A39697:261
Vindiciæ legis & fœderis
Vindiciæ legis & fœderis: or, A reply to Mr. Philip Cary's Solemn call Wherein he pretends to answer all the arguments of Mr. Allen, Mr. Baxter, Mr. Sydenham, Mr. Sedgwick, Mr. Roberts, and Dr. Burthogge, for the right of believers infants to baptism, by proving the law at Sinai, and the covenant of circumcision with Abraham, were the very same with Adam's covenant of works, and that because the gospel-covenant is absolute. By John Flavel minister of the gospel in Dartmouth
London: printed for M. Wolton, 1690
A REPLY TO Mr. Philip Cary's Solemn Call. › Section 3 › Argument 5: Argument V.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Reply. Words enough, and distinctions enough to reduce the Text to an indivisible point. But whither doth all this tend? I will ask you Two or Three plain Questions, and then make what use you please of your distinctions. (1.) Whether the Breaking off of the Jews and the ingrafting of the Gentiles here spoken of, have Relation to the invisible Church by election, or to the visible Church by profession of Faith, and some outward ⟨p. 118⟩Ordinance? (2.) Whether if it were into the visible Church by profession of Faith, that the Gentile believers were grafted in; as doubtless it was (and by relinquishing the former sense you here seem to yield it, saying this ingrafture may be certain upon the account of natural Birth, being Children of believers;) then I would fain know why you so state the Question, as to make the certainty of Believers Children's interest in Christ, to be the only ground of their admission into the Communion of the visible Church? This (say you) must be proved, or no Baptism for them.
Reply. Words enough, and distinctions enough to reduce the Text to an indivisible point. But whither doth all this tend? I will ask you Two or Three plain Qestions, and then make what use you please of your distinctions. (1.) Whether the Breaking off of the Jews and the ingrafting of the Gentiles here spoken of, have Relation to the invisible Church by election, or to the visible Church by profession of Faith, and some outward ⟨p. 118⟩Ordinance? (2.) Whethether if it were into the visible Church by profession of Faith, that the Gentile believers were grafted in; as doubtless it was (and by relinquishing the former sense you here seem to yield it, saying this ingrafture may be certain upon the account of natural Birth, being Children of believers;) then I would fain know why you so state the Question, as to make the certainty of Believers Childrens interest in Christ, to be the only ground of their admission into the Communion of the visible Church? This (say you) must be prov'd, or no Baptism for them.