1 
 
 ' 
 
 
 # 
 
 
 
 •^ 
 
 
 .03 
 
 
 f? 
 
 
 1c 
 
 3 
 
 
 • « 
 
 
 P3 
 
 
 *^ 
 
 
 IE 
 
 i 
 
 — >» 
 
 i-i 
 
 CL 
 
 1 
 
 # w 
 
 
 
 
 *^> 
 
 [25 
 
 ^o 
 
 
 ^3 
 
 
 $ 
 
 
 
 fe 
 
 o; 
 
 
 o 
 
 c 
 
 : 
 
 c* 
 
 O 
 
 bfl 
 
 r\ 
 
 »*5 
 
 Eh 
 
 <: 
 
 £ 
 
 l=> 
 
 
 Z3 
 
 <V4 
 
 
 & 
 
 E 
 
 .^ 
 
 •€> 
 
 »H 
 
 rj 
 
 "»vj 
 
 *s» 
 
 rt 
 
 CO 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 Ph 
 
 2 
 
 Q 
 
 Cq 
 
 Ct 
 
 
 
 
 &\ 
 
 
 -a 
 
 ^* 
 
 % 
 
 
 0) 
 
 c 
 
 c 
 
 v* 
 
 
 a) 
 
 i^ 
 
 e> 
 
 f 
 
 to 
 
 
 <# 
 
 ol 
 
 !• 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 >©Vf 
 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2011 with funding from 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/essayonbaptisminOOtyer 
 
; S 
 
 yf e.4. - -■/* *~* /^~ 
 
 AN 
 
 es&ap on Baptism* 
 
 Pricey in boards, two shillings j sewed, one 
 shilling and sixpence. 
 
AN 
 
 ESSAY ON BAPTISM: 
 
 IN WHICH 
 
 IT IS ATTEMPTED TO BE PROVED, 
 
 THAT 
 
 BAPTISM 
 
 ADMINISTERED BY SPRINKLING OR POURING 
 
 31$ a Scriptural ^otre: 
 
 AND THAT 
 
 THE INFANT OFFSPRING OF BELIEVING PARENTS 
 ARE PROPER SUBJECTS 
 
 OF THIS ORDINANCE. 
 
 BY 
 
 DANIEL/TYERMAN. 
 
 31sleofMigf)t: 
 
 PRINTED FOR THE AUTHOR, 
 
 By R. Tilling, at the Medina Press, Neicport. 
 
 SOLD BY BAYNES, PATERXOSTER-ROW ; WILLIAMS AND 
 
 SMITH, STATIONERY-COURT, LONDON; BARER AST) 
 
 FLETCHER, SOUTHAMPTON ; SHEPPARD, OFPOSITE 
 
 THE EXCHANGE, BRISTOL", AND BY THE 
 
 AUTHOR, ISLE OF WIGHT, 
 
 1806. 
 

 
 3 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 1 here is no doctrine without its diffi- 
 culties ; no truth but may be controverted. 
 It is not therefore a difficulty opposed to 
 the reception of a given truth, that should 
 make us abandon it. Were we to re- 
 nounce the sentiments we have adopted 
 merely because a few individuals may have 
 determined to start objections against them, 
 we might be ever learning, but should 
 never come to the knowledge of the truth. 
 Each of the doctrines of the Gospel is a 
 whole composed of various parts ; and all 
 these parts are to be embraced, in order to 
 a reception of the whole. For instance; 
 when I acknowledge the truth of the bap- 
 tism of adults by immersion, it appears to 
 me that I acknowledge a part' of the doc- 
 trine of Baptism only. But if I am re- 
 solved to receive all the various parts of 
 this doctrine, I shall embrace the baptism 
 of infants by sprinkling as well, as this is 
 only another part of the same doctrine; 
 for it by no means follows, that because 
 the former is true, that therefore the latter 
 
 
IV PREFACE. 
 
 is false. — It is this part of the doctrine 
 which is defended in the following Essay, 
 for the former requires no proof, as its pro- 
 priety under certain circumstances is not 
 controverted. 
 
 A mind determined to exercise its native 
 prerogatives, and to close its researches in 
 a rational decision, will weigh the evidence 
 adduced in the balances of the sanctuary, 
 and recewe or reject accordingly. Let us 
 apply this observation to the case before us. 
 Unless the reader can sap the foundation 
 of all the following arguments, and produce 
 arguments in favour of the other scheme, 
 more cogent, better supported, and which 
 prove that the baptism of infants by sprink- 
 ling is false and unscriptural, then, to act 
 with consistency, he ought to receive also 
 that part of the doctrine which is here de- 
 fended ; otherwise he attaches himself to 
 that which, at most, is but a part of the 
 truth, whilst he rejects that which he 
 cannot disprove ; than which, nothing can 
 be more absurd. 
 
 Much talent has been employed in this 
 controversy, and several books produced 
 worthy the attention of the scholar and 
 the critic. It is not to decry these works 
 that the author of this Essay has employed 
 his pen. Having devised a method of 
 
PREFACE. V 
 
 treating the subject, which, so far as he is 
 acquainted with the controversy, is new, 
 and adapted to common minds, he has 
 pursued it ; and an impartial public must 
 determine with what success. It is not 
 men, but principles which are opposed : 
 and an opposition to principles, which 
 all hold as non-essential, by no means 
 supposes a want of Christian affection to 
 the persons of those by whom they are 
 maintained. Whatever difference there 
 may be amongst Christians in this respect, 
 brotherly love should yet continue ; and 
 it is hoped that nothing in these pages 
 will have a contrary tendency. Firmness, 
 without arrogance ; decision, without bit- 
 terness ; and argument, without sophistry, 
 have been, at least, attempted through the 
 whole. 
 
 In stating and illustrating the following 
 arguments, the utmost brevity, consistent 
 with perspicuity, has been observed. An 
 ornamented style is not the st}de of con- 
 troversy. Argument never appears more 
 forcible, than, when stript of every thing 
 adventitious, it presents itself before us 
 in the simple dignity of reason: — this is 
 the author's apology in modern times for 
 plainness of speech. With respect to the 
 subject, it is necessary to observe, that 
 
«M 
 
 VI PREFACE. 
 
 each argument appears to the writer con- 
 clusive; but when the whole are collected, 
 like so many sun beams, into one focus, 
 they will be found, it is hoped, to throw A 
 clearness of evidence on the truth, which 
 will enable the dimest eye, if not hood- 
 winked by prejudice, to behold it with ease. 
 It was found difficult to compress the dis- 
 cussion within the present limits. How- 
 ever nothing has been omitted which ap- 
 peared necessary, whilst every thing was 
 rejected which was deemed superfluous. 
 
 This Essay was not begun with any view 
 to publication, hut merely to gratify the 
 wishes of a kind friend, with whom the 
 author had conversed on the subject. 
 The favourable opinion of many who have 
 seen it in manuscript, the frequent solici- 
 tations of friendship, an ardent desire of 
 usefulness, and a concern to inform the 
 ignorant and settle the wavering, have 
 united their respective energies to force 
 it into public attention. And should 
 God be glorified, and any of his people 
 benefited by this publication, the author 
 will be amply rewarded. 
 
 D. T. 
 
 Newport, Isle of Wight. 
 
^v 
 
 
 & ( 
 
 i%4 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 Page. 
 
 THE MODE OF BAPTISM. 
 
 ARGUMENT I. 
 
 There is no passage in the sacred Scriptures from 
 which it can be proved, that a single individual 
 was ever baptized by immersion. 10 
 
 ARGUMENT II. 
 
 There are many passages of Scripture^ which render 
 it exceedingly probable, that Baptism ivas admi- 
 nistered in some other manner, and not by immer- 
 sion - - - - 19 
 
 ARGUMENT III. 
 
 The words baptism, baptize, baptized, are used in 
 Scripture in such connections, as render it evident, 
 that they do not mean to dip or immerse 25 
 
 ^ARGUMENT IV. 
 
 The right performance of any instituted ordinance, 
 depends not on the quantity of the element employed, 
 unless that quantity be specified by the Head of the 
 church - 32 
 
 ARGUMENT V. 
 
 The spiritual truths denoted by Baptism, are gene- 
 rally conveyed by the terms sprinkling, pouring, 
 washing, shedding forth on, and but seldom, if ever, 
 by dipping - - - 35 
 
 ARGUMENT VI. 
 
 The system which makes immersion essential to Bap- 
 tism, is contrary to the spirit of the Gospel 
 economy : — as it is in some cases impracticable — 
 as it imposes what some proper subjects are unable 
 to bear — as it is often dangerous — as it appears 
 
VI CONTENTS. 
 
 Page. 
 to many highly indecent — and as it opposes Chris- 
 tian intercourse - 40 
 Conclusion - 44 
 
 THE SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 ARGUMENT I. 
 
 There is nothing in the sacred Scriptures that really 
 opposes infant Baptism 48 
 
 ARGUMENT II. 
 
 In examining ivith care and impartiality the sacred 
 Scriptures, ice meet with many passages ichich are 
 much in favour of infant Baptism. - 53 
 
 ARGUMENT III. 
 
 The infant offspring of believing parents stand in the 
 same relation to the Gospel church now, as they 
 did to the church of God under the Old Testament 
 dispensation - - - 59 
 
 ARGUMENT IV. 
 
 Seeing that the infant offspring of believing parents 
 have a right to visible membership, and that Bap- 
 tism is the only rite of admission to that state, 
 Baptism ought to be ad>?iinistered to them 6j 
 
 ARGUMENT V. 
 
 Children are capable of bang taken into a covenant 
 relation to God;> — to them many covenant promises 
 are made — and they are able to partake of the 
 blessmgs of the covenant : — if so, then it will follow 
 that they are fit subjects of Baptism, which is the 
 seal of the covenant J 3 
 
 ARGUMENT VI. 
 
 It can be proved from the clearest historic records, 
 that children have, in all ages of the Christian dis- 
 pensation, been received into the visible church by 
 Baptism - - - 81 
 
 Conclusion - 89 
 
 An address to those who profess religion 91 
 

 s * 
 
 AN ESSAY, &c. 
 
 W HAT is truth ? is a question which every man 
 should propose when he enters the regions of contro- 
 versy. The inquiry implies, or ought to imply, that the 
 mind is open to conviction and ready to embrace truth, 
 on whatever side evidence may bring it to view. Impar- 
 tiality, is an essential qualification in this pursuit : a 
 want of it leaves the mind under the dominion of 
 prejudice, insensible of the force of argument, and 
 the easy prey of error. In all our inquiries, solici- 
 tude should be proportioned to the importance of the 
 subject. Different truths have their different degrees 
 of consequence. Some have an immediate connec- 
 tion with our present and eternal felicity, such as 
 repentance, faith, the atonement, and holiness. In 
 all inquiries relative to these subjects, the mind ought 
 to feel the greatest concern : — and that soul must be 
 awfully stupified that does not. — There are other 
 subjects less clear, and more open to controversy, on 
 which the mind may feel abated eagerness, bat not 
 indifference ; especially if they affect Christian union, 
 B 
 
8 AN ESSAY 
 
 and the peace of the Christian church : — and such is 
 Baptism, the subject treated in the following pages. 
 
 Scarcely has any controversy separated Christians 
 more, and been productive of a smaller portion of 
 good to the church of Christ in modern times, than 
 this. Many books have been written, some to agi- 
 tate the question, others to send it to repose ; but 
 most of them have been too large and abstruse for 
 common readers to give them a clear view of the 
 arguments on either side. Obscurity and virulence 
 have been too often associated, evil tempers generated, 
 and but little done for the cause of the great Re- 
 deemer. But truth needs not the unhallowed weapon 
 of angry passion in its defence : it only asks a mind 
 open to conviction, and a heart in love with its dic- 
 tates, to ensure a triumph. Laying aside, therefore, 
 all the jargon attendant on unchristian disputation, 
 I shall attempt to give a fair statement of the argu- 
 ments in favour of that side of the question, which I 
 conscientiously embrace. If candour influence the 
 reader's mind, he will confess, that the writer's con- 
 duct is not without support ; and that strong argu- 
 ments indeed, must be produced on the other side, 
 to overthrow his system, or criminate his practice. 
 
 Before he proceeds on this subject, the reader 
 ought clearly to understand, that there is no dispute 
 between those who practise Infant Baptism, a and 
 a Paedobaptists. 
 
ON BAPTISM. 9 
 
 those who differ from them, b whether adult believers, 
 who have not been baptized in their infancy, be 
 proper subjects of baptism ; this both parties main- 
 tain, and in such cases, practise. Neither is there 
 any difference between them respecting the validity 
 of Baptism administered by immersion ; here also 
 they are agreed. — Let this be well understood, then 
 it will follow, that any passages of scripture which 
 may be produced relative to the baptism of adults, or 
 immersion (if there be any such) have nothing to do 
 with this controversy, as they would only tend to prove 
 what both equally maintain. — The only points in 
 dispute are, Whether Baptism administered by 
 
 SPRINKLING OR POURING OF WATER, BE A PROPER 
 
 MODE AND WHETHER THE INFANT OFFSPRING OF 
 
 BELIEVING PARENTS PROFESSING CHRISTIANITY, BE 
 
 proper subjects. It is to these two particulars I shall 
 confine my attention in this Essay. I shall begin, 
 
 First, with the Mode, or manner in which Chris- 
 tian Baptism may be administered. — Is it essential 
 to Christian Baptism, that it should be administered 
 by dipping or immersion ? Or, is not sprinkling or 
 pouring of water in the name of the sacred Trinity, 
 deemed, with equal propriety, scriptural Baptism ? — 
 In defence of the latter, I offer to serious considera- 
 tion the following arguments, which, taken collec- 
 tively, I think sufficient to justify the conduct of those 
 who administer this ordinance by sprinkling. 
 b Antipsedobaptists, or Baptists. 
 
W ON THE MODE 
 
 ARGUMENT I. 
 
 THERE IS NO PASSAGE IN THE SACRED SCRIP- 
 TURES FROM WHICH IT CAN BE PROVED, THAT 
 A SINGLE INDIVIDUAL WAS EVER BAPTIZED BY 
 IMMERSION. 
 
 1 o some, this may appear a bold assertion ; but a 
 brief consideration of those passages of scripture which 
 are commonly brought in favour of Immersion, will 
 establish its truth. — It has, indeed, been frequently 
 said, that it is a positive command of Jesus Christ 
 that adult believers only, should be baptized by dip- 
 ping : but let it be remembered, that there is no such 
 command in all the sacred volume, either expressly, 
 or by inference. We are aware that it is said, 
 " Repent and be baptized," "He that believeth 
 and is baptized shall be saved," &c. yet here is 
 no mode of baptism mentioned, either dipping or 
 sprinkling. 
 
 There is no proof that John ever administered 
 
 baptism by immersion. We see no evidence that ne 
 
 immersed our Lord. a It is said indeed that after he 
 
 was baptised of John, " Jesus went up straightway 
 
 a JUatth. 3. is— .16. 
 
