9. I am not able to prove, nor see any probable reason for it, that any but sound believers have such a promise for their children, nor that any hypocrite shall certainly save his child, if he do but dedicate him to God in baptism. For, 1. I find no promise in Scripture made to such. 2. He that doth not sincerely believe himself, nor consent to God's covenant, cannot sincerely believe for his child, nor consent for him. 3. And that faith which will not save the owner, as being not the condition of the promise, cannot save another. Much more might be said of this. I confess that the church is to receive the children of hypocrites as well as themselves; and their baptism is valid _in foro externo ecclesiæ_, and is not to be reiterated. But it goeth no further for his child, than for himself. 10. Therefore I think that all that are rightfully baptized by the minister, that is, baptized so as that it is well done of him, are not certainly saved by baptism, unless they be also rightfully baptized, in regard of their right to claim and receive it. Let them that are able to prove more do it, for I am not able. 11. Whereas some misinterpret the words of the old rubric of confirmation in the English liturgy, as if it spake of all that are baptized, whether they had right or not, the words themselves may serve to rectify that mistake, "And that no man shall think any detriment shall come to children by deferring of their confirmation, he shall know for truth, that it is certain by God's word, that children being baptized have all things necessary for their salvation, and be undoubtedly saved." Where it is plain that they mean, they have all things necessary _ex parte ecclesiæ_, or all God's applying ordinances necessary, though they should die unconfirmed, supposing that they have all things necessary to just baptism on their own part. Which is but what the ancients were wont to say of the baptized adult; but they never meant that the infidel, and hypocrite, and impenitent person was in a state of life, because he was baptized; but that all that truly consent to the covenant, and signify this by being baptized, are saved. So the church of England saith, that they receive no detriment by delaying confirmation; but it never said, that they receive no detriment by their parents' or sponsors' infidelity and hypocrisy, or by their want of true right _coram Deo_ to be baptized. 12. But yet before these questions (either of them) be taken as resolved by me, I must first take in some other questions which are concerned in the same cause; as, [274] Since the writing of this, there is come forth an excellent book for Infant Baptism by Mr. Joseph Whiston, in which the grounds of my present solutions are notably cleared. [275] Mark xvi. 16; Acts ii. 37, 38; xxii. 16; 1 Cor. vi. 11; Tit. iii. 3, 5, 6; Heb. x. 22; Eph. v. 26; Rom. vi. 1, 4; Col. ii. 12; 1 Pet. iii. 21, 22; Eph. iv. 5; Acts viii. 12, 13, 16, 36, 38; ix. 18; xvi. 15, 33; xix. 5; Gal. iii. 27.