& **t 
 
 

 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 (0 
 
 
 •*^ 
 
 
 
 •^ 
 
 IE 
 
 3 
 
 
 % 
 
 o 
 -a 
 
 
 *■» 
 
 1c 
 
 ■ 
 
 2S •"» 
 
 Q. 
 
 
 # W 
 
 
 
 '&> & 
 
 o 
 
 
 to 
 
 5 
 
 
 ~ s 
 
 a) 
 
 
 c 
 
 - 
 
 w O 
 
 bfl 
 
 Cv 
 
 ,S5 En 
 
 <t 
 
 s> 
 
 fc> 8 
 
 3 
 
 sf 
 
 to 
 
 E 
 
 .^ 
 
 *> M 
 
 u 
 
 ■S3 
 
 ^5 « 
 
 C/) 
 
 ■& 
 
 -+"* Ph 
 
 2 
 
 *** 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 C 
 
 S 
 
 % 
 
 
 
 
 scE 
 
 Mil 
 
 c 
 
 . ,' 
 
Stserrtattime 
 
 ON 
 
 CHRISTIAN BAPTISM; 
 
 IN WHICH IS SHEWN THAT 
 
 ANTIPJEDOBAPTISM 
 
 IS IN OPPOSITION TO 
 
 THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, 
 
 AND THE 
 
 GENERAL PRACTICE OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST, IN ALL AGES, 
 
 BY THE LATE 
 
 REV. MICAIAH^OWGOOD. 
 
 A NEW EDITION. 
 
 / 
 
 RECOMMENDED BY SEVERAL MINISTERS. 
 
 TO WHICH ARE ADDED 
 
 NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 HUNTED BY J. DENNETT, LEATHER LANE, HOLBORN ; 
 
 FOR WILLIAMS AND SON, STATIONERS' COURT, LUDGATE STREET ; 
 
 AND T. HAMILTON, PATERNOSTER ROW. 
 
 1815. 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2011 with funding from 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/dissertationsoncOOtowg 
 
RECOMMENDATION. 
 
 Amongst the great variety of publications 
 which have appeared on the much controverted 
 subject of Christian Baptism, the following- Dis- 
 sertations from the pen of a learned and respecta- 
 ble divine, are deemed well deserving a general 
 circulation and an attentive perusal. 
 
 Instead of employing a method too common in 
 the present days, and which, on controverted points, 
 is liable to great objections, viz. presenting the 
 subject in the form of a dialogue, in which the 
 author creates and manages the leading characters 
 in the drama at his own pleasure, and doubtless 
 renders them subservient to his own purposes; 
 Mr. Towgood makes a direct appeal to divine 
 revelation and authentic history; his statements 
 are fair and accurate; his criticisms learned and 
 solid ; his reasonings manly and conclusive : and in 
 every part he displays the spirit and manners of 
 the gentleman and the christian. 
 
IV RECOMMENDATION. 
 
 Although several editions of each of these trea- 
 tises have already been printed separately, yet they 
 have never been printed as a whole; and the im- 
 pressions, though repeated, have been but small, 
 so that the work has not been circulated to the 
 extent which its merits deserve. We, therefore, 
 most cordially unite in recommending this little 
 volume to all who wish for correct information on 
 the subject. 
 
 Rev. David Bogue, Gosport. 
 J. Clayton, sen. London. 
 B. Cracknell, D. D. Weymouth. 
 J. Dupre', D.D. Weymouth. 
 T. Durant, Poole. 
 T. Haweis,L.L.B. M.D. Bath. 
 J. Hooper, A.M. London. 
 S. Lowell, Bristol. 
 T. Raffles, Liverpool. 
 J. P. Smith, D.D. Homerton. 
 W. Thorpe, Bristol. 
 
THE 
 
 BAPTISM OF INFANTS, &c. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 A general view of the several dispensations of 
 religion with respect to Infants. 
 
 From the exactest observations, it appears, that 
 of those who are born into the world, scarce a 
 third part attain to the age even of one year. 
 Thousands of infants every day languish under 
 grievous distempers; are tortured, convulsed, and 
 in piteous agonies give up the ghost. — This, at 
 first, seems a very strange dispensation ; hardly 
 reconcileable with the wisdom and justice, much 
 less, with the goodness and mercy of God. It is 
 scarce possible not to ask— how comes it to pass, 
 that millions of harmless babes, in whose frame 
 is displayed such infinite skill; who are formed 
 with capacities of such exalted attainments, both 
 intellectual and moral ; with capacities of an hap- 
 piness evergrowing, and everlasting, in the know- 
 ledge, imitation and enjoyment of God :— How 
 
 B 
 
2 INTRODUCTION, 
 
 comes it to pass, that they only thus glance, upon 
 the coasts of life ; are just brought into the world 
 with exquisite pains, moan away a few weeks of 
 misery and disease upon it, and then in terrible 
 convulsions, fall victims to death ! What light 
 has God cast upon this dark scene of his provi- 
 dence I Has he left it quite covered with impene- 
 trable clouds ? And, where the interest and com- 
 fort of so great a part of his intelligent creation 
 are deeply concerned, has he given no intimations 
 which may be a solid ground of hope? It can 
 never be supposed. 
 
 There ore four dispensations, under which reli- 
 gion has principally subsisted since the fall, viz. the 
 dispensation of the Light of Nature, the Abrahamic, 
 (he Mosaic, and the Christian. Now, each of these 
 casts some light upon this awful scene, and admi- 
 nisters some hope as to suffering and dying infants. 
 Let it then be inquired : — 
 
 First. What judgment doth reason, or the 
 LIGHT OF NATURE, pass upon their case I There 
 are but two ways, in which reason can account 
 for this procedure of providence, viz. by suppo- 
 sing these suffering infants to have existed in 
 some former state ; or that they will exist in some 
 future. 
 
 Some have imagined, that they have existed 
 and misbehaved in a former state of being; and 
 that their sufferings in the present, are a correction 
 or punishment for evils done there. This the 
 
INTRODUCTION. 3 
 
 Platonic philosophy taught: and it seems to have 
 been an opinion not uncommon amongst the Jews, 
 in the days of our Saviour. Concerning the man 
 that teas born blind, the disciples, therefore, ask 
 him — master, who did sin; this man, or his parents; 
 that he was bom blind?* But, this prae-existence of 
 infants, being a matter of absolute uncertainty, un- 
 supported by any solid or probable grounds, reason 
 derives its principal satisfaction from the supposi- 
 tion of their existence in a state after death. There, 
 the Almighty Rewarder can give them pleasures and 
 entertainments abundantly to counterbalance the 
 sufferings of their present state. 
 
 This is what reason, I say, surmises and hopes ; 
 but cannot certainfi/ conclude. It wants some re- 
 velation, some promise from God, to give stability 
 and vigor to these wavering hopes. And under 
 all the conflicts and pains which he sees his dying" 
 child suffer, the pious parent has nothing, from 
 the light of nature, whereon to trust, but the un- 
 covenanted goodness and mercy of God. Now, 
 were it not, in these circumstances, a most de- 
 sirable thing, that God would give us some re- 
 velation or promise concerning our infants ? Some 
 covenant to assure us, that they are the objects of 
 his favour and peculiar regard ; and that as they 
 suffer and die in this world, so they shall be raised 
 again to life and happiness in the other? Was 
 
 * John ix. 2. 
 
4 INTRODUCTION, 
 not, I ask, some such covenant, revelation or pro- 
 mise, concerning- our infants, what nature greatly 
 wanted, wished for and desired ; and, if God 
 should be pleased to grant it, ought it not to be 
 highly valued and most thankfully received ?* Be- 
 hold ! 
 
 Secondly. This we see done in the Abra- 
 hamic dispensation. For as God's covenant 
 transactions with Abraham was the foundation, or 
 charter of the church, which, in after ages, he in- 
 tended to gather, and to erect amongst men ; so 
 
 * There is a very rational and just sense, in which God 
 may belaid to establish his covenant icith Infants. For the 
 scripture expressly says, Gen. ix. 9, 10, 12, 13. that he esta- 
 blished his covenant, even, with the cattle and the fowl ; so- 
 lemnly engaging no more to droun them by a flood. Is there 
 anything strange, then, or unreasonable, in God's establishing 
 his covenant with infants ; solemnly engaging to pour his 
 spirit and blessing on them. Or, that the evils they suffer ill 
 consequence of Adam's sin, shall be removed and amply re- 
 compensed through the righteousness of Christ? Most 
 surely not at all. — 
 
 But, if there is a rational and just sense, in which God 
 may establish his covenant with infants ; there is the highest 
 reason to presume that he actually has done it, and that 
 they are taken into his covenant: for if he graciously con- 
 descended to establish his covenant with the brute creation, 
 promising no more to deluge them ; and appointed a stand- 
 ing token or memorial of this covenant, viz. the boiv in the 
 clouds; much more, surely may we hope, that he hath esta- 
 blished his covenant also with infants, promising to de- 
 liver them from the fatal consequences of the fall ; and 
 that he has appointed a standing token or sign of this co- 
 venant, to perpetuate its knowledge and remembrance in 
 the church. 
 
INTRODUCTION. O 
 
 he here gives pious parents an express promise 
 and revelation concerning- their infants. He pro- 
 mises to be a God to Abraham, and to his seed; 
 and takes bis infants into covenant, together with 
 himself; commanding the token of the covenant 
 to be solemnly affixed to them, as a standing testi- 
 mony or sign that Jehovah was their God. See 
 Gen. xvii. 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14. God said, I zeill 
 establish my covenant between me, and thee (Abra- 
 ham) and thy seed after thee, in their generations ; to 
 be a God to thee, and to thy seed after thee, — and I 
 will be their God. This is my covenant which ye 
 shall keep — every man-child among you, that is eight 
 days old, shall be circumcised. The uncircumcised 
 man-child shall be cut off from his people. Circum- 
 cision then, by God's express command, was affixed 
 to Abraham's infants, and to the infants of all such 
 as believed in the God of Abraham, as a token of 
 his covenant; which covenant was, that Jehovah 
 would be their God. 
 
 Now, when the Almighty covenants and pro- 
 mises to be the God of these infants, what does it 
 imply ? Undoubtedly something great, viz. that he 
 will be, in a peculiar manner, their guardian and 
 benefactor ; that he will take them under the espe- 
 cial patronage and care of his providence, influ- 
 ences of his spirit, and ministration of his angels ; 
 and that if they died in their infant state, before any 
 transgression had put them out of the covenant, 
 they should certainly be raised to a happiness after 
 B 2 
 
6 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 death.— That this was the undoubted import or 
 meaning of this promise, the scripture hath clearly 
 taught us. — Now that the dead are raised Moses 
 shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord, the 
 God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, ^c* And 
 again, God is not ashamed to be called their God ; 
 for he hath prepared for them a city,f i. e. an 
 happiness in some future state. And again, / 
 will be his God,± is explained by, he shall be my 
 Son: but whoever is a son of God, and dies in that 
 relation, will infallibly be declared or manifested to 
 be" such by a glorious resurrection. See Rom. viii. 
 19. Luke xx. 36. 
 
 That this token of the Abrahamic covenant, as- 
 sured a resurrection to future happiness to an in- 
 fant dying under it, may be further proved thus : — 
 Suppose one of Abraham's circumcised infants lay 
 languishing under tormenting pains, and gave up 
 the ghost? An infidel stands by, and seeing the 
 mark in its flesh, scoffingly asks — what that mark 
 means I He is told, it is a token of the covenant 
 into which Jehovah took the child ; and by which he 
 solemnly declared, that he received it as his own, 
 and engaged to be its God. But what gets the 
 child, the infidel demands, by having Jehovah for its 
 
 * Luke xx. 37. A state of death, is a state of punish- 
 ment ; God's calling himself then, the God of Abraham, when 
 lie lay in a state of death, was a clear proof that he would not 
 leave hhn always to continue in it. 
 
 t Heb. xi. 16. \ Rev. xxi. 7. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 God ? Is he not ashamed to be called the God of 
 that emaciated, tortured, breathless infant? No, it 
 is replied, because he will raise it from the dead, and 
 give it happiness in a future state. Else, indeed, he 
 would be ashamed to be called the God of such a 
 babe. But we proceed to consider : — 
 
 Thirdly. The Mosaic dispensation; and 
 the farther strength which this gives to these ra- 
 tional hopes. Now, here, we see another covenant, 
 besides that of circumcision, into which infants were 
 taken. Deut. xxix. 10, 11, 12. Ye stand this day, 
 all of you, before the Lord your God; your captains, 
 your elders, your little-ones, your wives, that thou 
 shouldst enter into covenant with the Lord thy God: 
 that he may establish thee to-day for a people 
 unto himself; and that he may be unto thee a God, 
 as he hath sworn unto thy fathers, to Abraham, fyc. — 
 So Ezek. xvi. 20, 21. Moreover, thou hast taken thy 
 sons, and thy daughters, which thou hast born unto 
 me ; and these hast thou sacrificed unto the idols : thou 
 hast slain my children.* — Hence then, it is most 
 evident, that the Jewish infants, in consequence of 
 their dedication to God, and admission into his co- 
 venant, were in a peculiar manner his; his pro- 
 perty, and his children, in a sense in which the in- 
 fants of the idolatrous and uncircumcised gentiles 
 were not. But of these, multitudes, no doubt, died 
 
 * A child on the day of its circumcision, was wont to be 
 called Cliatan, because it was then considered as espoused to 
 God, and united to his people, Vid, Schindler in Verb. 
 Lexic. Pent, page 677. 
 
8 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 in their infant state. What now might be con- 
 cluded concerning- the case of such ? Undoubtedly 
 this : — That, as they died in covenant with God, 
 (by which covenant he had engaged to take them for 
 a people to himself, to acknowledge them as his chil- 
 dren, and to be to them a God) and as no advan- 
 tage nor happiness was given them in this world, at 
 all answerable to these characters; but they mi- 
 serably languished, like all other infants, and at last 
 died under the primitive condemnation or judg- 
 ment, it therefore certainly remained, that they will 
 be raised again and exist in some after state ; where 
 a happiness will be given them suitable to these 
 great promises, and where they will be treated as 
 the people and the children of God. For else, 
 God would plainly seem to ha\ e broken his co- 
 venant ; and the solemn and grand promise of being 
 a God to such an infant, and of taking it for his 
 child, proves a very mean and insignificant thing. 
 
 These are the hopes which reason surmises, 
 and which the several dispensations both of ABRA- 
 HAM, and of Moses, strongly confirm. We pro- 
 ceed to observe : — 
 
 Fourthly. How they are farther brightened 
 by the dispensation of Jesus Christ. As 
 this was to be the last, and the most perfect 
 display of God's mercy to fallen men ; in which the 
 riches of his abounding grace were to be most 
 fully revealed; it can never be imagined to come 
 short, in any points of the two former dispen- 
 sations. Did God take the infants of believers 
 
INTRODUCTION. 9 
 
 into covenant with himself, under Abraham and 
 Moses ; and command that, as a standing token of 
 it, the seal of the covenant should be solemnly affixed 
 to them ; but, under Jesus his Son, has he made no 
 such manifestation of his merciful regard to them ; 
 admitted them visibly into no covenant ; nor ap- 
 pointed any token that he receives them as his 
 children, and that he will be to them a God? 
 How utterly unlikely, as well as uncomfortable is 
 the thought. Thanks to his mercy ! — We can with, 
 good assurance say, that is not the case ! 
 
 No. When infants were once brought to our 
 Saviour, to be made partakers of the blessings of 
 his kingdom : he openly and severally rebuked his 
 disciples, and was highly displeased with them, for 
 endeavouring to hinder it. He kindly took them 
 (infants) info his arms, laid his hands tipon them, and 
 blessed them: and commanded that little children 
 should be suffered to come, i. e. be brought, to him 
 and not be forbidden ; declaring that of such is the 
 kingdom of God;*' i. e. that these, also, have a 
 place in the kingdom of the Messiah, which was 
 now to be set up ; and a right to the blessings 
 which himself, the promised king, was come to 
 bestow. 
 
 At another time, he took a little child into his 
 arms, and shewing it to his disciples, says, who- 
 soever shall receive one such little child, in my 
 
 * Matt. xix. 14. Mark x. 14. Luke xviii. 16. 
 
10 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 name, receiveth me.* Now the receiving a chile! 
 in Christ's name must mean the considering, 
 or treating it as standing in some peculiar relation 
 to Christ ; as th x. ot " a wv belonging to Christ ; as 
 being a subject of his kingdom, or a part of his 
 flock. That this is what our Lord means by, 
 receiving in his name, himself has expressly shewn 
 by thus explaining it in this same discourse, be- 
 cause ye belong to Christ :f whoso shall give you 
 a cup of water to drink, in my name, because ye 
 belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, csc. 
 Hence, then it is most evident, that infants may bo, 
 yea are to be, received in Christ's name ; and that 
 by this we are to understand, receiving them as 
 belonging, or standing in some peculiar relation, to 
 Christ ; but in this peculiar relation to Christ an in- 
 fant can no otherwise stand than by being solemnly 
 devoted to him, and admitted into his kingdom and 
 church. 
 
 And, that infants were to be admitted into the 
 kingdom of the Messiah, or into that incorporated 
 society of which he is the head, is quite rational 
 to presume : for as they stood in absolute need of 
 the redemption or grace which Messiah, the king, 
 came to bestow on mankind; and as provision 
 was made by the covenant of God for their actual 
 receiving it; so there was the strongest reason to 
 
 • Mat xviii. 5. Mark ix. 37. Luke ix. 48. 
 t Mark ix. 41. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 11 
 
 •xpecl, that they would be solemnly acknowledged, 
 and declared to be a part of that society or church 
 which should be thus blessed and saved by him. 
 In other words, that as they were condemned 
 through the first Adam, and treated as sinners ; so 
 the\ should be justified through the second Adam, 
 and treated as righteous. But, if they were to be 
 treated as righteous, and to be solemnly declared a 
 part of that society, or church, whom Christ came 
 to save, they were then to be baptized; for baptism 
 was the ceremony in which all, who by God's cove- 
 nant had a right to salvation, were to be admitted 
 into the church, and solemnly declared to be of the 
 number of the saved. 
 
 That, in the eye of the christian law, infants are 
 actually under a sentence of condemnation and con- 
 sidered as sinners, by being made to sutler death 
 the punishment and effect of sin, cannot be denied. 
 By one man si)i entered into the zcorld, and death by 
 s'tn, and so death passed upon all, for that ko y, ad 
 quod, as far as which) or (per quern through whom) 
 all are treated as if they had sinned.* Rom. v. 12. 
 
 * Iniquity and sin are very frequently used in scripture, 
 where not any real guilt or moral turpitude is meant, but 
 only the effects or the punishment of sin. See Gen. xix. 15. 
 1 Sam. \x\iii. 10. 2 Kings viL 9. lsa. liii. 6, 11, 12.— 1 Pet. 
 ii. 24. 2 Cor. v. 21. Heb. i\. 2.S. And this suggests an easy, 
 and, doubtless, the true sense of that much controverted 
 text, Psalm li. 5. / uas shapeu in iniquity, and in sin did my 
 mother conceive me: alluding to the bitter sorrows in which, 
 in consequence of the first sin, (Gen. iii. 16.) the woman is 
 sentenced to conceive and to bring forth. T. 
 
12 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 By one man's offence judgment came upon all men to 
 condemnation, ver. 18. By one mans offence many 
 were made sinners, ver. 19- In Adam all die. 1 Cor. 
 xv. £2. Though infants are incapable of any moral 
 or proper guilt, yet as in the wise scheme of God's 
 providence they are at present subjected to in- 
 numerable pains, diseases, and death, the penal 
 effects of sin, through the disobedience of Adam ; 
 they are, agreeably to the style of scripture, said 
 to have sinned, and to be made, i. e. treated as 
 sinners. 
 
 Now, the same discourse of the Apostle, which 
 represents them as condemned and suffering 
 through Adam, represents them also as justified and 
 saved by Jesus Christ. For, as by the offence of one 
 (A.dam) judgment came upon all men to condemna- 
 tion ; even so by the righteousness of one (Christ) 
 the free gift came upon all men to justification of 
 life : for as by the disobedience of one, many were 
 made sinners ; so by the obedience of one, shall many 
 be made righteous.* As much as to say, the salu- 
 tary effects of the second Adam's virtue, are as ex- 
 
 On this text Mr. Henry observes, " It is to be sadly 
 lamented by every one of us, that we brought into the 
 world with us a corrupt nature, wretchedly degenerated 
 from its primitive purity and rectitude ; we have from our 
 birth the snares of sin in our bodies, the seeds of sin in our 
 souls, and the stain of sin upon both." Nam vitiis nemo 
 sine nascitur. Horat. Sat. I. 1. s. 3. Ed. 
 * Rom. v. 18, 19. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 13 
 
 tensive as the penal ones of the first Adam's sin : 
 or, as the malignity of that first offence reached 
 even to infants, subjecting them to death ; so 
 the benefit of Christ's obedience reaches also to 
 infants, justifying, absolving, and restoring them 
 to life. It procures for and gives to them that 
 spirit of life, which releases and sets them free 
 from the law of sin and death. Now of God's giving 
 and of men's receiving this life-giving spirit, the 
 baptismal water is the appointed token, or emblem, 
 in the church. 
 
 This the scripture plainly intimates, by saying-, 
 Tit. iii. 5. We are saved, by the washing of regene- 
 ration (i. e. Baptism, the sign) and by the renewing 
 of the Holy Ghost (the thing signified in that ce« 
 remonial washing) which he hath shed (c^eev poured 
 out upon us abundantly , through Jesus Christ our 
 Lord. 
 
 From this discourse of the Apostle (Rom. v.) 
 the following deductions evidently ilow. ]. That in 
 the construction of the christian law, infants are, 
 most certainly, in a state of condemnation, and are 
 treated as sinners. 2. That they are, therefore, 
 capable of justification or remission, and stand in 
 absolute need of it ; in as much as, without it, they 
 must eternally lie under the sentence of death. 3. 
 As they are capable of this grace, and stand-in ab- 
 solute need of it, express provision is made, in the 
 constitution of the gospel-covenant, for their being 
 justified and saved. But 4. All who by the gospel- 
 c 
 
14 INTRODUCTION, 
 
 covenant are entitled to justification, salvation and 
 life, are entitled also to baptism ; for baptism is a 
 rite, instituted by God, to signify or betoken that 
 those* who are entitled to the blessings of his cove- 
 nant, shall certainly receive them. 
 
 The baptism of infants, viewed in this light, is a 
 very rational institution. The great parent of man- 
 kind having, in the wisdom of his providence, sub- 
 jected so vast a part of the race to miseries and 
 pains through no default of their own, it was quite 
 reasonable to believe, that his mercy would appoint 
 them some testimony of his favour, some monument 
 or pledge that he had not abandoned this noble part 
 of his creation to the ruin and death under which 
 they were fallen. That, as they continually suffered 
 the visible tokens of his displeasure in a variety of 
 tormenting agonies ; so, he would graciously ordain 
 them also some visible token of his good-will, some 
 perpetual and standing sign, of his still accounting 
 them his children, and that they were yet the ob- 
 jects of his tender and parental regard. It was 
 perfectly just, I say, and reasonable to imagine that 
 the great Parent of these tortured and suffering 
 innocents, whenever he erected a church upon 
 earth, would appoint some such standing token of 
 his mercy and favour to them. Now this, we sec, 
 he did under the two former dispensations, both of 
 Abraham and of Moses : and doubtless, it gave 
 their pious parents great consolation under these 
 dispensations, when they saw him languishing in 
 
INTRODUCTION. 15 
 
 extreme pains and giving- up the ghost, to reflect 
 upon the solemn token by which the Almighty had 
 accepted them as his children, and had promised to 
 be their God. But, can it ever be conceived, that 
 the dispensation of Jesus Christ is defective in this 
 important point ! That it, herein, comes behind, 
 and is inferior to both the former ! That it has no 
 such standing token of God's mercy to condemned 
 infants, nor any rite by which he visibly admits them 
 now, as he formerly did, into his family or church ! 
 — Is he a God in covenant to the Abraliamic, and 
 to the Jewish infants only, and not to Christian in- 
 fants also ? With great assurance we can say, to 
 christian infants also.* 
 
 * We arc not to imagine, that all infants dying such, 
 but those of believers, or all which die unbaptised, will be 
 annihilated or never rise again ; but the superior advantage 
 to believers' infants, above others, is : — 1. That with respect 
 to these, God has been pleased to lay himself under a more 
 particular covenant or promise of a resurrection to a future 
 happiness ; whereas the other are left more to his uncove- 
 nanted mercy. And 2. Their circumstances in a future 
 state may agreeably to all the moral perfections of God, be 
 supposed more happy and advantageous than theirs who were 
 never thus solemnly devoted to him. It being an evident 
 and important part of the scheme of God's moral govern- 
 ment, that great blessings and favours shall be conferred 
 upon some, in consequence and as a reward of the earnest 
 and sincere prayers and piety of others. 
 
