A Second Friendly Epistle TO Mr. George Keith, AND The Reformed Quakers. Who are now Convinced, That Water Baptism is an Ordinance of Christ, to continue to the End of the World. But are Enquiring about the Mode, and Form of Administration; Whether by Effusion or Plunging. Wherein is proved, (with the Approbation of some of the most Learned Divines in London) I. That John the Baptist, and Peter the Apostle, declare that they Plunged not. II. That Plunging is contrary to the Doctrine of Baptism; and therefore is no lawful Baptism. III. That if Plunging were a Duty, and commanded by Christ, our Brethren the Anabaptist practise it not, and so are Self-condemned on their own Principles. Humbly offered to the Consideration of all the Baptised Congregations in England; and also of the Dipped Ones. By the Reformed Quakers old Friend, Trepidantium Malleus. LONDON: Printed for John Marshal, at the Bible in Grace-Church Street. 1700. BOOKS Written by the Author of this Treatise; and Sold by John Marshal, at the Bible in Grace-Church Street. WIlliam Pen and the Quakers Impostors, or Apostates, which they please; proved from their avowed Principles, and Contrary Practices. Price 1 s. The Bostonian Quakers, Dunces, Liars, and Slanderers proved out of George Fox's Journal, and other Scribblers. Price 6 d. A Reprimand for the Author of a Libel, entitled, Mr. Keith an Apostate. Price 4 d. A Friendly Epistle to Mr. George Keith, the Reformed Quaker. Price 6 d. Three Contending Brethren Reconciled, and made Friends, Mr. Lob, Mr. Alsop, Mr. Williams. A Censure of three Scandalous Pamphlets. The first New-Years Gift for the Antinomians. The second and last New-Years Gift for the Antimonians; with Animadversions on the Conversion of a Jew, Salome Ben. Sholomah; With a large Epitaph on the late Reverend and Learned Mr. Steph. Lob. Price 6 d. A friendly Conference between the Suffering Saints for Conscience sake, the Jacobites, etc. Vindiciae Anti-Baxterianae: Or, Some Animadversions on a Book, entitled Reliquiae Baxterianae; Or, The Life of Mr. Richard Baxter. A Second Friendly Epistle TO Mr. George Keith, AND THE Reformed QUAKERS, etc. BRETHREN, I Shall not trouble myself, nor you, much about the Subjects of Baptism now; Whether Infants, or the Adult only, are to be Baptised: Because you are Mon and Women, and grown up Persons, to whom I now apply myself; and who are with too great Acrimony, and very severe Censures, contending about the manner of Baptising. We who (blessed be God) own, and our purblind Brethren who disown, Infant Baptism, are agreed as one Man in this, That all Unbaptized Persons, young or old, aught to be Baptised. I now bring (I hope) not a drop of Oil, but much Water to quench these Flames. It is a common Cant among too many paper-headed Men, That none should be Baptised till they come to the Years of Discretion; but if we read some of their Scribble, and hear some of their Chatte's, would they had stayed till then, the Controversy might the sooner be ended. According to your desire, My worthy Friend Mr. Keith, I appear to prove, Not so much-that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (to Baptise) signifys to Plunge only; (they are in a Dream that affirm it, and with me it is an idle Question;) but other things. Yet to do our Plungers (vulgarly so) right and equity, I do acknowledge, that one place urged against them by (otherwise learned) Pedobaptists is ignorantly, unlearnedly, and foolishly urged, Mark 4. the first part of the 7th Ver. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And when they came from the Market they eat not, we read, and that congruously, except they wash. These Men Criticise, except they are Washed or Baptised; For, say they, the Word is the Passive Voice, not Active. O miserable Grecians! It is neither; but the Mean Voice; the first Aorist of the Subjunctive Mood from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the first Future of the Indicative. Yet I acknowledge other Places well urged by these Lights, as Hebr. 9.11. There were, says St. Paul, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. among the Jews, many Washings or Baptisms; and among the rest, Sprinkling with Blood. Now if Sprinkling with Blood were a Baptism. Sprinkling with Water is so. In the 8th of Numbers, and in the 19th Chap. of that Book, they were said to be Clean, by Sprinklings on them; and those Sprinklings were some of their Washings or Baptisms. Also those Worthies do well and unanswerably urge, Mark 4.7. the latter part of that Verse; where we read of the Baptising of Beds and Board's, &c. were they Washed or Baptised by being plunged into Water, or Water poured on them? But there is one place, which our Eagle Eyed Men urge, tho' some too often in this Controversy forget it, that doth knock this Dispute in the Head. Luke. 11.38. When the Pharisee invited Christ to Dine with him, He wondered, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he was not Washed or Baptised before Dinner. Did he wonder that a Man he brought just before into his House, had not been plunged all over before he sat down to Meat? No, but that he did, not what is expressed elsewhere, wash his Hands before Dinner. Now this Argument, I dare aver, is Irrefragable. If a Man may be said to be Baptised, when his Hands only were washed, he may be said to be Baptised when his Face only is washed: Is there any Proposition in Euclid more evident? To say this is Synecdochical, and so f●● as they were Baptised (or Washed) they were Baptised. Why Sirs, are you Men? Will not this Answer serve us, as well as you? Away with such Childish Subterfugies (they washed Hands by pouring). 