giveth right to baptism before God," how much soever they differed in other matters. And as to all the Orthodox, the celebrated Dr. Van Mastricht, in his Treatise on Regeneration, says, "As to the baptism of adults,—that, if rightly administered, doth, by the consent of all the Orthodox, certainly presuppose regeneration as already effected." But this leads me to observe, 5. Another very extraordinary method Mr. M. takes to keep himself in countenance, is by misrepresenting that plan, unanimously agreed to by the synod at Saybrook, and on which the churches in New England, in general, were formed at the first settling of the country, which alone I was endeavoring to justify, "as a very groundless and unreasonable notion of the Anabaptists, in which Dr. Bellamy and a few others have joined with them; and at the same time claiming the Westminster Assembly, Mr. Shepard, Mr. Jonathan Dickinson, and Mr. Peter Clark, as friends to his external covenant; so that one would think, that scarce any are on our side of the question, but the Anabaptists. Now, this is very extraordinary in Mr. M. 1. Because, in his former book, he speaks a very different language, well knowing how the matter really stands. "Shall I then prevail with them to lay aside all prejudice, all attachment to received maxims, all veneration for great names? For he had before him the sentiments of the Protestant world, collected by the late learned Mr. Foxcroft, in an appendix to President Edwards's Inquiry, etc., and he well knew that received maxims and great names stood in the way of his new scheme. 2. It is very extraordinary that he should say, that his external covenant is included in the covenant of grace, described by the Assembly of divines at Westminster, when, as has been before shown, the doctrines of the perfection of the divine law, and of total depravity, as held by that Assembly, are inconsistent with the existence of his external covenant. And in their Confession of Faith, (chap. 29,) they say, "All ungodly persons, as they are unfit to enjoy communion with him, so are they unworthy of the Lord's table, and cannot, without great sin against Christ, while they continue such, partake of these holy mysteries, or be admitted thereto." Whereas, the very professed design of his external covenant is to open a door, that ungodly men, as such, should be admitted to partake of these holy mysteries. And, 3. It is equally extraordinary that he should pretend that Mr. Jonathan Dickinson was a friend to his external covenant, when, in his Dialogue on the Divine Right of Infant Baptism, he proves that the covenant with Abraham (Gen. xvii.) was the covenant of grace itself, in opposition to the Anabaptists, who, with Mr. M., maintain the covenant with Abraham (Gen. xvii.) was not the covenant of grace; and, having proved that covenant to be the covenant of grace, then proceeds, on this hypothesis, to prove the divine right of infant baptism. Dr. Gill wrote an answer to this piece of Mr. Dickinson's: Mr. Peter Clark wrote a reply to Dr. Gill, in which he spends above a hundred pages in proving the covenant in Gen. xvii. to be “a pure covenant of grace," in answering Dr. Gill's objections, which are the same for substance with Mr. M.'s Five Arguments, in his first book, and in establishing infant baptism on this foundation. And he expressly affirms, "Except a man be born again, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. And if, without regeneration, no man can enter into the kingdom of God, then surely not into covenant with God." But the unregenerate, as such, can enter into covenant with God, on the plan of Mr. M.'s external covenant. And yet Mr. M. pretends that there is "no material difference" between these authors and his scheme. But, 4. It is more extraordinary still, that Mr. M. should bring in Mr. Shepard as a friend to his external covenant, when the piece he refers to is not wrote on Mr. M.'s scheme, but on a scheme essentially different; and when Mr. Shepard, in his Sermons on the Parable of the Ten Virgins, has so plainly declared his mind. These are his very words: attend to them, candid reader, and say, was Mr. Shepard in Mr. M.'s scheme? The Lord "We may see hence one just ground of that diligent and narrow search and trial churches here do or should make of all those whom they receive to be fellow-members. Jesus will make a very strict search and examination of wise and foolish, when he comes, and will put a difference between them then. May not men nor churches imitate the Lord Jesus according to their light now? If indeed all the congregation of the baptized were holy, then, as Korah said, they take too much upon them. If Christ, at his coming, would make neither examination nor separation, not only of people baptized at large, but of professors, and glorious professors of his truth and name; if churches were not set to discern between harlots and virgins, foolish virgins and wise, as much as in them lies, that so some of the glory of Christ may be seen in his churches here, as well as at the last day; then the gate might be opened wide, and flung off the hinges too, for all comers; and you might call the churches of Christ the inn and tavern of Christ to receive all strangers, if they will pay for what they call for, and bear scot and lot in the town, and not the house and temple of Christ only to entertain his friends. But, beloved, the church hath the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and what they bind and loose, following the example and rule of Christ, is bound and loosed in heaven, and they judge in the room of Christ. (1 Cor. v. 4, 5. 2 Cor. ii. 11.) Whom the church casts out and bids depart to Satan, Christ doth. Whom the church receives to itself, Christ doth. We should receive in none but such as have visible right to Christ, and communion of saints. None have a right to Christ in his ordinances, but such as shall have communion with Christ at his coming to judge the world. Hence, if we could be so eagle-eyed as to discern them now that are hypocrites, we should exclude them now, as Christ will, because they have no right. But that we cannot do; the Lord will therefore do it for his churches. But yet let the churches learn from this to do what they can for the Lord now. The apostle gives a sad charge, (Heb. xii. 15,) "Look diligently, lest a root of bitterness grow up." The apostle doth not say, it is no matter what roots you set in Christ's garden; only, when they spring up, and begin to seed and infect others, then have a care of them; but look there be not a root there. Look diligently to it. It is ill counsel to the gardener to say, Have a care to weed your garden; but it is no matter, God looks not that you should be careful of your