 All rational creatures, there is reason to believe, are, 
 somewhere or other, placed in a state of discipline or proba- 
 tion, before they pass into a state of fixed and unalterable 
 bliss. Heaven itself was, if it be not at present, a state of 
 trial to angels. Infants dying such, therefore, there is 
 
16 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 And as it thus evidently appears, that, in th? 
 
 original construction and frame of bis church, pro- 
 vision ■was made that the infants of God's people 
 should be admitted into his covenant, so it may he 
 added — that such a solemn dedication, as is made in 
 baptism, of an infant by its parents to God the Su- 
 preme Parent, seems to be a most natural and ra- 
 tional service : a service which a pious mind can 
 scarce possibly forbear. Having received so great 
 a gift and trust from the Almighty Sovereign, how 
 natural and proper is it, that soon upon its birth, 
 and while a sense of the obligation is yet warm 
 upon the heart, he should make some solemn ac- 
 knowledgment that he has received it from God ; 
 should openly devote it to him, and lay himself un- 
 der a sacred vozo to educate it religiously, and bring 
 it up in his fear ! The light of nature itself seems 
 plainly to have taught this. It was the custom of 
 the Romans, on the ninth day from the child's birth 
 
 ground to presume, pass into such a state. Now, as in our 
 present state of trial, some are placed in circumstances far 
 more advantageous and favourable than others, so, probably, 
 is it in the state to which dying infants pass. Abraham's 
 posterity -were put in circumstances more favourable, for 
 attaining virtue and happiness, than other nations of the 
 earth, on account of their father's piety. The same may 
 be justly hoped as to the dying infants of good men ; who, 
 according to God's command, have been solemnly devoted 
 to him, whom he hath acknowledged for his children, 
 and to whom he hath, by a sacred covenant, promised to 
 le a God. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 17 
 
 (which was called the lustrical, or the day of purifi- 
 cation) lor its friends and relations to bring it to the 
 temple, and before the altars of the gods, to recom- 
 mend it to the protection of some tutelar deity. A 
 ceremony of the same nature also, was perfonned 
 among the Greeks. Is not this evidently, a be- 
 coming temper and action, upon receiving such a 
 trust .' Would it not naturally have a good influ- 
 ence on the conduct of the parent, with regard to 
 his child ; disposing him either to resign it more 
 cheerfully, if taken from him by death ; or to train 
 it up more religiously if its life be continued? And 
 might it not be hoped, that God would graciously 
 accept and reward the piety of such a parent, with 
 peculiar blessings on such a child ? 
 
 But, from this general view of the several dis- 
 pensations of religion with respect to infants, from 
 which their right to baptism may be strongly pre- 
 sumed, — We proceed farther to establish it by clear 
 and direct proofs. 
 
18 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 ARGUMENT I. 
 
 The first argument shall be 'presented under the 
 Jollozcing Propositions. . 
 
 I. It is an incontestable fact, that the infants 
 of believers, were, in former dispensations or ages 
 of the church, taken together with their parents 
 into covenant with God; and had, by his express 
 command, a sacrament or rite given them, as a 
 token that Jehovah teas their God ; and that in con- 
 sequence hereof, he counted them for his children, 
 and as standing in a peculiar relation to himself. 
 Gen. xvii. 7, 10, 11, 12. Deut. xxix. 10, II, 12. 
 Ezek. xvi. 20, 21. See these scriptures already 
 cited, pages 4 — 6. 
 
 II. When these infants of believers were thus 
 taken into covenant, it was certainly, a great privi- 
 lege, a favour or grant most thankfully to be re- 
 ceived ; for, by this token, the Most High obliged 
 himself and covenanted to be the God of that infant. 
 And what that implies, see before explained, pages 
 4, 5. Now — 
 
 III. If this great privilege was once granted 
 by God to his church, it is a privilege still subsist- 
 ing, and is now in actual and full force, if it has not 
 been revoked. But— 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 19 
 
 IV. This privilege or grant has never been 
 revoked. No such revocation, nor any shadow 
 of it, appears in the whole book of God. There- 
 fore, — 
 
 V. The infants of believers having- still a right 
 to their ancient unrepealed privilege, of being ad- 
 mitted with their parents into covenant with God, 
 and of having its token applied to them ; it hence 
 necessarily follows, that they have a right to chris- 
 tian baptism ; for baptism is now the only appointed 
 token or ceremony of admission. 
 
 These propositions it is humbly apprehended, 
 amount to a demonstration of the point in de- 
 bate. Which of them can be denied I Will any 
 man say, 1. That the infants of believers, in the 
 former ages of the church, were not taken, with 
 their parents into covenant with God ; had not, by 
 his express command, a sacrament or rite given 
 them in token that Jehovah was their God ; and 
 that in consequence of this, they were not consi- 
 dered and treated as being in a peculiar manner 
 his ? This no man will affirm. Will it then be 
 said : — 2. That this, though it was granted to the 
 infants of good men of old, was really no privilege 
 nor favour to them ? Neither durst any man assert 
 this. Can it be urged then : — 3. That this privilege, 
 though granted antiently to the church, and en- 
 joyed by it many ages, does not, now, continue to 
 it, nor ought, now, to be enjoyed by it; though it 
 be at the same time acknowledged not to have been 
 
20 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 repealed ! Absurd to imagine ! Will it be said 
 then : — 4. That this ancient privilege or grant has, 
 indeed, been repealed ? Let the repeal be shewn, 
 and the point shall be given up. There appears 
 no such repeal, nor any thing like it, in the whole 
 sacred scriptures: on the contrary, there appear 
 many things, as will presently be seen, abun-, 
 dantly to confirm this invaluable privilege ; and 
 to strengthen and enlarge it. And, indeed it were 
 the height of absurdity to imagine, that Jesus 
 Christ came to cut short the privileges of the 
 church, in any single point ; and to cast the chil- 
 dren of believers out of God's covenant, who be- 
 fore were taken into it. 
 
 It being impossible to deny, then, that the 
 infants of believers have still a right to their an- 
 tient unrepealed privilege, of being admitted with 
 their parents into God's covenant, and of having 
 its token applied to them ; the consequence is ine- 
 vitable : — That they have then a right to baptism, 
 the appointed token of God's covenant, and the 
 only initiatory rite by which persons are now ad- 
 mitted into it. 
 
 The point is farther proved thus. 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 21 
 
 ARGUMENT II. 
 
 From the Abrahamic Covenant. 
 
 The covenant which God made with Abraham 
 and with his seed, Gen. xvii. (into which his 
 infants were taken, together with himself, by the 
 right of circumcision,)— That covenant I say, is 
 the very same which we are now under, even the 
 christian or gospel covenant ; and Abraham, in 
 that transaction, acted and is considered under the 
 character of our father, the father of us believing 
 gentiles : the original grants, therefore, and privi- 
 leges of that covenant must necessarily belong to 
 us, believing gentiles, his seed.— -Now it was an in- 
 disputable grant or privilege of that covenant, that 
 infanta should be received, together with their pa- 
 rents, into it; and solemnly pass under its sacra- 
 ment or seal. This grant, therefore, or privilege, 
 in behalf of our infants, we, believing gentiles, may 
 now confidently claim. 
 
 That we, believing gentiles, are the seed really 
 included and intended in that covenant ; and that 
 Abraham, in that transaction, was considered as 
 our father — is a point actually and most clearly 
 determined by St. Paul. For in two several epis- 
 tles (Rom. iv. and Galat. iii.) where he is ex- 
 
22 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 plaining the nature and extent of the christian or 
 gospel covenant, he quotes this covenant made 
 with Abraham, (Gen. xvii.) refers to it, reasons 
 from it, and fetches arguments thence to prove, 
 that believers from among the gentiles, are, under 
 the christian dispensation, to be fellow-heirs with 
 the Jews, and are the real seed of Abraham, 
 intended in that covenant. See Rom. iv. 9- — par- 
 ticularly ver. 16, 17. Therefore it (i. e. the blessed- 
 ness, or justification, of the Abrahamic covenant) 
 is of faith, that it might be by grace ; to the end 
 the promise might be sure to all the seed ; not to 
 that only which is of the law, but to that also which 
 is of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us 
 all, (i. e. of believing gentiles as well as Jews,) as 
 it is written (Gen. xvii. 5.) I have made thee a father 
 of many nations. 
 
 Expressly to the same purpose, the Apostle 
 also assures us, Galat. hi. 7. That they who are 
 of faith (believers) the same are the children of 
 Abraham. And ver. 29. If ye are Christ's (i. e. 
 believers) then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs 
 according to the promise. And again ver. 16, 17. 
 That to Abraham, and to his seed, were the pro- 
 mises made ; (which seed he proves to be all true 
 believers, taken in a collective sense as the body 
 of Christ ; and adds ;) now this I say, that the co- 
 venant which was confirmed before by God in Christ 
 (eic -ypi-ov respecting Christ, or true believers) 
 the law, zvhich zcas 430 years after, cannot dis~ 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 23 
 
 annul, that it should make the promise of no ef- 
 fect. — Xow that the promises, or covenant, here 
 referred to, which the apostle affirms to be still in 
 force, and not to be disannulled, must be, and is 
 this covenant, (Gen. xvii.) into which infants 
 were taken by a visible rite, is most evident; be- 
 cause, this is the only covenant, in which God 
 ever made and confirmed promises to Abraham 
 and to his seed. 
 
 Seeing-, then, it is incontestable — that we be- 
 lieving gentiles, are the seed intended in that 
 covenant; it follows, that we have an undoubted 
 right to all its privileges and grants ; consequently, 
 to the admission of our infants into it; and conse- 
 quently, to their passing under its token or sign. 
 
 This token or sign was originally circumcision : 
 but when God sent his Son into the world further 
 to explain and confirm this covenant, and to pub- 
 lish it to all nations, he was pleased to alter its 
 token, or initiating rite, from circumcision to bap- 
 tism : partly, perhaps, as circumcision was a pain- 
 ful and bloody rite, and obnoxious to great re- 
 proach and contempt amongst the gentiles ; but 
 principally, because both sexes were now to be 
 alike visibly received into the covenant ; and under 
 this new dispensation of it, there was to he neither 
 male nor female. Galat. iii. 28.* 
 
 * That circumcision is abolished, is acknowledged by 
 all ; but the Abiahamic covenant still subsisting, and being 
 
24 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 Tims, then stands the argument, in short: — if 
 tee are Christ's (believers) then are tee Abrahams 
 seed : (Gal. iii. £9.) but, if we are Abraham's seed, 
 we have then a right to all the grants and privileges 
 of that covenant which God made with Abraham, 
 and with his seed : but the admission of his infants, 
 together with himself, was an indisputable grant or 
 privilege of that covenant: therefore, as it was 
 given to Abraham our father, it must necessarily 
 remain and endure to us his seed * 
 
 no other than the gospel covenant; and of this gospel co- 
 venant it being acknowledged that baptism is now the 
 appointed token or sign ; it hence evidently follows, that 
 baptism now succeeds in the room of circumcision. Ac- 
 cordingly it is called the christian circumcision, or circum- 
 cision of Christ. Col. ii. 11, 12. 
 
 * Infants are not baptised as being themselves the seed 
 of Abraham ; but as being the children, or property, of those 
 who are the seed of Abraham: for as Abraham's faith 
 brought not himself only, but his infants together with him, 
 into the covenant of God, so the faith of Abraham's seed 
 (believers) brings not themselves only, but their infants to- 
 gether with them, into the same covenant : else the cove- 
 nant would not be established in the same manner to his 
 seed, as it was to Abraham himself; which yet is plainly 
 promised. Gen. xvii. 7, 10, 11. 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 2j 
 
 ARGUMENT III. 
 
 From the Commission. 
 
 A THIRD argument for admitting- infants to 
 baptism, may be drawn — from the sense in which 
 the apostles, when sent forth to baptize, would 
 naturally and even necessarily understand their 
 commission. Go teach (/.ladriTtvcrare disciple or 
 proselyte) all Nations, baptizing them* It 
 is now enquired, in what sense they would under- 
 stand this commission ? Whether, as authorizing 
 them to baptize only the believing adult; or, to 
 give this token of God's covenant also to the in- 
 fants of such believers ? The commission is de- 
 livered in such general terms as not certainly to 
 determine this. If any part of it can be said to ex- 
 clude infants, it must be the word teach.f But 
 suppose it had been said — go teach, proselyte, all 
 tuitions, circumcising them: — Would not the 
 apostles, without any farther warrant, have natu- 
 
 ' M at. xxviii. 19. 
 
 t The word rendered teach {ixaQrjTtvaart) in the 19th 
 verse, is not the same with that in the next verse, teaching- 
 them to observe all things — (CitatrKovree) but is of a more 
 lar^e and comprehensive signification, and is better rendered 
 t<» proselyte or disciple. 
 
 D 
 
26 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 rally and justly thought, that upon proselyting the 
 gentile parent and circumcising him, his infants 
 also were to be circumcised I Or, if a divine com- 
 mand had been given to the twelve patriarchs of 
 old, to o-o into Egypt, Arabia, 8cc. and teach them 
 the God of Abraham, circumcising them: — Would 
 they not, must they not, have understood it as au- 
 thorizing them to perform this ceremony, not upon 
 the parent only, but also upon the infants of such as 
 believed in the God of Abraham J Without all 
 question they would. 
 
 Hence then it is plain, that the word, teach, 
 (disciple or proselyte) concludes nothing, certainly, 
 against infants being admitted, with their believing 
 parents, into God's covenant by baptism. But, 
 if the word, teach, does not necessarily exclude 
 infants, let us see, whether there are not such cir- 
 cumstances attending this commission, as would 
 naturally and even necessarily lead the apostles 
 to apprehend infants to be actually included 
 therein. 
 
 Now, here let it be considered — who the per- 
 sons were, to whom the commission was given I 
 They were Jews ; men, who had been educated in 
 the knowledge of that covenant, which God had 
 made with Abraham and their fathers; and who 
 knew it still to be in force. — Men, who had seen, 
 that in all covenant transactions, betwixt God and 
 his church, the infants of believers had always been 
 admitted, together with their parents, and passed 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 27 
 
 under the same initiating- rite. — Men, who appre- 
 hended this their admission to be a great pri- 
 ^ ilege or favour to them ; and knew, or were to be 
 soon informed, that the gentiles, (all nations) 
 were now to be taken into a joint-participation of 
 all the privileges of the Jewish church; to be 
 g ratted into the same olive-tree; and to be joint- 
 heirs with them of all their religious immunities or 
 grants. — They, moreover knew it to be the con- 
 stant, immemorial practice of the church, that when 
 any gentile was taught (proselyted to the worship 
 of the God of Israel) himself was baptized, and all 
 his infants were baptized with him, and these in- 
 fants were called proselytes. Further, they were 
 men extremely jealous and tenacious of their 
 anticnt rites. — They had seen also, under their law, 
 by God's express command, children of a month 
 old, and upwards, enrolled in the temple register ; 
 and entered, as ministers to Aaron, as doing the 
 service of the tabernacle, and as keeping the charge of 
 the sanctuary.*— They had been often witnesses to 
 the kind regard their master had shewn to little 
 children ; and had been once severely rebuked by 
 him for hindering their being brought to receive 
 his benediction ; and saw him laying his hands on 
 them, and solemnly declaring them to be subjects of 
 his kingdom. — Further, they knew that baptism was 
 
 * Numb. iii. 6, 7, 8, 28. And claimed by Cod as his 
 lilts. L< \it. xxv. 41, 42. 
 
28 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 appointed as a token from God of the remission of 
 sin, or of justification ; and that infants were in the 
 eye of the christian law treated as sinners, and 
 under a sentence of condemnation. Finally : they 
 knew that Christ came, not to lessen or abridge the 
 privileges of God's church (of which this admission 
 of infants was confessedly one) but to heighten and 
 to enlarge them. — Let these several circumstances 
 be impartially weighed, and then let any man say — 
 whether, as the commission will admit of a favour- 
 able and a large sense, so as to include infants, the 
 apostles would not naturally, and even necessarily, 
 suppose them comprehended therein i And whe- 
 ther there was not a most strong, and most mani- 
 fest necessity, if Christ intended that infants should 
 not be included in it, that he should have expressly 
 excepted them? 
 
 The commission viewed in this, which is its pro- 
 per and true light, is so far from concluding any 
 thing against the baptising infants, that it strongly 
 favours and supports it. For since, it is delivered 
 in such general terms as to be capable of ad- 
 mitting infants ; and since, from the above circum- 
 stances, the apostles would naturally and unavoid- 
 ably understand it as intending their admission ; it 
 follows, that our Lord's silence, as to these, is a 
 strong and most manifest presumption in their fa- 
 vour ; and that his not excluding, or excepting 
 them from the christian covenant, is, in all equita- 
 ble construction, a permission or order that they 
 should be admitted into it. 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 20 
 
 ARGUMENT IV. 
 
 Shall be drawn, from the EVIDENT AND CLEAR 
 consequences of other passages of Scripture. 
 
 I. In Rom. xi. the Apostle, discoursing of the 
 exclusion of a chief part of the Jews from the 
 visible church of God, and the reception of the 
 gentiles in their stead, speaks of it under this 
 figure, ver. 17. And if some of the branches (the 
 Jews) be broken off, and thou (a Gentile) being 
 a zcild olive tree, zcert grafted in amongst them, 
 and with them partakest of the root and fatness of 
 the olive tree; boast not, fyc. Here let it be noted. 
 1. The olive tree, is the Abrahamic covenant or 
 church ; from which, the unbelieving Jews are 
 cast out; and into which, the believing Gentiles 
 are taken in their stead. 2. The root and fatness 
 of this olive tree, of which the ingrafted branches 
 partake, are the religious privileges or grants 
 belonging to that covenant or church. Now 3. It 
 was a very valuable and indisputable privilege of 
 that covenant, that the faith of a parent grafted 
 his children, together with himself into that olive 
 tree, i. e. admitted them into the church, or into a 
 covenant-relation to God. Therefore 4. The un- 
 believing Jew being cut oft* from this root, and the 
 d 2 
 
30 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 believing Gentile succeeding, and being grafted 
 into his room, and partaking jointly with the natural 
 branches of all their church privileges, immunities 
 and grants, he must undoubtedly partake of this 
 privilege too. 
 
 What part of this argument can possibly be 
 denied ? Will it be said — that the faith of a pa- 
 rent did not graft his children, together with him- 
 self, into the visible church before the coming of 
 Christ? No — or, that this was not a privilege? 
 No.— Can it be urged then, that believing Gentiles 
 are not now taken in to be IvyKoirwvct r>/e pifyQ Joini- 
 Partakers of the root,* i. e. of the church privi- 
 leges and grants which the unbelieving Jew hath 
 lost? This were highly absurd: for they are ex- 
 pressly declared by the Apostle,f to be lvyK\r)por'o/j,o t 
 fellow-heirs ; Ivaw/xa of the same body ; and 
 Lvfi/xaroKoi tyjq eTrayyiXtag joint-partakers of the pro- 
 mise. 
 
 The argument, then, most clearly and strongly 
 concludes for the visible admission of the infants 
 of believing Gentiles, together with themselves, 
 into the covenant and church of God. Is he the 
 God of the Jews only ? Is he not also of the Gen- 
 tiles? A God, in the same manner, in the same 
 latitude and extent to us, as he was to them? 
 Yes ; he is undoubtedly, thus a God to believing 
 Gentiles also. Accordingly Isaiah, speaking of the 
 
 * Rom. xi. 17. f Eph. iii. 6. 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE- 31 
 
 christian dispensation, or the state of the church 
 under the Messiah, says, that not only believers 
 should be esteemed the seed of the blessed of the 
 Lord, (or the blessed seed of the Lord) but also, 
 their offspring- together with them.* 
 
 II. From our Saviour's own words, Mark x. 
 14. Suffer the little children to come unto me 
 and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom 
 of God. And John iii. v. Except any one (Tic) 
 is born of rcaler and of the spirit, he cannot enter 
 into the kingdom of God. From these two pas- 
 sages, I say, put together, the right of infants to 
 baptism may be also clearly inferred. For in one, 
 they are declared actually to have a place in God's 
 kingdom or church ; and yet into this kingdom or 
 church, the other, as expressly says, none can be 
 admitted without being baptised. 
 
 The kingdom of God, in the gospel denotes 
 either the visible church on earth ; or the invisible 
 one in heaven. Answerable to these, there is a 
 two-fold regeneration, namely a being born again 
 of Tcater (i. e. baptism, which is therefore called 
 the washing of regeneration, Tit. iii. .5.) which 
 admits into the visible church; and a being bom 
 again of the spirit (called the renezcing of the Holy 
 Ghost,) which admits into the invisible. Now, in 
 which soever of these senses the expression is 
 
 * Isaiah lxv. 23. 
 
32 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 here taken, it strongly concludes for the baptism of 
 infants. For 
 
 1. If, by the kingdom of God, be meant the vi- 
 sible church on earth, our Lord, by saying- of such 
 is the kingdom, declares that infants are to be con- 
 sidered as having- a place in this kingdom, i. e. as 
 being members of that body, society, or church, 
 which he, as Messiah came to rule and to save. 
 But, if they are to be considered as a part of this 
 kingdom, or visible church, they are then to be 
 baptized, or born again of water, for this is the 
 only appointed rite of entering into it. Or 
 
 2. If, by the kingdom of God, we understand 
 the invisible church in heaven; into that infants 
 cannot enter, except they are born again of the 
 spirit, i. e. regenerated, quickened and raised from 
 the dead,* But, if they are capable and proper 
 subjects of a regeneration by the spirit, they must 
 be also of baptism ; for the baptismal water is 
 nothing else but the appointed token or emblem of 
 this regenerating spirit. Seeing then, that God 
 grants them the thing signified, viz. the renezcing of 
 the Holy Ghost, it can never be thought his will, 
 that the sign or token be denied them, viz. the ■wash- 
 ing of regeneration, or baptism. 
 
 * A resurrection from the dead is frequently spoken of 
 in scripture as a being horn again, or a regeneration. Vide 
 Romans i. 4. Luke xx. 36. Matt. xix. 28. Acts xiii. 33. 
 Rom. viii. 29. Col. i. 18. 
 
A REASONABLE SER\ ICE. 33 
 
 The argument then is conclusive in whatever 
 sense we take the kingdom of God. For our Lord 
 having, in one place, declared that the little, 
 children should be brought to him, because of such 
 is the kingdom : and in another, that except any 
 one is born of water, baptised, he cannot enter into 
 this kingdom — it most evidently follows — that in- 
 iants are capable of being born again of water, or 
 baptised ; because, else, they could not enter into 
 this kingdom, into -which our Lord here expressly 
 declares, they do enter, and are admitted.* 
 
 It cannot be here said — that the words of such 
 — are to be understood, not of infants in years, 
 but of persons of a childlike and humble disposi- 
 tion. Because, this would represent our Lord's 
 conduct as extremely absurd. For, why should he 
 be very angry with his disciples, for forbidding in- 
 fants in years to be brought to him, because of 
 grown persons of an humble disposition his king- 
 dom consisted i There is no just connection be- 
 
 * The words, John iii. 5. thus interpreted, are a very 
 pertinent and just rebuke of Xicodemus's eowardice. It is 
 as though our Lord had said — " Except you have the 
 " courage to profess openly my religion, signified by your 
 " submission to the ceremony of Baptism, you cannot be a 
 " member of mv viable church on earth: and, notwith- 
 " standing your descent from Abraham, if you are not born 
 " of an higher principle, even of the spirit, or Holy Ghost, 
 '• yoni mind will be never raised to that state of purity and 
 " moral rectitude, nor jour body to that incorruptibility, 
 " spirituality and life, which is necessary to your admission 
 ' ; into my invisible kingdon in heaven.'' 
 
34 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 twixt his great displeasure at them for keeping- 
 infants from him, and his giving, as the reason of 
 it, that to quite differeut subjects, meek and hum- 
 ble persons, his kingdom belonged. According to 
 this interpretation, our Lord might rationally have 
 done the same, had lambs or doves been going to 
 be presented to him ; he might have been very an- 
 gry with those who should have forbid them, and 
 have said — suffer them to be brought, for of such, i. e. 
 of persons of a meek and harmless temper, is the 
 kingdom of God.* 
 
 Finally : let it be added — that as our Lord took 
 these infants into his arms, laid his hands upon 
 and blessed them; hence it appears — that infants 
 are capable of the divine influence, benediction, 
 and the operations of the Holy Spirit. Now what 
 are these, but the very things principally intended 
 to be represented by the baptismal water ? Though 
 our Lord did not pour water on them, putting up 
 a prayer for them, he performed a religious cere- 
 mony on them equally solemn, and of much, (per- 
 haps, exactly) the same purport ; he laid his hands 
 upon them, and prayed ; which was an act of re- 
 ligious worship hardly at all different from bap- 
 tising them with water. Yea, it was a far greater 
 thing for the Saviour of the world to take up 
 
 * Dr. Gale, therefore, ingenuously owns, that this pas- 
 sage is to be understood of infants in years. Reflections. 
 &c. page 421. 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 35 
 
 mlants in his arms and solemnly to bless them, than 
 for any minister now to baptise them with water in 
 his name. Further 
 
 111. It is also very worthy to be observed — that 
 the Christian dispensation, as well as the Jewish, 
 makes an evident distinction betwixt the children of 
 believers and the children of infidels. 
 