2 K. 3.11. As great Folly is it to tell us, with inflexible confidence, That all Critics in their Lexicons and Comments tell us, that the word Baptise, signifys only to Plunge or Dip. Were it true, as it is notoriously false, I cared not, when sacred Writings tell us so plainly the contrary, as if written with a Sun Beam, and every one that can understand his Greek Testament, may run and read it. I am even Sick of any Question about this; and crave Excuse I have taken any Notice of it. My Work to you, Good Mr. Keith, and the Reformed Quakers, and to all the Baptised Congregations in England (and Dipped one's too) is to prove. First, That John the Baptist, and Peter the Apostle, solemnly declare to all they Baptised, to all the Spectators, and by them to us, and to all Men to the end of the World, That when they Baptised such a vast Concourse, and so many Thousands, that they plunged not a Man of them. Secondly, That therefore Plunging is contrary to the Doctrine of Baptism, and is no lawful Baptism; but a Human or Diabolical Invention, a Breach, a notorious Breach, an intolerable Breach of the sixth and seventh Commandment, and to be abhorred, not only by all serious Christians, but sober Men and Women. Thirdly, That if Plunging were a Duty, and a Command of Christ, our Dippers practise it not, but are Transgressor's as well as we, hardly doing their Work by halves; And this will we do, if God permit. I. That John the Baptist, and Peter the Apostle, declare, They Plunged not when they Baptised. Luke says, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Luke 3.16. John said, I Baptise you with Water. So we well and truly, and gramatically read the Text, I Baptise you with Water; He that cometh after me, says the same holy Mouth and golden Oracle, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. shall Baptise you with the Holy Ghost, and with Fire: Now I thus Argue: 1st, He that saith, He Baptizeth, strictly and properly, with Water; doth here declare, He Plungeth not into Water. Is it Sense thus to say, I plunge you with Water? Now Luke leaves out the Preposition (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) in this Verse; therefore I cite this place principally. Thus this great Scholar, and Grecian, and beloved Pllysician, I have observed, doth in this his Gospel, and also in his Acts of the Apostles, Acts 1.5. And he brings in Peter's Saying, about the Baptism of Cornelius, with Water, without any Preposition, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) Acts 11.16. Now here Peter and John embrace each other, both disown here Plunging. Who can construe this Greek Sentence, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, I Plunge you with Water? No, but as we do, and they too, I Baptise you with Water. Now Luke wrote good Greek, as well as Matthew, that puts in the Preposition (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉); yet he, and others, cannot be read, I Baptise you in Water; for this is common for with, to give but one pregnant Example: If any be so weak as to doubt it, Ephes. 6.2. Honour thy Father and thy Mother, which is the first Commandment with Promise; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. so we well and truly read it. Not the first Commandment in the Promise, but with Promise; for the Commandment was not in the Promise, but the Promise in the Commandment. But this is so common in the Greek Tongue, that no Man that understands this rich and copious Language, can doubt it. But suppose the bare Phrase by itself were not so clear, yet it becomes so by its connexion with the next words; and therefore I put in here before, for greater Security. Now, as John says, I indeed Baptise you with Water; He that cometh after me, is mightier than I, the Latchet of whose Shoes I am unworthy to unloose; the same shall Baptise you with the Holy Ghost and with Fire. I hence Argue thus: II. John so Baptised with Water, as Christ with the Holy Ghost and with Fire: and Christ so Baptised with the Holy Ghost and with Fire, as John Baptised with Water. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Now the Proposition (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) is always put in here; yet this cannot be read in or into, but with the Holy Ghost and with Fire. Now let us turn to Acts 2.1, 2, 3, 4, 5. ver. etc. In the days of Pentecost was this Promise fulfilled. And I pray all to lay aside Passion, and read soberly, and see what Light that may give in this case about the manner of John's Baptisin, whether by Effusion or Plunging. The House was filled with Wind, but when? When they were together in one place, with one accord. Now observe, The Wind was poured on them, not they drove or plunged into it; and did this Wind reach any more than their Faces, or visible Parts? Our Plungers tell us, The Water must touch all. The Fire lighted on them, or sat on them, visibly. Observe, they were not thrown into the Fire; were they? I no more believe John threw his Hearers into the Water, than Christ, in the days of Pentecost, threw those Believers into the Fire. But that which puts the matter out of all doubt with me, is Peter's citing the Prophecy of Joel with a Then was fulfilled; I will pour of my Spirit, is mentioned twice, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. on your Sons and Daughters; your young Men shall see Visions, and your old Men shall dream Dreams. (This is another Proof, by the way, that Baptise signifies to pour.) Now, you that are Baptised, and you that are Dipped, I pray you, I adjure you, soberly, and in the fear of God, laying aside Pride, Wrath, or Confidence, compare Mat. 3.11, and Acts 2.17. ●ead carefully, The Promise and its Performance, the Sign, and this Thing signified, John's Literal Baptisin, and Christ's Spiritual Baptism, and you may easily know, how John Baptised with Water, as Christ Baptised with the Holy Ghost, and with Fire: And this is said plainly (as plain as words can make it) That it was done by Effussion or Pouring, not by Immersion or Plunging, I may say as the Prophet, Who is Blind as my Servant? if you see it not. For 1. Here is an excellent Analogy: How improper had it been for John to faith, I Plunge you into Water, and Christ shall pour the Spirit and Fire on you. Therefore in John's Baptism was there an Application of Water to the Persons; not the Persons to the Water. 2. We are not said to be applied to the Blood of Christ; but the Blood of Christ to be applied to us: Nor to be immersed into the Graces of the Spirit; but they poured on us. Therefore I take their Dipping to be Unlawful, as well as Plunging (the Difference I shall soon discover). When we are said to be Baptised into one Spirit, it speaks only of a Relation, not Manner of a Thing; as when a Man is said to be Baptised into such a Church, by some Men; though by the way, I understand not men's being Baptised into such a particular Church, and so ordained to such a particular Church only; when they are Members of another Church, must they have another Baptism? And when some are Pastors on removal, must they have another Ordination? Into what particular Church was Paul, the Eunuch, or Jailor, Baptised into? But not to digress. But now the Canons are mounted up, and roar. Many Objections some think cannot be Answered about my Assertion of John s Baptism. It is Objected, 1st, It is proper to say, I Overwhelm you with Water, if not, I Plunge you with Water; and the word Baptise, may be translated to Overwhelm. Yes, if I pour Water on a Man, or cover him this way with it, I Overwhelm him with Water; but if I throw him into the Water (and not the Water on him) I Overwhelm him in or into the Water. 