Another
may require of his children a given service, on condition of receiving
his blessing; and if the requirement be not morally wrong, who would not
feel themselves bound to observe it? But there are examples, perhaps
more in point, in Scripture, in which parents have entered into formal
covenants that have had direct reference to their children. Adam
covenanted for himself and posterity. They had no personal agency in it,
in any sense, and yet all are held accountable for its transgression;
all suffer a portion of its penalty, as they might, if he had kept it,
been made possessors of its blessings. So Abraham covenanted with God
for himself and his seed; and his descendants felt themselves bound to
fulfill its requirements. They knew, in fact, that unless they did, its
benefits could not be enjoyed. The same principle holds good in
reference to the baptized. You are bound by the covenant engagements of
your parents. You cannot be released from them on the ground that you
had no agency in assuming them. They were assumed for you by those who
had the right to do it--a right recognized by both God and man--and you
cannot therefore throw them off; you cannot willfully disregard or live
contrary to them, without guilt and dishonor. The apostle urges this
principle when he testifies "to every man that is circumcised that he is
a debtor to do the whole law.
Pages:
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208