 Several of the Corinthian converts having uu- 
 believing yoke-fellows, doubted of the lawfulness 
 of cohabiting- with them ; and seemed to think 
 themselves obliged to separate ; lest the offspring 
 of such unequal marriages should be deemed im- 
 pure and unmeet to be taken into covenant with 
 God. This their doubt seemed to be just, and to 
 carry in it great weight ; being grounded on the 
 known conduct of Ezra, and the Jewish elders, in 
 a parallel case. See Ezra x. 1,2, 3. But the 
 Apostle resolves it, by telling them — that the un- 
 believing yoke-j'ellozc teas so far sanctified by (or 
 to, or because of) the believing, as that their children 
 which mould otherwise be unclean, are now holy.* 
 Here then we see a most clear and evident dis- 
 tinction made betwixt the children of believers and 
 the children of infidels : the one are unclean, i. e. 
 do not stand in any visible covenant relation to Je- 
 hovah, and the other are holy, i. e. in the same sense 
 
 * 1 Cor. vii. 14. 
 
 
•3(J THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 holy, as the Jews were an holy nation, taken into a 
 peculiar relation to God.* 
 
 These several scriptures being impartially 
 weighed, the propriety and fitness of bringing chil- 
 dren to baptism seems to be established beyond all 
 rational doubt. As a conclusion of this argument 
 I beg leave to ask,-^Must not the Christian dis- 
 pensation be allowed, in all things, to have the pre- 
 ference, and to be better than the Jewish ? But 
 if it excludes our infants from the covenant of 
 God, and from standing in any federal relation to 
 hea\en; then here is one, and that a very impor- 
 tant and considerable instance in which it is vastly 
 inferior. Now, had this really been the case, 
 how mighty and just a prejudice would it have 
 raised in the Jews against Christianity! What 
 
 * This sentiment of an infant's holiness, and of the pro- 
 priety and duty of its being brought into the church of God, 
 and there solemnly devoted to him, was quite scriptural and 
 rational ; as well as perfectly agreeable to the appointed 
 customs and forms, and language of those times. For, 
 Luke ii. 22, 23, 'tis said— they brought the infant Jesus to 
 the temple, to present him to the Lord : as it is written in 
 the law ; Every Jir^t-born 7nale shall be holy to the Loid. 
 Hence it plainly follows. 1. That infants are capable of 
 holiness: and that some were accounted holy (i. e. taken 
 into a more peculiar relation to God) whilst others were 
 not. And 2. That our Lord himself, when an infant, passed 
 under a sacred ceremony, of Ihe same nature with our 
 infants when we bring them to be baptised. The infant 
 Jesus, like ours, was brought to the place of worship, there 
 solemnly to be presented, or devoted, to the Lord. 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. '67 
 
 complaints and objections should we, doubtless, 
 have heard them making- against this new dispen- 
 sation, aad casting- their children out of God's co- 
 venant, and putting them upon a level with those 
 of infidels and pagans ! But, as amongst their 
 many and loud cavils at the religion of Christ, and 
 the continued oppositions and reproaches of the 
 Judaizers, we find not the least shadow of a com- 
 plaint of this kind, it may with great assurance 
 be concluded, there was no such occasion given ; 
 but that Christianity, as it found, so it continued and 
 confirmed, the infants of good men in the covenant 
 of God. 
 
 Having proceeded thus far in the argument ; I 
 beg leave here to recapitulate, and sum up the force 
 of what has been offered, in the following queries ; 
 which will soon lead a fair enquirer to an easy issue 
 rf the debate. 
 
 Query I. Are not infants, in the eye or con- 
 struction of the christian law, under a sentence of 
 condemnation, and treated as sinners I 
 
 Query II. Are they not, consequently, in the 
 eve of that law, capable of justification and of being 
 treated as righteous ? 
 
 Query III. If, then, they are capable of justifi- 
 cation and remission, is it not most highly reasona- 
 ble, and even necessary to suppose that the christian 
 law, which is a manifestation of God's richest mercy 
 to mankind, has made provision for it, and given 
 *ome token of it I 
 
 K 
 
38 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 Query IV. Were not the infants of believers 
 taken into covenant with God; and did they not 
 stand in a more immediate relation to him, than the 
 infants of unbelieving Canaanites, Moabites, &c. 
 both under the Abrahamic and Mosaic dispensa- 
 tions J — And was not this a peculiar honour and ad- 
 vantage to these infants? 
 
 Query V. Are not the infants of us, christians, 
 as capable of this favour, viz. of being taken visibly 
 into God's covenant, as their (the Israelites) in- 
 fants were: but if ours are not, is not here an 
 important circumstance in which both the Abra- 
 hamic and Mosaic dispensations were more favour- 
 able to mankind, and manifested greater grace than 
 the dispensation of Jesus Christ? — But can this 
 possibly be I 
 
 Query VI. Are not the infants of christians 
 (who are now an holy priesthood, and who suc- 
 ceed to all the privileges of the Jewish church) are 
 not, I say, their infants as capable r« fiadrjTevscr^ai of 
 being discipled, as the infants of the Jewish priest- 
 hood were, of being enrolled in the temple re- 
 gister, and entered as ministers to Aaron, and 
 
 as <j>v\a<r <ro vrtq rag <\>v\aKag tuv ayiwv keeping the 
 
 charge of the sanctuary ;* and are not infants as ca- 
 pable, under the christian covenant, of being bap- 
 tised as they were of circumcision both under the 
 Abrahamic and Mosaic ? 
 
 * Vide Numb. iii. 6, 7, 8, 28. 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 39 
 
 Let the scriptures, then interpret themselves ; 
 and one part of the divine dispensation be suffered 
 to explain the other (of which other, it was in- 
 tended to be a figure or tyipc) and we shall find it 
 perfectly agreeable to the analogy and style of 
 scripture, as well as to the reason of things, that 
 infants should be admitted as members of the chris- 
 tian church, and are therefore included in the 
 commission to baptise. 
 
 ARGUMENT V. 
 
 From Apostolic Tradition. 
 
 The baptism of infants was the undoubted 
 practice of the christian church, in its purest and 
 first ages; the ages immediately succeeding the 
 Apostles ; who could not but know what the 
 apostolic doctrine and practice was as to this 
 matter. 
 
 This, I apprehend, to be an argument of great 
 weight. For the enquiry being about a fact, which 
 could not but be publicly and perfectly known, 
 and not possible to be mistaken, in the ages imme- 
 diately succeeding the apostles, the sense of those 
 
'40 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 ages, concerning* this fact, must needs be of great 
 moment in deciding the point, — Whether the 
 apostles and the evangelists formed the first 
 churches throughout the whole world, upon the 
 plan of infant baptism, or not ; that is to say, 
 whether they admitted infants, together with their 
 believing parents, into the church by baptism ; or 
 did not so admit them, was a fact of such nature 
 as could not but be evident, and indubitably 
 known to all the christians of the first age. Nor 
 was it, humanly speaking, possible, that the apos- 
 tolic practice in this point should be universally 
 departed from, disused and thrown out, in so short 
 a space of time, as we shall presently see the bap- 
 tism of infants to have universally prevailed. To 
 prepare the way to this proof, I beg leave to 
 premise these two things. 
 
 1. To weaken the testimony of the antient 
 writers and fathers upon this point, some have ob- 
 jected, the many foolish and absurd opinions and 
 interpretations of scripture with which their writings 
 abound. But this is extremely weak. For they 
 are not here appealed to as reasoners, or inter- 
 preters, but only as historians or witnesses to a 
 public standing fact. 
 
 2. If any think it strange, that we have no 
 more express testimonies to this practice of the 
 church, in the writings of these fathers, let him 
 consider, — That the far greater part of their writ- 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 41 
 
 iugs are lost; and that it is but little more than 
 their names and a few pieces of their works espe- 
 cially as to the first age, that are transmitted down 
 to us. — And also, that the baptism of infants being- 
 then universally practised, and no doubts or dis- 
 pute having- ever been moved about it; and it be- 
 ing likewise the constant ever-prevailing custom of 
 all the enemies of Christianity, both Jews and 
 pagans, to admit infants to a participation of their 
 religious ceremonies and rites together witb their 
 parents. These things considered, it will not ap- 
 pear strange that this point is so rarely touched on 
 in the writing's of those times. There are a tbou- 
 sand religious books written in the present age, in 
 which the least hint is not to be found about bap- 
 tising of infants, though the point has now been so 
 long and so warmly controverted amongst us: much 
 less, then, should one expect to find any thing but 
 a few allusions and hints as to this matter, in the 
 books of those early times. 
 
 This being premised, we proceed to the testi- 
 monies. The first shall be from 
 
 Justin Martyr, who wrote about forty years 
 alter the apostolic age. He says " Kcu 7roX\oi tiveq 
 
 " k.CU TTOXKOL ifylKOVTUTat KCU SpCOLl^KOVTUTai 01 EK TTCtlCWV 
 
 " f/*adi)Ttvdr)CTav rw -^pi^to." — " Several persons among 
 " us, both men and women, of sixty or seventy years 
 •' old, ziho mere proselyted, or made disciples, to 
 " Christ in, or from their infancy do continue un- 
 E2 
 
42 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 " corrupt."* Now, proselyted to Christ from their 
 infancy, they could not be, without being-, from their 
 infancy, considered and treated as proseljtes to 
 Christ ; that is, without being* from their infancy 
 baptised. — For whosoever t/maQ^nvBrjaav rut \p--rw 
 were discipled or proselyted to Christ, were by his 
 express order, Mat. xxviii. 19- to be baptised. 
 Note, seventy years from Justin carries us back, 
 almost, into the middle of the apostolic age. 
 
 Iren^el s, who wrote about sixty-seven years 
 after the apostles, and was born, it is said, some 
 years before the death of St. John, says concern- 
 ing Christ. — " Omnes enim venit per semetipsum 
 " salvare ; omnes inquam, qui per eum renascuntur 
 " in Deum, infantes et parvulos et pueros et 
 " juvenes."-f- — " That he came to sate all persons by 
 " himself; all, / mean, zcho by him are regenerated, 
 " i. e. baptised, unto God, INFANTS and little ones, 
 " and youths and elder persons." — That the word, 
 rcnascor, regenerated, in the writings of these an- 
 tients, particularly of Irenaeus, is most familiarly 
 used to signify, baptised, see from a vast variety of 
 instances proved, beyond all doubt, in Dr. Wall's 
 History of Infant Baptism. Vol. I. Chap. hi. § 2, 3. 
 and Defence page 318. 324. — And that by infants, 
 are here meant, children, before they come to the 
 
 * Just. Martyr. Apol. ii. 
 
 f Irenaeus adv. Ha?res lib. iii. cap. 39. 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 43 
 
 use of reason, is evident, not only as these must 
 necessarily be included in the ALL whom he came 
 to save ; but also because, after he had mentioned 
 infants and others regenerated, he runs over the 
 several ranks of age again : but with this remarka- 
 ble difference, that whereas he mentions the benefit 
 of Christ's example, as what was to be taken by 
 each of the other ranks, viz. the parvuli, the juvenes 
 and the seniores, he says no such thing concerning 
 the infantes infants ; for this reason, no doubt ; viz. 
 that these only, of all the mentioned ranks, were 
 incapable of this benefit. 
 
 Tertullian, who flourished about an hun- 
 dred years after the apostles, is the only person, 
 among the antients, who advises to defer the bap- 
 tism of infants, except in cases of necessity or 
 in danger of death. But his advising to defer it, 
 except in cases of necessity, is an incontestible 
 proof that the baptising of infants was the practice 
 of those times. And as he appears to be quite 
 singular in this his advice ; so, that he was ex- 
 tremely whimsical and absurd in his opinions on 
 this, as well as several other points of religion, 
 all who have read his works perfectly well know. 
 For, upon the same grounds on which he re- 
 commends the deferring the baptism of infants, 
 he advises also — " That unmarried persons should 
 '' be kept off from this sacrament, zcho are likely 
 " to come into temptalion ; as Kelt those who never 
 u icere married, as those in widowhood} until they 
 
44 THE BAPTISM OF IMFANTS, 
 
 " either marry, or be confirmed in continence. They 
 " who understand the weight of baptism zcill rather 
 " dread ihe receiving of it, than the delaying of it."* 
 
 This is Tertullian's reasoning upon the 
 point; but we have nothing 1 to do with that; all 
 we cite him for is a voucher to an antient fact, 
 to prove that in his days infants were baptised. 
 To this fact he bears incontestable witness. His 
 saying — " Itaque pro cujusque personam condi- 
 " tione," &c. Therefore according to every ones 
 " condition, disposition and also age, the delaying of 
 " baptism h more profitable, especially in the case of 
 " children f — and his asking — " Quid festinat in- 
 " nocens aetas ad remissionem peccatorum I Quid 
 " enim necesse est, si non tani necesse sponsores 
 " etiam periculo ingeri." — " Why does that innocent 
 " age make such hasie to the remission of sins, i. e. 
 " to the laver of baptism .' What occasion is there, 
 " except in cases of necessity, that the sponsors or 
 " godfathers, be brought into danger.'^ These 
 questions plainly prove the baptising- of infants to 
 have been the practice of his days. J 
 
 Note. There are some, who upon very proba- 
 ble grounds, understand these passages of Tertul- 
 lian as relating only to the baptism of the infants 
 of heathen parents ; which when they came into 
 their power by purchase, conquest, &c. the chris- 
 
 * Tert. de Baptismo: cap. 18. f Ibid. 
 
 X Tide the notes at the end of this volume. 
 
A REASONABLE .SERVICE. 45 
 
 fians of those times were wont to baptise. And 
 that it is only to delay the baptising of such infants 
 as these, which Tertullian advises, there is strong 
 reason to believe. 
 
 Hitherto, we find this point, of infant baptism, 
 but transiently touched on by these earl) writers : 
 there having- yet no controversy or doubt arisen in 
 the church which might give occasion to their 
 speaking more expressly concerning it. But about 
 this time, there arose some dispute about original 
 sin, or the nature and degree of that pollution with 
 which new-born infants are tainted. Henceforward, 
 therefore, we shall find more direct and express 
 passages relating to their baptism. 
 
 Origen, about an hundred and ten years 
 after the apostles, speaking of the pollution which 
 cleaves to infants, says, — " Adde his eliam, &c— 
 " Besides this also let it be considered ; what is the 
 " reason, that whereas the baptism of the church 
 " is given for the forgiveness, infants also by the 
 " usage of the church are baptised ! when if there 
 " were nothing in infants which wanted forgiveness 
 " and mercy, the grace of baptism would be need- 
 " less to them.'* 
 
 And again, " Partuli haptizantur in remissio- 
 " nem. — Infants are baptised for the remission of 
 " sins. Of what sins .' Or when have they sinned .' 
 •• Or how can any reason of the laver hold good in 
 
 * Humil. viii. in Levit. Cap. 12. 
 
46 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 " their case ; but according- to that "sense before 
 " mentioned ; none is free from pollution, though 
 " his life be but the length of one day upon the 
 " earth I And it is for that reason, because, by the 
 " sacrament of baptism the pollution of our birth is 
 " taken away, that infants are baptised."* 
 
 In another treatise he says — " Pro hoc et eccle- 
 " sia, $c." — " For this also it was, that the church 
 " had from the apostles a tradition, or order, to 
 " give baptism also to infants. For they to whom 
 " the divine mysteries were committed, knew that 
 " there is in all persons the natural pollution of 
 " sin, which must be done away by water and the 
 " spirit."f 
 
 There are other passages of Origen, full to this 
 point: but these, already cited, abundantly prove 
 the baptism of infants to be the standing custom of 
 his days. That they are genuine and authentic, 
 see clearly shewn in Dr. WaiFs History of Infant 
 Baptism, Vol. I. p. 55. — and Defence, p. 372. 
 
 Note. Origen was born, about eigty five years 
 after the age of the apostles ; and if baptised in 
 infancy (as there is no reason to question but he 
 was, Iris father and grandfather having both been 
 christians) here is clear proof of its practice very 
 near the apostolic age. Though he resided chiefly 
 at Alexandria in Egypt, he had been conversant in 
 
 * Orig. in Luc. 
 
 f Ibid. Comment, in Epist. Rom. L. 5. 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 47 
 
 almost all the noted churches of the world. His 
 testimony, therefore, to the print, may justly be 
 supposed to speak the sense of them all.* 
 
 We next proceed to Cyprian, who wrote 
 about an hundred and fifty years after the apostles; 
 and gives, if it be possible, a yet more indubitable 
 testimony to this fact. In his time, (Anno Domini 
 253) a council of sixty-six bishops being- convened 
 at Carthage ; one Fidus, a country bishop, having 
 entertained some doubt (not whether infants should 
 be baptised at all, but) whether baptism might law- 
 fully be given them, till they were eight days old, 
 according to the law of circumcision ? In answer to 
 this doubt, they unanimously decreed : — " That the 
 " baptism of infants was not to be deferred till the 
 " eighth day. — And after many things spoken to 
 the point they conclude thus — " C&terum si homines 
 " impedire cdiquid, Sr. But if any thing could 
 " hinder men from baptism, it will be heinous sins, 
 " which will debar the adult and mature therefrom. 
 " And if those who have sinned extremely, yet 
 " if afterward they believe, are baptised, and no 
 " man is prohibited from this grace ; how much 
 
 * The learned Dr. Gale, who with great acuteness had 
 disputed Hie preceding- authorities, (but whose objections 
 have been abundantly answered by Dr. Wall) does not 
 so much as pretend to contest those which follow, from 
 Cyprian and Austin. These, therefore, being admitted as 
 Lucontestible by our opponents, we shall see presently, the 
 strength with which they conclude in our favour. 
 
48 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 " more ought not an infant to be prohibited ; who, 
 
 * being but just born, is guilty of no sin, but of 
 " original, which he contracted from Adam.— 
 
 * Wherefore, dearly beloved, it is our opinion 
 " that from baptism and the grace of God, who is 
 " kind and benign to all, none ought to be prohi- 
 
 * bited by us ; which as it is to be observed with 
 
 * respect to all, so especially with respect to iit- 
 " fends, and those who are but just born, who 
 " deserve our help and the divine mercy."* 
 
 Hence, then, it incontestibly appears, that the 
 baptism of infants was the constant, established 
 practice of the church at this time : inasmuch, as 
 neither the person who proposed the doubt, nor any 
 one of the sixty-six bishops who answer it, made 
 the least question of the baptism of infants, but 
 speak of it as a thing universally acknowledged and 
 practised in the church. 
 
 Now, as this was but an hundred and fifty years 
 after the apostles ; and some of these bishops may 
 reasonably be supposed seventy or eighty years 
 old ; if they were baptised in their infancy, (which 
 can with no reason be doubted) it carries up the 
 practice to within eighty years of the apostles them- 
 selves. And at the time of their infancy, there were 
 many alive who were born within the very age of 
 the apostles, and could not but certainly and infal- 
 
 * Cyprian Epist. ad Fidum. Epist. 64. 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 49 
 
 liblv know what the apostolic practice and appoint- 
 ment was as to this matter. 
 
 The Clementine Constitutions, (a book thought 
 by some to be of very great antiquity ; and by all 
 acknowledged to be extant in the fourth or fifth 
 century, and to contain a good account of the an- 
 tient discipline and practice) have this express ad- 
 monition " l)07rrtfrf7-f ce c/twv Kat ra tnjiria" — " And 
 " baptise your infants, and bring them up in the 
 " nurture and admonition of God ;" for he says, 
 " Suffer the little children to come -unto me, and 
 "forbid them not." 
 
 There are several other testimonies, from Cle- 
 mens Alexandrinus ; quest, et. respon. apud Just. 
 Martyr; Greg. Nazian ; Bazil ; Ambrose; Chry- 
 sostom ; and Jerom, most full to this purpose, to 
 be seen in Dr. Wall's History of Infant Baptism, 
 too long to be here inserted : I shall further insist, 
 only, upon a very remarkable and decisive one, 
 from the writings of Austin and Pclagius; about 
 three hundred and ten years after the apostles. I 
 bring it not to prove baptism of infants to have 
 been the undoubted, universal practice of the 
 church in their days ; (this would be quite needless, 
 after the much earlier, and the indisputable evi- 
 dence already produced from the council at Car- 
 thage, 8cc.) but, to shew it to have been the con- 
 stant and immemorial practice from the very be- 
 ginning of Christianity. 
 
 In his controversy with Pelagius, about ori- 
 
 F 
 
50 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 ginal sin; to prove infants to be tainted with it, 
 Austin frequently and with great triumph urges 
 their baptism; demanding: — "Why infants are 
 If baptised for the remission of sin, if they have 
 " none V Pelagius seems exceedingly embar- 
 rassed by this argument ;* and every one sees, how 
 
 * It is surprising, to see the shifts by which Pelagius, 
 Celestius and their followers, endeavour to evade the force 
 of this argument. Sometimes they acknowledged infants 
 to have actual sin, and that their peevishness and froward 
 temper is to be considered as such.— Sometimes, they urged, 
 that infants had pre-existed; and it was for sins done in 
 some former state that they were brought to the baptismal 
 Iaver.— Sometimes, they said, that they were not baptised 
 for the forgiveness of sin ; but that they may be made heirs 
 of the kingdom.— Sometimes, that they were baptised for 
 forgiveness ; not that they had any sin, but that the uni- 
 formity of the words might be kept: or, because they were 
 baptised into the church, where forgiveness was to be had ; 
 and with a sacrament, which had the means of forgive- 
 ness for those who wanted it. Vide Wall's History, Vol. I. 
 p. 280. 
 
 To such extreme difficulties they thought themselves 
 reduced, to reconcile their opinion with the baptism of 
 infants. But, these had all instantly removed, and the 
 battery which so annoyed them been demolished at once, 
 by only denying that infants were to be baptised. Yet, so 
 far are they from this, that they seem not to have raised the 
 least doubt of this kind. Pelagius owns, as above cited. 
 And Celestius confesses, that infants are to be baptised ac- 
 cording to the rule of the universal church. 
 
 Note, Pelagius and Celestius were born, one in Britain, 
 the other in Ireland ; they lived a long time in Rome, the 
 then centre of the world, and reputed head of the church : 
 they were both, for some time, at Carthage, in Africa; 
 then, the one settled at Jerusalem; the other travelled 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 51 
 
 much it concerned him to deny the baptism of 
 infants, had there been any possible ground for it ; 
 and to do all that in him lay, to invalidate and dis- 
 prove it. Had it been an innovation, a departure 
 from the apostolic practice ; it is impossible but 
 so very learned and acute a person as Pelagius, 
 who lived so near the apostles, and had been per- 
 sonally conversant in some of the most noted 
 churches of Europe, Asia, and Africa, must have 
 been able to discover it, and both to have and to 
 give at least some strong- suspicion of it. But does 
 the very sagacious Pelagius attempt any thing like 
 this ? Xo : so far from it, that some of his adver- 
 saries having 'drawn as a consequence of his opi- 
 nion, that infants are not to be baptised, he warmly 
 disclaims it, and with indignation complains. — " Se 
 " ab hominibus infamari quod Jieget parvulis bap- 
 " tismi sacramentum, fyc. That he had been slan- 
 " derously represented, by men as denying- the 
 " sacrament of baptism to infants." And adds, 
 " Nunqwtm se, vel impium aliquem hcereticum, 
 
 through all the noted Greek and Eastern churches, in 
 Europe and Asia. If there had, then, been any church, or 
 number of churches, throughout the whole world, not only 
 in that, but in the two preceeding ages, who denied the 
 baptism of infants; it is impossible but these two very 
 learned and sagacious persons must have known, or heard 
 of it, and that they would not have failed to take mighty 
 advantage from it to check the triumphs of their opponents ; 
 and to wrest from them this argument, by which, of all 
 others they were most grievously pressed. 
 
52 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 " audisse qui hoc quod proposuit de parvulis diceretT 
 — " That he never heard, no not even any impious 
 " heretick, who would say that which he had men- 
 " tioned, viz. that unbaptised infants are not liable 
 " to the condemnation of the first man, and that 
 " they are not to be cleansed by the regeneration 
 " of baptism." And then proceeds — " Quis enim 
 " it a evangeJiac lectionis ignarus est, fyc. For who 
 "is so ignorant of that which is read in the gos- 
 " pel as, I do not say boldly to affirm, but even 
 " lightly to suggest, or even to imagine such a 
 " thing ? In a word, who can be so impious, as to 
 " hinder infants from being baptised and born again 
 " in Christ ; and so make them miss of the kingdom 
 "of God r 
 
 And having cited, these words of our Saviour, 
 John iii. 5, no one can enter into the kingdom of 
 God, except he is bom again of zcater and of the 
 spirit, he goes on — " Quis ille tarn impius est qui 
 " cujuslibet atatis parvulo. v — " Who is there so 
 " impious as to refuse an infant, of what age so- 
 " ever, the common redemption of mankind T* 
 Austin also, reciting the above-mentioned decision 
 of the council at Carthage, which determines that 
 infants are in no wise to be denied baptism, adds, 
 — " Non solum in catholica ecclesia, verum etiani 
 " in qualibet heresi vel schismate constitutis, non 
 " memini me aliud legisse. — That, neither from 
 
 * Austin, de peccato Origen. cap. 17, 18. 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 53 
 
 " such as were of the catholic church, nor of such 
 " as belonged to any sect or schism, whatsoever, 
 " he remembered to have read otherwise in any 
 " writer."* i. e. of any who denied, that infants 
 were baptised upon the account of original sin. 
 " This the church has alzoays had, has always 
 " held."f 
 
 These, now, are the evidence, on which we 
 rest the antiquity of this fact ; and by which we 
 prove the baptism of infants to have been the 
 practice in the christian church, from the very 
 beginning. Justin Martyr about forty years; 
 Irenseus about sixty-seven; and Tertullian about 
 an hundred years after the apostles, gave plain 
 intimations of its being the christian practice in 
 their times. From Origen an hundred and ten 
 years ; and from Cyprian and the synod of sixty- 
 six bishops, one hundred and fifty years from the 
 above date, we have indisputable proof of its be- 
 ing then the established and standing usage of the 
 church. And Austin and Pelagius, about three 
 hundred and ten years after the apostles, (though 
 the latter was under the strongest temptation, and 
 even necessity to deny the baptism of infants, had 
 there been any possible ground for it) acknowledge, 
 that they never heard, nor read of any, whether, 
 
 * Austin de pec. & merit, cap. 6. 
 t Serm . x. de verb. Apost. 
 
