inwardly circumcifed, whereas the fign and 
 the thing ngnifted fhould always go together; Abra» 
 bam had this Circumcifion and other*, and yet were 
 outwardly circumcifed. 
 Secondly, they might objeft we arentot fo corn- 
 pleat 
 
("7) 
 
 pleat in Chtiftas Abraham and his feed,* for,befides 
 the inward grace, they had an outward fign and Seal 
 to confirm ic to them. 
 
 The Apoftle in the it verfe anfwers both at dncfc, 
 (hey were not onely circumcifed inwardly, ,with 
 Chrifts Circumcifion, but there was an outward fign 
 in the New Teftament to be applied to them, of the 
 fame confederations Buried with him in Bapnfm,&c* 
 This is thefummeof the words, let us now eonfidec 
 what may be fairly deducted from them. 
 
 Many, and the mod of our Divines, do conclude 
 from hence the fucceffion of Baptifm in the place 
 or room of Circumcifion, that this Ordinance is ap- 
 pointed in the New Teftament in lieu of the formers 
 and for. the fame ends and purpofes; which doubtlefs 
 •is true from this place j if men would truly weigh the 
 import of the words, and not fight with their own 
 fhadows. 
 
 Firft, this compleatnefs in Chrill is as well to en- 
 joyment of Ordinances, and outward priviledges^ai 
 inwsrd graces ; elfe he would never have mentioned 
 Baptifm outwardly , when in the former verfe he 
 fpeaks of inward Circumcifion * he would have kept 
 ftill in that ftrsin. 
 
 Secondly, obferve how he joins them together^ncj 
 makes them one; the inward circumcifion confirmed 
 by the outward baptifm, circumcifed with the. Cir- 
 cumcifion of thrift 4 buried with him in baptifm * 
 now this could not be proper , nor of any poOibls 
 connexion but by putting the outward fign of tau 
 
 i 
 
Pttfm inftead of the outward fign of Circumcifion ; 
 *hat is j you are circumcifed becaufe baptized ; you 
 change but the outward element, or inflrument 3 
 but the fame inward grace is confirmed by both; chus 
 the words are legible, andco beunderftood without 
 difficulties but any other interpretation wMbe found 
 moft rugged, and unfiiitable : For, 
 
 Thirdly, as the Apoftle could not fay in the former 
 v. that they were circumcited in Chnft bur from the 
 analogie between the outward fign, and rhe inward 
 grace; chat is,if the outward fign of Circumcifion bad 
 not fignified (uch an inward work ; <o neither could 
 he have found chcy were circumcifed in Chnft, 
 being buried with him in baptifm, if that Ordi- 
 nance of baptifm did not as an outward fign an* 
 fwer to that inward Circumcifion, and were infteai 
 of that fign which did directly reprefent ic for- 
 merly. 
 
 Fourthly, the nature of the Apoftlesdefign holds 
 ©at this ; for he would take them off the praflife 
 of Circumcifion- and this he doth by difcovering 
 of another Ordinance, more fuitabie to the Go- 
 fpcl, which (hould fignifie the fame thing unto 
 them, in a more large and emphattctll manner, Sig- 
 nifying not onely Chrtlts death, but his refurre- 
 dton ; fo that in the very import of the phraie he 
 cals baptifm a Gofpel circumcifion ; and this argu- 
 ment he ufech as molt effectual to take them off Cir- 
 cumcifion, by fhcwmg them rhey were cornpkar in 
 thrift hi th^ New Teltament,« to inward graces,*nd 
 
 outward 
 
(^9) 
 outward Ordinances, for though thev were aot cir« 
 cumcifed, they had baptifm to fupplie rhe wane or ic 
 with advantage, fo that thty (hould nor loft* n? Or- 
 dinance, but exchange. In whom }o& are ctrenmcifed^ 
 &c. buried with him in baptifm ? if baptifm did hot 
 feal and confirm the inward Circumci(ion,ic could not 
 be faid circumcifedin Chrift% being buried with him irt 
 baptifm, and baptifm could not leal inward Circum- 
 cifion , but as it was of the Came ufe with outward 
 Circumcifion, which did mod directly fignifie the city 
 cumcifion of the heart ; and baptifm held the fame 
 analogie,and was inftituted to the fame end; therefor^ 
 it's called the waftiing of regeneration. Suppofe the. 
 Ordinance ftlould again be changed, and the foyer**, 
 (ion (houid be thus, That baptifm (bould be atjolifti- 
 ed, and citcumcifion fee up again, and theApoftle 
 (bould cxprefs himfclf after the fame mannerjintend- 
 ing to rake them off the uk of baptifni, and to be 
 circumcifed $ and fay ye are compieat in CJirift, jra 
 whom ye are alfo baptized with the baptifm of 
 Chn(t 9 being circumcifed with himjwoutd not the de- 
 duction be clear, thit circumcifion was ordained in** 
 ftead of baptifm , and to fupply the defect of that 
 Ordinance? the fame conclufion mull be accotding to 
 the words as from circumcifion to baptifm. 
 
 The fumme of all is. That as inward circumcifion 
 was figntfied by the outward circumcifion the circunv 
 ciiion made without hands, by the circumcifion with 
 handsj. as the proper and direcl fign of it ; fo is thac 
 inward dajamcifion ■{■ as really and fully fignified* 
 
 I £ and 
 
(120) 
 
 and confirmed by baptifm; and that Ordinance 2s ap- 
 pointed to reprefent and feal thar,u the outward ad 
 of circumcifion was formerly: fo that circumcifion and 
 baptifm, as co the thing fignified , and the inward in- 
 tent of their ufe,are made alt one ; elfe it will be very 
 hard to make fenfe of this place of Scripture. 
 
 The Pleas againft this interpretation are of little 
 worth, if weighed ; fome fay it's onely meant of the 
 inward circumcifion, and inward baptifm, which in- 
 terpretation will fcrve us better then themfelves; for 
 if inward graces, and of the fame fubftantial work be 
 done on us, as circumci fed and baptized in Chrift, it 
 flie ws the onenefs of the outward figns in the fame 
 fignification. 
 
 Mt^Tombes faith in his Examen p,o$. That there 
 is an analogic between circumcifion and baptifm: yet 
 faith it is rather between circumcifion and Chrifts bu- 
 rial, then between circumcifion and baptifm, as Chrj- 
 foftom^ and after him Theophjlatt on the place. 
 
 All which will (till make out the truth of our in- 
 terpretation ; For, 
 
 Firft, if there be an analogie between them, as is, 
 and mull be granted, then there is fome proportion 
 and agreement between thefe two Ordinances; now 
 it's not in the outward adminift ration, nor the exter- 
 nal! fign , in that there is no proportion between s 
 knife and water;and therefore it mud be in their pro- 
 per fign ification and reallufe, which is the Apoftles 
 (cope in this place : and therefore he exprefleth the 
 inward grace properly fignified by the one Ordi- 
 nance* 
 
(in) 
 nance, and yet confirmed by the other; Circumelfei 
 in him, being buried With him in Baptifm. 
 
 2. If the analogy be between Circumciiion and 
 Chrift* buriaf, not between it and Bapcifm,yet it will 
 come all to one, yea be our advantage ; For, 
 
 i. That fhews that Circumcifion did hold forth 
 as much as Baptifm, viz,. Chrifts death and bu- 
 rial. 
 
 2. That when we are faid to be buried with Chrift 
 in Baptifm, and that is the outward fign to reprefenc 
 our burial with Chrift, we are as if we were cireur&r 
 cifed i Circumcifion holds analogy with Chrifts bu- 
 rial , and fo doth Baptifm with both ; And thus 
 take it in what fcnfe you will , the Text will clc« it 
 fcif. 
 
 .&G 
 
 I ^ Chap, 
 
(Ill) u 
 
 Chap. XIV. 
 
 A char Explication of Mat. 28. 19. with 
 Mar* 1 4. 15, -i 6-. wherein their argu- 
 ment from the fir fl injiitution is opened 
 atdfonfuted. 
 
 LET* us at Icngth'torae ro viewtfcat prime Text, 
 fJW«*A.»8. r^ on which theie chat areagainft 
 ftfib^baiptifrti lay thtf moft weight* As from eh? 
 very fifftinftitutionof, that Owdkttrtc^, Chrift gives 
 tiis Apoftles there Commi{Tt<™ to teach and baptize;. 
 Co Jfe tfaefore, and teach all ?^ations^aptiz, ; ng them 
 in the mine of the Father^ Son and holy Cjho]}* Wence 
 (lAStmfc&Ti) which they tranflate, Dilciple all 
 Nations, and then baptize them, they argue, None 
 are to be baptized by Chrifts inftitiirion , but thefe 
 which are firft taughr, and Co made Difciples: But In- 
 fants are not capable to be taught, or to be made 
 pifciples. Ergo, They may not be baptized. 
 
 TfeatjJ may flaew the errors of this argument, and 
 foTulty clear up the point , the terms with their con- 
 nexion both in the major and minor proportion 
 muft be examined from the words of the Text, and 
 that parallel place, Mar. \6. 15, 16. which for me- 
 thods fake I (hall hold forth in thefe following con- 
 Gderatioro, 
 
 I. For 
 
1. For the word /w«t^MTstVatT«, we (hall not much 
 ftand on, whether it be tranflated to make Difciples, 
 or as it is in our common verflon , Go teach all Na- 
 tions ; for it is fometimes a verb tianfidve $ to teach 
 by writing, or viva voce , with a living voyce ; and 
 fo it is to be taken here , faith learned whitak$r De 
 Script, and moft agreeable with CMar. 16. 15. 
 whete he bids them go preach the Gofpel to every 
 Creature, 1 
 
 2. The ftrength of the argument lies (if there be 
 any ftrength in it ) on theabfolute (uppofed con- 
 nexion ber ween di-opling and being baptized;there- 
 fore they fay , None but thefe which are capable of 
 
 ' teaching , are capable of B*rxi(m ; which is Fallacia 
 a diBo feemdum q,uidaddiBumfimpliciter % a Fallacy 
 to take thac abfoluccly which is meant only according 
 to fome refped. but to (hew the idlencfs of the con- 
 nexion ; 
 
 1. You find preaching or teaching the Gofpel to 
 be feparated as to ihe admimft ration, and neceffary 
 and immediate connexion, by Paul himfelf , 1 Cor. 
 1 . 17. Chrift fent me not to baptize y bm to preach the 
 Gojpel ; 10 he faith in the former verfes , He taught 
 many i baptized few, 
 
 2. Compare this with Mar. 16.15,16. which ex- 
 pounds this, you will find believing and being ba- 
 ptized as clofe connected to faIvation,as here Bapti- 
 zing to Teach; He that believeth and is baptized. Jhall 
 befavtd. Now if any will ftand on the order of 
 words CO prove 1a infticution, we may as well argue 
 
 from 
 
(124) 
 
 from Ma^p they from Mmbtw ; None muA b» 
 Jieveth.ind is not baptized, csn behaved • and rhir 
 Lp^' er 4 0f . pbr L afethe y" e "bfolutely joyned' ° 
 
 dc to make Uaptifm equal W)t h faith to falvation » 
 tad yet we have as much ground to argne from Zm 
 Pne place fo as they front the other s ?«k£*J 
 JJH adm,t fome other quahfying term to m,K 
 
 fnfjf ° rder ^ f things is not al< vsy«, or commonlv 
 
 t^Yo^f '* SCtiptUre by the P° fitlon ' «f *» 
 words, for fometimes one thing m-the order of 
 
 Ztl!^? ote anotber > wh * h ™S 
 
 tore and coofidentionij antecedent to it 5 as Mar.i 
 15. Repentance is pot before Faith,fo w . to. «. Con- 
 feffion wuh the mouth i< put before belief with 
 nll« „ ' ™ o/il ™£ n * with abundance of other 
 places of Scripture. Thus many things in the Evan- 
 gehftsare left out by one,fu PP kd bylnother and 
 the fame word diteSly utt«c*in 6n/in«r ed in an- 
 other Really about the admmiftration of Se 
 i-Ofds Supper. For to avoyd tedioufnels^onlult the 
 placesyour fej V «. Mau ,6.26, 17.Mar.14X 
 *3- t^k: it. 20. 1 Cor. 11. 15. ' X ' 
 
 3^Athirdcon(iderarion to open this Text in 
 Mm fwtom companngit once more with itspa- 
 
 he elf <r ,5 -'^^ ereit < ^Preach the G»/ei ; 
 ** <t is, Tetck*»il,*p„v : Now hence it follows, 
 
 th?t 
 
(12$) 
 
 that their teaching was by holding forth the GofpeL 
 As much as if he had faid, Open the Covenant, tell 
 men the riches and fulnefs of grace : Now if they 
 muft teach the Gofpel,they mud needs inftrud: them 
 in the Covenant, which was to thefe that believed, 
 and their feed. Nowfutableto this Commiflion, 
 Peter, when he comes to open the Gofpel to the 
 Jews pricked in their hearts, prefently holds out the 
 promifeto them and their Children, ABsT.^S^ 30. 
 and by that to make them both Difciples. So Gal. 
 3.13, The bleflings of Abraham to come on the 
 Gentiles, is one of the main parts of the Gofpel. 
 Now if they teach men Gofpel, they mud preach as 
 Peter did when he had converted the Parent > The 
 Promife is to you and to pur Children. Thus in Luk- %* 
 72. this is made one great end of Chrifts coming , to 
 perform the mercy promifedto our Fathers, , and to re- 
 member his holy Covenant ; fo that preaching the 
 Gofpel is preaching the Covenant.Now that Infants 
 are in the Covenant as well as grown perfons, we 
 have formerly proved. 
 
 4. This is no more then was required of Abraham 
 at the time of Circumcifion, and yet his Infants were 
 not excluded from the Ordinance, gen. 17. Walkjbe- 
 fore me , and be perfett. Chap. 18. 10. Abraham was 
 to command his Children, and teach them to keep 
 the ways of the Lord-' and yet his Children were not 
 to be kept from the fign of the Covenant, until they 
 were taught, and had walked before God in upright- 
 nefs 3 \%v4brah^m. 
 
 5- 1° 
 
(1 16} 
 
 J. To come home to the word- in their own 
 fenfe, lu^taofdm fignifies Make DifiipUs-,; now 
 Children are not capable of being made Difci^les, 
 fay they. 
 
 I anfvver , i . Some have been made Difriples be- 
 fore they were diftinclly taught,as the twelve, whom 
 Chrift cai!ed,and they followed him,tnd became his 
 Difcip!e% and were real Difciples,yeca$ ignorant as 
 Infants, and were taught afterwards by degrees 
 
 2. One isfaid to be made a Difcipleeven in vulgar 
 phrafc , as well who is lifted in the School co be 
 taught , as one that is teaching or already taught , 
 though he hath not learnt a letter : Thus in ail 
 Schools lis a qfual phrafe at the firft entrance of a 
 Child, he is called a new Scholar, or a new Difciple : 
 Thus Infants being entred into Quids School , and 
 given up to be caught in time, and by degrees , may 
 be accounted Dticipl s ; it was fo in the former in- 
 fiance, and ii*& no firange exprcflion in civil 
 Schools. 
 
 3. Infants are exprcfly called Difciples iothe New 
 Teftamenr, as well as grown and taught men : Thus 
 es4%s 15.10. Circumcifion •§ called a yoke p»to»the 
 neck of th&Di/ciples s that »s, on Iofaaos,.whc*weKe 
 the fpecral SubjecV of that Ordinance, and bote the 
 burthen of if, and not properly the Parents ; aadyet 
 the Parents had 1 he deep fenfe of ic refle&ing on them- 
 felves and their little pass, and die*eforfi he calls ic» 
 yoke that they nor. their Fathers were able to bea< ; 
 especially becaufe it did bind them and then Children 
 
 to 
 
(127) 
 
 to keep the whole Law* there is no evafion of this-, if 
 they fay it was meant of the Fathers, and of the do 
 clrine of Circurncifion , which. did bind themfeives; 
 yec they muft grant the yoke was on their Children 
 as to the aft ; and that if the dp&rine was fo bur- 
 thenfome, much more the praclice , which the poor 
 Infants are under; and they are called indifirmeiy 
 Difciples t 6thet by themfelves,or with their Parents* 
 And the argument is thus : Thofe were Difciples on 
 whom the yoke of circurncifion was laid ; but on In- 
 fants was this yoke laid. Ergo Infants are Difciples 
 intheNewTeflarnentexpreflipo. If you will make 
 any diftin&ion,it mud be in the manner of lay ing on 
 the yoke , vU. on the Parents doclrinally , on the 
 Children actually : but there can be no reftridion of 
 the word, Difciples, from tbefe on whom that yoke 
 was laid, as is expreft in that Chapter. Confider , 
 
 4 Let us come to the fubjeds to whom the Gofpel 
 is to be preached • and they taught and baptized $ ic 
 is in Mttbeto , ?wn£ 7* %&pn> all 7{ations; in Marl^ 
 it is, Pretch the Gofpel, **V» *tiV«, to every 
 Creature i Now that Infants (bould be none of all 
 (be Nations , and excluded from being of this crea- 
 tion of God , who were included as fpecial fubje^ls 
 when the Church was in but fo fmal a fpot of the 
 world , is from our narrow apprehenfions in the 
 Gofpel times of difpenfation of Grace. 
 
 And the argument our Divines bring from this 
 place is ftrong and moft confiderable : The Gofpel 
 If to be preached to every Creature, all Nations muft 
 
(I2g) 
 
 be difcipled - but Infants are a part of this creation^ 
 are included in ail Nations ;• therefore the^ muft be 
 made Difciples alfo.Read the Text again; Mat, 28. 
 go teach all Tfations (?wT*Tce6$M ) bay tiding 
 them (Jvixs ) which muft needs refer to (** Zdw) 
 though the one be mafculine,the other; the neuter; or 
 elfe muft relate to nothing, forithirhno Relative 
 befides to anfwer unto .- This is very common in 
 Scripture, and the fame phrafes,as thevfe well know 
 that undeiftand the Greek in Rev, 2. 2 6,t 7. and Chap, 
 ip. i^.thereise^tfwithrtfT^jasMr.C^ffofiV. E. 
 Well obferves. Cohfult ABs 15.17. and 26, 17. 
 Atts 21. 25. Eph. 2. 11. Mafculinesjoyned with 
 (id-w ) that fign'ifesdfl Nations. Now are Infants 
 none of the Nations, or none of the National crea- 
 tion which the Gofpel may reach ? God forbid. 
 
 The words hold forth only the general commifli- 
 on given to the Apoftles after Chrifts death 5 which 
 was an enlarging of their bounds,; who were only 
 formerly circumfcrlbedin Ittdca, and charged not to 
 go into the way of the Gentiles : but now the em- 
 pale is broken down, they muft preach the Gofpel 
 to every creature, teach all Nations, and baptize 
 them; but it doth not hold forth either the proper 
 fubje&s of B aptifm ,crr t!h'4 form or manner of bapti- 
 zing, which (hould not be delivered ("according to 
 their own rule of inftitutionsj in general and indefi- 
 nite terms, as, Every,(>eatHre,dflNXtiotJs- } indby 
 tranGtive words, as, Prfach the Gofpel to them , teach 
 thm. If this be the prime inftitution of biptizfof, 
 
 from 
 
(1*9) 
 from which place they exclude Infants, when Chrift 
 ufeth fuch univerfal and comprehensive expreflions - 
 we fhall defire but to deal with them on their ground 3 
 and the fame Text will ferve to prove our positions 
 more demonftratively then theirs : And this Texc 
 (hews, that Chrift gave commiffion to the Apoftles 
 and Minifters to preach and baptize ; but in what 
 order to do it,or what (hould be required co the qua- 
 lification of thefubjed as abfolutely neceiTary, is not 
 at all difcovered in this Scripture; they muft look for 
 another Text to exclude Infants betides this,eife give 
 up their confidence. 
 