2dly, But say others, John Baptised 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into ordain, Mark. 1.9. But Mark before ver. 5. and Matthew say in Jordain, as we read and that properly. John I hope went into Jordain, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. was he plunged too? This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is many times only in, not into, Matth. 28.19, 20. Go you therefore, and teach all Nations, Baptising them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. In the Name, not into, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. with Mr. Ball's (Catechism) leave; and the Quakers Paraphrase, to prove the Baptism to be Spiritual. But is Spiritual Baptism the Work of Man? No; but of the Spirit: And Water Baptism is the Work of Man. But where is Spiritual Baptism, or Sanctifying Work said to be into the Name of God? O ●ard Phrase! Other places may be urged, when Occasion is. Mark 1.9. shows John Baptised ●ot Christ when in Galilee; but when he came ●o Jordain. 3. But that which is accounted the strongest Effort 〈◊〉, That many Pedobaptists grant John Plunged; and that so did the Primitive Christians a long ●●me. First, Not so many say so as you imagine. Secondly, Some think when they read Ancient History, of them that Baptised in such a River, that they Plunged: They that so mistake Scripture, no wonder if they do Eccle●astical History. I once lived in a Town where 〈◊〉 a River, and there, as is said of Enon, were 〈…〉 many Waters, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. no Convenience was there to Plunge; as Gecgraphers say, Is not in Enon. I often thought when I walked by the River, which was not seldom, that had I been the Instrument in the Hand of God, or any other been so, and they all had been baptised by Effusion; I doubt not, we had all gone down into that River for our Convenience, and yet never have thought of such a nasty Trick as Plunging. Yet some would have asked, What did you do there? As Foolish to ask, What did John do in Jordain? I pray did you never go into the Water for no other end, but to be Plunged there (not to Swim with your Heads above Water) nor to wash only your Feet? I pray what had John to do in the Wilderness? Go there, eat Locust and wild Honey; as well as choose a River for Baptism In neither was John to be a Precedent for us. III. The Transmarine Anabaptist, though so fierce against Infant-baptism, yet are one with me in this point; and so some here in England The Dutch Anabaptist lately wrote to the English one's, to know, Why they Plunge.— For they disown it, and plead for pouring, as I do May not I as well urge their Authority against them, as they some Commentators against me. iv I cared not if many more granted John Plunged, if I prove he declares he did not: I believe John's Words, not their horrid Exposition. I therefore soberly (not as a Doubter, as i● many things; O that all were as clear!) I say I soberly ask, without intemperate Heat but with burning Zeal mixed with Love. 1. What were John's and Peter's Arms and Legs made of? Of Flesh and Bone, or Wood and Stone, to stand, and embrace, and plunge ●o many? Mat. 3.5. All Jerusalem, all Judea, all the Regions round about Jordain, were baptised: So when Three Thousand were baptised by Peter in one Day, he had not much time to do it in, considering his Antecedent and Consequent Work. For my part, I should have read the History of John's and Peter's Baptism a thousand times over, before I should have thought of such an ill looked thing as Plunging, had I not heard of some that dreamt of it. Either they were plunged with their on; (if so, then indeed had they looked like Men full of new Wine: All must have smiled, and I think the gravest of themselves.) Or they were plunged with their off: They were then guilty of Immodesty. Peter's Converts never thought of being baptised when they came out, and so brought no change of ; if they had, there could be no putting on, without putting off. What! Men and Women seen naked before all Persons, young and old? Wet next to the Body is dangerous, in all Places, to most Persons; but I suppose their Bodies were made of, no Man knows what. Did Christ indeed deliver from the Yoke of Bondage, and take away so many easy things comparitavely to Plunging, and bring under this ●oke? Bread and Wine are things grave and decent in the other Sacrament, and, I doubt not, so must Washing be in this, without change of , without strong Liquors, to fortify against the Danger of a Gospel Ordinance. 4. Some others Object, There must be Plunging on another Account, if you have a Baptism that answers some of the ends of Baptism, that is not enough. Unless it answers all the ends of Baptism, it is not right. Now we are said, Rom. 6.4. to be buried with Christ in Baptism. 1. Prove, if you can, that those words have any Relation to the Form of Baptism; but to the Confession of Sin, the Person baptised made, see Mat. 3.6. Confession of Sin, we are said elsewhere to be dead with Christ, and risen with Christ, where not a word is mentioned of Water Baptism; by which we understand Mortification and Vivification. Thus Men deny others Symbolical Signs, and yet make some to themselves. 