The English nonconformity as under King Charles II and King James II truly stated and argued by Richard Baxter ; who earnestly beseecheth rulers and clergy not to divide and destroy the land and cast their own souls on the dreadful guilt and punishment of national perjury ...

CHAP. X. Point VII. Of the English sort of God∣fathers at Baptism.

L.

WHat have you against our use of Godfathers in Baptism. M. I. Negatively, we are not at all against the old sort of Patrimi, Susceptors, or Sponsors that were used at Baptism in the ancient Churches; though we think it but a prudential thing, and not of necessity to Baptism.

L.

What mean you by the ancient sort? what did they?

M.

At first, the adult were themselves Baptized: for their Children had no right till the Parent was a Christian. And for three hundred years Christians were under Heathen per∣secution; in which some forsook Christ for fear by apostasie, and others died while their Children were in Infancy, who were thereby exposed to desertion, or to Infidel Education. Wherefore to secure the Education of these Infants, the Su∣sceptors that joyned with the Parents as their Seconds. 1. Did

testifie their opinions of the Parents, as serious Christians, not like to apostatize. 2. And did promise that if the Pa∣rents either die or apostatized, they should undertake the Chil∣drens Education. But if the Parents were dead already, they undertook to Educate the Child themselves as their own. But they were Sponsors for no Infidels Child, unless they first adopted him, or took him for their own.

L.

And what doth our Godfathers differ from this, for which you take them to be sinful, or not approveable.

M.

The difference is so great, and maketh so great a change in our Christening, as I am loath to name to you. 1. With us godly Christian Parents themselves, are forbidden to be Godfathers with the rest, and to speak one word, much more to profess that they dedicate them in Covenant to Christ: Nor must the Minister urge the Parent to be present: lest his consent seem necessary.

2. The Godfathers and Godmothers are neither tyed to bring the Children of Christians only, nor only such as they take for their own; but without difference may bring the In∣fants of any Atheists, Sadducees, Jews, Infidels, or open ene∣mies of Christ and godliness, without taking them for their own.

3. They personate the Child in promising and professing in his name, without authority so to do.

4. They do not only promise what the Child shall do hereafter but they at present profess that the Child by them, or they personating it, do Believe, renounce sin, and desire Baptism: As if the Child were bound to do this by himself or by ano∣ther.

5. Godfathers too commonly covenant for the future Edu∣cation of the Child, themselves to do it or cause it to be done, which they neither ever purposed to perform, or ever made the Parents believe that they intended; and so make Christ∣nening a perfidious Vowing, or Covenanting with God: These are not things indifferent, I think.

L.

1. How prove you that the Parents may not be prime cove∣nanters, or Sponsors for their own Children? Are not they obliged to get Godfathers and Godmothers for them? who are supposed to come by their procurement? And doth not that signifie their own con∣sent, to what these are to undertake.

M. It signifieth only that the Law constraineth them to let their Children be baptized, to avoid their own punishment, and to get others to enter them into the Christian Covenant. But not that they either are Christians, or consent to that Covenant themselves, either for themselves, or Children. For

1. Known Atheists, Infidels, and Sadducees that deny Chri∣stianity, are bound by the Law to get Godfathers for their Childrens Baptism, as well as Christians; and such cannot be supposed to covenant for them with Christ themselves. The Sixty eight and Sixty nine Canons command Ministers to re∣fuse no Child that is brought, nor to refuse or delay to bap∣tize in private in case of danger who ever desireth him to do it.

2. The Twenty nine Canon saith [No Parent shall be urged to be present, nor be admitted to answer as Godfather for his own Child: Nor any Godfather or Godmother shall be suffered to make any other answer or speech than by the Book of Common-Prayer is prescribed in that behalf] The Parent may say what he will to God in secret. But at the Christening of his Child, if he should but say [I believe God's promise to the faithful and their seed: I do devote my Child to Christ, and engage him in his Cove∣nant: or I promise to educate him to Christianity] he breaketh the Canon, and goeth against the Churches Law. I did before the Bishops at the Savoy, 1661. put the case to them, thus without fiction: An Infidel of my Parish that useth openly to talk against the Scripture and Life to come, to a∣void inconveniencies, resolveth to send his Child to be bap∣tized; and I must not refuse it by the Law: Hath the Child right to Baptism, and is it undoubtedly saved? Dr. San∣derson in the Chair answered, nemime contradicente, that if he brought him with Godfathers according to the Church of England, I need not doubt it. But there were but two in the Parish that openly declared themselves to be of his o∣pinion, and those two being his familliers are likest to be the Godfathers. If the Child have not Right for Infidel Pa∣rents sake, how can Infidel neighbours, called Godfathers, give him right.