OF BAPTISM 
 
 11 
 
 out of the water :" but this proves nothing more, than 
 that he left the water, or went from it ; for the same 
 word here rendered " out of," is very frequently 
 translated, " from." There is nothing in the whole 
 transaction that proves that Jesus was dipped. — 
 John's baptizing the people in Jorcian, b does not 
 prove that any of them were immersed. The original 
 •preposition signifies at, as well as iis T . c But suppose 
 it were in Jordan, it cannot be inferred, without 
 violence put upon the words, that it was by immer- 
 sion. And when we consider the vast multitudes 
 that came to his baptism, it seems impossible for 
 John to have immersed them. — John's baptizing in 
 Enon, d because it is said " There was much water 
 there," by no means proves that any were dipped. 
 The learned know that the passage may be trans- 
 lated, " Because there were many waters or rivulets 
 there :" the place was undoubtedly convenient for 
 the purpose, but there is no proof whatever, that 
 any one of those rivulets was sufficiently deep for 
 immersion. 
 
 It cannot be proved that Philip dipped the 
 Eunuch : e we know it is said that " They both went 
 
 b Matth. 3. 5, 6. 
 
 c The same preposition is translated AT, Eph. ]. 1, 2, 12. 
 Phil. 1. 2. Colos. l. 2. 1 Cor. l. l. 2 Cor. 1. 1. and in many 
 other places in the New Testament. 
 
 d John 3. 23. e Acts 8. 36~-40. 
 
 B 3 
 
12 ON THE MODE 
 
 down into the water, and both came up out of the 
 water," but we have no more evidence that the 
 Eunuch was dipped than that Philip was, for what 
 is said of one is said of both. But to suppose that 
 Philip was immersed, is to suppose an absurdity. — 
 Besides, it cannot be proved from the words of the 
 original, (and we must criticise upon the original 
 words in cases of difficulty, and not upon those of a 
 translation) that they even went into the water or came 
 out of the water. Nothing more can be proved than 
 that they went to, and came from the water/ On 
 these words the learned Dr. Lardner makes the fol- 
 lowing judicious remarks. " I do not see any proof 
 that the Eunuch was baptized by immersion." " He 
 raid Philip went out of the chariot to the water, 
 and stood in the water, and Philip poured some of 
 the water upon him. To be baptized in the cha- 
 riot was unbecoming the solemnity of the ordi- 
 nance. It was proper to go out and stand, and 
 make a solemn profession of faith, and be initiated 
 by Philip. All the reasonings of Mr. B — and 
 others for immersion, taken from the Eunuch's get- 
 ting out of the chariot, have appeared to me incon- 
 clusive, not to say weak and trifling. Nor do I see 
 reason to think that John the Baptist used immer- 
 sion, but rather otherwise." " Among all the wash- 
 ings and purifications (called divers baptisms by the 
 
 f Acts 8. 38. 
 
OP BAPTISM. 13 
 
 apostle) in the Old Testament, there is not, I sup- 
 pose, one instance of any person being dipped or 
 immersed by another. It is contrary to decency, 
 and to the respect we owe to one another." s 
 
 Having considered those passages which are usually 
 adduced as proofs that the primitive mode of bap- 
 tizing was by immersion — and shown that they afford 
 no proof whatever that any such mode was prac- 
 tised ; — I shall now notice those texts which have 
 been supposed by some to have an allusion to immer- 
 sion as the mode of baptizing, and shall attempt to 
 make it appear, that they have no allusion to any 
 mode, and consequently, that they afford no proof in 
 favour of dipping. 
 
 That which is most commonly adduced, is a pas- 
 sage in Paul's Epistle to the Romans. 11 In this text, 
 the most superficial observer must see, that the 
 Apostle is treating on the work of feanctification, as a 
 consequence of our union with Christ, which union 
 is considered under the idea of a being grafted or 
 planted into Christ, of which Baptism is the sign 
 and seal. In the third verse, the Apostle says, 
 *' Know ye not, that so many of us as were bap- 
 tized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his 
 death ?" In understanding this passage, it is of 
 
 6 Letters to and from Dr. Doddridge, published by Thomas 
 Stedman, page 234. 
 h Rom. 6. l—ii. 
 
14 ON THE MODE 
 
 essential importance that we recall to mind the ides 
 of initiation, for which Baptism is administered. For 
 by Baptism we are initiated into the religion of 
 Christ, and all the blessings procured by 1 is death. 
 This is evidently the idea of the Apostle, for he 
 explains what he means in the fifth verse, where 
 he says, " If we have been planted together in the 
 likeness of his death, we shall be also in the like- 
 ness of his resurrection." Thus what the inspired Paul 
 considered before, a being baptized into Christ, he 
 here calls a being planted in the likeness of his 
 death. — Carrying on the same idea of initiation, which 
 is done by Baptism, he observes in the fourth verse, 
 " Therefore we are buried with him by Baptism into 
 death ;" by what are we buried with Christ into 
 death ? — by Baptism. Baptism t! en is the instru- 
 mental cause merely, or the rite of initiation into all 
 the benefits of the crucifixion, death, burial, and 
 resurrection of Christ : that " Like as Christ was rais- 
 ed up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even 
 so we also," who have been united to Christ, of which 
 union baptism is an emblem, " Should walk in new- 
 ness of life." Christians being thus united to Christ, 
 are said to be crucified, to be buried, and raised 
 with Christ ; and from this consideration, the Apostle 
 enforces the necessity of ( rucifying the old man, 
 dying to sin, and living to Christ in newness of life.— 
 Though the Apostle alludes to Christian Baptism, 
 
OF BAPTISM. 15 
 
 he evidently alludes to no mode, either dipping or 
 sprinkling, and therefore this text has nothing to do 
 with the controversy. 
 
 The sentiments of Beza on tins passage, correspond 
 with what has been advanced. " There are (says he) 
 three parts of thi;. sanctification, to wit, the death of 
 the old man or sin, his burial, and the resurrection 
 of the new man descending into us from the virtue of 
 the death, burial and resurrection of Christ, of which 
 benefit, our baptism is the sign and pledge." To 
 the same import are the words of Dr. Evans, Mr. 
 M. Henry's continuator. He observes — " It is plain 
 that it is not the sign, but the thing signified in 
 Baptism, that the apostle here calls being buried 
 with Christ ; and the expression of burying, alludes 
 to Christ's burial : as Christ was buried, that he might 
 rise to a new and more heaventy life : so we are in 
 Baptism buried, that is, cut off from the life of sin, 
 that we may rise again to a new life in faith and 
 love." 
 
 That Baptism is used as a sign or emblem of 
 our introduction to the benefits of the Redeemer's 
 mediation, is clear. " For as many of you as have 
 been baptized into Christ have put on Christ:" 1 
 where the word " baptized" is evidently used for initi- 
 ation or introduction to the benefits of Christ's glori- 
 ous undertaking; for in Baptism, the person re- 
 i Gal, 3. 27. 
 
16 ON THE MODE 
 
 nounced Judaism and Heathenism, and put on a 
 profession of Christianity. 
 
 The above reasoning applies with equal propriety 
 to another passage in the Colossians k of the same 
 import, and where the Apostle is treating on the same 
 subject; it is therefore unnecessary to enlarge 
 upon it. 
 
 Nothing favourable to immersion can be infered 
 from a passage in Paul's Epistle to the Corinthians, 1 
 where he says, " All our fathers (and their little 
 ones were included" 1 ) were under the cloud, and 
 all passed through the sea, and were all baptized 
 unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea." No 
 one, I presume, will bring this text as a proof of 
 dipping. For those persons were only baptized 
 unto Moses, not unto Christ. And if there be any 
 allusion to the mode of Baptism, it is certainly in 
 favour of sprinkling :— — the cloud came upon them, 
 and the water stood as a wall on the right hand 
 and on the left. The moisture of the cloud might 
 sprinkle the people, and the wind might carry some 
 of the spray of the sea upon them ; but none were 
 dipped on this occasion but Pharaoh and his host 
 who sank like lead in the mighty waters. 
 
 Some have supposed, with no more evidence, that 
 
 k Colos. 2. 11, 12. 'l Cor/ 10. 1, 2, 
 
 m Exodus, 10. 9, 10. 
 
OP BAPTISM. 17 
 
 Peter alluded to the mode of Baptism, when he 
 speaks n of the " Ark, wherein eight souls were saved 
 by wate<\ The like figure w hereunto, even Bap- 
 tism, doth aiso now save us, (not the putting away 
 of the tilth of the flesh, but the answer of a good 
 conscience towards God,) by the resurrection of 
 Jesus Christ." Peter here evidently speaks of a 
 resemblance between the ark and the ordinance of 
 Baptism, and not between the ark and water. And 
 what Baptism does the Apostle mean ? Not mere 
 outward Baptism, or " The putting away of the filth 
 of the flesh," but that which is signified by it, that 
 is, a real and spiritual renovation of soul, or " The 
 answer of a good conscience towards God." The 
 ark, wherein Noah and his family were saved, was 
 a type of the covenant of grace, whereby all the elect 
 of God are saved : — into which they are brought 
 when their hearts are changed by the Baptism of 
 the Holy Ghost, of which, outward Baptism is the 
 sign and seal. " And so it was the ark, and the 
 safety of those which were in it, and not the water, 
 that prefigured the gospel salvation in Christ, as 
 signified by Baptism, by means of which, when the 
 thing signified by it is found in us, through faith 
 in him, we are saved." Here is, then, no allusion 
 whatever to any mode, but merely to the ordinance 
 of Baptism. 
 
 • l Pet. 3. 20 5 21. • See Guyse on thi» pla«e. 
 
18 ON THE MODfc 
 
 There are other passages? which some have sup- 
 posed to have an allusion to dipping — but such 
 a construction is so forced, unnatural, and uncertain, 
 that I do not think it necessary to consider them 
 distinctly. The texts we have noticed, a e the 
 strongest that can be brought in favour of immer- 
 sion:— and not one of them amounts to any proof 
 that it was the mode adopted in the days of the 
 Apostles* 
 
 p Luke 12. 50. Mark 10. 38. 1 Cor. 15. 29. 
 
 * If this statement be just, and 1 will venture to say, that 
 no one will prove to the contrary, the consequence must be 
 that those who adopt dipping as the mode of baptizing, do 
 so, not because they can prove it from Scripture, but be- 
 cause it is their opinion that such was the mode. If it be 
 a mere opinion, then those who assert it to be a fact, 
 err through ignorance, or with design. If the former, then 
 it fol'ows that such persons ought to be silent, and differ from 
 others with modesty — if the latter, then they deserve the 
 severest reprehension, and forfeit their character as honest 
 men. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 19 
 
 ARGUMENT II. 
 
 THERE ARE MANY PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE, 
 WHICH RENDER IT EXCEEDINGLY PROBABLE, 
 THAT BAPTISM WAS ADMINISTERED IN SOME 
 OTHER MANNER, AND NOT BY IMMERSION. 
 
 XJ.AVING shown that there is no positive evidence in 
 Scripture for immersion, I shall proceed to show that 
 there is something that favours some other mode. In 
 this argument, I shall consider the slightest evidence- 
 that of PROBABILITY. 
 
 Had John baptized by immersion, his whole time 
 must have been spent in it, and that would not have 
 been sufficient. " There went out to him Jerusalem, 
 and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, 
 and were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their 
 sins." a — No mode is here mentioned ; but from the 
 vast multitudes baptized by him, it is certainly most 
 probable, that he baptized them by sprinkling or 
 pouring. When the people came to John in the 
 wilderness, they had no idea of being baptized by 
 him, and therefore would not brin^ that chancre of 
 clothing which was necessary for immersion. Imagi- 
 a Matth. 3. 5, 6. 
 B 
 
20 ON THE MODE 
 
 nation, indeed, would build a house on the banks of 
 Jordan, and provide it with all sorts of accommoda- 
 tions fit for immersion : — but, alas ! this is only a 
 castle in the air, the Scriptures give it no founda- 
 tion. 
 
 On the day of Pentecost, " They that gladly re- 
 ceived the word were baptized. And the same day 
 there were added unto them about three thousand 
 souls." b A considerable part of the day must have 
 elapsed before the baptizing commenced: and be- 
 sides this, we hear nothing of their retireing from the 
 place where they were met together, to any river or 
 convenient situation for immersion. And is it not 
 exceedingly improbable that about three thousand 
 should be immersed in so short a time as part of a 
 day ? — When Philip went down to the city of Samaria, 
 and preached Christ unto the people, they believed, 
 and " Were baptized, both men and women/' 
 They came to hear Philip in a state of Heathenism, 
 with various designs, and from various motives, — 
 some to persecute, others to hear what the babbler 
 should say, but none, I suppose, with any view of 
 receiving the truth, or being baptized. We cannot 
 imagine, therefore, that they brought suitable gar- 
 ments with them : — it is not conceivable that holy 
 Philip would immerse " Men and women" indiscri- 
 minately, without clothing; neither can we think 
 b Acts 2. 41. c Acts 8. 12. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 21 
 
 that they would be plunged in the clothing in which 
 they came, as it would have been highly dangerous 
 to have worn them afterward. Admit that they were 
 baptized by sprinkling or pouring of water, and the 
 whole becomes easy and plain : this solves every diffi- 
 culty. Admit this or not, the mind unshackled by 
 prejudice, will readily acknowledge, that strong pro- 
 bability favours sprinkling. 
 
 The next passage I shall mention, is that which 
 relates to the baptism of the Jailor and his family . d 
 The earthquake having shaken the prison, and waked 
 the Jailor, " He sprang in, and came trembling, and 
 fell down before Paul and Silas; and brought them 
 out. And they spake unto him the word of the 
 Lord, and to all that were in his house. And he 
 took them the same hour of the night, and washed 
 their stripes, and was baptized, he and all his straight- 
 way ; and when he had brought them into his house, 
 he set meat before them, and rejoiced in God with 
 all his house." — Here we meet with nothing that 
 countenances the idea of immersion. This Baptism 
 (it appears most likely) took place in the Jailor's 
 house ; for they were evidently brought into his 
 house before, or how could they have spoken the 
 word to all that were in his house ? " He took them 
 the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes;'* 
 there is every reason to think that this kindness would 
 d Acts it>. 2; — 34. 
 
22 OK THE MODE 
 
 be performed in his own house ; which is a further 
 proof that they were baptized there, as this circum- 
 stance preceded their baptism. "We hear nothing of 
 their going to a river, neither can we suppose that the 
 Jailor had conveniences for immersion in his house.— 
 Besides, it was midnight ; the Apostles were sore with 
 the wounds they had received a few hours before ; 
 and can we think it probable that they wouid go and 
 stand in a river in such circumstances, to baptize this 
 family ? 
 
