Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the ancient…Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the antient…
Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the ancient Britons [sic] being an answer to a book, intituled [sic] Children's baptism from Heaven, published in the Welsh tongue by Mr. James Owen / by Benjamin Keach.Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the antient Britains [sic] being an answer to a book, iutituled [sic] Children's baptism from Heaven, published in the Welsh tongue by Mr. James Owen / by Benjamin Keach.
Benjamin Keach 1640–1704London: printed by William Marshall, 1696
xxxi, [1], 320 [i.e. 334] p. · 141k words · Wing K75 · ESTC R32436
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.
Erasmus upon the place saith thus, Infants born of such Parents, as one being a Christian, the other not, are legitimately holy; for the Conversion of either Husband or Wife doth not dissolve the Marriage which was made when both were in Unbelief.
Nay, I find a very learned Divine to affirm, that the Ancients expounded this place no otherwise. None, saith he, that ever I met with expounded it of Federal Holiness, till the Controversy of the Anabaptists in Germany arose.
Nay, I find a very learned Divine to affirm, that the Antients expounded this place no otherwise. None, saith he, that ever I met with expounded it of Federal Holiness, till the Controversy of the Anabaptists in Germany arose.
And since Mr. Burkitt is so ingenuous as to confess, that the unbelieving Husband is sanctified in respect of Conjugal Relation to the Wife in a way of Marriage, in which so far he agrees with those Learned Men; this being so, how comes he to assert 'tis Federal Holiness that is said to be in the Children?
And by what we say, it appears, it is not a racking of the Scripture o maintain a private Opinion; and tho the word [holy] refers here to what we affirm with others, yet the Apostle speaks truly; tho it is granted the Children of Heathens born in lawful Wedlock, are no more Bastards than the Children of Christians For if the Marriage were made void, it would render their Children to be unclean, or base born. And what tho the Greek word does signify in so many places, as Mr. Burkitt saith, spiritual Sanctification and Separation to God; yet show us, say I, where it signifies External, Relative, Federal Holiness in the New Testament: yet as one observes, the word is not bound up to that sense as he seems to intimate; for [Greek or Hebrew] is used for Castimoni•m ser••, as Stephanus in his Thesaurus observes out of Demosthenes, [Greek or Hebrew], where a Priest of Bacchus speaks thus, [Greek or Hebrew], I am holy and pure from the Company of Man: and the words [Greek or Hebrew], chaste, to be chaste,
⟨p. 121⟩
to make chaste, Chastity, coming from the same Root with [Greek or Hebrew] holy, whether [Greek or Hebrew] to reverence, or [Greek or Hebrew] to admire, as Grammarians conceive, are used for Holiness very frequently, both in Scripture and in all sorts of Greek Writers: So that what he says as to the Signification of the word [Greek or Hebrew] holy, that it cannot be taken for [legitimate] is fully cleared, and we justified from the Pedo-baptists unjust Accusation, viz. that we wrested the word to favour our private Opinion. And now to conclude; But if it doth signify Holy, as you and your Brethren say, why might not the Children of such as the Apostle speaks of, be said to be holy, as well as the Infidel or unbelieving Wife is said to be sanctified? What is the difference between holy and sanctified?
And by what we say, it appears, it is not a racking of the Scripture o maintain a private Opinion; and tho the word [holy] refers here to what we affirm with others, yet the Apostle speaks truly; tho it is granted the Children of Heathens born in lawful Wedlock, are no more Bastards than the Children of Christians For if the Marriage were made voi•, it would render their Children to be unclean, or base born. And what tho the Greek word does signify in so many places, as Mr. Burkitt saith, spiritual Sanctification and Separation to God; yet shew us, say I, where it signifies External, Relative, Federal Holiness in the New Testament: yet as one observes, the word is not bound up to that sense as he seems to intimate; for 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 is used for Castimoni•m ser••, as Stephanus in his Thesaurus observes out of Demosthenes, 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, where a Priest of Bacchus speaks thus, 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, I am holy and pure from the Company of Man: and the words 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, chast, to be chast, ⟨p. 121⟩to make chast, Chastity, coming from the same Root with 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 holy, whether 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 to reverence, or 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 to admire, as Grammarians conceive, are used for Holiness very frequently, both in Scripture and in all sorts of Greek Writers: So that what he says as to the Signification of the word 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 holy, that it cannot be taken for [legitimate] is fully cleared, and we justified from the Pedo-baptists unjust Accusation, viz. that we wrested the word to favour our private Opinion. And now to conclude; But if it doth signify Holy, as you and your Brethren say, why might not the Children of such as the Apostle speaks of, be said to be holy, as well as the Infidel or unbelieving Wife is said to be sanctified? What is the difference between holy and sanctified?