 F 2 
 
54 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 true christian, heretick, or schismatic, who denied 
 baptism to infants. This is the evidence: let us 
 now argue from it. 
 
 1. All the churches, throughout the whole 
 christian world, were in the age of the apostles, 
 formed and established upon one and the same 
 plan. 
 
 That is to say, they all either baptised infants ; 
 or else they all rejected them from baptism. What 
 the opinion, and the practice of the apostles was 
 in this matter, (who were sent out into all the 
 world to preach and establish churches) must be 
 perfectly, universally, infallibly known ; nor could 
 it possibly be mistaken, by any one single church 
 throughout the whole earth, during- the apostolic 
 age. The Corinthians, for instance, the Galatians, 
 the Thessalonians, &c. all perfectly knew, whe- 
 ther Paul and his companions, when they bap- 
 tised and formed them into a church, baptised 
 their infants also ; or else rejected them from bap- 
 tism. And 
 
 2. As to the age, immediately following the 
 apostles; it is impossible that they should be ig- 
 norant or mistaken as to this fact. They could not 
 be in the least doubt, how their fathers had re- 
 ceived and learnt from the apostles, and practised 
 as to tins matter. For whether infants were, or 
 were not, then baptised, was so notorious and 
 plain a fact, a fact of so public and conspicuous a 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 55 
 
 nature, as could not possibly escape the know- 
 ledge of every particular christian, then living 
 upon earth.* 
 
 Now if all the churches throughout the world, 
 were really established by the apostles upon the 
 plan of only adult baptism, and they every where 
 rejected infants, and forbid them to be baptised ; it 
 will appear a thing absolutely inconceivable, and 
 even a moral impossibility, that the baptism of 
 infants should so early, so widely, so universally 
 prevail, throughout the whole world, as we have 
 now seen it to have done. 
 
 For if the baptism of infants was not an apos- 
 tolic institution and practice, how must the per- 
 sons, who first attempted to introduce it, be re- 
 ceived I Would not all their neighbouring chris- 
 tians immediately cry out upon the innovation, 
 and demand,—" By what authority do you pre- 
 " surae to perform this quite new, this unheard of 
 " and strange ceremony of baptising an infant!" — 
 
 * With whatever credulity as to miracles, said to be 
 wrought in their days, these early writers may be charged, 
 it cannot at all affect their evidence as to the fact, here in 
 debate. For, as there was no possibility of their being 
 themselves deceived as to this matter; so neither could 
 they be under temptation to falsify in their accounts of it. 
 Nor indeed, hud the temptation been ever so strong, could 
 they have ventured to falsify in a fact notorious to all the 
 world; and when every christian then living could have 
 stepped forth, and borne witness to the falsehood of then- 
 account. 
 
56 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 Suppose them to have urged, in support of their 
 practice, the same scriptures with us ; would it not 
 have presently been replied upon them with un- 
 answerable strength? — " But did not the apostles 
 " and first preachers of Christianity understand the 
 " true sense and force of these scriptures ? Yet 
 " not one of them all, nor any one of their follow- 
 " ers, ever baptised an infant, as we all perfectly 
 " know, and as you cannot but own. Look into all 
 " the churches throughout the whole earth, into 
 " Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Greece, Italy, Africa, 
 " Spain, &c. and you will find there never was such 
 " a thing known, nor heard of amongst christians, 
 " as baptising an infant." 
 
 What! I greatly wonder, could the first bap- 
 tisers of infants possibly reply I Could they urge 
 that it was an apostolic injunction and practice ? 
 No : the whole christian world would have rose 
 up against them, and borne witness to the false- 
 hood of such a pretence. Could they hope then to 
 establish this invention of their own ; yea, was it 
 actually established, in direct opposition to the 
 apostles' authority, and to their then perfectly well- 
 known institution and practice I — Impossible to 
 imagine ! 
 
 What then ? I again ask, could the first bap- 
 tisers of infants urge in favour of their practice I 
 Or how was it possible, it should be received, yea, 
 prevail, yea so universally prevail, that the very 
 learned and acute Pelagius about three hundred 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. o? 
 
 years after, never heard of a church amongst either 
 catholics or bereticks, who did not baptise infants, 
 if all the churches in the world were constituted by 
 the apostles upon the directly opposite plan I Yea, 
 and when the persons who first began this practice 
 could not but own, that the authority and example 
 of all the apostles, and of all the primitive chris- 
 tians, and of all the churches in the world were 
 absolutely against them I 
 
 Well; but suppose a few persons were of so 
 odd a turn of mind, as to run into this quite novel 
 and unheard of practice, of baptising infants ; can 
 it be imagined that whole churches would be led 
 blindly away after them \ Or, if whole churches 
 might be thus seduced, could whole nations be so 
 too i 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 the western chinches, in the space of about 
 two hundred years, universally fell in with this anti- 
 apostolic and new invented rite of worship ; and 
 so strangely apostatised 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 extravagance of the supposition is more- 
 over mightily increased, by remembering — that a 
 vast number of sects tind heresies sprung up, and 
 the christian church was rent into many angry and 
 
58 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 contending parties, during these times.* In the 
 second century, or the age immediately following 
 the apostles, there were those who took their names 
 from Cerinthus, Ebion, Valentinus, Carpocrates, 
 Marcion, Mo?itamis ; and the whole church was 
 rent into two furious and angry sects, the eastern 
 and the western, by the controversy about Easter. 
 In the third century there arose Novatia7i, Sabel- 
 lius, Paulas Samosatensis, Manes, §c. with their 
 followers. In the fourth, the Maletians, Avians, 
 Athanasians, fyc. Now these several inflamed par- 
 ties, into which by divine permission, the church 
 was then divided, were watchful and severe spies 
 upon each others conduct : so that if any of them 
 had innovated in this matter, of baptising infants, 
 how readily would the rest have entered their pro- 
 test against it, and exclaimed loudly upon the inno- 
 vation ? But, it seems, so far were they from this ; 
 that however mutually inflamed and angry as to 
 other points ; yet, laying aside their animosity, they 
 all surprisingly agree, in the affair of baptising in- 
 fants, to depart from the apostolic practice; and 
 
 * No less than ninety different heresies are said to have 
 sprung- up in the three first centuries. Irenasas, Epiphanius, 
 Philastrius, Austin, and Theodore t, it may be justly ob- 
 served, each of these wrote catalogues of the several sects 
 and sorts of christians they had ever heard of; but none of 
 them mention any that denied infant baptism, except those . 
 who denied all baptism. 
 
A' REASONABLE SERVICE. 59 
 
 by an unaccountable confederacy connive at one 
 another in this dangerous superstition. — Strange ! 
 beyond all belief! — That amidst their many mutual 
 accusations, reproaches, complaints, we meet not, 
 in all antiquity, with one upon this head ; and not a 
 man, catholic nor heretic, dropping- a single word 
 against this gross innovation ; except, perhaps, 
 Tertullian ; and he not absolutely, (if at all) cen- 
 suring- it ; and supporting- his dislike of it, by rea- 
 sons which are no strength but a dishonour to any 
 cause. 
 
 For an hundred years after the death of the 
 apostles, their authority was sufficient, our bre- 
 thren acknowledge, to keep such an innovation 
 from entering- the church. They therefore usually 
 place the introduction of this practice about the 
 beginning - of the third century. But behold ! in 
 the short space of about two hundred years more, 
 without a single precept to warrant, or a single 
 example to encourage it, yea with the well-known 
 practice of the apostles themselves, and of all 
 the churches they ever planted throughout the 
 whole world, confessedly, openly, directly against 
 it; under all these disadvantages, the baptism 
 of infants, it seems, so every where prevailed, 
 that upon the face of the whole earth there 
 was not a church found where it was not per- 
 formed ! — To him that believes this, what can be 
 incredible I 
 
 Some, perhaps, to evade the force of the fore- 
 
GO TIIE BAPTISM OF infants, 
 
 going- argument, may object — " There have been 
 " other great corruptions, such as image-wor- 
 " ship, transubstantiation, &c. which have alike 
 " universally prevailed in the church." But the 
 answer is extremely obvious. I. This is far from 
 being true; nay it is entirely without foundation. 
 Neither image-worship, nor transubstantiation 
 ever universally prevailed. The latter has by 
 the greater part of the christian church been in 
 all times rejected as it is at this day ; and though 
 the former, since, the seventh century, has spread 
 itself wide, and too generally prevailed, yet it 
 was not without mighty struggles and oppositions 
 in the church; numerous synods of bishops zea- 
 lously declared against it : solemn decrees of 
 councils, not one kingdom or church onlv, but 
 in diverse regions of the earth, publicly con- 
 demned it: the arm both of civil and military 
 power was strenuously exerted to establish and 
 support it: grievous persecutions were raised 
 upon its account : and many testified their ab- 
 horrence of it by bitter sufferings, and death itself. 
 — And is this a case at all parallel to that of 
 infant baptism, which we have now been consider- 
 ing? The most prejudiced judgment must confess 
 it is not. Besides — 
 
 £. Had these corruptions, indeed, as uni- 
 versally prevailed, as infant baptism ever did; 
 yet would this, by no means, have put them upon 
 an equal foot with that ; or have made the cases al 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. Gl 
 
 all parallel. For, when the bishop of Rome had 
 claimed and was acknow lodged to be the int'al 
 lrble head, the supreme pastor of the church, 
 ihe vicar of Christ, &.c. when emperors and kings 
 took upon them to convene councils to explain 
 doctrines, and establish faith by dint of civil au- 
 thority ; cherishing and upholding one party by 
 worldly honours and preferments; but terrifying 
 and crushing others by banishment, confisca- 
 tions, imprisonment and death : finally ; when 
 the clergy had both the terrors and the riches 
 of this world, much at their disposal; and the 
 spirit of true piety, fortitude and faith began to 
 languish in the church, (as it miserably languished, 
 in the times when image-worship and transub- 
 stantiation were brought in) and a spirit of pride 
 and domination, of sensuality and sloth sprung 
 up in its room : — When this, I say, was the case, 
 such an universal departure from the apostles' 
 doctrine and practice may seem easily to be ac- 
 counted for, and has nothing in it so strange. 
 But— when the circumstances of the church were 
 the very reverse of all this ; harassed and se- 
 verely pressed by persecutions from without; split 
 into various sects and angry parties within ; desti- 
 tnte of worldly honours to recommend, and of 
 worldly terrors to enforce any doctrine or prac- 
 tice ; and acknowledging no visible, supreme, in- 
 fallible head, as having dominion over its faith; 
 when this was the case (as in the three first 
 
 G 
 
62 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 centuries, when infant baptism has been shewn 
 universally to prevail, it manifestly was,) every one 
 sees the wide, the vast difference ; and must con- 
 fess the impossibility of so universally corrupting 
 the apostolic doctrine and practice of baptising 
 only the adult, if any such there had been ; and of 
 foisting in, throughout the whole world, infant 
 baptism in its stead. 
 
 So that, upon the whole, it appears a clear 
 and a very strongly attested fact: — That the 
 practice of baptising infants was primitive and 
 apostolic ; and that the first christian churches 
 were every where formed and established upon 
 this scheme. 
 
 But the examples of scripture-baptism, our 
 brethren are wont to urge, are all on their side. — 
 This is confidently, indeed, asserted ; but upon 
 a closer examination will be found a manifest 
 mistake. There being not, in the whole scrip- 
 ture, one single instance of the baptism for winch 
 they plead, and which is practised amongst them ; 
 viz. That those who are born of christian parents, 
 are to be suffered to become adult before they are 
 baptised. — This, it is to be observed carefully, is 
 the point in question betwixt us. As for the case 
 of adult proselytes, or converts to Christianity, 
 these, we all agree, are not to be baptised till 
 they personally profess faith. The scripture in- 
 stances therefore of such proselytes, baptised upon 
 such profession, are of no pertinence nor weight 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 03 
 
 at all in the controversy before us : for these 
 are exactly consonant to our sentiments and prac- 
 tice. The only point in debate is — what is to 
 be done with the infants of these proselytes ? — Are 
 they to be baptised with their parents? — Or; 
 are they to be let alone till they become adult, 
 and then be baptised upon their personal pro- 
 fession I The latter, our brethren say ; but have 
 not in the whole scripture, I again affirm it, 
 one instance of such practice ; no, nor any sha- 
 dow or appearance of it. Their boasts, there- 
 fore, of scripture instances, precedents, exam- 
 ples, are mere sound, and nothing- else. Whereas 
 the instance of Li/dia, Acts xvi. 14, 15. (not to 
 mention Stephanas and the Jai/lor) strongly fa- 
 vours our practice ; whose faith alone is mentioned, 
 and, immediately it is added, her household were 
 baptised. 
 
 The Religious or Moral purposes of 
 Infant-Baptism. 
 
 If it be asked — what are the moral purposes 
 of this Baptism of Infants? or, of what real 
 benefit or use in religion ? It were sufficient to 
 reply — of the same benefit and use as infant- 
 circumcision was ; which is acknowledged to have 
 been enjoined by God, and practised by his 
 church, for more than two thousand years.— 
 But I add ; it is of great moral benefit ; as it is 
 
64 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 both a solemn vow or dedication on our part, 
 and a gracious condescension and promise on 
 God's. 
 
 First. It is a solemn vow or dedication on 
 our part. For, herein, the religious parent pub- 
 licly recognises his own covenant with God : 
 binds himself by a sacred promise to watch over 
 the immortal soul now committed to his charge, 
 and to train it up in a religious manner ; and 
 devotes first himself, and then his helpless infant, 
 to the divine patronage and care. By being 
 baptised into the name, the child is solemnly given 
 up to the dominion and favour, and is received 
 as the peculiar property, the subject and charge, 
 of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
 Ghost* And to one who well considers into 
 what a world of various difficulties, temptations 
 and sins, his infants are born ; how every age 
 and path of life is beset with dangers and snares ; 
 and what consequences, of awful moment, depend 
 upon the manner in which they pass the present 
 state : — to him that considers this, it cannot but 
 appear an inestimable privilege to be permitted to 
 
 * Baptising in (or unto) the name — signifies, commend- 
 ing a person to the peculiar blessing and patronage of him, 
 or them, in whose name he is baptised. Thus, when the 
 form of solemn benediction is described, Numb. vi. 23. — 
 The Lord bless thee, and heep thee, kc. It is added— And thei/ 
 shall put my NAME upon the children o^" Israel, and J will 
 bless thfin. 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 05 
 
 give them up, in this solemn manner, to the gra- 
 cious protection and conduct of heaven. 
 
 The sentiments of a religious parent, on such 
 an occasion, may be thus expressed. — " I ac- 
 " knowledge, Almighty God, with the greatest 
 " thankfulness and joy, thine absolute right in me, 
 " and in all that is mine. This child, which thou 
 " hast given me, I receive as from thine hand. It 
 " is thine, for thou hast formed it, and redeemed 
 " it by the blood of thine only begotten Son. To 
 " thee therefore I now solemnly devote and give 
 " it up : to be guarded by thy providence ; mini- 
 " stered to by thine angels; influenced by thy 
 " spirit ; conducted safe through the many dangers 
 " and evils of this present world, and to be pre- 
 " served to thine everlasting kingdom and glory in 
 " the other. 
 
 " For ever blessed be thy name, that as by one 
 ' man's offence, judgment came upon all to condem- 
 " nation and death; even so by the righteousness of 
 " one, the free gift comes upon all to justification 
 " of life. That as the fatal effects of the first 
 " Adam's sin extended to our infant-offspring, so, 
 " the salutary effects of the second Adam's righ- 
 " teousness extend also to these, raising them to 
 " glory, to happiness and life. ' 
 
 " I render unfeigned thanks, that the blessings 
 
 " of redemption and of the covenant of grace, 
 
 " reach also to them. That thou hast commanded 
 
 " that little children be brought into thy presence 
 
 G 2 
 
66 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 " to receive thy solemn benediction, and hast 
 " declared them to belong to thy family and king- 
 " dom. That the baptismal water is appointed as 
 
 • a standing monument of thy favour and gracious 
 " acceptance of them; and that by this figure is 
 " represented, thy readiness, to pour dozen thy spirit 
 rt upon our seed, and thy blessing upon our qffs- 
 " pring.* — Lord T believe ! I most thankfully ac- 
 u cept this liberty which is given me. I here 
 *' bring my helpless infant, commending it to God, 
 
 * and the power of his grace. Oh take it into 
 " thy family, and into the arms of thy love ! Pour 
 " down thy blessings on it, and write its name in 
 " the book of life ! May it be sanctified from the 
 " zcomb : consecrated a chosen vessel, fitted for 
 " thy service! JVlay thy spirit descend upon, and 
 " dwell continually in it, as a new principle of 
 " life ; gradually rectifying the disorders of its na- 
 " ture ; rooting out the seeds of vanity and folly 
 *' which may spring- up in its heart ; enlightening 
 " its understanding, strengthening its moral powers, 
 " purifying and controling its appetites and pas- 
 " sions; and forming it into a living temple and 
 " habitation of God ! 
 
 " Guard and preserve the life, which thou hast 
 " thus graciously bestowed ! Conduct it through 
 " the dangers of childhood and youth ! Spare it, 
 " if it be thy will, to be a blessing to its friends, 
 
 * Isaiah xl. v. 3. 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. G7 
 
 " and a burning and shining light, amidst a dark 
 " and corrupt world ! As it grows in years, may 
 " it continually grow in grace, in wisdom, and in 
 " virtue, and in favour zvith God and men ! Grant 
 " me, ever to walk before it with a wise and 
 " perfect heart ; to bring it up in the fear and in 
 " the nurture of the Liord : and so faithfully to 
 " discharge my duty, in every respect towards 
 " it, that I may at last meet it with joy at thy 
 " kingdom and appearance, and with triumph then 
 " say — Behold me and the child which thou hast 
 " given me /" 
 
 " And as it is thus a solemn vow and dedication 
 on our part : so it is — 
 
 Secondly. A most gracious condescension 
 and promise on God's. It is a token of his co- 
 venant ; a memorial or sign that he graciously 
 accepts both the religious parent and his child, 
 and that he will be their God. By this rite he 
 assures us, that as, in the wisdom of his provi- 
 dence, he treats infants as sinners, through the 
 transgression of Adam ; so, in the riches of his 
 grace, he has opened a fountain for their cleansing ; 
 will treat them as righteous through the obedience 
 of Christ ; and will give them his spirit to quicken, 
 regenerate and raise them to life. Of this spirit 
 the baptismal water is the appointed emblem or 
 sign ; and by commanding it to be poured on them 
 lie virtually says — 
 
 " Suffer the little children to come unto me, and 
 
68 THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 "forbid them not : for these also I account as sub- 
 " jects of my moral kingdom, and as a part of that 
 " church, or chosen society, over whom I will 
 " exercise a peculiar providence and care. 
 
 " And the child, which the pious parent has 
 " thus publicly devoted to me by baptism, I de- 
 " liver back to him again ; with a solemn charge 
 " that he ever, henceforth, consider it as my pro- 
 " perty : — train it up as for my service ; teach it 
 " early the principles of christian knowledge and 
 " virtue : — pray daily with, and for it; set before it 
 " a good example ; and watch over it as one who 
 " must shortly give an account, to the great shep- 
 " herd when he shall appear. So only, mayest thou 
 " hope that it will be thy comfort and delight in 
 f* this world; and thy joy, and everlasting crown 
 " of rejoicing, in the other." 
 
 These are some of the pious sentiments, which 
 the baptism of infants naturally suggests. Con- 
 sidered in this light, it appears to be of great moral 
 benefit : a most rational and proper service, or act 
 of religion. It manifestly tends to enlarge and to 
 confirm a christian's faith and hope in God, with 
 regard to his helpless child — to a clearer and more 
 extensive view of the great scheme of redemption 
 —to render parents more faithful, more diligent, 
 and serious in the education of their children, if 
 their lives are continued : and if they are taken 
 from them, it affords the uoblest support and 
 consolation in their death. 
 
A REASONABLE SERVICE. 69 
 
 I here bog leave to add— that there is a vast 
 difference in the genius and temper of children, 
 even in their most early years, every one sees. 
 What influence the divine Spirit has in forming the 
 human mind, even in its infant state, and mould- 
 ing- it into a preparation for future usefulness and 
 virtue— we cannot certainly say. Probably very 
 great; for John, it is said, Luke i. 15. was filled 
 zcith the Holjf Ghost from Jiis mother 's womb. The 
 prophet Isaiah, was called and formed from the 
 womb, to be a peculiar messenger of heaven to 
 instruct and reclaim the people. Isaiah xlix. 1, 2, 5. 
 And of Jeremiah it is said, before I formed thee in 
 the belli/ I knew thee: and before thou earnest forth 
 out of the zvomb, I sanctified thee, and ordained thee 
 a prophet unto the nations. Jer. i. 5. 
 
 It is then, a rational act of worship, for parents, 
 from the very dawn and first beginnings of life, to 
 devote their children to God, and to the peculiar 
 influences of his Spirit. And it is a very merciful 
 and wise appointment, surely, if God has instituted 
 a rite, or sacrament of religion, in which believing 
 parents are commanded thus to dedicate their in- 
 fants to him ; and in which he gives them a solemn 
 token that he will pour his spirit and blessing 
 on them. This is done in baptism. The water 
 poured on them, being an apt and proper emblem 
 of his readiness to hear the prayers of the pious 
 parent and to give his Spirit to the child — to preside 
 over, and assist, its intellectual and moral powers— 
 
70 THE BAPTISM, &.C. 
 
 to form it to a love of virtue — and to fit and pre- 
 dispose it for usefulness in future life.* 
 
 Upon the whole then we conclude — that it be- 
 ing an undoubted Privilege of the Christian 
 dispensation, as it was of both the Abrahamic and 
 Mosaic of old, that the infants of believersf should 
 be taken, together with themselves, into covenant 
 with God; it becomes us, with great thankfulness, 
 to accept of this favour ; to dedicate our children, 
 as well as ourselves, in this solemn manner to him : 
 and thus publicly to declare — that WE and OUR 
 household, will serve the Lord. 
 
 * Mr. Tombs, the learned Antipaedobaptist, acknow- 
 ledges that the grace of God may put infants into Christ, 
 and unite them to him by his spirit. Vide Examen. §. 10. 
 Suppose, says one, there were a ?naster, who had the secret of 
 predisposing the brain in order for future learning, or of 
 giving a principle or power of future knowledge ; would it 
 not be a very reasonable and desirable thing to put infants 
 under his management ; and might they not thenceforward 
 be counted scholars, or disciples, to him, though not yet 
 actually taught .' 
 
 f By infants of believers, are not to be understood only 
 their natural offspring ; but any infants which are their pro- 
 perty, or members of their household, or for whose religious 
 education they will solemnly undertake. Thus, not only 
 Abraham's own children, but all bom in his house, or bought 
 uith his money, he was commanded to circumcise. Gen. xvii. 
 13. So when Lydia, the Jaylor and Stephanas were baptised, 
 it is particularly observed, that their household were bap- 
 tised with them. Foundling infants, therefore, are very 
 rationally brought to baptism, by those who will engage 
 solemnly for their christian education. 
 
DIPPING 
 
 NOT THE ONLY 
 
 SCRIPTURAL AND PRIMITIVE MANNER 
 
 or 
 
 BAPTIZING." 
 
 AND SUPPOSING IT WERE, YET A STRICT ADHERENCE 
 TO IT NOT OBLIGATORY ON US. 
 
 BY 
 
 MICATAII TOWGOOD. 
 
 FOURTH EDITION. 
 
 In Christ Jcsas, neiflier circumcision availeth any thing, nor 
 uucircnmcision, but a new creature. Galat. >i. 15. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 The subject of the ensuing treatise is, in itself, 
 of so little moment, that it may seem needful to 
 apologize for offering it to public view. But no 
 one knows any thing of the history of religion, that 
 hath not seen, with astonishment, the power of that 
 name to make little things become great; to give 
 trifles a solemn air ; and to exalt circumstances and 
 modes into objects, not of men's grave attention 
 only, but of their warmest passions and zeal. 
 
 Even under the christian dispensation, that ra- 
 tional, sublime and spiritual scheme of worship, 
 the minds of its professors have with great violence 
 been agitated, and fierce controversies have arisen 
 upon the most frivolous points. — Whether the sa- 
 cramental supper is to be eaten with leavened, or 
 with unleavened bread ? — Whether Easter is to be 
 kept precisely on the fourteenth day after the first 
 vernal moon ; or, not till the Sunday following ?— 
 Whether the Holy Ghost proceeded from the JFa- 
 ther and the Son; or, from the Father BY the 
 Son ? — Whether the christian laity were to cross 
 themselves with tvto fingers only; or, whether, 
 
 H 
 
74 PREFACE, 
 
 like the clergy, they might not use three?* — 
 Furious and dire controversies to the terrible con- 
 vulsion of kingdoms and states, and to the infinite 
 reproach of the christian doctrine and name, have 
 been kindled up in the church, upon such trifling 
 debates. 
 
