A41334:178
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.
Hence first, those arguments which Mr. Cawdrey hath drawn up in his Diatr. with Mr. Hooker from the Infants of the godly Members of our Churches here in England, they all labour with the disease called, Ignoratio Elenthi, for he hath changed the question, and doth not speak ad idem.
Hence first, those arguments which Mr. Cawdrey hath drawne up in his Diatr. with Mr. Hooker from the Infants of the godly Membe•s of our Churches here in England, they all labour with the disease called, Ignoratio Elenthi, for he hath changed the question, and doth not speake ad idem.
2. Hence secondly, all that pains Mr. Cawdrey spends to prove that Children may be baptized by virtue of Grandfather, or Adoption, [if he can make it out that they may be so] yet if such a Grandfather or person who Adopts, be confederate, and walk in Church-fellowship (though not explicitly Confederated) this doth not trouble Mr. Hookers question: if that Grandfather, or person who Adopts, be not Confederate, then the question falls upon them indeed, not else.
2. Hence secondly, all that paines Mr. Cawdrey spends to prove that Children may be baptized by vertue of Grandfather, or Adoption, [if he can make it out that they may be so] yet if such a Grandfather or person who Adopts, be confederate, and walk in Church-fellowship (though not explicitely Confederated) this doth not trouble Mr. Hookers question: if that Grandfather, or person who Adopts, be not Confederate, then the question falls upon them indeed, not else.
Mr. Hookers question then concerns only such godly Parents as are Members of no particular visible Church, and being no Members but coming to join with a Church; now the question will be, what explicitness may be required.