A17192:198
A most sure and strong defence of the baptism of children, against [the] pestiferous…A moste sure and strong defence of the baptisme of children, against [the] pestiferous…
A most sure and strong defence of the baptism of children, against [the] pestiferous sect of the Anabaptists. set forth by that famous clerk, Henry Bullynger: & now translated out of Latin into English by John Veron SenonoysA moste sure and strong defence of the baptisme of children, against [the] pestiferous secte of the Anabaptystes. set furthe by that famouse clerke, Henry Bullynger: & nowe translated out of Laten into Englysh by Ihon Veron Senonoys
printed by John Oswen, 1551printed by Ihon Oswen, 1551
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
JOIADA. Why doest thou still make up a rope of sand, have we not proved already before that, not only they that be of age, ought too be baptized: But year so stiff necked that ye will in no wise believe, that any may be baptized, onlesse he may repent of his misdeeds. And by and by the do conclude that, ergo, children ought not to be baptised. But in the mean season, ye have not yet showed any law ye orbiddeth to baptise the children. We (as we have declared before already) ⟨image 40⟩do know,1 that Isaac being an infant was so of the family & household of Abraham that he did cause his father to put away the bond woman, with her child. For Paul saith with Moses: The son of the bond woman shall not be heir, with my son Isaac, he was heir, then without doubt he was of the family, for they that be not heirs, as servants & free men are of the family. Exo. xii. We read after this manner: If any stranger will come to dwell among you, & keep the passover of the lord, let all his male children be circumcised, & then he shall keep it well. Why is it said, all his male children? Doth this pertain only to them ye be of age? It is your part then to prove, that they which receive the seal of the church of god, according to the religion of their parents, are not of the family and household of their parents. But I will bring an other testimony. In the .xxi. of Acts, Luk writeth after this manner: And after certain days, we departed from thence & they all brought us on our way, with their wives & children. Were all these children of age? Or if they were not of age, were they not of the family & household of their parents? What miracle, or what affection was it if the men did only bring forth the apostle on his way, with their wives & young ⟨image 40⟩men? But this was the great affection, that the fathers with their wives, did bear & draw their children with them, as in such a business it is wont to be. Now, they did not draw with them, other mens, but their own children. Ergo, they were of their family.
IOIADA. Whye doest thou styll make vp a rope of sande, haue we not proued alreadye before that, not onelye they that be of age, oughte too be baptyzed: But yeare soo styffe necked that ye wyll in noo wyse beleue, that anye maye be baptyzed, onlesse he maye repente of hys misdedes. And by and by ye do conclude that, ergo, children ought not to be baptised. But in the meane season, ye haue not yet shewed anye lawe ye orbiddeth to baptyse the chyldren. We (as we haue declared before alreadye)