Certain disputations of right to sacraments, and the true nature of visible Christianity defending…

THE Question is of the greater moment, because about Matter of Practice, and that in a Point wherein the Honour of God on one side, and the Rights of mens Souls on the other, are so much concerned. It supposeth first, that Baptism is Gods Ordinance, of continued Use, and that some are to be Baptized. Secondly, that it is a Benefit, or else we could not, in the sense now used, be said to have Right to it. Thirdly. It supposeth that some Infants have Right to be Baptized. This Question therefore is not to be disputed with the Anabaptists, who deny the presupposed. And they that are so indifferent in the former, as to take it for an inconsiderable matter. Whether Infants be baptized, or not, must needs judge this Question of the Infants of the Ungodly, to be much more inconsiderable. Fourthly, Yet doth it not suppose that the Infants of any ungodly persons have this Right, as if it were only the Right of Notorious ones that were disputable: but the word [Notorious] is added to limit our present Dispute to that sort, for several Reasons; at this time passing by the other, but not taking it for granted. Fifthly, Nor doth the Addition of the term [Baptized] to [Parents] take it for granted that no children of ⟨p. 248⟩unbaptized Parents have such Right; But it limits the Question to that sort only, as fitter in several respects for our Dispute.

THE Question is of the greater moment, because about Matter of Practice, and that in a Point wherein the Honor of God on one side, and the Rights of mens Souls on the other, are so much concerned. It supposeth first, that Baptism is Gods Ordinance, of continued Use, and that some are to be Baptized. Secondly, that it is a Benefit, or else we could not, in the sense now used, be said to have Right to it. Thirdly. It supposeth that some Infants have Right to be Baptized. This Question therefore is not to be disputed with the Anabaptists, who deny the presupposed. And they that are so indifferent in the former, as to take it for an inconsiderable matter. Whether Infants be baptized, or not, must needs judge this Question of the Infants of the Ungodly, to be much more inconsiderable. Fourthly, Yet doth it not suppose that the Infants of any ungodly persons have this Right, as if it were only the Right of Notorious ones that were disputable: but the word [Notorious] is added to limit our present Dispute to that sort, for several Reasons; at this time passing by the other, but not taking it for granted. Fifthly, Nor doth the Addition of the term [Baptized] to [Parents] take it for granted that no children of