2. Yet, were it so not to say what others have well done of the Jows way of Burials, (as we read of Joseph of Arimathea, etc.) our Form of Baptising more represents a Burial than theirs. When we bury a Man, do we drive him or plunge him into the Earth, or pour Earth upon him? Comparisons run not on all four. I am under a Necessity of taking up this, and a sew Passages more, I have written in other Books. Pardon me, Reader, I use not to offend this way, I cannot help it this once. When any Anabaptist goes down into the Water, I wish he would remember the words of God, by the Prophet, to them that went down into Egypt, Oh do not this abominable thing my Soul hates. This is a Breach of the sixth and seventh Commandment, which forbids all Temptations, Incentives, unnecessary Actions that have a tendency to it (besides the God and Man provoking Sin of some that deny their true Baptism) What is the reason that more Frenehers among the Anabaptists long professing Religion, should at last fall more before one particular Sin, than other Ministers? As I have observed where Providence hath cast me. I speak not now of young Men, but Men of Years, I verily believe, nay, I doubt it not, they got their Infection by embracing the fair Sex: Would I were sure Mr. T. got none of his there. Mrs. Roe of Bristol, for Twenty Years or more, confessed to her Husband, to all Ministers, and me among the rest, and to good Mr. Fairclough (who mentioned it, in my hearing, in the open Pulpit), That one of the first Plungers there at Baptist-Mill (for so is the place called) frequently lay with the Women he plunged; with her in particular, which made her go up and down as a Terror to herself. I call the great God to record, I mention not this Story on any Design against the Anabaptist; but to cure them of this Evil, if there may be hope. I doubt not the Piety of many of them. He that had the Vanity of writing himself lately Medicinae Doctor Academia Cantabrigiensis, to make himself look bigger after the Portsmouth Weights, had debased themselves to cope with him, talks like a little piece of Infallibility about Plunging. He is (I confess) a Man of Parts, that is to say, for a Tailor, or a Mandamus Doctor by a Popish King, who could make Tailors Quack-Physicians, as well as Coachmen Justices in some places. We are told, All the Ancients plunged; How long have some Men been acquainted with Lactantius, Origen, Socrates Scholar Eusebius, and other ancient Writers? I am sorry for the Book of his Whoredoms and Drunkeness, printed by a Dipper. I sear D. R. got his Infection in the Water. Mr. Danvers (or if you will Mrs. Danvers) Collections may serve, some Men; or will Clark's Lives serve the turn? who wanted somewhat else besides a good Style, and is unfit for the Learned. He leaves out remarkable Passages in Lives, and names trite ones. I pray, when Austin the Monk baptised Ten Thousand in one Day, were they plunged all, so many Saxons, in the River Swall? I pray, Brethren, when you embrace young Maids and Women in the Water, remember one place of Scripture, which I will make good to be an excellent place against plunging such Women, Led us not into Temptation; and then I hope you will never thus go down there more. My way is now plain to my second Assertion. Second, That Plunging is contrary to the Doctrine of Baptism, and is no lawful Baptism. Is it true, that Baptism is a Washing with Water in the Name of the Father, Baptizatio aqua? Than not into Water-Baptism signifys a Sprinkling with the Blood of Christ, a Washing of the Spirit, a pouring of it, etc. I pray all Pedobaptists, when they baptise Persons grown up, not to put their Heads into Basins or Fonts; tho' I do not say, they that do it should be baptised again; no, nor if plunged Head and Ears, for Quod fieri non dobet factum valet, but fiert non debet still. I hope, by this time, I have convinced some of them, who have granted Plunging to be a lawful Baptism, though not a necessary one. I say, it is not a lawful one; Plunging is not of God, I would be bound to make it good, that it amounts to a Demonstration, or that which is next to it, That God never sent such Reformers of Reformed Churches, who ●●led to the best of Ministers, Repent and be plunged, whose Whoredoms, Murders and Blasphemies were the worst acted under the Sun, as J. of Leyden, etc. I cannot but, with the highest Indignation imaginable, think of some Plungers, who shall tell us, Such Critics of ours say, Baptizo signifies to plunge or dip, and there stop; when they tell us, Or other ways of Washing, and cite Mat. 3.11. for one. Oh! No Protestant would so serve a Romish Priest, nor perhaps a Romish Priest a Protestant. I could tell a woeful Story, when some once appealed to Hollyock. Tho' he since would prove it by Miracles and Cures of Sick Persons thus planged. 1. Do not lie for God. 2. Nor put that for a Cause that is none. How many Infants baptised when almost dead have recovered? 3. We are sure of the contrary. 4. I know more learned Anabaptists than one, that tell us, Going down in the Water at any tir 〈◊〉 a cure for many Diseases, the Blood running to its Centre. 1. Where are their Wonders then? 2. Why do not their Physician plunge for Distempers? 3. Why are they so shy of Profession of Faith generally in Frost and Snow? Thirdly, Now I come to that which may occasion the greatest Wonder at the first hearing but is as easy to prove as any Proposition before That if Plunging were a Duty, the Anabaptis● practise it not. Never knew I a greater Gulf between Principles and Practice than here: Did Christ indeed give them a Commission to Plunge, and d● they only Dip? There is a great difference between these two, as I have proved elsewhere Dip thy Morsal with me in the Dish. To plun● in Butter or Vinegar many things we decent dip there, would turn the Stomaches of we● bred Persons, and make them loathe us as nas● Beasts. Joseph's Coat was dipped in the Blood a Kid, not plunged sure; there was not Blo● enough for this, neither had it looked as t● Coat of one whom some evil Beast had devour. Now no more can be called Baptism, th● what is the Baptizer's Work? The Person di● goes up half way often, or more, is he so fa● Sebaptist? Is every part defiled by Sin, and m● it be mortified by Grace, as the Anabaptists s● and therefore all be baptised? What a Mutilation is here of this Sacrament; as of the other in the Church of Rome; Doth the Bread without Wine make a Sacrament? I have heard of some in the Country, that have been plunged by putting Men into a Pond in a Sheet tied to both ends. Now I grant there was Plunging indeed, but there were two Baptizers by the way, and one only baptised; an Unpresidenced Antiscriptural Thing. If it be asked, Did John Sprinkle? That is not the Question; he did not plunge. I know none that sprinkle, which is, strictly, throwing drops here and there. Can a bit of Bread, and a sip of Wine be called a Supper? A late Writer comes now to my Hand, who asserts what I do of John's Baptism; I am glad to find him Harmonizing with me in this thing: we have both hit on many Phrases, which might make some think I had ploughed with his Heifer; no, my Notion were the Result of free Thoughts, not many Months since; and for this Book, I never saw it till all my former Work was finished. This Author says that which deserves Consideration, That it is strange, that if