 If we examine the circumstances attending the 
 baptism of Paul, e we shall see every reason to believe 
 that he was baptized by sprinkling in a private house. 
 After his conversion, he was taken to the house of 
 Judas in the street which was called Straight, in the 
 city of Damascus. Ananias having in a vision re- 
 ceived a positive command from Christ to go to him 
 there, he went, and found him in a very abject situa- 
 tion,— blind, emaciated with three days hunger in 
 which he neither did eat nor drink, and weakened by 
 distress of soul. As soon as Ananias came into the 
 house, " Putting his hands on him, he said, Brother 
 Saul, the Lord (even Jesus that appeared unto thee 
 in the way as thou earnest,) hath sent me, that thou 
 mightest receive thy sight, and be rilled with the 
 Holy Ghost. And immediately there fell from his 
 eyes as it had been scales ; and he received sight 
 c Acts 9. 8—19. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 23 
 
 forthwith, and arose and was baptized. And when 
 lie had received meat, he was strengthened." From 
 all this it is evident, that Sanl was in the house of 
 Judas when Ananias came to him ; that through the 
 agitation of his mind, and three days hunger, his 
 body was exceedingly weakened, and in a very unfit 
 state to be immersed in cold water ; that there is no 
 proof that he went out of the house to be baptized, 
 but merely rose up from his seat, and stood up upon 
 his feet, that the ordinance might be administered 
 with due solemnity ; and that as soon as he was bap- 
 tized, he received proper refreshment, and was 
 strengthened : not a word is said intimating that he 
 left the house to be immersed, or that Judas had 
 any conveniences in his house for immersion. Surely 
 here is every reason to believe that he was baptized 
 by sprinkling ; at least, this is far more probable. 
 
 I shall only mention another instance, which is 
 related in the next chapter/ After his remarkable 
 vision, Peter was sent for by Cornelius to his house. 
 As soon as he came, he entered in, " And found 
 many that were come together*" Cornelius having 
 related the reason of his sending for him, Peter began 
 to address them, and preached to them the salvation 
 of the Gospel. " While Peter yet spake these words, 
 the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the 
 word. Then answered Peter can any man forbid 
 f Acts 10. ig— 4S. 
 
24 ON THE MODE 
 
 water, that these should not be baptized, which have 
 received the Holy Ghost as well as we ? And he 
 commanded them to be baptized in the name of the 
 Lord." These persons were in the house of Corne- 
 lius; nothing is said about their leaving the house to 
 go to a river to be baptized ; nothing is mentioned 
 about a baptistry in the house of Cornelius ; Peter's 
 observing — " Can any man forbid water," seems to 
 intimate that water was brought to them into the 
 house ; and as they had just been baptized by the 
 Holy Ghost, by his falling upon them, I see no 
 reason to doubt but that sprinkling or pouring water 
 upon them, was the mode here used, as this most 
 resembled the thing denoted by it, that is, the Bap- 
 tism of the Holy Spirit. Surely the mind that takes 
 an impartial view of this passage will confess, that 
 the strongest probability is on the side of sprinkling. 
 
 From all these instances it appears exceedingly 
 probable, that Baptism was administered in some 
 other way, and not by dipping. All I plead for fiom 
 these quotations is, that strong probability favours 
 sprinkling or pouring, and opposes immersion.* 
 
 * Some have refered to the authority of the Church of 
 England in order to prove the necessity of immersion* But 
 let any one only read over the Service of Baptism in her 
 Prayer-Book, and he will see that the Church of England 
 maintains that Baptism administered by sprinkling is scrip- 
 tural, and consequently valid. 
 

 OF BAPTISM. 25 
 
 ARGUMENT III. 
 
 THE WORDS BAPTISM, BAPTIZE, BAPTIZED, ARE 
 USED IN SCRIPTURE IN SUCH CONNECTIONS, AS 
 RENDER IT EVIDENT, THAT THEY DO NOT 
 ALWAYS MEAN TO DIP OR IMMERSE. 
 
 Jlvespecting the import of the original word, the 
 great Dr. John Owen makes the following observa- 
 tions, which deserve to be remembered. " No one 
 instance (says that wise critic) can be given in Scrip- 
 ture, wherein Baptizo doth necessarily signify either 
 to dip or plunge. — It doth not signify properly to 
 dip or plunge ; for that in Greek is Embapto a and 
 Embaptizo. It no where signifies to dip, but as a 
 mode of, or in order to washing." b This being a 
 just statement of the import of the word, then it 
 follows, that washing either by dipping, or sprinkling, 
 or pouring, is baptizing. 
 
 It has often been said that the word Baptizo, the 
 word always used by the sacred penmen when treat- 
 
 a Embapto is translated to dip Matth. 26. 23. Mark 14.20. 
 John is. 26. IN.B. This word is never used in reference to 
 the ordiuance of Baptism. 
 
 b Collection of Sermons and Tracts p. 581. 
 
26 ON THE MODE 
 
 ing on the ordinance of Baptism, comes from Bap^ 
 to dip, and that as Bapto always signifies to dip, 
 therefore Baptizo which comes from it, signifies 
 always to dip also. This however is not true. Many 
 instances might be adduced to prove that even 
 Bapto is often used by various authors in such con- 
 nections as render it certain, that they did not mean 
 immersion; But let one instance suffice ; it is taken 
 from ihe Septuagint translation of the Old Testa- 
 ment into Greek, which is generally supposed to 
 have been made about three hundred years before 
 the Christian iEra. In this translation the word is 
 evidently used to sprinkle, for it is employed to 
 describe the manner in which Nebuchadnezzar's 
 body was " wet (ebapha) with the dew of heaven." c 
 This was certainly done by sprinkling, and not by 
 dipping. And it is equally certain that the word 
 Baptizo to baptize, is often used when it cannot 
 mean to immerse. This even the learned themselves 
 confess, who oppose baptizing by sprinkling. 
 
 Let us now see how these words are used in the 
 New Testament. The Apostle Paul in his Epistle 
 to the Hebrews/ speaking of the various Jewish 
 cleansing*, calls them " divers washings ;" in the 
 original it is " divers baptisms," or baptisms of dif- 
 ferent sorts ; but if dipping were the only mode, 
 there could not be divers baptisms, but one only, 
 and the Apostle is mistaken. 
 
 c Dan. 4. 33. d Heb. 0. 10. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 27 
 
 • No one can maintain with any show of pro- 
 bability, that the word denotes immersion in the 
 Gospel of Mark, e where it is said, " When they 
 come from the market, except they wash (in the 
 original it is baptize) they eat not ; and many 
 other things there be which they have received 
 to hold, as the washing (baptizing) of cups and pots, 
 brazen vessels and tables.'' — Some think that the 
 word here rendered tables, signifies beds : — but whe- 
 ther it signify tables or beds it matters little, for we 
 may consider it certain that they were not washed 
 by dipping, but by pouring or sprinkling water upon 
 them. Neither can we suppose from the above pas- 
 sage, that when they came from market they always 
 dipped themselves in water before they eat. — " The 
 Pharisees marvelled that Jesus had not first washed 
 (baptized) before dinner." f — What sort of washing 
 w r as that which the Pharisees expected Christ to have 
 performed ? I answer, only the washing of his hands. 
 This is evident from Mark 7. 3 — 5. " The Phari- 
 sees and all the Jews, except they wash (nipsontai) 
 their hands oft eat not, holding the tradition of the 
 Elders. And when they come from market, except 
 they wash (baptizontai) they eat not. And many 
 other things there be which they have received to 
 hold, as the washing (baptismous) of cups and pots, 
 brasen vessels and tables. Then the Pharisees and 
 e Mark 7. 4. f Luke it. 3£. 
 
£8 ON THE MODE 
 
 Scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples 
 according to the tradition of the Elders, but eat 
 bread with unwashen (aniptois) hands." In this 
 passage we have a positive proof that nipto to wash, 
 baptizo to baptize (the roots from which the above 
 words are derived) signify the same thing ; and are 
 used indiscriminately for each other : — the inference 
 is plain, that washing is baptizing in whatever 
 way it is done, either by dipping, or pouring, or 
 sprinkling. It appears from " Lliskas pouring water 
 on the hands of Elijah " % that the hands were usually 
 washed in this way ; at least they may be thus washed, 
 which was all that the Pharisees expected. In these 
 passages the word " baptize" signifies washing in 
 general, but does not specify any mode, either pour- 
 ing, sprinkling, or immersion. In these cases, a little 
 water, applied by sprinkling or pouring, would cer- 
 tainly wash (baptize) tabies, &c. 
 
 In the following pas ages it will appear more clear 
 still, tl;at pouring is baptizing. After his resurrec- 
 tion our Lord commanded his disciples h " That they 
 should not depart from J^ruocVem, but wait for the 
 promise of the Father, which, saitb he, ye have J.ea.d 
 of me. For John truly baptizi d v ith water, but ye 
 shall be baptized wit! the Holy Ghost, not many 
 days hence." Reference js here undoubtedly made 
 ro the day of Pentccust, of which we have a parti- 
 6 2 Kings 3. 11. h Acts l. 4, 5. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 29 
 
 culav account. 1 " And when the day of Pentecost 
 was fully come, they were all with one accord in one 
 place. And suddenly there came a sound from 
 heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it (the 
 sound) rilled all the house where they were sitting. 
 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues, like 
 as of lire, and it sat upon each of them. And they 
 were all rilled with the Holy Ghost." This is with- 
 out doubt, the Baptism of the Holy Ghost which 
 was promised them : — but how was this performed ? 
 Not by their being immersed in the Holy Ghost ; 
 for the cloven tongues sat upon them. — This bap- 
 tism Peter calls " pouring :" k " This is that (said 
 he) which was spoken by the Prophet Joel, 1 and it 
 shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will 
 pour out my spirit upon all flesh." Baptizing with 
 the Spirit is performed by pouring of the Spirit upon 
 those who were baptized : the natural inference is, tha't 
 pouring is baptizing. — To illustrate the nature of this 
 Baptism of the Holy Ghost still further, Peter ob- 
 serves,™ " He hath shed forth this which ye now see 
 and hear." Here the Apostle calls the same Bap- 
 tism, a " shediimg forth," and not immersion. In 
 reference to the same Baptism, Peter says, n " As I 
 began to speak, the Huiy Ghost fell on them, as on 
 us at the beginning." Here the same Baptism is 
 
 1 Acts 2. 1—4. k Ver. 17. l Joel 2. 28 — 32, 
 
 m Acts 2. 33. u Acts 11. 15, 16, 
 
30 ON THE MODE 
 
 called a " falling on us." — Again. While Peter yet 
 spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them 
 which heard the word. And they of the circumci- 
 sion which believed were astonished, as many as came 
 with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was 
 poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.' ° The use 
 of water in the ordinance of Baptism is, undoubtedly, 
 an emblem of the influences of the Holy Ghost on the 
 soul : and the Scriptures speak of a similarity of the 
 mode of application, as well as of the thing. Thus— • 
 " I indeed have baptized you with water ; but he 
 (Christ) shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost."? 
 But baptizing with water, is not applying the body 
 to the water, but the water to the body of the bap- 
 tized. This manner of speaking is very frequently 
 used in the Scriptures.* 
 
 If the word " baptize" signify invariably " to 
 dip," then on all occasions, wherever the word occur* 
 in the Scriptures, we may substitute dip, dipped, &c. 
 and that substitution will make as good sense as 
 baptize, baptized, &c. Let us then read a few pas- 
 
 Acts 10' 44, 45. p Matth. 3. 11. 
 
 * Matth. 3. ll. Mark l. S. Luke 3. 16. John l. 26. 
 Acts 1. 5. 11, 16. I know that the preposition en, in, is 
 used in the ahove passages. But the Translators rendered 
 it u with," being- aware of the similarity between Baptism 
 and the thing signified by it, and the absurdity that would 
 follow upon translating it in: in water, in the Holy Ghost. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 31 
 
 sages where the word " baptize" is used with this 
 change. " I have dipped you with water, but he 
 shall dip you with the Holy Ghost and with fire."^ 
 " For by one spirit are we all dipped into one 
 body." r " As many as have been dipped into Christ 
 have put on Christ." s " John did preach the dip- 
 ping of repentance." 1 " Preaching the dipping 
 of repentance for the remission of sins." u To 
 change the words would make a great many texts 
 speak language as absurd as the above. And the 
 obvious reason is, the texts to which I have alluded, 
 and a variety of others, have no reference to any mode, 
 but simply and alone to the design of Baptism, 
 namely, initiation, or an introduction into the 
 church as its visible members. 
 
 From the whole I conclude, that the word " baptize" 
 is often used in such connections as render it evident, 
 that it does not mean to dip or immerse, but " to 
 pour upon" — " fall upon" — " sit upon," &c. There- 
 fore immersion is not essential to Christian Baptism ; 
 and it is properly and scripturally administered by 
 pouring or sprinkling. 
 
 , Matth. 3. 11. r 1 Cor. 12. 13. s Gal. 3. 27. 
 
 Mark 1. 4. u Luke 3. 3. 
 
 O 
 
32 ON THE MODE 
 
 ARGUMENT IV. 
 
 THE RIGHT PERFORMANCE OF ANY INSTITUTED 
 ORDINANCE, DEPENDS NOT ON THE QUANTITY 
 OF THE ELEMENT EMPLOYED, UNLESS THAT 
 QUANTITY BE SPECIFIED BY THE HEAD OF THE 
 CHURCH. 
 
 The question here is, do the Seriptu.es speak of a 
 quantity of water, sufficient for immersion, as being 
 of essential importance to a right performance of 
 the ordinance of Baptism ? Surely not. 
 
 Let us here notice the other standing ordinance 
 of the Christian Church, where visible elements are 
 employed, I mean the Lord's Supper. Do the 
 Scriptures speak of any given quantity of bread to 
 be eaten, or wine to be drank, in order to an accept- 
 able performance of this important duty ? No. If any 
 given quantity had been of importance, the Head of 
 the Church certainly would have inscribed it on the 
 page of truth. But here the Scriptures are silent ; 
 excepting that they caution us against the abuse of 
 that solemn institution by the use of so large a quan- 
 tity, as would tend to gluttony and drunkenness. 
 However small the portion, only let it be eaten and 
 
OF BAPTISM. 33 
 
 drank in remembrance of Christ, and it is well 
 done.* 
 
 Had it been essential to the right administration 
 of Baptism, that there should be water enough for the 
 immersion of the subject, we may certainly infer, 
 that it would have been recorded. To suppose such 
 a quantity essential, but left unspecilied by the 
 Christian Lawgiver, would be a reflection on his 
 wisdom, his justice, and his goodness. But the sacred 
 Scriptures are perfectly silent on this subject also. 
 Besides ; there are reasons to suppose that Baptism 
 was administered in private houses, as well as at 
 rivers ; where there could be but little, as well as 
 where there was much water ; and therefore w*e natu- 
 rally and properly conclude, that whether there be 
 enough for immersion, or only sufficient for sprinkling, 
 is of no moment : only let it be administered in the name 
 of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and 
 it is all the Scriptu -es require. On this subject, the 
 famous Witsius makes the following remarks : " The 
 communion in the thing- signified, should not be rated 
 by the quantity of the external sign. A very small 
 
 * This ordinance is called a Suptsr, which in common lan- 
 guage conveys the idea of a meal ; and we are said to partake 
 of the Lord's Supper, though we eat and drink the smallest 
 quantity of bread and wine. On the same principle, Why may 
 we not consider a person baptized, though but a little water 
 be applied by sprinkling ? 
 
34 OX THE MODE 
 
 portion of water may no less seal the abundance of 
 divine grace in Baptism, than a small morsel of 
 bread, and a sparing draught of wine in the holy 
 supper."* To make that essential to an ordinance 
 which the oracles of God do not, argues the greatest 
 pride in the person who makes the daring attempt. — 
 If this argument be good, and who will prove it is 
 not ? then the use of a small quantity by sprinkling 
 is as valid as a great deal, which is all I contend 
 for.* 
 
 a Witsius's Economy of the Covenant, Vol. II. p. 436. 
 
