^ 
 
 <jt tut mtoUgicnt s^ 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 O "p-RTTrn-RTON- N. J. <vf/ 
 
 Presented by Mr Samuel Agnew of Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Agncw Coil, on Baptism, No. 
 
 

'/iiivV>-«ooOP<(afl\»^Ooo0^jjjnv»'' OeoO ''/iju* e»9» ''mi^'^' 
 
 THE 
 
 BAPTISM OF INFANIS, 
 
 AUTHORIZED SY SCRIPTURE, 
 
THE 
 
 BAPTISM OF INFANTS, 
 
 AUTHORIZED BY SCRIPTURE, 
 
 AND 
 
 The Praaice of the Church of CHRIST 
 IN EVERY AGE. 
 
 IN REPLY 
 To Mr. BIRT's PAMPHLET, 
 
 ENTITLED, 
 
 A Defence of Scripture Baptifm. 
 
 By HERBERT ^IVl ENDS. 
 
 GO TEACH ALL NATIONS, BAPTIZING THEM. 
 
 MATTHEW, 
 
 Oui praecipit omnes gentes Baptizari, is etiam praecipit 
 Baptlzari Infantes, preGeptum enim de genere 
 includit omnes fpecies, 
 
 TURRETINE. 
 
 PLYMOUTH: 
 
 Printfd and Sold by P. NETTLETON: Sold alfo by J. HEYDON, in 
 Dock; S. WOOLMER, in Exeter; J. BROWN, Briftol ; and by T, 
 CHAPMAN, No. 151, Fleet-Street, London. 
 
 Price ONE SHILLING, 
 
I 
 
 
 •ir. 
 
 ■^^ ^> \ 
 
 % 
 
 ADVE RTISEMEJTT. # 
 
 'T^HE long period which has intervened 
 ■ between the publication of the Rev. 
 Mr. Birt's Pamphlet, and of this Reply, 
 feems, in fome degree, to render an apology 
 requifite. This opportunity, therefore, is 
 embraced, to fay, that this Treatife would 
 have made a much earlier appearance, had 
 not a long and painful indifpofition render- 
 ed me incapable of finifhing the work. And 
 after it had been fent to the prefs, many 
 delays occurred, which could not be avoid- 
 ed. It is, however, at length, with great 
 diffidence, prefented to the impartial public, 
 
 H. M. 
 
To the Church of Chrift, affembling in 
 Batter- Street, Plymouth. 
 
 ^. \ 
 
 1 defend the caufe of, what I deem truth — to 
 confirm the religious opinions of thofe, whofe fpiri-- 
 tual profperity lies near my heart — and to guard 
 the minds of the Difciples of Jefus, againfi thofe 
 principles which hear fo unfavourahle an afpeB on 
 their privileges, this attempt^ to plead the caufe of 
 our Infant Offspring, is humbly fuhmitted to your 
 ferious and candid attention. 
 
 It is defgnedf more efpecially, for the benefit of 
 the younger branches of this Church and Congre- 
 gation : and to "whom this Treatife, as a fmall 
 token of affection and efieem, is mofl refpcBfully 
 dedicated. 
 
 By your Friend^ 
 
 And Servant, 
 
 In the Gofpel of Chrif, 
 
 HERBERT MENDS. 
 
 Plymouth, February ixth, 1797, 
 
ERRATA. 
 
 Page 2. Query V. for circumjion^ read circumcifion^ 
 
 Page 4. 23d line from the top, infert the» 
 
 Page 10. note, read page 22. 
 
 Page 13. 26th line, for (xxOslsva-o^s read fxaQ^svaretls. 
 
 Page 22. 10th line, for Jejus^ read Jews, 
 
 Page 26. 20th line, for beiievers, read hdievers. 
 
 Page 28. 28th line, dele of. 
 
Wj 
 
 >^: 
 
 BAPTISM of INFJ^^T^S,^ &^- 
 
 ITH reluftance I enter the field of contlO^S^/' 
 It has been trodden by illullrious charafters, who have 
 wielded the weapons with a mafterly hand. My reluc- 
 tance is proper donably increafed, as I appear an opponent 
 to one, of whom 1 have long entertained an high opinion, 
 and in whofe friendfhip I have experienced real fatis- 
 faftion. But circumftanced as I am, a neceffity is laid 
 upon me, to vindicate principles, Vv^hich I hold facred ; 
 and plead the caufe of thofe vyho cannot fpeak for them- 
 felves, and who are, by many, in the prefent day, de- 
 prived of the privileges of churcli memberfliip. 
 
 With that difiidence, which a confcioufnefs of inability 
 impofes upon me, but, with that boldnefs^ which a per- 
 fuafion of being on the fide of fcripture and of tmth, 
 neceflarily infpires, I enter on the difcuflion of this 
 fubjeft. 
 
 As I have faid, that I am conjlrained to engage in this 
 controverfy; it will be proper to flate the attending cir- 
 cumflances ; I ihall then cheerfully leave the decifion to 
 the candid and impartial public. 
 
 Sometime in Auguft lafl, the following hand bill was 
 given me, by one of the Members of my Church. 
 
 '-' TO ALL THAT LOVE TRUTH AND PEACE. 
 
 As union among profefled chriftians is very derrra:b]e, 
 
 and as a difference of fentimeTit, refpefling baptilin, is 
 
 B one 
 
[ 2 ] 
 
 one caufe of divlfion among them ; a juft Solution oi the 
 following Queries is earneftly requefted, as it would have 
 a happy tendency to promote- chriftian concord. 
 
 Query I. What precept or precedent is there in fcrip- 
 ture for Infant baptifm ? 
 
 Query II. W\\dX fpiritual promije is made to the chil- 
 dren of believers, more than to the offspring o[ others? 
 Or, if there be any fuch promife^ what proof does it af- 
 ford of Infant baptifm ? 
 
 Query III. To ^hd^l peculiar p r in i lege arc children ad- 
 mitted by baptifm ? 
 
 Query IV. Why are not infants admitted to the Lord's 
 /upper, as well as to baptifm ? 
 
 Query V. Wiiy, if circumfion was a feal of the cove- 
 nant of grace, did not Abraham circumcife his near 
 kinfman, the righteous Lot ? And why was baptilm ad- 
 minillered before circumfion was abolifhed, and enjoined 
 on thofe who were circumcifed ? 
 
 Query VI. Does not the do6frine of Infant baptifm 
 conjign over to everlajling vvjery all children that die in 
 their infancy, (except thofe of believers) while it pro- 
 ceeds on a fuppofition, that the covenant o{ circumcifion 
 was the covenant of grace ; and every infant, dying un* 
 baptized, on the principle of haptifoial regeneration? 
 
 Query VII. Can it be fuppofed, without abfurdity^ 
 that two fuch different modes of adminiftering the fame 
 inftitution, as dipping and fprinkling manifeltly are, 
 fhould be both agreeable to the law of Chrift, in that 
 cafe made and provided ? 
 
 Query VIII. Is baptifm a prerequifite to the Lord's 
 table? If not, why do not the fasdobaptiils admit per- 
 
 fons 
 
[ 3 ] 
 Tons to communion, that are. in their judgment, unhap- 
 tized? If it be, why are the Baptifls blamed for not ad- 
 mitting thofe, who, in their judgment, are unbaptized ? 
 
 A calm difcuffion, and a fcriptural folution of thefe 
 Queries, are of great importance to the purity of a pofi- 
 tive ordinance, and a branch of folemn worfhip,"* 
 
 The PerfoLi who put this into my hand, informed me, 
 that the Reverend Mr. Birt had circulated it. 
 
 Acknowledging the truth of this information, Mr. B. 
 fays,t " Of Uieir Author, I know nothing. At the clofe 
 of one of our weekly meetings, I gave a few of them to 
 the friends who were prefent ; the reft I gave to three 
 perfons who called on me, and afked for them ; I do not 
 remember that I gave one to a Paedobaptift. This is the 
 whole I know of, or have done with the queftions." 
 
 All this is to little purpofe, for whether Mr. B. was 
 the author, or not, he became refponfible by circulating 
 them. It is little better than trifling, to fay, that he does 
 not remember that he gave one to a Pczdobaptijl ; for 
 unqueftionably, it was Mr. B's intention, that they fhould 
 find their way into the hands of fuch, as believed and 
 pra6lifed Infant Baptilm : if not, to what purpofe would 
 it be, '* earneflly to requefl a folution;" and what ten- 
 dency could it have to " promote Chrilfian concord, and 
 an union among profeiTed Chriftians," if confined wholly, 
 
 t Page I. 
 
 > See an Anfwer to thefe Queries, addrelTcd " To thofe who eftcem the 
 Effence of Religion of more Importance than the Forms and Ceremonies." 
 Printed by P. Ncttl^oa, Plymouth, and fold by him and J. Heydon, Dock. 
 Price oi:e permy, 
 
 B <t. to 
 
L 4 J 
 to that fociety ol" perforxS, wlio were already of on^ mind 
 on that fubjeft ? 
 
 This hand-bill, therefore, has been juilly confidered, 
 
 as AN OPEN CHALLENGE TO ALL P iEDOB APTISTS, 
 
 which, it would have been efteeraed cowardly, not to 
 have accepted, and which, filently to have coiifigned to 
 oblivion, might have been confidered as a breach of po-" 
 litenefs towards our A nabaptift brethren. I'hus the ad- 
 vocates for Iniant Baptifm, were conftrained to detcnd 
 themfelves againft an attack, thus illiberally, (and may I 
 not fay infidiouf^y ?) made, by the circulation of the hand- 
 bill. When, therefore, (agreeably to "earneft requeft'"; 
 a reply was made, it was little apprehended, that ii 
 would have been conftrued into an zn/uit — efpecially ar] 
 infult offered to the Rev. Mr. B. Little was it expected 
 that Mr. ^. would fo far have refented it, as to have been 
 influenced, formally to announce (as he did in a letter of 
 the fifth of September lafl) his determination to break 
 the bonds of friendthip with me. In this letter, he fays, 
 *' Laft week I fhould have had (he pleafuj-e of vifiting 
 you, but was prevented by the appearance of a printed 
 addrefs, " To- thofe who efteem the ElTence of Religion, 
 Sec." And all this, only becaufe he confidered me a^,5lie 
 Author of that addrefs t 
 
 If it would have been efteeraed an unpardonable of- 
 fence, to have replied to the above queftions, it would 
 have been kind and fair, in Mr. B. to have fignified it, at 
 the time of circulation ; by which, the line of condu6l of 
 every Paedobaptift, would have been marked out. 
 
 However I may regret the lofs of Mr. B's friendfhip, 
 it is fome confolation, that a friendihip fo eafily broken, 
 
 could 
 
[ 6 J 
 could not have been very ftrongly cemcntea ; and is 
 therefore, the lefs vakiable in proportion to its verfa-^ 
 tilijy. Yet I am free to declare, that my efteem for him 
 fhall not be fhaken ; and however fevereiy he may judge 
 of ihe Author, as willing " if he had it in his power fadiy 
 to circumfcribe the rights of tiie Baptifts, and acf a.s a 
 rigid diftator"— ftill, on every occafion, 1 am free to 
 declare for myfeH. that my hand and my heart (hall be 
 open to him, and to every Mimller ot Jefus Chrift, let 
 his fentiments be what they may, concerning the circum- 
 ftantials of religion, and modes of worftiip ; for, \ never 
 thought, the water controverfy of fuch confequence, as 
 to interrupt, for a moment, the noble feelings of bro- 
 therly love. 
 
 I appeal to Mr. R. and to every Anti-pa^dobaptift in 
 the vicinity, that fince my refidence in this town, my 
 endeavours have been unremitting, to throw down every 
 party- wall of diftinftion, and to unite all thofe, who be- 
 lieve the eflential truths of Chriftianity, in the endearing 
 bonds of Chriftian fellowlhip. And in the prefent in- 
 ftance, I am perfaaded, that Mr. B. himfelf mull acquit 
 the Author of that Pamphlet of the charge of being the 
 <^ggreffor, 
 
 Mr. B.* fays, "that he has defcended \.o perfcnal ac- 
 cufations. This cannot be proved. The reply was evi- 
 dently made without a knowledge ot the Author, and it 
 was addrefTed to every individual, who might deign ta 
 caft an eye on its pages. Highly as I refpeft Mr. B. I 
 confefs that I did not ('till now) confider him as the rc^ 
 prefcntative of the Anabaptifts in this part of the king- 
 
 * Pagei. 
 
 donjj 
 
L 6 ] 
 
 <3om, fo that no controverfy could be malntaiiied, on 
 the fubjefl of Baptifm, without the i^uthor's being 
 chargeable with perfonally infulting him, and incurring 
 the lofs of his friendfliip. In fome, this would be thought 
 an alTumption of no fmall confequence. But a confci- 
 oufnefs, will always impart extreme fenfibility. To this 
 caufe, in part, may be attributed that great irritability 
 difcovered through every part of Mr. B's Pamphlet, and 
 the Reader will fee, with how much truth he can fay, 
 *' that he cannot dare to return" thofe fevere exprelTions, 
 which he fuppofes are ufed towards him. But this irri- 
 tability, may be alfo eafily accounted for, as nothing can 
 more effetlually roufe the Baptifts than to deteft them, 
 in attempting to unfettle the minds of the young, and 
 ferious members of other churches. 
 
 That this charge is not groundlefs, I appeal to the ftate 
 of the Anti-paedobaptill churches in general. Are they 
 not chiefly compofed of perfons who received their firft 
 ferious imprefiions under the miniflry of Psedobaptifts ? 
 and who once were in communion with our churches ? 
 
 Mr. B.+ kindles into a flame at the bare mention of 
 this, and fays, '* If what is fuggefted at the clofe of the 
 Pamphlet be defigned for me, I declare it to be a ground- 
 lefs calumny, and call upon him to cafl off his veil, and 
 exhibit proof of his unworthy infmuations." I fee no 
 juft caufe for all this warmth. I will give it as 7ny opini- 
 on, that the Author of that Addrefs, did not defign, 
 what he faid on that fubjeft. for Mr. B. in particular; 
 and that there was no more occafion, for Mr. B's appli- 
 cation of it to bimf'li, than to any other Anabaptift in 
 
 the 
 
[7 3 
 ihe County. This extreme fenfibility however may lead 
 feme to fufpeft, that all was not right. 
 
 However angry Mr. B. may be, and however unworthy 
 and groundlefs, he may deem the infmuations, I am con- 
 vinced, from many years experience and obfervation, 
 that the generality of the Minlfters and People of that 
 denomination, in this inftance, aft ungeneroufly. They 
 infinuate themfelves into the affeftions of Paedobaptift 
 congregations, and embrace every opportunity of un-» 
 fettling the minds of the young and unguarded, on the 
 fubjeft of Baptifm, by lending them books, and puzzling 
 them with certain queftions. To fuch a length is this 
 conduft carried by fome, that an Author lately afferted, 
 that three-fourths of the members in fome Baptift 
 churches, have been thus drawn from other focieties. 
 If they fee a perfon under ferious imprefTions, or ftrug- 
 gling with doubts of his intereft in the love of Chrift, 
 they fay, *' Friend, your darknefs and diftrefs may eafily 
 be accounted for — you live in the negleft of one of the 
 pofitive commands of God ; and how can you reafona- 
 bly expeft that the Lord will fhine on your foul, and 
 give you peace and joy in the Holy Ghoft?" The dif= 
 treffed perfon (his mind awake to every thing that may 
 encourage his hopes, or his fears) is alarmed, and eagerly 
 afks, " Pray, Sir, tell me what command is this to which 
 you allude ? as far as I know myfelf, 1 would do any 
 thing ; I would comply with every injunftion of my 
 Lord.'* They readily reply, *' You have never been 
 buried with Chrift in Baptifm : You have not complied 
 with the COMMAND, and the example, of Chrift and 
 his Apoftles. As for your Infant Baptifm, it was not 
 
 your 
 
L 8 J 
 
 your aS;, neitfecr may children claim, nor are they £t. 
 fubjecb for ihat folemn inftitution." This ilaggers his 
 belief — and as €very one, under his firft impre (lions, is 
 ilriongily influenced by legal principles, he immediately 
 iubmits to iye dipped, in expe£ldtion ot rifmg out of the . 
 wftt'cr, fully aiiu red of his interelt in Chrift. 
 
 This is not a cafe which exiiis in imagination only— 
 il h^^'itwrtthdn once come within ray own knowled:g-e ; 
 and, I bcliex'e, a multitude of PasdobaptiO: Minillers in 
 this knagdom, can confirni the truth ot this r€pa"efenta- 
 tiosn. Jt is ungenerous. Were Baptifm in adult age, 
 and Baptifm by mimerfion, neceSarv to the falvation of 
 the fotfl, they would bejuffifiod la laying afide all cere- 
 aiioiiy, a.id adopting every method to a^v-aken and unde- 
 ceive. But as the Baptifts themfeJves pretend not to af- 
 fertthis abfardity, (as on all hands ii is allowed to be a 
 meiTe cincumflantial) 1 fay again, it is ungenerous. — 
 Therefore I a<i<»pt the fentiment and lani/,uage of that 
 A'Uihior, againfi; whttsn Mr. 'B. is lb exceed mgly in- 
 cenfcd. '* it is far more becoming every difciple ot 
 the amiable Jefus, to behold with heart-felt pleaiure 
 (infteard of attempting to break) the peace of a Chriflian 
 faciety, for aao other reafon, than becaafe that fociety 
 has not fcen it . neceaTaay to be plunged, TJaat time 
 whick is .fpen)t in ufclefs, injurious controverfres, in cam- 
 paiiing fea and land to make prodelytes, and enticing 
 the Ihcep of one fold to for fake their companions, and 
 enter another, would be better employed in fcrious en- 
 deavoiars to refcue fiimifers from the power of Satan. — 
 Such conduft wotvid be more honourable to themfclves, 
 and mo-re beneficiai to their fellow-mortals. 
 
 Before 
 
C 9 ] 
 
 Before I enter on the difcuflion of the fubje8: in de- 
 bate, I fliall beg leave to lay before the Reader, a few 
 preliminary remarks on Mr. B's pamphlet. 
 
 ifl. Mifreprefentation h no proof of the ftrength oi 
 an argument. — And I appeal to the judgment of every 
 impartial Reader, whether Mr. B. has not mifreprefented, 
 the" plain and obvious meaning of the Author of that 
 pamphlet, whofe words are thefe.t *' Is the mere nV^— 
 the ?node of Baptifm— the quantity of water of fuch con- 
 fequence ? Does it enter fo efTentially into the nature 
 of a Chnllian ordinance ? The everlafting falvation of 
 the foul, and the cultivation of the graces of the Spirit, 
 are of greater confequence than the mere mode of 
 Baptifm." Now, with what appearance of juftice can he 
 afk, as he does in a note,§ " Is it confident to repreient 
 Baptijm^ in one place, as a mere form ^' and in another 
 to fay, " God has made it a prerequilite for admiflion 
 into the Kingdom of Grace." Or is it candid, to en- 
 deavour to perfuade the Reader, that the riuthor con- 
 jfidered Baptifm, as a mere rite, a mere form and cere- 
 mony, as he does ?i All his pathetic exclamations, and 
 warm eulogia, on the divine authority, and vafl im- 
 portance of Baptifm, vaniOi into air, as they apply not, 
 in the fmalleft degree, to what the Author meant, and 
 what every man of common fenfe, mull know that he 
 meant, when he ufed the terms, a merejorin^ rite, &c.— 
 He mull know, that they applied wholly, and exciuhvely, 
 to the MODE of adminiflration, and to the quantity of 
 water ufed, and not to the ejfence of Baptifm. 
 
 I moft cheerfully fubfcribe to the following fentiments: 
 + Page I and 8. \ Page 22, % Pages 22 and 23. 
 
 C **That 
 
[ 10 J 
 
 *' That Baptifrn is a part of gofpel worfliip, and therefore 
 comes to us, not only with divine authority, but alfo 
 fraught with all-important, and mofL inflru61ive truth. "'^' 
 But will any Anti-pasdobaptift allert all this, of the mock 
 of adminiftfation^ QV the quantity of the water ufed in 
 that ordinance? Are not thefe cireunntaniials, entirely 
 ah extra ^ which may be ufed, or not ufed, according to 
 the opinion of the perfons engaged ? Is the poilure of 
 the body in. the aB of prayer, or receiving the Lord's 
 fupper, an elfential part of thofe important duties ? 
 
