Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
duty_n	child_n	parent_n	person_n	2,074	5	5.3963	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85387	Cata-baptism: or new baptism, waxing old, and ready to vanish away. In two parts. The former containes LVIII. considerations, (with their respective proofs, and consectaries) pregnant for the healing of the common scruples touching the subject of baptism, and manner of baptizing. The latter, contains an answer to a discours against infant-baptism, published not long since by W.A. under the title of, Some baptismall abuses brielfy discovered, &c. In both, sundry things, not formerly insisted on, are discovered and discussed. / By J.G. a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.	Goodwin, John, 1594?-1665.	1655 (1655)	Wing G1155; Thomason E849_1; ESTC R207377	373,602	521

him over and over upon severall occasions in the Old Testament a Num. 3. 30. Deut. 17. 6. 19. 15. and again revived and confirmed by the Lord Christ himself and by his Apostles in the New Testament In the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established b Mat. 18. 6. It is also written in your Law that the testimonie of two men is true c Joh. 8. 17. In the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established d 2 Cor 13. 1. God himself having sanctified the mouth of two or three witnesses to establish i. to ratifie and confirm every matter of fact even those which concern the precious lives of men so that any thing which shall be attested by these shall be taken for true doth not Mr. A. presume to make that common which God hath thus sanctified by disparaging the testimonie of Christian Parents neighbours and others as insufficient to ascertain the Baptim of a person Baptized in their presence and sight 2. By another Law of God the child stands bound to honour his Parents how much more when they are Christian and holy Now whether it be consistent with this Law or with that honour which children owe by the tenour and authoritie of it unto their Parents to give them the lie yea or to suspect them of untruth and not to believe them when they shall affirm unto them that they have been Baptized let Mr. A. himself judge especially considering that there is no colour or pretence imaginable why Parents should lie unto their children in this kind 3. Men and women stand bound in conscience to believe some things and these of greater moment yea and to act according to this belief upon farre weaker testimonies and grounds then the reports of Parents and Neighbours the records of registers for their baptizing The reason or ground which children of any growth or years have to believe that such persons especially one of them who are commonly called and reputed their Parents are so indeed is nothing so authentique or full of proof as the foresaid testimonies and grounds of their baptizing Jealousies and suspicions about the legitimacie of many Children are we know rife in the mouths of men but I believe never did Mr. A. hear the Baptism of any person questioned which either was attested by the Parents or by any Parish Register or Record And yet persons stand bound by the Law of God to honour those as their Parents and to perform all other duties and respects unto them which are due from children unto Parents who are commonly called and reputed their Parents although they have no demonstrative proof of such a relation to them Therefore much more if persons be reported both by their Parents and others to have been baptized and are generally reputed so to have been they stand as well and as much bound to look upon themselves as baptized and to act and walk accordingly as if they knew with the greatest certaintie that they had been baptized 4. The Jews themselves circumcised in their infancie notwithstanding the sign of Circumcision in the flesh yet could have no other knowledge or certaintie that this sign was applied to them or received by them according to the mind of God or as the Ordinance of God but only from the testimonie of their Parents or others present at their Circumcision For how could Paul for example tell or say that he was circūcised on the eight day Phil. 3. 5. but by the testimony and report of his Parents unlesse we shall suppose that it was supernaturally revealed to him which I think is no supposition worthy a considering man Or however it is broadly ridiculous to suppose that every Jew who according to the precept of God was circumcised on the eight day had this supernaturally revealed unto him or came to the knowledge of it in any other way then by the testimony of his Parents c. Besides other Nations in the world using to circumcise their children besides the Jews with whom God made no such covenant as he made with Abraham and his posteritie by Jacob how could any Jew know that he was not circumcised in some or other of these idolatrous Nations and so contrary to the will of God but only by the affidavit of his Parents or others brought up with him Sect. 124. 5. Neither was Circumcision it self any such sign in the flesh but that it might be obliterated and defaced and so forgotten according to that of the Apostle Paul Is any man called being circumcised Let him not become uncircumcised 1 Cor. 7. 8. 