 * It is not unfrequently said — " V hot use is a little water 
 sprinkled upon the face — ' o i-swer this question I need 
 enly propose another*— Of what use iv a great deal ? 
 
OF BAPTISM. 35 
 
 ARGUMENT V. 
 
 THE SPIRITUAL TRUTHS DENOTED BY BAPTISM, 
 ARE GENERALLY CONVEYED BY THE TERMS 
 SPRINKLING, POURING, WASHING, SHEDDING 
 FORTH ON, AND BUT SELDOM, IF EVER,* BY 
 DIPPING. 
 
 .Daptism presupposes the sinful, depraved state of 
 man ; it expresses the necessity of regeneration and 
 
 w I know but of one place where the word " dip 11 is used 
 with any apparent relation to purifying, and there it is very 
 doubtful. I mean the case of Naaman the leper, 2 Kings 5. 
 10— 1-4. The Prophet Elisha told him to go and wash in (or 
 at) Jordan. The Septuagint translation makes use of the 
 proper word louo, which is used in common to denote " to 
 wash v by the application of water in any mode; and the same 
 word is used three times in this short history. When he 
 complied with the Prophet's direction, he washed the part 
 which was leprous, in the manner he was directed. And this 
 is all that is meant by its being said " That he went and 
 dipped himself seven times, according to the saying of the 
 man of God." And the above translation uses the word 
 baptizo to denote this washing. N. B. This is a further 
 evidence that the word baptizo signifies to wash in any 
 mode, as baptizo and louo are used to denote the same 
 thing, i. e. to wash. 
 
 D 3 
 
36 ON THE MODE 
 
 the removal of the impurity of sin by the sanc- 
 tifying operations of the Spirit ; and is the sign of 
 especial dedication to God. If we open the sacred 
 Scriptures, we shall see that these particulars are ex- 
 pressed by sprinkling, pouring, washing, shedding 
 forth, &c. 
 
 Thus by sprinkling. " Take the Levites from 
 among the children of Israel, and cleanse them. 
 And thus shalt thou do unto them to cleanse them ; 
 sprinkle water of purifying upon them, and let 
 them shave all their flesh, and let them wash their 
 clothes, and so make themselves clean." a " So shall 
 he sprinkle many nations." b " Then will I sprin- 
 kle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean." c 
 " If the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes 
 of an heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctirieth to 
 the purifying of the flesh, how much more shall the 
 blood of Christ, purge your conscience from dead 
 works." d " Almost all things are by the law purged 
 with blood ;" e — in what manner applied? — "By 
 sprinkling." f — " Having our hearts sprinkled from 
 an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure 
 water." 8 " Through sanctiheation of the Spirit, 
 unto obedience, and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus 
 Christ." h — " *We are come to the blood of sprink- 
 
 E Numbers 8.6./. b Isaiah 52. 15. c Ezek. 36. 25. 
 Keb. 9. 13, 14. e Ver. 22. f Ver. 19. 21. 
 
 8 Keb. 10. 22. h l Pet. 1. 2. ' Heb. 12. 24. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 37 
 
 ling, that speaketh better things than the blood of 
 Abel."* 
 
 The same things are expressed by pouring upon. 
 " He shall pour (the oil) upon the head of him that 
 is to be cleansed." k " I will pour water upon him 
 that is thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground ; I 
 will pour my spirit upon thy seed. ' * " And I will 
 pour upon the house of David, and the inhabitants 
 
 * The following serious observations made by the pious 
 and learned Owen, deserve the attention of those who 
 treat the idea of sprinkling with such sovereign contempt 
 as we find many do. " This rite or way of sprinkliug, 
 (says he": was chosen of God as an expressive token or sign 
 of the effectua communication of the benefits of the cove- 
 nant unto them that were sprinkled. (And children were 
 amongst them.) Hence the communication of the benefits 
 of the death of Christ onto sanctification is called the 
 sprinkling of his blood, 1 Pet. l. 2. And our Apostle 
 comprizeth all th^ effects of it unto that end under the 
 name of the blood of sprinkling, Heb. 12, 24. And I fear 
 that some who have used the expression with some contempt, 
 when applied by themselves unto the sign of the communi- 
 cation of the benefits of the de^th of Christ in Baptism, 
 have not observed that reverence of holy things that is re- 
 quired of us. For this symbol of sprinkling was that 
 which God himself chose and appointed, as a meet and apt 
 token of the communication of covenant-mercy, tint is, of 
 his grace in Christ Jesus unto our souls." Owen on the 
 Hebrews, vol. 3. p. 435, fol. edit. 
 
 k Levit. 14. is. l Isa. 44. 3. m Zech. 12. 10. 
 
38 ON THE MODE 
 
 of Jerusalem the spirit of grace and supplication." m 
 " On the Gentiles was poured out the gift of the 
 Holy Ghost.' n 
 
 T k e same things are expressed by washing. 
 " Such were some. of you, but ye are washed, but 
 ye are sanctihed — by the Spirit of our God." ° 
 " Arise and be bai-tized, and wash away thy sins."? 
 u Having our bodies washed with pure water." 3 
 " Christ loved the church and gave himself for it, 
 that he might sanctify aud cleanse it with the wash- 
 ing of water by the word." r " He saved us by the 
 washing of regeneration." 3 " Simon Peter said unto 
 him, Lord, (wash) not my feet only, but also my 
 hands and my head." 1 
 
 The same things are expressed by shedding forth 
 onus. " He hath shed forth this (the Holy Ghost, 
 the Baptism promised) which ye now see." u " The 
 renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed on us 
 abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." w 
 
 Several of the above passages have an allusion 
 to the mode of Baptism by sprinkling, pouring, 
 washing, shedding upon, &c. which are called 
 baptizing.* If there be a similarity between the 
 
 * Acts 10. 45. ° l Cor. 6. 11. p Acts 22. l6. 
 q Reb. 10. 22. r Eph. 5. 25, 26. 
 
 s Tit. 3. 5. f John 13. g. 
 
 v Acts 2. 33. w Tit. 3. 5, 6. 
 
 * That shedding forth, falling upon, &c. are called bap- 
 
OF BAPTISM. 39 
 
 mode of administering- the ordinance of Baptism, 
 and the manner of communicating the spiritual truths 
 denoted by it, (which we may naturally expect there 
 should be,) then we may conclude, that, when the 
 Scriptures speak of the communication of these bles- 
 sings it will be in terms of allusion to that ordinance, 
 by which they are represented : — this is done : — but 
 the mode alluded to is sprinkling, pouring, washing, 
 shedding forth : — we may therefore safely conclude, 
 that water administered in any of these modes, is pro- 
 perly Baptism. 
 
 tizing is clear. Compare Acts ]. 5, witb Acts 11, 15, 16. 
 K As I began to spenk (said Peter the Holy Ghost fell on 
 them, as osr up at the beginning. Then remembered I the 
 word of the Lord, how that he said, Johu indeed baptized with 
 water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost, 
 
40 ON THE MODE 
 
 ARGUMENT VI. 
 
 THE SYSTEM WHICH MAKES IMMERSION ESSEN- 
 TIAL TO BAPTISM, IS CONTRARY TO THE SPIRIT 
 
 OF THE GOSPEL ECONOMY : AS IT IS IN SOME 
 
 CASES IMPRACTICABLE AS IT IMPOSES WHAT 
 
 SOME PROPER SUBJECTS ARE US ABLE TO BEAR 
 
 ►•—AS IT IS OFTEN DANGEROUS A3 IT APPEARS 
 
 TO MANY HIGHLY INDECENT AND AS IT OP- 
 POSES CHRISTIAN INTERCOURSE. 
 
 Immersion is in some cases impracticable. There 
 are places so destitute of water, excepting in deep 
 wells, and that in very small quantities, that enough 
 for immersion could not be obtained. Tins is evident 
 from the testimony of travellers, who have penetrated 
 the interiors of Africa, and other hot countries, where 
 the Gospel might be preached, and where souls 
 might be converted to Christ, and made fit subjects 
 for the kingdom of grace. Malthus, in his Essay 
 on the Principle of Population, 3 has the following 
 remark : " The tribes of the desert (of Arabia) deny 
 that the religion of Mahomet was made for them. 
 For how, say they, can we perform ablutions, when 
 * Page 93, second edition. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 41 
 
 we have no water ?" Might they not make the 
 same objection to Christianity, if it be essential that 
 they should be immersed in water, before they be- 
 come members of the visible church ? 
 
 Immersion is a yoke which some proper subjects 
 are unable to bear. Suppose a person afflicted with 
 certain complaints, in which plunging in cold water 
 would endanger life : — And there are such cases : — 
 Suppose such a person converted to Christ, and 
 a proper subject for church fellowship, yet, on the 
 exclusive immersion system, that felicity would be 
 denied this real disciple, however holy ; no place 
 would be allowed in the church — no seat granted at 
 the table of the Lord, to such an one. Would not 
 this be afflicting the afflicted, by making that essen- 
 tial to communion, which the Scriptures do not, for 
 the crime, pardonable at least, of not being able to 
 endure immersion ? — And is it not often dangerous 
 also to the minister, who must frequently stand in the 
 water a considerable time, to immerse, as well as to 
 those who are to be immersed, as in cases of the 
 above nature ? * 
 
 The practice of immersion appears to many highly 
 indecent. This would be universally confessed, 
 
 * Could it be proved that immersion is essential to this 
 ordinance, which has never yet been done, all these dangers 
 must be risked, and every thing unpleasant attached to immer- 
 sion endured. 
 
4*2 ON THE MODE 
 
 were the practice of dipping men and women indis- 
 criminately, introduced into the public Theatres, 
 and performed before the gazing thousands. And 
 how much more so in a religious assembly, where all 
 should be done " decently and in order," and every 
 thing excluded which would generate a single dispo- 
 sition contrary to the purity of the Gospel. May we 
 not say with Dr. Lardner, in the quotation before 
 made — " It is contrary to decency, and to the respect 
 we owe to one another ?" 
 
 And does not this system oppose Christian inter- 
 course ? * In heaven, all barriers to Christian commu- 
 nion are for ever done away. Nothing ought to be 
 considered as essentially necessary in the church 
 militant, that would separate those who are united to 
 Christ, who agree in all essential points, and whose 
 inferiour sentiments are not contrary to peace and 
 love. This serious objection lies against the system 
 that makes immersion essential to Baptism and 
 church fellowship, as it separates whom the Lord 
 hath joined. For though it is impossible to prove that 
 sprinkling is not baptizing, yet a pious person thus 
 baptized, and fully persuaded that it is a scriptural 
 mode, would not be suffered to participate of the 
 
 * I here make an honourable exception of those few 
 ehurches of the Baptist denomination, which admit of mixed 
 communion. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 43 
 
 Lord's Supper with those who support this system. 
 Surely this is to keep out whom the Gospel invites 
 in ; and it throws a stumbling block in the way of the 
 communion of saints, which is at once uncharitable, 
 and contrary to the divine economy of that Gospel, 
 which is designed to unite, and not to separate chief 
 friends. " In my simple opinion," said good John 
 Bunyan, who was himself an Antipoedobaptist,*"your 
 rigid, church-disquieting principles, are not fit for any 
 age and state of the church. I say they are babes, and 
 carnal, that attempt to break the peace and commu- 
 nion of churches, though upon no better pretences 
 than water. — I am still of that mind, and shall be, 
 so long as I see the effects that follow, viz. the breach 
 of love, taking off Christians from the more weighty 
 things of God, and to make them quarrel and have 
 heart burnings one against another." d 
 
 * He did not consider immersion as essential to church 
 fellowship— for he admitted of an open communion. 
 b Works, vol. 1. p. 151, 153. 
 
 E 
 
44 ON THE MODE 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 1 hus we see — that it is impossible to prove from 
 the Scriptures that an individual was ever baptized 
 by immersion — that many passages of Scripture 
 render it exceedingly probable that Baptism was 
 administered in some other way, and not by immer- 
 sion — that the word " baptize," is frequently used 
 where it cannot mean to dip, but to pour or sprinkle 
 — that the right performance of this ordinance does 
 not require a quantity of the element sufficient for 
 the immersion of the subject — that the spiritual truths 
 denoted by Baptism are generally intimated by the 
 terms sprinkling, pouring, washing, shedding forth 
 on us, which appear to be allusions to the antien 
 mode of baptizing, but seldom, if ever, by dipping— 
 and that the system which makes immersion essen- 
 tial to Baptism, is contrary to the spirit of the Gos- 
 pel economy. From the whole I infer, that dipping 
 the subject under water is not essential to Christian 
 Baptism: and that Baptism administered by sprink- 
 ling or pouring is a scriptural mode. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 45 
 
 THE 
 
 SUBJECTS OF BAPTISM. 
 
 .Having considered the Mode of "Baptizing, and 
 produced sufficient evidence to justify the practice 
 of sprinkling, I shall proceed to notice the subjects 
 or persons to whom Baptism is to be administered ; 
 these are adult believers, who have not been baptized 
 in their infancy, and the infant offspring of believing 
 parents. — The reason we read of so many adults who 
 were baptized in the days of the Apostles, is evi- 
 dent : for those persons were converted from either 
 Judaism or Paganism, where, of course, they could 
 not have been baptized, with Christian Baptism, in 
 their infancy, their parents having been ignorant of 
 Christ and all Christian institutions. Being con- 
 verted to Christ in their adult years, it was requisite 
 that they should be baptized in order to become 
 vis le members of the Christian church, as Baptism 
 wao ihe only rite of admission. When such persons 
 oifered themselves to the Apostles as candidates for 
 
40 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 Baptism, it was necessary that the Apostles should 
 be satished that they had renounced Judaism or 
 Paganism, and embraced the Messiah : therefore 
 they always asked such a candidate, " Dost thou 
 believe on the Son of God ? if thou believest with 
 all thine heart, thou may est be baptized." Hence 
 the Apostles exhorted their hearers to repent of 
 their past Heathenism and Judaism, and their sins 
 in general, and to believe the Gospel in order to be 
 baptized ; for it would have been the most consum- 
 mate folly to have baptized them into the Christian 
 faith before they had received Christianity. And let 
 it be observed, that those who practise infant baptism 
 now, make the same demands in similar circum- 
 stances, and require a profession of faith from adult 
 candidates who have not been baptized in their infancy. 
 But though such adults are proper subjects of Bap- 
 tism, it would be groundless and unreasonable to infer 
 from this consideration, that therefore infants are not.* 
 
 * Groundless and unreasonable as this inference is, yet 
 nothing is more comino amongst those who oppose Paedo- 
 baptism. To maintain that because the baptism of adults is 
 right in certain circumstauees, that therefore the baptism of 
 infants is always wrong, would be as presumptive as to main- 
 tain that because adults dying in certain circumstances are 
 assuredly Savexl, therefore no infant can be saved j the reason 
 of the absurdity is, because when we admit the salvation of 
 adults, we say nothing against the salvation of infants. Sa 
 
OF EAPTISM. 47 
 
 A candid examination of the subject will make it 
 appear, that the infant offspring of such be- 
 lieving PARENTS ARE EQUALLY ENTITLED TO THE 
 
 ordinance of baptism. To make this clear, I 
 offer the following arguments. 
 
 when we have proved the baptism of adults, we have advanced 
 nothing against the baptism of infants, as the truth of the 
 former by no means militates against the admission of the 
 latter. 
 
