A26959:578
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.
§. 16. I take it therefore for the soundest Doctrine that Gods taking the Children of the Faithful into Covenant with him, and becoming their God and taking them for his own, doth signify no less than a state of Grace, and pardon and right to life eternal; and that they are in this state upon their Parents Consent and Heart-devoting them to God in Christ, before baptism, but baptism is the solemnizing and investiture, which openly coram Ecclesia delivereth them possession of their visible Church-state with a sealed pardon and gift of life: For it is not another, but the same promise and Covenant which is made to the faithful and their feed: And all Gods promises to the many Generations of them, in ⟨p. 207⟩the second Commandment and many other Texts, cannot mean any such little blessings as consist with a state of damnation and the possession of the Devil. And all the ancient Churches in baptizing of Infants were of this mind (whom I will not despise.) And Abraham's case persuadeth me that the Children of Natural and Civil Parents (truly their Owners) have this right (before they are baptized.) But the former (natural Parents) have plainer evidence than the later (which is a darker case.) But as for them that think either that all Infants are saved, or all baptized Infants ( •ure vel injuria) though no Parent or Owner consent or dedicate them (heartily, or openly) to God, or though they are hypocrites and truly consent not for themselves or theirs, let them prove it if they can; but I must say it is past my power.
§. 16. I take it therefore for the soundest Doctrine that Gods taking the Children of the Faithful into Covenant with him, and becoming their God and taking them for his own, doth signifie no less than a state of Grace, and pardon and right to life eternal; and that they are in this state upon their Parents Consent and Heart-devoting them to God in Christ, before baptism, but baptism is the solemnizing and investiture, which openly coram Ecclesia delivereth them possession of their visible Church-state with a sealed pardon and gift of life: For it is not another, but the same promise and Covenant which is made to the faithful and their feed: And all Gods promises to the many Generations of them, in ⟨p. 207⟩the second Commandment and many other Texts, cannot mean any such little blessings as consist with a state of damnation and the possession of the Devil. And all the ancient Churches in baptizing of Infants were of this mind (whom I will not despise.) And Abrahams case perswadeth me that the Children of Natural and Civil Parents (truly their Owners) have this right (before they are baptized.) But the former (natural Parents) have plainer evidence than the later (which is a darker case.) But as for them that think either that all Infants are saved, or all baptized Infants ( ure vel injuria) though no Parent or Owner consent or dedicate them (heartily, or openly) to God, or though they are hypocrites and truly consent not for themselves or theirs, let them prove it if they can; but I must say it is past my power.