 Either this placets the full and exa& rule of u£ 
 flitutionof baptizing, or not; if they fay it is, then 
 it would defcribe the perfons, and the manner , the 
 matter and the form of baptizing , and that in the 
 ufual phrafe with other Scriptures : but here is only 
 a general commiflion to two great aSs, viz,, to 
 preach , teach and baptize ; and we may fay in the 
 fame place , that whoever are outwardly taught, or 
 do buc hear the Gofpel ( though they walk never 
 fo contrary ) muft be baptized ; for the commiffion 
 is , Teach and baptize, nothing of the parties enter- 
 tainment of it is mentioned in this Mat, 28. nor of 
 the qualification of the fubjecl with any diftinguifih- 
 ing character. If they fay this doth not hold forth 
 all the institutions in every particular , as they muft 
 grant, then we may compare other Scriptures with 
 this, to make out the full institution , as thefe where 
 
 Infants 
 
(130) 
 Infants ire mentioned with fo much gracious eon« 
 fider ation, as hath been formerly t xprcii- 46* 
 
 Chap. XV. 
 
 Concerning the fignification and uje of the 
 word Baptifm y or to be baptised • the 
 genuine Etymologie of it in the Old and 
 New Teftament ; the places in the 
 New Teftament brought to projie it 
 fignifies to plunge the u?hole body 7 an- 
 jwered. 
 
 TH E confidence of thefe that diflfcr hathieen 
 fo great, that as rhey have excommunicated In- 
 fants from the ct parity of ftfeh a privtledge , which 
 ihey had fo old a titfe unco ; fothey have iorced this 
 only fenfe from the word to baptize , that it tnuft fig- 
 nu r *e to plunge the whole body under water $ and 
 deny that to betrue Baptiim , which is not fo ad- 
 rrviniftred ; and fo make it as efifentia! ro the maimer, 
 as vifibfe profeffion to the matter. 
 
 For clearing up of -this* mift , I iiave diligently en- 
 yuiredinto the propriety of the word , and itstffein 
 lire Greek Tranfco*§ of the Old" ami New Tefta- 
 ment? 
 
05*) 
 
 merit, which are the beftguides in this cafe 5 and if 
 we look narrowly , it will be very hard to find, and 
 Very feldome , that ever the word in Scripture is ufed 
 for the total imraerfion of the body, 01 being abso- 
 lutely under water 
 
 The word (&<riK*i) fignlfies artiong all Wri- 
 ters both Heathen and Ecclefiaftical, promifcuoufly 
 to d«p into,or wafli with water, by pouring on of ir, 
 or Iprinkling • and there is nothing more ufual in the 
 New Teftament expreflion of it, then to hold forth 
 any kind of wafliing ; It's expreft in Authors by ma* 
 def*&are t lavare, abluere, to wet or wafli : thus Bn* 
 d&iis , ScapuU , Pafor and Grotiw do interpret the 
 word,though they grant it is, and may be taken more 
 ftrtclly for imrnertion : but let the Scripture explain 
 it k\f 9 Mar. j. 4. it is ufed for the wafliing of hands, 
 and of cups, and beds,and brazen veffels, and of ta- 
 bles ; which is not by plunging them in the water , 
 fo much as wafliing them by the pouring forth of wa- 
 ter on them ; for fo it is expreft , when they came 
 from the market tbey dufft not eat (*irp*faidtyfi) 
 without they were baptized, that is, waflbed ; which 
 could not be their whole bodies, without both ex- 
 ceffive trouble and danger , for which times and lea- 
 fons rauft be obferved ': And befides this ( faith the 
 Evangelift ) they retained many other things in cu- 
 ftome 9 &*!fti*F** fixym, &c. as the Baptifm of 
 cups , that is, lotiont 3 t oi the wafliing of cups ; which 
 may be as well done ' y pouring on water 3 as by 
 plunging into water-, and was and is ufual \y done in 
 
 alf 
 
all Nations. So in Lnk- i i. 3 V the Pharifees won- 
 dred at Jefus (%v « votm kCatfldn ©rfrS «piV* J that 
 he was not baptized before dinner, that is, did not 
 tvafli. Arid Hel>. 9. 1 o. all the Ceremonial wafhings 
 or fprinklings are called Baptifms ; in a metaphori- 
 cal fenfe it's ufed for the pouring forch of the fpi- 
 fir. 
 
 And further, when it is tf anil tted to dip, both in 
 theOIdandNewTeftament, ic Signifies commonly 
 the lead touch or tad of any thing that is liquid. So 
 Luke 16. 24, Dives begs that Lazams might be 
 fent ( I** MAm. to <**? w t* Sclktu Aif aurtv <a*t©-) that 
 he might baptize, or dip the top of his finger in wa- 
 ter to cool his tongue ; the leaft drop would have 
 been prized by bim, I Sam. 14* 17. finathan is fiid 
 to dip the end of his rod in an hony-comb, that is, 
 but to take a very little; and the word is (dviM^) 
 (oithnkAingxoJ. 12.22. Joh.\*.. 26. 
 
 But to put it out of queftion , that there needs no 
 fuch rigidnefs ; and in prefsing this method of 
 plunging, from the word Baptifm^ let us compare it 
 with other phrafes. When the Scri- 
 Differt a Amttt, pture would exprefs a covering of 
 quod 4 prof"*- the whole body under water, and fo 
 S5 ISSlST * **^ ™ being wholly under 
 Paforj Lextc. water, it uleth two other words, as 
 different from baptizing » viz. 
 HA-MTarriZifyi* aad«Au£«u and /£«£$. Compare L Car. 
 10. 2. All the Fathers and the Israelites are fatd to 
 be baptized in the Cloud, and in the Set; they bad 
 
 only 
 
(us; 
 
 only the dewingsofthe Cloud,and thefprinklings o? 
 the water on them as they paft through.- But in Exod, 
 1 5-4,5' when he fpeaks ofPbaroah ard hisHoalt^ he 
 doth not fay they were baptized in the waters, but 
 ufeth thefe two words, *&7e7i6vnnv iv efw^pj SaWwvj 
 *#*v w*r* drowned in the Red Sea^ fubmerfi ; and he d 
 adds, the depths have covered them ; and >&Tt&£ m 
 guSwiamtiSof, they fank, or as the word is I 
 dbufed themselves into the bottom as a ft one j while the 
 Ifraelites Were but baptized under the gentle droppings 
 of the Cloud, and of the Sea. And the very fame di- 
 itinftion did the Greek Writers make between bap- 
 tizing and doufing, or carting under water ; espref- 
 fing by baptizing, to be in the water as a Bottle if j/ck 
 Ship that is feldom or never wholly overwhelmed i 
 And this appears mod demonstratively to be. their, 
 meaning by the verfe of the Ancient Oracle of the 
 Athenians, who well knew how to fpeakand diftiir 
 giiifti Greek. 
 
 A?jlg; gdifttUfa, fovea Jim i %4w$ l&. 
 Baptize or \\>ajh hibi>\itm inftar as a Botttlein 
 water % but do not drown him, or utterly plungo 
 him. 
 
 Whereby it plainly appears thk the word ( to bap- 
 tize) (ignifies any kind of wafhing , whether by 
 fprinkling or pouring out of water, or dipping into 
 watered that it is Specially diftinguifhed from thefe 
 words that do (Tgoifie a totalfubmeifion 5 and thsfe 
 
men do rsck the word only to fpeak for plunging 
 under water, excluding the ulual and more common 
 fence of if, which is to waGi or cleanfe. 
 
 Bee lee us view the Scriptures which they bring for 
 rhe maintainsnee of this fignification, yJ/rff.3. 13,16. 
 jeftts after he was baptize Ajteent firaight Wajesup out 
 of the Water ^ ( tlviQuhm ra vJkrQ- ) which may be 
 crai .flited, he went up from the waters, ^ fignifying 
 more properly ab then ex , from then out ; and it is 
 mod fiiitable to trar.flate it fo,becaufe all rivers,for 
 moft parr,!ie low,and in valleys, in corning to which 
 we are (aid to defcend, and coming from to afcend ; 
 thus when Chrift afcended, in Att.J.9. He Wat ta- 
 ken cut of thrir fight, that is, from their fight. 
 Of the like consideration is :hat other place, which 
 h^ fo much weight on for to hold forth plang- 
 ^$8 8. 36,37,3 8. Of Philip and the Eunuch,it is 
 v $?ent both down Into the Water ( *?* " v«k? ) 
 may as well, and better be trarflated, they 
 mn totr towards ths Water {\t feems they being 
 pn the upper grcund/pied water below them,and fo 
 it co be baptized, as it is a common 
 :o go dOvvn to the water (ide; 
 fhould we grant them this interpre- 
 tation* that ttoej Went both down into the water which 
 ..rig of the wprds,yet it can never be proved 
 t their whole body was dipt all over; 
 nay go into the W2ter 5 and yet not be over his 
 . i how can they prove by this place they went 
 how tar tfoy went; or whether Phi- 
 
* C *35 ) 
 //pdid not take up water,, and poured it on him ; ©4 
 whether be duckc him under water, or dipt oneiy his 
 head ; nothing can be proved from this place $ but if 
 they conjecture one thing, we may another, with as 
 much evidence. In the 1 07. Pfal. it is faid, They thrt 
 go down to thefea injhips r feethy wonders $ when they, 
 go down into the Tea in Giips, is the fhip plunged all 
 over ? or are they under water in the fhip ? 
 
 Yet thirdly, it is evident that their going into the 
 water^ is diftinguifhed in the fame ver. from the Eu- 
 nuchs being baptized 5 they went down, or to (or 
 according to their own mind,) into the water 3 and he 
 baptized him : fo that the going into the water,take 
 it for dipping and ducking,is not baptizing,but fome- 
 thing diltincl>another acl| and if they will prove go- 
 ing down to the water,or into the wacer,in this place 
 denotes the dipping of the whole body , then he muft 
 be dipt before he was baptized ; for Thilip baptized 
 him after they went into the water. ^ 
 
 Again, there is as much from this phrafe to prove 
 Philip to be dipt as the Eunuch $ and if dipping be 
 baptizing, for the text faith exprefly, : they both Went. 
 down to ,or in the water ^ you interpret it after their 
 qwn heart, that they both went into the water, <Phh>, 
 Up was as much in the water as the Eunuch; for therq 
 is no exception made,but both went in together,and 
 whofhould then baptize the Eunuch? if thisfeeni 
 to be aa abfurdity to them 3 how can they from thi| 
 ejxpreflion, jiuhe. (evereft acception, conclude tjW 
 Eunuch was dipt i but they both went into rtie wa» 
 
(116 J • 
 
 ret together, feeing the Text fpeaks as much of Phi- 
 lips going into the water, as of the Eurrachs : But if 
 we take it according to the fiift tranfhtion, that they 
 went both down towards the water, there may be 
 fome rcafonable account givsn how the one was bap- 
 tized | which feems to be moft probable, by pouring 
 out water upon him. 
 
 If any one object further from the next verfe,tbaE 
 they afcended out of the water, here is net ( ^ro as 
 in the former place,but ** w £<&w ) out of the water , 
 yet ic m\\ not ac all- help them; for it is faid of chtm 
 both, they came up out of the water, and it fpeaks 
 as much of Philips dipping hrmfelf as the Eunuchjand 
 you may as well argue that Philip was new dipt, as 
 that the Eunuch was baptized by dipping, becaufe 
 they both came up out of the water;befides > one may 
 be faid very properly to come out of the water, if he 
 put but his foot into it ; and thus you fee on what 
 weak foundations thefe high ftructures of confidence 
 and rigidnefs are built. 
 
 The third and molt triumphant place, which they 
 cry up, and adore for this manner of baptizing by 
 d ippi ng, is John 3.23. And John was baftiKing in 
 tA^non near to Salem, becaufe there Was much water 
 there. 
 
 If we confider impartially, here is but a Geogra- 
 phical defcription of this place, of its fruation, nigh 
 Salem , and of the bene fie they had of water, in re- 
 gard of the moft places befides in the countrey, c/4;- 
 nen lying nigh the banks of fordan-^ni whereas they 
 
 Jay 
 
mm 
 
 lay the weight on this, that he gives k as a reafon 
 why Iohn was baptizing at ^nonjotemfc there was 
 much water there; it may be a very good reafon Why 
 he chofe that place for the countrey to come in, and 
 be baptized, becaufe they might go many a mile in 
 thefe hot countreys, and noc meet with a drop of 
 water, and it was a great priviledge accounted to 
 thefe places that banked on Iordan, that they had 
 much water ; but what argument is this to prove that 
 John plunged all he baptized ? 
 
 The Argument according to their form muft be 
 thus ;Iohn baptized in *s£non, becaufe there was much 
 water 5 Ergo, baptizing is by dipping all the whole 
 body a this is a dangerous and ominous way of argu- 
 ing to thofe who deny confequences,and deductions, 
 for to warrant duties without exprefs fyllabical pre- 
 cept ; I hope they will allow us the fame priviledge 
 of demonftration, when we fay, whole houfes were 
 baptized, 8rgo 9 Infants and Children, who are the 
 pillars of a houfejis not this more fair and probable, 
 then that loh* plunged their whole body, becaufe 
 there was much water ? There is none of our confe* 
 quences for Infants baptifmfo (trained and far fetchr, 
 as we have demonftrated formerly 5 it was neceffary 
 for them that had fo many of feveral parts to baptize, 
 to go where there may be much water, when they 
 could get hardly a drop many miles round about,and - 
 yet not imrnerfe every one they baptized ; you may 
 in SngJartd go 20 miles in fome countreys, and not 
 fin4 a river co plunge a mans whole body under the 
 K 1 water. 
 
water, what would it be in Spain, and the other hot 
 countr eys,where water is fold as wine and bear with 
 us how far might they go ere they could get a river 
 to plunge themfelves in. ? Thus you fee how little rea- 
 fon they have from thefe Scriptures to be foprerem- 
 jirory and rigid,as to make the efTence of baptifm to 
 be dipping, or plunging all the body. 
 The laft pretence commonly urged for this dipping, 
 is from the analogie it hath with (Thrifts burial, from 
 that Rom 6.4. £0/2.12 Buried with htm in baptifm \ 
 hence fay they it is clear one muft be dipt under wa- 
 ter,elfe it will not reprcfent a burial. In this they 
 put all their confidence,and therefore let us ferioufly 
 view their ftrengtb. 
 
 Sol. Fir ft, let it be confidered that they ftill make 
 ufe of confquences, to prove indicutions, which they 
 will not allow u?o ■ 
 
 " But more particularly, i, Plunging the wbote bo- 
 dy into the water, doth not hold (tolitode neither 
 with Chrids burial, nor the manner of burials in the 
 moftpart of the world ; for firft, for Chrifts burial 
 and the manner of tc,was not by throwing under the 
 earth, for Chrifls body was wrapt in a linnen cloth 
 by Tofsph, and laid ifi a Tomb , or Sepulchre , 
 hewenoutofa rock, for that wasthecuftomeof the 
 Jews, e rape (pecum excavare condendis corporibus : 
 •Matth. 27.60. To cut out apUce like a cave, or den, 
 out of* rocl^ to lay their dead bodies in t as is obferved 
 by a man of great learning,and diligence: thus when 
 we fleep in our houfes we may be (aid to be buried, 
 having fomeching over $11? heads. Secondly, 
 
(n9) 
 
 Secondly, the manner of burying in Europe is not 
 by plunging the body into a pic of durt, but by call- 
 ing duft or dung on the perfon: fo that rheir pouring 
 out water on an Infant asapsffive fub/ecl, feems 
 more to anfwer the . Cmilitude of burying, then 
 the calling into the water, wherein there is fome 
 motion of the party himfelf contributing to his ba- 
 ptizing. 
 
 Thirdly, no man is faid to be buried who falls in- 
 to the water, or under earth, without he (lay there 
 fome considerable time. 
 
 Fourthly, we are faid to be buried with ChriCI in 
 baptifm, in regard of the ipiritual union we have 
 withChrift in his death, and burial; and this is as 
 much fignified by ppuring water on a perfon(as earth 
 on a dead body) as well, I fay, as by plunging. 
 Let us now confider what remains to be faid againft 
 this abfolute rule, as they would make it ; you have 
 feen all their main places for plunging,with what de- 
 monftration, at the beft ex probabilibtu & incertis^ 
 out of provable and uncertain conjeclures, which 
 they fo much tax us wichall, and yet the eye fees noc 
 itfelf. 
 
 Let us now go on, and confider what other places 
 oi Scripture fpeak more direcl to qualifie this rigid 
 opinion of plunging. 
 
 Whzn,John began firft to adminifter his officii t Is 
 
 h\dMat.$.$, That Ierufalem, and all Judea, and all 
 
 the regions round about lor dan went forth to John^and 
 
 were baptized of him in Jordan : A man had need have 
 
 K 4 good 
 
rnan.v t h6uun6 that came forth, far «£ dJjE J 
 
 nimb'efof ASK? great T y ' 0I the «"«<* 
 nimoer o thefe InhaDKants ; and how they could be 
 
 gv bapnzed men and womer-jn their cloths pro 
 
 imfcnonfly.or how d,ey could get garments foS 
 
 « to make the aS decent, « wVpl," K oujd 
 
 have, tong there were fo many, forth? wc^en and 
 
 the qv wo prepare the m f c | v « lor the cojotMS- 
 
 Biftrttion or forf, an Ordinance, I cannot du£. 
 
 ^ r # bw ^^ b ^Sw 
 
 M "PC-rtam; and that wbicbii fo hotly contended 
 {0r '-' f [ m ;-^b!^ilchin gs d,el confidS 
 Thehkco! thac , ^ 4 r where jio* were 
 
 £ef w,th rhe like .rcpnvfe. .- fo that it i,S 
 laid they, were; bapt^d, naf how . and the word as 
 you have .een, , n* ,, {$g - £ ^"J/j 
 
 od^ng^utadmicsofamoreiargT^fica- 
 
jbardiy be conceived how it could fee done vwtjn that 
 gravity the Go (pel requires, by plunging in their 
 own proper habits; and fuchfadden acls could not 
 be done with fuitabje preparations of garments. 
 
 But to come to particular, inltances, and parallel 
 them together with former plsces,which are brought 
 to prove this kind of dipping; and let us judge which 
 hath more demonftration. ABs 9.18. Paul was bap- 
 tized in the houfe of Judas ; there is nothing of a 
 Jordan or yEnon, a river that he was carried unto ; 
 neither can they by any thing prove that Paul was 
 thus dipt, but only their good will to have it fo 3 nei- 
 ther is it probable that every houfe had a deep pond 
 belonging to it, or a river running through if, or fo 
 vaft a receptacle or cittern to hold water as to plunge 
 3 mans whole body in it. 
 
 SecondlyjConfider the Jailors cafe, ABs 16.33. nc 
 was baptized in the prifon, and at midnight, he and 
 his houfe; he wa(hed their (tripes, and they waQied 
 him in token of remiffion of fins. 
 