L.

But the Canon saith that the Godfathers shall be only such as have received the Sacrament.

M.

Alas none are forwarder than these to receive the Sa∣crament, and laugh at it, and say they will obey the Church. Yet I doubt not but a faithful Parent may be present if he will, and may tell the Godfathers in private, that his pre∣sence shall signifie his devoting act; and when the Priest spea∣keth to the Godfathers, he may bow his head whether the Priest will or not, to signifie that act of his. But this is nothing to the sense of the Church, nor to our Assent and Consent to their exclusion of the Parent.

L.

I confess it sounds to me as unnatural. But what is your other reason against our sort of Godfathers?

M.

I••. My second Reason is, that it is a prophanation of this great and sacred Ordinance, to invest those in the visible state Christianity (and Salvation pretendedly) that have no right to such investiture, so they have but Godfathers they are to baptize the children of any Jews, or Heathens, or open enemies to Christ, as well as of Christians; which is a manifest prophanation.

L.

What is the fault of it.

M.

1. It supposeth a false Doctrine, that Infidel Children are within the Covenant, and may be baptized as well as Chri∣stians which in the Books aforecited, I have fully disproved.

2. It is a dangerous adding to God's word and worship.

3. It is a deceiving of mens Souls as to childrens state, to make them believe that their children dying when baptized are all saved, how bad soever the Parents be

4. It is a dreadful belying of God, and prophanation of his name, if men shall in the name of God pronounce pardon and salvation to those whom he never gave them to.

L.

But God will not punish the Children for their Parents sin.

M.

Not those that see their fathers sins and forsake them, and live not as their Parents did: and that's all that the Scrip∣ture saith for such. But if you will read my two foresaid Disputations for Original sin you will see it fully proved that God punisheth Infants, because they are the guilty, and cor∣rupt seed of guilty and corrupt Parents. Do you believe our Church Articles and yet deny original sin? If Infants have no guilt and sin what need have they of Baptism, or of a Saviour? If they have need of both, sure it is for no actual sin done by

them, was not the World lost for Adam's sin? Was not Cain's posterity cursed for his sake? Were not all the Infants of the old World, and all the Infants of the Sodamites burnt with fire from Heaven, and the Infants of the Canaanites and Amalakites, &c. killed for their Parents sin. Did not Christ tell the Jews, Mat. 23. that all their Forefathers per∣secutions should be punished on that Generation? The Jews knew this that said, His blood be on us and on our Children. Our Liturgy saith, Remember not Lord our offences nor the offences of our Forefathers, &c.

2. And yet I tell you, that it is for their own sin that the seed of the wicked perish, sin is made their own, when soul and body were for guilty corrupt Parents, made such by themselves. I do not say that God imputeth their Parents infidelity to them. But this infidelity is the reason of their not being delivered from their own original guilt. If Rebels forfeit Life and Estate, and so their Children live in beggery, and the King offer to restore Father and Children, if the Father will thankfully accept his grace: If the Parent refuse this, his Children will be beggars. Not because the King punish∣eth them for their Fathers fault, but because he first deprived himself of the Estate which he should have left them, and next because he refused to deliver them. If a Father will set the Pox on his children, and after refuse a Physician that would cure him and them, the Physician doth not punish the children.

All Scripture and Nature tell the world that it is so deep an interest that Parents have in children, as being causes of their very essence by Communication from their own essence, and it is so natural a power that Parents have over their children, that it should seem no strange thing to Christians, or Infidels, that God maketh a very great difference between the seed of the faithful and of the Infidels and wicked: And its strange that any men should rather lay their title to pardon and salvation upon a meer neighbour or stranger that per∣haps is a wicked wretch himself, than on the Parents of the child.

L.

But will God save children for their Parents Faith?

M.

If he destroy Infants for Adam's sin, do you think that Justice is so much more extensive then Mercy, that he will shew no mercy for Parents sake? But the case is this, Christ the Second Adam hath merited pardon and salvation to be given conditionally to all: Not absolutely, for then all would be saved: What the condition is to the adult, we are agreed, viz. Faith and Repentance and Dedication to Christ by co∣venant consent: And do you think that Infants pardon and salvation hath no condition? If none, than all Infants are saved; if any condition, what is it? 1. Is it barely that they be baptized without any right but what all have. This is an injurious fiction, God never said it: And its an unreasonable imputation on God, as if he would save thousands meerly for water and words, and comdemn thousands that had not the opportunity of these. And it is certain that Christians ne∣ver dream'd of this absurd opinion, or else godly Emperours would have forced Baptism on the children of all their Hea∣then Subjects, and would where their conquering Armies came in Charity have catcht up their children and baptized them. And Bishops and Doctors would have taught and intreated them so to do. To make meer baptising alone the condition of In∣fant salvation, is to lay Heaven on such a ceremony quite out of the Infants power, as would but tempt the rational Infidels to deride Christianity. No sober men lay a childs Estate or Life on such a thing.