 E 3 
 
4S ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 ARGUMENT I. 
 
 THERE IS NOTHING IN THE SACRED SCRIPTURES 
 THAT REALLY OPPOSES INFANT BAPTISM. 
 
 \_>ould an express prohibition of infant Baptism be 
 brou glit from the word of God, or an inference drawn 
 from positive premises, which was absolutely conclu- 
 sive against the baptism of infants, this controversy 
 would no longer afflict the church ; all real Chris- 
 tians would be of the same mind : but this is impos- 
 sible.: the sacred Scriptures have no such prohibi- 
 tion, warrant no such conclusion. 
 
 It argues nothing against this practice to say, that 
 faith and repentance were required of adults in order 
 to Baptism ; and as infants cannot exercise either 
 faith or repentance, therefore infants have no right 
 to Baptism.* All that this proves is, that a profes- 
 
 * Great stress has been laid by some persons of weak minds 
 on t&e order of the words" Repent and be baptized,'" from 
 which they have supposed that repentance must precede 
 Baptism, and have inferred tbat as infants are incapable of 
 repenting, therefore they are unfit subjects for Baptism. I 
 wonder that those persons should hold the necessity of con- 
 version in order to Baptism ; for it is said * 4 Except a man 
 be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the 
 
OF BAPTISM. 49 
 
 slon of faith and repentance was, and is still neces- 
 sary from those who are converted from Judaism and 
 Heathenism to Christianity, in order to Baptism, 
 which no one denies. But to assert, that as infants 
 are incapable of faith and repentance, therefore they 
 ought not to be baptized, is not solid reasoning, be- 
 cause it is a conclusion which the premises do not 
 justify, as there is nothing about infants in the pre- 
 mises. By this mode of argument we may easily 
 prove that all the infants that ever existed, dying in 
 their infancv, are sent to everlasting perdition ; for the 
 Scriptures declare, " He that believeth not shall be 
 damned;" infants cannot believe, and therefore must 
 be damned : a conclusion at once discountenanced 
 by Scripture, and abhorrent to the feelings of the real 
 Christian. By this way of pursuing knowledge, we 
 should arrive at the most destructive error: — we 
 should be led to embrace a faith the most pernici- 
 ous, and pursue a conduct the most barbarous. We 
 should not only be led to believe that every infant, 
 dying so, is sent to certain destruction in the next 
 world, but that we should hasten their ruin by starv- 
 ing them in this. For the Scriptures say a — " If 
 
 Dm of God. If any importance is to be attached to the 
 mere order of the words, then we should be " born o* w ter," 
 that is baptized in our sins, before we can be born of the 
 Spirit or baptized with the Holy Ghost. 
 a 2 Thess. 3. 10. 
 
50 OSL THE SUBJECTS 
 
 any will not work, neither shall he eat." But, to 
 follow the above mode of argument, we should imme- 
 diately reply, children have no will to work, and 
 therefore shall not eat. Thus reason and the 
 human race would soon perish together. — At the 
 first glance every one must see that this reason- 
 ing is fallacious, because nothing is said about in- 
 fants in the passages to which I have referred : and 
 it is just as fallacious to assert, that infants have no 
 right to the ordinance of Baptism, because they are 
 not mentioned with adults, where a profession of 
 faith and repentance is required of them in order to 
 Baptism. Besides ; if this prove any thing, it proves 
 too much : for if faith and repentance be essential 
 qualifications in the subjects of Baptism, then it fol- 
 lows that Jesus Christ ought not to have been 
 baptized : for as he had never sinned, it was impos- 
 sible that he should either repent or believe, and 
 therefore, on this supposition, was an improper sub- 
 ject for Baptism. And yet the baptism of Jesus 
 Christ is often referred to by Antipsedobaptists, as a 
 proof that repenting and believing adults only are 
 proper subjects. From this instance we see, that 
 there is a case in which Baptism was administered to 
 one who professed neither repentance nor faith : if so, 
 what reason can be assigned to prove that children 
 ought not to be baptized, though they profess neither 
 faith nor repentance ? 
 
OF BAPTISM. 51 
 
 Should it be objected, that no one has a right to a 
 positive Christian ordinance, but by express com- 
 mand, or precedent of Apostolic origin ; and there is 
 no such command nor precedent for infant baptism, 
 therefore infants ought not to be baptized : I reply, 
 that this argument is equally untenable with the. 
 former : for this also proves too much. By such 
 reasoning we can prove, that females have no right 
 to the positive institution of the Lord's Supper, 
 because there is neither command nor precedent 
 in the Scriptures for female communion. But 
 notwithstanding this silence of Scripture, who 
 doubts the right of pious females to communicate ? 
 And where is the authority for granting the right 
 of females to one positive Christian institution, and 
 denying the right of infants to another, seeing that 
 the Scriptures are equally silent on both? — There 
 being no express instance in the Scriptures of an 
 infant's being baptized, is no proof against infant 
 baptism. ; especially, if we have reason to believe, as 
 I shall afterwards prove, that the right of infants to 
 this ordinance was never questioned in the primitive 
 church. To speak positively against a prevailing 
 practice, in which there is nothing uuscriptural, but 
 much that agrees with the general scope of the Sacred 
 Oracles, merely from the circumstance of silence in 
 Scripture about that particular, would lead us to 
 oppose female communion, the observance of the 
 
5'2 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 Christian Sabbath, all modes of conducting public 
 worship which now prevail, as well as infant Baptism ; 
 for the latter stands on the very same grounds as the 
 former. " There was need of a plain and open pro- 
 hibition (says the learned Dr. Lightfoot) that infants 
 and little children should not be baptized, if our 
 Saviour would not have had them baptized. For, 
 since it was most common in all ages foregoing that 
 little children should be baptized,* if Christ had been 
 minded to have that custom abolished, he would have 
 openly forbidden it. Therefore his silence, and the 
 silence of the Scriptures on this matter, confirms 
 Pa?dobaptism and contiuueth it unto all ages. ,, — 
 Though we have an account in Scripture of the bap- 
 tizing of three whole families, yet, on the principle I 
 am opposing you would say, there certainly was not 
 one infant in them all, which would require more 
 than ordinary information to prove. 
 
 The above are the strongest arguments that can be 
 brought against infant baptism, but they have no 
 force : — and from the whole of what has been advanc- 
 ed, I conclude, there is nothing in the Scriptures 
 really against the baptism of infants. 
 
 * Works vol. 2. page 11 9. The Portor proves that it Mas 
 customary amongst the Jews to baptize their children, as. 
 well as to circumcise them, from a very early period. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 53 
 
 ARGUMENT II. 
 
 IN EXAMINING WITH CARE AND IMPARTIALITY 
 THE SACRED SCRIPTURES, WE MEET WITH 5IANT 
 PASSAGES WHICH ARE MUCH IN FAVOUR OF IN- 
 FANT BAPTISM. 
 
 An reading the word of God, our only guide in all 
 theological researches, our minds are not left in equi- 
 librium on the subject of infant baptism ; they thro\r 
 many a weight into the scale, which makes it prepon- 
 derate on the side of infants. We not only do not 
 see any thing that makes against, but much that 
 makes for their baptism. 
 
 I begin with our Lord's commission to his disci- 
 ples, a which greatly favours the cause 1 am pleading. 
 His words are, " Go ye therefore and teach (in the 
 original it is disciple) all nations, baptizing them in 
 the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
 Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things 
 whatsoever I have commanded you." How would 
 the disciples understand these words ? I conceive 
 that they must have understood them as compre- 
 hending children. " But suppose it had been 
 a Matth. 28. lg, 20. 
 
54 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 sa id — Go teach, proselyte, all nations, circumcising 
 them : would not the Apostles, without any further 
 warrant, have naturally thought, that upon proselyt- 
 ing the Gentile parent, and circumcising him, his 
 infants also were to be circumcised ? Or, if a divine 
 command had been given to the twelve Patriarchs of 
 old, to go into Egypt, Arabia, &c. to teach them the 
 God of Abraham, circumcising them; would they 
 not, must they not have understood it as authorizing 
 them to perform this ceremony, not upon the parents 
 only, but also upon the infants of such as believed in 
 the God of Abraham ? without all question they 
 would." b The Apostles then, must have understood 
 the commission of our Lord as meaning, that parents 
 and children were to be discipled, and therefore 
 baptized. 
 
 In the expression " All nations," we must suppose 
 infants included, unless there be some clause in the 
 commission to exclude them : but we find no such 
 clause.,. When adults and? i their infants are thus 
 discipled, they are brought into the condition of 
 scholars, and are to be baptized. And though adults 
 are to be taught before Baptism, the principles of 
 Christianity, their infant offspring, who are incapable 
 of being taught before, are to be instructed after Bap- 
 tism. For when initiated by this rite into the visible 
 church of Christ, they are to be considered disci- 
 • Towgood on Baptism, p. 20. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 55 
 
 pies ; c and parents, when they devote their children 
 to God in this institution, stand engaged to train 
 them up " In the way they should go," " In the 
 nurture and admonition of the Lord." The plain 
 sense of the words of our Lord appears to be, " Go — 
 disciple, put in the condition of my disciples, all 
 nations, Jews and Gentiles, old and young, parents 
 and children, by the rite of Baptism, which is the 
 sign and means of admission into my school ; and 
 then teach them the principles of my religion, as 
 their several capacities will enable them to receive 
 instruction. 
 
 Another passage which favours the cause of in- 
 fants is that recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, d 
 where Peter alludes to the promise which God 
 made to Abraham, e in which covenant blessings were 
 promised to him, and his seed, to be signified and 
 sealed to him and them by circumcision, which then 
 became a standing religious ordinance of initiation 
 into the church of the Jews. Peter, speaking of the 
 gift of the Holy Ghost, with all his saving influences, 
 the remission of sins, and Gospel repentance, the 
 great blessings of the covenant of grace, to be sealed 
 and signified by Baptism as coming in the place of 
 
 c Children are called the Lord's servants, Leviticus 25 ? 4], 
 42, and disciples Acts 15. 10. 
 - Acts 2. 38* 39. e Gen. 17. 
 
 F 
 
A 
 
 
 56 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 circumcision (which was the seal of the covenant 
 under the Law) says to his hearers who were con- 
 vinced of their sins, and inquireing what they should 
 do, *' The promise is to you and to your children." 
 Let it be remembered that Peter was addressing a 
 very numerous audience, great numbers of whom, 
 without any doubt, had children. As they knew 
 that the same promise was made to Abraham and his 
 infant seed, they would certainly understand this 
 promise as belonging as much to their children, as 
 the promise made to Abraham did to his seed. For 
 the promise is to you and to your children ; not shall 
 be when they are converted, but is now to them, in 
 their present state. The promise is to you, therefore 
 be ye baptized; the promise is to your children, 
 therefore let them be baptized. And the promise is 
 not confined to you and your children ; no : — but is 
 made to " As many as the Lord your God shall call," 
 and their children ; let them be baptized. So far 
 from any exception being made to children in refer- 
 ence to Baptism, they are expressly mentioned, and 
 the promise is as much made to them as their con- 
 verted parents, and therefore they have as valid a 
 claim to Baptism. 
 
 The Scriptures give us an accouutof the baptizing 
 mtj three whole families — that of Lydia; f that of the 
 
 f Acts 16. 14, 15. 
 
OvF BAPTISM. 57 
 
 Jailor;' and that of Stephanas. s Ancient families 
 tv ere often very large ; how large these were, we can- 
 not say; but they were families ; and whether larger 
 or smaller, they were all baptized ; the heads of the 
 family, the children, if there were any, and the ser- 
 vants. The weight of argument arising from this 
 circumstance, is certainly on the side of probability. 
 It cannot indeed be said there were children ; for it 
 is a possible case that there might not; neither can 
 it be said that there were not children ; for it is very 
 probable that there were : the question then is, 
 Which is most probable, that there were not, or that 
 there were children in these three families ? Every un- 
 prejudiced mind, I conceive, will give it in favour of 
 children. And if there were but one child in these 
 families, that child was certainly baptized, and the 
 
 * Acts lo. 33. I here anticipate an objection which some- 
 may bring against the supposition that there were children in 
 the househo'd of the Jailor, because it is said that after they 
 were baptized, " Ke rejoiced, believing in God with all his 
 house." To refute this objection, I need only quote a passage 
 from Guys's Paraphrase, in a note on this text. He says 
 M It may be read He believing in God, rejoiced all the house over', 
 (PANOlKl) he went to every apartment expressing his joy. 
 And it is evident that the words (agalliasato pepisteu- 
 Kos: he having believed, rejoiced, expresses only his oicn, aud 
 not his family's faith and joy. 
 e 1 Cor. 1. 16. 
 
58 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 cause I plead is gained. The strength of argument 
 is clearly in favour of infants. 
 
 If the Apostie, in his Epistle to the Corinthians,* 
 have any reference to Christian Baptism, it is 
 strikingly in favour of infants. " For (said he) they 
 were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in 
 the sea." And it is said their little ones were with 
 them ; they were also baptized, for all were baptized 
 unto Moses. 1 " There were six hundred thousand on 
 foot that were men, besides children." All these 
 considerations argue strongly in favour of infant 
 baptism. 
 
 h l Cor. 10. 2. * Exodus 12. 37* 
 
OF BAPTISM. S9 
 
 ARGUMENT III. 
 
 THE INFANT OFFSPRING OF BELIEVING PARENTS 
 STAND IN THE SAME RELATION TO THE GOSPEL 
 CHURCH NOW, AS THEY DID TO THE CHURCH OF 
 GOD UNDER THE OLD TESTAMENT DISPENSA- 
 TION. 
 
 X hat God had a church under the Old Testament, 
 no one can deny without at once rejecting the Scrip*- 
 tures, and sending to perdition all the generations of 
 four thousand years, including the most eminent saints, 
 of whom the world was not worthy. That church did 
 not differ essentially from the church of God now. 
 There was, without doubt, a differencein the external 
 form ; but this did not affect the nature of the 
 church : — it was spiritual ; the blessings promised 
 were the same, and on the same gracious terms; be- 
 lievers were saved in the same way, by faith in the 
 Lord Jesus Christ, and by virtue of his atonement. 
 Abraham rejoiced to see the day of Christ, he saw it 
 and was glad. Let it then be remembered, that the 
 chinch under the Old Testament dispensation, and 
 that under the New, are not two churches, but only two 
 parts of the same church, under the government of the 
 F 3 
 
60 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 same Lawgiver. Under the former dispensation, be- 
 lieving parents, that is, Jews, who professed to embrace 
 the true religion, and their infant offspring were visible 
 members* of the church. To deny that infants were 
 members, we must maintain that adults were not ; for 
 there is the same evidence for both, and that evidence 
 is the testimony of the Scriptures, in which God pro- 
 mises that he will be a God to Abraham and his seed 
 after him : — both parents and children were initiated 
 into that church by the rite of circumcision. 
 