Baptism must be by Plunging, and this practised by John and the Apostles, How was it that this Ordinance had not taken its Name from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bapto, which signifys to plunge or dip; but from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Baptizo, which never doth so. This Notion is, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies, to Plunge or Dip, exclusive of all other ways of Washing; so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, its derivative, signifys otherways of Washing, exclusive of Dipping or Plunging. So he challengeth any Man to name one place in Scripture, where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to Plunge. That derivitiives in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek loses much of their force. We know in Latin words ending in sco do, as Fervesco from Ferveo. But I may further consider this, if replied to. Tho' I declare, I shall not regard a Danvers or a Russel. No, false Historians; a poor Plea to say, The Wife did it; no Pretenders to Philology and Philosophy they understand not. I expect Ministers and learned Ones: If Mr. W. Collins be the Man chosen, as some say, I shall be glad to fall into the hands of a Man of so much worth, seriousness and good temper, such as I can better admire than imitate. If Mr. Steed, Mr. Stennet, or Men of known Learning and of good Report, Sound in our unhappy Controversies about Doctrinals, and of untainted Loyalty, think fit to appear, I shall treat them with that Civility they deserve; and I desire that Intimacy and dearness of Affection, that hath been between us, may continue; if not, it shall not be my fault. I pray them follow, if they appear my Arguments, closely, and trouble me not with Authors, theirs or ours, I care not what. They say, my Enquiry is what John says, and what Men ought to say after him. I hope, in time, to make it good at large, if I must do it, That John declares he plunged not, because he said he Baptised them, not Bapt: But what I have done already, is enough for once. Now as Baptist, Baptise, and Baptism are derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Baptise, what woeful Work is here for Men to usurp those words to themselves, when they belong to us. Now, say I, they being Plungers Vulgariter, as before, must have their Denomination from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (Bapto). Then say I, they are Bapts, we are as Baptist; they Bapt, we Baptise; they Plunge, and have 〈◊〉 Bammism, we Pour (or Sprinkle) and so have 〈◊〉 Baptism. They that understand the Greek Tongue, know I thus derive right in these new Names. O my Dear Word Baptist, have I redeemed thee out of the hands of them that have led thee Captive! Welcome in thine own Place and Land. I know some Plungers who are angry with their Brethren for calling themselves Baptist, as ●f, say they, Pedobaptist were against Baptism, or this Gospel-Ordinance. A worse thing is it to call one another Brother on this evil Practice, and not the best Men not so. Some of the late Men are almost Sick of such Fooleries; who are more judicious, more humble, more sober, and, I think, every way better Men and Christions, and fit for human Conversation than the old Men. Some of them would lift up Eyes to Heaven, if not Hands, walking in the Streets; who did this in the time of Christ? They would where I lived, in Prayer, Preaching, and Discourse, say, for Lord God, Lard Gad, etc. Notes and Hourglasses, Black , were Antichristian Things, as well as our Baptism and Singing of Psalms, and Ministers Maintenance. Blessed be God, many are much recovered. Oh! that the Leprosy were throughly healed. I pray them that are for that glorious Gosnel Institution of singing Psalms, that mo●● resembles the eternal Work in Heaven tha● any one Duty does on Earth, to consider often and urge it to their Friends that call it Balla● Singing. Whether Singing be not a Duty mentioned in the New Testament, distinct from Prayer? Whether it must not be performed in ou● way, or some other? but they do it in no other. Therefore let them in this, Hath God appointed an impracticable Duty, to tell us the Church hath been in Babylon, and therefore the Harp● must be hung up. That Singing and Praying are all one in the N. Testament, and yet after all say, The time is looked for, when a Brother may be moved to stand forth and sing a Hymns according to the ancient way, are strange Asser●tions and Contradictions. I know many well meaning Bapts, do believe the old Men more heavenly than these, because many of them talked oftener of Religion; who, perhaps, could talk of little else, and not tolerably well of that But to return from this Digression. If it be asked, Is not Plunging practicable o● their Principles? Or, what would I do if of their mind? Be not angry, seeing you ask the Question: I grant, I am not bound to plunge immediately with my own Hands, it is enough if i● be done mediately, by a certain Engine, what do we call it? where troublesome Persons are put who would willingly come out as soon as they can, and I would move it up and down by a Ro●e. How odious is it to see Men over-valuing things on Mistakes? These Men have made as great an Idol of their Baptism, as some Presbyterian Ministers have of the Assemblies Catechism, that when they should-expound Scripture according to the Example of Ezra, who read the Law, and gave the Sense, and is, without all doubt, the best way of Preaching, better than Sermonizing itself, They expound forsooth that Catechism when the Law and Prophets, the Gospels and Epistles are never once expounded. Expounding in Bp. Hall's way in his Paraphrase; with some Observation after all in Willet's way, and others, would sooner be remembered, when the Chapters were afterwards read alone, or in the Family. A sudden thought comes into my mind, Mat. 3.11. He that cometh after me, shall Baptise you with the Holy Ghost, and with Fire, Acts 2.17. That was pouring of the Spirit. It is evident, that Baptising signifies Pouring, or else the words are not true. ANd now Mr Keith, you see I have once more appeared for you I know most of you go to the Church of England, some to the Anabaptist, Love one another; bless that God that hath plucked you all (as Brands) out of the Fire. I know some of you despise the Anabaptist, because of many of their ignorant Teachers. I that know them, declare: First, That I question not, the Bishops have often ordained Men more Ignorant. Secondly, All