A26886:1027
Certain disputations of right to sacraments, and the true nature of visible Christianity defending…
Certain disputations of right to sacraments, and the true nature of visible Christianity defending them against several sorts of opponents, especially against the second assault of that pious, reverend and dear brother Mr. Thomas Blake / by Richard Baxter ...
London: printed by R.W. for Nevil Simmons, 1658
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.
11. The next Observation that I would give towards the Answering of this Objection, is, that it could not be expected that any Magistrate, Priest, or other in Power, should hinder any Israelite from circumcising his children. For to circumcise them was every mans Duty, and to baptize them is every mans Duty in the world now: that is, to give up himself and his child in sincere Covenant to God, and seal it, as he hath appointed: but not dissemblingly to use the sign, without the Covenanting and Resignation on his part. Now if any Israelite were unfit for this Ordinance, it being the Magistrates duty to put him to death, or cut him off, he could not judge him unfit, and so forbid him the Ordinance, without condemning himself. The first thing that lay upon him was, to cut him off for the sin which caused his unfitness.
11. The next Observation that I would give towards the Answering of this Objection, is, that it could not be expected that any Magistrate, Priest, or other in Power, should hinder any Israëlite from circumcising his children. For to circumcise them was every mans Duty, and to baptize them is every mans Duty in the world now: that is, to give up himself and his child in sincere Covenant to God, and seal it, as he hath appointed: but not dissemblingly to use the sign, without the Covenanting and Resignation on his part. Now if any Israëlite were unfit for this Ordinance, it being the Magistrates duty to put him to death, or cut him off, he could not judge him unfit, and so forbid him the Ordinance, without condemning himself. The first thing that lay upon him was, to cut him off for the sin which caused his unfitness.
12. Note also that Circumcision much differed from Baptism in this, that it was not the Priests work but Parents to circumcise his children: this being so, no wonder if there were not the scruples about the persons fitness and worthiness, and the children's right, as now there is in Baptism. For what man is so prone to scruple or question his own Right or his children's, as another may be? And the same reason that ⟨p. 310⟩