5. This proof is still more clear, if we observe with the instructor that "baptism was instituted in the stead of circumcision." That this is certain, appears hence, that circumcision, the sacrament of children, being abolished, it was necessary that another sacrament should come in the stead of it, otherwise the privileges of the New Testament would be less than those of the Old Testament. Christ hath also instituted two sacraments in the stead of the two ordinary sacraments of the Old Testament: now it is evident, that the Lord's supper hath come in the stead of the passover, of the remains of which the supper was celebrated. What can we think now more readily, and on better grounds, than taat baptism hath come in the stead of circumcision? Paul teacheth is this also, Coll. ii. 11, 12. "Ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ: buried with him in baptism, wherein ye are also risen with him." The Colossians being by nature sinners of the Gentiles, but converted to Christ, had not been circumcised. The false apostles required that the converts from Gentlism should be circumcised: Paul strenuously opposing this, warms the converted Collossians against those seducers, that they might not suffer themselves to be "spoiled after the rudiments of the world," vrs. 8. The rudiments of the world are the law of ceremones, and particularly circumcision, by which they were obliged to keep the whole law of ceremonies, Gal. v. 3. He assigns two reasons of this, first, that they were perfect in Christ, and therefore had no need of those rudiments, vrs. 9, 10. The other reason is, tha they were partakers of the thing signified by circumcision: the circumcision made without hands, vrs. 11. If they asked, Why they might not then receive the sign of circumcision, since they had the thing signified? the apostle informs them, that they had received, in stead of that sign, the sign of baptism, which signified the same thing with circumcision, “having been buried with Christ in baptism,” vrs. 12. From which it therefore appears very clearly, that baptism is come in the stead of circumcision. It is therefore certain, that the children of persons in covenant must be baptized, since the children of those, who were in covenant under the Old Testament, were to be circumcised It avails nothing against this, that then children ought to be baptized just on the eighth day, as they were circumcised on that day; for this was a circumstance for that time, which determined in many respects the time of uncleanness for women and children, to wit, how long they should be considered as unclean. Neither can it be objected against the proof for infant baptism from circumcision,

that circumcision signified only the inheritance of the land of Canaan, which doth not belong to us; for circumcision was a sign of the covenant, that the Lord was the God of Abraham and of his seed, of which Canaan was a special pledge, and the place where he woul' reveal himself, as the God of Israel, See Gen. xvii. 7-14. And so circumcision was according to Paul's description of it, Rom. iv, 11, "a sign and seal of the righteousness of faith," and it had therefore the same signifying and sealing virtue that baptism hath.

But what do our adversaries object against infant-baptism?

1. Christ hath said, Matt. xxviii. 19. "Teach all nations, baptizing them." We must first teach the nations, and then baptize them; we cannot teach infants, therefore we must not baptize them, but must defer their baptism, until they have been taught, and have made a confession of their faith. We answer, that passage relates to adult christianized Jews and Gentiles, whom we may not baptize, until they have been taught, and professed their faith, in order to their receiving of the seal of it; but it doth not follow therefrom, that we may not baptize any children, but rather that we ought to baptize them, inasmuch as they are received into the covenant of God with their parents, who enter into that covenant, when they suffer themselves to be baptized, as we have seen from Gen. xvii. 714. Acts ii. 38, 39.

2. Our opponents say further, that there is no command to baptize children. But shall we not admit women to the Lord's supper, because that is no where expressly ordered? There is no need of any command, where there are so many reasons. We are commanded to baptize persons in covenant with God' Acts ii. 38. 39. The command to baptize children is comprehended in the command of circumcision, inasmuch as baptism is come in the stead of circumcision; and there ought to have been a prohibition, and reasons ought to have been assigned, why, after the sacrament of children had been abolished, children might not now have a sacrament.

3. They say, there is no example, that the apostles baptized children. But have all things, even to the least circumstance been recorded? see John xxi. 25. When whole households were baptized, as that of Lydia, of the gaoler, and of Stephanas, Acts xvi. 15, 33. 1 Cor. i. 16, it is possible that there were also children baptized; and why need we seek for examples, when we have so many reasons?

4. Moreover, they are unwilling that children should be baptized, because they do not understand baptism. But we must not baptize children, because they understand it, as the aged and adult, but for VOL. II.

I

the reasons, which we have assigned before from the word of God; and it is enough, that they are by their incorporation into the church brought into a condition to understand it afterwards, as also their misery and deliverance, which they do not understand now neither. The children under the Old Testament did not understand circumcision, and it was nevertheless necessary, that they should be circumcised.

Before we dismiss this subject, we must propose and resolve two questions: the first is, whether all the elect children, born of persons, who are in covenant with God, partake virtually of the first principle and seed of regeneration, before their baptism? This question relates not to the elect children of heathens and others, who are not in covenant with God; for all agree that they are in their childhood alienated with their parents from the life of God; but the question relates to the elect children of persons, who are in covenant with God.