 It is undeniable then that infants enjoyed the privi- 
 lege of visible membership in the church of God under 
 the law : children were an important part of that 
 church. Now when Christ came into the world, if he 
 had altered the constitution of the church so materially 
 as to reject infants entirely, and to admit adults only, 
 we must suppose that he would have given us some 
 information on so important a change. To leave us 
 uninformed of this, would be to leave us ignorant of 
 what was of the greatest concern in his church. But 
 where does he teach us that children are to have 
 
 * A church is a society of persons, instituted for religious 
 purposes, and standing related to Jesus Christ the head of the 
 church: and by visible membership, we mean, an open 
 or visible relation to that church, which supposes that those 
 pei'sons have been initiated into this visible relation, by the 
 rite which is appointed for that purpose : for till that rite is 
 performed, this visible relation is not effected. 
 
OP BAPTISM. Gl 
 
 no place in his church ? And where do his Apostles 
 enforce an attention to any intimations of that nature ? 
 There is nothing in all the Sacred Oracles that for a 
 moment countenances such a rejection. But on the 
 other hand, both the Redeemer and his Apostles 
 give the clearest information that children have the 
 same place in the church of Christ now, that they 
 had under the Law. 
 
 Jesus said, " Suffer little children and forbid 
 them not to come unto me, for of such is the king- 
 dom of heaven ; and he laid his hands on them," a 
 &c. Similar expressions are used in other places. 6 
 In these passages our Lord evidently speaks of in- 
 fants ; for they are brought to him, and he takes 
 them into his arms. He speaks of them as having a 
 place in his church in this world. For the expres- 
 sions, " The kingdom of heaven," and " The king- 
 dom of God," we so frequently meet with in the 
 Gospels, most generally mean the New Testament 
 church ; c and Christ declares that those infants were 
 of that kingdom. We cannot refer these expressions 
 to the kingdom of glory, without virtually admitting 
 this. For if the church triumphant be composed, in 
 part, of such as these, it would be absurd to deny 
 them a place in the church militant, which is an in- 
 ferior state of the same church. From our Lord's 
 
 e Mettb. 10, 13—15. b Mark 10. 13—16. 
 
 c Matth. 21. 43. 
 
62 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 words it is evident that he considered infants as 
 standing in the same relation to his church then, as 
 they did under the Law. Ignorance indeed may 
 sneer at the thought, and say, " Children are inca- 
 pacitated for membership :" but it ought not to be 
 forgotten that all such opposition is made against a 
 positive divine institution ; for Gcd himself instituted 
 the membership of infants ; d if God made them 
 members, then, I suppose, they were capable : — 
 And it is impious to deny it: " Who art thou that 
 repliest against God ?" If children were capaci- 
 tated for visible membership in the church of God 
 under one dispensation, where is the propriety of 
 denying them a place in the same church under 
 another — a more gracious dispensation ? To do this, 
 it is necessary to prove that some important radical 
 change lias happened to infants, which has deprived 
 tht va of their original capacity for visible membership. 
 But who will make so vain an attempt ? 
 
 The Apostle Peter is of the same mind with Iris 
 divine Master. Addressing a large assembly pricked 
 in their heavts a e he sajd — " Repent and be baptized 
 every one of yuii, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the 
 remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the 
 Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you and to your 
 children (infants) and to all them that are afar off, 
 even as many as the Lord our God shall call." I 
 d Gen. j 7. e Acts 2. 8S, 39. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 63 
 
 have before noticed this passage, but with a different 
 yiew. This text is the same for substance as that 
 promise which God made to Abraham and his seed/ 
 The promise was as mucli made to Abraham's seed 
 as to himself, and sealed to both by the ordinance of 
 circumcision. Peter considered the children of the 
 believers he addressed, as standing in the very same 
 relation to God and to his church, and as having the 
 same right to Baptism as the seal of the new covenant, 
 as Abraham's seed had to circumcision, which was 
 another seal of the very same covenant ; for though 
 the seals are different, the covenant is the same. 
 Hence said Peter, " The promise is to you and to 
 your children." Baptism, therefore, ought to be 
 administered to parents, who have not been baptized 
 in their infancy, and their infant offspring, for the 
 promise is made equally to both. 
 
 Treating on the privileges of the infant offspring 
 of believers, Paul declares,s that the children of 
 parents, one only of whom is a believer, are holy. 
 " For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the 
 wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the 
 husband, else were your children unclean, but now 
 are they holy. The terra " Unclean" evidently refers 
 to the state of those who are without the limits of the 
 visible church of Christ, as was the case of the 
 Heathen; hence Peter in his vision calls them un-» 
 f Gen. 17. s 1 Cor. 7. 14. 
 
64 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 clean. The term " Holy," does not mean purity, 
 but visible relationship to the church of Christ. If 
 both parents were unbelievers, then their children 
 were unclean, that is, Heathen, Gentiles, out of the 
 church of Christ: but if one only of their parents 
 were a believer, visibly related to the church of 
 Christ, all their children are considered as " Exter- 
 nally, relatively and federally holy, as a seed visibly 
 separated and appropriated to the Lord, and so 
 entitled to all the privileges of the covenant thatthey 
 are capable of in their infancy, as much as if both 
 Father and Mother were professing believers." 11 
 The Apostle speaking on the same subject in another 
 place,' observes, " If the rirst-fruit be holy, the lump 
 is also holy : and if the root be holy, so are the 
 branches :" — that is, if the parent or parents belong 
 to the church of Chrst, so do the children. 
 
 In his Epistle to the Ephesians, k the Apostle proves 
 that Christ has broken down the middle wall of parti- 
 tion that stood between Jews and Gentiles, whom he 
 calls the circumcision (the Jews) and the uncircum- 
 cisiou (the Gentiles,) and made both one family. 
 Here is no rejection of either the children of the 
 Jews, or those of the Gentiles : — the Jews and their 
 families, the converted Gentiles and their fain lies 
 are embraced, and constituted one body, of which 
 Christ is the head : one family, of which Or. i^t is the 
 
 h See Dr. Guyse on this text. » Rom. 11. 16. 
 
 k Eph. 2. 11—22. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 65 
 
 Master. The unbelieving Jews and their families 
 were broken off" from the church, which is meant by 
 the true olive tree, but they shall be grafted in again, 1 
 in the same manner they were broken off, that is, 
 both adults and their infant offspring. As parents 
 and children had a place in the visible church of 
 God, before they were broken off through unbelief, 
 so we naturally conclude, that when they are re- 
 admitted it will be as extensively — that is, both 
 parents and children. Under the Jewish dispensa- 
 tion, when the head of a family was converted from 
 Heathenism to the true religion, he and his family 
 were taken into the visible church by the rite of 
 circumcision, which was then the initiating ordinance. 
 Under the Gospel dispensation, we see the Apostles 
 acting in the same manner, baptizing whole families, 
 and thus taking them into the visible church of 
 Christ, on the professed faith of only one of the heads 
 of those families — knowing " That if the root be 
 holy, so are the branjbes." 
 
 From the whole we conclude, that children under 
 the Law had a place in the visible church of God in 
 common with their parents : — that the Scriptures 
 so far from speaking against the membership of in- 
 fants under the Gospel economy, plainly declare 
 it ; and therefore the children of believing parents 
 under the New Testament dispensation, stand in the 
 
 1 Rom. 11. 
 
06 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 same relation to the church of God, as under the 
 Law, that of membership, to whom the promise 
 is made. To suppose the contrary, and exclude 
 children, under the present dispensation, from pri- 
 vileges which they enjoyed under the Law, is to 
 narrow the privileges of the Gospel church, and make 
 that of the Jews exceed it in glory, — which is con- 
 trary to matter of fact. On this subject Mr. Matth. 
 Henry makes the following remarks, " Though 
 God's covenant (says he) was not established with 
 Ishmael, yet he was circumcised; for children of be- 
 lieving parents, as such, have a right to the privileges 
 of the visible church, and the seals of the covenant, 
 whatever they may prove afterward ; Ishmael is 
 blessed, and therefore circumcised."" 1 The eminent 
 Dr. Owen observes — " That a privilege once granted 
 by God to any, cannot be changed, disannulled, or 
 abrogated without, first, an especial divine revocation 
 of it ; and, secondly, the substitution of a greater 
 mercy and privilege in the room of it." — " All this 
 contest (made by those who oppose infant baptism) 
 therefore, is to deprive the children of believers of a 
 privilege once granted to them by God, never re- 
 voked as to the substance of it, assigning nothing in 
 its room ; which is contrary to the goodness, love, and 
 covenant of God, especially derogatoiy to the honour 
 of Jesus Christ and the Gospel." n 
 
 ■ On Gen. 1 7. 23— -27. ■ Sermons and Tracts, p. 57f». 
 
OF BAPTISM. 67 
 
 ARGUMENT IV. 
 
 SEEING THAT THE INFANT OFFSPRING OF BE- 
 LIEVING PARENTS HAVE A RIGHT TO VISIBLE 
 MEMBERSHIP, AND THAT BAPTISM IS THE ONLY 
 RITE OF ADMISSION TO THAT STATE, BAPTISM 
 OUGHT TO BE ADMINISTERED TO THEM. 
 
 JLt is an established fact that infants were member* 
 of the church of God under the former dispensation ; 
 and it is equally evident that they were admitted by 
 a religious rite, which God had instituted partly for 
 that purpose ; that rite was circumcision. If infants 
 under the one dispensation had a right to the initiat- 
 ing ordinance, who can say that they have lost their 
 right under the other ? If they have a right to 
 visible membership, which has been proved, then 
 it follows that they must be baptized ; for till then 
 they cannot properly be considered members. A 
 right of membership, and the means of member- 
 ship stand inseparably connected— what God hath 
 joined, let no man put asunder. And these the 
 Head of the Church has joined, for he said of in- 
 fants — ." Of such is the kingdom of heaven" — but, 
 " Except they be born of water (that is, baptized) 
 G 
 
6$ ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 they cannot enter the kingdom of heaven"— -and 
 therefore infants must be baptized. 
 
 In order to resist this conclusion, we shall be put 
 to the necessity of maintaining, that Baptism is not 
 that under the Gospel which circumcision* was 
 under the Law, which contradicts the Apostle, who 
 calls Baptism circumcision, and at the same time 
 robs the Christian church of an instituted ordinance : 
 for if Baptism be not in the room of circumcision, 
 and the door of admittance into the church of Christ, 
 nothing is. The learned Witsius remarks — " We 
 argue from this, that Baptism has succeeded in the 
 room of circumcision; the Apostle declares this 
 Coioss. 2, 11, 12. where he proves the abrogation of 
 the ceremonial law, and especially of circumcision 
 with respect to believers of the New Testament, 
 from this consideration, that the spiritual thing 
 formerly signified and sealed by Circumcision, is 
 now signified and sealed by Baptism ; intimating, 
 that what circumcision was to the Old Testament 
 
 * There are some so exceedingly ignorant of our meaning 
 when we speak of Baptism as coming in the place of circum- 
 cision, that they are very much alarmed for the safety of the 
 Gospel, thinking that we want to revive Old Testament rites, 
 under New Testament privileges. Such persons need not he 
 afraid. We design only to run a parallel between the two 
 ordinances. In this there can be nothing unfair, as (he design 
 of bofeh institutions is unquestionably the same. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 69 
 
 church, the same is Baptism to the New, and in- 
 deed in a far more eminent and perfect manner, 
 because Baptism is an introduction at once into the 
 liberty and grace of the New Testament, whereas 
 circumcision contained the profession of a bondage 
 and yoke. But it is evident, that circumcision was 
 administered to infants;, it therefore follows, that we 
 are to have the same sentiment concerning Baptism. 
 And indeed nothing can be advanced against the 
 baptism of infants, which may not equally militate 
 against their circumcision." a 
 
 Under the Law there were two standing ordi- 
 nances ; the Passover and Circumcision. It is con- 
 fessed on all hands, that the Lord's Supper takes 
 the place of the Passover, and yet it is denied by 
 some, that Baptism comes in the place of Circumci- 
 sion, though it is granted that both are initiating 
 ordinances. The ordinance of Baptism agrees as 
 well with that of Circumcision as the Lord's Supper 
 does with the Passover, if not beiter. Baptism 
 corresponds with circumcision both in nature and 
 design. Circumcision implied natural depravity, 
 and the necessity of regeneration : — so does Bap- 
 tism. Circumcision was the seal of the covenant, 
 so is Baptism. Circumcision was the ordinance of 
 initiation into the Jewish church, so is Baptism into the 
 
 a Economy of the Covenants, English translation, 2d. edit> 
 vol. 2. p. 442. 
 
70 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 Christian church, or we have no initiating rite : — in 
 circumcision the subject was devoted to God, so in 
 Baptism the person is devoted to God, — Father, Son 
 and Spirit. Circumcision was administered to adults 
 and their infant offspring, when proselyted to the 
 Jewish religion : so ought Baptism to be granted to 
 believing adults and their infant offspring. It would 
 be very singular if these two ordinances agreed in 
 every thing, but this one, in the application of 
 Baptism to infants : — -that though circumcision was 
 applied to infants, yet Baptism must not, for no 
 reason, except that it does not agree with a favourite 
 doctrine. 
 
 Aware of the propriety of devoting their children 
 to God, some, who oppose infant baptism, have re- 
 cently done it in public, with every ceremony which 
 we use in baptizing children, excepting the applica- 
 tion of water. This practice is as unscriptural as it is 
 novel.— The pious custom indeed of devoting chil- 
 dren in their infancy to God, in a public manner, is 
 very ancient: we find many instances of it recorded 
 in the Old Testament, and have reason to think that 
 it was very general, if not strictly universal, amongst 
 the professing people of God ; but I know not one 
 case of a child's being publicly given up to the Lord, 
 without some sign. I shall mention a few in- 
 stances. Thus Hannah : " When Elkanah her 
 husband, and all his house went up to offer unto 
 
OF BAPTISM. 71 
 
 the Lord, the yearly sacrifice, and his vow ; Hannah 
 went not up ; for she said unto her husband, I will 
 not go up until the child be weaned, and then I will 
 bring him, that he may appear before the Lord, and 
 there abide for ever." And when he was weaned, 
 she presented him to the Lord, " With three bul- 
 locks, and one ephah of flour, and a bottle of wine." b 
 Ever after the institution of circumcision, all the 
 male children of the Jews were devoted to God on 
 the eighth day by its application to them. This i* 
 indisputable. And on the eighth day our Lord him- 
 self was devoted to God in this ordinance. It is 
 remarkable, that in all cases of especial dedication to 
 God, not only of persons, but also things, some sign 
 was used. Thus when the priests and kings were 
 initiated into their office, oil was poured upon their 
 heads. When pillars were built and consecrated to 
 record divine interpositions, it was with pouring of 
 oil, or some other ceremony ; many instances might be 
 produced to establish each of the above ideas. And 
 it shall be proved afterwards, that the application of 
 water to children, has been customary in all ages of the 
 Christian church, when their parents have devoted 
 them to God. It is universally confessed that chil- 
 dren ought to be devoted to God. Then it must 
 be either with, or without a sigm To maintain that 
 a sign is unnecessary, would be contrary to the 
 • l Sam. l. 20—28. 
 G 3 
 
72 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 custom of all ages, from the earliest periods of the 
 church of God to the present day. If we say it 
 ought to be with a certain sign, then that sign must 
 be what God has appointed. Circumcision was the 
 instituted sign under the Law, but this is now abo- 
 lished. Nothing now remains but Baptism. There- 
 fore as believers ought to devote their children to 
 God by the application of a sign, and as no sign but 
 Baptism exists in the New Testament church, it 
 follows that children are to be baptized. 
 
