A47605:391
The rector rectified and corrected, or, Infant-baptism unlawful being a sober answer to a…
The rector rectified and corrected, or, Infant-baptism unlawful being a sober answer to a late pamphlet entitled An argumentative and practical discourse of infant-baptism, published by Mr. William Burkit, rector of Mildin in Suffolk : wherein all his arguments for pedo-baptism are refuted and the necessity of immersion, i.e. dipping, is evidenced, and the people falsely called Anabaptists are cleared from those unjust reproaches and calumnies cast upon them : together with a reply to the Athenian gazette added to their 5th volume about infant-baptism : with some remarks upon Mr. John Flavel's last book in answer to Mr. Philip Cary / by Benjamin Keach.The rector rectified and corrected, or, Infant-baptism unlawful being a sober answer to a late pamphlet entituled An argumentative and practical discourse of infant-baptism, published by Mr. William Burkit, rector of Mildin in Suffolk : wherein all his arguments for pedo-baptism are refuted and the necessity of immersion, i.e. dipping, is evidenced, and the people falsly called Anabaptists are cleared from those unjust reproaches and calumnies cast upon them : together with a reply to the Athenian gazette added to their 5th volume about infant-baptism : with some remarks upon Mr. John Flavel's last book in answer to Mr. Philip Cary / by Benjamin Keach.
London: printed by John Harris, 1692
Title page typeset from the transcription.
THE Rector Rectified, and Corrected: OR, Infant-Baptism Unlawful. › Chapter 3
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.
Answ. 1. You mistake, 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 ⟨p. 104⟩to him, which the Disciples forbade; and from hence he spake 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 forbade 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. You mistake, 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 ⟨p. 104⟩to him, which the Disciples forbad; and from hence he spake 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 forbad 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?
2. You therefore may rather conclude, had they been the Subjects of Baptism, Christ, by not hinting any such thing in the least on this Occasion, might rather have left us in a Snare, in speaking nothing of it, neither here, nor at any other time.