Mr. Owen says, If the Children of the Faithful are not Members of the Church of God, then they are Members of the Kingdom of Satan, who is the Prince of this World: If they are without the Church, what hopes of Salvation have they? there is no Salvation out of the Church, Rom. 9. 4.
Answ. 1. I hope my Antagonist is a Protestant; but I must assure my Reader, he here maintains a Popish Doctrine, which all our worthy Protestant Divines have protested against. How! is there no Salvation out of the Visible Church? God forbid. I doubt not but there are many gracious Persons who shall be certainly saved, and who do truly believe in Christ, that are not Members of any true Gospel Church. Will you exclude all from Salvation that are not Members of your Church? I cannot think you own the Church of England to be a true Gospel-Church, and will you exclude all that are of that Communion from the Kingdom of Heaven?
2. But as to Infants, they are born Children of Wrath, and actually in Satan's Kingdom, till God is pleased to sanctify them; and those who die in Infancy that are saved, no doubt he doth sanctify their unclean Nature, but not such as live and remain in Satan's Kingdom, until they are regenerated by the Word and Spirit of God, after they are grown up to Understanding.
3. Therefore some Infants may be Members of the Invisible Church, or Mystical Body of Christ, (tho not Members of the Visible Church) and of this sort there may be among the Children of Unbelievers, as well as among the ⟨p. 122⟩Children of Believers; for the Election of Grace runs not only to the Seed of the Faithful, say what you please, as I said before.
3. Therefore some Infants may be Members of the Invisiole Church, or Mystical Body of Christ, (tho not Members of the Visible Church) and of this sort there may be among the Children of Unbelievers, as well as among the ⟨p. 122⟩Children of Believers; for the Election of Grace runs not only to the Seed of the Faithful, say what you please, as I said before.
You say, the Promises are the Inheritance of the Church, not to those that are without; and therefore, say you, if the Children be without, they are among Dogs, and what Promise belongs to them? Rev. 22. 15. and where there is no Promise, there is no hope of Salvation, &c.
2. The Promises are not the Inheritance of all that are Members of the Visible Church, for they may not belong to some that are in it, and they may belong to some others that are not in it. You darken Counsel with Words without Knowledge. For, (1.) You distinguish not between the Visible and Invisible Church. (2.) Also you distinguish not between who are the Lord's decretively, and who are his actually. (3.) Moreover, you distinguish not between external Privileges, and true internal spiritual Privileges. No external Privileges, or outward Church-Membership gives any Man a Right to Salvation, nor puts him under the Promise thereof.
2. The Promises are not the Inheritance of all that are Members of the Visible Church, for they may not belong to some that are in it, and they may belong to some others that are not in it. You darken Counsel with Words without Knowledg. For, (1.) You distinguish not between the Visible and Invisible Church. (2.) Also you distinguish not between who are the Lord's decretively, and who are his actually. (3.) Moreover, you distinguish not between external Privileges, and true internal spiritual Privileges. No external Privileges, or outward Church-Membership gives any Man a Right to Salvation, nor puts him under the Promise thereof.
3. There is hope and ground of hope touching the Salvation of dying Infants, tho they are not in Gospel-times of the Visible Church; because Christ saith, of such belongs the Kingdom of Heaven. But pray, Sir, take heed of what you say: You cannot prove that our blessed Saviour spake those words only with reference to the Children of Believers. I know no cause why unbelieving Parents should doubt of the Salvation of their dying Infants. They may (so far as I see) have as much ground to hope God's Election may reach their dying Infants, as any Believer can have it may reach to theirs. What if I should exercise so much Charity as to hope that God hath comprehended in his electing Love all the dying Infants both of Believers and Unbelievers, and that through the Blood and Merits of Christ they are sanctified, and shall be all saved?
My Opinion, were it so, could not justly be condemned by any; but I say secret things belong to God, and I shall ⟨p. 123⟩forbear to pass any Judgment in the case, but leave it to God; but I am sure no Child shall be damned for the Parent's Fault. Can Parents by baptizing their Infants save them? Or are they Dogs, and must be damned if their Parents baptize them not, and dare not do it because Christ hath not commanded them to baptize them?
4. Sir, what if a Man and his Wife when they were both vile and ungodly People, as bad as any that live on Earth, should beget many Children, and afterwards they both believe and become good Christians, is the State of those Children begotten when they believed good, and they holy? and are the Children they had when they were vile and wicked Persons, bad, nay so bad as they are to be counted Dogs? O that God would open your Eves! Nay, if it were as you intimate, it may be queried, Whether it be not a sinful, a wicked, and an unlawful thing for two ungodly, unbelieving, unfaithful Persons to marry, since they can beget no Children but such as you call Dogs; for you will not say their Children are holy, or ought to be baptized, nor are in the Pale of the Church.
But to conclude with this Chapter; let me speak a word to you that are Believers, and also a word to you that are Unbelievers, and I shall pass to the next Argument.