 Let the matter be thus rightly ftated, and the Author 
 permitted to fpeak for himfelf, and \\z v/ill not be afraid, 
 again to afTert, (however irreverent it may be deemed) 
 that the mo be ot adminiflering the ordinance of Bap- 
 tifrn, v/hether by ^///;/>//z^, ov /"prinkling, ox pouring wa- 
 ter, is a mere ritr'. form, and circmony, and docs not 
 enter into the elTence of that ordinance. 
 
 2ndly. Mr. B. finds fault ^vith the expreffion, that 
 ** God has made Baptifrn, a prercquilite for admiihon in- 
 to the Kingdom of Grace,t And 1 afk, is it not ? Did 
 not John and Philip, enforce Baptifrn, as necelFary to 
 admiihon into the gofpel difpenfation, frequently called 
 the Kingdom of God ? If Mr. B. daes not confider it, 
 in this light, why does he refufe admiflion to the Lord's 
 table, to thofe, who, fin his judgment J have not been 
 baptized ? But, I confefs, herein we look for con/iftency 
 of condu6l in vain, among the Anabaptifts; for while 
 one Church refufes fuch as have been baptized in their 
 infancy, but not in adult age, another will readily receive 
 them.; herein molt affuredly bearing tellimohy, to the 
 
 * Mr, B. page. f Note, page:§f %a 
 
 validity 
 
ii 
 
 v4idiLy of Infant Baptifm. But tliefe more liberal Bap- 
 tilts, leem to be confcious of the apparent impropriety of 
 this condu6l, and labour, as foon as poffible, to perfuade 
 thefe Pae.dobaptifts to go under water. Thus they openly 
 become Anabaptists, (that is to fay) advocates tor 
 R£-baptifm, or lie open, to the charge, of, admitting UN- 
 baptized perfons into church iellowlhip. We cheeriuily 
 leave tiiem to chufe which alternative they pleafe. 
 
 grdly. The fentiment of Tertullian, adopted by Mr, 
 B. as his motto, and made his own,* is highly objeftion- 
 able. "The scripture forbids, what it does 
 NOT MENTION." It is a fentiment, which ought to be 
 the lafi adopted by an Anii-p.aedobaptift, whofe whole 
 fyftem depends ©n analo_gical reafoning, and inferences 
 drawn from fcripture premifes, and fcripture filence.— 
 No fentiment can be more unfortunate than this, when 
 applied to the fubjeft in debate. It proves too much — 
 much more, than the advocates for dipping would v;ifji ; 
 as tpr inftance; the fcriptuie does not viention^ that the 
 fubje6i fhould go under water, therefore it forbids it : 
 The fcripture does not mention, that the deaths fhould 
 be baptized, therefore it y^r^/^j it; The fcripture does 
 not jnention, that women Ihould receive the Lord's fupper, 
 therefore \i Jorbids it: The fcripture does not viention, 
 that the ordinance of the Lord's fupper fhould be admi- 
 niftered once a month only, therefore \t forbids it : The 
 fcripture does not mention, that the Chriflian Sabbath, 
 .fhould be obferved on ihcfirji day of the week, therefore 
 It forbids it, I might go on to multiply cafes without 
 number, in which, were v/e to confider \hQ fiUnce of 
 
 * Page 12, 
 
 C2 fcripture 
 
[ ,2 J 
 
 fcripture as a pofitive prohibition, we fliould be in dan- 
 ger of Will-worfhip. More than one-half of our afts of 
 religious worfhip, and of focial, and relative duties^ 
 would be abfolutely forbidden : Yea, foine moft flagrant 
 violations of moral virtue, inight be perpetrated, net 
 only with impunity, but with the fanftion of the facred 
 fcriptures! ! — Credat Judasus! 
 
 It has ever been confidered, by every rational mind^ 
 that inferences, and conf quences, refuliing from fcrip- 
 ture premifes, by juft and logical deduftion, are equally 
 binding, with a pofitive, and literal comiri.ind. Thus 
 our Lord proved the crimes of heart- murder, and heart- 
 adultery ;t and thus he proved the do6trine oi the refur- 
 re6lion of the dead.* Such a fcntiment as this, muft be 
 pronounced an inlult on common fenfe, whether ex- 
 prefTed by a Tertullian or a Birt. 
 
 The long quotation from Dr. Owen, in Mr. B's pam- 
 phlet, will very feebly fiipport adult Baptifm, for the 
 Do^lor, is evidenly reafoning on a fubjecl of a very dif- 
 ferent nature. His dcfign is to (hew, that the Jews 
 pleaded their natural defcent from Abraham., as a juft 
 ground for their participation ot faving and fpiritiial 
 privileges; and that in this refpeft, they were awiuliy 
 miftaken. This is evident from the laft paragraph of the 
 quotation. ** The Church unto whom all the promij^s he- 
 long, are only thofe, who are heirs of Abrahani s faith, 
 believing as he did, and thereby interejied in hs covenant.''' 
 The Dotfor could not mean, that the defcendants of 
 Abraham, were not entitled, by virtue of their relation 
 to that Patriarch, to any external privilege, or to that of 
 + Matthew ^th. * Chap. 2zd and 3 ad, 
 
 a vifibh 
 
[ 13 J 
 2iViJihle covenant relation to God; for he v/as aware, that 
 the Jews, as a nation, were a peculiar people, and more 
 favoured, with external advantages, than any oiher.^ — 
 Thus fays Paul,* *' W.'iat advantage then hath the Jew ? 
 (i. e.) the feed of .Ibraham according to ih^JlefJi? or 
 zuhat profit is there in circumcifion ? (which feal was im- 
 parted to the feed according to iho^JlefJi, as well, as to the 
 feed according to the promife.J Much every way ; chiejlv 
 becaufe that unto them wzre committed the oracles ofGodJ' 
 The whole force, therefore, of this long quotation is 
 loft, inafmuch, as it is dir^^fted to a point, which every 
 ev.'Uigelical Pasdobaptiit, will as cordially acknowledge, 
 as the raoft rigid /^nabaptift, that the children of parents, 
 profefling their belief in the doftrines of the gofpel, who 
 are baptized, are not on account of the faith and piety of 
 parents, entitled iojpiritual privileges, ^.rAfaving grace. 
 But we affert, (and we conceive, that we are fupported 
 by fcripture) that the children of fuch parents, thus early 
 devoted to God, in the ordinance of Baptifm, are by 
 
 IT ADMITTED INTO AN EXTERNAL, AND VISIBLE 
 
 COVENANT WITH GoD, they are introduced into the 
 fchool of Chriff, to be taught the Jirft principles of the 
 oracles of God, agreeably to the exprefs words, and ob- 
 vious meaning of the commiffion given to the Apoftles,. 
 by our Lord after his refurreftion. " Go therefore, and 
 teach all nations, baptizing the7n,\ {xaOers-Jo-xTs (i. e.) go 
 MAKE THEM DISCIPLES. § Thus the venerable Tu R- 
 
 * Rom. 3d. and J2th. :j: Matt, xxviii. 19. 
 
 <j Leigh's Crit: Sae: Thus the word is rendered by Bullinger, TurretinCr 
 Stockius, Beza, Gafaker, Lightfgot, Witfius, FooJ, Dodderidgc, and zU 
 moft every Ifiterpreter. 
 
 RETINB 
 
[ H J 
 jj^ETiNE explains the text, in the remarkable v/ord§, 
 whicn I have chofen for my motto. " Qui prascipit omnes 
 gentes baptizari, is etiara praecipit baptizaii infantes, prae- 
 ceptum enim, de genere incliidit omnes fpecics,''^ A 
 command, which requires the Baptifm of all nati- 
 ons, necefTarily requires the Baptifm of Infants, who 
 conflitute a part of them ; for the command, that refers 
 to the GENUS muft include the species. 
 
 Having made tliefe remarks, I fliall proceed, to offer 
 fome reflexions on the s u B j EC T o f baptism; and the 
 ■ MODE in which Baptifm maybe adminiiteied, agreeably 
 to the word of God, and the practice of the Church, 
 fince the days of Christ and his Apostles. 
 
 Firft — The subjects of Baptism. 
 
 Here I beg leave to exprefs my fentiments, in the full, 
 and ffrong language of the Affembly of Divines. *' Baptifm 
 is not to be adminiftered to any that are out of the vifible 
 Church, till they profefs their faith in Chrift, and obe- 
 dience unto him; but infants of such as are 
 
 MEMBERS OF THE VISIBLE ChURCH ARE TO BE 
 
 BAPTIZED. We readily acknowledge, that perfons v/ho 
 
 have never been educated in the principles of the Chril- 
 
 •tian religion, have no right to the ordinance of Baptifm, 
 
 ^until they profefs faith in Chrilt, and obedience to him. 
 
 ^ut, when they are brought to the knowledge of the 
 
 ?truth as it is in Jefus, they (together with their children) 
 
 ought to be baptized, although they are arrived at years 
 
 of maturity. This was, precifely the cafe with all, in the 
 
 time of Chrift, who embraced him as the MefTiah ; and 
 
 ^ve find no inflance, in the New Teflament, in which 
 
 * Inillt: Tjieoli torn. IV. Loc: 19. Qu: 20. 
 
 ..the 
 
[ ^5 3 
 ihe cHifdren of thofe who thus believed, were baptized 
 in adult age. The reafon is obvious. They were admit- 
 ted into (he vifible Church with their parents, and by 
 virtue oi their faith; in the fame manner, as the children 
 of Pr^^/>'/d;j- were admitted, with Y^ezV parents, into the 
 Jewifh Churth bv the ordinance of circumcifion. 
 
 And that the Infants of ail, profeffing their faith in 
 Chrifl:, and obedience to him, ought to be admitted into 
 the vifible Church by Baptifm, we fhali endeavour to 
 prove by the following propofuions. 
 
 Pirft. — Infants of believers in every age, and under 
 every difpenfation, prior to that of the gofpel, were con- 
 lidered as in covenant with God, and members of the 
 vifible Church. 
 
 Oh this ground, the whole controverfy ftands. It 
 becomes us then, accurately to trace the facred hiftory, 
 ior inftances in which, the Lord God has entered into 
 covenant with man. 
 
 I think it will appear from the following, that in ali 
 ages of the Church, and in every covenant, God included, 
 not only the parents, but their infant offspring. 
 
 The covenant of works made with Adam, in PdradifCj 
 included children. "Wherefore as by one man fin eiitered 
 into the world, and death by fin: and fo death paifed 
 upon all men, for that (or as the Greek £^ un might be 
 rendered, in whom i. e. AdamJ all ha\^ finned; never- 
 thelefs death reigned from Adam to Moles, even over 
 them that had not finned after the fimilitude of ii dam's 
 tranfgrefiion, who is the figure of him that was ta^ 
 come."t 
 
 f Rom. V. 12, 14. 
 
 Th-. 
 
L 16 J 
 
 The covena-fit with Noah, included his feed.§ *' And 
 God fpake unto Noah, and to his fons with him, faying^ 
 and 1, behold I, eftablilh my covenant with you, and 
 your feed after you." 
 
 The covenant with yihraham, included his feed after 
 him.± " And I will ellablifti my covenant between me, 
 and thee, and thy feed after thee in their generations." 
 
 The covenant with the tribe of Levi. Deut. xviii. 1, 2. 
 compared with Mai. ii. 4. 
 
 The covenant with Phinehas, included his feed after 
 him.f " Behold I give unto him my covenant of pea<:e, 
 and he fhall have it, and his feed after him, even the 
 covenant of an everlafting piieflhood." 
 
 The coveyiant with David,^ '^'Although my houfe be 
 not fo with God, yet he hath made with me an ever- 
 lafting covenant, ordered in all things, and fure. 
 
 When God entered into covenant with the whole 
 mation of Ifrael^ their children were included. This is 
 clear, from the whole of the folemn tranfaftions on 
 Mount Sinai. ij And when the Lord condefcended to 
 renew his covenant with Abraham to the whole Church, 
 jufl before they entered Canaan, He addreffed them in 
 thefe remarkable words.** "Ye ffand this day all of 
 you before the Lord your God — your little ones, 
 your wives, &c. that thou {houldefc enter into covenant 
 with the Lord thy God, and into his oath, which the 
 Lord thy God maketh with thee this day.'' 
 
 Hence it plainly appears, that in every covenant, which 
 
 yCen. ix. 8, 9. :j: Gen. xvii. 7. f Numbers xxv. lo, ir, 12, 
 
 * 2 Sam. vii. 12, 16. and chap, xxiii. 5, j| Vide Exod. xix. 34, 
 
 ** D€ut, xxix. 19, 
 
 God 
 
C V 3 
 
 ^God has been pleafed to make with men, their cnnaren- 
 their little ones were included! 
 
 And in that glorious day, (which we hope is now open- 
 ing to the world) when "the ROD which is come forth 
 out of the 1km of JefTe, fhall grow," and ihelter all the 
 nations of the earth, beneath its grateful fliade; when 
 "He fhall fet up an enfign for the nations, and fliall af- 
 femble the outcafts of Ifrael, and gather together the dif- 
 perfed of Judah, from the four corners of the earth; 
 when the earth (hall be full o{ the knowledge of the 
 Lord, as the waters cover the fea ;" in this illuftrious 
 period, who are the perfons that fhall partake of this 
 glory and joy? — the Gentiles and their off= 
 spring! fo leilifies the prophet Ifaiah.* "Thus faith 
 the Lord God, behold I will lift up mine hands to the 
 Gentiles, and fet up my ilandard to the people, and they 
 fhall bring thy fons in their arms, and thy daughters fhall 
 .be carried upon their flioulders, "for they are the feedi 
 of the bleffed of the Lord, and their offspring 
 WITH THEM."t Again, God fays, by the mouth of 
 the fame Prophet,! " I will make an everlafting covenant 
 with them, and their seed fhall be known among the 
 Gentiles, and their offspring among the people — >• 
 
 THEY ARE THE SEED WHICH THE LORD HATH 
 
 BLESSED !" The prophet Jeremiah, when fpeaking of 
 the reftoration of the Jews in the latter day, when there 
 fhall be but onefold^ and one Shepherd, ufes thefe flriking 
 words II — " They fhall ferve the Lord their God, and 
 David their Kmg : (i. e. Jefus Chriff, of whom David 
 
 * Chap. xlix. ▼. Z2, + Chap. Ixv. v. 23. % Chap. hi. t. 8, 
 
 '! Chap. XXX. V. 9 and 20, 
 
 D was 
 
[ .8 ] 
 %vas a type, fee Ezek. xxxiv. 23=) Their chi^ldreM 
 
 ALSO SHALL BE AS AFORETIME." 
 
 Thus we affirm, (in the ftrong language of Doftor 
 Owen,*) that "no inftance can be given, from the Old, 
 or New Teftament, fmce the days of Abraham ; none 
 from the approved pra61ice ot the primitive Church, of 
 any perfon, or perfons, born of profelLng, believing pa- 
 rents, who were themfelves made partakers of the initial 
 feal ot the covenant, being then in infancy, and defigned 
 to be brought up in the knowledge of God, who were 
 not made partakers with them of the fame fign and feal 
 of the covenant." 
 
 But, as thai memorable covenant of God, with Abra- 
 ham, is ihat tranfaftion, which, in a peculiar and highly 
 emphatical manner, graciouQy includes the infant off- 
 spring of pious parents. And as this tranfaclion is par- 
 ticularly combated by our Baptift brethren, it demands 
 our more minute attention. The terms of the covenant 
 are thefe.f — "And I will establish my cove- 
 nant BETWEEN ME AND THEE, AND THY SEED 
 AFTER THEE, IN THEIR GENERATIONS, FOR AN 
 EVERLASTING COVENANT, TO BE A GoD UNTO 
 THEE, AND TO THY ^EED AFTER THEE. 
 
 This evidently includes children. I know not a Bap- 
 till that denies it. But to avoid the force of the argu- 
 ment arifing from thefe words, in favour ot the covenant 
 relation, and church-memberfhip of the children of be- 
 lieving parents, under the go/pel, our opponents fay, that 
 this covenant was nothing more than national,, the cove- 
 nant of circumcijion, and included nothing but a grant of 
 * Dr. Owen's Trails, p, 576. t Gen. xvii. 7. 
 
 temporal 
 
[ 19 3 
 temporal privileges ; and that, therefore, as the Mofaic 
 oeconomy is aboUihed by Jefus Chrift, that neither we, 
 nor our children, can lay any claim to an intereft in the 
 bleflings of this tranfaftion. 
 
 But we (hall endeavour to prove that this Abrahamic 
 covenant, was the Christian, or gospel cove- 
 
 I^ANT — that COVENANT OF GRACE UNDER WHICH 
 
 WE NOW ARE, and that Abraham, in this aft was con- 
 fidered as the COVEN an t-he ad, the father of believing 
 Gentiles, as well as Jews. Confequently, theprivi- 
 Hges granted to him, and TO His seed, belong to us 
 and TO OUR children, agreeably to the declaration 
 of Peter.* '* The promife is unto you and TO YOUR. 
 children." 
 
 Now, this could not be the covenant of works ^ for no 
 fuch, was ever made with man after his apoftacy. It 
 could not be the covenant of Horeby becaufe that was 
 made four hundred and thirty years, after the Lord fpake 
 thefe words to Abraham. The abolition of the Mofaic 
 ritual, therefore could not deftroy the covenant intereft, 
 and church-memberfhip of children, whofe right was 
 eftabliflied for ages before the Levitical law, or the birth 
 of Mofes : but it was the covenant of grace; un- 
 changeable in its nature and privileges ! 
 
 And this pofition is fupported by the following reafons : 
 
 Firft. It is ftiled an everlafting covenant. 
 
 Second, It is founded on free grace. § *' For if Abra- 
 ham were juftified by works, he hath whereof to glory, but 
 not before God :" *' therefore it is of faith, that it might 
 be by grace; to the end the promife might be fare to all 
 * A^s ii, 39. § Rom, iv. 3| 16, 
 
 D 2 the 
 
[ 20- J 
 
 the feed, not to that only which is of the law, but to that 
 alfo which is of the faith of _-..brdham, who is the father 
 of us all." 
 
 Third. It was confirmed by the oath of God.* " By 
 myfelf have I fworn, faith the Lord, for becaufe thou 
 haft done this thing, and hail not withheld thy fon, thine 
 only fon; that in bleffing I will blefs thee, and in multi- 
 plying 1 will multiply thy feed as the iiars of heaven, and 
 as the fand v/hich is upon the fea-fhorc; and thy feed fhali 
 pofTefs the gate of his enemies; and in thy feed (hall all 
 the nations of the earth be blelled." All the nati- 
 ons OF THE EARTH. This expreflion inconiroverti- 
 biy proves, tliat the covenant made v/itli Abraham, was 
 not 7iational^ of the fame nature ^v^ith that made at Horeb, 
 and confined to the natural defcendants of the Patriarch, 
 But the blellings of this covenant, were to be as widely 
 extended as the earth. Gentiles, as well as Jews, 
 were to partake of divine bleflings through the illuilrious 
 channel, the feed of Abraham, the Lord Jesus 
 Chpvist! 
 
 Fourth, lliis covenant was confirmed alfo by the^ 
 death of Chrift.:}: *' Now I fay, that Jefus Chrift was a 
 Miniffer of the Circumcifioa for the truth of God, TO 
 
 CONFIRM the promises MADE UNTO THE FA- 
 THERS: and that the Gentiles might glorify God for 
 his m.ercy, &c." and Jefus is filled the Mefftnger of the 
 £ove7iant,^ 
 
 Children were once entitled to the bleffings, and pro- 
 mifes, made to the Fathers, and if they are not now en- 
 titled, is Chrifl a faithful MelTenger ? Has he conjirimd; 
 * Gen, xsiio i6, xy. X Rom. xv. 8, 9. \ Mai. iii. i. 
 
 the 
 
L 21 ] 
 
 the promifes made unto the Fathers ? The Apoftle ex- 
 plicitly declares, that Abraham's covenant was confirmed 
 in Chrill; and that the Levitical law cannot difannul rhe 
 promife; in thofe remarkable words.* ** And this I fay, 
 that the covenant that was confirmed before of God in 
 Chrift, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years 
 after cannot difannul, that it fliould make the promife of 
 none efFeft." 
 
