« PreviousContinue »
promise is to you, and your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God fhall call.
Q. 2. How doth it appear, that the infant-feed of believers ought to be baptized?
A. It appears by this, that they being Abraham's feed, were taken into covenant with God, and ordered to have the fign of the covenant applied to them; and that grant was never reverfed; Gen. xvii. 7, 10. And I will establish my covenant between me and thee, and thy feed after thee, in their generations, for an everlasting covenant; to be a God unto thee, and to thy feed after thee. This is my covenant, which ye fhall keep between me and you, and thy feed after thee; every manchild among you shall be circumcised.
Q. 3. But was not that the covenant of works; and fo will not hold, to infer their privilege under the covenant of grace? A. No, it was not; for God never did, nor will become a God by way of special intereft to any people, by virtue of the covenant of works, fince the breach of it by the fall.
Q. 4. But if it were the covenant of grace, how doth it appear the right of believers infants is ftill the fame it was before in Abraham's time?
A. It appears plainly from the apoftle's own words, and ar、 guments; Acts ii. 39. For the promise is to you, and to your children, &c.
Q5. But though infants then were members of God's vifible church among the Jews, how doth it appear they are fo now, when God hath caft them off?
A. It appears, the membership and privileges are as free and complete to them now, that are the children of Gentile believ ers, as ever they were to the Jewish infants; Rom. xi. 17. And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou being a wild olive-tree wert graffed in amongst them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive-tree.
Q. 6. How elfe doth it appear they are within the covenant? A. It appears by this, that they are pronounced holy; 1 Cor. vii. 14. Elfe were your children unclean, but now are they holy. Which is a foederal holiness, and none out of covenant can be holy by covenant.
Q. 7. But may not that place mean only their legitimacy? A. No, it cannot; for then the apoftle muft pronounce all the infants in the world baftards, that defcend not at least from one believing parent.
8. But infants are not capable to covenant with God, or
to perform covenant-duties; and therefore why should they be admitted to covenant-privileges?
A. A child now of eight days old, is as capable of being admitted into covenant with God, as children of the fame age were in Abraham's days; and then it is manifest they were admitted.
Q9. Though they were admitted by circumcifion then, will it follow, they may be so by baptism now, seeing that ordinance is abolished?
A. Yes, it will: For though circumcifion cease, yet baptism is come in its place; Col. ii. 10, 11, 12. And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power. In whom alfo ye are circumcised with the circumcifion made without hands, in putting off the body of the fins of the flesh, by the circumcifion of Chrift, buried with him in baptifm, &c.
Q. 10. But circumcifion was a feal of the covenant of works; and the argument will not hold, from a feal of the covenant of works, to a feal of the covenant of grace?
A. Circumcifion never was, nor was intended to be a feal of the covenant of works, but of the righteousness of faith; Rom. iv. 11. And he received the fign of circumcifion, a feat of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcifed, &c.
Q. 11. But have we no exprefs command in the New Teftament to baptize infants?
A. There needed no new command; their privilege had been fettled many ages before upon them, and never reverfed by Chrift, or his apoftles, but their former right declared to continue ftill to them; Acts ii. 39. For the promise is to you and your children, &c.
Q. 12. But if they have a right, we might expect to find fome examples of their baptizing?
A. It is manifeft that believers houfholds were baptized with them; Acts xvi. 15, 33. And when the was baptized, and her houthold, &c. Ver. 33. And he took them the fame hour of the night, and washed their stripes, and was baptized, he and all his ftraightway. And if infants are not named, fo neither
are any of age, born of Chriftian parents.
Q. 13. But many truft to their infant-baptifm, as to their regeneration, and fo much mifchief is done ?
A. They do fo; yet the duty is not therefore to be neglected. The preaching of Chrift is to fome a ftumbling-block; yet Chrift must be preached for all that.
Q. 14, But many baptized infants prove naught?
A. And fo do many baptized at age too. Duties are not to be measured by events.
Of the Lord's Supper.
Queft. 96. W
Hat is the Lord's fupper?
A. The Lord's fupper is a facrament, where in, by giving and receiving bread and wine, according to Chriff's appointment, his death is fhewed forth; and the worthy receivers are, not after a corporal and carnal manner, but by faith made partakers of his body and blood, with all his benefits, to their Spiritual nourishment, and growth in grace.
Q.1. By whofe authority is the Lord's fupper instituted and appointed?
A. By the fovereign authority of Chrift, the king of the church, and not by the pleasure of man; 1 Cor. xi. 23. For I have received of the Lord, that which also I delivered unto you; that the Lord Jefus, the fame night in which he was bea trayed, took bread.
Q. 2. Of what parts doth this facramen: confift?
A. It confifts of two parts; one earthly and visible, to wit bread and wine; the other fpiritual and invisible, the body and blood of Chrift; 1 Cor. x. 16. The cup of bleffing which we blefs, is it not the communion of the blood of Chrift? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Chrift?
