the use of godparents themselves. Many Puritans probably ignored this ingredient in the baptism service altogether, and asked the parents to make the profession of faith on behalf of their own child. But as if to secure common ground, Hooker states at the outset, ‘they with whom we contend are no enemies to the baptism of infants’.25 Once again he uses covenant language. As we have already seen, Hooker knew that it was used by Isidore of Seville. But he would also have been fully aware of its popularity among the new Puritans. We may conclude that this was part of his intention, to try to get them on his side.
. . . baptism implieth a covenant or league between God and man, wherein as God and man, wherein as God doth bestow presently remission of sins and the Holy Ghost, binding all to himself to add in process of time what grace soever shall be further necessary for the attainment of everlasting life . . .
and:
The law of Christ requiring therefore faith and newness of life in all men by virtue of the covenant which they make in baptism, is it toyish that the church in baptism exacteth at every man’s hands an express profession of faith and an irrevocable promise of obedience by way of solemn stipulation?
and:
That infants may contract and covenant with God, the law is plain.26
(‘Toyish’ was used in the First Admonition to Parliament
Конец ознакомительного фрагмента.
Текст предоставлен ООО «ЛитРес».
Прочитайте эту книгу целиком, купив полную легальную версию на ЛитРес.
Безопасно оплатить книгу можно банковской картой Visa, MasterCard, Maestro, со счета мобильного телефона, с платежного терминала, в салоне МТС или Связной, через PayPal, WebMoney, Яндекс.Деньги, QIWI Кошелек, бонусными картами или другим удобным Вам способом.
