8u. W/,at is the true meani11g nf Spon[ors or God1ather~? child hath ro baptifm? 3· What •ight he bath to the benefits of the Covenant fealed and delivered in blptifrn ~ To che tirfi, two things concur to the title of the Parent to Covenant in the name of his, chi14: One is his Natur&l lnttreft in him, The child being hir own is at his difpofc. The Other is Godt graciolM wiU and confmt lhac it ~all be ~o ; that the Parents Will Gull b: as the childs fQr his good, till he come at age to have a Wtll of h1s own. To the fccond, The childs right to baptifm is not mecrly his Natur.ll or his Bittb rcb.tioii from fuch Parents, bu[ it is in two degrets as followerh, I· He hath a Vi.rtut~l Rigln, on condition of his Parw11 faitJJ: the Reafon is, becaufe that a believerI confent and {tlffotdication toGod dOth Virtuafiy contain in it a dedication with himfelf of all that i1 hi1: And it is a contradiction ro fay that a a man truly ded·rcateth himfelf to God, an.d not all that be bath, and that he truly ,confenteth to the Covenant fo1 himfelf, and not for his child, if he undeilhnd that God will impt it. 2. His AC!ud tide~condition is his Parents (or Owners) Ad:ua1 Confent to enter him into Gods Covenant, and his Ad:ua1 mental dedication of his child to God, which is his tide before God, and the Prcfe.llion of il is his title before the Church. So that it is not a rnecr Phyfical but a MorJJ tidt:·condition, which an !nfant h:uh to baptifin, that is, HH P;trtnts Confent to dedicate bim toGod. • 3· And to the third, His title-condition to the Benefit! ofbaptifm, bath two degms, r. That ho be really dedicated to God by the heart-confent of his Parent as afo1daid : And 2· Thlt his Parent ex– prefs this by the folemn engaging him to God in baptifin; The fi1fi being nccdfary as a Mc•nJ fine q 11 • non, and the fecond being necefruy as a Duty without which he finocth, ( when its poliiblc,J and as a !1-leanJ coram Ecclejia to the priviledges of the Vifible Church. The fum of all is, that our mttr HlftHral interdl: in our childrt:n is not their title-condition to baptifin 01 to falvation, but only that prefuppofed tlatc which enableth us by Gods Confenr to Co– venant for them : But their title~condition to baptifm .and falvation, is our c~vtHaming for them, or Voluntary d£dicating them to God; whic:h we do 1. Vtrtu.JUy when we dedit:are {J:~r {eliltJ, a;ul aU tbat wt bo1ve or !hall have, 2· A_lluaUy when our Heurs confent puricuh.dy for. them, and Alluafly devote them ro God, bt:fore Baptafm: 3• Sacramentally, when we cxprefs th1s mour folemn baprit.:. mat covenanting and dedic::.cion. Confide• exactly of this again; And ifyou loath difiinguin1ing, conrefs ingenuoufiy th11 you loath the uutb) m the nccdfary means of knowing .i.e. ~efl:. 39· WhRt is the trtle meaning of Spo11[ors, Patrimi or God.fathers M 1ve call tlmn? .;1nd is it la1v[ul to make t'.[e of them? Anfw. I. TO the firll quellion; All men have not the fame thoughts either of their Origi>zal, or of their prdtnt ufo. 1. So1.11e rhink that they were Sponfor! or SuretitJ for the Partntl rather than the childat firft : And that wllGn- many in tirq_es of Pe.rftcutiog., Herefie and Apoliafie, did baptize their children"'this month or year) and rhc next montl~ 'or year apo{hui~ and deny ChriJl thcmfelves, that the Sponfon were: on· ly credi~'tc ChriJlian~ witneffi.ng that tht:y believed that the Parents were credible fitm believers, and not like 'to apotlatizc. · 2. -bthcrs "think that they were undeitakm, that if th~ Parents did apollarize 01 dye, they would fee to the Chrifiian Education of the child rhemfelvcs. 3• Otb<Js think that they did both thefe together : ( which is my opinion ; ) viz. That they wirndfed the pr.bability of the parent! fidelity ; But promifed that if they Chould either apofiatize or dye, they would fee that the children wCie pioufly educated. 4· Others think that they weiC abrolute undertak..m that the child11~ (hould be pioufly educated,whether the.Parents dyed or apofiatized or nor; So that they went joint-u·niJi:rtakcrs wirl} the Pare,nts in the1r life umc. 5· And I have la(e]y met with fame that main... rain thanhe God-fathers andGod~mothCis, become Proprietors, and Adopt the child, and take him for their own, and that this is the fenfe of the C~urch of England. But 1 believe them not fo• rhefe reafonS. . •· There is no fuch word in the LitUigie,Dochine or Canons of the Church of England: And rhat is not to be feigned and 'fathered on them, which they never f•id. 2· It would be agalnll the Law of NituiC to f01ce all Puents ro give rhe file propriety, or joynt– proprUty in their children to others. NatHrt hatb given the propric(y to chemfdves, and we cannot ro'b themof it. 0 •It would be heinoufiy injurious to the child1en of Noble and Learned pcrfons, if they mufi be forced to give them up to the propriety and education of others, even of fuch as perhaps ue lower and more unfit for it than rherrifelves. 4·lt would be more heinoufly inju•ious to all God..j,tbm and God·moth<rJ, who mull all make other mens children their oum, and therefore mull ufe them as their own. 5· It would keep moll child.en unbapri~ed ; Becaufc if it wue once undCillood thar they mull t~kc th~!l) as rhcir own, few would be SponfoiS to the childiCn !'f the poor, for fear of kupmg thel,ll -, · and few but the lgnount rh~t know nqt·'What they do , would be Sponf01s for any, · • · becaufe
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=