Q. 3. How doth these earthly and heavenly things become a facrament?
A. By the word of institution, and bleffing coming from Christ upon them; 1 Cor. xi. 23, 24, 25. For I have received of the Lord, that which alfo I delivered unto you; that the Lord Jefus, the fame night in which he was betrayed, took bread. And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and faid, Take, eat, this is my body which is broken for you: This do in remembrance of me. After the fame manner alfo he took the cup, when he had fupped, faying, This cup is the New Teftament in my blood: This do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
Q. 4. When did Christ ordain and inftitute this facrament? A. He inftituted it in the fame night he was betrayed; 1 Cor. xi. 23. The Lord Jefus, the fame night in which he was betrayed, took bread. It could not be fooner, because the paffover must be first celebrated, and, by the inftitution of this, abrogated; nor later, for foon after he was apprehended.
Q5. What doth the time of its inftitution teach us?
A. It teaches us, how great Chrift's care and love to his people is, that he makes in his ordinance fuch provifion for our comfort, though he knew his own bitter agony was just at hand.
Q. 6. What is the general use and end of this facrament? A. It is to confirm, feal, and ratify the new covenant to believers; 1 Cor. xi. 35. This cup is the New Teftament in my blood: This do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
Q. 7. What are the particular ends, and ufes of it?
A. The firft particular end and use of it, is, to bring Chrift and his fufferings afresh to our remembrance; 1 Cor. xi. 24) 25. This do in remembrance of me.
Q. 8. What kind of remembrance of Chrift is here intended? A. Not a mere fpeculative, but an affectionate heart-melting remembrance of him; like that of Peter, Matth. xxvi. 75. And Peter remembered the words of Jefus, which faid unto him, Before the cock fhall crow, thou fhalt deny me thrice. And he went out, and wept bitterly. Or of Jofeph, Gen. xliii. 29, 30. And Jofeph made hafte, for his bowels did yern upon his brother: And he fought where to weep, and he entered into his chamber, and wept there.
Q. 9. What doth this end of the facrament imply?
A. It implies this; that the best of God's people are too apt to forget Chrift, and what he hath endured and fuffered for
Q. 10. What else doth it imply?
A. It implies this; that none but those that have the saving knowledge of Chrift, and have had former acquaintance with Chrift, are fit for this ordinance; for no man can remember what he never knew; 1 Cor. xi. 28. But let a man examine himself, and fo let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. Q. 11. What is the fecond particular use and end of this fa
A. It is to represent Chrift to believers, as an apt sign of him, and of his death; and that both memorative, fignificative, and inftructive.
Q. 12. How is it a memorative fign of Chrift?
A. It brings Chrift to our remembrance, as his death and bitter fufferings are therein reprefented to us, by the breaking of bread, and pouring forth of wine; 1 Cor. xi. 26. For as ot-. ten as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do fhew forth the Lord's death till he come.
Q13. How is it a fignificative ordinance?
A. It is a fignificative ordinance, not only as it represents Christ's fufferings, but the believer's union with him as the Head, and with each other as members of his body; 1 Cor. x. 16, 17. The cup of bleffing which we blefs, is it not the communion of the blood of Chrift? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Chrift? For we being many, are one bread, and one body, &c.
Q. 14. In what respect is it an inftructive fign?
A. It is an inftructive fign in divers refpects; namely, firft, as it teaches us, that Chrift is the only nutritive bread, by which our fouls live; John vi. 51. I am the living bread, which came down from heaven: If any man eat of this bread, he fhall live for ever, and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. And, fecondly, as it inftructs us, that the New Teftament is now in its full force, by the death of Chrift the Teftator; Heb. ix. 16, 17. For where a teftament is, there muft alfo of neceffity be the death of the Teftator. For a teftament is of force after men are dead; otherwife it is of no force at all, whilft the Teftator liveth. Thus much of the Author, nature, and ends of the Lord's fupper. Of the Elements, Ations, and Subjects of it. • Queft. 1.
RE not bread and wine too fmall and common things, to reprefent the body and blood
A. Though a bit of bread, and a draught of wine, be things of small value in themselves; yet they are great in refpect of their use and end. A pennyworth of wax is a fmall thing in itself, but being applied to the label of a deed, may be advanced to the worth of thousands of pounds, as it receives the seal to a great inheritance.
Q. 2. Is not the bread in the facrament turned into the very body of Chrift itself, by tranfubftantiation ?
A. No, it is not; but the elements retain ftill their own proper nature of bread and wine, after the words of confecration; and are fo called; 1 Cor. xi. 26. For as often as ye eat this bread, &c. Matth. xxvi. 29. But I fay unto you, I will not henceforth drink of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.
Q. 3. What is the first argument, by which Proteftants.confute the Popish doctrine of transubstantiation?
A. The firft argument against it, is taken from the end of the facrament; which is, to bring Chrift's body and blood