 All that the moft rational and profound Critick of 
 that judgement can fay, is onely this » That it may 
 be fuppofed he had fome great vetTeI,whtch feme had 
 in theie hot countreys for wafhing themfelves tn,ard 
 fo made ufe of it himfelfto be baptized ; but what a 
 poor fuppofirion in this?there is nothing either in the 
 texr,or from reafon to countenance it 3 who can ima- 
 gine that in thefe hot countreys, where water is fo 
 fcarce aid precious,* poor Jay lor (hould have (uch a 
 veifel of fo largs and vaft a continent, which mud 
 
 coft 
 
■Cm*) 
 
 coft much ; oc that the State would provide foch a 
 veflel in the Pri'fon to bathe and refredi Prifoners 
 who are under fufpition, or cenfures of all forts of 
 crimes againft the State ? but no more of that ; its 
 too grofs to conceive : And why may not we as 
 well argue thus ; The Jay ior wa> baptized late in the 
 night in the Prifon ; Ergo pot by plunging,buc wafh- 
 ing or pouring out water on him,as they argue from 
 fob 3.33. John was baptizing in ^£no» near Salem, 
 becaufe there was much water there • Ergons bapti- 
 zed 'by plunging ; I leare it to any fober judgement 
 ro determine ; if the one prove that baptizing may 
 be by dipping, the other proves it may be by fome 
 other way. 
 
 T hus you fee the Scripture is not fo peremptory 
 as thefe men are, but hath left the method of bapti- 
 zing in genera), and under a latitude : Neither can 
 they bring one exprefs.ptoce which holds it forth ei- 
 ther in precept or president ( whkh they call for 
 from u? to (hew them for our judge menr, and will 
 not be fatisfied in all other confederations) and have 
 no more but conjectural confequences to prove their 
 abfolute determination^, but what their confidence 
 fupplies ; N And if there be any abfolute need of dip- 
 ping, it is to cool the heat of thefe mens fpirits, who 
 deny Eaptifm to be true,becaufe they have not been 
 plunged. 
 
 The fum of all is this • They affirm the word/ To 
 &?/****,( jgnifies only immerfion,plunging or dipping 
 the whole body under water ; we deny it, and fhew 
 
 that 
 
r i43 ^ 
 
 tfoat it (ignifies to wafh by pouring on water, and 
 more often in the Old and New Tefhment ; and 
 that when this word is ufed in the Scripture, itsop- 
 pofed toother words thatdgnifie properly doufing, 
 or calling under water: And I think I may fay it 
 without too much rafhnefs.that they can hardly bring 
 one explicit place in the Old or New Teftament, 
 where the word, To baptize, is v&d pofitively for 
 plunging or doufing under water ; and doubtlefs the 
 moft of that judgement know not what the meaning 
 of the words are, elfe they would not lay the effence 
 of Baptifmona word of fuchalarge ufe. 
 
 The Scriptures being thus cleared , to fpeak at lead:, 
 that plunging is not abfolutely neceffary to conftirute 
 the truth of Baptifm : Let us now come to confider 
 the morality of this judgement , and the practical 
 conveniencies or inconveniencies of this way of 
 phmging ; for if it be the only and pure Gofpel- 
 Way, it will have no ominous or uncomely afpeclon 
 other rules, which are from the fame authority, nor 
 any way afperfe the Gofpei. 
 
 i.I know not how to believe that Chrift would 
 ordain any Ordinance, and tye fouls ftriclly to it, 
 that cannot be pradifed univerfally by all, and but 
 in fome places,and at fome feafons,without manifold 
 inconveniencies and dangers unto nature : For if 
 only dipping fhouid be baptixing^nd every one that 
 believes ought prefently to be baptized, how (hall 
 they do that live in thofe hot and dry Countryes 
 where water is fo (careers it is in many places of the 
 
 worldj, 
 
044) 
 
 world, whomufi: be forced to go fo many miles to 
 come to a River, and yet may only find itafmall 
 Brook, with which they can hardly wet their feet in 
 pifllng over, as it is in many places of the World ? 
 
 And if there were in every place never fo much 
 water, yet how dangerous is it for fome bodies who 
 are rheumatick, and fubjeel to Catarrhs and deflexi- 
 ons, in the winter time ("for no feafon (hould hinder 
 a man from the praclice of an Ordinance,) in cold and 
 wet to be plunged into the water ? it were enough 
 to beget difeafes in the moft healthy bodies; Chrift is 
 more tender of the bodies of his Saints, then co put 
 them into fuch hazards ; and I hope no one will con- 
 ceive baptifm to be a chirm to prevent all inconveni* 
 encies and difeafes on the body : yet thezeal of 
 thefe of that way carries on fo furioufly, that they 
 think its impofftble foi them co get any hurt, though 
 they plunge chemfeives into the water in froft and 
 fnow: but its dangerous to tempt God out of his 
 ordinary way ofprefervation, when there is no ah- 
 folute necefficy for fuch a practice. Befide**this'Or<- 
 dinance would be a greater yoke and burthen then 
 Circumcifion^ if this rule of theirs (houtd?be founi- 
 verfally followed ; for there was no danger Co the 
 child by tint act, though ic feemed bloody and 
 hard: But if all perfons ( for none are excluded b^ 
 any weaknefs or indifpofition) Giould be thus bapti- 
 sed* how eminent ^danger would many bean ?. And 
 if it prove fo hazardous^o.thebodiesof manybcakhy 
 ones, that have in winter time but accidentally fallen 
 
 into 
 
into the water, though they have not been under 
 water, that it hath coft them their lives, the violence 
 of cold fo piercing th-jir bodies an<! animal fpirits(oii 
 which we have many experiences ) how would it be 
 for others, who labour under daily weaknefs > And 
 there is no prormfe, that the water (hall have no 
 power to hurt thofe which after this manner are ba- 
 ptized* no more then others. Flefh and blood is the 
 fame in all, which is the immediate fubjeel of fuch an 
 ad ; and God doth proportion his Ordinances to 
 keep correfpondency with his other rules of mercy, 
 and prefcriptions for ufe of means. In a word, if* 
 this be the only way of baptizing , happy are 
 thofe that live in hot Countrey s, or have bodies of 
 braf?„ 
 
 Its faid,if it be an Ordinance, God will preferve • 
 but that is the qeeftion* and that which demonstrates 
 it, is not the only way ; if it be a way at all, it i? B 
 Thac it croffeth Gods rule* for prefervation of a 
 mansfelf; the pra^iceof it atfome times being? 
 kind of a decree of felf-murther, and very unfutable 
 to the laws of mercy and tendernefs, that command 4 
 the very heart of Chrift ; and fuch anabfolute un- 
 qualified command doth not look like an Ordinance 
 of theGofpel; For if baptizing be immediatlyto 
 be pradifed after believing^ according to their prin- 
 ciplesjthen what (hould hinder water that they may 
 not be baptized ?Suppofe they be fick and weak, nip- 
 pofe the feafon be unfutable, and yet the foal defires 
 so be baptized r Yob mull either go agatnft all rules 
 
 of 
 
(H6) 
 of nature to plunge that perfon,or elfe find out fome; 
 other way of baptizing ; or elfe a Gofpel command- 
 mull be neglecled ; for there is nor precept,nor pre- 
 sident of 4elay of that Ordinance ( ftjil to their own 
 pofitions)in ail the New Teftament; and fo both the 
 baptizer and baptized mutt fin in performance of 
 a duty^for the one fins if he by any pretence deftroys 
 his own health ; and the other fins in being an in-' 
 ftrument in ir. I wifti men were confederate of the 
 nature and effects of thefe things ; which if it were 
 more communly pra&ifed, we (hould have heaps of 
 inftances to make good this consideration. 
 
 2. Its very much to be obferved, that Chrift who 
 hath bid us avoid all appearance of evil, (houldor- 
 diin any Ordinance wherein there muft needs be 
 fome fuch appearance fit for fleflb and blood to ad 
 on ; I have fo much modefty as only to prefent this? 
 how women, take it in what habit you will, can be 
 baptized publickly, where all may come with men* 
 and by men, without appearance of evil. And if the. 
 ispcitle would have women to be vailed or covered 
 huhe Congregation, tacaufeofche Angels, takeic, 
 either literally or tropically, to (hew the modefty of 
 Church- nlfcmblies, and to prevent any fhadow of 
 temptation j how can we think that its iutable to 
 Apoftolical rule, that women fhoald appear in the 
 6penair> out of their wonted habit, in agarmene, 
 sexc to nakednefs , and fo be plunged into water*? 
 mi 1 am loth to enter into thefe fecrets. 
 
 I only propound this, Whether or 00 that this 
 
 1 .: ; ^'apti'te 1 
 
(147) 
 bapiifm by plunging, be not rather a baptizing of 
 mens cloaths,and upper garments,then of the body, 
 if the perfon baptized be not naked ? and if he or 
 fhe be, how odious a cuftome would that be ? I can-* 
 not but think that that part that is baptized,ought to 
 be naked,that the water may immediatly fall on that 
 placejclfe fomething elfe mull be baptized primarily, 
 and the flefti fecondarily and by confeqoence. 
 
 This is'the reafon why we only pour water on 
 the face, becaufe its the principalleft part wherein 
 the image of God moft appears, and the foul (nines 
 forth moll eminently, on which ail the workings of 
 mens humors and afte&ions leave the vifibleft im- 
 preffion and fymptomes. And itsobfervable, that 
 the fame word in the Greek (a&'wnw) fignifies 
 both the face and the perfon, becaufe the whole per- 
 fon is reprefented by the face. And thus we baptize 
 the perfon in baptizing his face, which we can look 
 on, and waft naked, and not be afhamed. Let :hefe' 
 men that are fo zealous for dipping and plunging the 
 whole body,con(ider from all this,what warrant they 
 have from Scripture for their fo much rigid conft* 
 dence. 
 
 C h a f\ 
 
( MS) 
 Chap. XVI. 
 
 An explication of that place } Heb.io; 22. 
 About wafnrigthe whole body with pure 
 water-, the improper application of it to 
 their manner of baptizing Iff plunging 
 the whole body. 
 
 ' n. Ftetallthaihrng-andfoiftsoftjieAntipedoba- 
 /Wifts.this place in Heb.w.v. « forced in to 
 -iv evidence foe that mir.net of baptizing, former- 
 ly fo much contended for. Ltttu irO> warmth* 
 ir«e heart in full ajfurance <rf fa.tb, havingowr heart, 
 fbrlnkledfrom an evil confeiener ,w» d 'ogr bodm wfied 
 iuhpure water; from hence they f«j^' n f 
 muftbe by dipping and ' plunging, or wafti.ngthe 
 boiv throughout. I|C , 
 
 t et us review it with its context, and we fta.l find 
 fhev chew but upon a dry bone. For, 
 
 f irftthe fcope of the Apoftle in all this chapter,* 
 iot in the leaftto difcover the manner of baptizing, 
 liuc to open two things. . , 
 
 1 The fulnefs of the fatisfaflion and merit of 
 C-briftt offering himfelf, and being a facr.fice for re- 
 miffion of fins, in oppoficion to all Legal, and On. 
 dowy o«erinp,jrf«ppem from the i.v.unco the a^ 
 
(149) 
 
 which was began to be demonflrated fa the former 
 chapters, efpeciaily the 9. chap. 
 
 2. To encourage fouls in their approaches to God 
 onfuch a glorious account now in the NewTefta- 
 ment, fointheip. ver. Having therefore boldntfs 
 (**nnefcur) or freedom, to enter into the holiefl by 
 the blood of ^efm y by a new and living Vvay^ & c . In 
 this 22. v. he bids them draw nigh with a true heart, 
 and full affurance of faith, &c. 
 
 Secondly, that his fcope or intent is not to open 
 the manner of baptizing, is evident- for he writes to 
 thofethat were baptized already as thefe Hebrews 
 were ; for you have no coocroverfie in this Epifife 
 about circumcifion and bapcifm, as in the Rom. gM 
 "Phil. Colof. but only concerning Chrids pried ly Of- 
 fice, efpecially compared with the levitical, Aironi- 
 cal Priefthood, and the virtue of Legal-ceremonisl 
 facfificec, and the facrifice of Jefus Chrift as High- 
 pried, as any one that runs may read ; now either 
 they muft fay thete were not baptized before, or elfe 
 muft conclude that his defign is not to inform them 
 (and that fo cranfiencljr; of the nature or manner of 
 admimftring of that Ordinance. 
 
 Thirdly, the Apoftle here doth dkttiiy inftruel the 
 fouihowtomake confident addrefles to God^viz, 
 rrom the fenfe of our judication and fana^cation 
 together . for fo by our hearts being fprinkled from 
 an evil confcience,is meant, <& can be meantno othe£ 
 then Chrifts blood fprinkled on our fouls, in theaffu- 
 tmcQof our abfohitidn- from fio, and the waging 
 
with pure water no more ( but by this outward ex- 
 prefiion ) of the purity of our conventions, as to 
 fandification, that we may not come with fcandal of 
 external unholinefs, when we pretend to be juftified 
 by Chrifts blood. 
 
 Fourthly,the ufual word is here left out which ex- 
 prefleth that Ordinance-and it is your bodies not ba- 
 ptized but wafhed (asa^Vc/) which is a clear allufion 
 to that of Levit. 16. 4. from whence it feems to be 
 excerpted, when Aaron the high Prieft was to enter 
 into the holy place, and before he was to be attired 
 for that work, it is faid, He /hail ^a(h hu fiejb in wa- 
 ter, andfo put them on ; the 70. tranflate the words 
 thus, As^7*u JA.77 m v in <m(Jio t He fhaK wajh his whole 
 body with water > to fignifie «the holinefs he ftiould 
 Jiaveinhisperfon, as from external publick polluti- 
 ons ; the very fame intent of the Apoftle is here,thac 
 if we would be confident before God, when we ap- 
 proach unto God, we muft come with Chrifts blood 
 on our confidences, and no known pollution on our 
 converfations ; and if we will follow their grounds 
 from comparing thefe two places, we may conclude 
 that baptifm was as much an Ordinance of the Old 
 Teftamenr,as the New, for wafhing ; the body was 
 ufedinboth. 
 Fifthly,it is a ufual phrafe in Scripture to exprefs the 
 fancMcation of our perfons,from inward & outward 
 defllements,by the wafhing of water and wafhing tht 
 bodyj& yet not in the leaft to hint out the manner of 
 baptizing by water ,as into the fpecial adminiftration 
 
 of 
 
of that Ordinance; thus in gfa.1.16. when God faith 
 to his backfliding people,wa(h you,make you clean 3 
 muft he needs mean, go and be baptized ? but thai 
 outward expreffion is put for the reforming of thd? 
 wayes,and expounded by putting away the evil from 
 their doings or works; thus in fob: i 3. Chrift expreff- 
 eth juftification and fanclifkation, by walhing in ge- 
 neral, and then walhing the feet ; he that is wafhed, 
 (which is not baptized;for Chrift faith he muft wa(h a 
 or dkPeter could have no part in him;and Chrift did 
 not baptize ) fuch a one need no more but to Wa(h 
 his feet, that is, walk holily ; fo that here is wafting^ 
 and waflhing of the feet, and yet neither meant of 
 baptizing nor waftiing : Thus likewife in the CiMffi 
 thians it is faid,as to their fandification,iV(?^7^^ 
 #*/W, nowyouarecleatifedinoTVpuarejttftifieds he 
 means not Now you are baptized, but of the fpecial 
 purification of their hearts, and lives from their for- 
 mer pollutions of flefh and fpirit ; which though fig* 
 nified by baptifm,yet fo remotely, as no man can ga- 
 ther the conftant method of exterual baptifm from 
 it. 
 
 Sixthly, he faith your bodies wafhed ( &&n 
 Qctp&) with clean or pure water ; now I hope, as to 
 baptizing, none are fo fooliQi as to ftand on it 3 whe- 
 ther they be baptized after a rain when the water is 
 puddled,or whether only in pure & chryftal ftrearns 3 
 from an unpuddled fpring or ocean • and yet thep 
 muft be tied to the one as the other, if this Text be 
 their prefident* and we may as well queftion {torn 
 
 L $ tssss 
 
this Text, whether they be rightly baptized, if there 
 be any mud,or flime,or filch in the water, as whether 
 we be baptized if all our bodies be not wafhed ; but 
 now this expreffion to fet forth holinefs and fan&ifi- 
 cation, is mod apt and full of life : our hearts and 
 conventions, in drawing nigh unto God,fhouldbe 
 as if externally they were wafhed with clean water, 
 tranfparent and fpotlefs before him, (Lining with an 
 Evangelical brightnefs, and fpiritual purity ; for it 
 will be very hard to draw nigh to God with a good 
 confcience, and a tainted and befroearedbodyor 
 converfation, with unholy ads, whereby Godisfo 
 much di(lionoured;efpeciaily to corners the Apoftle 
 faith in the former part of the \eife t with a true heart 
 and full affurance of faith. 
 
 Seventhly, if he had meant by this wafhing of the 
 body, baptizing, he would not have made fuch a dif- 
 proportion ( according to their own rule ) between 
 thefign and thing fignifiedjfor he fpeaksof the heart 
 being only fprinkled, and yet the body wafhed with 
 clean water ; now if bapcifm doth not fignifie and 
 feal juftificacion ,as well as fan&ification,it is not a fea! 
 of the Covenant of grace ; and if it do fignifie, it 
 cannot go beyond the thing fignified in expreffion 
 and outward reprefentation. And if Chrifts blood 
 in Heb. 1 2-24.be called the blood of fprinkling, and 
 it be one of the main things fignified and fealed in 
 baptiim ; well may we anfwer it by an outward aft, 
 without offence or fin. 
 
 Eighthly,grant that by wafhing the body is meant 
 
 baptizing 
 
(m ) 
 
 baptizing here ( which you fee cannot he extorted 
 by violence, or extracted by any chymical virtue ) 
 yet it will not ferve their turns : For, 
 Firft,> he body is faid to be wa(hed,when any one or 
 more of the principal parts in fight or ufe, are wafh- 
 ' ed ; and what is done to any eminent or command- 
 ing part, it carries the denomination of the whole 
 with it ; for Maries anointing and wafliing of 
 Chrifts head and feet in Luke 7.44>45-is interpreted 
 in John 1 1 . 2, for the anointing of the Lotd,as much 
 as if (he had done it to all his body throughout; 
 though it is only expreft in the former place of the a- 
 nointing and wafliing his head and feet, This is moft 
 ufual in Scripture. 
 
 Secondly, if they will go to the Itriclnefs of the 
 term of wafliing the body ; then, 
 
 Firft, it mull: be vvailhed naked, or elfe it is not a 
 wafliing of the body. 
 
 Secondly,it mult not be a bare dipping or plunging 
 into water, bat fome other aft muft be done with the 
 body,w*. a rinfing or rubbing, as we do pots or 
 cloaths which we wafli, which are not faid to be 
 waflied,beciufe dipt under water, but fo rinfed as the 
 filth and dirt is taken out ; I only urge this to (hew 
 inevitable inconveniences thefe men will bring on 
 themfelves by fuch interpretations of Scripture. 
 