 The whole argument assumes the following form : 
 all those who have a right to visible church member- 
 ship, have a right to Baptism, which is the only 
 initiating ordinance ; — Adult believers and their in- 
 fant offspring have a right to visible church member- 
 bership; therefore adult believers and their infant 
 offspring have a right to Baptism. To invalidate 
 this argument, to resist this conclusion, it must be 
 proved, either that children are incapacitated for 
 visible membership under the Gospel, though they 
 were not under the Law ; or that Jesus Christ has 
 cast them out of the church, or commanded his Apos- 
 tles to do so ; but to prove either is impossible. Till 
 this is done, both the argument and conclusion will 
 maintain their ground against all opposition. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 73 
 
 ARGUMENT V. 
 
 rillLDREN ARE CAPABLE OF BEING TAKEN INTO 
 
 A COVENANT RELATION TO GOD; TO THEM 
 
 MANY COVENANT PROMISES ARE MADE AND 
 
 THEY ARE ABLE TO PARTAKE OF THE BLESS- 
 INGS OF THE COVENANT'. IF SO, THEN IT WILL 
 
 FOLLOW THAT THEY ARE FIT SUBJECTS OF BAP- 
 TISM, WHICH IS THE SEAL OF THE COVENANT. 
 
 v^hildren are capable of being taken into a cove- 
 nant relation to God. — Henry observes, " That 
 those may be taken into covenant with God, and 
 receive the benefits of it, who yet are not capa- 
 ble of restipulating, or giving their own consent. 
 For this covenant (which God made with Noah) is 
 made with every living creature, every beast of the 
 earth." 8 — Bat we have a more sure word of pro- 
 phecy unto which we do well that we take heed; the 
 sacred Scriptures are decisive in their testimony on 
 this subject. " Ye stand this day all of you before 
 the Lord your God ; your captains of your tribes, 
 your elders and your officers, with all the men of 
 Israel, your little ones, your wives, and thy stranger 
 8 See Henry on Gen. 9, 8— 11* 
 
74 ON THE SUBJFXTS 
 
 that is in thy camp, from the hewer of thy wood unto 
 the drawer of thy water ; that thou shouldest enter 
 into covenant with the Lord thy God, and into hia 
 oath, which the Lord thy God maketh with thee this 
 day: that he may establish thee to-day for a people 
 unto himself, and that he may be unto thee a God, 
 as he hath said unto thee, and as he hath sworn unto 
 thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob." b — 
 The little ones thus taken into covenant, God 
 claims as his own property ; for when the people had so 
 far forsaken God as to sacrifice their children to 
 Moloch, he expostulates with them and says, " Thoo 
 hast taken thy sons and thy daughters whom thou 
 hast born unto me, and these thou hast sacrificed 
 unto them to be devoured ; is this of thy whoredoms 
 a small matter? That thou hast slain my children, 
 and delivered them to cause them to pass through 
 the fire." c Dr, Owen observes — " It was the way 
 of God from the beginning, to take children of 
 covenanters into the same covenant with their parents-; 
 so he dealt with this people in the establishment of 
 the first covenant, and he hath made no alteration 
 herein In -the establishment of the second." d 
 
 Further. As children are taken into covenant with 
 God in common with their parents, the promises of 
 
 » Deut. 29. 10—13. c Ezek. 18. 20,21.. 
 
 d Owen 011 the Hebrews^ vol, 3. p. 432, fol. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 7o 
 
 the covenant are made to both. In the covenant 
 which God made with Abraham, lie promises that 
 " He will be a God to him and his seed." e What- 
 ever reference might be had to his spiritual seed in 
 this promise, his natural seed was included; for Isaac 
 and Jacob and Joseph were blessed with faithful 
 Abraham.' — By Isaiah God promises that " He will 
 pour out his Spirit on his people and their seed, and 
 his blessing on their offspring/ — The Apostle de- 
 clares that the promise of repentance, remission of 
 sins, the gift of the Koly Ghost, and Baptism as the 
 sign and seal of them, is made to believers and their 
 children. s 
 
 Again. Children are able to participate in the 
 blessings of the covenant, even all the blessings pro- 
 mised in the above passages which I have just 
 quoted. These blessings are such as regeneration, 
 pardon, justification, holiness, the kingdom of heaven* 
 eternal life. That infants are capable of partaking 
 of these blessings, no one can deny, without at once 
 defying the power of God, and dooming every infant 
 that dies to eternal misery : for, in admitting their 
 salvation, we at the same time admit whatever is 
 necessary to it ; and it is essential to the salvation of 
 infants that they should be partakers of the graces, 
 of the Spirit, faith, love, repentance, &c. Though 
 
 e Gen. I7. 7. f lsa. 44» 3. 
 
 B . Acts 2. 38, 39. 
 
76 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 they are unable actually to exercise them, yet that 
 divine nature, in which they are included, must be 
 possessed in order to their salvation. Not only so, 
 but their original sin must be pardoned, their persons 
 must be justified, their natures must be regene- 
 rated and sanctified, before they can be made meet 
 to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in 
 tight. — The truth of the proposition which I am 
 endeavouring to prove, appears further evident from 
 the very consideration, that they are taken into 
 covenant relation with God, and that he hath made 
 them special promises of covenant blessings ; for it i» 
 absurd to suppose that God would make promises 
 of spiritual blessings to creatures who v.ere incapa- 
 citated for the reception of them. But in order that 
 these blessings may be conferred, and this meetnesa 
 for glory effected, it is essentially necessary that the 
 Holy Ghost should be poured out; children must 
 partake of his divine influences ; and the Apostle 
 •hows h that those who are partakers of the Holy 
 Ghost are tit subjects of Baptism, whether they are 
 infants or adults. But infants must be partakers of 
 the Holy Ghost in order to be holy, &c. ; if so, 
 then it follows, that infants are proper subjects of 
 Baptism. 
 
 Besides ; the kingdom of heaven is promised to 
 infants, and the Redeemer declares that it belong* 
 ft Acts io. 47. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 77 
 
 to such. Take the expression » The kingdom of 
 heaven" as meaning either the kingdom of grace or 
 the kingdom of glory it matters little >— to deny 
 children Baptism then, would be to make it of greater 
 moment than the kingdom of heaven ; for if children 
 have a right to the greater it is absurd to deny them 
 the less. As all those to whom the kingdom of 
 heaven belongs must be proper subjects of Baptism, 
 and as the kingdom of heaven belongs to infants, it 
 therefore follows that infants are to be baptized. 
 
 In a passage, at which I have before glanced, the 
 Apostle declares, that the children of believing parents 
 are « Holy/' 1 The term « Holy," must be understood 
 as signifying either real purity of nature, or visible 
 relationship to God. View it in either acceptation, 
 and it makes equally for the baptism of the infant 
 offspring of professing parents. If we take it in the 
 former sense, as denoting purity, then it follows 
 that children have a right to Baptism; for to with- 
 hold the sign from those who possess the thing 
 signified by it, would be the height of folly and 
 absurdity. If we understand it in the latter mean- 
 ing, as intending visible relationship to God, or a 
 being set apart to him, then the consequence will be 
 the same; because Baptism is essential to that rela- 
 tionship, as it does not visibly exist till the rite of 
 initiation is performed. — I am aware that some have 
 ' 1 Cor. 7. 14. Rom. u. j6» 
 
78 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 understood the term " Hoi}-," when applied to chil- 
 dren here, as meaning that they were legitimate, and 
 not bastards. But such a construction is too con- 
 temptible to deserve further notice. 
 
 No one can deny, but that those whom the Scrip- 
 tures call the servants of God and disciples, are 
 proper subjects of Baptism. But that the children 
 of professing parents are spoken of as such, is cerain. 
 God, giving direction concerning the conduct of the 
 rich Israelites towards their brethren, who might be 
 reduced to a state of servitude, says to the master— 
 « Then (in the year of jubilee) shall he depart from 
 thee, both he and his children with him f and the 
 reason is assigned in the next verse, " For they are 
 my servants." k Here it is evident that God calls 
 both the Father and the children, his servants. 
 That they are called disciples is equally certain. 
 Hence said Peter, when contending against the in- 
 troduction of circumcision under the Gospel dispen- 
 sation, " Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a 
 yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither 
 our fathers nor we were able to bear ?** Which words 
 Dr. Guyse paraphrases thus ; " And why should ye 
 attempt to put a yoke of bondage upon Gentile 
 believers, and their seed, by obliging them to be cir- 
 cumcised, who, under the Gospel state, are to be 
 considered a« disciples of Christ, in like manner as 
 
 k Levit. 25, 41, 42» 
 
or BAPTISM. 79 
 
 children were reckoned with their parents, to belong 
 to the church of Israel under the Mosaic economy ?" 
 Whom does the Apostle mean by the fathers, on 
 whom this yoke was imposed ? Undoubtedly the 
 Jews, both parents and children ; for both were cir- 
 cumcised. And now it was the wish of the believers 
 who had been brought from the sect of the Pharisees, 
 to impose this yoke also upon the Gentiles who had 
 embraced the Gospel, and their seed, whom the 
 Apostle here calls DisciPLES. k — As those whom the 
 Scriptures call the servants of God and disciples are 
 confessed to be proper subjects of Baptism ; and as 
 the professing people of God and their infant seed 
 are thus denominated ; it unavoidably follows, that 
 both are equally the subjects of this ordinance. 
 
 The whole of the argument may be placed in the 
 following form. Those who are taken into a cove- 
 nant relation to God, to whom special covenant 
 promises are made, and on whom the blessings of 
 the covenant are confered, are proper subjects of 
 Baptism ; this no one can deny : but such are the 
 privileges of the infant offspring of believing parents, 
 or they cannot be saved ; and it follows therefore 
 that the infant offspring of believers are proper sub- 
 jects of Baptism. 
 
 To get rid of this conclusion, we must deny that 
 
 k Acts 15. 10. 
 H 
 
80 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 infants stand in any covenant relation to God, or that 
 any covenant promises are made to them, or that they 
 can possibly partake of the blessings of grace and 
 of glory, which I presume none but those who deny 
 the authority of the Scriptures, or those who are 
 ignorant of their contents, will venture to attempt. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 81 
 
 ARGUMENT VI. 
 
 IT CAN BE PROVED FROM THE CLEAREST HIS- 
 TORIC RECORDS, THAT CHILDREN HAVE, IN ALL 
 AGES OF THE CHRISTIAN DISPENSATION, BEEN RE- 
 CEIVED INTO THE VISIBLE CHURCH BY BAPTISM. 
 
 In the following quotations, which are made from 
 the writings of the Fathers, it is not to be understood 
 that we place the least dependance on their autho- 
 rity in this ordinance : — the Fathers, as they are 
 called, have no authority whatever to introduce or 
 decree rites and ceremonies for the future observance 
 of the church of Jesus Christ : — we refer to them 
 merely to establish an historic fact, and to know what 
 was the custom of the primitive church, in the 
 respective periods in which they wrote. Several at- 
 tempts have been made in order to invalidate the anti- 
 quity of the following quotations, but these attempts 
 have been vain, and they yet stand the test of all 
 opposition. 
 
 It is utterly unnecessary to produce any historic 
 evidence, after the sixth century, because no one 
 can for a moment deny, that infant baptism has pre- 
 
82 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 vailed since that period. 3 I shall therefore begin 
 from that time, and go down to the days of the 
 Apostles, and show, that infant baptism prevailed 
 generally in the Christian church in its earliest 
 and most pure periods. 5 
 
 I begin with Austin, who lived about three hun- 
 dred years after the Apostles. He writes against 
 Pelagius, who maintained that children were born 
 i'cee from any defilement. Austin pleads against 
 him the universal practice of baptizing infants, which 
 implied their depravity, and observes- — " That infants 
 are by all Christians acknowledged to stand in need of 
 Baptism, which must be for original sin, since they 
 have no other." — Again ; he says — " If they have no 
 sin, why are they accepted to the usage of the church 
 baptism? Why are they washed with the laver of 
 regeneration, if they have no defilement r" — Pela- 
 
 a It has bee i sometimes objected to infant baptism, that 
 it was the invention of Popery. But the following testimo- 
 nies will prove, that infants were baptized before Popery 
 existed. Therefore, it would be as absurd to say, that this 
 practice originated in Popery, as to say, that the effect existed 
 before the cause. 
 
 b For the authorities oi" the following- quotations, sec Dr. 
 Wall's History of Iufant Baptism, and his Defence. 
 
 c Let it be observed, that the term regeneration is often 
 used by the fathers for Baptism ; with what propriety is no 
 concern of mine. I need only quote the words of twe of 
 them to prove this. Thus Iren.i;us— ** When Christ gave 
 
OF BAPTISM. 83 
 
 gius, being charged by some with denying infant 
 baptism, was highly offended, and said, " Men slan- 
 der me, as if I denied Baptism to infants ;" this he 
 calls a slander, because a thing he abhorred. The 
 same Austin writing against the Donatists, says, 
 "If any ask for divine authority in the matter of 
 infants being baptized, though that which the whole 
 church practises, and which has not been instituted by 
 Councils but was ever in use, is very reasonably be- 
 lieved to be no other than a thing delivered by the 
 authority of the Apostles ; yet (continues he) we may 
 take a true estimate how much Baptism avails in- 
 fants, by the circumcision which God's former people 
 received." d It is evident then that the Baptism of 
 infants was universally practised in the days of 
 Austin, about three hundred years after the Apostles. 
 The martyr Cyprian was made overseer of the 
 churches at Carthage, about two hundred and forty- 
 
 his disciples the command of regenerating unto God, he said, 
 go teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the 
 Father, aud of the Son, and of the Ro'y Ghost. 1 ' — the fol- 
 lowing are the words of Justin MftftTYR, who was contem- 
 porary with Irenjel^ — " They are regenerated in the same 
 way in which we have been regenerated, for they are washed 
 with water in the name of the lather, the Son, and the Holy 
 Ghost." 
 
 d Here it is plain, that the fathers considered Christian 
 Baptism, as coming in the place of, and signifying the same 
 thing as circumcision. 
 
S4 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 eight years after the birth of Christ. A question 
 was started in his time, whether infants might be 
 baptized before they were eight days old. To decide 
 this question, he calls a council of ministers, sixty-six 
 in number, all of whom unanimously agreed, that 
 Baptism ought not to be delayed till the eighth day. 
 A long letter was written to this purpose, to satisfy 
 all who were in doubt respecting this question, 
 signed by Cyprian in the name of all the rest. 
 Infant Baptism was therefore universal about one 
 hundred and fifty years after the Apostles. 
 
 Tertullian, who lived about one hundred years 
 after the Apostles, entertaining an idea that sins 
 committed after Baptism, were nearly, if not utterly 
 unpardonable, speaks against infant baptism on this 
 account, and advises that it should not be adminis- 
 tered till after marriage. But had it not been a 
 prevailing custom to baptize infants at that period, he 
 could not have spoken against the practice : — be- 
 sides, even he allows it in certain cases, as when the 
 child was in danger of death. 
 