2. If there must be some condition of Right to Baptism antecedent to it, what is it. 1. It is not actual faith in that Infant, that understands not? 2. It must then be some o∣thers act or nothing? If anothers, whose should it be so likely as the parents from whom the Children have their essence? Whom nature hath taught to take them as almost parts of themselves; and so hath the custom of all Nati∣ons; and who are obliged above all other to provide for them, and whose will in their Infancy disposeth of them till they come to have a rational will of their own (in act:) And Scripture from end to end confirmeth this.

But besides this you know not whither to look for a title-conditione, unless to some Pro-parent, whose the child is,

upon the Parents Death or Resignation. For 1. If you say it is the Faith of the Church (as some) that giveth the Child Title, what Church mean you? The Universal, or National or Diocesan or Parochial. And how doth the Church give right to Pardon and Life to Infidels Children. If it be meer∣ly volendo, as if Heaven were at their Will, why do they not sit at home, and make a deed of Gift of Heaven to the In∣fants at the Antipodes and of all the World: If it be by bap∣tizing them, I shewed before that Baptism meerly as such, doth it not. And if it be the Will of the Baptizer they must mean the Priest, Deacon or another: And to say that these are the Terms of Infant Title to Baptism and Salvation, that if the Priests will they shall be baptized and saved; or else not, seemeth a New Gospel.

2. But it seems with us it is the God-fathers that give them Title, else the Church could save them when they will with∣out Godfathers: And if so, where is the proof of it, in Scrip∣ture or Reason, that God will accept and save Infants because a meer Neighbour will bring them to be baptized, and pro∣miseth to bring them up well if they live. It is supposed that these Sponsors own not the Children, and how come they then to have the power to be their Representatives, and to dispose of their Souls?

L.

But any Beggars Child hath right to be taken into your house, if you are so Charitable as to do it? And so much right to Baptism and Salvation by it, Christ hath given to all.

M.

Where is that deed of Gift to be found. It is not a Forgery? He hath made a Covenant to the Faithful and their Seed. But where hath he said, I will save all Infidels Children, if any Priest or Christian will but Baptize them? He that said Go to the high-wayes and hedges and compel them to come in, ex∣cepted the Refusers, and required none but perswading com∣pulsion: And its Parents that have power of their Children. He that can believe to day that God hath made a Gift of Sal∣vation to all Infants that any body will baptize, may easily believe to morrow that he will not cast away the rest meerly because no Carrier will bring them in, or because no body will wash them and say over them the words of Baptisme. God hath made even in the Second Commandment, and in Exo∣dus

34. when he proclaimed his name and nature, so great a difference between the Seed of the Godly and the Wicked, that we dare not consent to the confounding of them, nor with the Anabaptists unthankfully to deny this Mercy, nor to deny or corrupt Pauls plain assertion, Else were your Chil∣dren unclean but now are they holy.

L.

III. What mean you by your third Exception.

M.

I have told you while I opened the former. They per∣sonate the Child without Authority: And it is a great doubt whether the Covenant and Baptisme were not a meer Nullity, did not Parents besides the Laws of Conformity some way signifie their own Agency therein. If any Neighbour should make a Covenant in the name of your Child, binding him at Age to Marry an Heiress, who hath a Lordship to her Portion, would this either oblige your Son, or give him any present right to her or her Estate?

L.

If the Donor or person empowered Consent, it giveth a condi∣tional right, which becometh Actual when he marrieth her; and so here if God consent its so far valid.

M.

God hath given Christ and Life conditionally to all before they believe or are baptized: But all must not there∣fore be baptized: This is not Actual Right, and so such In∣fants have no right by this Rule, till they believe in Christ. But Baptisme is an actual Marriage with Christ, and its a Mockery where neither Party doth consent. Christ doth not consent: for he hath made no Promise but to the faithful and their Seed. Let them that affirm more, show it. The Infant doth not consent, having no Will of his own in Act, and the thing being done by one that had no power to personate or oblige him. And he may say, It was no act of mine, per∣sonally or Legally.

L.

Any one may accept a gift for another, and bind him to grati∣tude, which if he refuse he forfeits it.