 Fifth. The leading promife of the covenant declares 
 it a covenant of gofpei grace. "I will be a God un- 
 to THE£ !" Here Jehovah gives hivifdj to his people, 
 and to their feed ! What greater blefTings could God 
 beflow? Can the Gofpei covenant enfure a greater?-— 
 Can this be ftiled, with any propriety, 2. carnal covenant^- 
 a mere temporal grant of the Land of Canaan ? 
 
 Sixth. The bleflfings, of the Abrahamic covenant^ 
 are given to the GENTiLES,t *'That the blefTings of 
 Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jefus 
 Chrift." This, unequivocally, proves tliat it could not 
 be the peculiar, national covenant, afterwards made with 
 Mojes, for that was never enjoined on the Gentiles. 
 
 Seventh. The Abrahamic covenant w-as the gofpei 
 covenant, becaufe the fame words are ufed by the Nev/ 
 Teflament writers, and applied to the Church ot Chriff.§ 
 
 Here it may be proper to notice, an objeftion which 
 the Anti-paedobaptifts urge againft this interpretation, that 
 all the promifes made to the^^^^ of Abraham, were made 
 to Christ perfonally, and to him only. In the fupport 
 ©f which, they plead the expreffion of Paul. ** He faith, 
 not to feeds, as of many, but as of one feed, and to thy 
 
 ♦ Gal. iii, 17, + Gal. iii, 14. S Ibid. 
 
[ 22 ] 
 
 Jud, that is Chnft."t But it thele promifes be thus con- 
 •fined, it will follow, that they were not made to the 
 Jewish Church, any more than to the Christian.— 
 Again, this objeftion operates, as forcibly againft adult 
 believers, as their children ; for if the promifes belong to 
 none but Chri/i perfonally^ then neither believers, nor 
 their children, have any right to them. Hence it fol- 
 lows, that by this expreffion of Paul, but of one feed that 
 is Ckrzf, he muft mean Chrift ?ny/lical, or the Church 
 of Chrift, confifting of Je^^ and Gentiles.* On any 
 Other principle, there is no reconciling it, to the drift 
 ©f the Apoftle in this place, to the promifes themfelves, 
 of which he is fpeaking, or to the concurrent fenfe of 
 fcripture. 
 
 Now let any ferious, candid Reader refle£f on thefe 
 arguments, and let him judge of the truth and propriety 
 of that declaration made by Mr. B.t ** Therefore there 
 is no evidence ot the offspring of believers having any 
 peculiar relation to Abraham, or of their being more in^ 
 terefted in the promifes made to his feed, than the chil- 
 dren of others," "An abfurdity founded on Jewifh 
 prejudice.". 
 
 The argument therefore, drawn from the Abrahamic 
 covenant, may be comprized in the following fyllogifm :- 
 
 The feed of Abraham are entitled to the privileges of 
 the Abrahamic covenant. 
 
 Children of believers, by virtue of their covenant re- 
 lation, are the feed of Abraham. 
 
 Therefore children are entitled to the privileges of 
 that covenant. 
 
 I Gal. iii. i6. * Vide i Cor, xii. 13, f Page 10, 11. 
 
 Should 
 
[ 23 ] 
 
 Should our opponents, reluftate to admit the idea, of 
 God's entering into covenant with infants^ and judge it 
 derogatory from the honour ot Jehovah ; I would reply in 
 the words of a fenfible Writer on this fubjeft.* "There 
 is a very rational, diuAjufl fenfe, in which God may be 
 faid, to eftablilh his covenant with infants. For the 
 fcriptureexprefsly fays,|| "that he eftablifhed his covenant 
 with the cattle, and the Jowls ;• folemnly engaging no 
 more to drown them by a flood." Is there any thing 
 Itrange, then, or unreafonable, in God's eftablifhing his 
 covenant with infayits ; folemnly engaging to pour his 
 Jpirit^ and blejjing upon them? Or, that the evils they 
 fufFer, in confequence of Adam's fin, fhall be removed, 
 and amply recompenfed, through the righteoufnefs of 
 Chrijl? Moft furely not at all. But, if there is a rational, 
 and jufl fenfe, in which God may eftablifh his covenant 
 with INFANTS ; there is the higheft reafon to PRESUME 
 that he HAS done it, and that they ARE taken into his 
 covenant ; for if he has gracioufly condefcended to efta- 
 blifli his covenant with the brute creation, promifing no 
 more to deluge them ; and appointed a ftanding token or 
 memorial of his covenant, viz. the bow in the clouds ; 
 much more, furely, may we hope, that he has eftablifhed 
 his covenant with infants, promifing to deliver them 
 from the fatal confequences of the fall ; and that he has 
 appointed a ilanding token or fign of this covenant, to 
 perpetuate its knowledge, and remembrance in the 
 Church." 
 
 This covenant being everlajling^ muft be unchangeable. 
 
 * Twogood's Baptifm of Infants, a reafonable fervice, p. 3, note, 
 il Gen. ix. 9, &c. 
 
 The 
 
I 24 ] 
 
 The only alteration therefore, which has taken place by 
 the abolition of the Mofaic ritual, and the introdu6lion 
 of the gofpel difpenfation, is this, the seal is changed. 
 Under the law of Mofes, cjrcumcision was the 
 SEAL; under the gofpel, baptism, being more adapted 
 to the mildnefs, and fimplicity of the difpenfation of 
 Chrifl. 
 
 Hence it follows, that if the Gofpd forbid children, to 
 fhare in the privileges of their believing parents, IT is 
 THE ONLY DISPENSATION THAT EVER DID, SINCE 
 THE CREATION OF THE WORLD.' 
 
 Our next proportion arifes out of the preceding. 
 
 Second. — Children never have been caft out of thi^ 
 covenant, therefore they have an indifputable right to 
 Baptifm as the feal. 
 
 I prefume, that nothing can be more evident, than 
 that Infants were once in covenant; if fo, THEY must 
 BE TO THIS DAY. For although the difpenfation be 
 altered, and the feal changed, the ejfence oi iho. covenant 
 remains, the privilege of having God for our God, and 
 the God of our Jced ! ! 
 
 The Anti-paedobaptifls call on us to prove that Infants 
 ^re flow z?i covenant. To this we reply, that we have 
 proved that they were included in every covenant, 
 which the Lord God has been gracioufly p leafed to make 
 with man, prior to the difpenfation of the gofpel, and 
 therefore, we rationally conclude, that as God is un- 
 changeable, the covenant is everlalHng ; and, as children 
 are not capable of breaking it, THEY must be still 
 
 CONSIDERED IN COVENANT, 
 
 In our turn, we call on them to prove, that they are 
 
 excora- 
 
[ 25 ] 
 
 excommunicated. And we appeal to every man of 
 common fenfe, whether the proof of this does not reft 
 with them. 
 
 Nothing can be more clear, than that they had a 
 right, and if they have not now — how, and when, 
 did they forfeit that right ? This is a queftion, which 
 not one of the Adverfaries of Infant Baptifm, has ever 
 been able to anfwer. It is not therefore to be wondered 
 at, that Mr. B. has very prudently declined it. It is 
 again afked, *' By what authority, do any perfon refufe 
 Infants the privilege of a covenant relation to God ? this 
 privilege God once granted, and if it be taken away, 
 
 WHEN WAS IT? AND FOR WHAT REASON?'* 
 
 Nay, we will go further, and fay that they not only 
 never have forfeited, but never could forfeit this 
 privilege ; becaufe they were not capable of aftual fin, 
 and the Lord God will not break covenantj^r//. Again, 
 if Children be caft out of the Church, and be deprived 
 of thofe privileges to which they were once entitled, by 
 virtue of the faith of their Parents, their exclufion muft 
 be the efFeft of JUDGMENT, or of mercy. It cannot 
 be oi judgment J becaufe not being capable of finning, 
 they could not merit fo great a curfe, as that of excom- 
 munication. And if we allow, that the promife made to 
 the feed of Abraham, contained, or implied any blefTing, 
 it will follow, that to be deprived of a right to this pro- 
 mife, is a mark of difpleafure. It cannot be in mercy ^ 
 unlefs we can prove that God has given them a greater 
 in its flead : and we again afk with confidence, what 
 IS THAT greater MERCY, which God has conferred 
 upon Children, inftead of that they have loft? "A 
 
 E fpiritual 
 
[ «6 ] 
 fplritual privilege (fays the great Dr. Owen) once grant- 
 ed by- God unto any, cannot be changed, difannulled, or 
 abrogated, without a fpecial divine revocation of it, or 
 tfee fiibftitution of a greater pfivilege, and mercy in tiie 
 room of it, for ivko fhall dif.innul what God hath grant- 
 ed ? And to fay, a privilege fo granted, may be revoked, 
 every by God bim felt', without the fubftitution oF a greater 
 privilege, and mercy in the room of it, is contrary to the 
 goodneis of God, hi§ love and care unto his Church ; 
 contrary to his conftant eourfe of proceeding with it, 
 from the foundation of the world, wherein he went on in 
 the enlargement, and increafe of its privileges, until the 
 coming oi Chrift, And to fuppofe it under the gofpel, is 
 contrary to all his promifes, the honour of Chrill„ and a 
 multitude oi expreis teftimonies ot fcripture.'* 
 
 Lei it be obferved, that if Ave deny Infants, a title to 
 tfce covenant, and to its feal, it would fruftrate one grand 
 ^ftci of our Lord's incarnation, and the defign ot his 
 gofpel. Jeius came to multiply^ not to diminifli the privi- 
 leges oi the Church. But li the feed ol believers, under 
 tb© gofpel, be denied the privilege of covenant raercies» 
 \tflMieh the cbildren of the Jews enjoyed, this fliockin^ 
 con.fequence will inevitably follow, that Jefus,. who 
 fullained the amiable chara£fer of the Fritnd oj Sinners^ 
 was far from being the Friend of Infants^ inafmuch, as 
 liis coming has excluded them from the covenant, and 
 c a ft them out into the kingdom of Satan! But why? 
 •vy:ii:^.T EVIL HAVE THEY DONE? Let thofi^ who 
 ufe tbeir pens, and their tongues againll thofe dear 
 LITTLE ONES, anfwer the queftion. 
 
 *- Dr. Owen's Trad on Baptifm. 
 
 We 
 
L 2/ ] 
 
 We wiil now attend to the language of the New 
 Testament; and colle6l what is there faid, of the pri* 
 vileges of the infant feed oi believers. Not one paflage 
 fhali we find, which affords the moft diftant hint, that 
 the covenant relation of children is deftroyed. The laws 
 and cuffoms, concerning the admiflion of Infants into 
 the vifible Church, and their receiving the initiating feal^ 
 have not been repealed by Chrift, or his Apoftles; had 
 they been repealed, it would have been abfolutely necef- 
 fary to record ixkch. a memorable tranfadion ; an aft which 
 fo materially affefted every Difciple of Chrift. It would 
 have been neceflary to record it, becaufe the Jews had 
 ever been accuftomed, to confider their offspring as in 
 covenant, and a part of the vifible Church. They would 
 therefore, continue to view them in the fame light, and 
 THEY DID, for they were never informed to the con- 
 trary. Nay, Jefus exprefsly tells them, that he was as 
 willing as tvtr^ to receive their Infants, when it is faid,t 
 "They brought unto him alfo Infants, that he would 
 touch them, but when his Difciples faw it they rebuked 
 thetn: but Jefus called them unto him, and faid, Suffer 
 little children to come unto me, and forbid them not : 
 
 FOR OF SUCH IS THE KINGDOM OF GOD." If bv 
 
 the term Kingdom of God^ we underftand the vifible 
 Churchy the point is given up ; but if it meant Kingdom 
 of Glory, then we afk — If the Lord God will admit little 
 Children into the Church triumphant^ who will dare 
 deny them a place in the Chufch militant? The lan- 
 guage of Peter* is ftrongly emphatical — The promifc is to 
 you^ AND TO YOUR CHILDREN! Thefe wofds Were 
 X Luke Xviii. i^, 16. * A^s ii. 39. 
 
 E 2 addreffed 
 
- [ .8 ] 
 
 addrefTed to the Jews, and gave them the firmeft affu- 
 ranee, that their Children were confidered in \hQ Jame 
 light by God, and entitled to the fame external privi- 
 leges, under the gofpel difperifatiun, as they were under 
 that of Mofes. None, I think, can deny that this pro- 
 mife does, as plainly, include the feed o( the Difciples 
 of the Lord Jelus, as the promife to Abraham, *' / zvill 
 he a God to thee and unto thy feed." 
 
 What could the Apoftle mean by the promife being 
 unto them, and unto their Children ? for if they are not 
 in covenant, they have no right to the promife ! 
 
 This mode of condu6t, would make a very unfavour- 
 able impreflion on the minds of Jews, and yield them 
 very poor encouragement to embrace Chiiftianity. You 
 muft tell them, that, '* notwithftanding your Children 
 have, from the creation of the world, to the prefent day, 
 been entitled to the fame privileges ot Church-member- 
 ihip, as yourfelves, yet, on your receiving the gofpel, 
 your Children mull be excluded." But how melancholy 
 thefe tidmgs in the ears of every confiderate Jew | 
 
 A great variety of arguments, might eafily be adduced 
 to prove, that children of parents, who profefs their belief 
 of Chrifiianity, have an indifputable right to Baptifm, as 
 the initiating feal ot the covenant of grace. 
 
 The following are fubmitted to the attention of the 
 candid Reader: 
 
 liril. — Children are members of the vifible Church of 
 Chrift. Of fuch is the kingdom of God: i. e. the vifible 
 Church IS the kingdom of God, and children belong to 
 that kingdom. Suffer little children -Tra/^/a & 
 /3p£f>j IN F ANTS ; the fame word is ufed concerning Jefus 
 
 in 
 
C 29 3 
 
 in the manger, and tranflated " babe.'' Thefe babes were 
 brought to Jefus, (not to be healed of bodily difeafes) 
 but to be bL'Jfed; therefore children are capable of re- 
 ceiving fpiritual bleffings. The Difciples were culpable 
 in attempting to forbid them, and fo, I prefurae, are all 
 thofe now, who aft a fimilar part. The queftion was. 
 Whether children might be brought to Jefus to receive 
 his bleffing? He replies — by all means; for they are 
 members of the Church, and therefore I am concerned 
 lor them, they belong to my fold, and as the Shepherd, 
 I am to take care of them. Accordingly, he took them 
 up in his arms and blelTed them. True ; he did not bap- 
 rize them (for he baptized none.t) But he did that which 
 was equal to it, he took them up in his arms, and de- 
 clared them members of his kingdom. As Chrift gave 
 them the thing fignijied by baptifm, we are juftified in 
 giving them \\i^ fign\ for as Dr. Owen juilly obferves, 
 •'They who have the thing fignified have a right to the 
 ilgn of it." The moft rigid oppofer of Infant Baptifm, 
 . will not venture to fay that the children of believing 
 parents, are not capable of receiving that grace, which is 
 fignified in Baptifm. Nay, it is certain that fome chi]« 
 dren are actually partakers of the grace of regeneration, 
 i. e. all fuch who die in infancy, if not, they muH perilh 
 without hope ; therefore fuch have a right to Baptifm. 
 Be it obferved alfo, that Infants are created for an eternal 
 duration, and are capable of enjoying eternal happinefs, 
 or fufifering eternal mifery; and at death, muft pafs into 
 one or other of thofe ftates : and as all infants are children 
 of wrath, and under the curfe, unlefs they are regene- 
 
 f Jo.hn iv, 2» 
 
 \. rated, 
 
[ 3° ] 
 Tated, they cannot enter into the kingdom of God: Novt% 
 as regeneration is that, which is fignified by Baptifm, it 
 follows that children ought to be baptized. 
 
 Secondly.- — Children are relatively holy, therefore 
 they ought to be baptized^ There is a two-fold holinefs 
 fpokeii of in fcripture, a perfonal holinefs, or fanftifi- 
 cation of the fpirit, and 2l fccdcral or relative holinefs,'^ 
 For the latter, we plead in behalf of our children, on the 
 ground ot the Apoftle's aflertion.* " Elfe where your 
 children unclean, but now they are holy." To fettle the 
 meaning of the terms, unclean and holy^ M^e muff have 
 recourfe to fcripture. The great Mr, Locke, in his com- 
 mentary fays, *' By holy, is meant that relative holinefs, 
 whereby any thing, hath an appropriation to God." — 
 The term ay/oo- is ufed in the fame fenfe as it is, when 
 applied to the Jews as a nation — to the temple, and the 
 various uteiifils, i. e. they were feparated to a holy ufe, 
 devoted to the fervice of God. Thus, the word (x\(.oScx.^ra^ 
 is ufed to fignify, perfons out of the pale of the vifible 
 Church, not devoted to God. Therefore the Septuagint 
 apply this word to the Heathen, i " The unclean 
 itxaflapTos fhall not pafs over it." In this {^\\^<t alfo does 
 Peter ufe the t^rm.t " God hath fliewed me, that I 
 Ihould not call any man, common, or unclean," aM.cSot.^rm 
 ^ystv ctvQpanrov. Our Baptift brethren, with a view to avoid 
 the force of the argument, arifing from the relative holi- 
 nefs of children, in confequence of the faith of the parent, 
 contend, that the term holy, means legitimate ; as if the 
 Apoftle bad faid, *' If but one of the parents is a believer, 
 l^our children are legitimate, but if neither— then they 
 * I Con vii. 14. + Ifa, XXXV. 8. f Afts. x. zZ, 
 
 are 
 
C 31 3 
 
 are all bastards. This is the neceffary refult of con- 
 fining the meaning of the term holy, to that of legitimacy, 
 an abfurdity too glaring to be cherilhed for a moment ! 
 
 We aflert, on the authority of chat keen difputant, 
 Mr. Baxter, that the word holy, is ufed near fix hundred 
 times in fcripture, for a relative holinefsy and ajeparation 
 to God, and never once ufed ior legitimacy. The Apoftle 
 Paul reafons in the fame manner, when he fays,* ** For 
 if the nrft fruit be holy, the lump is alfo holy : and if the 
 root be holy, fo are the branches." Hence we conclude, 
 that children are made partakers of fcederal holinefs, as 
 well as the parents, and that therefore, they are entitled 
 to Baptifm. 
 
 Thirdly. — Baptifm came in the ilead of circumcifion.^ 
 It has been obferved above, that God made a covenant 
 with Abraham four hundred and. thirty years before th^ 
 national covenant with Ifrael, and appointed circumcifion 
 as its feal. And here let it be remarked, that as foon a« 
 Abraham was circumcifed, all his; Children, his houfe- 
 hold, were made partakers of the fame fign ; which is a 
 convincing proof, that his ChiUren were confidered as 
 isaciuded in the fame covenant. Now, by the efiablifli- 
 ment of the gofpel difpenfation, the Mofaic ceconomy^ 
 and confequently circumcilion, is abolifhed, and Baptifm 
 is inftituted in its room. This appears clear from the 
 language of Paul.§ " And he received the fign of cir- 
 curacifion, a feal of the righteoufnefs of faith^ which he 
 had yet being uncircumcifed/' Here it is wortLy our 
 notice, that the Apoftle t calls the gofpel (in oppofition to 
 the lazuj the righteoufnefs which is^cf faith, 
 
 * Rom, xU iS, % Rom, jv. ii. t Chap, i, 6. 
 
 Again 
 
[ 3^ ] 
 
 AgcLin we obferve, 
 
 That the dtfign of both ordinances, (Circumcifion and 
 Baptifm) is the lame, viz. a dedication to God, 
 and our relation to him, by an external and vifible cove- 
 nant. As in circumcifioa, the child was dedicated to 
 God. and laid under an obligation to obferve all the 
 ftatutes, and ordinances of that difpenfation, fo in bap- 
 tifm, the fubjeft is devoted to the Lord Jefus, and there- 
 by bound to love, honour, and obey him ; whence it is 
 reafonable to fuppofe that the one fucceeded the other. 
 As there were two feals to the covenant ot" Grace, under 
 the Old Tellanicnt, fo there muft be under the New : 
 And it Baptiftn do not come in the room of circumcifion, 
 there is n^d ordinance, that can be confidered as fuch ; 
 confequently otie Jeal mufl have been loll, and the Chrif- 
 tian Church is inferior, in point of privilege, to the 
 Jewifh, whereas '^ the law zvas only a piadozu of good 
 things to come.'' 
 
