316 The Birth- Pri?riledge and Covenant -holine e Ch. 3 g peale of it ? Suppofe fuch an Ordinance in the Gofpe! for re- peale, running in forme ; That whereas it hath been ena8 ed and ordained ; that when any by Faith íhall accept the termes of the Covenant , their feed íhall have their intereft. But now be it enacted and ordained, that the interef} in Covenant as to the feed o f thofe that thus accept be from fuch a time void and null; Suppofe fuch a one ( which Mafter Tombes would gladly íhew in cafe he could fee) yet this could not be the breaking off there mentioned for a twofold reafon. I. The deferving - caufe of that breaking off is Uñbelief; now Unbeliefe is not in Infants , much leífe proper to Infants. 2. This breaking offwas of the general( body of the Church of the Jewes that is, the Major part. Now Infants were not the generality, they made not up the Major part of that body: And the title ofthat Chapter of Matter Eaxters, to which Mr. Tombes relates, part. I. Chap. 7. is, The fecond e 4rgument to prove that Infants Church- Ademberfl7ip is not repealed, and confequently they arefrill to be Members of the vifible Church. That Matter Tombes had not animam in patinis, when he preflxt this title, I believe; but where he had it, I know not. To fpeak fomewhat to the Se&ion it fe(f. Mafter Raver proving, That it was only force that were broken off and thofe tome not Infants,then it mutt follow that Infants are not br6i,en off but their Church- memberfhip continues: Mr. ombes anfwers ; The Church is either invifible, and the breaking of from it is by non -Ele Lion or hardening; or vifible ; either Chriítian or Jewifb and the breaking offfrom it, is either by non- Admifl'ion, non-Circumcifing non - Baptizing, or by draw- ingup the fore-skin,or Excommunicating or fuchlike ac`t.The firft roome in the houfe is here much like the porch. That there is a Church invifible and vifible we yield willingly, as a fit Divifion of a fubjed by its feveral adjuncts; but that there is any breaking' off from the body invifible, is but his bare fancy, So Chrilt1 fhould lofe his Members and there would be a fe.paration from the love of God in Chrift. And if there íhould be a breaking off of fuch ; yet how a non.Eleâion to it íhould be a breaking off from it, is above my capacity. I had thought; r. That all the invifible bode had been Elea ; I am fure it is wont to be put into the definition of it. So Matter Tombes himfelfdefines it Antipæ- dobapt. pag. 71. 2. That feparation or breaking off had im- plied:
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=