 Many other considerations might be added, if this 
 Trait would bear the weight of them, 
 
 L 5 Chap^ 
 
Chap. XVIL 
 
 AfhoYtfummlng up of the former principle^ 
 and arguing them from the method of 
 the Apojlle Peter about tho/e be baptised, 
 Adts 10.47. 
 
 n^Hat we may bring up ail unto a full conclusion, 
 + let that pike be confidered, ^#/ 10.47. an( * 
 the manner of the A pottles arguing in it, which is 
 mod fpecial to what we would prove ; his argument 
 lies in this, they have received the holy Ghoft as well as 
 "tot: Ergo,whu fhould hinder waterPwhere there is a 
 qualification, there may be an administration of that 
 Ordinancejthisis grounded on a common principle; 
 now if we obferve, 
 
 Firft/he Apoftle changes the ufual expre(fion,and 
 faith not, Seeing they have believed as well as we^ but 
 feeing they have received the holy Ghoft as well as Vte , 
 What fhould tinder f The argument is from the equi- 
 valency of the qualification •'■ for whereas he faith all 
 along formerly ,^7 believed and were baptized ; and 
 to the Eunuch,^^.8.37./f/W believeft thou maift; 
 but here, feeing they have received the holy Cjhoft as 
 well as We ; this change of phrafe (hews the qua- 
 lification not to lie in one term or expreffion,but in 
 the univerfal equality of Gofpel manifeftacion, to 
 
 fome 
 
(1$$) 
 
 fome one way, to fome another « that if any title in 
 the Gofpel can be found properly, either by Gods 
 promife or our judgement, applicable to any perfon, 
 we may fay, What fhould hinder water ? now to re- 
 ceive the holy Ghoft, is the largeft and mod vaft ex- 
 preffion,as to a qualification,that ever could be men- 
 tioned, taking in both real graces and all external 
 gifts and priviledges, which are all conveyed by that 
 holy Spirit, whether common or fpecial, as is before 
 expreft in another Chapter. 
 
 We (hall defire on the Apoftles account to argue 
 from all thefe pregnant Texts of Scripture concern- 
 ing Infants ; and having the fame premifes we (hall 
 not certainly draw a wrong conclufion,when we find 
 the Scriptures giving fuch titles to Infants,and fo ma- 
 ny fpecial carriages of Chrift to thera,which amounts 
 to as much as is fpoken of any that were baptized, 
 why may not we fay with Teter, What Jhould hinder 
 water ? as for inftance, 
 
 If Infants be in the Covenant, that ^Abrahams 
 promife belongs to them, as we have proved, What 
 Should binder Water f 
 
 If Infants be \\o\yjvhat Jhould hinder water? Thefe 
 which are vifible Saints may be baptized ; but fo are 
 the Infants of believers; for they are called (*>*) 
 i Cor.y.v\ 9 The fame name given to denominate all 
 Saints ; now to be holy is as much as to be a be- 
 lievers to receive the holy Ghoft is made all one 
 with being a believer ; and what then fhould hinder 
 water? 
 
 So 
 
dm 
 
 So again/when the Gentiles and their pofcerity are 
 ingraffed into the fame roor, Rom. i 1 . which is A, • 
 brAham and the Covenant, and the branches holy as 
 the root, what fliould. hinder water I 
 
 If Ghrift wais angry when Infants were forbidden 
 toccrme to hint, and charged his' Difcipies to fuffer 
 them to be brought, who can forbid water ? efpeci al- 
 ly when Chrift took them up in his arms, laid his 
 .bands on,and blefled ihem^which is as muchand more 
 then is done in baptifm, what (bould hinder water 
 to be call on them? and (o wc may argue from every 
 place in the former difcourfe, upon this very prin- 
 ciple; fortheApoftte argues neither from precept 
 inore2ample 5 but from a parallel qualification 3 becaufe 
 ehey had received the holy Ghoftjand (urely all thefe 
 places of Scripture concerning Infants, will fully a- 
 mount to rwtas up an equivalent qualification in 
 them to a v.fible profeflicm of grown perfons.and fo 
 we may argue on the fame ground with Teter ; be- 
 fidesjlnfants arexaf able oi receiving the holy Ghoft 
 as we'll as grown peifons, and why not capable of 
 water? if they fay it is only a vifible believer,a vifible 
 profelTor that i? the fubjecl; Weanfwer, 
 
 You fee the Apoltle uieth feveral expreffions 
 sboutir, fometimes adively, fometiraes paffively, 
 fometimessf thou beiievd^here.feeing they have re- 
 ceived the holy Ghoft,bu? never fairh a vifible Sainr, 
 or a vifible believer, or one that aduaily profeffetb ; 
 and fomay we fay,feeiug the promtfe is to them/ee- 
 ing they are holy,feeing they are called Difciples,fee- 
 
 ing 
 
(*57) 
 
 ing they had Chrifts hands laid oh them, and were 
 bleffed, feeing ihey are capable of receiving the ho- 
 ly Ghoft, what fliould hinder water I 
 
 guefi. If they fay ftill there is no command 5 I 
 infwer, 
 
 Firft,there is as much as is faid of others that were 
 baptized. 
 
 Secondly, there is no command in terms from 
 Chrift or his Apoftles to baptize profefling believers, 
 or thofe that fhould receive the holy Ghoftjyet they 
 were baptized. 
 
 Thirdly, where there is parallel character? to Qiew 
 qualification ,there may be the fame outward fign ap- 
 plied ; on this principle the Apoftk reafons in this 
 Scripture ; it is only to be wondred how fo many 
 direct places of Scripture, which cannot but fparkle 
 in the confidences of thofe which are diligent and 
 diving into truth, can be fo lightly evaded and made 
 nothing of, while men pretend to fearch truth impar- 
 tially, without deceit or guile. 
 
 Chap: 
 
058) 
 
 Chap. XVIII. 
 
 Wherein Ufhewed who is to adminijler this 
 Ordinance of baptifm, according to the 
 rule of the Gofpel. 
 
 AS thefe that are contrary to Infant baptifm are 
 (trie!:, and moft fevere in other ci rcumftances, 
 which they think muft be in that Ordinance, (o they 
 are mod (light and rude in their confederations and 
 pra&ife, astotheadminiftrator of that Ordinance, 
 making every male Difciple,or any one that can give 
 an occafional word of exhortation, the minifterof 
 this Ordinance, which they do otherwife (hut up, as 
 in the moft holy place, and put the very fubftance of 
 the Gofpel in it; this is moft unfutable to the Gofpel, 
 and makes baptifm one of the pooreft and loweft 
 Ordinances, and of no fuch folemnity, feeing every 
 Difciple may baptize another, and he that can fpeak 
 any thing of the Gofpel may do fuch an acl. 
 
 But if we trace the rule,we (hall fee, that as it is an 
 Ordinance ofpublick cognizance,fo it muft beadmi^ 
 niftred by a publick Officer, who hath received com- 
 miffion authoritatively from Chrift and his Church, 
 and that it was never adrniniftred by any one but he 
 that was either ordinarily, or extraordinarily called 
 thereunto • begin with lohn the Baptift, fo called 
 from his work and defignment to the adminiftration 
 
 of 
 
of that Ordinance; he was extraordinarily called, as 
 the proprieties of him witnefs,with the circumftances 
 of his birth and behaviour, Luk,. i. 7J&C Matth. 
 
 All the time of Chrifts miniftry, his Difciplcs by 
 immediate commiffion from himfelf baptized, and 
 noneelfe : and we all know how they were called, 
 and who gave them power. 
 
 When Chrift gave up all his power and authority 
 to be continued to the end of the world,or his fecond 
 coming, Matth. 28. Go teach all nations, baptizing 
 them 9 tnd gave them their general and publick com- 
 miflion, he gave it to thefe that were to be Apoftles, 
 ind to thefe that fcould fucceed them in ordinary, 
 md as by fettled commiffion, not to every one that 
 Should be made a Difciple ; this was a commiflion to 
 them at large,and yet appropriated to fuch an or- 
 der, without we will fay all arecommiffionedto 
 :each and baptize. 
 
 Afterwards, when the Gofpel order of Churches 
 came to be fetled,and particular inftrudions giren ? as 
 :o the foundation and method of adminiftration in 
 Churches, it was never adminiftred by any but thofe 
 :hat were for the time extraordinary, or ordinary 
 fecled Officers of the Church, whofe names arefum- 
 med up in 1 Cor. 1 2.28,29. * fl d Ephq. 1 1. Apoftles, 
 Prophets, Evangelifts, Paftorsand Teachers j befides 
 ;hefe,none have office or power to fuch admmiftrad- 
 >n but only thefe. 
 
 Thofe that we the more fober and intelligent fort 
 
 of 
 
(itfo) 
 
 of our oppo(ites,grant us this,that the adminiftration 
 of baptifnus of publick cognizance ; and that ordi- 
 narily it muff be adminiftted by tbofe which are in 
 publick and fee office ; but generally every brother 
 among them of any fuppofed gift may be a bap* 
 tizer. 
 
 As for Philip and Ananias , whobaptized,the firft 
 was an Evangelift, an extraordinary efficer,as the A- 
 poftles, raifed and infpirited, and impowred much 
 after the fame manner;and if wc confuk with ABs 8. 
 he had fpecial commiflion arid authority from hea- 
 ven, by a Divine call, to perform that acl on the Eu- 
 nuch 3 and fo for Ananias who baptized Paulas one 
 of their own judgement faith well,he was deputed in 
 an extraordinary manner to that miniftery, Aft. 9. the 
 Lord appearing to him in avifion; and thefe ex- 
 amples cannot be drawn into an ordinary rule, with- 
 out the fame circumftances be found ufual. 
 
 And it mud needs be fo that none but one of the 
 fetied officers of the Church, who is to preach the 
 Gofpel, may be a bapcizer. 
 
 Fiifl,becaufe it is a Church Ordinance y Chrift hath 
 now left the keyes to the Church, fet in the Church 
 fucceffively fuch perfons who are actually to admini- 
 fter ail Ordinances in it 5 and if it be a Church Ordi- 
 nance, onely thefe may adminifter it who are called 
 to one of thefe offices in the Church ; all grant this, 
 that it is a Church Ordinance, though forne take the 
 Church more largely, others more ftriclly. 
 
 Secondly,kis an acl of power to baptize,^'.*8. 
 
 All 
 
All power is given to me in heaven and earth; go teach 
 and baptize ; now power is conveyed by a fpeciall 
 commiffion and call. For a man to exercife a gift of 
 knowledge by utterance, needs no fuchfolemnity ; 
 but to baptize, it being a fealing of a fpecial privi- 
 ledge to others,muft come from an office- power,and 
 fo cannot ordinarily be adminiftred by a gifted 
 Difciple, 
 
 Thirdly, there would be no diftin&ion as to pow- 
 cr,between Apoftles,Evangelifts,Paftors and Teach- 
 ers, in administration of any Ordinance, and every 
 brother of the Church, if their rule Hand ; this is 
 the common confufion of the moft of the contrary 
 judgement, which utterly overthrows the other of 
 Gofpel Churches, 
 
 Chap: 
 
Chap. XIX.' 
 On Chrifts being baptized bj Johnjvhen he was 
 about the thirtieth year of his age 5 whether 
 any thing can be gathered from it againji 
 baptizing of Infants * 
 
 THis is the lift plea urged from Chrifts example, 
 that he was not baptized untilr about the thir- 
 tieth year, therefore none but grown perfons ought 
 to be baptized, if there be any force in Chrifts ex- 
 
 ample. , -. 
 
 To which isanfwered, t. Ift general, aftingsare 
 not^always to be our examples j for fame acl he did 
 meerly as Mediator, God-man, unimitablebyus,as 
 to be crucified for our fins ; fome he did out of fpeci- 
 ilreafon, and eminent emergency, as to fait forty 
 dayes and nights in the wildernefs, with many luch 
 like, up and down the Scripture, that ate no rules to 
 as j his perfonal and reprefentative afl% and thefe 
 whxh have been acled upon extraordinary occafion 
 and reafon, cannot be drawn into practical rule of 
 example to us. • . . 
 
 a. If we will take Chrifts example for a rule in 
 thi* that he was baptized when fo grown up, why 
 then we may as well take Chrifts praffife, as our ex- 
 ample, in the adive fenfe, be baptized none, therefore 
 none are to baptize ; the fame holds asftrong as the 
 other i if any fay the rule afterward warrants that, 
 
fo it doth the biptizing of Infants, as hath been for- 
 merly proved. 
 
 3. And more home, Chrift was a Saint in the 
 womb, he profeffedhis faith from a childe, difpu. 
 ted with the Doclors about Divine things when he 
 was but 12. years old, fo that he could be baptized 
 with an infallible evidence at firft, and yet was not 
 baptized untill fuch an age ; hence if we will follow 
 Chnfts example,though men be known to be profef- 
 fors, and never fo godly, yet they muft not be bap- 
 tized untill juft they come to the fameftature, and 
 term of years that Chrift was baptized in,- therea- 
 fon is ftronger for the one then the other, becaufc 
 Chrift, though he had fuch a vifible, fuch an infallible 
 right to it, yet did abftain from the pradiife of 
 jt,untill juft fuch a time, which he chofe out as fltteft, 
 fo that the time hath as much force to make an ex- 
 ample, and binds as ftriaiy to the obfervance of it, 
 as the general confideration of him, as a grown per- 
 fon: upon this account no man muft be baptized 
 untill he be 29. or full 30. years of age. 
 
 4. There may be many confiderations why Chrift 
 was baptized at years. 
 
 1 • That he might enter on his publique miniftry 
 with the more greater folemnity of fuch an Ordi- 
 nance, and have a teftimony from heaven to him in 
 that Ordinance, which was gm^TheHo/j ghofi des- 
 cending on him in the form of a Dove, Mm. I. two laft 
 v. Now Chrifts entrance into his publique miniftry* 
 began immediately after his baptifm, how he con- 
 
 verft 
 
0*4) 
 verft for the moil: part of the former years, is very 
 dark in Scripture. 
 
 2 . It might be alfo, becaufe he would give a tefti- 
 mony to fohn Baftift, who, though he was defigned 
 from the womb to that work, yet began to afl bis 
 office but a little while before, and had foon done. 
 It is a queftion whether he baptized anycortfderable 
 time after he baptized Chrift } but juft as Chr ift did 
 arife in his miniftry, John fell in his. 
 
 3. As there is no reafon to be given why Chrilt 
 fhould live fo long, and not take on him his pubhquc 
 miniftry, untill fuch an age, nor may it be urged as 
 fuch an example to us ; fo there is no rsafon perem- 
 ptorily to be given why he was not baptized untill 
 ■then,- and fo the rule is uncertain, and of no value. 
 But this example is contrary to the following rule 
 left for baptizing, according to their own princi- 
 ples ; For, ■ . .. 
 
 i. That Ordinance was immediatly admin»ftred(as 
 tbaO after believing, and profeffion ; Chrift wasa 
 known Believer>and Profeffor before;r,eitber did be 
 make a new profeflion to ?^» when he came to be 
 baptized ; but John rather fcrupled if as an att too 
 high for him to perform* as to fuch a glorious per- 
 for, M*t.$.f*ffer it to be done (faiih Chntt) &C It 
 i would be a fin for us to delay fo long. 
 
 - Chrifts Baptifm was upon no other grounds 
 then our*, his to fulfill all tighteoufnefs in our ftead, 
 or to watfi away unrighceoufnefe , the filth ot 
 the <kfln, and fpirit, as an outward fign of rr, and io 
 
cannot come under the common rule • this I conceive 
 fufficient to be fpoken as to that confideration; there 
 onely remains, that queftion which will eafily be an- 
 fwered on the former grounds , if they prove if ue- 
 as they are dcmonftrated, The Lord give a hlejjing u 
 thefe confidtrAtkns onyonr heart* 
 
 M ChaK 
 
(166) 
 
 Chap. XX. 
 That Baptifm doth not form a Church. 
 
 SO much do our oppofites advance Baptifm , that 
 they make it the only conftitutive principle of a 
 Gofpel Chgrch,by which men enter into the Churchy 
 and are made vifible Members onely by its admini- 
 ftration,and in their own method. But we (hall foon 
 dethrone that pofition by the authority and force of 
 Scriprure and rational argumentation. 
 
 Onely in general, I doubt our Divines have un- 
 wittingly given them too much ground to affirm as 
 they do , calling it an entrance into the Church, an 
 iniriating Ordinance , feal , and by their practice of 
 late to let the Font nigh the Church porchj though I 
 would not much ftand upon it , how proper it is to 
 call it an initiating Ordinance : ( a phrafe I have 
 nfed in this difcourfe Pro forma) without it be be- 
 taufe it is the firft feal to be adminiftred in the Order 
 of Sacraments ; but it will be eafily proved that 
 Baptifm gives no effence or being either to a Church, 
 or memberfhip. 
 
 i. Becaufcaman muft be a member, and of a 
 Churcbjere he can be Baptized according to the Go» 
 ipell rule. 
 
 2. Sacraments are Ordinances to be adminiftred 
 ill the Church, and to the Church , which fuppofeth 
 trie exiikr.ee of the Church beforqthus i Cor. 12.28* 
 
 ifbif. 
 
(i6 7 ) 
 
 Ephef. 4. 11, is, 13, the Lord hath fct inland give* 
 all officers to the Church, if fo, Sacraments , whicr 
 muft be adminiftred by officers, if rightly. 
 
 3- A Church may be without Baptifm , and ye* 
 be as true and as real a Church ; as the Ifralltes were 
 fo long in the wildernefs without Circumcifion 
 which was as much an initiating Ordinance, as evei 
 Baptifm was; now nothing can be without its form 
 and exift 
 
 4. That cannot be the form of a Church or make 
 a man a Member, which remains the fame, and un-^ 
 touched after excommunication, whereby a man is 
 cut off from memberfhip at. prefent, but now though 
 the Church may take away his membership , they 
 cannot his Baptifm, which is the fame (till , and i$ 
 not loft. 
 
 5. Forthisisanabfolute rule, that that which 
 givesthe form, or being to a Church, icmuftceafe 
 when the Church ceafeth, or when a Membet ceafeth 
 to be a Member, it mult ceafe with it ; and that mull: 
 be renewed, as^often as membership is renewed, and 
 fo one rauft be Baptized again , as ofcen as he re-* 
 news Memberfhip • this is moftabfurd, yet muft fol- 
 low from fuch a principle. 
 
 6. Baptifm is a fign, and feal, therefore gives 
 no being to any thing, but confirms it • It is a con- 
 sequent aft , and fuppofeth fornething prc-exM 
 ftent. 
 
 Ob). As for that place they fo much (land on ; 
 <AU, 2,41, As many as received the Veord gladly ,, 
 
 M 2 weri 
 
Were Baptized, and there Was added that day about 
 3000. fouls ; hence they fay they were added by 
 Baptifm. 
 
 Sot.Thz words fay not,they were added by Baptifm, 
 but puts a full point, or Hop after that fentence , as 
 mmy as gladly received the Voordjtoere Baptiz.ed.Thcic 
 chat fentence ends. And the Apoftle goes on a new 
 account ; and faith, there ti> ere added that day 3000. 
 fouls y b\xi doth not at all (hew the manner of their 
 adding; fo that thefe words are rather a recapitulati- 
 on, and fumming up the number of Church Members 
 added that day,then any defcription of the way of 
 their taking into the Church : as if one (hould fay, he 
 had 3000 li. in gold addedto his eftate,he only (hews 
 it is fo,but not how he came to have that added,fo it 
 •mud be here ; and the former reafons prove the im- 
 poffibiiity of fuch an interpretation. 
 
 2. Ob). There is one place more urged to prove 
 Baptifm to be the form of a Church, and that 
 which makes a Member, which is, 1 Cor. n.i^yye 
 are all BaptUed into one body , there? Baptifm onely 
 embodyes members. 
 