There are some eminently learned and godly men, who hold the affirmative of this, to wit, that all these children partake virtually before baptism of the principle and seed of regeneration, and that this seed of regeneration remains hidden and buried in many a long time under the clods of youthful and fleshly lusts, until it springs up, and shows itself alive by an actual conversion. The foundation, on which these worthy men build their opinion is, that regeneration is sealed in baptism, and must therefore exist before baptism. To this they add what Paul saith, that " the children of persons in covenant with God are holy," 1 Cor. vii. 14, and that " God had separated him from his mother's womb, and called him by his grace," Gal. i. 15. On which account the sponsers are required in the form of baptism to acknowledge, "that the children are sanctified in Christ, and therefore as members of his church ought to be baptized." And if these elect children have not this privilege above the elect children of persons, who are alienated from the covenant of God, that there is then no difference at all between the children of persons in covenant with God, and of heathens.

In order to express our thoughts upon this subject, we must say that certainly some children obtain regeneration from their birth in a mysterious manner. If we will not acknowledge this of Obadiah, Ahab's steward, 1 Kings xviii. 12, of Jeremiah the prophet, Jer. i. 5, and of others, who exhibited evidences of it in their youth, it is nevertheless undeniably evident in John the Baptist, "who was filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother's womb," Luke i. 15. This matter is also not impossible, any more than it is impossible, that a child newly born should have a virtual ability to

reason and to sin, and should assuredly have been born with and in the image of God, if our father Adam had continued to stand: but we cannot believe that all the clect children of persons in covenant are regenerated thus before baptism, because they would then all of them in their youth, and as they grew up in the use of reason, exhibit likewise certain evidences, each of them according to his capacity, that they possessed a good principle, as well as they exhibit evidences of their rationality and of sin. Was it not thus with Abijah, the child of Jeroboam, 1 Kings xiv. 13, and with Timothy, 2 Tim. iii. 15. Whoever will read the examples of children converted in their early life, enlarged and reprinted lately, will see the praises of God emphatically published by the mouths of such children. Who can persuade himself, that a person, who possesseth this first principle of regeneration in his soul from his youth, should not exhibit the least evidence of it, but that he should abandon himself to every vicious practice, until the end of his life, and that that seed should then first shoot forth by an actual conversion? The murderer who was converted on the cross, was a child of Jewish parents, who were in covenant with God, (for they who filled in those days the land of Judea with insurrections and murders were Jews, who would not submit to the power of the Gentiles,) who now can believe that this man, who had lived so long in the practice of horrible enormities, harboured any good principle in his mind? We must say here with the Saviour, "The tree is known by his fruit: a good man, out of the good treasure of his heart, bringeth forth good things: and an evil man, out of the evil treasure of his heart, bringeth forth evil things," Malt. xii. 33, 35.

It is true, that baptism supposeth and sealeth regeneration, yet not always as already existing, but as future, and that the baptized elect children of persons in covenant with God, will surely partake of regeneration. This will not appear so strange to us, if we consider that the sacraments seal not only present, but also many future graces: all the benefits of the covenant of grace are sealed to the covenant people, and they nevertheless do not possess all these benefits, at the time, when they are sealed; it is true a perfect right to all those benefits is sealed unto them, but they do not therefore possess all those benefits at once; thus we must also say of those children, that they do not all partake of regeneration, when they are baptized, but that baptism sealeth to them, that they have a right to

The person called a thief in the English translation, is called a murderer in the Dutch.

it, and that they shall obtain it. That we may understand this properly we must know, that God receives them without their knowledge into covenant with their parents, as his elect and redeemed by Christ; according to this covenant redemption by the blood of Christ, and by the Holy Ghost, who works faith, is promised to them, as the instructor saith and thus the Lord acknowledges them for his children, as he calls them, Ezek. xvi. 40, 21. In order now to seal this, they are baptized, see cts. i. 38, 39, and obtain afterward regeneration and faith, whereby they actually enter into the covenant; and urge and plead the seal with the answer of a good conscience, that they may obtain of God all the grace of the covenant. See the

text.

In this manner "are the children also holy," according to 1 Cor. vii. 14, not holy in fact, as if the first principles of holiness were imparted to all elect children of persons in covenant from their birth: Paul doth not intend this, any more than he doth that the unbelieving husband is sanctified indeed and in fact by the believing wife, and the unbelieving wife by the believing husband; but the matter is thus, that the children of a marriage, into which persons enter in a holy manner, being born in the covenant, are also reckoned and esteemed holy therein by virtue of that covenant, which promiseth them the sanctification, purchased for them by the Mediator; for "he is made sanctification" to the children of the covenant also, 1 Cor. i. 30. And so those "children are holy," as elect persons, who are yet "scattered abroad, and are not gathered into one body, are the children of God," as they are called, John xi. 52. From this we may also learn in what manner sponsors are required to acknowledge, that the children are sanctified in Christ. And in this manner Paul also separated from his mother's womb," Gal. i. 15. indeed, "and called by his grace," but he was not called from his mother's womb, for he was not then yet capable of being called, but afterwards, when "God revealed his Son in him." If we apprehend the matter thus, we shall see that there is a great difference between the elect children of heathens, and of the believing covenant people; for these are favoured with much greater privile res than those, as they are admitted from their infancy into the covenant, and this is sealed to them, and the parents are greatly encouraged to hope for the salvation of such children, and those children, when they arrive to years of discretion, can solicit the Lord on the sealed covenant, like David, when he saith, Psalm xxii. 9, 10, "thou art he that took me out of the womb; thou didst make me hope," (or didst render me secure) when I was upon my mother's breasts. I was

was

He adds