6. Nor could any circumcised person amongst the Iews know but by the report of his Parents or others that he was so much as circumcised For the Scripture doth nor report or affirm that every particular person of the male Sex is born with a fore-skin upon his flesh I mean with such a superfluitie in this skin which was wont to be cut off by Circumcision or that every male who wants as much or more of this foreskin as any other not circumcised must needs therefore have been circumcised Yea I believe there are males or men in this Nation who though never circumcised yet have as little of that superfluitie on which only circumcision wrought as many of those who have been circumcised 7. Neither is the receiving of Baptism by men and women when come to years of discretion alwayes capable of improvement to Spirituall ends many years after it is received as if it had been newly acted and done before their eyes For why may not the senses of some baptized in these years be as well sodden into Trapezuntius his temper as the senses of one of Mr. Fishers Antagonists it seems were a See Mr. Fisher Baby-Baptism p. 367. This Trapezuntius was a learned Grammarian and great Scholar but thorow the violence of a sicknesse sustained the losse of memorie to such a degree that he quite forgat not only all his learning but even his own name 8. And lastly In case it should be supposed that a person who is born in hand by his Parents Neighbours or Parish Register that he hath been baptized should yet be deceived by all these and be made to believe that which was not what grand inconvenience danger or losse can reasonably be conceived that this person shall sustain or incurre hereby For whils● the sence of his conscience bears upon him that he hath been really and truly baptized especially being otherwise really and truly willing to be baptized with the first what greater improvement can they make of the remembrance of their baptism who have indeed been baptized then he is capable of making by his apprehension and belief of his being baptized Yea as the Apostle while Circumcision was yet in some request speaks of a way or Method how men might make their un-circumcision turn to as good an account of benefit unto them as Circumcision

that authoritie which they had from God otherw●se for the confirmation or avouchment of such things Especially considering that the Jews with whom they had either only or chiefly to do in these reasonings subscribed to the Authoritie of the Scriptures but rejected the Authoritie of the persons who argued from them and did not own them as teachers sent from God And however the Apostle Peter maketh the word of Prophesie i. the Scriptures of the old Testament more sure i. of greater and of a more rationall authoritie for a mans satisfaction and conviction touching the truth of what they deliver then a voice from heaven 2 Pet. 1. 18 19. when things taught are of a ready perception and deduction from the Scriptures and the Divine Authoritie of the Scriptures acknowledged by the persons to whom these things are delivered it is very unreasonable for the Teachers to bear themselves with a strong hand upon their extraordinarie Commission or Authoritie from God to teach especially towards such hearers who are hard to be convinced hereof Nor are the scripture-instances produced by Mr. A. to shew the contrary any wayes pertinent to such a purpose And that he is mistaken in that wherein he placeth his greatest trust Mat. 12. 8. For the Son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath day I have shewed elsewhere a Water-dipping Consider 1. pag. 6. directing the Reader where he may find a very sufficient account given that by the Son of man in that saying is not meant the Lord Christ himself but any person of mankind as the the phrase oft signifieth in scripture Job 25. 6. 35. 8. Esa 51. 12. 56. 2. Psal 8. 4. 144. 3. 146. 3. to omit others 2. If neither Christ nor his Apostles ever made the Scriptures or those scripture-examples upon which they argued and avouched their Doctrine the sole ground and foundation hereof by what Authoritie can we do it Upon what account can we raise Doctrines from and build conclusions upon any scripture-examples yea though the Doctrines we raise and build in this kind be but of a morall consideration and of the easiest and readiest perception and deduction from these examples Or are they who do raise any Doctrinall conclusion from any Scripture example worthy reproof for so doing Or if Mr. A. teacheth this doth he not make a rod for his own back Sect. 144. 3. Whereas he pleads that the things which Christ and the apostles in the cases objected plead for examples out of the Law were not meerly and barely institutive but of a morall consideration and so of a more ready perception c. pretending that Infant-baptism hath no morall equity in and of it self discernable to commend it I clearly answer that though Baptism it self be institutive and positive yet Baptism with the severall gracious ends intended by God in it supposed which is nothing but what Mr. A. himself as well as his adversaries supposeth the baptizing of Infants is of a morall consideration and hath equitie in and of it self to commend it If God intended good by Infant-circumcision either to the Jewish Church in generall or to the children themselves who were to be circumcised the administration of circumcision unto children was of a morall consideration and had a morall equitie in it self to commend it and they upon whom the duty of the said administration at any time and in reference to any person lay should have sinned against the Law of charitie to neglect it Now there being the same or as much reason to judge as hath been formerly argued and may be further in due time that God by Infant baptism intendeth spirituall good either unto the Infants themselves who are or should be baptized or to the Christan Churches respectively as that he did intend the like good either to the circumcised Infants or Church of the Jews by Infant circumcision it roundly follows that Infant Baptism notwithstanding Mr. A's opinion to the contrary is of a morall consideration and in this respect of a readie perception and deduction from the example of Infant-circumcision yea and that