Background Image
Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  347 / 846 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 347 / 846 Next Page
Page Background

P

A

R

T

II.

Reverend

Mr. Richard

Baxter.

313

It

is

diforderly

that

the Parents are neither

of

them required

(ordinarily)

to be

prefent, and prefent

their Childto Baptifm,

but

it

is

left

to Godfathers and God-

mothers, that have

no

power

to

confersfor them, or enter theminto the Covenant,

unlefsit

be

in the Parentsname, or

they be Pro.parents, taking the

Child

as

their

own.

And

it

fruftrateth

due

Enquiry aidAffîltance

,.when

the Parents.may choofe

whether they

will come beforeto

the Minifter to

be

inftructed about the

Nature

and Ufe

of

Baptifm

;

and may choofe

whether they

will let him

know

of

it till the

Night or

Morning before.

The

Exhortation

before

Baptifm

is

very defective

,

omitting many weighty

Points.

So are

the

two

Prayers before it

:

where

alfa

it

is

inconveniently

faid ,

That

God

by Chri/'s

Baptifm

didfanttifre

the

Flood

Jordan,

and all

other

Waters,

to

tbemyfti-

.cal

wafhisig

away

of

Sin.

The

afcribingof

the

Gift of the Holy Gholt

to

Infants by their

Baptifm,

as irs

ordinary

EffeEt

and neceffary to their Regeneration,

is

to bring an undetermined

uncertain Opinion into our Liturgy.

.

The

Arguments for

Infant

-

Baptifm are fo defectively

expreft,

as

have tempted

ma-

ny into

Anabaptifm.

The

third Prayer faith

very little;

bist What was faid in

bile

of

thofe

fore-

going.

Sureties

that

have

not

the Parents power, are unjuftly required to promife

in

the

Infant's

Name, or

the

Infant by them

:

And

fo

iris

a

doubt whether many Infants

have,ever indeed

been entred into

the Covenant

of

God, when they cannot

be

laid

to

Promife

or Covenantby Perlons, whom neither Nature or Scripture

, or any

fufficient

Authority bath

enabled

to that

Office.

The

Sureties

are

unjuftly and irregularly required,

to

profefs

prefent Actual

Faith

in

the Infant's name, whets

it

is

a

thing not

required

of

the

Infant;

but

'only

that

he

be

the Child

of

a

Believer, and by

the Parent:dedicated to God in Baptifm,

and there engaged

in

his

Covenant,

to

Believe

and Obey when he

is

ca-

pable.

Of

the Crofs

in

Baptifm

we have

Paid

more in due place

;

but here

only add

that it

is

a very

great diforder

(

betides

the

other faults) to

exprefs

the

Terms

of

the Covenant

as

fignified

by

the

Crofs ,

more

fully than

as

fignified

by bapti-

zing

;

viz.

[We f,gn him

with

the fsgr

of

the

Croft,

in

token

that

hereafter

be

fhall

-not be

afhamed to confeß the

Faith of Chriil

crucified

,

and

manfully to

fight

under his Banner,

againfi

Sin,

the

World

and

the

Devil, and

to continue

Chrift'r

faithful

Soldier

and Servant

unto his lives end

:

Amen].

The

Conclufion that

[the Child

is

Regenerate]

and the Thankfgiving

for

[Rege-

nerating

it

by

the

Spirit] are

doubly

faulty:

First,

in concluding that

all Children

baptized

are 'Regenerate,

when we

admit

thofe (before mentioned) wholelnterelt

in

the Covenant, which

Baptifm leal'eth,

cannot

be proved

:

that

is,

fach whole Pa-

rents

can

lay

no jolt

claim

to the Grace

of

the

Covenant: At

leaft

,

here

is

a

pri-

vateOpinion thrult into our Liturgy. Secondly in concluding

all

Infants regene-

rate by the Holy

Gholt,

when

fo

many Learned Divines think

that

it

is

but

a

Relative

Regeneration, that

is

afcertained

them;

and the Controverfie

is

yet un-

decided.

The Exhortation to

the Godfathers

.and

Godmothers impofeth on them

the

Dutyof

the Parents, to

fee

to the

holy

Education, which ordinarily they can-

not

do,

nor

are

to

be

required to do

;

nor

is

it ordinarily done,

and

yet

we

ge

on in the

abufe.

The

concludingRubrick

halteneth Children

too faon

toConfirmation, contrary

to

force Claufes

in the Rubrick forConfirmation.

Divers

Defekts

betides thefe

expreiRd,

will

appear, by comparing this part

of the

Common Prayer, with the Formswhich we

offer.

In

the Private

Baptifm

it

is

diforderly to make the Godfathers end

God-

mothers

tenon

folemnly

the

Covenant-Ingagemenr

of

the.Child ,

when before

we ar6

to

[

certife them

that

all is well

done,

and

according to due order

]

;

and the

folemnizing

of the

Cotenant

is

the principal ole'

of

Baptifm.;

fo

that

its

doubtful

whether

the

repeating

of

fo

great

a

part

of

Baptijrn, be

not

a great part

of

Anbaptifm.

.

And

it

is

not orderly that twice we mull fay to the Godfathers and Godmothers

[

Dofr thou

in

the

Name

of

this Child]

as

if

we

fpoke but to

one

Of

them: and the

third

time we

fay

[Do

you in his

Name].

S

s

Alfó