The Mosaic Covenant

Search this site

Stephen Marshall

Stephen Marshall was a member of the Westminster Assembly.  The following work, A Sermon of the Baptizing of Infants (1644), was a lecture/sermon delivered in the Abbey Church of Westminster, at the morning lecture, as appointed by the House of Commons.  The work itself is dedicated to "the Reverend and Learned the Prolocutor, Assessors, the Commissioners of the Church of Scotland, and the rest of the Assembly of Divines now sitting in Westminster."   Apparently, the work was intended to be a systematic response to one John Tombes.   A brief outline of his life can be read here. 
 
In the course of his argument, Marshall defends the Reformed doctrine of infant baptism by appealing to the unity of the covenant of grace in the entire dispensation of the Old Testament.  Covenant theology and sacramentology have always been connected for the Reformed.  Because the covenant of grace is one in substance, so also the sacraments of the Old and New Testaments are one in substance.  Anabaptists have always tried to argue that the Old Testament was entirely external and legal in character, thus overly bifurcating covenant history to account for their sacramentology.
 
Though Marshall admits that there was a "rehearsal" of the law or the moral demands covenant of works in the giving of the Law at Mt. Sinai (especially evident in the manner in which it was delivered), it was not given as a part of the covenant itself.  Rather, the law was given "in order to the administration of the covenant of grace," to convince the Jews of their inability to keep it for their justification, and thus to drive them to Christ (pg. 10).  In addition to this aspect of the giving of the law, there is "also something touching the administration of the covenant of grace."  Not only were all the threats and curses mere preparations to Christ and the covenant of grace, but also because the directing part of the law contains the very same rule which Abraham and all believers must walk by.
 
The most interesting part of this piece (at least to me) is the way in which he denies that the external blessings of the land, and Israel's continuance therein are governed not by a so-called works-merit principle, but rather by a principle of faith and grace:
 
 To conclude this, all their external promises in case of obedience, all outward blessings which were to be enjoyed by them, the Land of Canaan, and all the good things in it, all outward punishments and threatenings, loss of their Country, going into Captivity, all their sacrifices, their Washings, their Sprinklings, their holy Persons, holy Feasts, and holy things, were all of them but Administrations of the Covenant of Grace; Earthly things then, were not only promised or threatened more distinctly and fully, then now they are to them who are in Covenant, but were figures, signs, types and Sacraments of spiritual things, to be enjoyed by both them and by us, as might be cleared by abundance of particulars: Take but that one instance of the Land of Canaan, which albeit in itself was but like other Lands, yet was it by the Lord sanctified to spiritual ends, where he would have his Tabernacle pitched, and Temple built, out of which Land, when the ten Tribes were carried captive, he is said to have put them out of his sight: the very Land being figuratively holy, and a sign of God's presence, the resting of Gods people there, a sign of their eternal rest in Heaven, into which not Moses the Lawgiver, but Joshua, or Jesus, the type of the true Jesus was to bring them: neither did the Lord promise them entrace into, or continuance in that Land, but upon the same conditions upon which he promiseth eternal life, as true Faith in the Gospel, with the love and fear of God, and obedience of his Commandments, [pg. 12] Godliness having then, as it has now and always, the promise of Good things for this life, and the life to come, of earthly things, then more distinctly, and fully, and typically, but of heavenly things more generally and sparingly; whereas now on the contrary, there is amore clear and full revelation and promise of heavenly things, but the pomise of things earthly, more general and sparing: Now this external Administration of the Covenant is not the same with us, as it was with them, but the covenant is the same; they were under the same misery by nature, had the same Christ, the Lamb slain from the beginning of the World, the same conditions of Faith and repentance, to be made partakers of the covenant, had the same graces promised in the covenant, circumcising of their heart to love the Lord, etc.  Theirs was dispensed in darker Prophecies, and obscurer Sacrifices, types, and Sacraments, ours more gloriously and clearly, and in a greater measure: the clothes indeed do differ, but the body is the same in both. 
 Notice especially the phrase "neither did the Lord promise them entrance into, or continuance in that Land, but upon the same conditions upon which he promiseth eternal life, as true Faith in the Gospel, with the love and fear of God, and obedience of his Commandments."  Not only Israel entrance into, but also their continuation in the land was governed by a principle of grace and faith, joined with love and obedience.  The reader will undoubtedly recognize how this 17th century Reformed construction differs markedly from some modern constructions of this same topic. 
 
Subpages (1): A Sermon of the Baptizing of Infants