they who do deprive their children of it walk uncharitably towards them and deserve reproof according to the saying of Beza a Baptismus sine impietatis scelere contemni nequit gravissimam reprehensionem coram Deo hominibus merentur qui tantum beneficium differunt vel sibi vel suis liberis accipere Beza Opnsc. p. 334. Baptism cannot without the great sin of impietie be despised and they deserve a most severe reproof both before God and men who delay the reception of so great a benefit either for themselves or THEIR CHILDREN So that things duly and unpartially considered Mr. A's Objection is too hard for his Answer the spirit of the former is the greater spirit And thus we see that his minor Proposition which he hath been all this while labouring in the fire to make straight remains as yet crooked His two former probations have afforded no Protection at all to it But it may he hath kept his best wine to the last and his third Answer will recover the credit which his two former have lost Let us therefore with patience and without partialitie hear and consider what this hath to say unto us Another thing by which it may appear that Infant-baptism is not agreeable to the Gospell-ministration is in that it M. A. p. 34. differs from it in this propertie of it viz. as it is a ministration of the spirit for so it is called 2 Cor. 3. 8. It 's the ministration of the spirit in two respects 1. because in and by this ministration the spirit is given unto men 2. Because the worship and service which God receives from men under it is or ought to be more spirituall then that was under the Law in both which respects Infant-Baptism will be found disagreeable to it I answer Sect. 145. 1. This argument or probat is to be commended in this before either of the former it promiseth full and undertakes home in the cause of the Proposition to be secured the Proposition as we heard being this Infant-Baptism is disagreeable to the ministration of the New Testament Now his first proof undertook for no more but to prove Infant-Baptism not simply disagreeable but only lesse agreeable to this ministration His second that Infant-Baptism as he might well fuppose savors strongly of the Legall ministration But this proof it be as good as its word will prove Infant-Baptism simply and right-down disagreeable to the said ministration But 2. Whereas he attempts to prove this disagreeablenesse by this argument viz. that it differs from it in one particular prop●rtie his attempt amounts to no more then the beating of the ayr For what though it should differ from it in two properties which are more then one yet if it agree with it in others especially in more why should it not be judged rather or more agreeable with it then disagreeable yea one

Isaac and the God of Jacob Exod. 3. 6. he expected that men should beleeve the Resurrection of the dead upon the account of these words and practise accordingly This is evident from that of our Saviour to the Sadduces Mat. 22. 31 32. But as touching the Resurrection of the dead have ye not read what was spoken unto you by God saying I am the God of Abraham the God of Isaac c. clearly implying that these men and others stood bound in duty and in conscience towards God upon the account and ground of such words as these to have beleeved the rising again of the dead and that it was their sin having such a ground of proof for it not to beleeve it Yet could not the truth be gathered or inferred from the said words but by a diligent close and intense working of the rationative faculty and understanding as is evident No nor can our Saviours own demonstration it self in the place ment●oned of the said truths from the words be apprehended without some considerable engagement of the m●nd and intellectual powers of the Soul So likewise he expected that from the example of David and his men eating the Shew-bread the Pharisees should have understood and known that it was lawful for men to pluck ears of corn on the Sabbath day Mat. 12. 23. yet the argument here was not of so ready a perception The Apostle saith that God hath exhibited faith or given assurance unto all men that he will judg the World in righteousness by the man whom he hath ordained meaning Christ in that he hath raised him from the dead Acts 17. 31. Yet it is a matter of no obvious conception how to conceive or make the act of God in raising Christ from the dead a sufficient ground of assurance that he will judg the World in righteousness by him So when Moses avenged the Israelit by smiting and slaying the Egyptian who oppressed him he supposed and expected that h●s Brethren would have understood and beleeved th●t God by his hand would deliver them Acts 24. 25. His supposition and expectation in this kind cannot be judged unreasonable nay certainly they were regular and agreeable to the mind of God himself Yet was this fact of Moses in vindicating the Israelite and smiting the Egyptian no such pregnant argument at the first sight no ground of a ready or easie conviction unto his Brethren the Israelites that God by his hand intended to effect that great Deliverance from the Egyptian Bondage which afterwards we know he did effect by him Nor did his Brethren the Israelites no not so much as any one of them as far as can be gathered from the Scriptures and as is most probable apprehend or understand any such thing thereby The Apostle Paul expected that the Corinthians and so other Christians should hear know and understand that it was their duty to afford competent maintenance to the Ministers of the God from and by means of this Mosaical Law Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the Ox that treadeth out the corn 1 Cor. 9. 8 9 10. See also 1 Tim. 5. 