A41334:113
A sober reply to the sober answer of Reverend Mr. Cawdrey, to A serious…
A sober reply to the sober answer of Reverend Mr. Cawdrey, to A serious question propounded viz. whether the ministers of England are bound by the word of God to baptise the children of all such parents, which say they believe in Jesus Christ, but are grossly ignorant, scandalous in their conversations, scoffers at godliness, and refuse to submit to church discipline ... : also, the question of Reverend Mr. Hooker concerning the baptism of infants : with a post-script to Reverend Mr. Blake / by G.I. Firmin ...A sober reply to the sober answer of Reverend Mr. Cawdrey, to A serious question propounded viz. whether the ministers of England are bound by the word of God to baptise the children of all such parents, which say they believe in Jesus Christ, but are grosly ignorant, scandalous in their conversations, scoffers at godliness, and refuse to submit to church dicipline ... : also, the question of Reverend Mr. Hooker concerning the baptisme of infants : with a post-script to Reverend Mr. Blake / by G.I. Firmin ...
London: printed by J.G., 1653
A SOBER REPLY TO A SOBER ANSWER, &c.A SOBER REPLY TO A SOBER ANSVVER, &c.
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.
I should further have objected against the Separatists; what will you make of those Parishes, are they Infidels? They would answer, let them be what they will, they are not, nor ever were (that we know, or others) fit matter for Churches; if the Presbyterians will stand to their own Definition, but they would say again, they are State-christians made such by the power of the Civill Sword, not Church-christians made by the spiritual Sword. And this shows it that in their Religion, they will not go one step beyond, what the State commands: and had the State let them alone, they would still have held to their Popery. And talk to them of any other Church, but the place they met in, they understand you not.
I should further have objected against the Separatists; what will you make of those Parishes, are they Infidells? They would answer, let them be what they will, they are not, nor ever were (that we know, or others) fit matter for Churches; if the Presbyterians will stand to their own Definition, but they would say againe, they are State-christians made such by the power of the Civill Sword, not Church-christians made by the spirituall Sword. And this shewes it that in their Religion, they will not go one step beyond, what the State commands: and had the State let them alone, they would still have held to their Popery. And talke to them of any other Church, but the place they met in, they understand you not.
Had I said, But they are Baptized, they would answer, if men will abuse Baptism, as if a Minister should go and Baptize Indians, must we needs say therefore they are a Church? Baptism doth not make a Church, for it presupposeth a Church.
Had I said, But they are Baptized, they would answer, if men will abuse Baptisme, as if a Minister should go and Baptize Indians, must we needs say therefore they are a Church? Baptisme doth not make a Church, for it presupposeth a Church.