seed, so long as it be seed. Nay, the Lord, that forbids me to suffer weeds to grow, forbids my carelessness in sowing what seeds I please. It is the judgment of some divines, that the first sin of Adam and his wife was in suffering the serpent to enter into the garden, uncalled for. The ruin of a church may be the letting in of some one ill member. "Objection. But the primitive church never received in any with such strict confessions and large examination; three thousand in a day were admitted. "Ans. I remember a godly divine, in answering an objection of late repentance from the example of the thief, having whipped it with many other rods, at the last lasheth it with thisIt is an extraordinary case; and hence not to be brought in for an extraordinary example. Hence he speaks thus: when, therefore, the time comes that Christ shall come and be crucified again, and thou one of the thieves to be crucified with him, and it fall out that thou be the best of the two, then shalt thou be saved by Christ, that despising Christ now puts off thy repentance till then; so I say here, there is somewhat imitable and ordinary in the apostle's example, in admitting three thousand in a day, but something unusual, and far different from our condition now; and therefore that I would say, when the time comes, that the Spirit is poured out on all flesh; and that time is known to be the spring tide, and large measure of the Spirit, when ministers are so honored as to convert many thousands at a sermon; and so God and reason call for quickness; when elders of churches are as sharp-sighted as the apostles, when the conversion of men also shall be most eminent, and that in such places where it is death, or half hanging, to profess the Lord Jesus; as that they shall be pricked at their hearts, gladly receive the word, lay down their necks on the block, cast down all their estates at the church's feet, out of love to God's ordinances; when men shall not have Christian education, the example and crowd of Christians, from the teeth outwardly, to press them to the door of the church, as those times had not; then, for my part, if three hundred thousand were converted, I should receive them as gladly, and as manifestly, as they receive Christ. But truly there is such little takings now, that we have leisure enough to look upon our money, and the hypocrisy of the world gives us good reason to stay and see.”—Mr. Shepard's Sermons on the Parable, Part 2, p. 184. This sermon was preached at Cambridge, near Boston, about the year 1640, and so about one hundred and thirty years ago, ten years after they began to settle Boston, by one of the most godly and most celebrated ministers then in the country, a few years before his death. And this passage shows us the spirit of the godly in New England, in those early days. And to all godly people in the country, the name of Mr. Shepard is precious to this day, and Mr. M. knew it ; and therefore, to keep himself in countenance, thinks fit to bring in him as a friend to his external covenant. But is not this an extraordinary method? To omit the rest, we will mention but one instance more. 6. Another extraordinary method Mr. M. takes to support his scheme, is to bring arguments against us, built on principles which he himself does not believe to be true; and which, if they were true, would infallibly overthrow his own scheme, nay, and persist in such arguments, after their fallacy has been pointed out, without saying one word in excuse for such a piece of conduct. Thus he insists upon it, that if infants may have the seal of the covenant without saving grace, then also may the adult; and therefore saving grace is not needful to qualify any one for sealing ordinances. And therefore the covenant to be sealed is not the covenant of grace, but an external covenant, "distinct from the covenant of grace," which only requires, as a necessary qualification for sealing ordinances, that sinners should be under such "convictions," as to "come to a fixed resolution to forsake all known sin, and practise all known duty." But have all infants these convictions, and such a fixed resolution? Does he believe they have? Is there any evidence of it? No; he does not believe they have. Nor is there any evidence, that there ever was one infant since the world began, that had these convictions, and such a fixed resolution. What, then, does Mr. M. mean? Does he mean to give up infant baptism? No, by no means. What then does he mean? Odd as it is, he means to confute our scheme by an argument which confutes his own; that is, by an argument built on a principle which he himself does not believe to be true, namely, that the same qualifications are necessary in infants as in the adult, to qualify them for baptism; for Mr. M. does not believe this principle to be true; for he does not believe that infants need any qualification at all. And yet he does believe that the adult must have some qualification. Now, how extraordinary is it for a man of learning to conduct thus, and to go on and persevere in this conduct without a blush, or the least excuse, in the sight of all the country, after the absurdity had been pointed out before his eyes, in my former book! And thus, again, he insists upon it, that if saving grace is necessary, then no man can, with a good conscience, join with the church, without assurance, an assurance equal to that certainty which we have of facts, which we see with our own eyes, and to the truth of which we can give oath before any civil court. But ninety-nine in a hundred of true believers" are destitute of this assurance, he says, and therefore saving grace is not needful. Nothing more is needful than to come to a fixed resolution to forsake all known sin, and practise all known duty. But does Mr. M. believe that no man can, with a good conscience, join with the church, without being thus infallibly certain that he has the requisite qualifications? for on the supposed truth of this proposition is his argument built. But does Mr. M. believe this proposition? does he teach his people to believe it? had all his church members this high degree of infallible assurance, that they had the requisite qualifications, when they joined with the church? and have they the infallible assurance every time they attend sealing ordinances—an assurance equal to that certainty which they have that they ever saw the sun shine that they "are come to a fixed resolution to forsake all known sin, and practise all known duty"? Does he insist upon it in his public preaching, and in his private instructions, that without this high degree of assurance, without this infallible certainty, they cannot with a good conscience come to baptism or to the Lord's table? that "they are guilty |