M.

If the Donor give it on those Terms, it's true. And if you can prove that God hath made his Covenant Gift of Par∣don and Salvation to all the Seed of Infidels, Atheists and Wicked Men, on Condition that any body will but Accept it in their names at present, and bind them to accept it at Age, it will then I confess prove a valid act of Charity: And I see

not but why some good man should say [Lord, I accept of Christ and Salvation for all the Infants on Earth, and I bind them to ac∣cept it when they come to Age; and I hope the meer want of washing shall not deprive them of that which I have power to accept for them] I never heard of valid contracts made for Infants by any one that will but pretend to personate them.

L.

Thus you would make rebaptizing necessary, if such Baptism be a nullity.

M.

1. Not to any whose Parents, though besides the Laws of Conformity own their agency, and dedicating their own child to Christ, which I hope is the case of most, custom through God's mercy teacheth them better than the Canons and Common-Prayer-Book.

2. And I think not to any other, whose Parents in Infan∣cy, and themselves at Age do own the Covenant, and think that it was valid Baptism. For to such the end of Baptism is attained. If it were no Minister, or were one unautho∣rized that baptized him, it would not be a meer nullity as to the ends, if by mistake it were supposed well done. Factum valet, was judged by some, when Athanasius by a Boy was bap∣tized in Sport.

L.

What is your fourth Objection against our way of Baptism?

M.

That in personating the Child, they say that they (and so he by them) doth at present Believe, renounce, desire, &c. falsely intimating that Infants are bound at present to do this by another: And yet the same men plead that God doth not accept him for the Faith of his Parents; As if his God∣fathers Faith were his, and not his Parents: when as God requireth no Faith, or Repentance of Infants, but only that [They be the Seed of penitent Believers, devoted to Christ.]

And in the Catechism it is said that [Repentance and Faith are required of persons to be Baptized.] (And Repentance and Faith have a promise of Life) and that Infants who cannot per∣form these are Baptized because they promise them by their Sureties, which promise when they come to Age themselves are bound to perform.

Where note that the former Book had [They perform them by their Sureties] They perceived that having said Faith and Repentance are requisite: Infants they saw must have at present what is requisite at present: And they knew that they had

them not themselves; and so were fain to hold that the Sure∣ties Faith and Repentance was theirs, and a performance of that required condition. But our new Bookmakers saw that this would not hold, and so they say, Though Faith and Repentance be required of persons to be baptized, yet Infants are baptized because they promise them by their Sureties to be hereafter performed; a∣mending the former errour by a greater, or a double one. 1. Granting that Faith and Repentance are pre-requisit, and yet confessing that Infants have neither, of their own or Sureties imputed to them; and yet are to be baptized: 2. Or making a Promise of future Faith and Repentance to be present Faith and Repentance. 3. Or like the Antimonians that say, all that are Elected to believe hereafter are justified before they believe, so they imitate that; though Faith and Repentance be requi∣site in baptizandis, yet God at present will justifie and save all that have it not in infancy, because they promise it hereafter. All plain contradictions: as if they said, it is requisite in per∣sons to be baptized, and it is not requisite.

L.

How would you have them have answered these.

M.

Professed Faith and Repentance are requisite in adult persons to be baptized: And in Infants, that they be the Seed of the Faithful, devoted by them to God in Christ, accor∣ding to his offered Covenant of Grace.

L.

V. What mean you by your fifth Objection▪

M.

Alas, the worst is yet behind. The common Perfidi∣ousness that is committed under the name of Godfathers Bap∣tismal Vows and Covenants: Baptism is one of the greatest actions of all our Religion and Lives. Our rising from Death to Life; our visible new Birth, our solemn Covenanting with God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost: Our solemn Translation from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that we may receive remission of Sin, and inheritance among the Sanctified: What more holy, great and venerable action can be done by mortal man, than to enter a solemn Covenant with God and our Redeemer, in which we wholly give up our selves to him, and Covenant for a holy Life, and are to receive the pardon of all sin, and the gift of Grace, and right to Everlasting Glory: And if men turn this great Ordinance which is the Summ of all our Re∣ligion

into perfidiousness and mockery, how heinous sin must this needs be?

And here let us consider, I. Who these Godfathers in Eng∣land usually be. II. What they do, III. How they perform what they Vow and undertake.

L.

I. They are usually some of the Parents Friends.

M.

