A26886:965
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.
Answ. What is this to our business? We plead not for Excommunicating any child for the Parents sin; but for not Admitting them at first into communion, when the Parents have lost their Right, and the child is born after. 2. What if by the Law of the Land a Traitors Estate be forfeit? if his Heir therefore receive not that which he could not give him because he had lost it, will you say that this is contrary to Gods Ordination, that the Son shall not suffer for the Parents sin? The Son may yet have some privilege, from a Father, which he could not have, were that Father an Infidel or excommunicate person; and therefore all the world have not the same Privileges as the Church. So much of that Argument.
Answ. What is this to our business? We plead not for Excommunicating any child for the Parents sin; but for not Admitting them at first into communion, when the Parents have lost their Right, and the child is born after. 2. What if by the Law of the Land a Traitors Estate be forfeit? if his Heir therefore receive not that which he could not give him because he had lost it, will you say that this is contrary to Gods Ordination, that the Son shall not suffer for the Parents sin? The Son may yet have some priviledge, from a Father, which he could not have, were that Father an Infidel or excommunicate person; and therefore all the world have not the same Priviledges as the Church. So much of that Argument.
Arg. 16. Those whom we may justly Baptize (supposing them of age and natural capacity) we may justly admit to the Lords Supper while they are no worse than they were at Baptism. But we may not admit a notorious ungodly person to the Lords Supper: Therefore we may not justly Baptize such: And consequently, not their children upon their account.
The Major is plain: No Church-member ought to be kept from Church-communion in the Lords Supper, but upon some just Accusation of a crime which he is since guilty of, more than he was at his Admittance. But the Baptized are Church members. Ergo, &c.