 Fourthly. — None fhould be denied the benefit of or- 
 dinances, who have neither an aHual, nor a moral inca- 
 pacity for receiving the benefits thereof; Children have 
 no fuch incapacity, therefore they are to be admitted into 
 the vifible Church ot Chrift by Baptifm. 
 
 They are not adually incapable, for the Children of 
 the Jews, were judged by God,, to be capable of fuftain- 
 ing a covenant relation, and received the feal thereof, 
 and it would be abfurd to fuppofe, that the Children of 
 Chriftian parents are iefs capable, or lels worthy than 
 they were. 
 
 They are not rriorally incapable, for they have never 
 
 finned, and God has promifed to bleis them.* " I will 
 
 * Ifaiah xliv. 3 . pour 
 
[ 33 ] 
 pour out my Spirit upon thy feed, and my bleiTing upon 
 thine offspring." They cannot therefore be luppofed, in 
 any one inftance, to have forfeited their right to a vifible 
 relation to God. 
 
 But we will advance one ftep further on this ground, 
 and affirm that Children are capable, of receiving the 
 greateft blefling, which God ever beffowed on mortals, 
 of having God as their God ! They are capable 
 of acceptance with God, capable of juftiiication, and 
 fanftification, (which, according to the Baptift principles) 
 are neceffary to baptifm. " Hence then it follows, that 
 if they are capable of receiving thofe qualifications, which 
 are requifite for the mojl important privilege of falvation, 
 they, unqueftionably, are capable of thofe, which are re- 
 quifite for the lefs important privilege of baptifm. For 
 if the one be denied, fo may the other. Infants are ca- 
 pable of a divinely conflituted union with the infiniteiy 
 worthy Saviour, not lefs than adults; and are they inca- 
 •pable of \\i^fymhol of that union ? Infants are capable 
 of the influences of the Holy Spirit, not lefs than adults ; 
 and are they incapable of (h^fymbol of thole influences ? 
 He that can believe it, let him believe it."* 
 
 Should it be afked, What benefit do Children receive 
 from Baptifm ? I reply, as much as the Children of the 
 Jews from circumcifion. Children are capable of an- 
 fwering foms of the ends of Baptifm, though not all: 
 They can be admitted as difciples into the fchool o£ 
 Chrifl, and as fubjetl* of his kingdom, which is the very 
 firf defjgn of Baptifm. Children are confidered as fub- 
 jefts of Great Britain, although they ate not capable, at 
 
 "^ Dr, Williams, vol. j. p. jito, 
 
 F prefent, 
 
C 34 ] 
 J)ferent, of anfwenng every end, and fulfilling every duty 
 of a fubjeft. The Children of Freemen are free, altho' 
 infants are not capable of difcharging every duty, and 
 performing every aft of freemen. *' Let it be remember- 
 ed, (as Mr. Henry fays) that a leafe of a covenant be • 
 tween a landlord and a tenant, may be of ufe to a (jhild, 
 though he does not under/land it ; nay, though when he 
 grows up, he may forfeit the benefit of it." There are 
 many inftances, in which Infant Baptifiti has been abun- 
 dantly blefTed: The pious Author, jiiH quoted, fays, 
 "For my own part, I publicly exprefs my gratitude to 
 God for my Infant Baptifm, not only as it was an early 
 admiffion into the vifible body of Chiiil, but as it fur- 
 nifhed my pious parents, with a good argument (and I 
 truft, through grace, a prevailing argument) for an early 
 dedication of myfelf to God, in my Childhood. If God 
 has wrought any good work upon my foul, I defire, with 
 humble thankfulnefs, to acknowledge, the moral in- 
 fluence OF MY INFANT BAPTISM UPON IT."t— 
 And fhould children, who were baptized in their infancy, 
 forfake the Lord, the guilt ol ihe breach of the cove- 
 nant, does not reft on the parent, but on the children. 
 
 Thus I conceive, that the right of the Infants of Be- 
 lievers, ftands firm, on the ground of their covenant re- 
 lation to God, and therefore I conclude, that they ought 
 to be baptized. It is impoflfible for them, who deny thJs 
 conclufion, to produce one injlana\ in the New Tefla- 
 ment, ot a perfon profeffing the Chriftian religion, who 
 delayed the i^.aptifm oi his Children, until they arrived 
 i.i maturity. Nor is there one inftance, in which a Child 
 
 + Henry on Baptifm, page ii8. 
 
 who 
 
C 35 ] 
 
 who has been baptised in infancy, was baptized a SECONJ& 
 TIME in adult age. If our Opponents can produce one 
 fuch inllance, fanftioned by the command of God, 
 or by SCRIPTURE example, we will cheerfully give 
 up the point, fubmit to immerfion, and fuffer our little 
 ones (however dear to us) to be cut off from all fhare in 
 covenant,bleffings, and caft out ot the vifible Church o£ 
 Chrift. But no fuch inftance has ever been produced, 
 neither will it be; for the infpired Writers of the New 
 Teftament, inform, us, that when a Jewijh^ or a Gtntile 
 parent ernbraced Chriftianity, not the parent only^ but all 
 his children were admitted alfo, by Baptifm. Thus we 
 are informed, that Lydi a and her houfehold; Corne^ 
 Lius and his family: the Jailor and his houfehold 
 were baptized. 
 
 A late Writer among the Anti-psedobaptifts takes it for 
 granted, that there were no Infants in the Jailor's houfe, 
 becaufe it is faid, that the Apoftles preached the word to 
 all in his houfe. If this reafoning be juft, then we may 
 fairly infer, that there was not an Infant among the muU 
 titudes to whom John preached ; for it is faid that John 
 preached the baptifm of repentance to all the people o£ 
 Ifrael. Befides, the following paflage tranflated literally, 
 would read thus : " He believing in God, rejoiced all 
 the houfe over." Ka/ y)yx>:Kia,a-ix\o Trxvoixt TreTTisBViiioslij fiso/.— ' 
 Now it is evident, that the participle Jingidar ix^'ni^^vKus 
 cannot exprefs the faith of the Jailor, and of all in his 
 houfe, which would have required a verb or participle 
 fluraL And it is remarkable,, that (according to Dn 
 Guyfe) the Syriac verfion, when fpeaking of Lydia, 
 reads the paflage thus: " The Children of her houfe were. 
 
 F 2 haptized^^ 
 
C 36 3 
 hapti'zed,'- which fhews, at leaft, that in thofe early times. 
 Children were deemed fuch parts o£ the houfehold as, 
 were baptized. t 
 
 It was the opinion of Dr. Lightfoot^ tliat it had been 
 a well-known, and long-continued cuftom among the 
 Jews, to admit Profelytes into the Church of Ifrael, by 
 baptizing them, and their whole families, inclufivc oftketY 
 Infants : and therefore, that the exprelTion, ** Lydia and 
 her houfehold," refers to that cuftom."^ 
 
 Thus the Lord God of Heaven, has raanifefled a pe- 
 culiar regard to Children in every age. Jefus, with di- 
 vine tendernefs, took them up in his arms, and bleffed 
 them. He gave commiffion to his Apoftle^, to fad his 
 lambs y and from the creation of the world, to the prefent 
 day, they have been included in every covenant; and 
 entitled to every benefit, contained in thofe folemn en- 
 gagements, to which their parents were entitled. 
 
 Hence it follows. 
 
 Thirdly. — It is bofh unkind, and unwarrantable to de 
 ny Children a right to Paptifm, as the initiating feal oi 
 the covenant, fmce they cannot have forfeited their co- 
 venant relation to God. 
 
 I have never confidered this fubjeft as edential to fal- 
 vation, whether adminiftered in infancy., ox in adidt age; 
 whether hy fpr inkling, or by dipping. Yet I hold myfelf 
 bound, to plead th€ caufe of (wliat I conceive to bej 
 truth wi&h ftrinrters; and evei to confider the lofs of pri- 
 vate friendfhip, as not deferving a moment's attention, 
 when put in competition with itj efpecialiy when that 
 iofs is procured, by no other conduft, than that oi self-- 
 i>efe>^ce. 
 
 . + Guyfe in Lijci * iightfoot's Harmon^u lu- 
 
C 37 ] 
 
 Influenced by thefe motives, I proc£ed to obferve^ 
 that it is unkind and unwarrantable, to deny Children a 
 right to Baptifm, as an initiating feal of the covenant.—- 
 
 It is unkind; fince they partake of the corruptions df 
 their parents, would we deprive them of t^i-itiv privileges ? 
 
 It is unkind] becaufe it weakens the hope of the fal- 
 vation of Infants. I do not intimate that all Infants^ 
 becaufe of their Baptifm, are faved. But the argument 
 is this: Thofe who deny Infant Baptifm, deny it, be- 
 caufe they are not now in covenant, and becaufe they are 
 incapable of anfv/ering the end and defign of Baptifin.-^ 
 Now if this be true, there can be no ground, on which 
 to found our hopes of their falvation. For if God deny 
 Baptifm to Children, it is becaufe they are incapable of 
 receiving that, which is fignified by Baptifm, his grace; 
 eonfequently, the inevitable refult is, they must 
 perish!! 
 
 But if our Opponents will acknowledge, that Infants 
 are capable of receiving the grace of God, then we afTert, 
 that they have an equal claim to Baptifm, as the iign, 
 with believers themfelves. Mr. B. fays, *''the future 
 happinefs of all dying Infants, without ciftinfiion, is that, 
 which meets my moft firm, and cordial belief »" And 
 then, in the plenitude of his benevolence, adds, ** If 
 ANY of my P<edabapti{l friends are of the fame opinion, 
 
 i REJOICE." 
 
 I am happy to i-eftio^e the doubt, which bangs ^>ii 
 
 Mr. B's mmd, and to afTure him, that he is by no means 
 
 Jolitary^ in his benevolent belief. This fentiment, which 
 
 is fo honourable to theblelled God, and is not fubverfive 
 
 of one gofpel do^riije, has been "^^ moft firm and 
 
 cordial 
 
[ 38 3 
 
 cordial belief," ever fince I have been capable of think- 
 ing, with any propriety, on fubjefts of religion. It is 
 the fentiment of a very large majority of Paedobaptifts ; 
 and is much more confiftent with our general principles, 
 than with the principles of our Opponents. For we be- 
 lieve, that all Infants are delivered from the condemning 
 power of original guilt, by virtue of the precious, and 
 efficacious atonement of the Lord Jefus Chrift ; confe- 
 fequently, as every Infant dying in that ftate, is received 
 into the Church triumphant, we believe that every fur- 
 viving Infant ought to be admitted into the Church mili- 
 tant, as foon as either of the parents declares his, or her 
 belief of the Chriftian religion. But the Advocates for 
 adult Baptifm, reafon thus : None are to be baptized but 
 thofe, who are capable of faith, and repentance; Infants 
 are not capable, therefore are not to be baptized. From 
 this mode of reafoning we juftly retort, if faith and re- 
 pentance are abfolutely neceflary to falvation, Infants are 
 not capable of believing or repenting, confequently they 
 cannot be faved. Hence it follows, that as Mr, B. cor- 
 dially believes the falvation of *' all dying infants 
 WITHOUT DISTINCTION," he is not indebted to his 
 -/fw^z-paedobaptift principles, for this benevolent article 
 of his faith. — Again, 
 
 To deny Infants a right to Baptifm, is unwarrantable \ 
 Becaufe it diminilhes the Church of Chrift, by excluding 
 more than nineteen parts in twenty,, from the Chriftian 
 world. 
 
 It IS unwarrantable; becaufe it is excommunicating 
 thofe, who, IN EVERY AGE, were entitled to this re- 
 lation, ^nd who were confirmed in their privilege by our 
 
 Lord 
 
C 39 ] 
 Lord Jefus Chrift. It is doing that, for which they have 
 no authority, and appears to be little lefs, than an af- 
 fumption of the divine prerogative. 
 
 I fhall add but one remark morej under this pro- 
 polition, 
 
 It is unwarrantable-, because it is contrary to 
 
 THE CUSTOM OF THE ChURCH OF ChRIST IN ALL 
 AGES. 
 
 It is granted, that as the fubjeft in debate, is a matter 
 of faft, an appeal to the cuftom of antiquity, and the 
 t.eftimony of Authors, who flourifhed in the earlieft ages, 
 is highly proper. For if the Churches eftablifhed by the 
 Apoltles, admitted Infants into their focieties by baptifra, 
 it mull have been a faft known to all : or if the/ 
 uniformly denied the right of Infants, this muft have 
 been equally notorious. 
 
 I proceed then to examine the truth of Mr, B's af- 
 fertion,* " there is no certain evidence what- 
 ever THAT BABES WERE BAPTIZED ANY WHERE, 
 OR BY ANY ONE, FOR THE SPACE OF TWO HUN- 
 DRED YEARS AFTER THE BIRTH OF JesUS ChRIST.'* 
 
 It is obfervable, that this pofition, like almoll all 
 others of the Anabaptifts on this fubjeft, is of the 
 negative kind. To render the argument conclufive, 
 I conceive it ought to run thus : There is certain evidence 
 that no babe was baptized, any where, or by any one, for 
 the /pace of two hundred years after the birth of Jtfus 
 Chrifl. But on refleftion, it is probable, that Mr. B, 
 applies Tertullian's fagacious maxim, to the writings at 
 the Fathers, as well as to the writings of the Apos- 
 
 * Eage 13. 
 
 TL£S^ 
 
C 40 ] 
 
 «LES, "The Fathers forbid, what they do 
 
 NOT MENTION." 
 
 The teflimonies of the following perfons, who were 
 the imrnediajre fucceffors of the Apollles, I beg leave to 
 place in oppofition to the afTertion of my Opponent. 
 
 Justin Martyr flourifhed about forty years after 
 the time of the Apollles, and died A. D. 167. In his 
 Apology he has thefe remarkable words. + — Ka.i ;i:qK>^qi &c. 
 •K TTxiowY s(ji^9ni£v9v<TJty rco X^isui. " Aiany of Jixty or Jcventy 
 years of age^ were made Dijcipks to Chrijl from their 
 lnf-{Lncy,'' Now this Writer ufes the fame word, as Jefus 
 did in his command to his Apoflles : Go and dijciple all 
 nations^ e^h^ivja^iti. And to be made DifcipUs of Chrifi^ 
 from their Infancy, I think could mean nothing lefs, 
 than that they were admitted by Baptifm, into the 
 Church, or School of Chnft. 
 
 iRENiEUS was a Greek Biihop of Lyons, and put to 
 death A. D. 203. He was cotemporary with Polycarp^ 
 who was the Difciple of John the Baptift, and wrote 
 ^out hxty-feven years after tiie Apoftle. Now, if he be 
 lound to (peak of the Baptifm of Infants, it may be pre- 
 lumed, that it was the pra6i:ice of tlie Apostolic 
 Church. That he does, will appear evident from his 
 own words ^ — Omnes enijn venit, per femttipfum falvare, 
 -amncSy inquojn p^r eum^ R £ N a sc u N T E R 1 ^i D e-u M, 
 •iNF ANTES et PARVULOS, et pueros, et jiwenes, et fent- 
 -QTCS, " He (i. e. Clirifl) came to faye all perfons by him- 
 £e!f ; all, I fay, who by him are regenerated unto God, 
 Infant Sy and little ones, and young men, and aged 
 perfons." 
 
 t Juftia Martyr's Apel. II. ^I,ib. advcr. Hsrefes, II, cap. 39. 
 
 The 
 
[ 4' ] 
 
 The phrafe, regenerated unto God, is conftantly ufed, 
 by the Writers of that age, for Baptifm. And for the 
 truth of this interpretation, \ve appeal to the judgment 
 of our learned Opponents. 
 
 This affords another proof, that Infant Baptifm was 
 the praftice of the Apoftolic Church, becaufe this Writer, 
 who was born feveral years before the death of the Apof.le 
 John, cannot be fuppofed to have been ignorant of the 
 opinion, and the pra6lice of the Apollles, concerning a 
 fubject of fo much importance. 
 
 The teftimony of Tertullian, may alfo, be very 
 properly adduced, in favour of Infant Baptifm. This 
 Author, who died A. D. 216, advifes Parents to defer 
 the Baptifm of their Infants until a certain period, "un- 
 less IN CASE OF NECESSITY, or DANGER OF 
 death!" This advice, unanfwerably proves, that the 
 Baptifm of Infants was the univerfal praftice of Chriftians 
 in his time. 
 
 . Thefe are the teflimonies in favour of Infant Baptifm, 
 which are to be found in the writings of this, very early 
 period of the Church, and are fufficient to overthrow the 
 affertion of Mr. B. ^' that there is no evidence of this 
 fraBice for the f pace of two hundred years after tht 
 birth ofChrift." 
 
 The probable reafon, why we have no more ample, 
 and repeated teifimonies on this fubjeft, immediately 
 after the Apoftolic age, without prelumption, we may 
 conclude to be this ; the right of Infants to Baptifm was 
 never called in queftion, and no difputes had, at that 
 time, arifen in the Church on the fubje6t. 
 
 This is fupported by the more frequent and exprefs 
 G teftU 
 
L 42 J 
 
 teftimonies, given by the Writers in the fucceeding ages^ 
 as foon as error began to fhew its head. 
 
 About this time arofe Ori.gen, w^ho was born A. D, 
 18^, when a difpute was agitated concerfiing original fin ; 
 fome afferted that Infants were not tainted- by Adam's 
 tranfgreflion, while others maintained that they were. — 
 Origen embraced the latter opinion, and reafoning on 
 this fubje6t, he afks — *' What is the reajon,, that^ whereas 
 the Baptifm of the Church , is iJiflituted for the forgivinefs 
 of fins ^ Infants also by the usage of the 
 Church are baptized, when f there was nothing 
 in Infants which wanted for givenefs and niercy^ the grace 
 of Baptifm luould he needlefs to them?'''\ In another trea- 
 tife, he expreffes hunfelf more fully, (if pofliblej when 
 he fays, ^- For this alfo it zvas, that the Church had., 
 r-ROM THE Apostles a tradition, or order to 
 GIVE Baptism also to Infant^."* 
 
 The next teftimony that prefents itfelf, is that of Cy- 
 BRIAN, who was converted to Chriflianity A. D. 240. 
 In his time arofe one i'^Wz^J', an African Blfhop, who de- 
 nied original fin, and was of opinion, that the Baptifm 
 of Infants fhouM be deferred until the eighth day. 
 
 On this oGcafion, a council of fixty-fix Bilhops was 
 convened at Carthage, A. D. 253, of which Cyprian 
 was chofen prefident. And the refult of their delibe- 
 rations, was this; they were unanimoiifly of opinion, 
 that the Baptiim of Infants was not to be deferred until 
 the eighth day : And the decree which they paffed on 
 this occafion, clofes with thefe memorable w^M'ds:-!-? 
 *''' Wherefore^ dearly helovtd^ it is our opinion, thc^t from 
 
 + Horn. 8, in Levitt cap, xa, * Comments in Epis. Rom: 
 
 BaptfrUy 
 
C 43 ] 
 
 Sdptifm, and the grace of God, who is kind and benign H 
 all, none ought to he prohibited by U5\ which as it is to 
 be obferved with refped to ALL, so especially with 
 RESPECT TO Infants, and those who are but 
 JUSTBORN, who deferve our help, and the divine ??iercy,"f 
 
 St. Ambrose, according to Mr. B's quotation, ''was 
 not baptized until the full age of a man, or more'' If this 
 be true, then he afted contrary to the praftice of the 
 Apoftles, as he hirafelf teftifies. ''The Baptifrn of Infants 
 was the praditt of the Apofles themjelve.s, and of the 
 Church until now'' St. Ambrofe lived' about 2 74^ years 
 from the time of the Apoftles. 
 