18. And yet this Law was nothing so obvious and clear a ground for such a duty and practise as the Command of God for the Circumcising Children under the Law is for their Baptizing the Commandment of Baptism or the change of the Ordinance only supposed under the Gospel Consectary If God requireth of men as well to beleeve as practise not onely upon plain and express grounds such as from whence that which ought to be beleeved or practised may readily and without the mediation of a Consequence be inferred but upon grounds also more remote and from which the thing to be beleeved or practised cannot be inferred or drawn but by force of argument by a narrow and through debate of the understanding then it roundly followeth that Infant-Baptism may be a duty and necessary to be practised though the grounds evincing it should lie much deepe● in the Scriptures then now they do and not be so obvious to persons uncapable whether through passion and shortness of spirit or through weakness or scantness of understanding of a narrow sifting of and through searching into matters of a more difficult consideration CONSIDERATION III. MAny practises may be lawful yea and necessary which are neither enjoyned by any expressness of ●recept nor yet countenanced or warranted by any expressness of Example in the Scriptures Proof 1. By expressness of Precept I mean a Precept or Command of such a Tenor of words which doth plainly and according to the literal and grammatical sence of the words and without the mediation of any inference or deduction require such or such a practice So likewise by expressness of example I mean an action or practise every ways or in all circumstances semblable unto or parallel with the practise in question As for example Children are commanded to reverence or honor their Parents by expresness of precept in the fift Commandment but they are not upon the like terms I mean by expresness of precept here commanded to relieve them when they stand in need with their substance though it be granted that this may reasonably be understood to be here commanded also because to regard those that are in want so as to relieve and support them is a casting of honor or respect upon them See 1 Tim. 5. 3. 17. Judg. 9. 9. 2. By necessary I mean that which ought to be done or which a person stands bound in duty and conscience unto God to do These terms explained by the way we proceed to the proof of the consideration It was lawful yea and in a sence necessary that the Disciples passing through the corn fields though on the Sabbath day should being an hungry pluck ears of corn Mat. 12. 1 2 c. and eat otherwise our Saviour would not have justified them in this action against those which reproved them But certain it is that the Disciples were not able to produce either expresness of precept or example from the Scripture whereby to warrant such an action Nor doth our Saviour himself produce either the one or the other upon this account So also it was necessary and matter of duty from the beginning of the preaching of the Gospel by men for those that were instructed and taught therein to supply their Teachers with things necessary and to make them partakers of all their goods * Gal 6. 6. 1 Cor. 9. 14 c. Even so saith the Apostle hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel yet had they no expressness either of prec●pt or example to engage them hereunto until afterwards as viz. when this Apostle declared the Ordinance or Institution of God in this behalf in the words now cited and elsewhere Let him that is taught in the Word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things Again when Dav●d and they that were with him

are more readily apprehended and conceived then things figuratively and mystically a M. Baxter affirmeth proveth this kind of baptizing to be no Ordinance of God but an heynous sin yea and flat murther and no better and upon this account judgeth that the Civil Magistrate ought to restrain it as being destructive to the lives ●f their people See this and much more t● like purpose p. 134. 135. 136. in his Plain Scripture Proof for Infants Church-membership c. such Therefore if children were capable of a metaphorical or typical baptism much more are they capable of that which is literal and proper So that the Scripture now argued is on the behalf of Infant-Baptisme like Solomons King upon his Throne against whom there is no rising up CONSIDERATION XXX THe ceremony or dore of entrance or admission into the Christian Church is lesse grievous or offensive to the flesh and more accommodate to the weaknesse and tendernesse of children then the ceremony of like import was under the Law Proof The Proof or evidence rather of this Consideration is neer at hand For the entrance into the Jewish Church under the Law was by blood which occasioned Zipporah to tell Moses that he was an Husband of blood to her Then she said A bloody Husband thou art because of the Circumcision which it seems she was necessitated to administer unto her child to save her Husbands life Exod. 4. 