A47591:771
Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the ancient…Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the antient…
Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the ancient Britons [sic] being an answer to a book, intituled [sic] Children's baptism from Heaven, published in the Welsh tongue by Mr. James Owen / by Benjamin Keach.Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the antient Britains [sic] being an answer to a book, iutituled [sic] Children's baptism from Heaven, published in the Welsh tongue by Mr. James Owen / by Benjamin Keach.
London: printed by William Marshall, 1696
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 saith Mr. Burkitt, Can any wise or good Man believe, that our Saviour would speak such favourable words of Infants, and his outward Gesture manifest so much good Will towards them, only with an Intent to ensnare and deceive us? doubtless it was to encourage his Ministers to perform all charitable Offices towards them.
Answ. 1. He mistakes, our Saviour speaks very little concerning Infants, and that which is said of them was accidentally spoken, being occasioned by those who brought little Children to him, which the Disciples forbade, and from hence he spoke what he did. Moreover, the cause why our Saviour spoke those words, might be more for the sake of Parents, that they might not be afraid touching the Condition of their dying Babes, than to show any Ordinance belonged to them; for had it been so, doubtless the Disciples would not have for bad those People to bring little Children to Christ. 'Tis therefore an Argument against Infant-Baptism, and not for it, because the Disciples were appointed by their Master to be the Administrators of that Ordinance on such to whom it did of right belong; and had Infants been the Subjects, would they have forbid People to bring Infants to him?
Answ. 1. He mistakes, our Saviour speaks very little concerning Infants, and that which is said of them was accidentally spoken, being occasioned by those who brought little Children to him, which the Disciples forbad, and from hence he spoke what he did. Moreover, the cause why our Saviour spoke those words, might be more for the sake of Parents, that they might not be afraid touching the Condition of their dying Babes, than to shew any Ordinance belonged to them; for had it been so, doubtless the Disciples would not have for bad those People to bring little Children to Christ. 'Tis therefore an Argument against Infant-Baptism, and not for it, because the Disciples were appointed by their Master to be the Administrators of that Ordinance on such to whom it did of right belong; and had Infants been the Subjects, would they have forbid People to bring Infants to him?