 St. Augustin, who lived A. D. 370, was frequently 
 engaged in a controverfy with Pelagius, who ftrongly 
 oppofed the doftrine of original fm. St. A^lguftin infifts 
 that Children are polluted by original fin, and therefore 
 urges the neceffity of baptizing them, faying, " why art 
 infants baptized for theremiffion of fin , if they karue none?''' 
 Now, unqueftionab ly, if Infant Baptifm had not been 
 the invariable praftice of the Church, Pelagius would 
 have immediately and gladly fled \o this refuge. But fo 
 far from pleading this, he confiders it as a grofs calumny 
 caft* on him, to fay, that he denied Infant Baptifm. On 
 the (iotiti^ary, he fays, " We confefs, that Infants ought 
 tfo be baptized for the rerriiflion- of fins, acco-rding to 
 
 't'iit rule of the UNIVERSAL Ch'URCH, AND AC=. 
 <J6RDIN<i TO THE DOCTRLNE OF THfi ApOSTLES.'* 
 
 At another time he fa}'«, " Nunquam fe, vel iriipium ali* 
 quern Hsereticum, audifTe qui hoc quod propofuit de 
 parvulisdiceret;" i, e. "i^Rat he never had heard 
 
 + Cyprian Ep. ad Pidum. Ep. 64; 
 
 G 2 OF 
 
C 44 3 
 
 OF ANY ONE, NOT EVEN AN IMPIOUS HeRETIC, 
 WHO WOULD SAY SUCH A THING OF LITTLE CHIL- 
 DREN," 
 
 The teflimony of the renowned Calvin, A. D. 1509, 
 is alfo full to the point.t " Now every one mull fee that 
 the Baptifra of Infants, which is fupported by fuch a 
 body of fcriptural evidence, was in no refpefl of human 
 invention. It is foolifhly trifling to objeft, tiiat we never 
 find, that even one Infant was baptized by the hands of 
 the Apoflles. For though it be not exprefsly mentioned 
 by the Evangelifts, yet as they are never excluded, 
 whenever an account is given of any family's being bap- 
 tized j who then, but a mad man, would thence infer, 
 that they were not baptized ? If arguments of that kind 
 were ol force, by a parity of reafon, women fhould be 
 forbidden to partake of the Lord's fupper, as we do not 
 read that they were admitted to it, in the time of the 
 Apoflles; but here w€ are fatisfied with the rule of faith. 
 For when we confider the defign of the inllitution, we 
 can eafily determine, who are to be the fubjefts of it : 
 which we obferve alfo in Raptifm. For if we refle6l on 
 the end for which it was inftituced, we evidently fee that 
 it is not lefs fuitable for Infants, than for adults. And 
 therefore they cannot be deprived of it, without doing 
 manifeft injuftice to the will of its divine Author. But 
 whereas they dilTeminate a report among the fimple comr 
 mon people, that a long feries of years had elapfed, after 
 the refarreftion of Chrift, in which the Eaptifm of In- 
 fants was unknown, they are guilty of the bafeft falfe- 
 
 hood.* FOxR THERE IS NO WRITER, HOWEVER AN- 
 t Calvin's Inftit. Lib. IV. Cap. XV, Scft. 19. 
 
 * f sdifiime ijaentiuntur, CI E N T , 
 
[45 ] 
 
 CIENT, WHO DOES NOT CERTAINLY REFER THE 
 ORIGI5? OF IT TO THE DAYS OF THE ApOSTLES." 
 
 Many other leftimonles might be brought forward, but 
 a greater number would needlefsly fwell this treatife.t 
 
 On the review however, we may maintain, that no 
 hiftorical faft, can be more honourably, and more uni- 
 formly fupported than this, that from the time of the 
 Apoflles, to the year 410, the Baptifm of Infants, was 
 the UNIVERSAL PRACTICE of the Church: for Pe- 
 L AG I us, (who lived about that time, and who would 
 moft gladly have denied it, could he have done it, with 
 any profpetl of fuccefs) as we have fhewn, exprefsly 
 avows it. And no one, was better qualified to decide 
 on the praftice of the Churches than himfelf : for though 
 he was born in Britain, yet he was a confiderable time 
 at Carthage, in Africa, and at Jerufalem, and had tra- 
 velled through all the noted Greek and Eaftern Churches 
 in Europe and Afia. And Dr. Wall has abundantly 
 proved, that from the year of our Lord 400 to 1100, no 
 fociety of men, in all that period of feven hundred years, 
 ever pretended to fay, that it was unlawful to baptize 
 Infants. ** As thefe evidences are for the firft four hun- 
 dred years, in which there appears only one man, Ter, 
 tullian, that advifed the delay of Infant Baptifm IN 
 
 :j: Thofe who wifh to fee this faft eftabliflied by the concurrent teftimony 
 of the ancieut Fathers, will be highly entertained by a perufal of Mr. Tv/o- 
 good's admirable panvphlct, entitled, "The Baptifm of Infants, a rcafon- 
 able fcrvice," cfpecially Argum. V. from which, I readily confefs, a great 
 part of the above teftimoniej is extrafted, not having the original Authors ia 
 my poffeflion, nor within my reach. The curious and learned Reader will be 
 gratified by CO nfulting Mr. Wall, whofc labours have done him honour^ 
 «nd thiQwa great light on this fubje^ 
 
 SOME 
 
i 46 ] 
 
 .^QMB CAS-Es; and one Gregory, that did perhaps 
 pfatkffe fuch delay in the cafe of his children : But no 
 focietyof men, fo thinkings or fo praftifing ; nor any one 
 man, faying it was iMikwful to" baptize InfaTrts.: So in the 
 Tltxt feven hundred years, there is not To much as one 
 ffian to be foi>nd, that either fpoke for, or pra6i:ifcd any 
 liich dthy, BUT all the contrary. And when 
 about tbe^year 1 130, one feft among the Waldenfes de- 
 <flaTed againfl: th€ baptizing of Infants, as being incapable 
 cif falvation, the main body of that people rejected that 
 tftfeir 6pirtion, and they of them, that held that opinion, 
 qu-ickly dwindled away, and difappeared, there being no 
 more heard of, holding that tenet, till the rifmg of the 
 German Anabapcifis, anno 1522. All tbe national 
 Churches now in the world, do profess, 
 
 ^ND PRACTISE IN'FA-NT BAPTISM.t" 
 
 As Mr. B. hafi faid fo much on the genealogy of the 
 Anaba^tifts, it may be necefTary for me to pay fome at- 
 fiention to it alfo. On which fubje6f, I cannot refer to 
 3^ Author of higher refpeftability than Mosheim.* 
 
 As Mr. B.§ has fet the exatnple, he cantiot be offended 
 jr my tracing up the origin of the Anabaptifts to that feft, 
 iwhich made its appearance in the 16th century, of whom 
 Mofheim fays, *' The true origin 01 that feft, which ac- 
 4i|jiired the denomination of A?iabapiifts, by their adml- 
 >ni^cnng aneWf the rite of Baptifra, to thofe v/ho came 
 .tfver to their communion, and derived that of MemiO' 
 Mites, from the famous man, to whom they ovtq the 
 '^reateft part of their felicity, is hid in the remoteft depths 
 
 f Cr. Wall's Hlft; oflnf. Bapt. part IT. €ap. to. 
 * Ewles. Hiftory, Vol. IV. p. 129. ^ Page I'j, 14-. 
 
 of 
 
C 47 ] 
 ©f antiquity, and is, of confequence, extremely dilScuk 
 to be afcertained." 
 
 This Author obferves, " That the Mennonites are not 
 entirely millaken, when they boaft of their defcent from- 
 the Waidenfes, and Petrobruffians — and before the time 
 of the reformation, many of this fe(3; lay concealed in, 
 almoft all the countries of Europe. However, among 
 them were perfons of different ways of thinking — fome 
 were of a fanatical complexion; and others of a more 
 prudent, and rational turn of mind. The views and- 
 hopes of thefe people were revived by Luther^ but at 
 length they forfook him, not fatisfied with the plan of 
 reformation propofed by him. 
 
 " The mofl pernicious faftion, of all thofe that com-, 
 pofed this motley multitude, was that which pretended- 
 that the founders of the new, and perf^ft Church, were 
 under a divine impulfe, and were armed againlt all op. 
 pofjtion by the power of working miracles. It was this 
 deteftable fa61;ion, that,^ in the year 1621, began their fa- 
 natical work, and excited the moft unhappy tumults and. 
 eommotions in Saxony, and the adjacent countries. — 
 But at length, this feditious croud was routed, and dif-» 
 perfed by the Eleftor of Saxony. MuN ?er, their ring- 
 leader, was piit to death in an igngminious manner, and^ 
 his factious counfellors fcattered. In this critical fitu- 
 ation, they derived much comfort, and affiilance from the 
 Gounfels, and ?eal of M^NNo Simon, a native oi 
 Friefland, who had formerly been a Popifli Prieft, and, 
 as he himfelf confeffes, a noterious profligate. This man 
 went Qveir to the Anabaptiftf^^h? W4s a man qf genius^ 
 though not of a very fpi^nd judgment. By his prudence, 
 
 probity. 
 
[ 48 ] 
 probity, meeknefs, and eloquence, he was rendered 
 very fuccefsful. He drew up a plan of doftrine and dif- 
 cipline of a much more mild, and moderate nature, than 
 that of the furious, and fanatical Anabaptifts, which had 
 been a curfe to every nation where they were found, and 
 a difgrace to human nature." 
 
 Hence I obferve, that although the aflertion of the 
 Author of that Pamphlet, was not ftriftly correft, " that 
 Msnno was xh^ Jirft perfon that denied Infant Baptifm," 
 yet it is a llubborn faft, tliat although there were indi- 
 viduals, for feveral preceding years, fuch as Peter de 
 Bruis, Arnold, and fome others, who denied Infant 
 Baptifm, yet, until Men No arofe, there were no regular 
 and ftatedfocieties ot Anabaptifts, (except thofe impious 
 and fanatical fefts, from whom no perfons in the prefent 
 day, would wifh to trace their defcent) "HencE (fays 
 Mofheim) he is deservedly looked upon as 
 the common chief of almost all the Ana- 
 baptists, and the parent of the sect, that 
 still subsists under that denomination.":}: 
 
 By the allufion made to the conduft of the Anabaj-tiils 
 in Germany, I hope it will not be confidered, as imply- 
 ing any refleftion on their defcendants, of the pre.ent 
 day, as if they were actuated by the fame Ipirit. and their 
 principles were tending to produce the fame excefles ; I 
 mean no fuch thing. I freely acknowledge, that many 
 of the Baptift perfualion, are ornaments to reiigioi.. — 
 Their piety and learning demand the affeftion and i eve- 
 rence of the age. Neither fhould I have recalled to me- 
 mory thofe tranfaftions, which difgraced religion, had 
 
 t Vol, IV. p. HZ. 
 
 not 
 
[ 49 J . 
 
 not Mr. B. rendered it necelTary, by his tracing tl:ie fub- 
 jeft up to its origin, in the large quotation which he has 
 made irom Du Pin. 
 
 Here, then, we cheerfully leave it with the Reader of 
 refleftion, and impartiality, to determine, on which fide 
 the weight ot evidence preponderates. 
 
 I now proceed to the fecond part of ray defign. 
 
 Secondly — to confider the mode in which Baptifm 
 may be adminiflered, agreeably to the word of God, and 
 the praftlce of the .Church of Chriif , 
 
 This part of the fubject, has been fo frequently dif- 
 cuffed, and is thereby involved in fo much perplexity, 
 that the generality of readers, are fcarcely able to per- 
 ceive the real fubjetl of difpute, between the Paedobap- 
 tifts, and the Anti-psedobaptifts. I fhall therefore en- 
 deavour, to be as concife, and explicit as poflible.--^ 
 *' We believe Baptifm to be a Chriftian ordinance, whick 
 implies a ceremonial purification by water. — 
 The proximate genus, is purification, the fpecific diffe- 
 rence is, that it is a purification by a ceremonial or re- 
 ligious uje of water J" t And I moll cordially agree with 
 Dr. Williams, when he fays, " I maintain, that the proper 
 facramental import of the word ^Airitay^os, in the New 
 Teilament, is exhaufled by this definition." Hereby it 
 will be eafily perceived, that all which we plead for is, 
 the religious ufe of water ^ ni the Chrijiian ordinance of 
 Baptijm, We contend, that the mode of adminilfering 
 this ordinariae, whether by fprinkling, pouring, or dip- 
 ping, is a circumftance only, and does not enter into the 
 % Dr. Williams, Y<A. H. p. 36,9. 
 
 H ilf'^nce. 
 
[ 50 ] 
 
 ejfence^ or affeQ the ^^{\gxv of our Lord in the inftitution 
 of Baptifm. We do not deny that the original word 
 has been frequently ufed, by profane Authors, to denote 
 wafhing by dipping. Ail w^ contend for is, that the 
 word does not figniFy to dip on ly, by a total immerfion; 
 and we affirm, that the facrament ot Baptifm is as valid, 
 and fcriptural, when adminiftercd by fprinkling, or pour- 
 ing water upon the fubjeft, as by plunging the body 
 wholly under water. 
 
 On the other hand, our Opponents contend, that the 
 original term fignifies to dip, and ikat only; and 
 confequently, that cannot be fcriptural Baptifm, which 
 does not immerfe the fuhjeB totally under water. " If the 
 Anabaptifts (fays an acuie Writer*; were content with 
 maintaining their particular mode, only as the favourite 
 badge of their party, without infiftmg on it, as ih&ejfence 
 of the facrament, our controverfy would be inftantane- 
 oufly at an end." But as fo much importance is attached 
 to this diilinguifhing mode^ it becomes us to make our 
 appeal, 
 
 ift. Therefore, let us examine the true meaning of the 
 original terms. The word ufed by our Lord, when he 
 gave the commiflion to the Difciples, after his refurrec- 
 tion, is /3«WI<^i<;. This is a diminutive derived from (^xtfiu. 
 And Lexicographers agree in faying, that the primitive 
 idea of this word is to wash. This is done, fometimes 
 by dipping, fometimes hy pouring water, and fometimes 
 hy fprinkling, "And here it is obfervable, that of the 
 tiuo-and'twenty inffances where this word % found, not 
 one is inconfiilent with its being, in its primary meaning, 
 
 * Mr, De Courcy Rejoin'd, p, 126. 
 
 a^<?- 
 
[ 5» ] 
 d generic term, fignifying to TINGE ; whereas in Jix in- 
 ftances at leaft, if I am not much miftaken, the fpecific 
 notion of immerfion is excluded."* 
 
 Let us fee in what fenfe the facred Writers oi the New 
 Teftament ufe the w^oiA^xn^u. *' Send Lazarus that he may 
 dip the tip of his finger."f " And he was clothed with a 
 vefture dipt in blood."|| In each of thefe places the word 
 ^xtfloj is ufed; and it is evident, that in wezV^^r place is it 
 ufed for total immerjion ; and certainly all muft acknow- 
 ledge, that when applied to the vefture of Jefus, it rauft 
 convey the idea oifprinkledorjiained. Let it be re- , 
 membered, that this word is never ufed with refpeft to 
 the ordinance of Baptifm ! The word ^xifli^u; is ufed by 
 Chrift in his commiihon, and by the Apoftles, when they 
 fpeak of Baptifm, And in the words of that learned 
 Critic Dr. Owen, J we aflert, " that no one inftance can 
 be given in fcripture, wherein ^avli^oj doth neceffarily 
 fignify either to dip or plunge. It doth NOT fignify. 
 PROPERLY to dip or plunge, for that in Greek is e/xCaTr/w 
 and Bf/.Qocnli^aj. It no where fignifies to dip, but as a mode 
 of, and in order to wafhing. I muft fay, and will make 
 it good, that no honeft man, who underftands the Greek 
 tongue, can deny the word to fignify to wafh, as well as 
 to dip." 
 
 If we confult the learned Commentators of Antiquity, 
 
 we (hall find them all agreeing, that the primary fignifi- 
 
 cation of the term is waJJnng, Now it is clear, that this 
 
 aft of wafhi'ijg, may be performed, either by dippings by 
 
 Jprinkling^ or by pouring water, and each of thefe muft 
 
 • Dr. Williams, Vol. II. p. 54, 
 i L^ke xvi, 24, {] Rev. xix. 13. % Coll<a. tff Traas, p» 581. 
 
 H2 be 
 
[ 5- 1 
 ire confidered as 2i fecandary idea attached to the^ word. 
 So that that man would aft as abfardly who confined the 
 meaning, of the word baptize, or wafh, to the aft of 
 Jprmkhng or pourings as ano'ther who confined h to dip- 
 pings for the term baptize unqueflionably is equivocal, 
 and is ufed for wafhing, fometimes in one fenfe, at other 
 times in- o^notker. This ftatement of the cafe will ac- 
 count for the appare ,t difagreement on this fubjeft, be- 
 tween Authors equally learned : And this d-ifagreement, 
 is not fo much in the Authors themfelves, as in the 
 Writers, who quote thera. For when the Advocates for 
 immerrion, refer to an Author, it is too common with 
 them to take one/enjc only, fuch as ferves their own pur- 
 pofe. In this manner, has Mr. B. quoted Calvin and 
 Beza.:|: '' The renozuned Calvin tejlifies : Thezuordbap^ 
 tize figmfies to immerfe ; and the rite of ivimerjion zras 
 ufed by the ancient Church." But does this venerable and 
 learned Father fay nothing more? Yes; but Mr. B's 
 reafon i-or going no further in the quotation, is evident. 
 The FIRST PART of that fentence, which Mr. B. has 
 quoted, runs thus, " I ut whether the perfon baptized be 
 wholly pi u-ng'd, and that, once or thrice, or whether he 
 be on\y J'pnn-kkd with water poured upon him, is OF 
 VERY LITTLE IMPORTANCE, but in this, Churclies 
 ou^ht to be left at liberty to aft, according to the difte- 
 rei^ice oi countries."*' 
 
 Thus, ttes sgreat raan, when permitted to fpeak !or 
 
 him.^lf, fays no more, than w4iat many inteUigent Psedo- 
 
 ba^tiits will .readily fay ; and would Mr. B. cordially ac- 
 
 quiefce in this fentiment of Calvin, " that the inode of 
 
 X Page 1 8. * Calvin's Inftit. Lib. XV. Sed. lq. 
 
 applying 
 
[ 53 J 
 applying water in Eaptifm, is of VERY little im- 
 portance," our controverfy would immediately ceafe. 
 
 Again, iVlr. B. introduces Beza, as faying, '' Ckrifl 
 commanded us to be baptized-, by which words it is certain, 
 im77ier/ion is fignijied'' But this learned Commentator, 
 alfo faySjf **Tiie reality of Baptifm is \.hejprinkli7ig of 
 the blood of Jefus Chi'ifl for the remifhon of fins, and the 
 imputation of his righteoufnefs, which are as it were 
 dif played before aiir eyes in the fign of outward fpr inkling. 
 Are they therefore improperly baptized, 
 who are sprinkled with water only caist 
 ON THEM ? AV." This fame Author is quoted by 
 Leigh, in his Critica Sacra, (in Marg.) as expreffing 
 himfeif thus, on Mark vii. 4. *' Except they waih 
 ^«7r1/fwyl«/, i. e. are baptized, Loti fuerint vulg. bapti^ 
 zentur, i. e. they waflied, or made their hands wet, 
 by pouring water upon them," as is the cuftom of the 
 Jews to this day. Thus the caufc of immerfion is not 
 much aflifted by either of thefe great men, when their 
 teftimony 1% fairly ftated. 
 
 The opinion alfo of Dr. Featly,* may be adduced as 
 of confiderable confequence. He fays, " Chrilt no where 
 requires dipping, but only baptizing-, which word im- 
 ports no more than ablution or wafhing, which may he 
 done without dippings as Hefychius, Stephanas, Scapula,, 
 and - udaeus, the great mafters of the Greek tong^ae^ 
 in^ke'good by very many inftances, and allegations out 
 of clafFiC writers." 
 