 Of much the same moment is the point here 
 discussed; viz. whether baptism is to be adminis- 
 tered by dipping the body under water ; or, by 
 sprinkling or pouring on. 
 
 There are some worthy and good persons — (ex- 
 tremely strange to consider!) who lay so great 
 stress upon this trivial circumstance in religion, as 
 to allow none to be baptised christians but those 
 who have been dipt— to break off christian fellow- 
 ship, and renounce communion as saints, with men 
 of the most shining piety, if they have not been 
 thus baptised— and even to think themselves 
 obliged to be unwearied in raising doubts and 
 anxieties in the breasts of such, concerning the 
 validity and truth of their baptism. 
 
 * The church, through the vast empire of Russia, was 
 greatly rent and inflamed, even to tortures and death itself, 
 in the reign of Czar Theodore, hy tliis insignificant dispute. 
 
 Vide Present State of Russia Vol. I. page 238. Voltaire 
 
 says, a violent sedition was raised by it in Astracan. Life 
 of diaries XII. page 21. 
 
PREFACE. 75 
 
 Many pious, but weak minds have been greatly 
 disturbed, not to say distressed, with scruples on 
 this head. When they hear it confidently affirmed 
 —That baptism evermore, and constantly, implies 
 dipping — That no person ever was, or can be, bap- 
 tised, who has not been dipt — And consequently, 
 that themselves are as really unbaptised, as pagans 
 or Ttwks. — It fills them with concern. They doubt 
 whether they are not wanting in obedience to an 
 express command and institution of Christ. 
 
 Effectually to remove every scruple of this 
 kind ; to shew, that there is no occasion of putting 
 this yoke upon the neck of the disciples, and to vin- 
 dicate Christianity from the unworthy imputa- 
 tion of laying so great a stress upon so merely 
 circumstantial and external a thing, is the design 
 of the ensuing treatise. How far it shall be ef- 
 fectual to answer this purpose, is humbly left to 
 the favour of heaven ; and to the calm and impar- 
 tial judgment of those into whose hands it may 
 happen to fall. 
 
THE 
 
 QUESTION. 
 
 IS CHRISTIAN-BAPTISM TO BE ADMINISTERED 
 ONLY BY IMMERSION, OR DIPPING THE BODY 
 UNDER WATER? OR, MAY IT NOT ALSO, BY 
 SPRINKLING, OR POURING WATER ON IT? 
 
 JL HE following tract is intended to prove, 
 
 First, That dipping the body under water, 
 was not the only antient and scriptural way of bap- 
 tising. And 
 
 Secondly, That, if it was, yet a strict ad- 
 herence to it, is not obligatory upon us ; but that 
 this circumstance may, very lawfully and properly 
 be now exchanged for that of sprinkling or pouring. 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 It is, first, to be shewn that dipping the body 
 under water, was not the only antient and scrip- 
 tural way of baptising. To which purpose, the 
 three following things are premised; in which all 
 are agreed. 
 
 I. That baptism (i. e. water-baptism) is but an 
 emblematical, or figurative thing. 
 H 2 
 
78 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 II. That the general nature or design of this 
 emblem or figure, is — by the application of water, 
 to signify or betoken a person to be holy or clean ; 
 appropriated to, and fit for the divine service. 
 And, 
 
 III. That baptism was really a divine institu- 
 tion; and, by the express command of God, prac- 
 tised as a religious rite in his church; both long 
 before, and at the time of Johns and Christ's 
 appearing, and beginning to baptise. 
 
 This last proposition is not, perhaps, so care- 
 fully attended to, as it ought. We are wont to 
 consider baptism, as a purely christian institution ; 
 and to trace it to no higher origin than Jesus 
 Christ, or John the Baptist. But this is cer- 
 tainly wrong. Baptism was, unquestionably, a di- 
 vine institution; practised as a religious and sa- 
 cred ceremony, in the church of God, ages before. 
 There were Siacpopot BanTLfT/noi divers kinds of bap- 
 tisms, the apostle expressly says,* in which the 
 worship of God stood, under the Jewish dispen- 
 sation. Neither John, nor our Saviour, did pro- 
 perly institute this rite ;f but only took this an- 
 cient, standing, religious institution, and applied it 
 to a particular purpose, in their mission: namely, 
 
 * Heb. ix. 10. 
 f It is a great truth (says Grotius) what the most 
 learned Brought&n notes, that Christ instituted no new rites. 
 Vide Tract concerning - Communicating, &c. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 79 
 
 by the application of water, to betoken to certain 
 persons, that they should be accepted of God, as 
 holy and pine ; Jit for his service, and for a place 
 in that church, or kingdom of the Mtcsiah, which 
 zcas then going to be set up* 
 
 They made no alteration in its general nature 
 or design. Baptism, under the New Testament, 
 has the very same general meaning, purpose or 
 intent, with baptism under the old; and is but an 
 application of water to signify or betoken a person 
 to be holy, or consecrated to the service of God. 
 It is a ceremonial, and but a ceremonial washing 
 in both. 
 
 Now, forasmuch as neither Christ, nor John 
 the Baptist, did properly institute, but only borroz&ed 
 or continued this previously instituted ceremony; 
 and forasmuch, as it has the very same general 
 meaning and design under the christian scheme of 
 worship, as it had under the Jewish; it follows, 
 that to look back to the manner of its administra- 
 tion under the Old Testament, will be of great use 
 to direct us, as to the manner of its administration 
 under the Nezc. 
 
 What, then, was the manner, in which baptism 
 
 * Our Lord took (says Dr. Lightfoot) into bis hands 
 baptism, such as he found it ; adding only this, that lie 
 exalted it to a nobler purpose, aud to a larger use. Hor. 
 Htb. .Matt. iii. 6. 
 
80 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 was wont to be administered ; that is to say, in 
 which water was wont to be applied, by God's 
 express command, to persons or things, to betoken 
 them holy, and consecrated to his service ; at that 
 time, and in that church, in which both John and 
 Jesus Christ were born, and brought up ? Was 
 it only by dipping wholly under water I Or, was 
 it not also by sprinkling, or pouring it on ? I re- 
 ply — Undoubtedly by both. 
 
 That it was sometimes by dipping, there is 
 no dispute. And that it was also, sometimes, by 
 sprinkling, or pouring on, the case is equally clear. 
 Amongst a multitude, I shall mention but the fol- 
 lowing texts. 
 
 Levit. xiv. When a leper, who had been put 
 out from the camp of Israel (the then enclosure, 
 or church of God) as being unclean or unholy, 
 was again to be taken in, and received to the 
 communion of saints, (i. e. of the Israelites, the 
 holy people) and to a free access to God ; by 
 what ceremony was it done? Sprinkling zcater 
 on him, was one of the principal rites by which he 
 was thus received. Verse 7- And he, the priest, 
 shall sprinkle upon him, that is to be cleansed 
 from the leprosy, and shall pronounce him clean. 
 By the same rite also, of sprinkling, the injected 
 house r:as to be purified, i. e. declared holy or clean. 
 Verses 51, 52. 
 
 Note. It ought carefully to be remembered, 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 81 
 that the laio is expressly said to be a shadow or 
 exemplar of the christian dispensation; and the 
 then scheme of worship, was intended to be a 
 sacred figure or type of the present.* 
 
 Numb. viii. When the Levites were to be sepa- 
 rated from the rest of the tribes, and consecrated 
 a holy priesthood to God (a figure of christians, 
 who, at their baptism, are separated from the rest 
 of the world, and are consecrated a holy priest- 
 hood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices.^) How was 
 it done .' Verses 6, 7. Take the Levites, from 
 among the children of Israel, and cleanse them : 
 and thus shalt thou do unto them, to cleanse them, 
 SPRINKLE zcater of pur if \j in g upon them. 
 
 Numb. xix. 11. If a man had touched a dead 
 body, and was thereby become unctecm, unfit to 
 approach God, and to stand before him in his 
 sanctuary; by what right was he to be declared 
 clean, and re-admitted to the divine presence? 
 The zcater of separation zcas to be SPRINKLED upon 
 him, and upon his tent, and upon his vessels. 
 
 Finally ; — When the Israelites were called out 
 from among the idolatrous Egyptians ; and were 
 sanctified and set apart as a holy people or church 
 to God ; they were all baptised, the apostle says,;}; 
 by the cloud, and by the sea, ev rt] v^eXtj teat tv tij 
 
 * Heb. viii. 5. ix. 9. x. 1. Vide Peirce in Loc. 
 
 f 1 Peter ii. 5. 
 
 I 1 Cor. x. 2. Sec more concerning tins text, p. 89. 
 
82 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 BaXaaat) ; i. e. by the cloud pouring dozen water on 
 them, and by the sea sprinkling them with its 
 surges, as they passed through. And when they 
 were, in the most solemn manner, entered into 
 covenant with Jehovah at Sinai, and formed into a 
 church ; by what token or rite did Moses, the me- 
 diator, initiate or admit them ! When Moses had 
 spoken every precept to all the people, according to 
 the laze ; and they had publicly consented and pro- 
 mised to obey; he took the blood of sacrificed 
 beasts, and zcater, and sprinkled both the book 
 and all the people* 
 
 Hence, then, it is indisputable ; that SPRINK- 
 LING, or POURING on zcater, was one of the prin- 
 cipal ways in which it was applied, by Gods ex- 
 press command, to betoken persons to be holy : 
 Or, that it was a religious ceremony, by which 
 men were taken from a state of distance, into a 
 state of nearness or access to Almighty God, in 
 the very church, wherein John and Jesus Christ 
 were brought up, and from which they borrowed 
 this religious rite of baptising; for it is carefully 
 to be observed that this is but a borrozced rite. 
 
 But, perhaps, it will be replied — " That none 
 " of the instances, now mentioned, of applying 
 " water for purification, were really baptising ; for 
 " the true and the only import of that word is 
 
 * Heb. ix. 19. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 83 
 M plunging or dipping" If this, indeed, can be 
 proved, all that has been alleged must be owned 
 of little weight. But if the contrary be clearly 
 shewn ; if it can be evidently demonstrated that 
 the word Bcnmlw, to baptise, is frequently (and 
 even generally) used in scripture, where the act of 
 pouring or sprink/ing, not dipping, is intended; 
 and that the above-mentioned applications of wa- 
 ter, under the Jewish law, are expressly called 
 baptisms, — the point will be then fully cleared; 
 and there remains no further room for doubt, as 
 to this matter. But both these, I apprehend, are 
 very evidently to be shewn. — To begin with the 
 latter. 
 
 I. The above-mentioned applications of water, 
 under the Jewish law, are, in scripture, accounted 
 and actually called baptisms. For, Heb. ix. 10. 
 it is said the Jewish dispensation stood in meats, 
 and drinks, and diverse baptisms, cia<popoie Ba7r- 
 -lafMOKT. All, who understand the original, know, 
 that the words do and must mean diverse sorts of 
 baptisms, or baptisms of different species or kinds. 
 It is not said 7toXKoiq many, nor ttoikiXoiq various, 
 but ctayopoie diverse, or different sorts. The only 
 place, in the New Testament, where the word 
 (ctapopoe) is used, besides this, is Rom. xii. 6. 
 Y\ here, by uafopa ^apt^fia-a differing, or diverse 
 gifts, is indisputably meant several differing kinds 
 oj gifts; as the words following demonstrate, viz # 
 prophecy, teaching, ruling, Sec. The word Ba7r- 
 
84 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 TiafxoL baptisms, in the one place, like the word 
 -^apKT/LLara gijts, in the other, is used as a genus, or 
 general term, under which are comprehended se- 
 veral species or kinds ; and, when here joined with 
 haycpoL diverse, must necessarily signify several 
 different manners, or modes, of applying water, 
 for ceremonial purification, under the Jewish law. 
 Some of these were by dipping, some by sprinkling 
 or pouring. Should, then, a person now say — 
 That there is no baptism but by dipping, — he 
 would most plainly and undeniably contradict the 
 apostle ; for he would hereby affirm, that there is 
 but one kind of baptism; whereas the apostle de- 
 clares there are more kinds than one.* 
 
 As, in the forecited passage, Rom. xii. 6. by 
 calling the several powers in the christian church, 
 viz. prophecy, ruling, teaching, ciafopa ^apto/tara 
 differing gifts, the apostle does, undoubtedly, pro- 
 nounce each to be a gift ; so, by calling the se- 
 veral ways of Jewish purification, viz. sprinlding 
 pouring, dipping, ciayopot /3a7rrtoytoi differing bap- 
 tisms, he does, as certainly and undoubtedly, pro- 
 
 * Concerning: the sense of the word Siatyopog diverse, 
 see also Wisdom, vii. 10. ctafopac, tyvrtov diversities, or 
 diverse sorts, of plants. Dan. vii. 19. Otjptov iiatyopov Trapa 
 irav 6>iptov a beast of a hind or species different from all 
 other beasts. So the word diacpoptjj-tpoe. is twice used, in 
 this same epistle. Hcb. i. 4. and viii. 6. in both which 
 places, it signifies of a very different kind A name of a very 
 different hind ; and a ministry, of a very different kind from 
 theirs. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 85 
 
 nou nee each to be a baptism. Yea, that the 
 apostle has, in this place, a more particular regard 
 to the Jewish sprinklings, than dippings, seems 
 highly probable (to say the least) from his express 
 mention of the sprinklings, verse 13, as some of 
 the principal of those legal purifications, or dif- 
 ferent baptisms, concerning which he had spoken. 
 Verse 10. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, 
 and the ashes of a heifer, (with which the water of 
 purification was made) sprinkling the unclean, 
 sanctifeth to the purifying of the flesh ; hozc much 
 more, &c. 
 
 If any shall imagine that the baptising of 
 cups, pots, tables, human bodies, &c. is meant by 
 these diverse baptisms, the reply is obvious. These, 
 if they must be all dipt, in order to their being- 
 baptised, can with no truth or propriety be called 
 diverse or differing kinds of baptisms ; for they 
 are then but one and the same baptism of differing- 
 things. 
 
 Here, then, is full proof that the scripture 
 uses the word BanTiffjuoc, baptism, in so general 
 and large a sense, as evidently to comprehend 
 sprinkling, if not chiefly to intend it. Sprinkling 
 then, in the judgment of an inspired writer, is an 
 authentic and divinely instituted manner of bap- 
 tising. I proceed, 
 
 2. To shew, that the word Ba7rri£w, to baptise, 
 is frequently used, in scripture, where the act of 
 i 
 
86 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 pouring or sprinkling, not dipping is intended : and 
 that a person is said to be baptised, when not his 
 whole body was plunged under water, but when 
 water was applied only to a part. 
 
 Luke xi. 38. The pharisee, who invited our 
 Lord to dine with him, marvelled that he had not 
 jirst been baptised before dinner, on » npu)Toi> tfiair- 
 tkt£i). Did he expect that our Lord should have 
 plunged his whole body under water before dinner? 
 Undoubtedly not. But what his expectations were 
 may be learnt from those of his brother-pharisees, 
 in the very same case, as to the disciples; they 
 found fault with them for eating with defiled, that 
 is to say, with nnzcashen hands* So Grotius ex- 
 plains it — E/3o7r-to-^ baptised; that is, says he, 
 £ri\baTo tciq \ £l P ac > had not Jirst washed his hands.-]- 
 And " Dr. Pocock observes, and quotes Beza as 
 " saying, that Bcnr-tfcaSai, to be baptised (Luke 
 " xi. 38.) means the same as XxevSui and -yEpvnrrttv 
 " to washf and to wash the hands. And since that 
 " washing the hands might be done, either by 
 " putting them into the water, or b) pouring water 
 " on them ; here is a word used, tficnr-ioSri, which 
 
 * Mark vii. 2. 
 \ Note, Aaron and his sons, even v\ hen they went into 
 the tabernacle, and officiated in the most sbleinn manner, 
 to offer up the burnt-offering upon the altar unto (Jod, are 
 directed (Exodus xxn. 18—21.) to wash their hands and 
 their feel at the laver, verse 19— (not to bathe the whole 
 bouy/ and again, verse 21. '"So shall they wash their hands 
 and their feet, that they die not. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 87 
 
 " comprehends both the one and the other of these 
 " ways."* 
 
 Mark vii. 3, 4. The pharisees and all the Jezcs, 
 when they come from the market, tuv /.irj fiairTLouvTcu. 
 except they are baptised, eat not. Did they think 
 themselves obliged, on every such occasion, to be 
 dipt wholly under water I Absurd to imagine I 
 For it is said, not only the pharisees, but all the 
 Jezcs — If the pharisaic severity might, possibly, 
 subject those very precise persons to such a total 
 immersion, at all times, even in the depth of win- 
 ter, whenever they came from market ; it can never 
 be imagined, that all the Jezcs did the same. 
 Dr. Pocock proves, Maimonides and the whole 
 body of the rabbins, that the Jews had no such 
 custom.f Some, indeed, to Weaken this testimony 
 of the rabbins, have alleged the many whimsical 
 and sillv notions with which their writings abound : 
 but this is, certainly, itself, extremely weak. The 
 enquiry is about a national custom, a common, 
 familiar, well known fact. Were their heads so 
 strangely turned that they could not transmit to us 
 a credible account what their national usage was as 
 to washing the hands J Should a papist, or raa- 
 hometan be called into a court of judicature to 
 give testimony to any public, indifferent fact; 
 would not any person draw upon himself the smiles 
 of the court, who should attempt to set aside their 
 
 • Dr. Wall's Defence, &c. page 111. f Ibid. 
 
88 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 evidence, by alleging their absurd notions and spe- 
 culations in religion ? 
 
 Others aware of the force of this text, endea- 
 vour to evade it by a different rendering, viz. And 
 what they buy in the market, unless it be washed t 
 dipt, they eat not.* But this will by no means, 
 help off the difficulty. They might, indeed, thus 
 baptise, or dip, the flesh and herbs they brought 
 from the market; but did they also dip their corn, 
 honey, meal, salt, oil, milk, &c. I 
 
 Others object, — That, not to suppose the evan- 
 gelist here to mean a total immersion, by ficnrriZuivrai, 
 is to make him guilty of an insipid tautology. For 
 after having said, verse 3. The pharisees, and all 
 the Jezes, except they wash their hands oft eat not. 
 He would not immediately have added, verse 4. 
 And when they come from the market, except they 
 wash they eat not — had not this latter washing been 
 something different from the former. But, why 
 not I Is it not quite proper to say — The pharisees 
 and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft 
 (Trvy/u>i seduld, crebro, saepissime, so the Syriac. 
 Casaub. Vulg. Erasm. Arab. i. e. frequently and 
 carefully) eat not. And (particularly, one occa- 
 sion, in which they are wont thus carefully to wash, 
 is) when they come from the market ; for then, except 
 they wash they eat not. 
 
 In the same Mark vii. 4. we read of the wash- 
 
 * Dr. Gale's Reflections, &c. page 167. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 89 
 
 iug (Gr. RaTTrto-juec the baptisms) of cups, and pots, 
 and KXlucov of beds. Did they wash their couches 
 and beds by putting them wholly under water? 
 No ; this word Ba7rrtoyi8<; baptisms, says Dr. Light- 
 foot,* does not always signify dipping or putting 
 under water ; but sometimes washing only, or even 
 sprinkling.f 
 
 1 Cor. x. 1, 2. The apostle says — All our 
 fathers zcere under the cloud, and all passed through 
 the sea, and zcere all baptised into Moses, eficnr- 
 
 Tiaavro ev r?; vecptXyj Kal tv ->/ daXaaai) by the cloud and 
 by the sea. But how were they baptised in, or by, 
 the cloud, and by the sea ? By being immersed into, 
 or totally overwhelmed with them J Most certainly, 
 not. The Egyptians were thus baptised ; the Is- 
 raelites were not. For it is said, Exod. xiv. 21, 
 22. The Lord caused the sea to go back, by a strong 
 east wind, all that night, and made the sea dry land; 
 and the zcaters zcere divided; and the children of 
 Israel went into the midst of the sea, upon the dry 
 ground; and the zcaters zcere a zcall unto them 
 on their right hand, and on their left. Note : 
 though they might possibly be said to be covered 
 or overwhelmed by the cloud; yet so were they 
 
 * Vide Poli. Syn. in Loc. 
 f I must say, and I will make it good, says Dr. Owen, 
 that no honest man, who understands the Greek tongue, 
 can deny the word to signify to wash as well as to dip. Dr. 
 Owen on Infant Baptism and Dipping, 
 
 I 2 
 
90 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 not, nor could they be, by the sea. The sea, it is 
 undeniable, never overwhelmed, or covered, them 
 at all : yet behold ! they are expressly said to be 
 baptised in, or by, the sea, as well as by the cloud. 
 Their being baptised, then, by the sea, must sig- 
 nify something else besides being immersed into, or 
 covered or overwhelmed with it. What then, does 
 it mean? Or how were they baptised by it? — As 
 God sent a strong east wind to drive back and 
 divide the waters ; the same instrument was, no 
 doubt, employed to continue them in this state. 
 Now by the mighty agitation into which the waters 
 were cast, by this violent repulsion ; and the strong 
 wind at the same time furiously blowing ; it is easy 
 to conceive the passing Israelites must be sprin- 
 kled with the spray of the tossing waves, and thus 
 were baptised by it. 
 
 Here, then, is another incontestible instance of 
 a scripture baptism without immersion. The Is- 
 raelites are expressly said to be baptised in, or by, 
 the sea, as well as by the cloud; yet no one will 
 presume to say they were buried or overwhelmed 
 in it. 
 
 In further confirmation of this sense of the 
 word, j3aTrri£u) to baptise, I beg leave to ask— what 
 is the real nature or design of christian baptism? 
 It is unquestionably but an emblematical, or figu- 
 rative thing. But what is the water, in this reli- 
 gious rite, designed to figure or represent? Un- 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 91 
 
 doubtedly the Holy Ghost.* This is frequently in 
 scripture, spoken of and promised, under the em- 
 blem of water tf and is represented as the great 
 instrument of purifying - , refreshing and strengthen- 
 ing - the soul, as water is of the body. Accordingly, 
 John says, / indeed baptise you zeith water; but he, 
 Christ, shall baptise you with the Holy Ghost. — 
 Except a person is born of zcater, and of the Spirit : 
 —Repent, and be baptised, every one of you, and ye 
 shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost? — Can any 
 forbid water, that these should not be baptised, zvho 
 have received the Holy Ghost? — The zvashing of 
 regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Ghost.— 
 It is therefore, carefully to be observed, that the 
 water, which in christian baptism is applied to the 
 body, being- intended as an emblem of the Holy 
 Spirit, which is promised to the soul, to sanctify 
 and cleanse it; it will throw great light on the 
 present subject to take notice in what manner this 
 Spirit is represented, in scripture, as communi- 
 cated or given to us. Are we, generally, repre- 
 sented as immersed into, or overwhelmed zcith the 
 Spirit : or else, as having it poured dozen upon us '! 
 Undoubtedly by the latter. 
 
 By one Spirit we are all baptised into one body 
 
 *^V%^W"W%'*'% 
 
 * See Luke iii. 16. John iii. 5. Acts i. 5. ii. 38. x. 47. 
 1 Cor. xii. 13. Tit. iii. 5. 
 
 t Isaiah xliv. 3. Ezek. xxxvi. 25, 27. John iv. 10, 14 
 John vii. 38, 39. 
 
92 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 — And, he shall baptise you with the Holy Ghost 
 and with fire. How was this done? The scrip- 
 ture itself informs us — viz. By the Holy Ghost 
 descending, and sitting on them, in the form of cloven 
 tongues of fire. Note, they were not overwhelmed, 
 or covered, with the fire, when they were baptised 
 with it; but it only fell upon, and rested on them. 
 And see how St. Peter remarks upon this fact, 
 namely, their being baptised with the Holy Ghost, 
 and its resting on them in the form of fire! verses 
 ]6, 17, 18. This is that, which teas spoken by the 
 Prophet Joel ; and it shall come to pass in the last 
 days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit 
 UPON all flesh — And ON my servants, and ON my 
 handmaids I zcill pour out, in those days, of my 
 Spirit. Observe, This is that which teas spoken 
 — i. e. By this fact, of our baptism with the Spirit, 
 is that prophecy, I will pour out fulfilled. — — So 
 Acts x. 44, 45. And xi. 15, 16. When Peter, 
 and the Jetcs which were with him, sazo the Holy 
 GHOST zTrtirirrt, Kal tKKevytai em ret edi'tj, FALL ON, 
 and poured out upon the gentiles; then remem- 
 bered I, says he, the word of the Lord, how that 
 he scad, John indeed baptised with water ; but ye 
 shall be baptised with the Holy Ghost. Hence, 
 then, it is most evident, that this pouring out 
 of the Spirit, which Peter saw, was that baptism 
 with the Spirit of which Christ spake; and of 
 which baptism with water was an intended emblem 
 or sign. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 93 
 
 See also, bow the Apostle Paul, Tit. iii. 5, (j. 
 joins the sign, and the thing signified ; and illus- 
 trates the one, by the other. The washing of re- 
 generation (i. e. the baptismal water, the sign) and 
 the renewing of the Holy Ghost, (the thing signified 
 by it, not, with which we are overwhelmed, nor into 
 which we were dipt, but) which he hath shed e^tnv 
 poured out upon us abundantly — So then, the man- 
 ner in which we all, by one Spirit, are baptised into 
 one body, is by having that Spirit shed dozen, or 
 poured out upon us ; and of the imparting to us 
 this Spirit, the baptismal water is the appointed 
 emblem, representation or sign. Let it hence, 
 then, be now fairly and impartially judged — In 
 what manner this water is most significantly ap- 
 plied — If baptism, by immersion, be allowed to be 
 more significative of a death unto sin, as is usually 
 urged from Coloss. ii. 12; sprinkling or pouring 
 on, surely, is much more significative of the pro- 
 mise of the Holy Spirit, and of its cleansing, sup- 
 porting, and quickening influences; which is the 
 principal thing intended to be represented, and 
 shewed forth in this ceremony. 
 
