A26959:224
More proofs of infants church-membership and consequently their right to baptism, or, A second…
More proofs of infants church-membership and consequently their right to baptism, or, A second defence of our infant rights and mercies in three parts ... / by Richard Baxter.
London: printed for N. Simmons and J. Robinson, 1675
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.
Mr. T. addeth that It will not hold from Christs Headship in Infancy, &c. 1. It is not declared in Scripture, and so a mere fancy: 2. Then an Infant in the womb should be a visible member, because then Christ was Head of the Church: 3. Then an old man should not be a member; for Christ was not an old man.
Mr. T. addeth that It will not hold from Christs Headship in Infancy, &c. 1. It is not declared in Scripture, and so a meer phan•y: 2. Then an Infant in the womb should be a visible member, because then Christ was Head of the Church: 3. Then an old man should not be a member; for Christ was not an old man.
Reply. 1. Irenaeus thought it would hold who giveth this reason of it: And I leave the Reader to consider whether the words cited prove it not. Sure I am, it greatly satisfieth my judgement, that God hereby declared his will to include Infants in his Church visibly. For the Head is a Member, even the noblest: Therefore one Infant is confessed by you to be a visible member of the Church: And if one, it will be incumbent on you ⟨p. 84⟩to prove the rest uncapable or excluded. When I read that Christ came not into the world at the statute that Adam did, but chose to be an Infant, and to be persecuted in Infancy, and to have Infants murdered for his sake first, and to invite and use them as he did, it is not the rolling over of your wearisome dry denials and confident absurdities, that will persuade me that Christ shutteth out all Infants. And I am sure that the Instance confuteth your common exceptions against Infants; As that they are not Disciples because they learn not, which yet they may be in the same sense as Christ was their Master in infancy when he Taught not: And that their Infancy did not incapacitate them to be in Covenant with God, to be Christians, to be Church-members, &c. Christ showed, in that in Infancy he bore all the Counter-relations, and was in the Covenant of God as Mediator: and that (as far as we can judge) only by a virtual and not actual consent (in his Infancy and humane nature) to the Covenant of mediation.