 Sol. To which I anfwer flrft, The Apoftfe fpeaks 
 there primarily of this Baptifm of the Spirit, not 
 of watery So by one Spirir, we are Baptized into one 
 Body, not fo much of Baptifm by water. 
 
 But fecondly, grant it to be meant of Baptifm by 
 water , yet it proves nothing that Baptifm is the 
 fotmof that body, which hath its matter and form 
 liofiaefs, and unign before baptifm \- baptized intc 
 
 on< 
 
(16 P ) 
 
 one body, doth not here (Lew the eiTemial ccnftitu- 
 tion of a Church, but the confirmed union. 
 
 For firft, we are faid in Gal. 3. 27. to be Baptized 
 intoCkrift; now none will conjedure thac baptifrn 
 gives the form of union with Qhrift , but oneiy 
 feals it ; fo into one body, may be as to the unity of 
 communion in the fame body. 
 
 2. The phrafe of baptizing into, or in one body, 
 (hews the body exiftent,and in perfecl being before, 
 elfe we could not be baptized in a body , or into a 
 body ; for when one is baptized firft , into whan 
 body is he, and the fecond, and third incorporated ? 
 until! a body be compleac, they cannot be faid to be 
 baptized into it, or in it ; therefore baptifrn can- 
 not conftitute the form of a Church , which is this 
 body, faying, we are baptized into it,that is, to hold 
 union and communion with fuch a body. 
 
 3. This argument is inferted more to prevent 
 Schifm, thentoexprefsthe. way of firft embodying 
 or conftitution of Churches,as the whole context de- 
 monftrates. 
 
 4. ft is the fame reafon with the Lords Supper , 
 and we may as well be faid as to the firft conftitution, 
 to conftitute Churches by thac Sacrament , as by 
 baptifrn, 1 Cer.iQ. 1 6,17. The cup ofblejfing We blefs* 
 u it not the Communion of the blood of Chnft} the break 
 that rve breaks k it not the Communion of the body of 
 Chrifi tfor rve being many are one bread, and one body, 
 for We are all partakers of that one bread. So thac we 
 may as well be faid to be gathered into a Church by 
 
 M 3 the 
 
(i 7 o) 
 
 the Lords Supper , as by Baptifm , for by it we are 
 made one body, and one Spirit. 
 
 But laftly, if Baptiftn doth elTentially conftitute 
 a Church, and is its form , then all who are Baptize'd 
 are reall Members of the Church, and muft have all 
 priviledgcs,be they never fo loofe and vain ; for they 
 bave the elTentiall qualification, and the pcrfecl form, 
 and what will any defire more ? and ftrange confe- 
 rences muft needs follow : you may make whom 
 you will Members, and make them Members before 
 &hey are Members, and Baptize into a body before 
 there is a body, or any knowledge of what frame the 
 body is ; you may baptize and have no Church, for 
 they may never come into Union, and Communion, 
 who are baptized upon there terms , and then no 
 Church can be conftituted ; for who (hall baptize 
 fir ft? for he muft have an extraordinary Commifsion, 
 for he can have no ordinary delegation, until! the 
 form be introduced which makes the Church, and 
 that form is not, untill a competent number be 
 baptized, and Co Church power muft be csercifed 
 firft without a Church, and political power without 
 fcboiyt 
 
 It is wonderful ro imagine how thefe that differ , 
 flight and unchurch all the Congregations , though 
 rnade up of the pureft, and (pecialleft Saints, without 
 mixtures of humane allay, and meerly in this princi- 
 , pie they are not baptized in their Form , nor plunged 
 under water, which with them is onely^ baptizing 
 and under this principle, Faith, and Repentance., and 
 
 the 
 
P70 
 the mod refplendent graces of the beft Saints muft 
 lye buried, and no Church , if not thus dipt •* I 
 hope you fee the fallacy , if not the perfed folly of 
 this poficion , and how Churches ftand upon other 
 principles more firm , and fare; though we would 
 not lofe any ornament of the Gofpel to adorn 
 this body,yec we dare not constitute it of fuch ingre- 
 dients. 
 
 M4 AGOSPEL 
 
GOSPEL^ORDINANCE 
 
 CONCERNING 
 
 The finging of Scripture- 
 
 Pfalms, Hymns and Spiritual 
 
 Songs ^ the lawfulnefs of that 
 
 Ordinance. 
 
 LONDON^ 
 
 Printed for R. m and are to be fold at the 
 
 three Dttggers in fleetftreet. 1654. 
 
• 
 
fi7S) 
 
 Chap. I. 
 
 Concerning the finging of Scripture-® '[alms ; 
 
 Hymns y and fpiritual Songs ; the lawful- 
 
 nefs of that Ordinance. 
 
 |He next publick controverfie which Sa- 
 tan hath raifed to difturb the Churches, 
 is about the pracWeof tinging Scri- 
 pture-Pfalms , on purpofe to deprive 
 the Saints of the benefit of that foul- 
 raifing,andheartTraviftiing Ordinance,by which God 
 is publickly and folemnl y praifed,and the fpirits filled 
 with the glory of God; and becaufe your hearts may 
 be (tablifhed in every truth*and not (o eafily perfwa- 
 ded to part with fuch a holy Ordinance, I could not 
 but endeavor to clear up this alfc 9 which you have in 
 this method. 
 
 Firft, that tinging of Pfalms, Hymns, andfpirU 
 tual Songs, vocally with the voice,and mufically,is an 
 Ordinance of the New Teftament, conftantly to be 
 pra&ifed in the Churches of Chrift, 
 
 Secondly, 
 
(i 7 6) 
 
 Secondly , Open unto you the three exprefsions, 
 Pfalms, Hymns, arid Songs, wherein they agree, and 
 whether there be any difference between them. 
 
 Thirdly,(hew you that it is the Pfalms of David, 
 Afaphi Heman , and the Hymns and fpiritual Songs 
 of thefe holy men, which are recorded in Scripture , 
 thac is the matter ordinarily to be fung. 
 
 Fourthly, anfvver the main objections of the dif- 
 fenters ; thefe are fcattered up and down this fmall 
 Treatife. 
 
 For the firft.it isejearfrom Epk$Ag.he bids them be 
 filled withtheSpirit^^Ts^fpeakingto one another, 
 andin Col. 3.13 .Teaching and admonijhing one another , 
 <Ai<PaTHOi,Ti{ 3 '>t) fo'3-5T«;'Ti; io.vT*{ <£stAp.jfr i&vyivolt ttifoAcuf 
 
 ftsnvpcMws ; What ever thefe be as to the matter of 
 them, yet the finging of chem is commanded as an 
 Ordinance, and a fcccia'l Ordinance for edification $ 
 That the Apoftle exhorts here to this as an Ordi- 
 nance, is clear ; 
 
 Firft,becaufe he fpeaks to the whole Churcb,and as a 
 publick duti*,not appiopriated to arty Office, but as 
 a commandment univeiTd on al!. 
 
 Secondly, he doth difUnguiftuhis Ordinance from 
 that of preaching or teaching doclrinally, which be- 
 longs to the Officer, or ocafionally to a gifted bro- 
 ther ; for he doth not only fay , as in other plices , 
 teach and admoni(h : but in Pfalms, and Hymns, and 
 Songs, which (hews the manner of the teaching and 
 admonilhing, not in the general , bu: in fuch a way 
 as by finging with Pfalms,&c, and as Mr, Cotton well 
 
 obferves, 
 
077) 
 
 ©bfervesjif the Apoftle had meant the ordinary and 
 common way of teaching, he would have faid, teach 
 one another out of the Pfalms, or from them, rather 
 then in,orwiththem,whichistheufual language pf 
 the holy Ghoft in exprefsing fuch a duty ; fo in Pauls 
 example, ^#.28.23«&fo Thiliph faid to preach Jefus 
 to the Eunuch, ( dm r?i4y ^^Tav7m)hom that Scri- 
 pture in Eiaiah;andfurely he would never have added 
 the word (Mwtu) in the following part , finging 
 with melodie in your hearts, if this teaching and ad* 
 monifhing were not to be difcovered in fuch a pecu- 
 hr Ordinance. To which places we muft add that of 
 tbfc i Cor. 14. 15, 16. where the Apoftle fpeaks to 
 the Church, as to the orderly adminiftration of that 
 Ordinance, it?, 17. v. where he fpeaks of finging as a 
 diftincl dutie, and to be done in publick before the 
 Church ; and that phrafe of finging with the fpirit , 
 and with underftanding , is very emphatical , as Di- 
 vines obferve ; fori cannot fing with the fpirit, but I 
 muft alfo with underftanding- but theunderftanding 
 here, muft be meant of others who hear me,and joyrs 
 with me in that acl ; however , publick finging was 
 then an Ordinance folemnized in the Church $ and 
 we (hall hereafter fee what kind chefe Pfalms were 
 they fung ; Thus fames 5. 1 3. If any be merry, let him 
 fing Pfalms $ though this be particular in the Text, 
 yet it is of the fame confideration with the for- 
 mer ; and thefe places hold forth the inftitution • 
 finging is an Ordinancejand a fpecial one in the Go- 
 
 fpd. . 
 
 Secondly, 
 
(i?8) 
 
 Secondly, that it is not only meant of an inwarc 
 frame of rejoycing; but that it is of the voice,ismoP 
 apparent : 
 
 Firft,from the very words of thefe Texts ; Speak: 
 ing to one mother ; teaching one another , in Pfalmj, ana 
 Hymns, Sec. Now no man can fpeakto cdifie others 
 by inward workings, • or (ilent re joycings. 
 
 2. Befides the melody to be made in our hearts, 
 we muft (ing with melody, which (hews not only the 
 inward frame,buc the outward acl,and order;for me- 
 lody in the heart were enough to exprefs the in- 
 ward grace ; but he adds an outward exprefsion s 
 Singingwith melody in your hearts ; fo that it is with 
 the voice as with the heart. 
 
 5. Singing in Scripture is ever put in diftinclion 
 from bare reading or fpeakingj and commonly Signi- 
 fies a modulation of the tongue, or exprefsing any 
 thing mulically and in cune,and (0 k is a mufical fpeak- 
 ing. 
 
 4. There would be the greateft confufion of Or- 
 dinances^ preaching and prayer would be made all 
 one with fingingjnay .internal works would be found 
 contrary to outward exprefiions; and if there be any 
 fuch thing as preaching,and prayer,and exhortarionjt 
 muft be different from linging,even to the mod igno- 
 rant;for no man will lay-, when a man meerly fpeaks 
 or preaches, he fings, without his. tone do make them 
 call him 3 finging preacher or talker, as too many ei- 
 ther out of affectation or cuftome, have given juft 
 caufe to fufpecl. 
 
 5. This 
 
5. This is undeniable,if there be any fuch command 
 as to fing,it is vifible;forelfe no man could ac any time 
 be faid to fing or not fing; it mud be an outward ad; 
 for elfe we muft fay we have only fouls for that Or- 
 dinance, and bodies for all the reft, 
 
 <?. All that ever fung in the GofpeI,as to praSice, 
 fang vocally ^Mattk 2*5.30. Thej went out and fung 
 an Hjmnftox. muft be with an audible voice,^#.i6* 
 i^rPanl and Silas fung, and all heard them • and if it 
 be an inward acl only, who (hall know when men 
 fing or think^or would they have men to be gods, to 
 judge when men fing Pfalms, and Hymns, and fpiri- 
 tual fongs inwardly . ? what needthefe names outward- 
 ly? A more ungrounded opinion was never invented 
 by the deviJ,and furely he hath fitted it for the weak.* 
 er and moft perfectly captivated forts of profelytes, 
 who have rirlt left their reafons, and then their con. 
 fciences. 
 
 Can my inward joy teach another > or my private 
 ejaculations admonifh another ? I wifh Satan have 
 not thefe men at his will : they would have finging to 
 be an Ordinance, but no man to hear them 5 So that 
 if finging be not a diftinclvifible Ordinance, then no 
 man can tell what it is to fing ac all, but the fame 
 with preaching,praying, talking, or only an invifible 
 motion of the ioul, known to God only ; which is 
 moftabiurd, when we look on the weight of thefe 
 slacesof Scripture mentioned formerly. 
 
 Ob. If any objeel, If finging be with the voice, why 
 lot with other inftruments, as Lute, and Harp, anct 
 Organs, &c. as in the O. T e SoL 
 
Sol. M In ■■*» ^w Teft.mcnt the voice and the 
 W are only Gods infttumencs; this holds forth the 
 £c a my of worfhip from foul and body as from 
 P ne^erron y ; artificial inftruments are la.d .fide , not 
 
 "TclTJhe voice is ftill required.becaufe it « the 
 
 wardinfttumentbefidesisfo. ■ £„.„,!„ :„ 
 
 Thirdly, nothing can be espreft fo fignifictttly tn 
 JSS'd»rrfkS «by the vo.ce , «»*• "J* 
 prefsions of God we have in words,and the tongue 
 can beft mike out them. 7,.^ ftrV oice, 
 
 fourthly, theunion of heart, nd t< ongue^o rvoce 
 
 rsarp, cci. wc , Ar i ir :ft«f, ct ifi C e- when the fab- 
 ceremomesweretoChnltsiacr.nce, « 
 
 ftance came, they ceafed ; *"« ^J^'S 
 row the fpirit being mote abundantly pourea tortn 
 nd they"have no fignificancy ; buc there.needs foul and 
 body alwayes to fing out D.vine ftor.es, wh,!e » this 
 
 world 
 
 "FiLy, this hath been p^rf^Jj 
 before the New Teftament dayes , by the Ftopw" , 
 o finging to God with a lively voice,when the vo.c= 
 (h ibeafLute.andHarp^daUinftrumenKtoGod 
 
 .. :„ F/i«8 (as W.Cotton in that precious Treat le 
 ir% prophetically to the Gofpel. >«"»¥* 
 
(\Z1) 
 
 Sixthly, if they dare grant this* that there muft be 
 no finging by voice, then they cue off them felves from 
 any fort of finging by gift, in PfaIms,or Hymns, and 
 fpiritual Songs, and any outward way of cxprefs ng 
 Gods praifes ; and muft blot out finging in any way 
 publickly as to be looked after, though a perloh ne- 
 ver fo much infpired by the holy Ghoft ( after their 
 own fenjjpjfoould extemporariiy compofe,and breath 
 forth the moft glorious Sonnets , or heavenly An- 
 thems ; for what is not a duty in it felf , and general 
 in the nature of it,is not a duty to the rhoft raifed fpi- 
 rit,if never fo well gifted in fuch a myfterie. 
 
 Butthe wifet fort of the contrary judgement, who 
 confultwith Scriptures and the nature ofthings 3 will 
 not own the diffent of others as to this, butconfefs 
 finging of Pfalms muft be by voice, & lay it on another 
 foundation ; that it is Pfalm>, &c. but not thefe we 
 fing, that the command fpeaks of, but Pfalms of ano- 
 ther constitution , from a peculiar gift, and fo to be 
 looked on by the Church , vhu not to fing Davids 
 Pfalms, or Afaphs y or the like ; but from the fillings 
 of the Spirit in fuch a perfon,and on a fudden break- 
 ing forth for the edification of the Church. 
 1 end this with what Zanchy faith on thefe places 5 
 Thefe words <* x«V T '> an <l <=* ** kol^Ha vpav^ finging 
 with grace in your hearts, non exclttdunt vocem oris^ 
 verum exclttdunt hypocrijin & vamtatem, ex qua fere 
 loqumtur ebrii vino (& b %^\<l valet at que «* T ^ 
 H&Jiiais ) they do not exclude the voice, but hypocri- 
 fie, and vanity, from which men drunk with wine do 
 
 NT fing/ 
 
fing ; and in y out hearts, is as much as from your 
 heaits,that isnotvainlyvoras hypocritically, but as 
 from inward fenfe : So the Greek Scholiafts , 
 
 Chap. II. 
 
 What's meant by thefe three exprfysions > 
 Pfaims, Hymns, Spiritual*Songs . 
 how they are ufed in the Old Teflament 
 and the New 'Tefiament 5 from which 
 the matter of finging is cleared* 
 
 TH E next difference is about the matter of 
 finging, which all muft grant to be Pfaims, 
 and Hymns , and Spiritual Songs .• but what thefe 
 Pfaims were, &c. and how to dtftinguifa them one 
 from another, muft be debated ere we can clear the 
 point between thefe three exprefsionfi ; forae eon- 
 ititute one difference, fome another. 
 
 "Vfthpoi^ Tfa/ms, fay fome, are fuch Songs which 
 
 were fung with other Inftrumems betides the tongue, 
 
 SVfiMfi Hjmns^ fuch as aie made only to 
 
 jZ&Yi" exprefs the praifes,and fee out the excellcn- 
 
 • . ciesof God. £&«?**» Sengs , fuch as con- 
 
 CblUS. um noc on |y praties, but exhortations. 
 
 prophefies, thankfgiving . and thefe onlj 
 
 fang with the voyce and tongue. 
 
 Othei 
 
Others difference them thus : Pfatms are thole 
 
 which were pend by David wd others , drawn isp* 
 
 into meeter to be fung in the Temple in a mufiea! 
 
 (train. Hymns are thofe excemporal praifes 
 
 Gro- wnic ^ kreak ^ orcn u P on occa ^ on ^ r01 " * 
 
 hearc filled with the Spirir, and obfervanc o£ 
 ttUS* Gods goodnefs. Songs or Odes they call 
 fuch chit were premeditated not withouc 
 fome art : Thefe tb<ty call the Songs of Mofts , De- 
 borah, Hannah^ Simeon-, Mary t &c* 
 
 Bnc we (hail find , if we confute the ufe of 
 the words, the difference will not be consider- 
 able between them -and that they are ufed pre- 
 mifcuoufly in the Old Teftamenf, from whence ivc 
 muft leatn how they are to be taken in the New i 
 Now,, 
 
 i. I find they are ufed in general as the title 6£ 
 Davids P films , which are named promt Icuoufiyiy 
 thefe three words. 
 