 I beg leave farther to observe — In the christian 
 scheme, every true disciple is repi'esented as being 
 consecrated a king, and a priest ; a royal priest- 
 hood to God,*' when admitted into the christian 
 church. Now the divinely appointed rite of con- 
 
 * 1 Peter ii. 9. Rev. v. 10. 
 
94 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 secration to these offices, was unction, or pouring 
 on them the sacred oil. But the baptism of chris- 
 tians is their inauguration into these offices; and 
 the Holy Ghost, represented by the baptismal wa- 
 ter is expressly called the unction or anointing,* 
 by which we are consecrated to them. Now bap- 
 tism by affusion, is a significant and lively emblem 
 of this unction or consecration ; whereas, in the 
 mode of immersion, this part of the allusion is 
 entirely lost. 
 
 Again. — Was not the baptismal water designed 
 to signify and represent, that purging from an evil 
 conscience; that cleansing or purification; which 
 we obtain by the blood of Christ? But are we 
 ever spoken of in scripture as overwhelmed with, 
 or dipt into, that blood of the son of God I Is it 
 not, on the contrary, always represented as sprin- 
 kled upon us I 
 
 Finally. The circumstances or state of those 
 in the ark, (1 Pet. iii. 21.) is said to be a fgure, 
 or resemblance, of christian baptism; but they 
 were not dipt into the water and taken up again ; 
 as it is contended baptised persons ought to be ; 
 but only had water poured down upon them. 
 
 From these observations on the sense of the 
 word, Ban-ifa to baptise, in the New Testament ; 
 we proceed to its use in the Greek version of the 
 
 1 John ii. 20, 27. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 95 
 
 old, and in the Apocrypha. And here it is found 
 but in the ibur following- places. 
 
 Ecclus. xxxiv. 26. The person who was pu- 
 rified after the touch of a dead body, is called 
 ficnTTi'£oixtvoQ, one baptised. Now the ceremony of 
 his purification consisted chiefly, if not entirely, in 
 sprinkling water upon him, see Numb. xix. 18. 
 And a clean person shall take hyssop and dip it in 
 the water, and sprinkle it upon the tent, and upon 
 him that touched a bone, &;c. And this water which 
 was to be sprinkled, is emphatically and expressly 
 called the water of separation, and a purification for 
 sin, verse 9- There is mention indeed, verse 19, 
 of washing- his cloaths and bathing himself in wa- 
 ter. But this may, possibly, be understood not of 
 the sprinkled, but of the sprinkler; who, it is plain 
 from verse 21. contracted a defilement from his 
 sprinkling, and even touching the water of separa- 
 tion; but as for the person sprinkled, from verse 
 12. it seems to follow that the mere sprinkling the 
 water on him, the third and the seventh days, was 
 all requisite to his cleansing. But supposing that 
 he was also obliged to bathe his flesh; it is most 
 evident that this bathing was not that application 
 of water in which the ceremony of his cleansing 
 chiefly consisted, nor on which his purification is 
 made to depend, but the sprinkling it upon him. 
 This fully appears from verses 13, 20. where the 
 person, who had neglected this ceremonial purifica- 
 tion, is threatened to be cut off. For what i For 
 
fM5 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 not having bathed his body ? Nothing like it. 
 No, but in each distinct threatening, his guilt is 
 expressly made to consist, in his not having the 
 water of purification sprinkled upon him. And 
 the apostle, it is observable, speaking of this very 
 same purification, makes the efficacy of the ce- 
 remony to consist entirely in the sprinkling, with- 
 out the least mention of the bathing. For if the 
 blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of a 
 heifer, (with which this water of purification was 
 made) sprinkling the unclean, sanctifleth to the puri- 
 fying of the flesh, how much more, fyc.* But the 
 person thus purified is here called Ba7m^o/iiBvog one 
 baptised. 
 
 In Judith xii. 7- It is said — She went out, in 
 the night, into the valley of Bethulia and zeashed 
 Ktci tficnTTi&To and was baptised, in a fountain of wa- 
 ter, by the camp. Did she dip her whole body in 
 this fountain of water? Yes, some earnestly con- 
 tend. But utterly without reason, and against all 
 probability. For as there appears to have been 
 but this single fountain in the valley of Bethulia ; 
 at, close by, or around which (e-m rrjg wtjyijs verse 3.) 
 an army of above two hundred thousand soldiers 
 lay incamped, it is the height of absurdity to ima- 
 gine that Judith, in the night, could with any con- 
 venience or modesty unclothe herself and plunge 
 her whole body therein : or, if she could, that the 
 
 * Heb. ix. 13. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 97 
 
 soldiers would have suffered it ; in a country, where 
 water was both so much needed and so scarce ; and 
 so prodigious an army, with its infinite multitude of 
 attendants and cattle, were to be continually sup- 
 plied from it. When therefore it is said, she 
 f/3a7n-i£fro tv Ti) irapifijioXtj mi rrjQ Tnjytjg th vcarog* 
 teas baptised in (he camp, at the fountain of water, 
 (this is the exact rendering) it may be left to any 
 one to judge — Whether, she was totally immersed, 
 or had the water applied only to a part of her body. 
 This, then, must be accounted another very clear 
 and incontestable instance, where a person is said 
 to be baptised, without being overwhelmed. 
 
 Isaiah xxi. 4. It is said, r\ Avofiia ^ ftcnrTifci 
 iniquity baptises me. This passage is confessedly 
 an error of the seventy. But it seems to allude to 
 a form of speaking exceeding common in the scrip- 
 tures, where God is represented as pouring out his 
 fury or wrath, upon transgressors. So Jer. xiv. 16. 
 / will pour their wickedness upon them. And Ilev. 
 xvi. 2. The vengeance heaven executes upon 
 kingdoms and nations is represented as poured out 
 from a vial, or cup. Now, the penal effects of sin 
 being thus usually represented as poured out upon 
 men ; it is a beautiful and easy figure to speak of 
 iniquity as pouring them out. 
 
 The only remaining passage is, 2 Kings v. 14. 
 
 ■* Note, It is not siq 7T>/A>/j> which might be rendered in\ 
 the fountain ; but eKt rng Trnytjg at the fountain. 
 K 
 
98 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 Then went he, (Naaman) dozen and dipt himself 
 tfiairn<raro washed or baptised himself) seven times, 
 in Jordan, according to the saying of the man of 
 God. This is the only place, in the whole bible, 
 where /3a7m£w is rendered to dip; nor is it at all 
 necessary that it be so rendered here. Naaman, it is 
 plain, expected that the prophet should have come 
 and stroked his hand over the place, and recovered 
 the leper. See verse 11. Instead of this, he bids 
 him — Go and wash in Jordan seven times. Verse 
 10. Then went he dovn (i. e. either from his cha- 
 riot, or from Samaria to the river Jordan) and 
 e fiairTiaa.ro zoashed seven times, according to the say- 
 ing. — It is now enquired — Whether he plunged 
 himself all over seven times I Or, whether he only 
 sprinkled or poured water seven times upon the 
 leprous place I — There is nothing- in the expres- 
 sion, (by which the command is given,) \bo-cu wash, 
 to determine it ; for this may be alike understood 
 either of a total, or a partial, washing ; but there 
 is a remarkable circumstance which seems to give 
 ft strongly for the latter : which is this. The pro- 
 phet, in commanding him to wash seven times, 
 alludes, no doubt, to the manner of cleansing the 
 leper appointed by the Jewish law. Now there 
 were two ways of applying water to the leper's 
 body, injoined by that law ; both alike commanded, 
 and necessary to his cleansing, viz. bathing, and 
 sprinkling : the former, bathing, to be used but 
 once; the latter, sprinkling, to be done seven 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 99 
 
 times. See Levit. xiv. 7, 8* When, therefore, 
 the prophet bids him — Wash seven times, it is much 
 more natural to understand it of sprinkling, or 
 pouring- water, seven times upon the leprous part 
 (over which he expected the prophet should have 
 stroked his hand) than of dipping his whole body 
 seven times ; of which kind of washing there is 
 not the least footstep nor shadow in the law. — So 
 the blind man is commanded, John ix. 7. Go wash 
 in the pool cf Siloam : when not his whole body, 
 doubtless, but only his eyes, besmeared with clay, 
 were to be washed. 
 
 Thus have we considered the scripture sense of 
 the word fiawriZw to baptise; and have, it is pre- 
 sumed, fully proved it to be used when the act of 
 pouring, or sprinkling, not dipping is intended.— 
 Amongst a multitude of authorities which might be 
 produced from other writers, in confirmation of the 
 same, I shall only beg leave to mention one from 
 Origen.* He is speaking of John's baptism ; and 
 considering him as the Elias, he says — " How 
 " came you to think that Elias when he should 
 " come would baptise, who did not, in Ahab's time, 
 " baptise the wood upon the altar, but orders th« 
 ** priests to do that; not only once, but says, do 
 " it a second time, and they did it the second time. 
 " — He therefore who did not himself baptise then, 
 " but assigned the work to others, &c."— Now the 
 
 * Comment, in Joan. p. 116. D. 
 
100 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 act which Origen here calls baptising, and which 
 Elias ordered the priests to perform, was not dip- 
 ping the wood into water, but pouring zcater on it. 
 See 1 Kings xviii. 33. Fill four barrels of zcater, 
 mid pour ii—on the zcood. 
 
 The force of the word /3a7rrt£w having been thus 
 carefully examined, it may, in the opinion of some, 
 at least, throw some light on this enquiry, to ob- 
 serve : — That as water-baptism is confessedly but a 
 figurative thing; so the scriptures frequently speak 
 of God's giving or imparting to us those very spi- 
 ritual blessings, which the water in christian bap- 
 tism was designed to represent as given or im- 
 parted, under the figure of sprinkling or pouring. 
 Thus, when David prays — Purge me zcith hyssop,* 
 (alluding to the rite of sprinkling zvith hyssop) and 
 I shall be clean. He means the very same thing, 
 viz. pardon, or justification, which is signified by 
 the baptismal water, corresponding to which are 
 the words of Ananias, Acts xxii. 16. Arise, and 
 be baptised, and zcash away thy sins. When Eze- 
 kielf speaks of God's gathering the Jews from 
 among the heathen, purging them from their un- 
 cleanness, and forming them into a church, a pe- 
 culiar people under his protection, (the very things 
 which are intended to be represented by christian 
 baptism) what figure does he use I I zcill sprinkle 
 clean zcater upon them, and they shall be clean. So 
 
 * Psalm li. 7. f Ezek. xxxvi. 25. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 101 
 when Isaiah describes the blessings of the Mes- 
 siah's kingdom, or of the christian dispensation 
 (when the blessing of Abraham, even the promise of 
 the Spirit, reus to come upon the nations,*) he does it 
 under the same figure. — He shall sprinkle many na- 
 tionsr'r — And, J rcill pour zcater upon him that is 
 thirsty, and foods upon the dry ground ; I zc ill pour 
 my Spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine 
 qffspring.i Xow from these, and other like pas- 
 sages, it may be fairly argued thus: — Forasmuch 
 as the water in christian baptism applied to the 
 body, is confessedly but an emblematical or figu- 
 rative thing, and was intended to represent some 
 spiritual blessing to be imparted to the soul; and 
 forasmuch as this spiritual blessing, which is in- 
 tended to be represented by it, is in the old tes- 
 tament often spoken of, as to be given when the 
 new should take place, under the emblem of water 
 sprinkled or poured out ; it follows, that if the 
 word ftanriCw to baptise will at all admit of this 
 sense, then it is perfectly agreeable to the analogy 
 of scripture to administer the baptismal water by 
 sprinkling or pouring. 
 
 It further strengthens this argument to observe 
 — That these very spiritual blessings, of which the 
 baptismal water was the appointed emblem or 
 figure, are in the New Testament also spoken of 
 as actually imparted to us under the figure of 
 
 * Gal. iii. 14. f Isaiah lii. 15. J Isaiah xliv. 3. 
 
 K 2 
 
102 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 sprinkling or pouring. Thus, we are said to have 
 our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience* or a 
 consciousness of guilt. To be come to the blood 
 of sprinkling.f To be chosen through sanctifica- 
 tion of the Spirit, and sprinkling of the blood of 
 Jesus.% And to have an unction, or anointing t 
 from the Holy One,\ poured on us. — Now what, I 
 ask, is meant by all these emblematical and fi- 
 gurative expressions I Is it not remission, justifi- 
 cation, or the Holy Spirit ; the very things of which 
 the water, in this christian ceremony, was intended 
 to be an emblem ? 
 
 But it is objected — John mas, baptising in JEnon 
 because there was much water there. \\ Does not 
 this very clearly and certainly imply that he bap- 
 tised the multitudes by dipping I I apprehend, 
 not at all. For there were other necessary and 
 important uses for iroXKa vcara many zcaters^ be- 
 sides dipping the multitudes ; other weighty and 
 just causes why John should chuse this well-wa- 
 tered and fruitful country for the scene of his mi- 
 nistrations ; and not that desert and barren region, 
 where he before sojourned; that dry and thirsty 
 land (as the Psalmist** calls it) where wo water 
 is. Let it be considered — How valuable and 
 
 %-V%.'VV%'V'W%'»'W'%^'V*V%^'VV*-V 
 
 * Heb. x. 22. f Heb. xii. 24: \ 1 Pet. i. 2. 
 § 1 John ii. 20, 27. || John iii. 23. 
 
 f[ iroXka v?ara many rivulets, a well-watered country. 
 ** Psalm lxiii. 1. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OP BAPTISING. 103 
 scarce water was in those parts — how hot the cli- 
 mate — how numerous} the crowds which flocked 
 to John's baptism — From how distant parts they 
 came — How long - they tarried to hear his doctrine 
 and instructions ; for the mere act of baptising- was 
 the least part of John's mission and of the people's 
 end in flocking- to him : — Let these be considered, 
 and there will appear sundry good reasons for his 
 chusing- this well watered and fruitful country for 
 the place of his preaching, without any regard 
 had to the convenience of dipping. That this 
 therefore was the reason of his making this choice, 
 does by no means appear. So 2 Chron. xxxii. 4. 
 They stopped all the fountains and brooks — Saying, 
 why should the kings of Assyria come and find MUCH 
 water I For what ( Why, to drink and refresh 
 their army. 
 
 And here it cannot be improper to ask — If 
 these multitudes were all dipt, how was it done ? 
 Were they naked ? This modesty forbids. Had 
 they all change of raiment, to undress, and put on 
 drj apparel, when they came out of the water? 
 This the vastness of the multitudes, the openness of 
 the country, and the great distance whence they 
 came, will not easily admit. And that they stood in 
 their wet garments, and hearkened to John's doc- 
 trine, or travelled in them many miles to their 
 homes, seems equally improbable. I pretend to no 
 certainty that John did not dip at all. But, as he 
 had seen, by the express appointment of God, 
 
104 DTPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 water applied both ways to the human body, for 
 ceremonial purification, viz. by sprinkling and dip- 
 pi?^ ; and both these are by the Spirit, which sent 
 him to baptise, actually called baptisms, it is possi- 
 ble, he might use both ways of administration, ac- 
 cording- as the circumstances of time, place, and 
 persons required.* 
 
 * It seems an observation of some weight in this de- 
 bate—That as water was used by divine appointment under 
 the Jewish law in a figurative and sacramental manner, or 
 as an emblem of moral purity ; and the christain ceremony 
 of baptising is, undoubtedly, adopted from this usage under 
 the law; so the only way, in which one person (the priest) 
 was ever directed or known to use it upon another, for this 
 symbolical or sacramental purpose, was by sprinkling or 
 pouring it on, never by dipping him into it. 
 
 There were diverse baptisms under the law : Heb. ix. 10. 
 These baptisms were generally performed by the priest ; but 
 the priest amongst the various rites he is directed to use, to 
 sanctify and cleanse a person, and receive him into the 
 church, is never once directed to dip or plunge him in water, 
 but only to sprinkle or pour it upon him. 
 
 The priests plunging a person, in order to his separation 
 or cleansing, is a ceremony quite strange, and absolutely 
 unheard of through all the sacred records. Persons were, 
 indeed, on some occasions, directed to plunge or bathe 
 themselves; but that one man should take another, and 
 plunge him under water, is a thing utterly uncommanded, 
 unprecedented, and unknown, throughout the whole con- 
 stitution and history of the Jewish church. It may, there- 
 fore, strongly be presumed, not to have been the practice 
 either of John or of Jesus Christ when the christian was 
 set up. 
 
 For John being of the priestly race ; and beginning his 
 ministrations agreeable to their law, at thirty years old ; 
 and using, like them, an application of water to the body 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 105 
 
 So, that the Jaj ler* and his whole family ; avIio 
 were all taught, converted and baptised about mid- 
 night without any previous thought of, or prepara- 
 tion for this ceremony; had it done by dipping — 
 As, likewise, that Saul, afterwards St. Paul, having 
 neither eaten nor drankf for three days before ; and 
 being- greatly enfeebled, by the mighty shock which 
 he received from the vision in the way, as well as by 
 the great remorse with which he reviewed, and re- 
 pented of his crimes ; and it being now also in the 
 depth of winter ;:£ as the learned have supposed; 
 that, in this weakly and feeble state, I say, he arose 
 and was baptised, by being totally put under water : 
 
 \%t\MMH« 
 
 as an emblem of moral puirity ; it is left to any impartial 
 judgment — Whether he is, most rationally, supposed to 
 have plunged men under Water, (a thing unpractised 
 amongst them) or, whether he only sprinkled or poured 
 water on them, — a rite divinely instituted, and every day 
 familiarly practised in that church. 
 
 If it be said— But that question of the Jews—" Why 
 baptisest thou, if thou art not that prophet?' implies there was 
 something new and unprecedented in John's baptism ; — the 
 answer is obvious. 1. That it could not be his mere using 
 the ceremony of baptising which occasioned this enquiry, 
 because it was, confessedly, a ceremony perfectly well 
 known and familiar amongst them. But 2. It was his 
 using this ceremony upon the Israelites or Jewish nation ; 
 who looked upon themselves as a people already holy, and 
 in covenant with God ; and therefore not to need this cere- 
 mony of cleansing or separation, under which the Gentiles 
 were wont to pass, when received into the church. 
 
 * Acts xvi. 33. t Acts ix. 18. 
 
 X About the 26th of January. 
 
106 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 — And finally, that the three thousand* also, who 
 were converted at Jerusalem, and baptised in one 
 day, were all overwhelmed — seems, to say the least, 
 to have scarce an air of probability. 
 
 Nor will the circumstance of Philip and the 
 Eunuch going down (etc) untof the zcater ; and 
 coming up (ek) from it,% with any certainty prove, 
 that he there dipt him. For as waters run in the 
 valleys, they might go down from the chariot «e to, 
 or unto, the rivulet (for geographers find but little 
 streams there) and Philip baptise, by pouring water 
 on him ; and from thence go up to the chariot 
 again, in the most perfect consistence with this 
 account of the matter. 
 
 So, when the people of Judea are said to be 
 baptised of John tv ru lopcavi] in the river Jordan : 
 And, that Jesus, when baptised, came up out of 
 area th vcarog from the water ; it will by no means 
 hence follow, that they were totally plunged under 
 it. For, it being the custom of those countries to 
 wear sandals only on their naked feet, and the 
 washing these being, amongst them, a very familiar 
 and delightful thing; the going down into the 
 water, to have it poured upon their heads, is quite 
 natural and likely. So that the arguments drawn 
 
 ^■vw^-w^*^ 
 
 * Acts ii. 41. f Acts viii. 38, 39. 
 
 % Note, The Greek particles «c and sic are thus rendered 
 unto, and from, the one several hundred, the other above a 
 hundred times in the New Testament. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 107 
 
 hence also in favour of overwhelming- will in no 
 wise conclude.* 
 
 * Note. The laying any weight on it's being said — were 
 baptised in Jordan — shews extreme ignorance of the original. 
 For, 1. The word tv here translated in, is in no less than a 
 hundred and fifty places of the New Testament (a learned 
 gentlemen hath observed) rendered with. And had it thus 
 been rendered here — baptised with Jordan — meaning with 
 the water of that river ; it would have been a form of speak- 
 ing, neither more figurative nor improper, than is familiar 
 both in scripture and in common life. But, to lay no stress 
 on this: — 
 
 2. The word ev is'more than a hundred times in the New 
 Testament rendered at, and kv rw loplavr) may most justly 
 be rendered at the river Jordan ; and so, the whole strength 
 of the argument, from John's baptising in Jordan, evaporate* 
 at once. 
 
 Let a short and easy experiment be made upon one of 
 Mr. Booth's premises, by proposing and solving three plain 
 and very obvious questions ; as, 
 
 1. Can it be proved that baptism is immersion only? 
 Though three questions have been mentioned, this principle 
 of the Baptists will be won or lost upon the first only. 
 Who can prove that the term Baptism means immersion, 
 and nothing else but immersion I Could Dr. Gale do this ? 
 He was able to have done it if any one could ; — but did 
 he prove it .' Not he. Nay, he proved the contrary, and so 
 overthrew himself; for meeting with a passage in Aristotle, 
 in which the thing baptised was not put into the water, but 
 the water came upon it, he said, " The word Baptise, per- 
 haps, does not so liecessanly express the action of putting 
 under water, as in general, a thing being in that condition, 
 no matter how it came so." — Another passage came in his 
 way, in which the thing baptised was only partially wet. 
 His assertion was, " That the word does not always neces- 
 sarily implj a to'.ai immersion of the whole thing spoken of, 
 all over." These two things put together amount to this: 
 that a tiling is baptised if the element come upon it ; and if 
 
108 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTUPvAL 
 
 But the chief argument for immersion is taken 
 from Rom. vi. 4. and Colos. ii. 12. Where it is 
 
 it come only on one part, it is baptised. Dr. Wall laid hold 
 of this; and shewed to the world, that while Dr. Gale con- 
 tended for immersion only, he held fast the mere word ; but 
 completely lost the thing. 
 
 If baptism meant immersion only, there could be no 
 different or differing baptisms ; but there are differing bap- 
 tisms, so not immersion only. In Heb. ix. 10. the apostle, 
 speaking of the ablutions among the Jews, rails them divers 
 washings, hia<l>opoiQ Jlaimoftois. The true meaning of the 
 first word is differing, or different Rom. xii. 6. Thus it 
 is, "baptisms differing," or different ; and this directly over- 
 turns the sentiment of the Baptists, who contend that bap- 
 tism is immersion only. 
 
 Had Origen thought as the Baptists do, he would not 
 have said, " That when Elijah ordered water to be poured 
 upon the wood, the wood was baptised." Nor would the 
 seventy translators have said, that Nebuchadnezzar was 
 baptised, — which they do, when he was wet with the dew 
 of heaven. Much less would the scripture have called the 
 pouring out of the Holy Ghost, Baptism. Nor can it be 
 proved that the word Baptism, in the New Testament, does 
 ever mean immer; ion. we w ill not say only, but at all ; and 
 if not immersion only, the Baptist principle is lost. 
 
 2. Can ii be proved that any one person in the New 
 Testanicnt was immersed ? 
 
 There are seven instances of baptisms, which have some 
 connection With place and circumstances: the baptism of 
 Jesus at Jordan,— the baptising at Enon, — the baptism of 
 the Eunuch,— of St. Paul,— of Cornelius,— of the Jailer,— 
 and the three thousand in Jerusalem. Of these instances, 
 three were in the open air, and at streams of water, two in 
 private houses, one in a jail, and one in a city. 
 
 If we look for a proof of the immersion of any one, 
 it must be from the first three instances ; but here is no 
 proof at all that any one was immersed. It is true, here 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 10J* 
 said, that ice are buried with Christ by baptism into 
 death; and buried zi.it h him by baptism. 
 
 were persons, and there was water ; but whether any per- 
 son was immersed in water, there is not a word said. All 
 that could be said, and all that the most sanguine could 
 say, would be this, " It may be, — it is likely, — it is highly 
 probable, — I am apt to think so ! Such forms of speech 
 shew there is no proof; and that the best is merely pre- 
 sumption ; but if we attend to the other instances, the pri- 
 vate houses, the jail, and the city, there is neither proof nor 
 presumption : or, if there be any presumption upon the case, 
 it is entirely on the other side, that is, that there was no 
 immersion practised ; and the sum of all is this, that in the 
 first instances there is not the least proof; and that in the 
 others, there is not the least presumption. 
 