Stories of the Anabaptists are not true, If some hear a piece of Dunstical Divinity, Oh! It is an Anabaptist presently; when perhaps not so. If it be asked, How I came to be so favourable in this Controversy to them, who have been so keen against two sorts of Men owning Infant Baptism; and so, my Brethren, I declare, I look on the Controversy about Water Baptism, as nothing to that about Justification and Repentance. I look on a Calvinistical Conformist, and a Calvinistical Anabaptist, more as Brethren, than a Calvinistical and an Arminian Conformist are so; or a Calvinistical and Arminian Anabaptist so. I had rather any Man tore my than my Body. I declare, I find not any such Ignorance among Anabaptist Preachers, that are unlearned according to the Cry of it. Mr. Benjamin Keach his late Book about the Change of the Sabbath, was approved of by the Archbishop, who desired to see him about it. There are another sort of Men, that make woeful Work abroad. I will divert you with a Comical Story I lately heard of two Men, that set up for great Expositors of Scripture without Learning; but I could never hear they were Anabaptists, nor believe they were. They applied themselves to a worthy Divine, and told him of their Abilities this way; and desired him to try them. He asked them, What Trades they were of? One replied, A Vintner; the other, A Tailor. I hope, said he, I shall find you Men, though not Scholars, shall I not? Yes, Sir. I pray, Mr. Vintner, when you broach a Butt of Wine, what Bottles do you use? My old ones. I pray, Mr. Taylor, when you patch an old Garment, do you not sometimes ●ut a new ●●●ce? Yes. Then said he, I will prove, by Scripture you are no Men; for it is said, No Man putreth new Wine into old Bottles; nor putteth a new piece of Cloth on an old Garment. Any may imagine how these Reverend Expositors were confounded. But it may be some Reformed Quakers may say, Have you not one Word to say for our Infants, who cannot speak for themselves? Many Adult Persons, now baptised, may have Infants, what shall they do? 1. It is certain, some Infants were elected, and shall be saved. 2. None can be fit for the Kingdom of Glory, that were not fit for the Kingdom of Grace. 3. It is evident, Children were once Members of the Church of God; who cast them out? not God, not Christ sure; none but Satan, and— did it: 4. In the New Testament all is confirmed, Of such is the Kingdom of God. The Promise was to them; they are said to be Holy. The Sign of the Covenant of Grace was changed, Circumcision into Baptism. I need no more to know, who must be the Subjects of Baptism, whether Infants, than to know whether such were o● Circumcision. I will show one full place of Scripture for Infant Baptism: Be baptised, every one of you; for the Promise is to you and to your Children, etc. 5. As Christ proved the Resurrection of the Body to the Pharisees, not by p●●n Scripture speaking of that matter, but by good Consequence, so might we. And some Men may as well keep their Wive, and grown up Daughters, from one Sacrament, as their Infants from the other, for want of a plain Institution or Command, or however they will phrase it. Who cannot bring as plain Scripture as the afore-named, or Infant-Baptism, Acts 2.39. 6. If Infants be not within the Church, they are without; and so no visible way left for their Salvation. I know some fiery Pedobaptists are angry with me for my Conversing with Anabaptists, and speaking so favourably of them, and tell me what Character one they had, tho' now grown better— Are they grown better? I would we were too. Let none of us make an Idol of Baptism: Som● will not bury unbaptised Children, yet read Prayer over Brother Drunkard, Brother Swearer, Brother Whoremonger, or Brother Atheist. S me again, wi●● not admit any to the Lord's Table but Dipped Persons which holy Mr. Jessy and honest John Bunnyan cou●● not bear the thoughts of. And now Mr. Keith and you Reform Quaker gone to the Church of England, beware of such the who lay Infant Baptism on the power of the Church Magistrates. Oh! So Dr. Stilling fleet when an Erastian in his Irenicum; so Dr. Hicks in a printed S●mon of his; so I fear D. Barlow, notwithstanding 〈◊〉 Complimental Letter to M. Wills. D. Tully told Friend of mine, That if D. B. had been searched to the bottom, he was no Friend to any Baptism. So I think politic Jeremy Taylor, in his Liberty of Prophesying, written in the Interregnum, to get a Toleration for the Prelatical Party, as he on the Return of the King pleaded. He designed to set us together by the Ears, he says indeed. We have more Reason on our side, but the Anabaptists more Scripture. A learned Distinction! He by Playing with Witticisms did the Anabaptists greater Service than they themselves. He made many go down into the Water, and had almost me for one in my younger Days. Some among you deny Original Sin, and yet baptise Infants according to your Liturgy. For as much as all Men are born in sin— And seeing this Child is Regenerate— What! that was never corrupted or defiled? But any thing for Tyth-piggs and Corn. Jer. Taylor was a notorious Dissembler here, and a Subscriber to the 39 Articles, tho' he denied Original Sin. The old Pelagians were not for Infant Baptism, nor could be; our new ones are indeed their Friends too much. You know, as well as I, many Anabaptist talk not now of Baal, Antichrist, Idolatry, when speaking of the Church of England. They acknowledge the Piety of many of that Communion: some occasionly hear and commend their Preachers. For M. Pendarvis his Arrows shot against Babylon. Mr. Brown his Jerubbad; with that place under the Title, If Raal be a God let him plead for himself; because one hath pulled down his Altar. Would this Man challenge the God of the Church of England to come forth? He says, He that heareth the Parish Priest heareth the Bishop; he that heareth the Bishop heareth the Pope: And (no doubt) he that heareth the Pope heareth the Devil; and say I, so he may, and never be the worse Man; for when do Popes preach I pray? I knew a great Man, and good Scholar, among the Bapts, that got so many Colds by Dipping, that he would walk by the River and pronounce the Form of Baptism, and appoint a Deacon as his Substitute to Dip (and I believe many unknown to me have done the like). Now, how could this Man say, I Baptise thee? The unlearned Colonel Danvers very mannerly tells us, That when we say, I Baptise thee— we lie, because we Plunge not. Now, tho' I will have