26. Whereas the ceremonial entrance into the Christian Church is by water and the washing of the flesh herewith Indeed as some form and obtrude this Ceremony upon the consciences of men the entrance into the Christian Church is made more bloody in many cases I mean more prejudicial unto health and more threatening life then that under the Law For though Circumcision was smarting and painful yet it made no breach upon the health nor endangered the life of any that came under it Whereas Bptizing in Rivers by plunging or dipping the whole body under water in cold climates and seasons must needs threaten not the healths onely but the lives also of many infirm and tender constitutions ● Yea I am all thoughts made that upon the account of this kind of Baptizing many amongst us at this day are sick and weak and many also have fallen asleep Several instances of persons who have suffered in these kinds have been reported unto me and this upon tearms sufficient to secure the truth of the reports Consectary If God admitted Infants into his Church when the entrance hereunto was more grievous and not without blood it is very unreasonable to conceive that he should now exclude them having made the entrance hereinto more accommodations unto them and much better comporting with their weakness CONSIDERATION XXXI IT cannot be proved from the Scriptures that the Baptism of any child born of Christian Parents or Bele●vers was deferred to adultness or years of discretion much less can it be prov●d that the Baptism of all such children was thus deferred Proof If that which in this Consideration is implicitely denyed the deferring of Baptism to the persons specified can or could be proved from the Scriptures the proof must be either first by some example of an Infant one or more of the relation mentioned who was not baptized untill mans estate But evident it is that no such proof as this can be found in the Scriptures Or else 2. the said proof must be made by producing some prohibition of Divine Authority by which Beleeving Parents are restrained from desiring Baptisme for their children untill maturity of years But as certain it is that no proof in this kind neither can be found in the Scriptures Or 3. and lastly the proof we speak of must be made by producing some reason or ground otherwise from the Scriptures by which the necessity of such a Dilation is substantially evinced But neither do the Scriptures afford any proof of the point in question in this kind as our Adversaries themselves upon the matter as far as I understand do confesse in that they never yet produced any If it be objected and said though there be no particular or special prohibition in the Scriptures restraining Christians from desiring Baptisme for their children whilest they are yet children yet are their prohibitions in general laid as well upon them as others to restrain them from will-worship and so from using the Holy things of God in any manner not directed or prescribed by himself and consequently to restrain Beleeving Parents from offering their children whilest such unto Baptisme in as much as Infant-Baptisme is will-worship or an act or kind of worship not prescribed by him to this I answer That every usage of the Holy things of God after a manner not particularly prescribed by him is not will-worship To read a Chapter two or three daily is no will-worship yet is it an using of the Holy Scriptures nor particularly prescribed by God To give the Holy things of God in the Administration of the Supper unto women is an usage of these Holy things not particularly directed or prescribed by God himself yet it is far from Will-worship To pray about a quarter or half or an whole hour every day is an usage of the Holy Ordnance of prayer not particularly prescribed by God yet is it not Will-worship many instances in this kind might be added Therefore neither is the Baptizing of Infants any strein of Will-worship upon any such account as this viz. because it is an usage of an Ordinance not particularly prescribed by God 2. Will-worship properly consists in this when men exhibit or perform that in the name of worship or for worship unto God which he hath not prescribed as any part of his worship As they who conceit they worship God by being baptized men and women having formerly been baptized infants do most properly commit the sin of Will-worship because it is certain that God hath not prescribed any such things especially not in the nature of worship Yea it is a kind of Will-worship if Parents-place worship in offering their children unto Baptism because God doth not require this of them in the nature of worship but of obedience and duty otherwise All duty is not worship neither is every act not warrantable by the Scriptures though supposed such an act of Will-worship 3. And lastly it hath been proved by many arguments and grounds both in this discourse and in several others by other men that the mind and will of God is that Christian Parents should devote and consecrate their children by water unto his service upon the first opportunity from the beginning of their daies Which arguments and grounds have it may be some of them been replied unto instead of answered or had something said to them which emphatically considered amounts to nothing and others of them may probably in time be triumphed over in the same kind However evident it is in the mean time that no Christian Parent is restrained by any

himself yea and gave such a Law unto his people one clause whereof observed should tend to blesse them another prejudice them or at best do them no service at all Now if the administration of Circumcision unto children was judged by God himself the most edifying administration of this Ordinance unto the Church of the Jews upon what substantiall account can men denie the administration of Baptism unto children to be the most edifying administration unto the Gentile Churches The differences pretended by Mr. A. towards the close of his second argument between the one administration and the other upon examination of them we found to be meer impertinences and shifts from Sect. 120. to the end of Sect. 134. where the Reader may please to peruse their respective examinations Sect. 160 2. The regular baptizing of children inricheth the Church totie● quoties with the solemn testimonie and profession of the Faith of those who have been like Mnason a Act. 21. 