 2. That the three.Hebrew words,v/^.^»tO Mif£ 
 mr 9 W Schir.dmnTehi/Iim, to which thefe 
 three, ^V^/r^/a^, do fully an(wer, are 
 u4id in the Pfalms one for another 5 withouc diftin- 
 dion ; and fometimes two of them joyned toge* 
 ther as the title of one Pfalm ; fometimes all three 
 Joyned together in one title f we could heap up tr- 
 amples inthis kind » Judges 5. J. faith Debroab i 
 m-\& f-TVtfK, / Mlfing, Imllfing unto the Urd; 
 it's transited by the 70 ; **»/*«« $4**0 here is 
 two words f the one ufed for a Pfalm, the dther fo<£ 
 
ns 4 ; 
 
 an Ode or Song pat to exprefs one act. i Chrcn.\6* 
 £ji.the two fame words are tranflated thus m the 70. 
 dmn fyvyvnJAT*, Sing unto the Lord, fiHg an Hymn 
 unto the Lord. \nPfal. 105. 3. which is the fame 
 Pfaira, only inferred into the body of the Book of 
 the Plalms , the former word tptOT, is rendred by 
 4*> ast£, fmg Pfalms : and thus the fame word in 
 the fame verfe is expreft by thefe two words, yet 
 tidid forth one thing. In Efay 12.5. "pET is rendred 
 iJuv'i<rcLTz, In the title oiPfaL 38. i.Mizmor is ren- 
 dred by &<?», which is here tranflated a Song : and in 
 moft of the cities one is ufed for another without di« 
 ftinclion ^and *Vfcr Schir, which is moft uiually ren- 
 dwd by »Jn a Song , yet is alio rendred bv 4*V®" 
 aT/tlm, PfaU^ I. and47. 1. And by* J >^ , a 
 Hymn, If ay 42. 10. As for the other word D^nr, 
 Tehi/hm, that comprehends fully both Hymn- and 
 Songs j it is the general title of the Book of Pfalm c , 
 where the variety of the m are contained. And as fome 
 particular Pfalms are called in the Greek Hymns or 
 Odes, according to the two former words: fo this 
 word is put at top holding forth the fignificancy of 
 all the reft, and diftinguifhing the Pfalms from all 
 other Books of fcripture as thefe that know th«fu- 
 perfcriptionof that Book underftandj and itfigmfles 
 the moft univerfal and full way of praifing God , 
 efpecialiy by tinging ; and 11% expreft by various 
 words ^ as (*ivtiv, Imuviw ) to praife ; (ifapitiZw ) to 
 commend or fet forth the refutation of another ; 
 ( A?*^" )togiorifit ordifcover the glory of another $ 
 
( ivhtfw ) to hkfs, with many other expreffions ; 
 So in particular ( Wftetv ) Pfal. 145. 1. but moft 
 cfpeciaily is this laft word ( p-"frnn ) which is a 
 word for all Pfalms expreft by ( uf*w ) a Hymn ; as 
 2 Chrpn.7.6. and 23.13. Pfal. 39.4. 2 Cbren. 29. 
 3©. ■ <PfaL 21. 13. Pfal. 64. i. and 99. 3 • where 
 rheonc word is tranflated by the other. 
 
 For their conjunction of each of them together in 
 one a title of aPfalm,is very ufual,and often inverted: 
 The title of Tfal- 29. 1. is in the Hebrew, TUHDtfD. 
 Mizmor Schir; in the Greek Tranflation its •Uk^h.^ 
 a Jits, APfalmofaSong, or a Song and al* [aim* So 
 64. 1. and 47. i. and 26. 1. but in 6y 1. there the 
 title is 1D?0 "VW, and tranflated #<h $$&*% A 
 SongofaPfalm, oraSengand Pfa/m. So < P/^/.82.i. 
 But unto the title of Pfal. 75. the 70 Greek Inter- 
 preters ( from whom thefe words are borrowed in 
 the New TeftamentJ do add all the three together 5 
 
 £ Am'?tor . ^ /y^/ w /<> Afaph *» ar W**£ Hyww * a 
 Song to the Affyrians, By all which we fee, and might 
 by many more, ; jae 
 
 1. That there is not fuch a critical diftinclion to 
 be made between a fpiritual Pfalm, and a Hymn, and 
 Song, but that they are put indifferently one for an- 
 other, 
 
 2. Having opened the words with their ufe (I 
 hope with advantage to thofe that know the language 
 of the Hebcew with the Septuagint) let us now con- 
 sider them as the matter to be fung, and what thefe 
 
 N $ Pfalms, 
 
Pfalr^Sj Hymns and Spiritual Songs ate; whether 
 Davids, Afafh*) HetnAns, and fuck other which are 
 foundin Scripture ^>en*d by holy men upon fpecial cc- 
 caftons,or another of a new campofure ; the former 
 of which I affirm to be an Ordinance of the New 
 Teftament. 
 
 i. Thefe are the ticks given folely to Davids 
 jpjaZins , and the other Scripture- Songs, which chefe 
 holy men, Divinely infpired, breathed forth, and kit 
 on record: And as Mr. Cotton excellence argues, 
 What reafon can there be why the Apoltle CbouAddi- 
 rec3us in our tinging to the very ti:k of Davids 
 Pfdlms , and other Script ure-Song?, it' he meant we 
 flaould not (ing thefe Vfakns and Songs ? Either we 
 xnuft exclude 'Davids Tfalms.znd the reft from being 
 called Pfalms, orHymns,ot Spiritual 'Songs, or elfe 
 £hey mult be fung as well as other e. 
 
 2. The names are borrowed from the Greek 
 Tranflatorsof the Old Teftament,and there is no di- 
 fltinclion of them in the New ; neither can any one 
 tell whit they meanjbut as by their ufe in the CMd Te- 
 ilament : Now thefe names were ufed there a&pecu*- 
 !iar characters to exprefsand diftinguifb the works of 
 Am'^Und the reft .which were penned to* be fang in 
 the Church : Let thefe which ate againft finging £)a- 
 vids TfalmSyiTid of other holy men, (hew us any one 
 word or fyllable in the New Teftarnent , where my 
 of thefe words are taken in any other feate theft as 
 they were in the Old, and yet we are commanded to 
 Cing them in the New ; onthis ground the<afe would 
 
 be 
 
(1*7) 
 be foon concluded ; when the queftion is propound- 
 ed, ( granting this is a command for finging ) what 
 fhaiiwe fing ? why,Pfalms, Hymns, and fpiritual 
 Songs ; how (hall we know what thefe are ? we muft 
 look in Scripture, where thefe words are ufed ; now 
 we find them nowhere explained fo properly as in 
 the Old Teftament $ where they are the ufual titles 
 oi^Davids Pfalms,and the fongs of other Holy men, 
 and no other ufe of them expreft in the New ; why 
 may not we judge then , thefe are the Pfalrns, and 
 inns, and fpiritual Songs we are there command- 
 :o fing > But , 
 
 Come to the New Teftament,and there when 
 ever Chrift or his Apoftles fpeak of Pfalms , they re- 
 fer us to Scripture Pfalms, Luke ao,4i.(Chrift faithj 
 As it is written in the Book of the Pfalms, that is the 
 1 1 o. Pfalm,The Lord faid unto my Lord, fit thou at my 
 right hand: in Luke 24.44. when Chrift would make 
 anexacldivifion of the Old Teftament, he divides 
 them into the Law of Mofes, the Prophets, and the 
 Pfalms , diftinguifhing the Pfalms from all other 
 Scripture, as a peculiar book by it lelf ; And as when 
 we arecommandedto readthe Law 3 andthe Prophets, 
 we cannot think them to be any other then the wri- 
 tings of Mofes and Samuel ', and the reft of the Pro- 
 phets in the Old Teftament ; So when we are com- 
 manded to fing Pfalms,not the Law or the Prophets: 
 how can we imagine it unlawful to fing that part of 
 Scripture which is properly called the Tfalms, as the 
 writings of DavU 9 Afafh, &c ? So the Apoftle, 
 
 N 4 j*Q. 
 
4&s i.20.fpeaking of Judas his fall, and ruin, faith, . 
 as it was written of him in the Book of the Pfalms, 
 Let his h ablution be made At folate, &c.7y!60. 16. and 
 in the \6v*rfe (faith Peter) the Holy Ghoft by the 
 month of David fpake this concerning fudas,^. v.io* 
 for it is written in the Book of the Pfalms. *ABs 2, 
 esffis 2 ? . and 2p.in ftead of faying as in the Pfalms, > 
 he faith, DdWfpeaketh ofChnftthus and thus in 
 Pfal.i6.ABs 13*3*$* fpeaking of Chritl again ; he 
 faith,/// it is Written in the feconfrp fdlmfftt v.^yAs 
 it is written in Another Pfa/m, which is the 1 6. By all 
 which is clear what Chrift and the Apofties v ^gBd 
 have us underftand by Pfalms (when we are'tom 
 fllanded to fing them)efpecially thefe P/k/w^whfch 
 are called the Book of the Pfalms ; and there is no 
 other Pfalms fpoken of in the New Teftamenc ; and 
 the Holy-Ghoft is the beftExpoficor of his own com- 
 mands. »>3aw men muft either deny the/e of Davids, 
 (is before) to be "Pfalms , or eifechey are bound 
 to fing them as for Hymns and Songs 5 they ate com- 
 prehended under this general word {fPfalmi ;J being 
 all exprelt in the Book of the Pfalms 3 as hath been 
 demonftrated. ■* 
 
 4, Let us confider the vainicy of the contrary opini- 
 on,in regardit utterly makes way for will*worflaip y - 
 which they feem to be fornnch agairft. For fir ft , I 
 &m commanded to fing Pia!ms r Hymns, Songs r the 
 Old and New Teftamenc fpea,k of no other Bklmt 
 then of D.dvidsindAfapbs > 8£ of fuchiike infplred per- 
 fansj^nd tfcey are called she Ffalms by Chnft *nd his 
 
 ApO- 
 
(1*9) 
 
 Apoft!es,but you muft not ling them (fay they. JI ask 
 what Pfalms then muft you {ing * there is no fight in 
 Old or New Teftament to warrant any other; either 
 you muft fancy a P film , and (ay Chrift meant this 
 way, when he fpake of the Book of the Pfalms, 
 and devife a new way of wor(hip out of your own 
 brains, or elfe (ing the it Pfalms , which Chrift and 
 his Apoftles call Pfalms. Befides, 2. How can any 
 man perfwade himfelf, or others, when he tings, that 
 he (ings a Pfalm, when he doth not (ing that which 
 in Scripture is onely called a Pfalm ? Or how can any 
 man diftinguifa, now I (ing a Pfalm , now a Hymn , 
 now a Song, when there is not one word in the New 
 Teftament to diftinguifib them one from another, or 
 the two latter from the Book of the Pfalms ? if any 
 man from the New Teftament can diftinguifh a Pfalm 
 from a Hymn, or a Hymn from an Ode or Song, or 
 any one from another.but as they borrowit from the 
 Old Teftement t mt mihi magnus nAfollo ; he (hall 
 be an Oracle I will coniult more then with 
 Scripture. They ceil us Davids Pfalms, and the like 
 are not to be fungi Chrift and his Apoftles call them 
 fpecially by the name of Pfalms, and command as to 
 (ing Pfalms.Now let them (hew us any other Pfalms 
 from Scripture, and we are fatisfied ; but it's hard 
 to be perfwaded from fuch a precious Ordinance, by 
 a meer Negative, and the workings of a melancholy 
 fancy, or the preemption or a hot brain that he hath 
 a gift of compofing Pfalms, and Songs, and Hymns, 
 for the edification of the Church, 
 
 Let 
 
(19*) 
 
 tet us go on further, and cry the Scripture exam- 
 ples ; and begin with onr Lord Jefus Chj iff, and his 
 Difciples ; after the adminiftration of his Supper ; 
 its faid in Math. 26.30. and Mark 14.26. when they 
 had fang an Hymn, for a Pfitlm) (as the margeV ex- 
 prefleth irjand its all ontjkey went forth to the mount 
 Olivet ; the words are, «S ipvfottvfiie kSi^M «* t5 
 «#* &c.Take it either as all Trarflatorsintei prepa- 
 ying fung an Hymn, Hymn mUo Arab : The] went 
 forth, ox they Vcent forth hymning, for ringing of a 
 PfalmJ its not mareria! : But 1 . Irs clear they fung 
 openly with their voice. 2. TheyJanga Pfaimot 
 Hymn ; now what this Hymn ftiourd he , is the que- 
 ftion,whether one of Davids Pj 'aims, or any in ehat 
 Book ; to which I anfwet: I. Irs onely faid they fung 
 an Hymn orTy aim, and its moft probable, yea de- 
 monnrative, that it was one of thefe Pfalms , or 
 Hymns of David and the other Holy men, becaufe 
 Chrift himfelf fpeaks of no other , as before t 
 2. Becaufe Chrift was Jo much prophefied of in thefe 
 Pfalms, which were formerly fnrrg prophetically, 
 and with thankfgivingfor thefe very acls before-hsrrd. 
 5. Becaufe Chrift did itill quote the fame Pfalms^ 
 prove both his Divinity and faf&fthgs ; fo did his A- 
 poftles. New it was no more dishonour, or 
 unfuitable to Chrift to fmg wirh his Difciples one 
 or more of thefe 'Hymns or Pfalms , then it 
 was to prove himfel; : , and his rnedistorfhip by 
 them, which he doth in all chef (inner phces, ye* the 
 very nature and manner of his Af&riflgs. 4.We>ftave 
 
 Scripture 
 
Scripture ground from Chrifts expreHIon to believe 
 
 the one,ar.d onely cur own conjecluses that be fung 
 
 any other ^Pfalms^ or Hymns ; and th*t Chrift both 
 
 before and aft er his death fhould bring his choice 
 
 proofs of his perfon, and humiliation,and glory from 
 
 the book of the Tftdnu^ and when he was to* fufTer 
 
 it (hould be found they fung a Pfalm > or Hynw-> and 
 
 yet not one of thefe Pfaltnsjs very hard to prefs on a 
 
 Scripture confeience, efpecially when the a&cxprtft 
 
 is in general,and the fame word ufed for finging fuch 
 
 Tftlmsjmd no other determination of it in tbe New 
 
 Teftaroent; let men but weigh things in an equal bai- 
 
 knee of the Sanctuary and Judge; yea, let them who 
 
 are fo high on the other fide, (hew us from Scripture 
 
 what that Hjmn % or Pfalm was, which Quill and 
 
 his Difciples fung after the Supper , and give us any 
 
 place as a comment on it>and but the hint to our de- 
 
 monftration,and we (hall think our felvcs well quit 
 
 of fuch a roiftake : in the mean while the argument 
 
 Hands thus untouched, Chrift and his Difciples fung 
 
 an Hymriy and Chrift and the Apoftles fpeak of no? 
 
 other Hjwns> or Tfalms , but thefe recorded in the, 
 
 Old Te(tament,eipecially thefe in the book of 'rjie . 
 
 P films } therefore they fung none other. And furejy 
 
 Chrift would conform his praclife to his expreflions, 
 
 or would have made fome diftinclion. 
 
 The fecond great example of finging is that oiPmi 
 
 and Silas % Atts v6. 25* where it is faid, Thy fung m 
 
 Hymn to Qodjrr gave praifes in tkefrifon at midnight - x 
 
 we are (till on the fame account as formerly, and ask 
 
 what 
 
Op*) 
 
 whit this Hymn was they fang, if not one of thefe 
 Pfalms of Scripture which they might have chofen 
 for this prefent condition ? If any one can fay it was 
 an exemporary ejaculation, let them (hew us their 
 proof;we (hew them the Scripture ufe of the word, 
 and which was known to them ; and thefe that op- 
 pofe muft have fomething from thereafon of the 
 Text, or ufe of the Word to contradict us, and con- 
 firm themfelves ; they did not barely (ing , bat 
 tipuvTovkov, they fung Hymns; and do not we 
 go on furer grounds that ting thefe Pfalms and 
 Hymns ; which in the New Tcftament Ghrift and his 
 Apofties do call fo, then what we imagine to be 
 Pfalms.ind Hymns ^z. by an unfcripturaJ fuppofiti. 
 on? fo that the fumm of all may be drawn up thus to 
 argue, j, -; $riT 
 
 i; Ic is our duty to obey Divine commands; It is t 
 command to fing Pfdms^Hymnsffirittml Songster ge^ 
 it is our duty. tgifr^aiti 
 
 a. It is a command to fing Tfdms, Hymns^ fciri* 
 tud Songs ^ as to the matter ; but there is no other 
 Pfylms, Hymns > or tyiritud Songs mentioned in the 
 01dorNewTtftamenr,bu: thefe which arepen'dby 
 Holy men,infpired to that end j frg*,it is our duty to 
 
 P 
 
Km) 
 
 C H A P, HI. 
 
 An Anfmrto that objecHen concern** bneine 
 
 fit- . 
 
 ONtrfpecial Objedion that is made againft fing- 
 tog Scripture Pfalm,, &c. is that it hinders the 
 exercife of gifts, and fo its but formal ; all duties in 
 the Church muft be done from a gifc. 
 
 Anfwer. i You fee here is a duty laid on uuio fuch 
 limitation as from a gift. 
 
 2, The matter is prefcribed you, P/*/«, f and 
 fa>m/,and-^/ 9 and to thefc you are efpeciaily en- 
 joyned : now the limitation of the matter limits the 
 daw. 
 
 g.There is no promife of fuch a gift in the Gofoe! 
 tocompofcP/4/«M, uAHjm*. God hathprovi-' 
 ded matter fufficient ; there is a promife for the fpirit 
 of prayer and Application, Zack.u. and of prea- 
 ching andj>rophefying, in jW, repeated in Afc 2. 
 but no diftma promife for a gift of fpiritual Poetrir v 
 or Singm&for there are but three things required to 
 Iwging fit matter, a voice, and heart • all which may 
 be performed without any fuch fpecial gift of com- 
 poimg , the matter Is ready, if the heart and Yoicebe 
 pre lent, 
 
 4. It is a duty laid generally on the whale Charca." 
 w.thout any d.ftinft.on of gifts 5 all ate commanded 
 to ling, &c. Here is no hint of a gift requited. 
 
 5. Cbrift 
 
(m) 
 
 x. Chrift would not ordain an Ordinance of fuch 
 confequcnce,which the Churches (html d wane the ufe 
 of- tome utterly , and not one among many (hould 
 know what it means;for there is hardly one among a 
 thoufandof Saints which hattvfuch a gift of aompo- 
 fing Tfalms , and Hymns, &c. and if it be an Ordi- 
 nance in one Church,all others may want it,tndfo he 
 deprived of the comfort of fuch a fweec Ordi- 
 nance for want of a pretended gift, when they hare 
 mutef enough of pratfes before them. 
 
 rf. Ic is lawful to make ufe of the gifts of others, as 
 well as to ufe our own ; when a man hath* gift of 
 prayer,! joyn vvithhim,and make ufe of bisgifts,&c. 
 !*> is it much more lawful to make ufe of the gifes of 
 holy and blefled men in Scripture,who had that glo- 
 rious gift of competing all forts of Pfalms, Hjm*s> 
 and fpiritual Songs t tnd when we fing them with me- 
 lody in our hearts, we manifeft ail thofe treafcresof 
 the g*fct of che fpirtr,- that brearhed mzhdt-ffalms, 
 &c. as if we had from a pet fonil gifecompofed them 
 our feives ; for if we fing them with the fametmder.* 
 fhiidmg , with the lame inward affedion of 
 love, joy, &c. we fing the® with the fame 
 
 P y Yf there were fuch a gift promifed/it would have 
 Meamenuontdby Chrift orhw Apoftles,» the gift 
 of tongues and miracles were,aud Saints would have 
 bOTtnftrucled to feck for tt, andthefe that had ft , 
 would have been commanded to wait on it, as tht 
 BVderi are on exhortation, cexching, rilling , the 
 
 Deacons 
 
090 
 Deaconson adffiiniftring, and diftributing,& c . Rom 
 12.6/7,8,9,10. 
 
 8. It is Anticbriftian to introduce an Ordinance to 
 be pradifed among the Churches, which hath not been 
 commanded by Chrift and his Apoftles, ( thefe that 
 differ, make much uie of the word Antkhriflian) and 
 cannot bur grant this principle to be undeniab!e ; now 
 I affume bu: to introduce; A way of Tinging by a gift, 
 with catting off Scripture-*?/*/*^, and Hymns, and 
 Songs,vm never commanded by Chrift or his Ape- 
 ilk&yergo, itisAntichriftian . the minor hath been 
 proved bcfore 3 -there is no mention in the writings of 
 Chiift or the Apoitles/>f finging Pfidmby* perfonai 
 gift, or of a gift of compofing Ffalms either for our 
 lelves or the Church; neither is there mention of any 
 ochcr <Pjalms, Hjmns, and Songs, as the matter to be 
 tang; but fuch as are pen'd in Scripture i and left to 
 b&Iurig by ail the Churches. Thus it men will bring 
 in a new Ordinance, they mutt (hew their authority 
 from the Word p or elfe apply the word ^ntichrlflUn 
 tothemfelves. 
 