 Having mentioned that eminent facred critic Leigh, it 
 may be deemed ftrange, if I bring not forward his tefti- 
 -i- Annotiit. Matt. Hi. 11 * * Leigh's Crit* Sac. io Loc. 
 
 mony^ 
 
[54 J 
 mony. On the word (Sccjfii^zj, he fays, " The vvord bap- 
 tize, though it be derived from f^^cTfiu; tingo, to dip or 
 plunge into the water; and fignifieth primarily, fuch a 
 kind of wafhing, as is ufed in Bucks, where linen is 
 plunged and dipt; yet it is taken more largely, j^r*^?2^ 
 kind of wafhing, rinfing, or cleanfing, even where there 
 is no dipping at all : as, ** he fliall baptize you with the 
 Holy Ghoft;"^ and many other places.' This is all that 
 we contend tor, that the word baptize does not necelta- 
 rily mean dipping, to the exclufion of any other mode of 
 waftiing, by the application of water, either by fprinkling 
 or pouring. 
 
 Thefe are the opinions of the learned on the primary 
 meaning of the word : and many more might have been 
 brought forward. But, my Opponent ventures to place 
 his opinion, in oppolition to the decifion of all the learn- 
 ed, of ancient and modern times ; and, with a mafterly 
 ftroke, clofes at once, all pofTibility of any further dif- 
 pute ; for he fays,* *' Dipping is commanded in 
 
 ALL THOSE PLACES IN THE NeW TESTAMENT, 
 
 WHERE Baptism is enjoin'd!!!" 
 
 Thus all the learned labour of ages, is fwept away 
 with one ftroke, "" Baptifm is dipping!'* But notwith- 
 ftanding this point is fo authoritatively decided by Mr. 
 B, I fhall prefume in the next place, 
 
 2nd — To examine the propriety of confining the word 
 Baptifm, to the afcl of d ppmg, in thofe places where 
 it is ufed in facred fcriptures. Here I perfe6lly agree 
 in the opinion oi a late Writer,t *' that the point 
 
 ^ Matt. iii. IT. and chap. xx. 22. * Page 18. 
 
 t Elliott's dipping, not baptizing, chap. 2, 
 
 in 
 
i 55 ~] ' 
 in difpute entirely hinges on this— //z what fenfe the 
 SCRIPTURE ufes this word: whether to dip a perfon z'w, 
 or under water, or to wajh him with water : Is it not 
 then impertinent for any one ilill to urge, in Homer, 
 Plutarch, &c. it fignifies to dip or plunge; for WHO 
 DENIES IT? The point in difpute hinges on this ; has 
 it always that fenfe and no other ? for elfe it proves no- 
 thing againft us ; efpecially if this be not its conjiant 
 meaning throughout the fcripture. But the infpired Wri- 
 ters ot the OJd and New Teftaments, do no where, in 
 my opinion, intend by the word baptize, to exprefs 
 merely, or chiejly^ an aft of immerfion or dipping, and 
 much lefs to dip under water ; but rather thac of wafh- 
 ing or fprinkhng." 
 
 I (hall now, endeavour to colleft thofe paflages in the 
 New Tettament, wherein the word Baptifm is mentioned, 
 and (hall examine whether in all, or in any of them, it 
 mult NECESSARILY mean dipping 2ind plunging, to the 
 entire exdujion offprinkling or pouring, 
 
 Mauhew iii. 1 1. I indeed baptize, i. e. dip you with wa- 
 ter, hut he that cometh after me Jhall baptize (dip) you with 
 the Holy Ghqfl and withjire. The manner in which the 
 Difciples were baptized by the Holy Gholl, was by the 
 facred emblem hangmg over, and refting on their heads 
 in the fhape of cloven tongues. " And there appeared 
 unto them cloven tongues, like as of fire, and it lat upon 
 each of them : and they were all filled with the Holy 
 Ghoft, and began to fpeak with other tongues, as the 
 Spirit gave them utterance." Chap. xx. 22. Jefus faid, 
 are ye able to be baptized f dipped) with the baptifm (dip- 
 ping J that I am baptized (dipped) with ? 
 
 Mark 
 
L 6^ J 
 Mark vii. 4. And when they come from the market, 
 except they wa(h, {f^xifh^uvlxi baptize) or agreeably to our 
 Opponent's mode of rendering the word, except they dip 
 or plunge themfelves ; *' and .many other things there he, 
 which they have received to hold, fuch as the wafhings 
 (dippings) of cups and pots, brazen veffels and tables," 
 (or more properly) beds. It is abfurd to fuppofe that the 
 Jews plunged themfelves under water, before every meal^ 
 or dipped their veffels and their beds. It is well known, 
 that thefe rites were obferved, with a view of purifying 
 themfelves from cerem.onial pollution. And Mofes in- 
 forms us, in what manner thefe purifications were per- 
 formed ; *' and he (hall fprinkle upon him that is to be 
 cleanfed, &c."* 
 
 In this manner alfo, was the blood of the lamb to be 
 
 applied to the doors of the houfes of the Ifraelites, by 
 
 Jprmkling it on the lintels, and two fide polls. In allu- 
 
 fion to this aft, the Apoftie calls the blood of Chrilt, the 
 
 blood ^SPRINKLINC.t 
 
 Luke vii. 29, And all the people that heard him and 
 the Publicans juftified God, being baptized (dipped) with 
 the baptifm (dipping) of John. 
 
 Afts xiii. 24. When John had firft preached before 
 his coming, the baptifm (dipping) of repentance. 
 
 Chap. xvi. V. 33. And he (the Jailor) took them the 
 fame hour of the night, and wafhed their ftripes, and was 
 baptized, he and all his llraightway. On this paffage, I 
 ihall beg leave to prefent the Reader with the opinion of 
 the judicious Dr. Guyfe.t " It feems highly improbable, 
 
 * Lcvit. xiy. 7. X Heb, xi. z8. compared with Exod. xii. aa. 
 f Guyfe's Parajxh. in Loc. n9te. 
 
 that 
 
[ 57 ] 
 that the Jailor, and his houfe, were baptized by immer- 
 fion ; fince, as far as appears, that ordinance was, all on 
 a fudden, adminiftered to them, feverally, while they 
 were in prifon; and fince the mangled condition of Paul 
 and Silas's bodies, by means of their being feverely 
 fcourged the day before, made it very improper, not to 
 fay unfafe, for them to go at midnight into the water fo 
 deep, as that mode of baptizing would oblige them to 
 do."* 
 
 'Revelation xix. 13. ** And he was clothed with a vef- 
 ture dipt in blood" — the original word is (^sQx-^ix.^vov, bap- 
 tized : now, in order to judge of the true meaning of this 
 word, it may be of ufe to compare this expreffion with 
 another, in the Old Teftament, In Daniel v. 21, we find 
 the fame word ufed by the Septuagint, in defcribing the 
 itate of Nebuchadnezar's body : his body was wet, sCaip*?, 
 baptized with the dew of heaven: and it is left to every 
 one to judge, in what manner a perfon is baptized with 
 rain or dew defcending upon him; whether he is fprinkled 
 ov plunged? — once more — 
 
 1 Corinthians x. 12. "Our fathers were under the 
 cloud, and all paffed through the fea, and were all bap- 
 tized unto Mofes, in the cloud and in the fea." Now the 
 infpired Author of Exodus informs us, how this was ef- 
 fe6ted : *' And the children of Ifrael went into the midft 
 of the fea upon the dry ground, and the waters were a 
 wall unto them, on their right hand, and on their left."|[ 
 Here again, is another inftance, in which perfons are 
 faid to be baptized, and yet not piimged under water.— 
 The Egyptians only were thus baptized! 
 
 ♦ Guyfe's Paraph, in Loc, nots, || Exod. xiv, zz, 
 
 I But 
 
C ^ 7 
 
 Bat out Baptift brethren^ driven from this ground* 
 prefently make their ftand on another, which I conceive 
 to be equally untenable. They tell us^ that in many 
 parts-, of fcripture, fuch a mode of e.^preffion i^ ufed, as 
 iiau.ft mcijfarily imply inTmei:fio;i-^-Thefe are the follow- 
 ing : 
 
 Matt. iii. 6. " And we.re baptized of him in Jordan :** 
 and V. 1^. *' And Jefus, when he was baptized, went ap 
 ftraightway, out of the water :" Hence they draw 
 a certain conclufion, that the fubje£ls were aftuaj-ly 
 plunged under water. But we do not perceive, any 
 thing in thefe words, to weaken our opinion; for would 
 it be any great inconvenience for them to go into the 
 water anch deep^ with their fandals, for the fake of being 
 fprinkled ? The whole force of this argunient ariljes 
 froTU the words in and out of ; but it is well known 
 tha:t the Grecians ufe. the prepofuions e<^, and ex, in a 
 different fenfe: e<s- often is: tranflatedapud, coram, ad, tOy 
 at:^ by, near.^ dLiid itpan; and sk (ignites Jro7?i and^/; as 
 the follov/ing pafTages of fcriptiire abundantly prove. 
 
 The example of the Eunuch is pleaded as an in- 
 conteftible proof of imnitrjion : " And they went down 
 BOTH INTO the water, both Philip and the Eunuch,, 
 and, h^ baptized him, and when they were come up OUT 
 QJ the water," &c.* But, if this paffage of fcriptuj^e 
 proves any thing in favour of immerfion, it moft untor* 
 tunately for our: Baptift friends, proves too much, as for 
 inilance : t^cy went dpwu-^oxH into the water, i. e, 
 (according to the interpretation of the advocates for di\^^ 
 ^mg) they were plungei underwater. Why, then it is 
 » AOs viii, 33. 
 
 equally 
 
[ 59 ] 
 equally certain, that Philip, as well as the Eu= 
 N UCH, was plunged ! And the infpired Hittorian expreffes 
 himfelf particularly llrong on this point, as though he 
 <lefigned to inform us, that neither the one, nor the 
 other were dipped, for he fays, they went down BOTH 
 into the water, both Philip and the EunucH. 
 
 Therefore, if our Opponents infift, that the Eunuch 
 was aftually immersed, we alfo infifl, (and that upon 
 the7G:;«<?ground)that Philip also was "immersed! ! 
 Tliis is one inftance out of many, which might be addu- 
 ced, to expofe the abfurdity of building fo much, on the 
 bare conffruaion of a fentence, and the ufe ol a prepo- 
 pofition. The exprefTions and £<j % v^^^^ and zy-lov^Mo,-, do 
 not necefarily imply, that either Philip or the Eunuch 
 went under the water, for the fame prepofition is ufed in 
 Matthew V. i. "And Jefus went up into a mountain 
 to pray," ^i,% o^os. Did Jefus enter into the bowels of 
 a mountain to pray ? Chap, xv. 24. '' I am not fent but 
 u NTO (e,s) the loft fheep of the houfe of Ifraei.'' Chap- 
 ter xvii. 27, " Jefus faid unto Peter go thou s^? t>jv OaAxa-a-av 
 TO the fea, and caft an hook.'* Now, if dipping be 
 urged, from the bare meaning of fuch prepdfitions IN 
 and UNTO, then Peter muft have plunged himfelf into 
 the fea to catch the fi(h. Again, John xi. 32. "When 
 Mary was come where Jefus was, and faw him, fhe fell 
 
 down AT HIS FEET, Bis tow War. 
 
 The abfurdity will appear ftill more glaring, by an at- 
 tention to the mode of exprefTipn ufed by our Lord to 
 the young man who was born blind,+ '* Go wafh IN the 
 pool of Siloam, ^ts %v K^iXviAQ-nQ^ccv. " To infer therefore, 
 
 f John ix, 7. 
 
 I ^ always 
 
[ 6o ] 
 
 always a plunging of the whole bpdy, in water, becauf& 
 the word in (or ^is) occurs in the narrative, would in ma- 
 ny inftances, be equally as falfe, as abfurd. For inftance, 
 our Lord commands the young man born blind,, to wafli 
 in the pool of Siloam : but that his whole body was not 
 immerfed in it is plain; becaufe only his eyes were af- 
 fefted, and only this part was to have been wafhed, in 
 doing which there was no immerfion at aU/'t 
 
 Another paffage is ftrongly urged by the advocates for 
 immerfion, as unanfwerable, which is John iii. 23. — 
 •*And John al To was baptizing in £non, near to Salim, 
 becaufe there was much water there." On this we ob- 
 ferve, That at the time of John's appearing, there was 
 a general expeftation of the promifed MelTiah, among 
 the Jews. And when he began to preach, in a public 
 manner, thefe hopes were raifed to the higheft pitchy for 
 "the Jews fent Priells and Levites, from Jerufalem, to 
 afk him, who art thou?"* This expeftation brought 
 vaft multitudes to hear him ; they were convinced of the 
 truth of his do6lrine, and were baptized. Now John was 
 the harbinger of Jefus the MelLah, and his baptifm was 
 a general purification of the J^ws, as a prelude to the 
 coming of Chriff : and it is obfervable, that it is faid, 
 verfe 2,3tb, ** Then there arofe a quellion, between fome 
 of John's Difciples and the Jev/?, about purifying." — 
 And as John was a Jewifh priefl, he mult have been ac- 
 Guftomed to the manner of performing tnofe various pu- 
 rificaiijns, which vvcre appointed, to remove ceremonial 
 pollutions, by dipping a bunch of h) fTop in water, and 
 Jprinkling the unclean perfon.t Is it noc therefore 
 f Mr. De Courcy Rej. 232. * Chap. i. 19, 28. % Numb. xii. 18. 
 
 highly 
 
r 6i 
 
 J 
 
 highly probable that he arranged the multliudes, on the 
 banks of the river, and that he baptized them, by fprink- 
 ling the water over them, either with a bunch of hyflbp, 
 or any other convenient inftrument ; than that he fub- 
 mitted to the Herculean labour of plunging lo many 
 ihoufands, as came to him, from day to day, and from 
 month to month ? John had never been accuflomed to 
 plungings^ under the Mofaic ceconomy, and he would 
 not have adopted that mode, without a pofitive command. 
 But no fuch command is pretended. 
 
 Let us obferve again, that as fuch multitudes came 
 from all parts to hear John, many muft have been far 
 from home, and many had cattU with them ; this circum- 
 ftance alone would induce John to chufe Enon, becauje 
 viuch water would be necefiary for the accommodation of 
 his hearers. Eefides, our learned Opponents well know, 
 that the original expreflion, literally is, many waters, or 
 • Jmall flreams , confequently nothing certain can be ga- 
 thered hence in favour of dipping. 
 
 It is reafonable to fuppofe, that a very large majority 
 of thofe, w^ere led by curiofity to hear this extraordinary 
 perfon. When they left their habitations, they had no 
 intention of being baptized ; and confequently were not 
 provided with the neceflfary change cf raiment. Indeed, 
 were they thus provided, I know not what conveniency 
 this wildernefs could have afforded for undrefTmg, and 
 drefTing themfelves, confillent with decency. Now, if 
 the Difciples of John were abfolutely plunged under 
 water, it mufl have been either clothed or naked \ the 
 Jormer would be unfafe, the latter an outrage on modefly : 
 let the advocates for dipping take which akernative they 
 pleafe. Romans 
 
. [ 62 J 
 
 - Romans vi. 3, 4, 5. "Therefore we are buried vviili 
 kiim by baptifm into death," &c. The learned and jii- 
 <iicious expofitor, Dr. Owen, affirms, "that there is not 
 one word, nor one expreffian, that mentions any refem- 
 blance, between dipping under water, and the death and 
 burial oi Chrift ; nor one word that mentions a refem- 
 blance between our rifmg out oF the water, and the re- 
 furreftion of Chrift. Our being buried with him in bap- 
 tifm into death, v. 4, is our being planted together in the 
 likenels of his death, v. 5. Our being planted together 
 in the likenefs of his death, is not our being dipped under 
 water, (if it were, then many ungodly perlons have been, 
 and are daily) but the crucifying the old man, v. 6. our 
 being raifed up with Chrift from the dead, is not our 
 fifing from under the water, but our walking in newnefs 
 of life, V. 4. by virtue of the refurre8;ion of Chrift. "§ 
 
 An eminent Writer of the prefent day,* remarks, that 
 *'it is obfervable, that the x^poftle, through the whole 
 paflage, does not fo much as mention, our being baptized 
 into Chrift's burial, nor into his reJurrcBion, bat, he 
 fays, again, and again, baptized into his death. No modd 
 oi b.ipnfm, then can, with certainty, be inferred from 
 thefe words, for he mentions our having been buried and 
 raifed with Chrift, only as the effeft, of in confequence 
 of our being dead with Chrift, by being baptized into his 
 death ; therefore the Apoftle only infers, that we are bu- 
 ried with Chrift — How ? by being baptized into his 
 burial ? no — but by being baptized into his death ; and I 
 humbly conceive, that the Apoftle would have faid, not 
 his death, but his burial, if he had intended to defcribe 
 \ Tradts, p. 582. ' * Dr. Williams, vol. II. p, 125. 
 
 Baptifm 
 
C 63 ] 
 
 Bapti;{ln as a refemblance of Chrift's burial in the mods 
 of it, but he feems carefully to avoid it." 
 
 Ai;itl all muft acknowledge, that the burial of Ckrift ^ 
 his being put into the tojnb, is a more expreffive emblem 
 of immerjion, than his death on the crofs of Calvary. 
 
 A thought has occurred to me on this fubjeH, which, 
 I conceive, is far from being unnatural. As the body of 
 Chfiil was Jprinkltd^ and Jlained by the blood ilTuing 
 from his wounded temples, his hands, his Jide, and feety 
 ^o the adminiflraiion of the ordinance of Baptifm by 
 JprinkUng or pouring, exhibits a far inore lively and ftri- 
 king refemblance of the death of Chrift, than plunging. 
 Therefore, I am firmly of opinion, that if the infpired 
 Writer intended an allufion to the mode of Baptifm> 
 (which I confefs is very doubtful] by the expreffion 
 planted together in the Itkenefs of his deaths in the paflage 
 under confideration, it. is natural to fuppofe he alludes 
 tOi that oi fprinkting^ 
 
 Thus, 1 hope, it is eftabliflied, in the view of the im.-- 
 partial Reader, that the facred Writers of .the New 
 Teflament, have not pofitively decided, that Baptifm \k 
 to be adminiftered by irnmerfion, and by that mode alom^ 
 and that we may rationaUy conclude, from their tefti- 
 mony, that it might be adminiftered hy fprinkling. And 
 the public are now left to judge, whether Mr. B's af- 
 fertion, amounts to any thing more, or lefs than an un- 
 warrantable, and an unfupported afrumption,+ dxppinq 
 
 IS COMMANDEI) IN ALL THOSE PLACES, WHERE 
 
 RAPTUM IS ENjaiNRDl Nay w-cre. we to reafan on 
 Mc- B's favourite maxim, we fliouid fay— The scrip^ 
 
 Page 18. 
 
 TURE 
 
[ 64 j , 
 
 tURE t)OES NOT MENTION PLUNGING, THERE- 
 , FORE IT FORBIDS IT ! ! 
 
 The Author of the fmall Pamphlet fo frequently aU 
 luded to, propofed the foilowing quellion, to the advo- 
 cates of immerfion, "Does the quantity of the elements 
 ufed in an ordinance enter efFentially into the nature, and 
 €ffficacy of that ordinance ? If it do, why do not advocates 
 for ?nuch water ^ nfe alfo viitch bread and wine, feeing there 
 is as pofitive a command for the one as the other ? 
 
 To this Mr. B. replies* "I have no objeftion to fay, 
 that the quantity of the elements ufed in an ordinance, 
 enters efientially into the nature ot that ordinance." — 
 Surely! It would have been then, peculiarly kind, to 
 have infomed the' religions world, more particularly, of 
 this important circumft ance ; otherwife we fhall be in 
 continual danger of errin,^, by ufing, either too much, or 
 too little, and th-ereby rendering our fervices of no avail, 
 nay far worfe, — ot rendering them — a6fs ©f will worjhip; 
 and consequently abominable in the fight of -God. But 
 on reading farther, we find that Mr. B. has given us in. 
 formation, he tells us that it is '* A sufficient quan- 
 tity !" Important difcovery! Benevolent information! 
 But alas! fuch is the perverfenefs of the enquiring Paedo- 
 biaptift, he retorts the queftion. 'What do you call afuf- 
 
 ficient quantity T' " 1 have hitherto taken it for granted, 
 that a tew drops fprinkled, or poured, upon the fubjeft, 
 were fufficient." And fo they are, iox-d. fufficiency is a/uf' 
 
 Jiciency ! ! Is not this arguing in a circle ? But Mr. B, 
 
 informs us that there muff be a fufficient quantity of water 
 
 to COVER the body, in order to conllitute fcripture bap- 
 
 * Page 20. 
 
 tifm ; 
 
[ 6a ] 
 tifm; but WHO told Mr. B. this? WHERE has Chrift 
 ENJOINED IMMERSION ? "A iufficient quantity is all 
 that we plead for," fays Mr. B. And who pleads for 
 more ? But we. think a vaMch f mailer quantity is fufficient. 
 Mr. B. thinks otherwise — Who then is to be the judge? 
 