16 old Disciples and have had long experience of the waies of Christ in the Gospel For such Christi●n Parents or Friends who offer their children unto Baptism do hereby avouch the goodnesse and truth of the Gospel and of the Faith hereof it being every mans sence that no Parent is desirous to have his child baptized into such a Faith or Profession which he judgeth unsound erroneous or false Whereas the Baptizing of men and women at least if they were baptized as Mr. A. himself acknowledgeth they ought to be I mean upon their first believing accommodateth the Church with the testimonie and profession of young converts only and such who are as yet unexperienced in the word of righteousnesse and little other then strangers unto the Gospell In which respect their testimonie and profession cannot be of like authoritie weight or edification to the Church with theirs who have been in Christ many years before them and still continue stedfast in him 3. Infant-Baptism maketh more for the edification of the Church then after-Baptism upon this account also When Infants are baptized the whole Church may and this with conuenience and without breach upon their other occasions be present and so partake of all the fruits benefits and accommodations of the administration Whereas when men and women are baptized very few of the Church especially in many places can have the opportunitie of being present the place of the administration in this case being remote at least where Rivers or Pools of water convenient for the service are not neer at hand and the time likewise of the said administration can hardly be notified unto the generalitie of the Church In which respect this Baptismall administration cannot be much edifying to the Church nor comparable with that which may be and ought to be and in part is ofttimes made unto children 4. Infant-Baptism affords many more occasions and opportunities for the administration of the Ordinance and consequently for the edification of the Church then Beleever baptism doth For the children of Beleevers are many more in number then Beleevers themselves and many thousands live to a week or moneth who are prevented by death before they come to years of discretion and so much as to a capacitie of beleeving In which respect many baptismall opportunities are lost and cut off from the Church which might have been gained and enjoyed by the baptizing of these persons in their infancie Sect. 161. 5. Whereas the holy Ghost admonisheth the generality of mankid to Remember their Creatour in the dayes of their youth a Eccle. 12. 1 they must needs be accessarie to the sin of their children in case they do not thus remember him who deprive them of so great an engagement to this See M Rogers Treatise of Sacraments part 1. p. 80. timely remembrance of him as their having been early baptzied must needs be And they on the contrary wisely and graciously consult the obedience of their children to that heavenly exhortation who prevent them with and lay upon them a baptismal engagement hereunto in their Infancy 1. It cannot be denied but that baptism is an ingagement to that duty which Solomon expresseth by a mans remembring his Creatour 2. Neither can it be denied but that men and women in their youth and as soon as they are capable of the duty it self of remembring their Creatour are capable of the said ingagement also I mean of understanding and conceiving that their being baptized is and ought to be unto them a motive unto this dutie 3. Neither can it reasonably be denyed but that they who are actually capable of a motive or ingagement unto a duty or work may thorow want of this motive or ingagement lying on them neglect the performance of the duty which under an ingagement they would perform and not neglect 4. Every mans sence may teach him that when the two scales of a ballance are equally poised a very small weight cast into either will cast it 5. And lastly from these premises it roundly followeth that any mans children who know themselves unbaptized and so free from the ingagement of Baptism may from hence take occasion to neglect the dutie of remembring their Creatour in the dayes of their youth a duty which would lye with more weight and authoritie upon their consciences and so weas more likely to be performed did they look upon themselves as by Baptism ingaged unto it I am not positive in affirming that ever the Son or Daughter of any Parent did actually miscarrie upon the account we speak of but this I say with fulnesse of conviction in my judgment and conscience 1. that it may very possibly come to passe that a Child Son or Daughter unbaptized may be lesse thoughtfull and carefull to remember their Creatour in the dayes of their youth by understanding thēselves free loose from a baptismall tie and engagement thereunto 2. That in case the child of any Parent shall stumble at that stone we now speak of and fall and be broken to pieces by it the parents of this child being accessary hereunto will be able to give but a sad account of the losse of their child unto God 3. And lastly that whatsoever the consequent or event of a non-baptizing a child in his infancie shall or may be evident it is that in this case the Parents or Vice-parents upon whose hand the Christian nurture of this child shall lie will want a very materiall and weighty argument whereby to work his judgment and conscience to the remembrance of his Creatour And doubtlesse the reason why God threatned the uncircumcised manchild amongst Abrahās posteritie with a cutting off from his people a Gen. 17. 14 was not to signifie that this judgement should universally befall every man-child amongst them which possibly thorow the neglect of his Parents should be uncircumcised but to awaken the care and conscience of every Parent of such children amongst them to circumcise them lest the want of this Ordinance