 3. Can it be proved that any person baptised was so 
 much as in the water at all ? 
 
 The putting of this question may appear singular to 
 some, who would be ready to say, Can any thing be more 
 evident than this ? Did not our Lord come up out of Jor- 
 dan I Did not Philip and the eunuch go down into, and 
 come up out of the water? The truth is, that, whether 
 they went into the water or not, depends upon three small 
 words: ae, ax or zi, and airo. The two last are used in the 
 Xew Testament, I suppose a hundred times, to signify 
 from ; and the first as often, to signify to ; and they neces- 
 sarily signify no more than to the water and from the water; 
 — so here is no proof that any one person baptised was in 
 the water at all. 
 
 If, therefore, it cannot be proved that baptism is immer- 
 sion only, — if it cannot be proved that any one was im- 
 mersed, — if it cannot be proved that any one baptised was 
 at all in the water, we may be exceedingly easy respecting 
 Mr. Booth's consequence ; for if it appear formidable to 
 such as admit his principles, yet, while there is no proof 
 that these principles are true, to others it must appear as 
 
 nothing. Evangelical 3fagazine. 
 
 L 
 
110 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 Now, here, let it be considered. 1. That the 
 weight of the argument rests entirely upon the 
 supposition, that the apostle in these passages 
 alludes to the mode of christian baptism ; which 
 can with no certainty be proved. For, 2. The 
 apostle in both places may be justly understood as 
 speaking, not concerning" the external and cere- 
 monial part of christian baptism, but concerning- 
 the internal and moral part; not concerning- the 
 application of water, which has no power to kill, 
 or destroy, the body of sin ; but concerning- the 
 regenerating influences of the Spirit; by which 
 Spirit the scriptures often speak of christians as 
 baptised ; and by the influences of which Spirit 
 (or in consequence of their baptism by which) 
 alone it is, that they are said to be dead.*' Dead 
 tcith Christ.f Dead to sin.% Now as this Spirit 
 only has power to kill, or destroy, the old man, 
 (to use the apostle's phrase) and to make us dead 
 with Christ, and dead to sin ; and as we are very 
 frequently represented as baptised zcith this Spirit ; 
 it is perfectly natural to understand the apostle as 
 speaking of these internal and moral influences of 
 the Spirit, when he tells christians — that they were 
 buried with Christ by baptism into death, &;c. And 
 it is further observable — That we are, in this dis- 
 course of the apostle, as much said to be crucified 
 and circumcised by, or with Christ, as we are to be 
 
 * Colos. iii. 3. f Colos. ii. 20. J Rom. vi. 11. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. Ill 
 buried with him: and baptism is as expressly styled 
 the circumcision of Christ, or the christian circum- 
 cision, as a burial with Christ. Why, then, must 
 we not in administering this ceremony, seek for 
 some visible allusion to the one, as well as to the 
 other ! 
 
 The apostle, it is manifest, is here all along 
 talking in figurative terms; such as planted, cruci- 
 Jied, dead, buried, rising, zcalking, reignii.g — his 
 mere use of the word buried, then, seems a much 
 too feeble bottom to rest an argument upon. It 
 may be said, there is as much necessity of finding 
 something, in the christian worship, answering to 
 the other figurative expressions, as to this single 
 one of being buried: and that persons baptised 
 should be signed with the cross, to signify, that 
 their old man is crucified; as that they should be 
 put under water to signify their being buried with 
 Christ* 
 
 * I be<r leave here to subjoin the note of a very learned 
 and ingenious writer on tliis passage — Colos. ii. 12. Bu- 
 ried with him in baptism. The apostle frequently speaks 
 
 of christians as being very closely united to Christ, as huth- 
 bers of his bodij, and parts of Ins person. Eph. i. '23. v. 30. 
 Consequently, whatever was done to Christ, was, as it were. 
 at the same time done to them. When he was crucified, his 
 members were crucified, Gal. ii. 20. When Christ nets 
 quickened, they were quickened together irith him. Eph. ii 5. 
 Because he lives, they shall live also. John xiv. ID. When 
 Christ was raised, they were raised. Eph. ii. 6. And when he 
 ascended and sat dona in heaven, the) sat down with him there. 
 Ibid. Xow, in the same sense, it is true, that christians 
 
112 DIPPING, MOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 But 3. Were it absolutely certain, which it by 
 no means is, that the apostle doth here allude to 
 the mode of christian baptism ; all that will follow 
 is — That immersion was the most usual, but not 
 that it was the only way of administering this rite ; 
 and this at Coloss and at Rome only, and the 
 warmer regions of the world ; but not that it was 
 the most usual, much less the only way, in all other 
 the most northern and coldest climates of the earth. 
 But if it was not the only way ; not only there, but 
 throughout the whole christian world, no argument 
 can hence be drawn, that baptism must always be 
 administered in this manner. 
 
 were buried with Christ (i. e. when Christ was buried, they, 
 as members and parts ot him, were buried with him) zv ru> 
 fiaTTTKTfiart cither in baptism, or by means of baptism. If 
 wechuse the former rendering, the meaning' must be — That 
 at the time of our being baptised, we were united to Christ ; 
 and consequently then looked upon as haying been buried 
 with him. If we prefer the latter rendering", viz. by means 
 of baptism (which seems best, because in the parallel place, 
 Rom. vi. 4. the apostle uses eta) then the sense will be 
 — It is by means of baptism that we are united to Christ, 
 and so must be considered as having been buried, when he 
 was buried. Whichever rendering we take, we may be 
 allowed to say, by analogy, the same things of our being 
 crucified, quickened and risen with Christ ; all which also 
 happened by means of our baptism, and at the time of oiu 
 being baptised. 
 
 As then, there can be no reference to a mode of bap- 
 tism, in our being crucified and quickened by baptism ; so, 
 there is no reason to suppose any reference to a mode of 
 baptism, (dipping) when we are said to be buried with Christ 
 by baptism. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 113 
 
 Finally. Should it be granted, that these two 
 texts (Horn. vi. 4. and Colos. ii. 12.) favour the 
 mode of dipping-, it must certainly be also allowed, 
 that the several texts, above cited, do equally fa- 
 vour sprinkling, or pouring, in baptism. So that 
 the matter may admit of an easy compromise, by 
 supposing — That as (his christian ceremony un- 
 doubtedly had its origin, and was borrowed from 
 the Jewish law; and as persons and things were 
 purified, or set apart, under that law, sometimes 
 by dipping, and sometimes by sprinkling ; so the 
 apostles performed this ceremonial purification in 
 the christian church, sometimes in one form, and 
 sometimes in the other; as the circumstances of 
 time, place, persons — required. 
 
 Let us now briefly review, and sum up the evi- 
 dence upon the point in debate — That the word 
 FtaTTTifa to baptise does not necessarily, nor con- 
 stantly, signify to dip; but is very frequently, if 
 not generally, used in sacred writ in a more large 
 and extensive sense ; and signifies an application 
 of water by sprinkling or pouring, has been evi- 
 dently shewn ; and the whole learned world, (an 
 antipredobaptist or two, perhaps, excepted) readily 
 acknowledged* — We have also seen — That there 
 were under the Jewish law, different ways, of ap- 
 plying water for ceremonial purification, which 
 
 * See a cloud of -witnesses from Lexicographers, Di- 
 vines, Grammarians — in Walker's Doctrine of Baptism. 
 L 2 
 
114 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 are expressly called different baptisms ; Dipping, 
 therefore, in the scripture judgment, is not the 
 only way of baptising — That our Lord is said not 
 to have been baptised before dinner; and that all 
 the Jews when they came from market eat not, ex- 
 cept they are baptised; when not a plunging the 
 whole body is meant, but only washing the hands 
 — That the apostle actually says, the Jewish fa- 
 thers xcere all baptised in the sea ; when the fact 
 is incontestable that they were not overwhelmed, 
 or covered, with the sea, but only sprinkled with its 
 spray — That John says of Christ that he should 
 baptise the disciples with the Holy Ghost and zcith 
 fire ; which baptising them was performed, not by 
 their being overwhelmed, or immersed, in the Holy 
 Ghost and in fire, but by its being poured out, 
 and resting on them — In the Greek version of the 
 Apocrypha we have seen a person styled, Bct7r- 
 Tt£o[j.evoe, one baptised; when the principal part, 
 if not the whole ceremony, of his cleansing, con- 
 sisted in sprinkling water on him.— That Judith is 
 said to have baptised herself; when the circum- 
 stances of the story will, by no means, suffer us 
 to imagine, that she dipped herself wholly, but 
 only washed herself in part — That in Origen, the 
 priests at Elijah's command are said to baptise the 
 wood upon the altar, when they only poured water 
 on it. — We have seen farther : That from several 
 circumstances attending those who were baptised ; 
 viz. the vast multitudes of both sexes, baptised by 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 115 
 Jobu in the open country, far distant from their 
 habitations; Paul, under extreme weakness and 
 after several days fasting; the Jailer and his fa- 
 mily, at midnight, and in their own house, imme- 
 diately upon their sudden conversion ; and the 
 se\eral thousands in one day, by the apostles at 
 Jerusalem ; it seems highly improbable that they 
 were all totally plunged. — Finally, That viewing 
 the matter with the eye of impartial reason, pour- 
 i)ig wafer on the body, as effectually, and fully an- 
 swers all the moral ends of baptism, as dipping 
 into it ; yea, is much more significative of one prin- 
 cipal thing intended to be represented or signified 
 by this christian rite, namely, the giving us the Holy 
 Spirit, that unction from above, which is poured 
 down upon us. 
 
 These things being considered, it seems not a 
 little strange, that some, who profess to think 
 freely in religion, lay so great a stress upon bap- 
 tism by dipping only — That they make it to enter 
 into the very essence of christian baptism — That 
 they think it justifiable to break off from the 
 churches of their fellow-christians partly on this ac- 
 count — And can, without a smile, hear the few bre- 
 thren of that way speaking of themselves as the 
 only baptised christians ; and looking upon the 
 whole christian world, besides themselves, as to the 
 matter of christian baptism, as being much upon a 
 level with Hottentots and Pagans. 
 
 But such consider not, with due attention, the 
 
116 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 consequences of their opinions ; nor observe, how 
 this preciseness as to ritual matters naturally gen- 
 ders strife, and ministers occasion to endless, con- 
 temptible, and foolish debates. For if overwhelm- 
 ing the person be of the essence of christian bap- 
 tism, hence obviously springs a doubt — What if 
 the person, when lying- beneath the water, should 
 lift up a hand, so as to be not quite covered with 
 the element; is the person, nevertheless, truly bap- 
 tised? Or, suppose in the great hurry which such 
 an operation may occasion, both the hands, or 
 even the arms, should be so incautiously extended 
 as not to be overwhelmed; I ask, is that baptism 
 good I Or again, if through the bulk of the bap- 
 tised, and the weakness of the baptiser, some part 
 even of the face or head should be uncovered; 
 what is to be pronounced concerning such a bap- 
 tism? Is it valid; or not? — Suppose the person 
 whose hands, or part of whose face, was not quite 
 overwhelmed, should be desired by the admini- 
 strator to submit to a second dipping, because the 
 first being not total, he thinks not to be suffi- 
 cient ; and either himself, or some attending- friends, 
 should steadily refuse: alleging, the defect to be 
 not material; and that the baptism was valid: — 
 Would there not hence arise a very important 
 debate ; perhaps, an actual separation, or rent 
 in that church i Some insisting, that the person 
 be received to full communion, as a truly baptised 
 brother : others strenuously opposing, and refusing- 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 117 
 
 communion with him as not being baptised, be- 
 cause not totally overwhelmed. — How much to the 
 edification and honour of the christian world would 
 such a contest appear I What matter of ridicule 
 would it furnish to unbelievers ? And how na- 
 turally draw contempt ; net upon baptism only, as 
 a solemn trifle ; but upon Christianity itself, as 
 ministering occasion to such frivolous debates? 
 And yet, really, to this issue, does the making im- 
 mersion essential to christian baptism, naturally 
 and directly tend. If it does not, in fact, gender 
 such debates, it is because those, who avow the 
 principle, do not follow it into all its consequences, 
 nor closely adhere to it in every emergence of this 
 kind. The Greek christians, who dip their infants, 
 hold it necessary that every part of the child be 
 dipped. And so the Jews of old held.* " That if 
 " a man be baptised all over, saving the tip of his 
 " little finger; or if clay, or any the like thing, 
 " cleave to the flesh of man, and keep it from the 
 " water, it is unclean still as it was, and the bap- 
 " tising profiteth nothing." — 
 
 And, if washing the whole body be of such 
 moment in christian baptism, as our brethren re- 
 present; they ought, surely, to consider, that the 
 dipping a clothed body seems not a strictly just or 
 adequate performance of it. The bathings of the 
 
 * See Ainsworth on Lcvit. xv. 11. 
 
118 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 Jewish law were, doubtless, of the naked body ; 
 and it is an ineontestible fact that in the primitive 
 times, (those of Chrysostom, and the ages after,) 
 such as were baptised by dipping, were naked 
 when baptised.* 
 
 Nor ought it to be overlooked, that upon this 
 scheme of our brethren, there are two parts of 
 the character of an able minister of the New Testa- 
 ment, which St. Paul, in his epistles both to Ti- 
 mothy and Titus, entirely omits; yea, which nei- 
 ther himself, nor his beloved Timothy, seem tu 
 have possessed ; viz. hardiness of constitution, and 
 bodily strength. Without a good degree of these, 
 in a variety of cases which must frequently occur, 
 it will be rash and highly criminal for a christian 
 minister to give this sacred rite of religion to 
 some of the most worthy and capable subjects; 
 inasmuch, as he cannot do it without apparent 
 hazard, not only to his own life, but to that also of 
 the baptised. 
 
 Besides, after all the ceremonial zeal and fulfil- 
 ment of all righteousness, which is pretended in 
 this point; the person dipt, in truth and real fact, 
 is not baptised by him that undertakes to perform 
 
 * Vide Walker's Doctrine of Baptisms, Ch. xv. § 15. 
 Vossius de Baptis. Di$p. 1. Thes. 6. See also a sad acci- 
 dent which befell a company of women in these circum- 
 stances, in the great church of Constantinople. Bower's 
 Hist. Popes, vol. ii. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 11J> 
 
 that office on him ; but, in great part, if not prin- 
 cipally, baptises himself: such matter of endless 
 doubts, and unprofitable disputes, does a circum- 
 stantial exactness as to the mere rite of religion 
 gender! — But, zee have not so learned Christ. We 
 proceed. 
 
 SECTION II. 
 
 Should immersion be allozced to have been the only 
 ancient, apostolic and scriptural mode of bap- 
 tising; yet a strict adherence to it is not obli- 
 gatory on us: but this circumstance may very 
 lawfully and fitly be exchanged, for that of 
 sprinkling or pouring. 
 
 To be satisfied of this, we need but consider 
 
 What is the true spirit and design of Christianity ; 
 which the apostle calls, a law of liberty ; James 
 i. 25. That a great part of its intention was, to 
 take off men's regard from things ritual and cere- 
 monial. It is a doctrine according to godliness; 
 a spiritual, exalted, heavenly scheme of worship ; 
 in which the Father seeks such to worship him, as 
 will do it in spirit and in truth* It expressly de- 
 clares that the kingdom of God,f (or the state of 
 
 * John iv. 23. t Rom. xiv. 17. 
 
120 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 religion under the Messiah) is not meat and drink ; 
 i. e. stands not in things ceremonial and ritual; 
 but in righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy 
 Ghost ; and, he that in these serveth Christ, is ac- 
 ceptable to God, and approved of men. And in 
 Christ Jesus, (or under the christian dispensation) 
 neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncir- 
 cumcision, but a new creature.* To imagine, there- 
 fore, that our Lord intended absolutely and im- 
 mutably, to bind down his followers, of all nations, 
 and of all ages, to the Jewish form of baptising ; 
 supposing it to have been by dipping only ; is quite 
 repugnant to that mild, that generous and free 
 spirit which his religion every where breathes. — 
 And here it is natural to observe — 
 
 1. That concerning a certain ceremonial, em- 
 blematical washing, much like this of christian bap- 
 tism, our divine lawgiver hath determined — " That 
 " the quantity of water, or its application to the 
 " whole body is little to be regarded." Peter saith 
 unto him, thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus 
 answered him, if I wash thee not, thou hast no 
 ■part with me. Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, 
 not my feet only but my hands and my head. Jesus 
 saith unto him, he that is washed (in such an em- 
 blematical and figurative washing, as I am now 
 going to perform) needeth not save to zvash his 
 feet : f — The application of water to one part only, 
 
 * Galat. vi. 15. f John xiii. 8, 9, 10. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 121 
 
 u as effectual to his cleansing, as if his whole body 
 was actually overwhelmed. 
 
 Note : The washing-, concerning which our 
 Lord has left this determination, was of the very 
 same nature with baptism : i. e. it was an applica- 
 tion of water to the body, for a religious or moral 
 end. And this determination, was, no doubt, left 
 upon record, that it might be applied by us (as, 
 in the reason of the thing, it is most justly appli- 
 cable) under his spiritual dispensation, to every 
 like ceremonial washing. And it evidently teaches 
 us, that in such ritual purifications, the quantity of 
 water and the manner of its application, are things 
 of no great concern ; upon which no important 
 stress is to be laid in his church. It is farther to 
 be observed — 
 
 2. That even under the Jewish, which was con- 
 fessedly a weak and ceremonial dispensation, and 
 which laid infinitely more weight upon ritual ob- 
 servances than the christian religion does, a liberty 
 was given to human prudence to dispense with some 
 of the most express and most solemn institutions, 
 in cases where only mercy or great convenience 
 required it. 
 
 Thus the rite of circumcision, though injoined 
 under the awful penalty to the neglecter of being 
 cut off* was yet, without offence, laid aside, for 
 the space of forty years ;f and upon no other 
 
 * Gen. wii. 14. f Josh. v. 6. 
 
122 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 ground as far as appears, but because the frequent 
 and uncertain decampments, marches and wars of 
 the Israelites, in their passage through the wilder- 
 ness, rendered it inconvenient and troublesome to 
 be observed. 
 
 So by an express command, none but the priests 
 were to eat of the hallowed or shew bread.* Yet 
 David and his men, when no other supply could 
 conveniently be had, violated this injunction : they 
 eat of that bread, which it was not lawful for them 
 to eat, and are justified by Christ.f 
 
 So also, the brazen serpent, which was set up 
 by the command of God ; honoured by many 
 great and miraculous cures; and designed, pro- 
 bably to be an instructive memorial to future ages 
 (which is the very nature of a rite or sacrament in 
 the christian church) was yet, when abused to su- 
 perstition, broken down by Hezekiah and actually 
 destroyed. % 
 
 Now, if under the Jewish, ceremonial and 
 weakly dispensation, such liberty was indulged to 
 human prudence and convenience, as to dispense 
 with and set aside its ritual injunctions; and this, 
 when they were injoined under so awful and se- 
 vere a penalty; how absurd is it to imagine, that 
 our divine lawgiver Jesus Christ has, under his 
 infinitely more free and spiritual dispensation (un- 
 
 * -ww% * vw% -w* vw\ www 
 
 * Levit. xxiv. 5—9. f Matt. xii. 4. 
 
 J Numb. xxi. 8, 9. 2 Kings xviii. 4. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 123 
 
 der which our state is as much freer than that 
 of the Jews, as the state of sons is than that of 
 servants ; or of friends, than that of slaves) tied us 
 up to a strict and invariable exactness, as to merely 
 ritual observances ; and that no considerations of 
 decency, health, convenience, or mercy, ought now 
 to substitute the form of sprinkling the baptismal 
 water, instead of a total immersion into it I But, 
 farther, 
 
 3. Many rites of undoubted apostolical usage 
 if not injunction, are now, without blame, not only 
 altered, but entirely laid aside ; which is a far 
 greater liberty, than the mere substitution of sprink- 
 ling instead of dipping. 
 
 The greeting one another with the holy kiss, 
 was unquestionably an apostolical practice. See 
 Rom. xvi. 16. 1 Cor. xvi. 20. 2 Cor. xiii. 12. 
 1 Thess. v. 26. 1 Pet. v. 14. In all which places 
 it is expressly recommended, if not injoined. 
 A\X>/X«e ytXrjua-t aaira^o/j.eda iravaa^Evoi tojv tv^wv. 
 " Having finished our prayers, we salute each other 
 " with a kiss :" says Justin Martyr* A like apos- 
 tolic practice and command was the anointing the 
 sick zcith oil, in the name of the Lord. See Mark 
 \\. 13. and James v. 14. 
 
 Now to our good brethren, who declaim zea- 
 lously upon — Fulfilling all righteousness— and who 
 ask—" By what authority do you take upon you 
 
 t W»% W^-v-V *.-v-vv% WVWW 
 
 * Apol. 2. 
 
124 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 " to alter Christ's institution ; and laying- aside the 
 " scriptural and apostolic mode of immersion, to 
 " substitute sprinkling- or pouring in its room?" 
 —With great confidence we reply—" By the very 
 ft same, Sirs, by which you also quite abolish and 
 " lay aside the scriptural, apostolical, institution 
 " or practice of saluting with the holy kiss, and 
 " of anointing the sick with oil in the name of the 
 u Lord"— -These we can prove, with ten times 
 clearer evidence, to have been either actually com- 
 manded or practised, by the apostles, than you can 
 baptism by immersion only. Now, if these signi- 
 ficant and holy rites, unquestionably once injoined, 
 or practised, by the apostles, in conformity to the 
 common usage of their countries and times, are 
 by you wholly laid aside ; because they would 
 seem odd in this country and age where no such 
 customs obtain ; we demand, why bathing the whole 
 body (which was also among the eastern nations 
 and warm climates, where Christianity was first 
 planted, a very familiar and delightful thing) why, 
 I say, may it not in like manner be exchanged, 
 for pouring water on the body : seeing such total 
 immersions are in this country and age, an unusual, 
 a troublesome, a scarcely modest and decent, and 
 in many cases a cruel and a very dangerous thing ? 
 —Especially, as the form of pouring is every whit 
 as significative as that of dipping can be.— Let 
 those, who contend warmly for a circumstantial ad- 
 herence to scripture practice in one rite, say, how 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OP BAPTISING. 125 
 
 it is they justify the great liberty they take quite to 
 abolish and change others.* 
 
 Again, why do they not insist also, that un- 
 leavened bread and but one loaf, ought constantly 
 to be used in the sacred rite of the supper? (To 
 which, perhaps, may be added, the mixing water 
 with wine in the sacramental cup.) It is incompa- 
 rably more certain that these only were used by 
 our .Lord and his apostles, in that sacrament ; than 
 that they invariably practised immersion only, in 
 the other. 
 
 It was unleavened bread which our Lord took 
 and broke (for the Jews at that time, by the ex- 
 press command of God, were to have no other in 
 their housesf) when he instituted the supper, and 
 said — Do this in remembrance of me: and con- 
 cerning which, it is said— As oft as ye eat this 
 bread — What bread was that? Bread that was 
 wdeavened. Yea, and both these circumstances, 
 viz. The bread being unleavened, and the having 
 but one loaf are as expressly alluded to by the 
 apostle, and represented as significative of some- 
 thing moral in this sacrament, as immersion is of 
 
 * Though a kiss of peace, and an order of deaconesses, 
 were the practices of the apostolic time ; yet when the one 
 gave occasion to raillery, and the other to scandal, all tho 
 world was, and still is, satisfied with the reasons of letting 
 both fall. Bishop Burnet, on Art. XX. 
 
 f Exod. xiii. 7. 
 
 M 2 
 
126 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 being buried zvith Christ, in the other. By the 
 former, the unleavened bread, the christian wor- 
 shippers are reminded, of the purity and since- 
 rity with which they should assemble, and cele- 
 brate this religious rite. Therefore let us keep the 
 feast ; not with old leaven, neither with the leaven 
 of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened 
 bread of sincerity and truth* Behold how em> 
 blematical and significative it is made ! And by 
 the latter, the one loaf, the unity of the church 
 is, with great beauty and propriety, figuratively 
 shewn forth, and the communion in one body, into 
 which all christians are received. For zve being 
 many, are one bread, and one body, for we are all 
 partakers of that one breads or, as the passage 
 ought to have been rendered, because there is one 
 bread, or loaf used in this sacred ceremony, we 
 who are many are one body ; for we are all partakers 
 of that one loaf.% 
 
 Let some reason be now shewn — Why we are 
 to be tied down to a rigorous conformity to the cir- 
 cumstance of dipping, in one sacrament; but are 
 not to the circumstance of unleavened bread, and 
 of one loaf, in the other? If we must indeed 
 fulfil all righteousness (as is warmly urged on this 
 head) if we must observe exactly all the institu- 
 
 * 1 Cor. v. 8. f 1 Cor. x. 17. 
 
 £ Ort tig Aproe, sv au)fia oljtoWoi tajxiv: oi yap 
 TravTtQ £K re ivoq apra ^i£Ttyof.uv. 
 
