A41334:73
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 must not here condemn the holy Divines, who have before kept this Ordinance; neither dare I say the Assembly of Divines did very weakly, to trouble the Parliament in requesting the Houses to make an Act against such persons, that they might be debarred from the Lords Supper, which I must do, if they were bound to give it while such were tolerated Members, they would find hard work to have Excommunicated all these. If any say I condemn the former Divines for Baptizing all: I pray let them say no more then they hear me say, I do not do so, only I would gladly see the reason of the practise, and for those, who lived before these times, I can answer my self another way.
I must not here condemne the holy Divines, who have before kept this Ordinance; neither dare I say the Assembly of Divines did very weakly, to trouble the Parliament in requesting the Houses to make an Act against such persons, that they might be debarred from the Lords Supper, which I must doe, if they were bound to give it while such were tolerated Members, they would finde hard worke to have Excommunicated all these. If any say I condemne the former Divines for Baptizing all: I pray let them say no more then they heare me say, I do not do so, onely I would gladly see the reason of the practise, and for those, who lived before these times, I can answer my selfe another way.
I pray remember my Question, how it can be proved that the Officers must look more to this Seal then the other. 1 Cor. 11. It is said, Let a man examine himself, &c. True, so he hath need before he comes to Baptism: but what is this to the Officers of Corinth, the Lords Supper was administered every Lords Day in those times, what must the Officers examine them every week? here is work enough, they looked to them [or should have done] when they first took them in to be Members, and so if they did ⟨p. 11⟩not walk as such ought to do, they were to looks after them, reform, or cast out, but in so doing they saved other Ordinances as well as this. But we have a notion taken up, as if Discipline were appointed only to save the Lords Supper from being profaned, and no other Ordinance.