Selected quad for the lemma: child_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
child_n	wrought_v	year_n	young_a	58	3	5.9405	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A51037	Propositions concerning the subject of baptism and consociation of churches collected and confirmed out of the word of God, by a synod of elders and messengers of the churches in Massachusets-Colony in New-England ; assembled at Boston, according to appointment of the honoured General Court, in the year 1662, at a General Court held at Boston in New-England the 8th of October, 1662.	Mitchel, Jonathan, 1624-1668.	1662 (1662)	Wing M2292; ESTC R380	36,245	49

partake of that which is the main ground of baptizing any is clear Because interest in the Covenant is the main ground of title to Baptism and this these children have 1. Interest in the covenant is the main ground of title to Baptism for so in the Old Testament this was the ground of title to Circumcision Gen 17.7 9 10 11. to which Baptism now answers Col. 2.11 12. and in Acts 2.38 39 they are on this ground exhorted to be baptized because the promise or covenant was to them and to their children That a member or one in covenant as such is the subject of Baptism was further cleared before in Propos 1.2 That these children have interest in the covenant appears Because if the parent be in covenant the childe is also for the covenant is to parents and their seed in their generations Gen 17.7 9. The promise is to you and to your children Acts 2.39 If the parent stand in the Church so doth the childe among the Gentiles now as well as among the jews of old Rom 11.16 20 21 22. It is unheard of in Scripture that the progress of the covenant stops at the infant childe But the parents in question are in covenant as appears 1. Because they were once in covenant and never since discovenanted If they had not once been in covenant they had not warrantably been baptized and they are so still except in some way of God they have been discovenanted cast out or cut off from their covenant-relation which these have not been neither are persons once in covenant broken off from it according to Scripture save for notórious sin and incorrigibleness therein Rom 11.20 which is not the case of these parents 2 Because the tenor of the covenant is to the faithfull and their seed after them in their generations Gen 17.7 even to a thousand generations i. e. conditionally provided that the parents successively do continue to be keepers of the covenant Exod 20.6 Deut 7 9 11 Psalm 105 8. which the parents in question are because they are not in Scripture account in this case forsakers or rejecters of the God and Covenant of their fathers see Deut 29.25 26. 2 Kings 17 15-20 2 Chron 7 22 Deut 7 10. 2. That these parents in question do not put in any barre to hinder their children from Baptism is plain from the words of the Proposition wherein they are described to be such as understand the doctrine of Faith and publikely profess their assent thereto therefore they put not in any barre of gross Ignorance Atheism Heresie or Infidelity Also they are not scandalous in life but solemnly own the covenant before the Church therefore they put not in any barre of Profaneness or Wickedness or Apostacy from the covenant whereinto they entred in minority That the infant-children in question do themselves put in any barre none will imagine The children of the parents in question are either children of the covenant Argum 2 or strangers from the covenant Eph 2 12. either holy or unclean 1 Cor 7 14. either within the Church or without 1 Cor 5 12 either such as have God for their God or without God in the world Eph 2 12. But he that considers the Proposition will not affirm the latter concerning these children and the forme being granted infers their right to Baptism To deny the Proposition Argum 3 would be 1. To straiten the grace of Christ in the Gospel-dispensation and to make the Church in New Testament-times in a worse case relating to their children successively then were the Jews of old 2. To render the children of the Jews when they shall be called in a worse condition then under the legal administration contrary to Jer 30 20. Ezekiel 37 25 26. 3. To deny the application of the initiatory Seal to such as regularly stand in the Church and Covenant to whom the Mosaical dispensation nay the first institution in the covenant of Abraham appointed it to be applied Gen 17 9 10. John 7.22 23. 4. To break Gods covenant by denying the initiatory Seal to those that are in covenant Gen 17 9 10 14. Confederate visible Believers though but in the lowest degree such Argum 4 are to have their children baptized witness the practice of John Baptist and the Aposiles who baptized persons upon the first beginning of their Christianity But the parents in question are confederate visible Believers at least in some degree For 1. Charity may observe in them sundry positive Arguments for it witness the terms of the Proposition and nothing evident against it 2. Children of the godly qualified but as the persons in the Proposition are said to be faithfull Tit 1.6 3. Children of the Covenant as the Parents in question are have frequently the beginning of grace wrought in them in younger years as Scripture and experience shews Instance Joseph Samuel David Solomon Abijah Josiah Daniel John Baptist and Timothy Hence this sort of persons shewing nothing to the contrary are in charity or to Ecclesiastical reputation visible Believers 4. They that are regularly in the Church as the Parents in question be are visible Saints in the account of Scripture which is the account of truth for the Church is in Scripture-account a company of Saints 1 Cor 14 33. 1.2 5. Being in covenant and baptized they have Faith and Repentance indefinitely given to them in the Promise and sealed up in Baptism Deut. 30 6. which continues valid and so a valid testimony for them while they do not reject it Yet it doth not necessarily follow that these persons are immediately fit for the Lords Supper because though they are in a latitude of expression to be accounted visible Believers or in numero fidelium as even infants in covenant are yet they may want that ability to examine themselves and that special exercise of Faith which is requisite to that Ordinance as was said upon Propos 4 th The denial of Baptism to the children in question Argum 5 hath a dangerous tendency to Irreligion and Apostacy because it denies them and so the children of the Church successively to have any part in the Lord which is the way to make them cease from fearing the Lord Josh 22.24 25 27. For if they have a part in the Lord i. e. a portion in Israel and so in the Lord the God of Israel then they are in the Church or members of it and so to be baptized according to Propos 1. The owning of the children of those that successively continue in covenant to be a part of the Church is so far from being destructive to the purity and prosperity of the Church and of Religion therein as some conceive that this imputation belongs to the contrary Tenet To seek to be more pure then the Rule will ever end in impurity in the issue God hath so framed his covenant and consequently the constitution of his Church thereby as to design a continuation and propagation of his Kingdome