More proofs of infants church-membership and consequently their right to baptism, or, A second…

OF the Question 49. p. 826. as cited by him (The falsehood of his inserting [in a Popish Country in their way of Baptizing] in that cited place which spake only of the Lutherans, I pass by as weary of answering such: But

OF the Question 49. p. 826. as cited by him (The falshood of his inserting [in a Popish Countrey in their way of Baptizing] in that cited place which spake only of the Lutherans, I pass by as weary of answering such: But

I. That it is a sin for any man (supposing Infant Baptism a duty) to offer his child to be Baptized where it will be done with the sign of the Cross, or such ceremonies as the Lutherans use, though he profess his own dissent and disallowance of those ceremonies, and though he cannot lawfully have it done better, but must have that or no Baptism at all?

I. That it is a sin for any man (supposing Infant Baptism a duty) to offer his child to be Baptized where it will be done with the sign of the Cross, or such ceremonies as the Lutherans use, though he profess his own dissent and dissallowance of those ceremonies, and though he cannot lawfully have it done better, but must have that or no Baptism at all?

II. That in the ancient Churches of the second, third, and fourth ages, it had been better to be unbaptized than to use a white Garment in Baptism as they did, or to be anointed as then, or to taste Milk and Honey, though the Person offering his child to such Baptism, had professed his dissent as aforesaid?