 In order to fupport this ftrange mode of reafoning, 
 Mr. B. fay?, "For inftance, at the Lord's fupper, our 
 Lord Jefus, has commanded his Difciples to drink wine 
 in remembrance of him. But fhould any adminiftrator 
 infift that there fhould be wine fufficient, only to wet 
 the lips of the communicants, and think this application 
 of the elements, anfv/ered all the purpofes of the infti- 
 tution ; we fhould objeft ; I prefume my Opponent him- 
 felf would remonftrate" — Moll affuredly he would — and 
 his remonftrance, I think, would be founded on a rational 
 ground. The pofitive command of our Lord is to eat 
 and drink ; and therefore if the receiver, do no more 
 than touch or wet his lips, with the bread and wine, cer- 
 tainly he does not comply with the literal^ and exprefs 
 command — to eat and drink. — But this cannot apply to 
 the command to baptize — for our Lord Jefus commands 
 nothing more, than an application of water to the body. 
 He does not fay — Go and i)lun^e all nations under water. 
 Here neither the mode of adminiftering, nor the quantity 
 is commanded, or even mentioned. 
 
 This is little better than ferious trifling. It may have 
 the appearance of plaufibility, but no man of common 
 fenfe, will confider it as folid reafoning. 
 
 I (hall clofe this branch of the fubjeft with a few re- 
 flexions. 
 
 3d, On the inexpediency of adminiftering the ordi- 
 K nance 
 
C 66 ] 
 
 nance of Baptifm by dipping or plunging* R is unne- 
 cejfary. The efTence oi religion does not confift in the 
 moll flrifcl obfervance of forms and ceremonies. The 
 acceptance of our prayers depends not on the poflure of 
 the body, or the form of words; nor the validity of the 
 Lord's fupper, on our receiving it, ^\\!t\^x jianding^ fittings 
 or kneeling. It would therefore be unneceffary to lay 
 fo much ftrefs on things merely circumftantial, and in- 
 difPerent, as to fay that thofe who comply not with them, 
 eannot receive it acceptably, or pray acceptably. 
 
 Thus we argue in the prefent cafe : Our Lord Jefus 
 has commanded us to be baptized, but not to be dipped; 
 therefore it is needlefs to contend for the quantity of 
 •wrater, and tlie 7node of adminiftration. "To urge it as 
 neceffary (fays Dr. Owen) overthrows the nature of a 
 facrament, by making the validity of Baptifm, depend, 
 not on the the thing fignified, but on the mere fign."— 
 Hence it follows that it is uncharitable to condemn and 
 reproach, that Eaptifm, which is adminiflered by fprink- 
 YiT^g^ or pouring. The ccnfure of the pious and honeil 
 John Bunyan^ is truly applicable to the Baptifts of the 
 prefent day: and as he was oF that perfuafion he will not . 
 be chargeable with partiality in this cafe. " In my fimple 
 opinion, your rigid and church disquieting prin^ 
 ciples, are not fit lor any age and ftate of the Church. I 
 fay they are babes and carnal, tha^ attempt to break the 
 peace and communion of Churches, though upon no 
 better pretences than water."* 
 
 ■ It is indecent. It is an indifputable faft, that it was the 
 praftice of the ancient Anabaptifts, to baptize all perfons 
 
 * Bunyan's Works, Vol. I. page 151, 153, 
 
 naked I ' 
 
[ 67 ] 
 .naked! as Mr- Henry aflerts. And Dr. WiHiams quotes 
 the learned Mr. Bingham as faying, "After he had pro- 
 duced paffages from Chryfqflom^ Cyril of Jerufakm^ Leno 
 Veronenfis and Aihanajius: all which are manifeft proofs, 
 that perfons were baptized naked^ either in imitation of 
 Adam in Paradife, or our Saviour upon the crofs^ or to 
 fignify their putting off, the body of fin, and the old man 
 with his deeds. And this praftice was then fo general, 
 that we find no exception made, either with refpeti to 
 the tendernefs of infants, or the bafhf ulnefs of the female 
 fex, fave only where the cafe of ficknefs, or difability 
 made it neceffary to vary from the ufual cuftom."§ Mr. 
 Baxter alfo charged this on Mr. Tombes, as being the 
 pra6fice of- the Anabaptifts, which charge Mr. Torabqs 
 could not repel. 
 
 We readily confefs, that the method adopted by the 
 Anabaptifts of the prefent day, approaches much nearer 
 to the rules of modefty. And, yet, at times, fuch fcenes 
 are exhibited as awaken the fenfibility of many, and tinge 
 the cheek of female modefly with a blufti, "As toijap- 
 tizing women, in the face of a full congregation, after 
 all that has been done to preferve decency, is too indeli- 
 cate a mode to be obferved, in the prefent day, unlefs it 
 were ab/olutely ^x\A fpccijically enjained, which cannot be 
 proved. For women in looie dreffes, to be taken into 
 the arms of men, and plunged into the water ilruggling, 
 before hundreds of fpeftators, it is fo abhorrent to modef- 
 ty, that no one can credit fuch things without far better 
 proof, than was ever brought to countenance them. To 
 
 \ Dr. Williams, Vol. III. p. 173, and Bingham's Antiquities of ths 
 Chrifti^n Churches, Book 11. Chap, u, %. i, z, 
 
 K 2 behold 
 
C 68 ] 
 
 behold men and women, when about to be plunged, ftar.d 
 on the brink of the Baptifteries; to fee the weaker fex, 
 ready to faint for fear, and to hear them fcream, when 
 plunged into the water, has more of confufion and dif- 
 may in it, than is confiftent with the folemn fervices of a 
 Chriflian ordinance." t However, we hope that we may 
 venture to fay this without offence, that if our brethren, 
 will flill adhere to this mode of dipping, the leafl they 
 can do, to preferve a due decorum, would be, to provide 
 FEMALE DIPPERS, and take care, that none but women 
 were prefent, on this occafion. 
 
 It is Pharijaical. It was the grand fault ot the Jews, 
 that they paid more regard to the externals of religion, 
 than to the effence. This charge I would by no means 
 attempt to fix on my Baptift brethren in this age — tar 
 from it. I again declare that I admire the flirling piety, 
 and revere the exemplary conduft of mukitudes of that 
 perfuafion. But I appeal to every unprejudiced mind, 
 whether it has not fomewhat of this appearance, when 
 wc hear perfons contending fo vehemently, for the abja- 
 lute 7uccj]ity of dipping to conftitute the nature of Bap- 
 tifm. When we find them, fo unreafonably, attached to 
 that mode^ and to the quantity of the element, as to refufe 
 to hold communion with their fellow Chriftians, however 
 ufeful, or eminently pious, and foleiy becaufe tliey have 
 not been plunged! and when we behold them fo unre- 
 mittingly employed in making Profelytes from other 
 Churches : we cannot refrain from faying — -^^Brethren^ we 
 perceive that in thefe things^ ye are too fuperftitious." 
 
 Nothing has a Itronger tendency to cherifn carnal con- 
 
 + Shrubfole's Letters, p, 53 and 54. 
 
 fidence 
 
[ 69 ] 
 
 iidence than making the mere ceremonial pans of gofpel 
 worfhip, of fo much importance. And verily, as it is 
 neither circu'iicifion nor uncircumcifion that conilitutes 
 a real Chriilian; fo it is neither fprinkling, nor plunging, 
 that conftitutes the efTence of the ordinance of Chriftian 
 Baptifm. 
 
 Mr. B. fays, " This fentiment, (viz. that infants of be- 
 lieving parents are in covenant with God, and therefore, 
 have a right to Baptifm as the feal ©f that covenant) is 
 highly calculated to engender, and cherifh that carnal 
 confidence and pride fo awfully apparent in the Jewilh 
 nation." Eut we afk every reader of reflefclion, which 
 fentiment is moft confiftent with the freenefs of the gof- 
 pel covenant, that which maintains that children are ad- 
 mitted into the vifible Church of Chrill, by the unmerited 
 mercy of God, without, and before their being capable 
 . of performing any condition whatever: or that fentiment 
 which demands the condition, of faith, repentance, and 
 fubmilTion to a levere a6l of mortification, before the 
 fubjefl can be admitted ? Our adverfaries mufl acknow- 
 ledge, that many whom they baptize by immerfion, are 
 not true believers, confequently fuch are admitted, 07ily 
 into the vi/ible Church of Chrift; and are therefore in 
 much greater danger of cheriftiing carnal confidence and 
 pride, than thofe who have been baptiaed in infancy. 
 
 We alfo appeal to the impartial Chriftian world, whe- 
 ther the mode of baptizing adults by plunging them un- 
 der water, be not more highly calculated to engender 
 fplritual pride, than devoting infants to God, by fprink- 
 ling or pouring water upon them ? 
 
 When we fee a perfon ftanding on the brink of the 
 
 Baptiflery^ 
 
[ 70 3 
 
 Baptillery, m an attitude of confidence; when we liea:: 
 •him exprefs his refolution to follow Chrift, and fubmit 
 to this aft of felf denial, in honour of his Mafter, and 
 proclaiming aloud to a crowded affembly. 
 "I am not afhamed to own my Lord, 
 Or to defend his caufe." 
 It ftrikes the ferious, and humble mind with difguft, as 
 favouring too much of fpiritual pride, and felf confidence. 
 
 On the review of this fubjeci, the following prac- 
 tical INFERENCES, claim the attention of the ferious 
 Reader, 
 
 iff. Adore the condefcenfion of Immanuel ! 
 
 In the PERSON of Jefus, divinity and humaniiy were 
 united. God was inanifejl in the Jlefhl In the cha- 
 racter of Jefus, infinite dignity, and matchlefs com- 
 paffion are fweetly blended. 
 
 At one time, we behold the Lord of life, flanding 
 over the tomb of his beloved friend, and calling with a 
 voice that awakened the dead, Lazarus come forth I At 
 another, we behold the fympathetic friend recalling 
 the departed fpirit of the daughter of Jairus, and affeft i- 
 onately prefenting t:heir living child to the enraptured 
 parents. At one time we behold the Som of God, 
 ^landing on the furamit of the foaming billows of the 
 tnighty deep, and at his command the angry waves are 
 liufhed into a calm ] At another, we behold him as the 
 Saviour of sinners, clafpmg the helplefs infants to 
 ■his bofom — we hear him pronouncing a blefTing upon 
 them, and declaring them the fubje6ls of his kingdom. 
 
 Here 
 
C 7> ] 
 Here is a combination of wonders. And in which 
 eharafter the Son of God appears moft amiable, it is 
 hard to fay. 
 
 Let every heart feel the warmeft affeftion for this ex- 
 alted Redeemer, and adore his condefcenfion in ad- 
 mitting our infant offspring into his vifible Church. 
 
 The heart, that has ever leit the indefcribable glow of 
 parental love, cannot but yield to the irrefiftible influ- 
 ence of the compaffion of Jefus ; and conffrained by the 
 emotions of gratitude, exclaim — " Blefs the Lord, O my 
 foul, and all that is within me blefs his holy name! Blefs 
 the Lord, O my foul, and forget not all his benefits, who,; 
 although he is the Lord of angels, and the king 
 OF glory, has condefcended to feed his flock like a 
 SHEPHERD, to gather the lambs with his arms, and carry 
 them in his bofom." 
 
 2nd. It is a duty incumbent on thofe, who have 
 been devoted to God in infancy, to remember their 
 PECULIAR obligations. 
 
 You have a more lively incentive to gratitude than 
 others. Great is the honour conferred upon you in being, 
 thus early devoted to God. Great is the benefit refulting 
 from the relation, in which you fland to your Creator 
 and Redeemer. While many are ready to afk — ** Wha^ 
 advantages refult from Infant Baptifm ?" You may reply* 
 **As great, as thofe which arife from Adtdt Baptifm. It 
 is the higheft privilege that infancy is capable of receiv- 
 ing, to be admitted into covenant with the Lord God» 
 and adult baptifm does no more." 
 
 If you have been baptized in your infancy ^ you have a 
 ftrong excitement to humility. Having been fo early m- 
 
 .' troduced 
 
C 72 ] 
 
 troduced into the fchool of Chrift, you have every reafon 
 to blufh, that you have made no greater progrefs in di- 
 vine knowledge; that you have made fuch ungrateful 
 returns to God, for that kindnefs, which he difcovered 
 towards you in the morning of life. The Lord God ot 
 your lathers, has condefcended to ftile himfelf YOUR 
 God, he has notirijhed and brought you up like children^ 
 and yet you hav^ rebelled againfl him. Let thefe con- 
 fiderations awaken the moll lively contrition. 
 
 If you have been baptized in your infancy, you are 
 bound by the ftrongeft and moft endearing ties, to love 
 the Lord Jefus Chrift, Jefus deferves, and claims the 
 love of ALL intelligent creatures, for his tender mercies 
 are over all his works. Biu you have been baptized in 
 his name, therefore he has 2. Jlronger claim on your af- 
 fettion. Refle£l on the condefcending compaflion of 
 Immanuel, to you in your helplefs days. He has en- 
 tered into a folemn and gracious covenant with you.— 
 He has promifed to pour out his fpirit and his bleffing 
 upon you. Let thefe exprelTions, and defigns of mercy 
 warm your hearts, and excite the facred principle of love 
 to Jefus in your breaft. 
 
 You are alfo, bound to adorn that gofpel which you 
 profefs. You have been devoted to God, in your infant 
 days, therefore thofe words may be addrefled to you with 
 peculiar energy: "Forget not what manner of perfons 
 ycu ought to be, in all holy converfationand godlinefs,'* 
 You bear the name of Christ: And is not this a 
 greater honour than to bear the name of the mofl weal- 
 thy, the moft potent monarch? Should you not then ab- 
 iior every thing that has a tendency to difhonour that 
 worthy nams, by lu huh ycu are called? You 
 
[ 73 ] 
 
 You are bound to difcover greater diligence in the fer- 
 vice of your divine Mafter. You are the Difciples of 
 Jeius — his fervants — his covenant fervants. *' I befeech 
 you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye 
 prefent your bodies a Hving facrifice, holy, acceptable 
 unto God, which is your reafonable fervice.'* % 
 
 You are bound, by your infant baptifm, to cultivate 
 brotherly love. As you are taken into the family of God, 
 admitted into the vifible church of Chrift: you are laid 
 under the moft endearing obligations, to cherifh a cordial 
 affe6lion for tvcry branch of that family. And that this 
 connexion has taken place, fo early in life, in your 
 INFANT days, fhould operate as an additional incite- 
 ment to love. 
 
 By your infant baptifm, you are loudly, and afFe6li- 
 onately called to enter into aElual covenant with God at 
 . the table of the Lord, To renew and confirm that folemn 
 engagement which your parents and friends made on. 
 your behalf. You were early in life, numbered among 
 the Difciples of the Lord Jefus Chrift; you are therefore, 
 bound by every confideration of gratitude, affeftion, and 
 intereft to put your names to the covenant, to take upon 
 you thofe obligations, which reft on every one in aftual 
 covenant with God. You are bound to follow the fteps 
 of your Mafter, and yield a chearful, and cordial obe- 
 dience to all his commandments. Jefus has left his dying 
 requeft on record : a requeft addreffed to you with pe- 
 culiar emphafis, whom he has fo highly honoured in in- 
 fancy, "THIS DO IN REMEMBRANCE OF ME." Go 
 
 then, and publicly acknowledge your approbation of the 
 
 X Hcb. xii. I. 
 
 K conduft 
 
[ 74 ] 
 conduct of your parents in dedicating you to God, in the 
 ordinance of baptifm. Your obligations are many and 
 great. And by what method can you more properly, 
 teftify your gratitude? To commemorate the incarnation, 
 the fufferings, and the death of Jefus the Saviour of Tin- 
 ners, is a duty incumbent on alL^ who have feeri their 
 danger, and felt their mifery. ViVLi you are bound by ties 
 of a more tender, and endearing nature, to ''take the cup 
 of falvation, and call upon the name of the Lord.'' 
 
 Remember alfo, my young friends, that it you feel not 
 the force of thefe obligations ; it you obey not the voice 
 of the Lord, which entreats you to enter into covenant 
 with the God of your fathers^ and the God of your in.- 
 fancy ; then, be afTured that your prefent privileges will 
 aggravate your guilt, and enhance your condemnation. 
 Where God hath given, much, his demands will be in 
 due proportion. The condefcenfion of Jehovah, has 
 afloniihed the angelic legions. In your earlicft days, you 
 were dedicated to God, as an holy thing. Your parents, 
 your minifters and your friends, frequently, fervently,. 
 afFefliionately prayed,, and wept over you. Your open- 
 ing mind has been filled with pious inftr unions. Your 
 paflions received an early check, on the firft appearances 
 of irregularity. You have now been many years in the 
 fchool of Chrift, and indulged with rich advantages : 
 advantages, which thoufands have noi enjoyed ! 
 
 Now paufe a moment and refleft — \Vhat is the lan- 
 guage oi ail thefe mercies, which crowd around you 
 every ftep, in rich profufion ? Do they not unite in ad- 
 dreffirjg you in words like thefe? "Seek ye the Lord, 
 while he may be found j csill upon him while he is near. 
 
 Them 
 
[ 75 j 
 
 Them that honour me I will honour; and they that de- 
 fpife me, (hall be lightly efteemed. I love them that 
 love me: and thofe that feek me eaTvLY shall find 
 ME," But (hould you ftop your ears, and harden your 
 hearts againft thefe reiterated expoftulations, this awful 
 confequence will enfue ; every mercy — every admo- 
 nition—every prayer prefentcd to God on your behali — 
 every tear fhed over you — your minifter, who has tra- 
 vailed in pain until Chrift be formed in your foul — your 
 deareft friends, who, with conftant folicitude, watched 
 over your condu6l — yes, your tenderly affectionate pa- 
 rents whofe hearts have often bled over you — all — all 
 H'ill come forward, as fwift witneffes againft you, if you 
 refufe to hearken to the voice of the Lord your God. 
 If you burft the bands of your education — if you give up 
 the reins to the corrupt bias of your heart — if you crucify 
 the Son of God afrefh, and put him to an open (hame : 
 as affuredly as there is a juft and terrible God, he will 
 avenge the breach of his covenant, ^^and make your 
 plagues wonderful V Your condemnation will be aggra- 
 vated beyond thfet of millions ; beyond the power of lan- 
 guage to defcribe, or imagination to conceive! In you^ 
 the tremendous declaration of the Judge of the quick and 
 the dead, will be verified — ^'''Verily I fay unto you^ itfiail 
 be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gojnorrak^ 
 THAN FOR you!" Let none therefore dare to trifle 
 with their Infant Baptism. It is a folemn engage- 
 ment: ah engagement, which fliall be attended with con- 
 fequences the moft ferious and important. The peculiar 
 privileges of your covenant relation, in the early part of 
 life, will either enhance your joys, or add frefh horrors 
 to your everlafling mifery ! 3rd, 
 
L 76 J 
 
 3rd. It highly becomes Christian parents to be 
 mindful of the duties incumbent on them, towards their 
 children. There are duties, which relate to the body, 
 and the temporal concerns of your children. With thefc 
 I have nothing to do, at prefent. That fond affeftion, 
 which glows in the heart, and mingles with every wi(h, 
 will be irrefiftible incentives with you, to take care of 
 the temporal welfare of thofe dear babes. 
 
