A26924:792
The English nonconformity as under King Charles II and King James II truly stated…
The English nonconformity as under King Charles II and King James II truly stated and argued by Richard Baxter ; who earnestly beseecheth rulers and clergy not to divide and destroy the land and cast their own souls on the dreadful guilt and punishment of national perjury ...
London: printed for Tho. Parkhurst, 1689
Chapter 49: Point VI. The Laity denied Baptism, who refuse the foresaid way of Godfathers, as it ex…
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.
M. And do you think this doth? will you try now and prove to me that I may be unexcuseable, 1. That Children have right to Baptism merely upon the presentation of a Neighbour or Stranger that never owned them. 2. That it is not the Parents Duty to dedicate them solemnly to Christ, and to be the Person (as having power of them) that must Covenant for them. 3. That it is lawful for Neighbours or Strangers, to undertake and Vow that for the Child's Education, which they are neither able to perform, nor ever intended it? 4. That it is lawful for Parents either to give up their Children to such Sponsors for to Educate them, or to seek or accept such to Vow and Covenant, that which the Parents know they never meant to do, and which if asked, [Do you seriously intend to do all this for my Child?] they will say, No: Is it lawful thus ⟨p. 187⟩to Suborn Men, and put them on so great a Sin? Cure these Errors in me if you can.
M. And do you think this doth? will you try now and prove to me that I may be unexcuseable, 1. That Children have right to Baptism meerly upon the presentation of a Neighbour or Stranger that never owned them. 2. That it is not the Parents Duty to dedicate them solemnly to Christ, and to be the Person (as having power of them) that must Covenant for them. 3. That it is lawful for Neighbours or Strangers, to undertake and Vow that for the Child's Education, which they are neither able to perform, nor ever intended it? 4. That it is lawful for Parents either to give up their Children to such Sponsors for to Educate them, or to seek or accept such to Vow and Covenant, that which the Parents know they never meant to do, and which if asked, [Do you seriously intend to do all this for my Child?] they will say, No: Is it lawful thus ⟨p. 187⟩to Suborn Men, and put them on so great a Sin? Cure these Errors in me if you can.
L. I told you before that they may agree to speak as in your Name.