But when Providence first brought forth the Issue of that debate many did Conscientiously dissent from these Conclusions. And although of later years, that Cause hath exceedingly gained ground, yet there are some that still withhold their Assent, whereby practice according to those determinations is impeded in many Churches. The first Question then is, Whether the Qualifications expressed in the fifth Proposition of the late Synod Book do give right unto Baptism. In many Polemical discourses a great part of the Contest hath risen from the not understanding, or not rightly stating of the Question, that so there may be no mistake about that matter, Let it be remembered that the words of the Proposition are these, viz. Church members who were admitted in minority, understanding the doctrine of faith and publicly professing their Assent thereto, not scandalous in Life, and solemnly owning the Covenant before the Church wherein they give up themselves, and their Children to the Lord, and subject themselves to the Government of Christ in his Church, their Children are to be baptized. So that the Question now is not whether the Children of ignorant or profane persons, or of Heretics may be baptized, or of such as do in a light manner own the Covenant, and so do no more, but visibly take the Lords Name in vain; or of such o• do ⟨p. 3⟩refuse to subject themselves to Church Discipline, I say the Question is not whether such persons have right to Baptism, no such thing being affirmed by the Synod. Nor is the Question whether grand-Children as such have right to Baptism by virtue of the faith and Covenant of their godly proparents, although the Immediate Parent should be a forsaker of the Covenant and God of his Father. This very mistake hath been the Reason why many have drank in prejudice against the Synod Book, Because they have apprehended, that there in the Baptism of the Children of godless Parents hath been pleaded for, only by virtue of the Grand-Fathers Religion, although the next Parent should be no Christian. But that is a most Injurious stating of the Question, for the Synod Book doth in no wise ground Baptism on the qualification of the Grand-Father, but on the qualification of the Immediate Parent.
But when Providence first brought forth the Issue of that debate many did Conscientiously dissent from these Conclusions. And although of later years, that Cause hath exceedingly gained ground, yet there are some that still withhold their Assent, whereby practice according to those determinations is impeded in many Churches. The first Question then is, Whether the Qualifications expressed in the fifth Proposition of the late Synod Book do give right unto Baptisme. In many Polemical discourses a great part of the Contest hath risen from the not understanding, or not rightly stating of the Question, that so there may be no mistake about that matter, Let it be remembred that the words of the Proposition are these, viz. Church members who were admitted in minority, understanding the doctrine of faith and publickly professing their Assent thereto, not scandalous in Life, and solemnly owning the Covenant before the Church wherein they give up themselves, and their Children to the Lord, and subject themselves to the Government of Christ in his Church, their Children are to be baptized. So that the Question now is not whether the Children of ignorant or prophane persons, or of Hereticks may be baptized, or of such as do in a light manner own the Covenant, and so do no more, but visibly take the Lords Name in vain; or of such o• do ⟨p. 3⟩refuse to subject themselves to Church Discipline, I say the Question is not whether such persons have right to Baptisme, no such thing being affirmed by the Synod. Nor is the Question whether grand-Children as such have right to Baptisme by virtue of the faith and Covenant of their godly proparents, although the Immediate Parent should be a forsaker of the Covenant and God of his Father. This very mistake hath been the Reason why many have drank in prejudice against the Synod Book, Because they have apprehended, that there in the Baptisme of the Children of godless Parents hath been pleaded for, only by virtue of the Grand-Fathers Religion, although the next Parent should be no Christian. But that is a most Injurious stating of the Question, for the Synod Book doth in no wise ground Baptisme on the qualification of the Grand-Father, but on the qualification of the Immediate Parent.