They are usually such as these: 1. The poor that have no rich Friends do sometimes intreat a poor neighbour to do the office, and sometimes hire any man that will do it: Which I never knew tell in London, by begging they made me understand that men do it as Labourer's work for their wages: About half a Crown is the ordinary pay of Beggers, or very poor Folks Godfathers. But the Poor and Middling sort do use to try some rich Friend or Neighbour; if they have any such, in hopes of some small gift; some give us for the Child a Shilling, some half a Crown, some a silver Spoon. The Richer sort seek to persons rather above than below their Rank, in expectation of a piece of Plate, or some such bigger gift. And in other Na∣tions Princes are Godfathers to Children whom they never see, nor perhaps the Land of their nativity: And with us it is very often some that dwel not very near, who oft sevre as Proxy to stand in their place, and they only give the expected gift and bear the name.

II. What they are to do, I told you before, 1. To personate the Child, and take on them to say as in his name [I believe, I renounce, I desire] when they are three and the Child but one, and so three persons by fiction represent one, and say that He doth that which he doth not, either, per se vel per alios.

2. They Vow or promise solemnly to do all the things be∣fore named. Ch. 4. Numb. 7. viz. To see that the Child be taught as soon as he shall be able to learn what a solemn Vow, Promise and Profession he made by them; and that they call on him to hear Sermons, and chiefly that they provide that he may learn, the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten Commandments in the Vulgar Tongue, and All other things that a Christian ought to know and believe to his Souls health, and that he be virtu••usly brought up to lead a Christian and Godly life. All this they solemnly undertake to God and the Church.

III. And so far are they usually from performing it. That 1. I ne∣ver yet knew one Parent that expected any such thing from them, or that ever seriously asked them, Do you understand what you are to promise? and do you resolve to do it.

2. I never in all my life knew one Godfather that made the Parent before hand believe that he intended any such thing.

3. If he had, it's not credible that three persons should all intend to educate one child of another man's, and perform it?

4. Nor did I yet ever know to this 68th. year of my age, one Godfather that before adopted the child, or took him for his own, and took him home with him, unless he was a Grand∣father and did it as such and not as Godfather; much less could all three do it.

4. Nor did I ever to this day know one man or woman that performed this which all three undertake. A very few I have known that will ask How doth my Godson, and say, you must be a good Boy and learn your Book, and perhaps give him a piece of Silver: But usually they never look after them.

I confess with shame that I have been Godfather to four; to one when I was a Child and knew not what I did, but thought, it was only to be a Witness of Baptism. And to three more when I was twenty three years of age; of all which I agreed beforehand with the Parents to be but a Wit∣ness, and that they should stand there themselves as the un∣dertakers and signifie it. Two of these I never saw since; a third now dead, I never saw since his Infancy till a little be∣fore he dyed, and the fourth never since till that lately he came a begging to me.

I confess one Bishop told me once that he knew one or more that had performed this Vow, so did never I, who have li∣ved in many parts of the Land. Those that perform it not, sure are guilty of heinous perfidiousness; as breaking so so∣lemn a Vow to God. And if this be so common in England that to this Age I could never know of one performer, is not the case doleful and dreadful; that the Nation should by such perfidiousness be made Christians?

L.

But this is the Parents or Godfathers fault: what's this to the Minister, or to your Assent and Consent?

M.

If it be not nothing to the Canons and to the Liturgy, it is not nothing to him that must Assent and Consent to all things in that Liturgy, and must swear Canonial obedience. And 1. Do you think that the Nation can so commonly live in this sin, and the Church Governours and Orders be innocent in it. Can those Canons and Orders be blameless that with∣out any more opposition, let such perfidiousness go to our Christening? Can the medicine be laudable that so many mis∣carry in the use of it?

2. By the Canon all men are constrained to get some God∣fathers, and they can force none that is unwilling.

3. No Conscionable persons will Promise and undertake that which they never purpose to perform. I never in all my life met with one godly man, that if you opened all the undertaking plainly to him, would say seriously, I am resolved to do all this? but would refuse the office when he knows it is expected.

3. If there be hundreds or thousands in a Parish that are grosly ignorant of the nature of Baptism, and what they do, or that ere Atheists, Infidels, wicked men not Excommunicate, the Minister can not deny to take them for Godfathers, if they did but ever once receive the Sacrament. And to this 68th year of my age, I never knew one Godfather, or God∣mother questioned or refused by any Minister.

4. If the Parent can get no man to stand, he shall be ruined for it, as not bringing his Child to be Baptized according to the order of the Church.

5. Rich men will not give up their Children to the God∣father's propriety or education. Poor mens Children none will take. And is it lawful to Assent and Consent to such orders of Baptism as cherish this?

If Parents were the undertakers we might urge them to per∣formance. But from such others who can expect it.