 For that espreffion in i Corinth. 14.26. When job 
 come together fiwr®-^^,,^; everJ ont 
 hath * yfdm , hath a c Doarine y tcc. from whence 
 they gather they had a gift of compofing Pfalms by 
 the apicit, which they were to fing in the Church if 
 they did it orderly. j 
 
 To which I further anfwer, there is not any thins 
 to explain what Pfalm this was. 
 2.Wefeave mor^reafon to ^hink it was one of thefe 
 
 Scripture 
 
(m) 
 
 Scripture Pfalms, which the New Teftamcnt always 
 calls a Pfalm (as he faith, in the fecond <?/*/. and m 
 another P/Vmas before) far more reafon then they 
 have to fay it was a Pfalm of their own compohng 
 by a gift ; every one hath a Pfalm i that is , this 
 and the other have a P/*/»v that «, one had this, 
 Pfalm inScripture which he thought moft proper^n- 
 othcr,another of thefe P films Jot Iw©- »s not to be 
 taken univerfaily of all,buc fingularly ; one hath this, 
 another that; thus fome 5 but rather the meaning is, 
 not as if one had this Pfalm, and another another ; 
 but one hath a Pfalm, another a Z>*#r*W,another to 
 fpeak with tongues, another to prophede 5 now thus 
 there was a confufion among them; one would have 
 a 'Ffnlm fung, another would have his Dottrtne, or 
 wordofCortftrftftiott as moft fit^nother his Revelation. 
 Now the Apoftleonely tells them they might ail be 
 done one by one, and in order 5 he that had iTjWaj 
 to be fung, might in its proper place , but thiadoch 
 not prove thac it was a Pfalm extemporanly com- 
 pofed, or by aperfonal gift, or that it was not ona 
 01 the Pfalms in that which the Scripture calls the 
 Book of the Pfalms. « 
 
 Objea .If any fay furthest muft needs be from a 
 gift, becaufeit is joyned with other afls which were 
 meerly from a gih&s Do8rine s Tongues .Revelations , 
 Trophecjjnteryretation. 
 
 1 Aniwer, Of theie things here named, foroe are 
 accounted extraordinary, and peculiar, as gifts of 
 Te»z«esJievelationsfittQ<l for thefe times j the other 
 * ordina* 
 
forae think this laft extraordinary alfo) to having a 
 PJalm, maybe accounted ordinary, and not from 
 an extraordinary gift, as the gift of tongues was , 
 however you muft not make a particular argument 
 from things of divers confederations and ufes. 
 
 2.0ther Scriptures have determined what a ^falm 
 is, and it may be eafily gathered what it is in the Co. 
 rintbians for one to have a Pfalm i we prove they 
 had a Pfiim ; let them prove what that <Pfalm was. 
 befidesthefe Scripture-/*/*//^ onely mentioned in 
 the New Teftament; 
 
 It is mod evident that the matter of finging is de- 
 termined by the words of the Apoftle,in Mffl^>$A& 
 LettkewordofGoddwellrichlyinyoti^c. which \n 
 Efh. 5. i*more in general, Be filled with the Spirit, 
 which do not make any difTereneejfor theWord andj 
 the Spirit muft makeup the melody in our hearts 8 
 but -IbJl- the word of God is the matter to be fung 
 with the Spirit, as ic is the matter for reading, prea- 
 chtng,mterpretation ; but he here names that part of 
 the Word which belongs to the duty heenjoyns* 
 as a fpecial part of that Word which ought to dwell 
 richly in them, as to fuch a duty of finging : So 
 that, 
 
 1. If 7>y«Aw,and #;»»/, and Songs fa part of the 
 word of God, then they may be fung. 
 
 2. If that part of the Word be more properly fit- 
 ted to the duty commanded then any other, it muft 
 be fo reftramed here, 
 
 tf 3: That 
 
(19%) 
 
 }. That it k (o, appears, becaufehe fpeak9 fo par- 
 ticularly* That the Word wight d^ell in them rlchl), 
 teaching andadmonifhing one another pox. in generates 
 by Preaching, Doctrine", or the like : but in Pfafms, 
 and Hymns, and fpiritual Songs, which mull; needs 
 be the great duty in the Text,and ail before reftridled 
 to char. 
 
 4. Then the word of God in generator any fpe- 
 cial Word of God may be faid to dwell richly in a 
 perfon, when the fpiritual intenr, fenfe, and meaning 
 of it, with the inward fpirir, and power of ic upon 
 all occafions doth appear in the duties commanded 
 by it ; and thus you may fee the verfe in its parts. 
 
 1 . Here is the duty, finging. 
 
 2. The Word of God, the matter 
 
 3 . The fpecialty of the Word fo fitted to rfee nature 
 of that duty , Pfalms , Bjmns , and jpiritttal 
 Songs- 
 
 4. The peculiar way how ro be a perfect fpiritual 
 Snger; it is to have this word dwell in a man, and 
 richly .having the true fenfe, fweet experience of this 
 word in the heart, being upon all occafions able to 
 cull out in the language of Scripture, Pf*lms t Hymn^ 
 and Sonvs, futable to our own conditions or c* 
 thers. 
 
 If the Apoftlehad meant here a gift of compofing 
 new Pfalms, &c.as he would not have ufedtheOld 
 Teftament language without an explanation ; fo he 
 would* not have mentioned the word of God iri fuch 
 aclofe limitation as in Tfalms^ and Hjmns, and 
 
 Songs, 
 
(199) 
 
 Songs ^ whicti are eiegecica! to the word of God to 
 be fung,if he had not inr ended that put of the Word 
 as fitted for that Ordinance; for no man knowa 
 what thefe expreflions hold forth, but as they are 
 found in the word of God ^ and as a diftincl and emi, 
 nentpartofit. It were more proper to fay, Let the 
 grace of God dwell in you? or thegoodnefs of God. thaC 
 you may from the fenfe of it break forth upon alf-oc- 
 cafions to praifcs. But to name the Word of Go<f„ 
 and nam$ ft with that modification's Pfalms,Hymn*, 
 Songs, which we all know is a part of it, and bid us 
 fing, and deny us in his intention for to fing thefe 
 Pfalms which are part of that Word, is too unwor- 
 thy a refleaion on the Holy Gboft, and the Pen-men 
 of Scripture. And that feems very ftrange to afrlrrh 3 
 that I may not fing that Word of God which is cal- 
 led by the name of TJatms, Hymns, and ^«£/,when 
 this Word muft dwell in me richly to that end and 
 ufe. 
 
 Laftly, thefinging of thefe Pfalms, Hymns, and 
 Songs, is the Word of God, is molt adapt and pro- 
 portioned to the particular ufe the Apoftie intended, 
 by finging in the Church, which was to teach and ad- 
 monifh one another- Now no gift of any Saint can 
 be fo powerful, and authoritative to teach, as the 
 Word of God in thefe Pfalms, which were pen'd bf 
 the fpirir, as a rule to all Saints, and their gifts ; ao4 
 as the Word of God is made ufe of feveralways 
 to teach, and admonifii, fo this is one fpecial way,by 
 Pfalms^Hjmns Jongs, When I fing by a pretended 
 * gift, 
 
/20(>J 
 
 gift* I fee caufe ofjealoufie, that it may be more a 
 fancy then the fpirit ; every man hath caufe of fufpi- 
 tion from whence it comes, and ere I can be fatisfied, 
 Imuft compare it with, and try it by the Scripture 
 ftrainof Pfalrns y Hymns>*n& Songs, But by finging 
 the very words of Scripture with fenfe, and experi- 
 ence, I teach both by my holy carriage in the action, 
 *nd the word it felf commands by its own authority, 
 as when it is read. 
 
 But that I may more clearly open this* how that 
 the Word of God in P/atmt, Hymns, and Songs ^ is 
 the mod fie matter of finging, let us view that part 
 of the Wotfd called by thefe names, and fee how far 
 it will reach this kind of edification^ beyond all that 
 which may come from a prefent gift to compofc mat- 
 ter tor fuch a duty. i ijito'-'lCI^H 
 
 i. Befides the ipi ritual elegancy of phrafe, the in- 
 fpircd ftyte of that part of holy writ,whkh is beyond " 
 ordinary with the height of matter, of no vulgar 
 compofure, it having fuch attending ftampof Di- 
 vine authority on ir 5 rouft needs conveigh its fenfe 
 with more weight and power, then any thing from 
 particular invention, though aififtcd by a gift of the 
 fpirir, which comes but in the fecond place, and can- 
 not be put in any confideration with lhac authority 
 as the other, nor inferred among the heavenly Ca- 
 nons and Scripture rules for Saints to build their faith 
 on, or dired their lives. 
 
 2. The Jargeneis, and comprehenfivenefs of the 
 fcope of the&orteft Pfalsn, is fo^ that it will give 
 
 matter 
 
( 20I ) 
 
 matter to ftudy and ponder on, and give advantage 
 to enlarge our thoughts and affetfions on more then 
 any particular gift ofany Saint now can be rationally 
 conceived to afford ; for commonly the befl gifts are 
 but an enlargement ofthefirft: text, and bring forth 
 nothing^ novo, no new thing , and all theie Saints 
 with all their gifts muft be glad to have recourfe to 
 that part of the Word, as the reft, for the fulnefsof 
 teaching and admonition. 
 
 3- The variety of matter in thefe Tfatms&c. is fo 
 wonderful, that they do provide before- hand by an 
 eternal wifdom, for the conditions of all Saints, 
 either perfonally, or myftically,that no man (ing any 
 thing, but if that Word dwell in him richly, he may 
 hnde a fuitabie Pfalm prepared for him,by the fore- 
 "ghr, and wife, and infallible diredions of the Al- 
 mighty, and in this, the Book of the Pfdmntm- 
 kends all other parts of Scripture,and may be called 
 the Epitome of the whole Bible. In fome Scriptures 
 vou have Jittle but matter of ptecepr, in others little 
 but hiltorical relations of perfons, and anions- but 
 in the Book of the Pfalms you have the variety of 
 matter concerned in ail the whole Scripture, moft 
 fuitabie to the vaft duty of ringing praifes. 
 
 i. Matter of all forts of prophefies referring to the 
 very latter end of the world. 
 
 ; 2. All forts of general and fpecial direclions, either 
 for Faith or Life, 
 
 3> All forts of promifes fitted to particular condi- 
 tsorj&, 
 
 O 3 4. All 
 
( 3Q>) 
 
 4. All forts of experiences in what condition a (boi 
 may be in, either of trya! or triumph, either to foul 
 or body. 
 
 5. All forts of figns ? and characters of heavenly 
 motions arid frames to God. 
 ' 6. All fort of thankfgivings and pray fes for fpiriru- 
 si or temporal mercies, with their various diicords, 
 which makes up the harmony of the whole. He is a 
 jttiildcinthe Scrippure,thatdoth not admire the un- 
 paralleled variety of truth in that Bocft; fo that if I 
 were raifed by fome extraordinary gift to the great- 
 eft enlargement of composing a c Pfa/m J or Jptrityal 
 Song on a (pecial occafton, I fhouldcomc fliortof 
 the variety,and fulnefs of the leaft of thefe Pfalms, 
 and yet the ignorant (landers bymight more admire 
 my gift,and there would be more danger in ir/hen to 
 ring the Scriprure- ?/*//»; which have nothing from 
 rnen to grace rhem but their own native mayfly and 
 authority* And truly, it is fomewhat odd for one 
 go be fee up by others, or for any one tofcefetup 
 himfelf as a fpiritual Poet in the Church, and the 
 Church to fing his thoughts, with the neglect of the 
 Ward of God, which is furnifhed with iuch variety 
 for the conditions of fouls 
 
 And as the Word of God in general is fo large, 
 andvaft, and various, that all the Saints with their 
 higheft emprovements can never come up to the ful- 
 nefs of it f and all the valt folio's that have been writ- 
 ten by commentators of ail fort* 9 bave hardly pierced 
 she bark, the (hell, the letter, and all Saints of the 
 ! higheft 
 
( *03 ) 
 higheftattainmenr, mull: dig in to it as thecnely vi- 
 able Mine, and we muft not exclude the Pfalms as co 
 Kinging from that fulnefs and variety, feeing Chrift 
 himfeif when he diftinguiftmh the whole Scripture, 
 gives the Tfalms an equal part. 
 
 Chap. IV. 
 Concerning the Tranflation of Davids Pfalms 5 
 and other fpiritual Hymns, and Songs, 
 xvitfj the Anfaer to the objection artftng 
 from it* 
 
 IHave endeavoured to prove the duty ; let as con*- 
 (ider the ftrength of the main Objections againft 
 
 it, 
 
 Ob. The firfl: in order is that which carps at the 
 Tranflation, and that into Meetre,as the humane in- 
 vention ; the Tranflation ( fay they ) is corrupt and 
 efpecially as into Meetre, and Tune 5 if you will (ing 
 Davids Pfams, fing them in Hebrew, as they were 
 fung formerly ' this they much flick on. 
 
 Sol. To whicji I anfwer,That in thefe Pfalms,and 
 Songs, there was a fet Meetre, fitted to Tunes, and 
 Voices, and mufical Instruments ; none can deny that 
 obferves the Dedications of moft Pfalms, and thofe 
 of undeiftanding that can read learned Gomartu may 
 fee it fully, and with great exaclnefs ; where the fpi- 
 ritual prefie of thefcPfalms is excellently fet forth. 
 O 4 2. So 
 
( *°4) 
 
 7. So far as there is coriuption in the Tranflation, 
 it is fpurious, and not to be approved of> but cor- 
 rected. 
 
 3. But Tranfhtions according to the import of the 
 words and fenfe of the text, are as much the Word 
 of God, as the Text in the original ; for the cohe- 
 rence of word and fenfe make up the copy entire and 
 perfect. 
 
 4. Which follows, the Trarfhtion of the words in 
 Meetre^if itfyave the full fenfe of the words,is as much 
 the Word of God,as it it were tranflatedin profe, or 
 ordinary fentence for reading 5 for it is not Ae way 
 or method, but the fenfe and meaning of the words, 
 that is the Word irf God. So that I may as well fay 
 tvhen I fing in fuch a compofkion, it is as much the 
 Word of God as when I read the fame words in the 
 Bible,onely they are orderly difpofed for that a&on. 
 None mull by this reafon,pretend to know the Wor4 
 of God in reading or expounding>but he that knows 
 the Hebrew,and Greefe ; 3nd rhat mull be al(o in the 
 firft perfect copy, immediately rrarfcribed from in- 
 spired underftandingsjfor all things befides arc either 
 tranflations,or add!tion$,orfubftraclions,ffQrn which 
 two laft comes perfeel corruption. • 
 
 So that a crarfliton for figging, or reading is the 
 fame Work of God ^ long as it harh the fame iubftan- 
 tiaf truth in it; anci (ing rhem which way you will, 
 either as they lie in the verfe, or as the fame verfe is 
 digefted into ftaves, and with mufical notes, it is -all 
 one as to the nature of finging, and the ttatoflition 
 
 may 
 
may be as Orthodox in Meetre, as in Profe • fothat 
 you fee what force, efficacy, that objection from the 
 tranflacion carries with it ; Iconfcfs there are many 
 defers in the tranflation into Meetre, bur there arc 
 the like in fome copies in profe,or continued fentence; 
 but as to the nature of the thing, one verfe may as 
 well be made two,according toimifical notation,and 
 yet retain the fame continued fen fe, as remain one, 
 only bounded by Arithmetical figures, as 1,2,3. &c\ 
 
 Ob. But if any one fay the Pfaims, as thus tranfla- 
 ted info Meetre, are but an humane invention, and 
 you worfhipGod onelyafcera humaneforrn. 
 
 SoL The Anfwer is at hand. 
 
 1. To know the fignificancies of the tongues, and 
 how to translate them to edification, is a fpecial gift 
 ofGodsfpirit, 1 Qor. 12.28,29. 1 Corinth* M.i a 2> 
 
 2. On this ground we read humane inventions when 
 we read the Old or New Teftament in any transiti- 
 on, but the firft copies of Hebrew and Greek,wherein 
 they were firft written. 
 
 3 . Is it not more a humane invention for to ling 
 any thing of my own compofing,then for tofing the 
 very matter, andfenfeofthe Word of God in my 
 own tongue f and yet its ufual among thefe that 
 are againft this Ordinance,to cry aloud,! t is a humane 
 invention, Antichriftian. 
 
 4. The tranflation of the Scripture for to be read, 
 is as much a humane invention's in pocfie tobefung; 
 but this is an Objection urged for want of a better. 
 
 Ok 
 
(206) 
 
 Ob. The next grind Ob je&ion j* f that we may as 
 well ufe a fet form of Prayer, as of finging P/alms • 
 rhe one is as lawful as the otber,the one (lines the fpi- 
 ric as much as the other. 
 
 SoL i .There is no Divine holds that a fet form of 
 Prayer is abfolutely unlawful, for then no man may 
 meditate before hand what he ought to pray for,nor 
 confult with his own mouth, or Gods promifes • for 
 if'I meditate on what I need, and what God hath 
 promifed, I form fuch petitions, and tyemyfdfto 
 them as neceiTary to be petitioned for, and it jaay be 
 I may have no occafion for a long while to be^ any 
 thing of God,but the fubftance of thefe premeditated 
 confiderations or my want. 
 
 2. Here lies the unlawfulnefs of fet form of Prayer, 
 that it is compofed by one, and impofed by another, 
 to which I am limited, let ray Wants be what they 
 wiil,requiring further additions when I neither ftudy 
 my own wants, nor am permitted to urge them to 
 God in my prayer. 
 
 3. This is a more Curable Objection againfl: thofe 
 that pretend to fing by a gift, and do make Pfalms, 
 or Hymns, or Songs, for themfelvfts and others, with 
 ipeglecl of inspired Pfalrm, and Hymns. So finging 
 of £fa;ms s and ufing a fet form of Prayer, are very 
 nigh of kin, and hold much correfpondency. 
 
 4. But to (ing the very words of thefe Scriptures 
 wichunderftanding,<s a command, as hath been for- 
 sperly proved ; and if you take a ietrfbrm o^ pray- 
 ing, for praying Scriptuie-wWs^aud fpeakingto 
 
 God 
 
jCod in that language, it is noe only Jawful,but is the 
 excellency of fome Saints, who fel^iom make a Peti- 
 tion, but they urge it in Scripture- dialect, and (hew 
 the Word of God to dwell richly in them ; thus for 
 finging to praife God, or ting to God in his owe 
 form of words in the fpirit,and under(tanding,whac 
 can be more fqtable co God , and fweet to the 
 foul > 
 
 5. There is a great deal of difference between 
 praying andfinging,as to the method of performance, 
 though praying and praifes may be considered in the 
 fame duty, yet praying and Jingingte quite a diftinft 
 method; for the very words, to fing Pfalm% and 
 Hymns, and Songs, import a fpecial method of the 
 voice in a fet tune, and proportion, whereas prayer 
 in the method of performance requires no fuch exacl* 
 nefs ; if one (hould take on him to fing, and not in a 
 fee form, and tune, he would be ridiculous to all 
 hearers : but a man hath a larger liberty in prayer,and 
 is not tyed to fuch ftrait connexion?, heighths, and 
 falls, flops, and paufes ; but the nature of this Ordi- 
 nance calls for it, elfe it cannot be done gracefully, 
 though there be grace in the heart- And if the Apo^ 
 ftle had not meant by finging of Pfalms, finging «*»- 
 JtcallyMz would have onely bid them praife in the ge- 
 neral, and have Iefe out the outward expreffion of it, 
 which cannot be a&ed but in a fet form . 
 