 Origin, was born about the year of Christ, one 
 hundred and eighty-three, within one hundred years 
 of the Apostles; both his father and grandfather were 
 Christians, who must have lived, either at the time 
 of the Apostles, or a very few years after. Origin 
 was a man of profound learning; he preached the 
 Gospel at Rome, in Greece, in Palestine, and in 
 
OF BAPTISM. 85 
 
 Syria ; and therefore must have been acquainted 
 with the custom of the church in the days of the 
 Apostles. He uses the argument of the baptism of 
 infants to prove original sin, in a controversy on that 
 subject. This he could not have done, if the prac- 
 tice had not been universally prevalent. His words 
 are these — " The baptism of children is given for the 
 forgiveness of sins ; but why, says he, are infants by 
 the usage of the church baptized, if they have nothing 
 that wants forgiveness ?'* And further adds — " It is 
 because, by the sacrament of Baptism the pollution 
 of our birth is taken away, r that infants are baptized." 
 And in his comment on the Epistle to the Romans, 
 declares that they received it from the Apostles. 
 His remarkable words are — " The church had also 
 from the Apostles an order to give Baptism to in- 
 fants ; for they to whom divine mysteries were com- 
 mitted, knew that there was in all persons, a natural 
 pollution, which ought to be washed away by water 
 and the Spirit." — In the above passage, this learned 
 man takes it for granted, being a universal custom in 
 the church, that infants were baptized, and makes 
 use of it to prove another doctrine — that of original 
 sin. 
 
 The next I shall mention, is Iren.-eus, who, as is 
 generally supposed, was born before the death of 
 John, and was acquainted with Polycarp, who was 
 John's disciple : it was impossible that he could be 
 
86 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 mistaken about the usage of the church in reference 
 to the baptism of infants. The doctrine not having 
 then been a matter of contention, he only mentions 
 it transiently. His words are these — " Christ came 
 to save those who by him are regenerated unto God 
 (that is, baptized), both infants, and little ones, and 
 young men, and elderly persons." 
 
 Justin Martyr wrote about forty years after the 
 apostolic age ; he says — " Several persons among us, 
 both men and women, of sixty or seventy years old, 
 who were proselyted, or made disciples to Christ in 
 or from their infancy, do continue uncomipt." — -They 
 could not be proselyted to Christ without being bap- 
 tized, for this is our Lord's express command, " Dis- 
 ciple, or proselvte all nations, baptizing them." — 
 Seventy years back from Justin Martyr brings us 
 nearly into the middle of the apostolic age. 
 
 " Now, if all the churches throughout the world 
 were really established by the Apostles upon the plan 
 of onlv adult baptism, and they every where rejected 
 infants, and forbid them to be baptized, it will appear 
 a thing absolutely inconceivable, and even a moral 
 lMPOs?rBii!TY, that the baptism of infants should so 
 eaHy, so widely, so universally prevail throughout the 
 whole world, as we have now seen it to have done." e 
 The same sensible author, from whom I have made 
 the above quotation, in another place observes — 
 
 e Tov-good. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 87 
 
 " Suppose a few persons were of so odd a turn of 
 mind, as to run into this novel, and unheard-of practice 
 of baptizing infants, can it be imagined that whole 
 churches would be led blindly away by them? 
 Or if whole churches might be thus seduced, could 
 whole nations be so too ? Yea, if whole nations 
 might, can it enter into the heart of any reasonable 
 man, that all the nations of the Christian world, 
 both the eastern and western churches, in the space 
 of about two hundred years, universally fall in with 
 this anti-apostolic, and new-invented rite of worship : 
 and so strangely apostatized from the primitive and 
 pure doctrine of Christ as to this matter ! It were 
 the height of absurdity even to surmise such a thing." 
 The testimony of the fathers is decidedly in favour 
 of infant baptism, even from the days of the apostles. 
 If infant baptism had been an innovation, a doctrine 
 newly invented, those holy men of God would have 
 treated it as such. But the way in which they speak 
 of it, is an evidence that no one disputed the fact. 
 They certainly considered themselves as walking in 
 the steps, and following the example of the Apostles 
 in this particular. Should it be said — " Is it not 
 strange that we no where find children mentioned, 
 if it were the Apostle's custom to baptize them with 
 their parents ? — And is it not strange that we no 
 where find the children of believers baptized after 
 they grew up ? There is no example of this kind." 
 
88 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 " The history of the Acts contains a period of above 
 thirty years ; and the New Testament a much longer 
 period. There was time enough for two or three 
 generations of infants to grow up to adult age. We 
 have all along accounts of Baptism. But it is re- 
 markable, that in all this time there is no intimation 
 that any one of the children of the early believers 
 was baptized after he grew up ; or that any one of 
 those adults whom the Apostles baptized, was born 
 of believing parents." f 
 
 These are facts of great importance in this con- 
 troversy, and which ought to be well considered. 
 In the above quotations from the writings of the 
 Fathers, we meet with some uncouth sentiments 
 respecting other things — but respecting the facts of 
 an historic nature, to which they are called in to give 
 their evidence, they are all of one mind in proving, 
 that infant baptism universally prevailed in the Chris- 
 tian church in its earliest and most pure periods — 
 even from the days of the Apostles. As it was impos- 
 sible for infant baptism, had it been an error, to have 
 obtained so universally, in so short a period as a 
 century or a little more, wo must conclude, that it 
 was practised by the Apostles themselves, and there- 
 fore it ought to be practised by us. 
 f Dr. Lath r op. 
 
OF BAPTISM. 89 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 Jr rom a review of the evidences which have been 
 produced in support of infant baptism, we see — that 
 there is nothing in all the Scriptures that really 
 opposes the practice — that there are many passages 
 of Scripture much in favour of it — that the infant 
 offspring of believing parents stand in the same rela- 
 tion to the Gospel church, as they did to the church 
 of God under the Law, that of visible membership — 
 that as they have a right to visible church member- 
 ship, and as Baptism is the only rite of initiation, 
 they must be baptized — that children are capable of 
 partaking of the blessings of the covenant, and 
 therefore have a right to the seal of the covenant, 
 which is Baptism — and that this has been the prac- 
 tice of the church of Christ in all ages, even from 
 the days of the Apostles. This fact is supported by 
 the testimony of Austin, three hundred years after 
 the Apostles: — Cyprian, one hundred and fifty 
 years after the Apostles : — Tertullian, one hun- 
 dred yeai after the A pestles : — Origin, within one 
 hundred years after the Apostles: — Jrenjbus, who 
 was born before the death of John the Apostle and 
 Evangelist : — and Justin Martyr, who wrote about 
 
90 ON THE SUBJECTS 
 
 forty years after the Apostles. — Such is the evidence 
 on which we rest, in administering Baptism to in- 
 fants ; evidence, which never has been, which never 
 can be invalidated.* 
 
 * Mr. Bicheno, in his Glance at the History of Chris- 
 tianity, p. U, informs us, that the foundation of the first 
 Baptist church that was formed in England, was laid Sept. 1% 
 l633j one hundred and seventy-three years ago only. 
 
AN ADDRESS 
 
 THOSE WHO PROFESS RELIGION 
 
 JL he preceding pages contain the reasons of our 
 administering Baptism to the infant offspring of 
 parents professing Christianity, by sprinkling of water 
 upon them in the name of the Sacred Trinity : 
 reasons which, after the most mature and candid 
 reflection, we deem sufficient to justify our conduct. 
 Taking it for granted, that my readers are professors 
 of the religion of Jesus, I shall close this Essay by 
 addressing to them a few observations suited to their 
 circumstances — as candidates for an eternal 
 
 WORLD : AS STANDING AT THE HEAD OF FAMILIES : 
 
 AND AS BEARING A SACRED RELATION TO EACH 
 
 other. The subject which has been discussed sug- 
 gests a train of thoughts suited to each of these par- 
 ticulars. 
 
 First. Ye are candidates for an eternal 
 world, and must shortly appear before the Judge of 
 quick and dead. Personal, experimental, and prac- 
 tical religion is essential both to your present peace and 
 future felicity ; — without this you would be ashamed 
 and confounded before God, and must perish for ever 
 as his enemies. It is lamentable that though the doc- 
 I 
 
92 ADDRESS TO THOSE WHO 
 
 trine of Baptism most loudly teaches the necessity of 
 a renovation of soul by the mighty operations of the 
 Spirit of God, yet it is too generally considered as a 
 matter of bare speculation, and discussed in the spirit 
 of contention and vain jangling. Thus speculation 
 is substituted in the place of vital religion, and a 
 vain-glorious spirit takes the precedence of humble 
 solicitude that the soul may be created anew in Christ 
 Jesus. These things ought not to be. — Professors of 
 religion, while you are justly concerned to be rooted 
 audi grounded in your principles, and to be able to 
 give a reason for the hope that is in you, recollect, 
 that unless your principles be implanted in a renew- 
 ed heart, and influence you to the love and prac- 
 tice of holiness, they will be of no saving advantage to 
 you, however true in themselves. 
 
 You were baptized. Your parents devoted you to 
 God. It was believed that you were depraved by 
 nature, that it was essential to your salvation that 
 you should be baptized with the Holy Ghost, and 
 that God had an equitable claim upon you. Your 
 parents discharged, so far, the duty of their high voca- 
 tion. But Baptism is not regeneraton ; a profession 
 of the Christian name may be supported without 
 possessing the true image of the Son of God ; pious 
 parents may conscientiously discharge their obliga- 
 tions to their offspring, and yet their offspring may 
 perish for want of the faith of their pious parents. — 
 I therefore solemnly warn you of the insufficiency of 
 
PROFESS RELIGION. 93 
 
 a form of godliness without its power, and of your 
 danger in having a name to live, while you are dead 
 in trespasses and sins. — Suffer me to propose a few 
 serious interrogations to your consideration. You 
 were conceived in sin and shapen in iniquity ; but 
 what reason have you to hope that your pollution 
 has been removed by the renovating influences of the 
 Holy Spirit ? You were devoted to. God in Baptism ; 
 but have you presented yourselves as living sacrifices 
 holy and acceptable to God, which is your reason- 
 able service ? You were instructed in the first prin- 
 ciples of the Oracles of God ; but have those prin- 
 ciples taught you that, denying ungodliness and 
 worldly lusts, ye should live soberly, and righteously, 
 and godly in this world. You name the name of 
 Christ ; but do you depart from all iniquity ? It is 
 appointed unto all men once to die, and after this 
 the judgment; but are you prepared for a dying 
 hour, and the judgment day ? Beloved brethren, be 
 ye ready, for in such an hour as ye think not the Son 
 of Man cometh. 
 
 Secondly. I will now suppose you standing at 
 the head of families. It is an important post which 
 you fill 1 Great is your responsibility ! Surrounded 
 by your children and domestics, who are in a great 
 measure governed by what they see in you, what 
 manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conver- 
 sation and godliness ! Your whole demeanour ought 
 to be that of pious circumspection. Your spirit will 
 
94 ADDRESS TO THOSE WHO 
 
 be imbibed by your children. Your language they 
 will adopt. Your actions they will imitate. Won- 
 der not at a want of propriety in them, if they disco- 
 ver in you sinful levity, worldly conformity, and a 
 want of religion. Unless the root be holy, it is folly 
 to expect purity in the branches. 
 
 An attention to parental duties can not begin too 
 early. Amongst the first, is that of devoting your 
 children to God by fervant prayer, and the applica- 
 tion of the instituted rite. Under the Old Testament 
 economy, that rite was circumcision, which was to be 
 performed on the eighth day : this is abolished, and 
 baptism takes its place. As I have already proved, it 
 has been the pious custom of the followers of the 
 Lamb in all ages of the Christian church, to devote 
 their tender offspring to a God in covenant by the 
 application of it to them. This is your duty. Mr. 
 Matthew Henry observes, — " Omissions are sins, and 
 must come into judgment, and particularly the con- 
 tempt and neglect of the seals of the covenant ; for 
 it is a sign that we undervalue the promises of the 
 covenant, and are displeased with the conditions of it. 
 He that has made a bargain, and is not willing to 
 seal and ratify it, we may justly suspect, neither 
 likes it, nor designs to stand to it. God takes notice 
 of, and is much displeased with, the sins of his own 
 people; if they neglect their duty, let them expect 
 to hear of it by their consciences, and perhaps to feel 
 from it by cross providences ; for this cause many 
 
PROFESS RELIGION. 95 
 
 are sick and weak ;" * and may not I add, conten- 
 tious too ? 
 
 Having thus devoted them to God, it will be your 
 duty to pour into their opening minds the solemn 
 truths which their baptism suggests. Hence you 
 may take an opportunity of impressing their minds 
 with a sense of their natural depravity — the necessity 
 of the new birth in order to the enjoyment of hea- 
 ven — and the importance of dedicating themselves 
 cheerfully to God. These are arguments to enforce 
 early and personal religion of the most impressive 
 kind, of which you would entirely deprive yourselves 
 by a neglect or contempt of this ordinance. After 
 this solemn dedication of your tender offspring to 
 God, follows a variety of important duties, such as 
 religious instruction, constant prayer for them, &c. 
 the consideration of which I wave, as not being im- 
 mediately connected with the subject in hand; and 
 pray that the only wise God our Saviour, may give 
 you understanding in all things ; that you may main- 
 tain a conscience void of offence towards God and 
 your children, and finally give up your solemn do- 
 mestic charge with joy and not with grief. 
 
 Thirdly. Professing Christians, ye bear a sa- 
 cred relation to each other : though sustaining 
 different denominations among men, and connected 
 with different societies, yet ye are but one body. Ye 
 are members one of another. How dishonourable 
 * Henry ou Exodus iy 24— »3l. 
 
96 ADDRESS TO THOSE WHO 
 
 to Jesus, the head, for schisms to exist in the body 
 whose members ought to be in the most perfect 
 peace, and exercising the most affectionate sympa- 
 thy. — When I take a review of the history of the 
 Church from the time that the controversy of baptism 
 was first agitated in England (one hundred and se- 
 venty-three years ago), when I consider the conten- 
 tions it has occasioned, the separations in happy and 
 prosperous Churches, the rancour and animosities in 
 the hearts and tempers of professors, and the disho- 
 nour it has brought upon the name of Jesus, I stand 
 confounded, and with amazement inquire, " Are these 
 Christians ? Are these the followers of the meek and 
 lowly Jesus ? It cannot be ! Yet all this sin is com- 
 mitted in the defence of what the sensible of both 
 parties confess is a non-essential. Let the time past 
 suffice. Agree while ye differ. When ye discuss the 
 point, let religion influence your hearts, and the word 
 of God determine all your decisions. But if ye must 
 differ " Let all bitterness and wrath, and anger, and 
 clamour, and evil-speaking, be put away from you, 
 with all malice. And be ye kind one to another, 
 tender-hearted, forgiving one another, even as God 5 . 
 for Christ's sake, hath forgiven you." 
 
 FIXIS. 
 
 Printed by 1\. Tilling, Nexvpori 
 
ERRATA. 
 
 Page 26, for Ebapha, read Ebaphe. 
 
 Page 57, note, for Agalliasato* read Egalliasato, 
 
 Page 84 and 89, for Origin^ read Origen.