AND PRIMITIVE MANNER OF BAPTISING. 127 
 
 tions and rites of the apostolic church; let us in- 
 deed, fulfil it. But then let us be consistent and 
 uniform in our obedience: fulfilling the. righteous- 
 ness of saluting with the holy kiss — of anointing the 
 sick zeith oil in the name of the Lord — of unleavened 
 bread, and one loaf in the sacrament of the supper; 
 as well as the righteousness of dipping the baptised. 
 To conclude — 
 
 4. From our Lord's decision in a like case, viz. 
 The Sabbath zvas made for man, and not man for the 
 Sabbath ; and / will have mercy and not sacrifice :* 
 —It appears plainly to be his will, not to tie up his 
 followers to a rigid and severe exactness in things 
 of a ritual and positive kind. 
 
 The law injoining the sabbatical rest, was one 
 of the ten delivered, with infinite pomp, at Mount 
 Sinai — Is often spoken of as an important part of 
 the covenant which subsisted betwixt God and his 
 people — Great blessings are promised to its reli- 
 gious observation ; and severe threatenings de- 
 nounced upon those who neglect it — Yea, a trans- 
 gressor was once, by the express command of God, 
 stoned to death for its violation, as a warning to fu- 
 ture ages. — This is a thousand times more than 
 can be said in support of the form of dipping in 
 baptism : yet behold ! The strict observance of 
 this sabbatical rest, even under the Jewish, cere- 
 
 * Matt. xii. 7. Mark ii. 7. 
 
128 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 monial, weakly dispensation, was violated by the 
 apostles, and dispensed with by our Lord, when 
 convenience or compassion to the body required it. 
 Much more, then, may we conclude, that the strict 
 observance of dipping, may be innocently neglected, 
 under the infinitely more exalted dispensation of 
 Christ; when either decency, or mercy, or great 
 convenience forbids its use. 
 
 This fact, viz. the disciples breaking the sab- 
 batical rest, by plucking and rubbing ears of corn, 
 and our Lord's reasoning thereon, happened, no 
 doubt, and was recorded with a view to the in- 
 struction of after ages; and was designed as a pre- 
 cedent, a rule of judgment and action, by which 
 we are to be directed in every like case. — Our di- 
 vine legislator hath hereby taught us to reason thus 
 —When the strict observance of a merely ritual 
 command will be attended with danger and great 
 inconvenience to the disciples, it may lawfully be 
 waived — Or thus : baptism was made for man, and 
 not man for baptism. If, therefore, through any 
 change of national custom, or of climate, the form 
 of dipping in baptism should become odd and un- 
 becoming, (as the love-kiss would now be) ha- 
 zardous to the health, or troublesome to the disci- 
 ples, it might then innocently be waived; and a 
 form less burthensome and disagreeable be substi- 
 tuted in its room. 
 
 And here I beg leave to ask — Whether a strict 
 adherence to dipping the baptised, would not, 
 
AND PR1MITIVK MANNER OF BAPTISING. 129 
 probably, be attended with as much danger and 
 inconvenience to the bodies of the disciples now ; 
 as a strict observance of the sabbatical rest would 
 have been to the twelve apostles, when going 
 through the field of corn ? In other words: — 
 \\ hether it be not as much mercy to excuse some 
 at least (viz. new-born infants, weakly and un- 
 he aithy persons, and even all others throughout the 
 winter season, in these northern and cold climates) 
 from being totally plunged in baptism ; as it was to 
 excuse the twelve for plucking and rubbing the 
 corn on the Sabbath day I 
 
 It enters into the nature of things ritual and cir- 
 cumstantial, to be mutable, transient and liable to 
 be changed. As they are often but an adoption 
 of some national custom (which is apparently the 
 case as to the institution of baptism) or, an ac- 
 commodation of a common usage to some purpose 
 in religion: so, they are alterable in their na- 
 ture ; and are themselves in some measure to be 
 accommodated to prevailing customs and tastes; 
 to the several countries, climates, and tempers of 
 mankind. This, I apprehend, is the only reason- 
 ing on which it is possible to justify our disuse of 
 the primitive, apostolic practice of saluting with a 
 kiss of love, in our worshipping assemblies. The 
 custom of those ancient tunes rendered such salu- 
 tations neither odd nor ridiculous: but should the 
 practice be introduced into our present churches, 
 
130 DIPPING, NOT THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL 
 
 and worship, it needs not be said — with how just 
 an offence ! 
 
 Now, if, for no other reason than a change 
 of national custom, we lay aside this undoubtedly 
 ancient, apostolic, religious ceremony, the kiss 
 of charity ; why should not a like change of na- 
 tional custom, with regard to bathing the whole 
 body be allowed to justify its disuse in the cere- 
 mony of baptism '. For a woman, in thin apparel, 
 before a multitude of spectators, to go into the 
 water, and be taken into the arms of him who 
 officiates, and be laid under the water, is, in the 
 present nation and age, an equally indecent and 
 disagreeable sight, as for men, at the conclusion of 
 public prayers, to salute one another with a kiss of 
 chanty or peace. 
 
 To conclude : — If after all that hath been said 
 any still think it their indispensable duty to baptise 
 by immersion only; let them, by all means, thus 
 baptise ; but then, we beseech them to forbear all 
 severe censures of those, who are not dipt. Let 
 them not represent us as persons unbaptised — 
 withdraw from our churches — refuse communion 
 with us, at the common table of our Lord, upon so 
 trifling a difference. This, surely, were to disho- 
 nour our sacred religion ; and too naturally brings 
 not only christian baptism, but Christianity itself, 
 into manifest contempt. 
 
 Let us therefore, according to the apostolic 
 
\\n PRIMITIVE MANNER OP BAPTISING. 131 
 
 precept — receive one another, but not to doubtful 
 disputatious. To maintain an unity of spirit, by 
 mutual forbearance, and to live together in per- 
 fect charity, is a matter of infinitely more impor- 
 tance, than the quantity of water, or the manner of 
 its application, with which a person is baptised. 
 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink, but 
 righteousness, and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost. 
 And the end of the commandment is charity ; out of 
 a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith 
 unfeigned. 
 
 Xoic the God of patience and consolation grant 
 vs to be like minded one toicards another, 
 according to Christ Jesus. That rce may 
 zvith one mind, and one mouth glorify God, 
 even the father of our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 Amen. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 In the preceding pages Mr. Towgood has presented 
 a clear and striking view of the testimonies of the fathers 
 of the christian church, in defence of the universal preva- 
 lence of Infant Baptism. Nor does it appear, that any one 
 of the fathers, even in appearance, favoured Antipaedo- 
 baptism excepting Tertullian; and, upon unprejudiced 
 investigation, it will be evident, that he did not oppose 
 infant baptism, but only recommended delay, as he did 
 also to adults, who were likely to be exposed to strong 
 temptations, thinking, that if they fell into sin after 
 baptism, it would so far aggravate the offence, as to be 
 almost, if not altogether, unpardonable. 
 
 Mr. Pirie, a sensible and judicious writer, in his 
 Dissertation on Baptism, speaking of the origin of the 
 Baptists, says — 
 
 " We have already seen, that the famous Tertullian 
 had adopted a fancy, that every sin committed after bap- 
 tism was either unpardonable, or nearly so ; for which 
 reason, he earnestly recommended the delay of baptism 
 till, at least, the heat of youthful passion subsided. 
 Now, as Tertullian was a man of such eminence in his 
 time, we may be sure that an advice from him, urged 
 with vehemence, and supported by such plausible argu- 
 ments, could not fail to influence many. This was also 
 a leading opinion among the sect called Novatians ; in 
 consequence of which, infant-baptism could not be 
 practised among that sect; and I may add, nor could 
 adult-baptism either, till the hour of death, as they 
 denied the remission of sins to christians, sinning after 
 baptism. 
 
 Others, again, imagined, that the very act of bap- 
 tism washed away all sin whatever, and hence deferred 
 
APPENDIX. 133 
 
 baptism, that every one might gratify his lusts without 
 restraint, knowing that, if he could get himself bap- 
 tised before death, he was sure of a full remission. 
 Others would delay baptism till they had attained the 
 thirtieth year, because Christ was baptised at that pe- 
 riod of his life. On a similar pretence, Constantine the 
 Great would not be baptised but in the river Jordan ; 
 and hence, as he never came to that place, he only sub- 
 mitted to baptism on his death-bed. Some, moreover, 
 deferred baptism till they coidd have access to be bap- 
 tised by some eminent bishop. All these opinions, and 
 refutations of each of them, are to be found in the 
 writings of Bazil, Gregory, Nazianzen, Chrysostom, 
 Augustine's Confession, and Eusebius' Life of Con- 
 stantine. 
 
 From the above short detail, it is easy to see what a 
 powerful and extensive influence these ideas must have 
 exerted among mankind, ideas suited to the taste of the 
 whimsical, the capricious, the fond of novelty, the lovers 
 of pleasures, supported at the same time, by men of 
 talents, in eminent stations, and renowned for piety and 
 learning. Seeds so congenial to the soil of man, and 
 cherished with so much care, must have taken such a 
 firm hold of the human heart, that we need not wonder 
 if time itself has not been able to extirpate them. Had 
 they not been checked in their progress, by the stre- 
 nuous efforts of men of great eminence in the churches, 
 they would probably have overspread the far greater 
 part of the christian world. The votaries of these opi- 
 nions, howbeit, still maintained a footing in various 
 places, and although, for a long time, they seem to have 
 inculcated the delay of baptism for such reasons as have 
 been mentioned, yet, as the transition from these to an 
 absolute denial of the divine authority for infant-bap- 
 tism was so very easy, in process of ages infants were 
 excluded from baptism altogether, and that, as is usual, 
 
 N 
 
134 APPENDIX. 
 
 in the name of Jesus Christ. When or where this last 
 idea had its birth,, I imagine camiot be ascertained. It 
 seems to have dwelt in obscurity for a time, till at last it 
 burst forth from its solitude in the sixteenth century, and 
 made a considerable progress in Germany, extending its 
 influence to Holland, Britain, and other countries, in all 
 which it still maintains its ground. Thus it has assumed 
 various forms. At first, it deferred the baptism of in- 
 fants on prudential considerations ; at last, it divested 
 them of their right, and made the sacred oracles pro- 
 nounce against them the sentence of exclusion. In all 
 stages, however, it seems unhappily to have laid a dis- 
 proportionate stress, on what the schoolmen call the opus 
 operation, the act itself, and the mode of performing it. 
 A finger undipped would render baptism of no effect ! 
 would make it " a mere human ordinance !" Scripture, 
 too, must be called in to support this fancy. What has 
 not been spoken and done in the name of the Lord ! 
 False ideas, in religion, it seems, must still be 
 
 The maggots of corrupted texts. 
 
 While paedobaptism appears to be as antient as 
 the apostolic age, antipaedobaptism appears only as a 
 modern invention. In Dr. Wall's defence of his learned 
 and elaborate History of Infant Baptism, he affirms, 
 " antipaedobaptism does not appear to have been prac- 
 tised till after the middle of the eleventh century ; and 
 that by a people few, ignorant and quickly converted." 
 
 As the evidence from history enters so essentially 
 into the merits of the question between paedobaptists 
 and antipgedobaptists, the statement of the learned Dr. 
 Osgood shall here be presented to the reader. 
 
 We acknowledge, indeed, that during the ages of 
 darkness winch preceded the Protestant reformation, 
 the institution, as well as the doctrines of Christ, were 
 exceedingly corrupted by the mixture of human inven- 
 
APPENDIX. 135 
 
 tions. We learn from history the origin of these cor- 
 ruptions, and that, in each successive age, there were 
 witnesses against them, whose testimony shews that 
 they never were, even at the season of the thickest 
 darkness, universally received. I shall now prove that 
 infant baptism stands not on the foot of these corrup- 
 tions, was not introduced on them, and during the 
 course of many revolving ages, was not scrupled by a 
 single christian. Of the writings of the primitive fa- 
 thers, the immediate successors of the apostles, some 
 scattered fragments only have reached modern times ; 
 yet, in these fragments, we have unquestionable evi- 
 dence that infant baptism was the general practice in 
 the very century after the apostles. They had been 
 dead about forty years, when Justin Martyr published 
 Ins apology, in which he mentions some " aged chris- 
 tians who were made disciples in or from their infancy." 
 This is understood as implying that they were baptised, 
 as that was the known method of making visible disci- 
 ples. Irenceus, who was born before the death of St. 
 John, is yet more full in his testimony. Origen was 
 born about one hundred years after the decease of the 
 apostles, and from him we have these words, " The 
 church received a tradition or order from the apostles to 
 administer baptism to infants." About fifty years after 
 this, or one hundred and fifty from the apostles, bap- 
 tism being then universally considered as supplying the 
 place of circumcision, a question arose, whether it ought 
 not, as circumcision was, to be deferred till the eighth 
 day after the birth of the child. For the discussion of 
 this question, a council of sixty-six bishops, or pastors 
 of churches, was assembled at Carthage. In their result, 
 they give it as their opinion, that " baptism ought least 
 of all to be referred to a new born infant ;" and as to 
 its being put off to the eighth day, they add, " there 
 is not one that approves of it : it appears to us all, who 
 
136 APPENDIX. 
 
 are here met in council, far otherwise." Undoubtedly, 
 some of the elders upon this council could remember 
 what the practice of the church had been for seventy or 
 eighty years before, at which period there were proba- 
 bly many living who were born within the age of the 
 apostles, and who must have known what their practice 
 had been. If the baptising of infants had not originated 
 with the apostles, is it credible that all the churches of 
 Christendom should have so soon and so universally de- 
 parted from the apostolic institution? If so striking 
 and notorious an innovation had been attempted, is it 
 not beyond all belief, that it should have been every 
 where received without a single objection from any of 
 those myriads of saints, confessors, and martyrs, who 
 lived in the purest and best ages of the church ? 
 
 iVfter this period, as we come down to the third and 
 fourth centuries, the writings of Austin, John Chrysos- 
 tome, Pelagius, and a multitude of others, show that, in 
 those centuries, there was not a single exception to the 
 baptism of infants, The learned Dr. Wall, who in- 
 quired most accurately into this subject, says, " For the 
 first four hunched years, there appeal's only one man, 
 Tertullian, that advised the delay of infant baptism, in 
 some cases, and one Gregory that did, perhaps, practice 
 such delay, in the case of his own children ; but no so- 
 ciety so thinking, or so practising; nor any one man 
 saying, that it was unlawful to baptise infants. In the 
 next seven hundred years, there is not so much as one 
 man to be found, that either spoke for, or practised any 
 such delay, but all the contrary. And when, about the 
 year 1130, one sect among the Waldenses declared 
 against the baptising of infants, as being incapable of 
 salvation, the main body of that people rejected their 
 opinion ; and those of them that held that opinion, 
 quickly dwindled away and disappeared, there being no 
 more heard of, who held that tenet, until the rising of 
 
APPENDIX. 137 
 
 the German Antipaodobaptists, in the year 1522." This 
 account by Dr. Wall brings us clown to the era of the 
 Protestant reformation. Amidst the commotions attend- 
 ant upon that great revolution, sprang up the founders 
 of the present sect of Anabaptists. " Soon after Lu- 
 ther's appearance," says Dr. Robertson, in his History 
 of Charles V. " the rashness or ignorance of some of 
 his disciples led them to publish tenets no less absurd 
 than pernicious, which being proposed to men ex- 
 tremely illiterate, but fond of novelty, and at a time 
 when their minds were turned wholly towards reli- 
 gious speculations, gained too easy credit and authority 
 among them. The most remarkable of their religious 
 tenets related to the sacrament of baptism, which, as 
 they contended, ought to be administered only to per- 
 sons grown up to }' ears of understanding, and should 
 be performed, not by sprinkling them with water, but 
 by dipping them in it. For this reason they con- 
 demned the baptism of infants, and re-baptising all 
 whom they admitted into their society, the sect came 
 to be distinguished by the name of Anabaptists. — To 
 this peculiar notion concerning baptism, they added 
 other principles of a most enthusiastic as well as dan- 
 gerous nature. By a monstrous and almost incredible 
 conjunction, voluptuousness was ingrafted on religion, 
 and dissolute riot accompanied the austerities of fanati- 
 cal devotion. Luther, who had testified against this 
 fanatical s/pirit on its first appearance, now deeply la- 
 mented its progress, and exposed the delusion with 
 great strength of argument, as well as acrimony of 
 style." Not Luther only, but Calvin, Melancf/icm, Bul- 
 linger, Zuhiglius, Gualier, Sleidan, Zanchy, and indeed 
 all the eminent reformers, united their voice in bearing 
 solemn testimony against the principles of this sect, 
 reprobating them in terms of great severity. 
 
 Perhaps these great and good men would have used 
 N 2 
 
138 APPENDIX. 
 
 less asperity of language in speaking of them, had they 
 been chargeable with no other errors besides those re- 
 lating to baptism; but, in,.that age, they did not con- 
 tent themselves with disturbing the peace of religious 
 societies, and breaking up of churches ; they committed 
 outrages upon civil society, which united all the states 
 of Germany against them. They were subdued and 
 dispersed by military force. But, as generally happens 
 in this mode of suppressing any sect or party, the fugi- 
 tives were the more confirmed in the belief of their 
 principal peculiarities, and spread their tenets in every 
 country whither they fled for shelter. Dropping the 
 extravagances which had armed the civil magistrates 
 against them, they rigidly adhered to many of their 
 other notions. " The party," says Dr. Robertson, " still 
 subsists in the Low Countries, and a small number of 
 this sect is settled in England* 
 
 This Tract is presented to the public, not with the 
 most distant idea to degrade the Baptist denomination, 
 amongst Avhom are, doubtless, many respectable cha- 
 racters, who view the turbulence and enthusiasm of the 
 German Baptists with the greatest detestation, but 
 merely to shew that their views of baptism are not so 
 antient and apostolic as many are prone to imagine and 
 zealous to propagate." 
 
 Notwithstanding this declaration of the Editor, he 
 has been represented as illiberal, unjust, ungenerous, 
 unkind, if not base in the highest degree and even 
 antichristian. Is this meeting the historical question, 
 or pouring out a torrent of abuse ? As it was in then* 
 
 * The wbole of Dr. Robertson's narrative respecting the German 
 Anabaptists, or Antipaedobaptists, or Baptists, call them by whichever 
 name, the Doctor evidently intended the same people, is published 
 separately, and sold by Williams and Sou, Stationers' Court, price 2d, 
 or 12s. per hundred. 
 
APPENDIX. 139 
 
 beginning is now. — **** This Tract and three others by 
 the learned, acute, and profound Towgood are repre- 
 sented in the Baptist Magazine as " Jiippant pieces." 
 Such a judgment upon Robertson and Totvgood reminds 
 us of the lines of Cowper — 
 
 Tbe moles and bats in fall assembly find, 
 
 On special search, the keeu-eved eagle's blind. 
 
 Having found their way into England, some of 
 them very early appeared in America, formed a society 
 at Swansey, ami another at Boston, in the year 1665. 
 Qf this last, Dr. Mather relates, " that they admitted 
 into then- society persons whom our churches had ex- 
 communicated for moral scandal, and employed them 
 as administrators of the two sacraments." From such 
 an origin and such beginnings has this sect arisen. If 
 there be any truth in history, then* opinions are wholly 
 modern and unknown to antiquity. If infant baptism 
 be a human invention and an absolute nullity, as they 
 pretend, it is certain that, three centuries ago, there was 
 not a society of baptised christians in the world, nor 
 had been for many preceding ages. What then are we 
 to conclude ? Did the church of Christ remain, during 
 the lapse of centuries, overpowered by the gates of 
 hell T If we could suppose this • yet, woidd -it not be 
 more difficult still to suppose, that it was, at length, 
 recovered by the madmen of Munster, the German 
 Anabaptists ? 
 
 Though the scriptures be, at last, our only sure 
 guide, yet it is a satisfaction to know in what sense our 
 fellow christians understand the scriptures with re- 
 ference to any s disputed point, and how they have been 
 understood by the church of Christ in former ages; 
 and if we be able, as in this question concerning infant 
 baptism, to trace the practice of it up through all pre- 
 ceding ages to that of the apostles, it must be allowed 
 
140 APPENDIX. 
 
 a strong presumptive argument in favour of its having 
 originated with the apostles themselves. It is in this 
 way, that Ave argue the change of the Sabbath from the 
 last to the first clay of the week. The New Testament 
 contains no express order or command upon the sub- 
 ject ; but as we can trace the observance of the first 
 day of the week up to the age of the apostles, and find 
 that they actually met on that day for religious worship, 
 we conclude that the practice originated from their 
 authority and appointment. In my view, the argument 
 is equally full and strong in favour of infant baptism. 
 
 As our Antipaedobaptist brethren do not seem desti- 
 tute of a disposition to celebrate the worthies of their 
 denomination (and which indeed is to be commended) 
 for we have voluminous publications, devoted to the 
 English Baptists, and the American Baptists, and how 
 is it that we have never had a biographical work con- 
 taining the lives of ancient Antipaedobaptists, this is 
 certainly a desideratum. Should such an attempt be 
 made, it is hoped they will not claim in one line, as has 
 been done in the Baptist Magazine, the whole body of 
 the Waldenses. 
 
 On this subject Dr. Wall writes, " The present 
 Waldenses, or Vaudois in Piedmont, who are the pos- 
 terity of those old, do practice infant baptism : and 
 they were also found in the practice of it when the 
 Protestants of Luther's Reformation sent to know their 
 state and doctrine, and to confer with them ; and they 
 themselves say, that their fathers never practised other- 
 wise. And they gave proof of it from an old book of 
 theirs, called the Spiritual Almanack, where infant bap- 
 tism is owned : and Perm, their historian, gives the 
 reason of the report that had been to the contrary, viz. 
 that then ancestors being constrained for some hundred 
 years, to suffer their children to be baptised by the 
 priests of the Church of Rome, they deferred the 
 
•UXDIX. 141 
 
 doing thereof as long as they coiild, because they had 
 in detestation those human inventions that were added 
 to the sacrament, which the] held to be the pollution 
 thereof. And forasmuch as then* own pastors were 
 many times abroad employed in the service of churches, 
 they could not have baptism admini>tered to their 
 infants by then - own mimsters. For tins cause they 
 kept them long from baptism : which the priests per- 
 ceiving, and taking notice of, charged them with this 
 slander. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 Printed bv J. Dennett, Leather Lain, Holborn. 
 
Lately published. 
 
 THE 
 
 ADVANTAGES of EARLY PIETY DISPLAYED, 
 
 IN A MEMOIR OF 
 
 MR. JOHN CLEMENT, SURGEON, 
 Late of Weymouth; who died in the Twentieth Year of his Age- 
 
 Compiled from his Letters and Diary, and interspersed with 
 occasional Reflections. 
 
 By the Rev. JOHN HOOPER, M.A. 
 
 Classical Tutor at Hoiton, df-c. <$-c. 
 Price 4*. 6d. 
 
 " The whole of this Memoir we cordially recommend to 
 our young Readers." 
 
 " This neat volume is occupied by a well-executed por- 
 traiture of a youth of no common excellence, and it is given 
 in a somewhat novel and happy form." 
 
 " No pious and intelligent parent can read this excellent 
 little volume, but must admire its contents, and feel it an 
 imperative duty warmly to recommend it to his children, 
 and especially to such of them as are approximating to 
 manhood." 
 
 THE HISTORY OF THE BAPTISTS. 
 
 By W. ROBERTSON, D. D. 
 
 Principal of the University of Edinburgh, and Historiographer to His 
 Majesty for Scotland, $-c. 
 
 A new Edition. Price 2d. or 12s. per hundred. 
 
 " The Editor of this Tract professes not to have had the 
 most distant idea of degrading the Baptists by publishing 
 this account of the vices and extravagances of that body of 
 people, but to shew that the Baptists, as a society, are of 
 very recent date." 
 
 " Here we have a curious fact." — Evangelical Mag. 
 
 In the Baptist Magazine for November last, these Tracts 
 are designated " flippant pieces." Is this true? Could the 
 writer believe what he wrote ? At any rate it falsifies pub- 
 lic opinion ; for, as authors, Who have acquired (and justly 
 too) more celebrity than Towgood and Robertson ? 
 
THE 
 
 CHRISTIAN'S VIEWS AND REFLECTIONS 
 
 DURING HIS LAST ILLNESS, &c. 
 
 By the late Rev, SIMON READER. 
 
 Edited by the Rev. B. CRACKNELL, D.D. 
 
 Second Edition, price 3*. 6d. 
 
 " This volume is highly calculated to be useful ; and we 
 have been assured that in many instances the first edition 
 has been much blessed to the Sick and the Dying" : nor do 
 we know a better companion for persons in such trjing cir- 
 cumstances." — Rev. Dr. Simpson, Rev. D. Bogue, Rev. M. 
 Wilks, and Rev. G. Collison. 
 
 THE SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 EXAMINED and CONFIRMED by PLAIN ARGUMENTS; 
 
 Or, An Appeal to Reason and Common Sense, 
 
 FOR THE TRUTH OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. 
 
 In Two Discourses, by David Jennings, D.D. 
 
 With a Recommendatory Preface by B.Cracknell, D.D. 
 
 Third Edition, price 1*. 
 
 u These discourses are clear, convincing, and admirably 
 
 calculated for general usefulness." 
 
 INCITEMENT TO EARLY PIETY ; 
 
 OR, 
 
 A MANUAL OF DEVOTION; 
 
 With a Selection of 'Hymns adapted to Youth of both Sexes. 
 
 To which is prefixed, 
 
 A Letter of Maternal Advice, from a Lady to her Son, 
 
 On Prayer, and various Relative Christian Duties. 
 
 Price 8rf. 
 
£>