 6.1f finging Were not in a mufical manner, fas be* 
 fore J it were the fame with pray er, for you may fing 
 out a prayer, and praife in praying. Thus mDavidst 
 
 Halms. 
 
Oo8) 
 
 Pfalms. How many Pfalms which were matter only 
 of petition, yet were fung with faith and confidence 
 in (Sod? For performance, the Apoftle James diftin- 
 guifheth them apparently, Is any fickj let UmprAy\U 
 Any merry?let himjing Pfalms ; and the other Apo- 
 ftle, Let us pray With the Spirit y tnd under ft anding y and 
 fing with the Spirit ,&c. Now wherein lies the diffe- 
 rence ? In prayer you have varieiy of workings, and 
 considerations; there is Deprecation^ Imprecation, dc* 
 clamatioHtind Admiring* Pleading^nd urging promife t 
 and the like. So in fmging, there are the like; the dif. 
 ference is onely in thefet, and mufical way of expref- 
 fion, which requires a more fet form before- hand to 
 rule my outward carriage by, in that Ordinance ; 
 whereas in prayer we are not tyed to fucba feverity 
 of method, and fo need not have our words fo form, 
 ed. 
 
 Another p!ea,whicb is fomewhat fcurrilous,by the 
 ruder forr, yet much urged, is, that we lye when we 
 fing Pfalms, and affirm chat we cannot but lye when 
 we fing the phrafes of many Pfalms, As that of Da- 
 vid,0 Lord I am not puffed in mind? Jam as a Weaned 
 child, &c. 
 
 To which I reply, in general, that fome miynoe 
 have the frame of thefe expreflions, when they fing, 
 and fo may perform a duty which may be but as a lye 
 to them. buc> 
 
 i. In fpecial, there is no Saint but can in f<#ne 
 meafure fay what ever David faith in that or any o- 
 ther Watajdefcribingthe fpiricual qualification of, 
 
 his 
 
his heart; all graces are in every Saint there mtjie 
 feed, and habit, and in a proportion, though all are 
 not fo eminent and apparent in the bud and fruit ; 
 though no godly man is free from pride, yet he can- 
 not be a godly man that is a proud man in attuftgna* 
 to, which hath never been humbled, and brought out 
 ofhimfelf; thus all along the 119. Tfalm, thatA- 
 natomy of a Saints inward parts, when David hith, 
 He delights in the Law ofGody He hops ra Geds mer- 
 cy ,His foul longs after God > He keeps his C i*M*"<l m 
 rnents. He hates every evil way , &c. every godly man 
 may fing thefe and all other Pialms,and fpeak truth * 
 for the reality of thefe frames are the fame in every 
 gracious heart. 
 
 2. Whatever I finde tobethe cafe of any Saint, I 
 may make it mine according to the likeoefs of ray 
 condition to it, and yet not a lye, 
 3. One great ufe of finging is to commend the excel* 
 lency of fuch graces which are and have been in o- 
 thers to fweeten the harflinefs of other duties, and 
 to ftir and quicken the heart to the endeavouring 
 after fuch like frames ; therefore fome Law-givers 
 have put their Laws into verfe firft, that the people 
 might take a pleafure in them, and Gng them as 
 their recreations, and be the more insinuated into 0- 
 bedience. 
 
 4. 1 can tell no lye fo long as in the fincertty of my 
 foul I fludy my duty, and fing with defire after fuch 
 qualifications, from the contemplation of the beauty 
 of them in fuch holy men, though I do not find she 
 
 pre- 
 
(210) 
 
 prefent frame fo high as I breath after, and fuch men 
 found ac prefent. 
 
 Ob, But this Objedion jgrant it in its full Latitude, 
 proves nothing againft the nature of the Ordinance 
 of finging, but the per fons who ting, who are not fit- 
 ly qualified to forne exprefiions. 
 
 Again, others plead, Pfalms that are fung are not 
 futable to my condition. 
 
 Sol. i. That is nothing Hill againft the Ordinance 
 of finging ; if it do not fit you,fc fits others. But, 
 
 i.There is nothing in Scripture- exprcifion&but all 
 Saints at all times may make fome ufe of in the very 
 reading or finging; if not fo particularly , yet as to the 
 general nature of in(truclion,and edification,it is pro- 
 fitable ; Saints mud read all Scripture, with faith and 
 undemanding ; though every place may not fo di- 
 reclly open their prefent condition; and why may 
 not they ling as well all Pfalms . ? 
 
 3 It (hould be the care of Officers in the Church,to 
 be very choice in picking out Pfalms fie for the ] 
 Church, according to the nature of the body, and 
 times, and feafons; and I could wifh there were 
 jnore choicenefs oblerved in that particular ; yet the 
 Ordinance remains (till the fame. 
 . 4. When I (ing any of thefe Pfalms, I foould by 
 faith perfonate the fame (late of the Church, or the 
 Saints, as when I apply promifes made to others, 
 I do their conditions , as if it were fpoken to 
 me. 
 5. It is for want of Divine ftudy of the nature of 
 
 thsfc 
 
(Ill) 
 
 thefe Scrrpturecxpreffions, and the myftery of them 
 that we fay fuch a Pfalra is unfuitable to our conditi- 
 ons ; for if when I read undetftandingfy, lean get 
 profit by themjean the fame when I fing them, 
 
 6.li it do not reach my condition, as to a particu- 
 lar cafe I am troubled withali,oi the providence I am 
 eminently under j yet it concerns the ftate of the 
 Church , and I may fing thetn as a Member of the 
 fame Body,and fympathifing with them either tn for- 
 row ot joy, in afflictions or triumphs; which is a 
 fpecial way ro ac! the graces of Saints, fometimes to 
 fing what concerns others as themfelves, as to pray 
 for others as themfelves ; this is like Chrifts heart in 
 heaven. 
 
 Laftly , you have opportunity enough to chufe 
 Pfalms for your emergencies. It is good to keep the 
 harmony of the whole Body in the main. 
 
 Ob. That which follows next as urged againft this 
 truth, is, that its confufion to fing together, and thac 
 but one (hould fing at one time. 
 
 Sol. Still this is not againft the Ordinance of find- 
 ing. But, 
 
 i . Singing is more melodious and fuitable, wherf 
 performed by many, then onefeveral inftrumen: ac 
 one timejand fo feveral voices make the greater Har- 
 mony: the excellency of fingingliesin theChurchf 
 which is made up of divers voices. 
 
 2. Chrift and his Difciples fung together, Mat ^6. 
 30. tfci'aOTcmftthey fung, Taut and Silas Ac!.. 1 6 2?. 
 fung together in thePrifon, not one after another, but 
 together. Ok 
 
(2u; 
 
 O^.But if any one fay,when one pra^s^ali may be 
 laid to pray,tbough he doth but confenr;ic way be fo 
 in finging of Pfalms. 
 
 It is Anfwered,i. All Ordinances muft be confider- 
 cd according to their proper nature^ fome Ordinan. 
 ces are To to be adm»niftred,as that onely one at once 
 can perform it, as publike prayer, and preaching, 
 and yet there muft be a distinction even in thefe : my 
 filence in prayer ought to be when I pray with ano- 
 ther ,and yec t may be faid to pray as well as he which 
 is the mouth of the whole, becaufe my heart is with 
 him in the fame petitions, and my defires go equally 
 with him ; but it. i» not fo in preaching, where fileoce 
 muft be likewife from the nature of the Ordinance ; 
 yetthough I content fully with the matter,and agree 
 in all that is faid with never fo much affection , yet 
 I cannot be faid to preach,but onely he that fpeaketh 
 preacheth. So now as to finging there is a difference 
 likewife of another confide ration $ if onely one (ing, 
 none elfe can be faid to (ing, though they joyn with 
 the matter,and agree to ic in their hearts ; for its an 
 ouwatd a6t,and terminated in the perfon that per- 
 form^ it ; and though in my filcnt conjunction, I msy 
 really ptaife God, yct,I can in no fenfe be proper- 
 ly laid to fing with others,without I do ufe my Voicd 
 and Organs as they do. This confederation will give 
 light to men that rrffnde the nature and diftinclion of 
 Ordinances in their outward adminiftrations. 
 
 a.That which iAhe confufion of ether Ordinances,, 
 is the beauty of this $ for two to preach, or pray to- 
 gether 
 
gether at the fame time and place, were the greateif 
 confufion imaginable $ but for a hundred to (ing to- 
 gether is trioft harmonious, andpleafant; fo far from 
 the breach of order,that harmony is moit difcovered 
 by it. 
 
 3. It hath been the cuftome of the Churches always 
 thus to pra&ife ; and there is nothing in ghe nature 
 or the Ordinance, or Divine precepr, or example a- 
 gainft it. I (hall conclude this with a word from An* 
 tiquit y, concerning this prtctife, 
 ; Eufehin his EcchfiHtfl. Jib.^cap.J 3. quotes twtf 
 Epiftles oiPUniu* Secun&tu to Trajan (he Emperor* 
 teftifying that Chriftians were wont to gather them- 
 felves before day to fing Pfalms and Hymns toge- 
 ther : the fame doth Philo fadim tcftifie^ who lived 
 in the Ap 9 ftles time, as the fame gufeh faith, liki. 
 cap.22. Now in the time of Plinins and Trajan, did 
 fyhn the beloved Difciple live, Mth ZanchAn Sph.^ 
 18.29. whereby it appears an Apoftolicai inftitution; 
 Tertul. in his ApoU. 19. faith, that it was a ufuall 
 cuftome among theChriftians,after their Lovc-Feafk, 
 cajtere de Scriptnris Santin^ to fing of the Scriptures • 
 his meaning is, doubtlefs, out of, or from the Scri- 
 ptures : In the Weftern Churches this hath been the 
 conftant praaice^though much corrupted by the Re~ 
 *m» additions to Saints methodjbut yet that bleffed 
 Ordinance is now more fpecially recovered, and 
 made pure for Saints according to primitive inftituti- 
 
 \ Chaf 
 
(*M> 
 
 Chap. V. 
 
 The great abnfes rf the Roman and Epifcppal 
 Church about thts Ordinance^ whereby many 
 flick not to call it Antichriflim^ hath hee»* y 
 
 i. 'T t He introducing mufical Inftruments together 
 A with, as Organs, Harps, Viols, &c. whertitaf 
 in the New Teftament God requires the Voice as ihe 
 onely Organ of the heart in woifhip. 
 
 2. They had a meer order of Singers to whom 
 they gave penfiqns unto for that purpofe, and eiclu- 
 ded the Church from the perions of that duty, which 
 is of fo Univerfal a concernment. 
 
 3. They would hrig in Latin,and with fuch ftraisi* 
 of their Voices, that the words might not be undcr- 
 llood. 
 
 4. They (pent molt of the time in (inging^nd gave 
 not other Ordinances, as preaching^ and praying, 
 their due time of exejcTe. Thus have precious Ordi- 
 nances been abufed by the corruptions of men $ buc J 
 are now reftoring unto their purity 3 and will every 
 day be more glorioufly pr&Siie^in the Churches. 
 
 Cha*. 
 1 Ah 
 
( *i$ ) 
 
 Chap. VI. 
 How we way he faid to teach and admgnifh one 
 another, in Pfalms, Hymns, and Songs, 
 according to that of C ol . 3 . 1 6^ 1 7 . 
 
 MAny think there can be no fuch ufe of linging, 
 as to teach and admonifh one another by it 5 
 but if we confider,there ate many leffons to be Icarnc 
 one another from this publique conjun& , finging 
 Scripture. Pfalms. 
 
 i. They teach one another,and by the very aft ad- 
 monifti one another ro get the fame frames thefe 
 Holy men had in the penning the PfaJms, and in, the 
 variety, and fpirituality of them ; to get Davids 
 frame, in finging Davids Tfalms : and fo for the 
 reft. 
 
 2. Us by this they teach one another the Unity and 
 Harmony that is and fhouid be among Saints as one 
 body, that their happinefs and joys are bound up 
 together, and fo the mifery of one, is the mifery of 
 the whole ; and this is a glorious leffon to know their 
 Union together, a* a body equally concerned in the 
 glory, or ftiame of one another, equally interefted in 
 :he praifes of God ; there is no duty praclifed in all 
 ■he Gofpel that doth fully exprefs the Communion 
 ;>f Saints, and reprefent Heaven,as the Saints finging 
 :ogether; the Lords Supper doth reprelcnt the Com- 
 nunion of Saints very lively, but not fo as mutual! 
 Pa finging, 
 
finging, when all at once, not by confeot onelyi but 
 cxprefly fpeak the fame thing in the Time moment $ 
 in the Lords Supper,though afterwards they were all 
 one bread, yet they all do not receive it at the (ame 
 inftantofcime, but take fucceflively the Elements ; 
 but in Tinging they all joyq perfedly at once to 
 found Gods prayies,as if they had but one Lip, and 
 one Voice. This is the perfecl Embleme of Heaven, 
 r>o jarring, all with one Voice and Heart cryjng Hal- 
 ielftjabtHa/Uffijah* 
 
 3, They teach one another this leflbn a!fo,T*£.with 
 what alacrity and cheerfulnefs they fhould perform 
 all their duties together ; with fweetnefs of love,and 
 joy they ought to walk together. 
 
 4. They teach one another how to carry them- 
 selves in all conditions with joyful! and prayfing 
 frames of fpirit, for matter of the Pfalms ; ana 
 arevarious, not onely affording matter of exultation, 
 and graculacion ; but alio reciting the fadnefs and 
 low condition of the Church ; yet ari are fit matter to 
 be fung ; Lachryms. mult be Jung, fs4 things with a 
 fpiritualjoy full heart in God an&hispromifes; mer- 
 cy, and judgement in rhe fame fong, exprelt in melo- 
 dy of the Voice, and Heart ; and it ftiews afoul is 
 not in a right temper when he cannot (ing over his j 
 condition 
 an a u 5. They teach one another by tmging,and adrno- 
 nidi one another to avoid any thing ihac may hinder 
 their joys in Communion, and break their Har* 
 raony in Jpirkuaiaclmgs ; all which, and many more 
 
 arc 
 
are great exhortations, and are taught naturally by 
 Saints mutual finging together. 
 
 Chap. VII, 
 Concerning fwging with a mixt multitude. 
 
 MAny who grant finging to be an Ordinance a- 
 mong Saints, yet ftumble to fing in promifcu- 
 ous manner with others ; efpecially becaufe there are 
 fo many Pfalms of fach compofition that doth not 
 feem to concern a mist multitude. 
 
 For opening of this, I muft lay down this gene- 
 rail pofition • that prayer and praifes are natural 
 duties belonging to all men,men as men ; though on- 
 ly the Saints can do them beft, and Spiritually ; it is 
 upon all men by the Law of Creation.to feekto God 
 for what they want, and to thank him for what they 
 have : this is due unto God, owning him as » Crea- 
 tor, and Benefaclor ; and though finging be a part 
 ©f inftituted worftiip , yet its onely an addition of 
 Order & a regulation of a natural duty. And as there 
 is no man but is bound to pray for mercies, fo none 
 are exempted from praifing God for mercies, though 
 they fing in a lower tune then Saints, Thus David 
 calls in all creatures to blefs and praife God, as a na- 
 tural duty according co their feveral capacities, 
 BfitL t s6,Pfal. i i7.P/*/.i07. P/al. i ©£. P f 20.21 ,22! 
 Praifes, its the natural duty of al!> the proper duty 
 of Saints, the perfect acl of Angels. ob. 
 
(>i8) 
 Ok You will fay they cannot perform it night, 
 and glorifie fouls. 
 
 Sol. i. Their want of ability doth not discharge 
 them from fuch a duty engraven cm theirConfciences 
 and arifing from the natural refpecls they have to 
 God as a Creator ; to perform which, God gave full 
 power; at folt. 
 
 2.Het every man do his dury coirfcientioufly.he may 
 afterwards come go do it fpirkually ; though I 
 (houki lofe the f«nie of a duty m my confcieRce, yet 
 the dory lyes on my conscience from Gods autjbork.y, 
 and my relation ro him* 
 
 i. By the fame rule every one fhould abftain-from 
 performance of a du^y for want of prefeuc ability, 
 whereas the dury rnufi be done, and the ftrength ex- 
 peeled from Heaven, and waited for according to the 
 Divine manner of difpenfation. 
 
 2. Its not unlawful! to joyn in any acl with others, 
 or to countenance them in it, which is really their 
 duty as weJJ as our own;! cannot fin in joyning. with 
 aoy one in chat acl to perform, . which is the dmy of 
 another,as niine,tiiaughhe may want the prefent ahi* 
 
 For duties mud be meakired according to the 
 rule, not the abJuuesof the pet&wner ; now its no 
 duty for any man to receive the Lords Supper, or be 
 a Member of a Church in order toCommunion^witb- 
 outhe find himfelf in fome mtafure fitted b^mm;} 
 theie iealing Ord^ces'ei ih£\iS¥pel> iup^ofe^d 
 require fome o&her qualification, and ate gec^arto 
 
 viable 
 
(2tp) 
 
 vifible Saints^but where there is a natural CharacTer* 
 or an Ordinance as to the fubftance of ic at leaft e- 
 cjualjy concerning alljthere'it is no fin to joyn in the 
 administration orit 5 and if weconfider of it warily, 
 umegenerate men are great (tiarersin the mercies ot 
 the Churches ; befides their own pa'rticular,that they 
 may well afford their voice without fin, and we joyn 
 with them in fetting forth Gods praifes ; But more 1 
 clofely, and particularly. 
 
 1. When the Church and Saints of God are ga- 
 thered together to worfliip him, infinging- it is no 
 more unhwfull to fing with others that ftand by 
 and joyn their voices , then when in prayer they 
 ftand by, and give their content, we do not fo much 
 joyifr with them as they do own Gods agings a- 
 mong us : it is no fin in them to joyn with us in inch 
 a duty, neither can it be any fin in us to fing, though 
 others very carnal will outwardly praife God with 
 us. 
 
 2. The carriage of Saints in their hearty and real! 
 expreflions of prayfes may convince others in the 
 coldnefs, andiownefsof their fpirit, and ftir them 
 up to fome fpiritual apprehenfion** 
 
 3. Though it be lawful to joyn with them in fuch 
 at duty generally considered, yet it were to be wifhed 
 in a mixt multitude, there were more care in the 
 choice of Pfalms , to fit them to the very duty of 
 praife and thanks, which is fo really belonging to all 
 theCongregation:and that mud be lamented,that the 
 choice of Pfalms, to a mixc multitude, is not fo con- 
 
 fidered 
 
(tio) 
 fidered as ic ought to be, which makes the Ordinance 
 fo much (lighted in itspubliqueadminiftration, But 
 however, the incapacity of others to their duty, 
 fhould not hinder me from performing mine 7 efpeci- 
 ally when I cannot, nor ought not to hinder others' 
 frorrifuch in aft. 
 
 FI^CI s*