A27008:65
Rich. Baxter's review of the state of Christian's infants whether they should be entered…
Rich. Baxter's review of the state of Christian's infants whether they should be entered in covenant with God by baptism ... or whether Christ, the Saviour of the world, hath shut all mankind out of his visible kingdom ... 'till they come of age? : occasioned by the importunity of Mr. E. Hutchinson (and of Mr. Danvers and Mr. Tombs) who called him to this review in order to his retractation [sic] ...Rich. Baxter's review of the state of Christian's infants whether they should be entered in covenant with God by baptism ... or whether Christ, the Saviour of the world, hath shut all mankind out of his visible kingdom ... 'till they come of age? : occasioned by the importunity of Mr. E. Hutchinson (and of Mr. Danvers and Mr. Tombes) who called him to this review in order to his retractation [sic] ...
London: printed for Nevil Simons, 1676
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.
But still you say, There is no Scripture, President, or Precept for Infants Baptism.]
Answer, 1. Abuse not your selves and others: we ⟨p. 17⟩are first to agree Whether Infants may be Church members, and under the Covenant of Grace with their Parents? And then we shall next consider, at what age, and in what manner they should be solemnly invested. Confound not differing Questions: the first must be first resolved. 2. There is no Scripture president for Baptizing any Kings; must none therefore be Baptized? 3. Scripture tells us not all that was then done, but all that must be done. 4. When Baptism was first instituted and practised, the Parents must first be Converted and Baptized. 5. Yet over and over the Baptizing of Households is recorded. 6. Infants Church-membership was a thing that they were before in profession of, and no sort that ever I read of questioned it: Therefore what need Christ institute it anew, any more than to new make the Ten Commandments? 7. If it had ever been his meaning to dispossess them all, he would have told us so in some word of Scripture, or some mention sure had been made of it. 8. But certainly he told them that he would have gathered Jerusalems Children to him, which is the Nation that was before Gods Church. 9. And he took Children in his arms and blessed them, and was angry with those that kept them from him, and said, Of such is the Kingdom of God. 10. And how can we obey Mark 9. 36, 37. and receive Children in Christs name, and as belonging to Christ, if none do visibly belong to him?
Answer, 1. Abuse not your selves and others: we ⟨p. 17⟩are first to agree Whether Infants may be Church members, and under the Covenant of Grace with their Parents? And then we shall next consider, at what age, and in what manner they should be solemnly invested. Confound not differing Questions: the first must be first resolved. 2. There is no Scripture president for Baptizing any Kings; must none therefore be Baptized? 3. Scripture tells us not all that was then done, but all that must be done. 4. When Baptism was first instituted and practised, the Parents must first be Converted and Baptized. 5. Yet over and over the Baptizing of Housholds is recorded. 6. Infants Church-membership was a thing that they were before in profession of, and no sort that ever I read of questioned it: Therefore what need Christ institute it anew, any more than to new make the Ten Commandments? 7. If it had ever been his meaning to dispossess them all, he would have told us so in some word of Scripture, or some mention sure had been made of it. 8. But certainly he told them that he would have gathered Jerusalems Children to him, which is the Nation that was before Gods Church. 9. And he took Children in his arms and blessed them, and was angry with those that kept them from him, and said, Of such is the Kingdom of God. 10. And how can we obey