more manners than to say, this Man ●ied; yet I will say, he told a notorious untruth. Should not these Men, on their Principles, keep the Person under the Water (tho' they do it not) whilst they use this Form. And if this Ba●●mism represent the Resurrection of Christ, as they say, should not the Persons rise out of the Water of themselves? be Active, not Passive, in this thing. But about my Charge against Plunging Women. If it be said, Do not ●ayl●rs take measure of them, & c? Yes, and Physicians and Surgeons' do more, to express all as modestly as I can: What therefore is necessary by the Law of God and Nature, must be done; but should other Men do to them, what Physicians, Surgeons, and others must, they sinned; especially, if they did this openly. A Friend of mine told me, how a Kinswoman was invited to a Dipping; the Dipper and the Dipped were almost gone by the Stream: There was such a Cry, the Woman was content with her old Baptism. You see I have taken a Method with the Anabaptist, none else hath done, that I know of: I therefore applied myself to the learnedst Pedobaptist in this City, who approved of what I have done. I communicated these Things also to the most Learned, Orthodox, Pious and Well-tempered Anabaptists here, to know their Objections; I thank them for their Civility. If I hate their Cause, I certainly know, I love their Persons. I suffered once about a Year and halfs Confinement (which cost me about an hundred pounds) occasioned by Visiting a great Man of that Persuasion in Goal. I have not now applied myself directly to them, but to you Mr. Keith. My Work is not so much to pull down their Altars, as to strengthen our own I hope this Consideration may content them; if not, it doth me. Can we not manage a Controversy among ourselves, for fear of offending them? I own them, nor any Man else, any such Service. They, seem of them, can set on us directly, not only in Print, but in our Meetings. I do declare, I intent not to answer every sawey malapert, little Man, that shall set on me in a Coffeehouse, or elsewhere; but am ready to meet any wise Men, whether Scholars or not. If any of your Clergy do, as some say, put a few drops on the Child's Face; tho' I will not deny it to be a Baptism, any more than a few drops of Wine and crumbs of Bre●d (tho' indecently and irregularly thus taken) to be the other Sacra●●● or the Lord's Supper: Yet I take it to be a way unsuitable, and an unwarrantable Practice. I cannot but wonder at Mr. Lesly, and many great Men of the Church of England, that often call our ●apts Baptists, it is a Scruple to me so far to Countenance their Error, and Censure ourselves. I know I ●ove their Persons much better than he. In the place I have often called Noah's Ark, are good-tempered, discreet, serious Bapts, who are dear to me, as I to them. They are the best Person to be Examples of Temper and Moderation I ever knew; they do not grow shve one of another, or refuse occasional Converse; as some other Contenders do. I value them more than some others against whom I have written. Had two Men lived when Men were more devout than discreet, particularly in the Reign of Q. Elizabeth: A Question may be made, whether they had not been burnt for old Heteticks? I grant indeed, the Controversy about Baptism is not so great, nor yet so small as some make it. If we ●r, we err like them of Old, who give Infants the Lord's Supper: If they err, they err like Moses, whom God sought to slay, for not Circumci●ng his Child But God is more Merciful to us than we one to another. You young Men once again; take heed what you do: Were it only your contracting Colds and Pains in the Water, I would not so much care (for 〈◊〉 you do notwithstanding all Attempts to hid it); but beware of Heats, Libidinous Provocations there. But to the other matter. If any such should 〈◊〉. They lead down all into the Water. Yes, for Conveniency, not as a part of the Sacrament, but on a civil Account: For the Work and Element make the Sacrament. I ask, must the be plunged by you, that have gone to the Wast o● above it themselves? How horrid is it by the way 〈◊〉 baptise ? I think I can prove it ought to be done on the Skin. How odious would it be in us 〈◊〉 pour Water on the Cloth that covers the Child's Face? By the way, some Anabaptists invite their Friends to Dine with them, and before them pray for their Infants, solemnly bless them, and dedicate them to God. I am glad they are come so far; but more of this and other things. if uny sober Reply be made to me by any learned Divine; for no other, I declare must expect an Answer from me; let no such trouble me with Authors. I speak it without Vanity, and for good Reason. I have given away my Library elsewhere, to young C●ndidates in the Ministry, and others; and the Books I buy ●ere, I commonly dispose the same way. I use not books; John's Testimony is better than other men's Notions. He that believeth John and Peter plunged, had need of almost a Transubstantiation Faith. They that tell us, how the Dutch (Mat. 3.1.) read John the Dooper. If they meant Dipper, they might not mean Plunger. I believe some of those love to make the World believe they understand Dutch, and I know not what Languages, that hardly well understand their Mother-tongue. Do they mean any more than John the Washer? May not the word largely be to taken in that Language? Will any of them dare to say, who deny us Consequences, That they find Plunging used once in Scripture, or required in plain word without a Consequence. The know how their Seventh-Day Men torment them with their Common-Question, Where is your Institution or plain Words? Why not they as well as the others. Let the Bants on their Notions, who will not have their Children baptised, because they have no plain Word or Example (say they) for it in Scripture, let them (I say) go Home and tell their Wives and Daughters that are Women: You shall never more go to the Lord's Table: There is no Word or Example for it in Scripture, and I have read my Bible over many times. Nothing can be said for this abominable thing but Consequences of Man's Wisdom: Remember what befell Nadab and Abihu, when they offered strange Fire, God commanded them not; for my part, I am for keeping close to the Word. You know how Infant-Sprinklers act contrary to Mat. 28.18. And they that abhor that Idol Infant-Baptism, have set up another contrary to the 20th Ver. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. So much: No more. Now Christ commanded, permitted not the devout Women that wept at the Cross, and outdid Peter and the rest in Zeal and Piety, to sit down with him, where were Men Disciples only; nor find we one Example after. For any Man to say, That Baptism must be of the whole Body, and not a part only; and yet be Baptised about the Shoulders and Head only, is such a Contradiction as is seldom found in any Party under Heaven, but among them: For as in the other Sacrament if the Bread were not Consecrated, and administered to the Receiver as such, but the Cup only, and the Receiver should take the Bread in a common way; could he say he took the whole Sacrament, Bread and Wine? No. So here on their Principles: It hath been a Query a long time, what Name this Party should be called by; they call themselves Baptist: A high Name, given to none but John the Baptist, and this honourable Name was given him not purely as an Administrator of this Ordinance, for then all such might be so called. But we never read of Peter the Baptist, etc. How much worse is it for private Men, no Administrators, to take to themselves this great Name, and all the while be none, being Plunged? John the Baptist was so called, as the first Administrator: Now what Name shall we give them? Anabaptist? No, they care not for it, disowning being rebaptised, or baptised again; for so the word signifys. Mr. Tombs and others desired the name Antipedobaptist: And Mr. Baxter well replied, It was a long word, and not easily pronounced by the Vulgar. Perhaps they would crack the Word a thousand times to their Discredit and the Merriment of them that heard it. Well then, I that love the Anabaptist more than most zealous Pedobaptist, have found out a word for them, that signifys, Men for Plunginig; it is but a Monosyllable, easy to be pronounced, that is Bapts. I hope they that are Learned among them will not be angry for this Kindness (for indeed such it is) and then I have enough. For Ignorant Men that cannot reason, but rave, I care not what they say who are no more to be regarded by Wise Men than Rab●ons. I have too long replied to such, but intent no more. Perhaps such may say, I have Nicknamed them, and called them Bats, and then run on what a Bat is, and half of that ignorantly talked of. Others may say, I have made them Owls. No, there are enough such among us, as well as them. The Kindness I have hitherto shown them, as well as other friendly Adversaries, I intent the continuance of, if they will give me leave. But if the best of them refuse any Acceptance of Civilities, I shall not impose on them, but be their Friend, if not their Companion. My Kindness to them hath given Occasion for a Story, That I had renounced my Baptism, an I were Plunged, by which some great, godly, good Friends of mine, became my Adversaries. This is one reason, among others, why I was willing to appear against this great God-provoking Sin, to Renounce a true Baptism for one not so. But I never intent to write one word more upon this Subject, unless a Reply by any worthy Divine and Scholar of theirs make it necessary. If any such appear (and let them as soon as they please, why not they as well as I?) whilst I can have Pen, Ink and Paper; I hope to vindicate that righteous Cause I have now espoused. And for a Close of all, Dear Mr. Keith, I am hearty sorry any Dissenters (especially Presbyterians) should so severely Censure you for your Compliance with the Church of England. You know, you went between me and the famous Author of the Snake in the Grass; sent me his Letters, and him mine, about Liturgies and Ceremonies, printed with his consent in my Apology for Congregational Divines; nothing more clean on both Hands. You than seemed to be of my mind, if you are otherwise persuaded, I am not, tho' I was glad to fall into the hand of one of the most accurate devout Advocates for that Cause, who made the best of it. If you have left me, and are now of his mind, I dare not Censure another Man's Servant. I hope you do nothing against your Conscience: I am not so sure you Sin in your Compliance with the Church of England in her Liturgies, Ceremonies and Sacraments, as I am sure some of my Brethren Sin in their ungodly Censures of you. I do not much Care what Party hath you, seeing you have lest the Quakers. You have left them that had the Plague Sores on them, and gone among them that may be Itchy or Lousy. Many say, you being such a little Man, will look very ugly in a Surplice. I tell them pleasantly, you will then but look like all the rest that wear it: For perhaps no Man looks otherwise that ever puts it on. If ever you appear against us (as some fear) I pray Answer my Arguments in my forementioned Epistle to Mr. L. If you thus do, you may see A Third Friendly Epistle to Mr. George Keith, and the Reformed Quakers, by Trepidantiam Malleus: As Friendly as the Letters to the aforenamed great Man. You know how many plead Plunging from your Fonts, and Orders to Plunge Children, and not Sprinkle, but in case of Necessity. Should I Answer this at large, I should make those Reflections as are not now convenient. Bishop Laud was the Death of many Infants by this barbarous ungodly Impolition. Whereas several Bapts say, when we tell them the Tendency of embracing fair Women, We see what you are inclined too: We fear not— When David, from the top of his House, saw Bathsheba bathing herself, perhaps as well Clothed as some of their baptised Women are, though hè a Man after God's own Heart, and so in as little Danger as any Man; yet we know the woeful Conclusion. How much greater had the Temptation been, had David had this Woman in his Arms in that Water. If they thus dare to talk of Pedobaptist as less than themselves, Experience proves the contrary: He that locketh on a Woman, and Lusteth after her (by Land or Water, it is all one) be committeth Adultery with her in his Heart. POSTSCRIPT. To my Dear Friends the London BAPTS. IF I have given you any just Occasion of Offence by any Words too sharp, I beg your Pardon; and I know you are reconcilable Men, as you have found me to be so. I own your worthy Preachers before named, and ohers, to be Ministers of Christ and of the Gospel. If any of our baptised Believers whether Conformists or Dissenters, Ministers or People, be displeased for my saying so; I wish them more Charity, and you more Wisdom, and Light in our Controversies. No Baptists among us hates Plunging more, and yet loves the Plungers (falsely so called) better than Sam. Reconcilable. FINIS.