A26959:261
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.'s talking of [the next cause, and the sole efficient] seem to me the words of a man that knew not what to say, but was resolved that he would not yield: Sir, do you grant that the promise maketh Infants visible Church-members, as any cause, next or remote, sole or cooperating?] If not, why cheat you your simple followers by this talk? If you do, we are agreed, and why contend you? If Logical notions are our difference, say so; I think as it is a Beneficial Relation, the Parents consent and dedication, and the child's being Theirs, are the dispositio materiae, called by some causae Receptivae vel dispositivae: and that Gods donation is the sole efficient in which his donative word (call it what you will) is the Instrument: This is plain Logic. But you that profess that your Church-membership is it self no benefit (and so owe God no thanks for it, and yet make such a stir about it) cannot indeed hold, that Gods love or mercy, or Christs merits, or the Covenant or Promise are givers of it to young or old: For they give nothing but ⟨p. 101⟩benefits. Be not angry to have your absurdities opened, but before you die be sober and reform them.
Mr. T.'s talking of [the next cause, and the sole efficient] seem to me the words of a man that knew not what to say, but was resolved that he would not yield: Sir, do you grant that the promise maketh Infants visible Church-members, as any cause, next or remote, sole or cooperating?] If not, why cheat you your simple followers by this talk? If you do, we are agreed, and why contend you? If Logical notions are our difference, say so; I think as it is a Beneficial Relation, the Parents consent and dedication, and the childs being Theirs, are the dispositio materiae, called by some causae Receptivae vel dispositivae: and that Gods donation is the sole efficient in which his donative word (call it what you will) is the Instrument: This is plain Logick. But you that profess that your Church-membership is it self no benefit (and so owe God no thanks for it, and yet make such a stir about it) cannot indeed hold, that Gods love or mercy, or Christs merits, or the Covenant or Promise are givers of it to young or old: For they give nothing but ⟨p. 101⟩benefits. Be not angry to have your absurdities opened, but before you die be sober and reform them.