 But brethren and friends, the grand objeft of your 
 endeavours, — your tender folicitude, fhould be the 
 SALVATION OF THE SOULJ Thofe dear infants, have 
 fouls 
 
 " Which muft for ever live 
 In raptures, or in wo ! " 
 
 Immortal souls, which will outlive the ruins of 
 the globe, and the general convulfion of nature! These 
 
 PRECIOUS SOULS ARE COMMITTED TO YOUR CARE! 
 
 A treafure how valuable! A charge how momentous! 
 
 In their early life, your firft duty is prayer* Often 
 take your dear little ones in your arms, and carry them 
 to the footftool of mercy, and with that ardent glow of 
 love, which the parental breaft alone can experience — 
 with that pathetic emphafis, which parental feelings alone 
 can di6iate — fay — 
 
 "O thou mod indulgent Saviour'' — ihou haft faid, 
 " Suffer little children to come unto me and iorbid them 
 not, for fuch is the kingdom of God." Jn chearful obe- 
 dience to thy command, I bring my children unto thee. 
 Dear Jefus, take them into thy arras, and blefs them.'— 
 They are the creatures of thy power, they have been de- 
 voted to thee, and thou haft been pleafed to enter into a 
 
 covenant 
 
L 77 'l 
 covenant with them: O take them under thv fpecial pro- 
 tection, teach and inftruft them in the way that they 
 ftiould go, guide them with thine eye, and make them 
 the fubjefts of ihy pardoning mercy, and faving grace \ 
 O Lord teach, and affift me to bring them up as Chriftians 
 in thy fear. They have been difcipled, and baptized : 
 may I be found diligent, and fuccefsful in teaching them 
 to ohjerve all things., whatsoever thou haft co?nmanded me, 
 O what precious promifes are fealed to them ! May they 
 have an early, and a faving acquaintance with thefe pro- 
 mifes! May every one of thefe bleflings be aBually pof- 
 fefled, and every obligation, accordmg to their capacities, 
 be difcharged by my dear children ! Mighty Saviour, I 
 would make my fupplications unto thee, in behalf of 
 every child, thou haft gracioufly given me, with the faith, 
 and the importunity of the woman of Canaan in behalf 
 of her daughter. Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son 
 of David, my children labour under the guilt, pollution, 
 dileafe and tyranny of fin and Satan: Lord help me. I 
 cannot doubt of thy power, nor, while thy word, thy oaith, 
 thy facred feal ftand uncancelled, can I doubt of thy 
 willingnefs, to fave to the uttermoil all tbac come unto 
 thee. 1 do not ground my lupplications on the worthi- 
 nefs of mylelf or mine, but on ihy free grant of covenant 
 favours. On this my faith would reff. I have therefore 
 admitted thy covenant gilt in its full extent; and received 
 both the inftrument and the feal of faith. Now Lord, 
 help me to make thefe my children, acquainted with their 
 privileges and obligations: By thy Holy Spirit hitU 
 my endeavours, and command fuccefs!"§ 
 
 \ Dr« Williams, with fome VariatiOD, Vol* II* p. ,34 c. 
 
 The 
 
[ 78 ] 
 
 The pious parent is encouraged in thefe his fervent 
 addreffes to the throne oi grace, in behalf of his children, 
 by the nature of the covenant, it is free : not clogged 
 with conditions, above the ahility of man to fulfil. It is 
 unchangeable : *' Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and 
 look upen the earth beneath: for the heavens fhall vanifli 
 away like fmoke, and the earth ihall wax old like a gar- 
 ment, and they that dwell therein (hall die in like man- 
 ner: but iny falvation fiiall be forever, and my righte- 
 ^ufnefs fhall not be abolifhed." t 
 
 You are emboldened alfo, in your prayers, by the pro- 
 mi/es of God. '*I will be a God to thee, and to thy 
 feed!" ** I will pour out my fpirit upon thy seed, and 
 my blefTing upon thy offspring." And an infpired 
 Apoftle afTures you that, "The promife is, not only unto 
 you, but unto your children.'* No argument can be more 
 powerful and prevalent than the veracity of God. And 
 none can urge this argument fo eHe6lually, as thofe 
 parents, who have lerioufly placed their children in a 
 ^covenant relation to God, in baptifm as the feal of that 
 covenant. I fee not now thofe parents (fays the pious 
 Mr. Henry:*:) can with ^qual confidence, pray for their 
 children, who deny them to be in covenant, 
 
 AND so SET THEM UPON EVEN GROUND WITH 
 
 THE CHILDREN OF INFIDELS ! Ifaac and Jacob, 
 ibleiTed their children by faith; and that faith refpefted 
 the covenant which God had made with them, and with 
 their feed." " No prayer for a blelTing is acceptable, but 
 the pra) er ol faith : no blejjing can be prayed for in faith 
 but what is pro7nifed\ to have a promife, is to have a 
 f Ifa. li. 6. % Treat, on Bapt. p. 24*. 
 
 covenap 
 
[ 79 ] 
 covenant grant ; wherefore I can conjijiently pray for my 
 children m faith, no further than I allow them an interefl, 
 in the gofpel covenant, that is to fay, that the admini^ 
 ftration and ceconomy of privileges of mercy appertain 
 10 thera, and confequently baptifm; nor fhould any thin^ 
 be deemed a bar to the enjoyment of them, but an inca- 
 pability or a criminal rejeftion. But they neither crimi- 
 nally reject, nor are incapable ; confequently, the cove^ 
 nant and its feal terminate and reft upon them, and m 
 warding off any part of what was thus intended for their 
 ufe, I muif be blame-worthy. How can I plead injaitk 
 promifed mercy, while I deny to them the token of mer- 
 cy ? It baptifm, the token, be not their's, neither is pro- 
 mifed mercy their's; and if the latter be not their's, j^//A 
 has no foundation, in reference to their happinefs. Hzd- 
 den counfels, do not teftify or affert any particular truth 
 to me concerning my child. Through grace, I can think,., 
 with adoring complacency, of myfelf and mine being, 
 in the hand of a fovereign God; but ih& fovereignty of 
 God, predeflination, eternal covenant intereft, particular. 
 redemption, and the dijiinguijliing application of grace, 
 are not the obje6^s of gofpel faith, properly and diretlly. 
 As far indeed as they are tejlified of in revelation SLsfo^s, 
 which are only general, fo far, and no farther, faith re» 
 gards them. While unexplained, and therefore in the 
 clafs oi J'tcret things, they belong to God\ whereas the: 
 things which are revtaled, and thefe only, belong to mei 
 and my children. The arcana of the divine government,, 
 neither are, nor in the nature of things can be, either the, 
 ohjeds of my faith, or the rules of my duty. In Ihort 
 they are not, they cannot be, the ioundation of the 
 
 PRAYER 
 
[80 ] , 
 
 PRAYER OF FAITH. Take away the plea of covenant 
 inter eft, and faith is ftruck dumb. Take away covenant 
 promijes, diiidi faith is ftruck blind. Take away covenant 
 faithfulnefs, and faith has no ft an ding. But bleffed be 
 thy name, O Lord my God, my children's covenant in- 
 tereft is tounded on thy teftimony, and remains indifpu- 
 table, therefore I can plead in faith; thy precious promifes 
 are direfted to each by name, as a covenantee, and 
 therefore I may view in faith thy merciful defigns to- 
 wards them ; thy faithfulnefs was never known to fail, it 
 cannot fail, and therefore the heirs of promife may have 
 llrong confolation, faith having two immutable things to 
 ifand upon, the promfe and the oath of that Cod who 
 cannot lie. Lord increafe my faith! And blefs ray chil- 
 dren with the faving knowledge of this covenant ! * 
 
 As your children advance in years; as their young 
 minds begm to expand, it will be your duty to teach them 
 thefirfi principles of the oracles of God, Teach tliem the 
 nature of fin, and the tremendous confequences of the 
 violation of the righteous laws of an holy God. And 
 when their tender minds begin to tremble beneath the 
 terrors of the Lord, open to them, my brethren, open to 
 them the rich treafures of gofpel mercy. Take them by 
 \)ci^ hand and lead them to the ftable and the manger of 
 Bethlehem — lead iheni to the garden of Gethfemane — 
 to the Judgment Hall — to the crofs on Calvary: tell 
 them to look on that dear Jefus, and drop the tear 
 of mingled grief and joy. Tell them, that Jefus came to 
 feek and to fave fuch loft finners as they are. Tell them 
 of the infinite compaftion of the great Redeemer, who 
 Dr. Williams, p, 321, 
 
 affeftionately 
 
[ 8i ] 
 affeftionately invited little children to his arms, and 
 blefTed them. Tell them that this Jefus is now alive, and 
 lives for evermore; that millions of helplefs babes have 
 been redeemed by his precious blood, and that he is 
 willing to clafp tkem in his arms of mercy, and blefs 
 them. 
 
 It is your <luty to explain to tliem the nature of go] pel 
 i)rdinances. As they have been baptized in their infancy, 
 you are to explain to them the nature and the defign of 
 this facrament. That the Lord of heaven and earth has 
 condefcended to enter into a covenant with man, and 
 that this covenant includes his infant ojf springs which 
 covenant has two feals annexed to it — Baptism and 
 tlie Lord's supper. Baptiim is a fign or token of the 
 favour of God, and an afFurance that he is reconciled to 
 a guilty world. It is a feal which confirms to us, and 
 our children a participation of the promifes, and bleffings 
 of an external and vifrble covenant relation to God, 
 
 Baptifm is a folemn admiflion into the vifible Church 
 of Chrift. The Difciples were commanded to admit all 
 NATIONS into the Ichool of Chrifl : to make Difciples 
 of them, and Baptifm was the token of their admifTion. 
 *' To difciple all nations, is to chrijlianite all nations.— 
 Not making a perfon a Chriflian in faro cceli, in the 
 Judgment of Heaven, but declaring him a Ghriftian, in 
 faro ecciejia^ in the Judgment of the Church. They are 
 added to the number. Thus, thofe that were baptized 
 are faid to be added to the Churchy i. e. -added to the 
 number of vifible believers. And they are entitled tt) 
 the privileges of the Church : to thofe privileges which 
 ^re common to all vifible beHevers." + 
 + Henry on Baptifm, p. z6, 
 
 M Baptifm 
 
C 82 ] 
 
 Baptlfm is alfo, juftly filled a feal of that covenant ot 
 tnercy, which God condefcended to make with parents 
 and their children through the Lord Jefus Chrift, This 
 covenant contains a variety ot rich bleflings : bleflings 
 adapted to the wretched ftate of man, and calculated to 
 render him completely happy. Now Baptifm is a leal 
 which confirms this covenant ; and is defigned to affure 
 us, that he is willing to make good that promife to us, 
 and our children, which he made to Abraham—" I will 
 BE A God to thee, and to thy seed.'* And as 
 circumcifion was enjoined as a feal of confirmation to that 
 holy Patriarch, fo is Baptifm now en joined as a feal of 
 that covenant to every believing parent and his offspring. 
 
 This ordinance in the moll folemn manner binds us 
 to be the Lord's. Baptifm is a free, and entire furrender 
 of ourfelves, and our feed to the fervice ot the Lord 
 God. Parents, who prefent themfelves and their chil- 
 dren before the Lord, pledge themfelves to obferve all 
 the ftatutes and ordinances of God, and to bring up their 
 children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. 
 
 After having thus explained the nature and defign of 
 this gofpel ordmance, it is your duty to guard their 
 young minds againfl its ahuft. Labour to convince them 
 that the falvation of the foul, does by no means depend 
 on he adminiftration of the element of water, but on 
 the application of the precious blood of Chrift, which is 
 ftrikuijly leprefented by the fprinklmg ©f the water in 
 the ordmance oi baptifm. " For in Chriff Jefus, neither 
 circumcifion availeth any thing, nor uncircumcifion, but 
 a new creature." § 
 
 \ Gal. vi. 5., 
 
 Endeavour 
 
C 83 ] 
 
 Endeavour to expofe the abfurdity, (not to fay the im- 
 pietyj of making the mode ot adminiftration and the 
 QUANTITY of the element effential to this Chriftian 
 ordinance. Baptifm is a folemn dedication to God, 
 \vherein water is ufed as ^ Jign or token of fpiritual blef- 
 ftngs. It cannot, therefore, enter materially into the 
 nature, and affeft the validity of the ordinance, let thfi 
 elements be ufed in a largp.r or d^fmaller quantity. The 
 religious ufe of water, is all that is commanded, therefore 
 whether Baptifm be adminiflered by dipping — pour- 
 ing or SPRINKLING, it is of no importance. It favours 
 too much of a Pharafaical fpirii, to contend fo vehe- 
 mently for MODES and forms. It deviates from the 
 freenefs, and fpirituality of the gofpel difpenfation, which 
 fays, ** The hour is come, when ye fhall, neither in this 
 mountain, nor at Jerufalem, worfhip the Father ; but 
 God is a Spirit, and they that worfhip him, muff worfhip 
 him in fpirit and in truth." \ So, ceteris paribus — the 
 hour is come, when ordinances, (hall no longer owe their 
 importance to the manner in which they are admini- 
 flered, but in the frame of mind, and the difpofition 
 of the heart. This unreafonable attachment to the mode 
 of Baptifm, has a powerful tendency to cherifli a legal 
 fpirit. and encourage a carnal confidence. 
 
 Efpecially fuffer me, to exhort you, by the facred 
 name of Jefus, in which your children were baptized — 
 by the honour of religion — and by the concern you feel 
 for the prefent and future welfare of thofe young im- 
 mortals — by thefe tender and powerful motives, let me 
 charge you to -walk before your family in the fear of God. 
 
 X John iv, 31, 
 
 M 2 Live 
 
[ 84 ] 
 Live fa as to- enable you to fay — "IVaik, as ye have us 
 for an exampkl " Example is far more prevalent than 
 precept. Children are fond of treading in the fleps of 
 their parents. Ungodly parents dare not reprove their 
 children, left they retort — ''Pky/iaan heal thyjdjl " — 
 Remember the honourable tellimony, which the Lord 
 God bore to the piety of Abraham, and his exemplary 
 condu61: in his family. '* I know him, that he will com- 
 mand his children, and his houlhold after him, and they 
 fhall keep the way of the Lord, to do jn.ftice and judge- 
 ment." * 
 
 The impiety of parents hardens the hearts of children, 
 and excites the ftrongeft prejudices in their minds againfl 
 religion. To this fource may be traced, a great part of 
 the iniquity of the rifmg generation. And, at the laft 
 great judgment day, multitudes of thofe, who will be 
 bantlhed from the prefence of God into everlafting pu- 
 nifhment, may lay the blood of their fouls, at the door 
 of their ungodly parents] I 
 
 Suffer me, therefore, to befeech you who have felt the 
 warm emotions of paternal love, to hear the ftrong and- 
 pathetic words ot the Lord: "Thefe words which I com- 
 mand thee this day, (hall be in thine heart. And thou 
 flialt teach them diligently unto thy children, and talk of 
 them when thou fiiteil m thine houle, and when thou 
 walkeft by the way^ and when thou licil down, and when 
 thou rifeft up, and thou fhalt bind them for a fign upon 
 thine hand^ and they fhall be as frontlets between thine 
 eyes, and thou (halt write them upon the polls of thy 
 houfe, and on thy gates." t 
 
 * Gen. xviii. ig. i Deut, vi. f^ 
 
 And 
 
C 85 ] 
 
 And the pratllce of baptizing children- will fumifh a 
 pious parent with a variety of convincing arguqients, 
 while pleading with them, and exhoriing them to kjiow^ 
 to love and to obey the Lord Qod of their fathers.— 
 Taking his child in his arras he may addrefs him in the 
 ftriking language of a pious Author. * 
 
 *' My dear child, thou art fmful from thy birth, guilty/ 
 and polluted. This thy baptifm teaches. In baptifm, 
 God fhews and teftifies that he will forgive fins; and this-. 
 is one reafon why thou haft been baptized, becaufe thouj. 
 art a finner, ftanding in need of fpiritual waihing. Thou 
 art not<to think that the water of baptifm takes away fin, 
 that is, pardons and makes thee pure in thy foul; no, no, 
 it only Ihews ihee plainly that thou wantejl this pardon, 
 and purity; and it alfo fhews that God is merciful, and' 
 willing to give thee every good thing in this life, and in • 
 the world to come, on thy coming to him. He fays in.- 
 his word^ that he will give grace and glory ; that thofe 
 who feek him early, that is, ^N\it.n young as thou art, fhall 
 find him; and Chrift fays he will in no v/ay caft out any. 
 poor finner that cometh to him. But thy baptifm fhews 
 jiill more plainly, that thou art guilty, and that God is 
 merciful — That thou art impure, that is, unfit to go tO: 
 heaven, but that God is willing, on thy coming to \i\m^ 
 to cleanfe thee and make thee meet for heayen. My. 
 dear child, learn this, and ftrive to underftand it \vithow{- 
 delay. If thou dieft without repentance—how fhall I 
 fpeak of it? — thou mull perifh for ever! No one-goes 
 tp heaven without pardon, and thou muft not expeft to 
 go there without repentance. And O remember, thatJ, 
 
 •Dr. Williams, Vol, II. p. 331. 
 
 not 
 
• C 86 ] 
 
 not only the bible, the- fabbaths,. the fermons, the prayer's^ 
 
 and the advices thou haft had from me arid others, will 
 life up againft thee, but alfo thy bapufni, in the day ot 
 judgment. O then, my dear child, bring thy poor perifh- 
 ing feli to Jefus Chrift. He will not put thee off, for he 
 has declared he will not. He went through every ftate, 
 from infancy to manhood; and having been a child him- 
 felf, when in the world, he receives children. O the 
 happinefs he has to give! He will not only keep thee 
 from hell, but at death take thee to heaven. He alone 
 can make thee truly good; I cannot. No body on earth 
 can. But Jefus Chrift, being himfelf divinely good and 
 gracious, can make us good; yes, he can and v/ill make 
 thee fo, on coming to him with all thy heart. This thou 
 mayeft be as fure of as that thou art baptized. For bap- 
 tifm according to the will of Chrift is a feal of confir- 
 mation. You know, my dear, that, what an homft man 
 confirms hy Jt^aling it, he will ftand by. Much more fo 
 will our gracious Lord and Saviour. Senfible ot thy 
 finful and helplefs condition, with the affurances of di- 
 vine grace, and with a contrite heart, pray unto thi<! mer- 
 ciful Redeemer in fome fuch words as thefc. *' O Lord 
 God, who alone canft fave me from fin and the wrath to 
 come, accept the prayers and cries of a helplefs child. — 
 No one on earth, or in heaven, but thyfelf, O Lord moft 
 merciful, can help me. I am deftroyed by fm, ih^Jin of 
 my heart efpecially, but my help is from thee. Accept 
 me in Chrift, whofe nature and life were perfeftly holy, 
 and who is made wifdom, righteoufnefs, fan6lification 
 and redemption, to all thy children. O that as I have 
 been baptized with water, I may alfo be baptized with 
 
 the 
 
L 87 3 
 
 the Holy Ghoit, And as this was fa-nftified and fealed 
 by my baptifm, grant it me, O Lord God, for Chrift's 
 fake. Amen." 
 
 I have now brought my defign to a clofe. And I take 
 this opportunity to fay, that as I, moft reluftantly , entered 
 into the controverfy, I fhall now take my final leave of 
 it: refoived (according to my prefent views) to take no 
 public notice of any thing that may be written in reply. 
 More important duties demand my attention and my 
 time. 
 
 I cannot however, put a period to this work, without 
 declaring that I have not been aftuated by a principle of 
 malevolence to any of my Anti-paedobaptift Brethren. 
 I wifh ever to maintain fuch language on this, and on 
 every other religious fubjeft, as may be confiftent with 
 that candour, which the gofpel inculcates, and humility 
 requires. 1 love the perfon, and revere the charafter of 
 every ferious Anti-paedobaptift, and would gladly cherilh 
 the moft friendly intercourfe with him, as a minifter, or 
 a private Chriftian, provided he would obferve, in his 
 conduft towards Paedobaptift Churches, that admirable 
 precept of our Lord — " THEREFORE all THINGS 
 WHATSOEVER YE WOULD THAT MEN SHOULD DO 
 TO YOU, DO YE EVEN SO TO THEM ! " + 
 
 Permit me alfo to exprefs a hope that nothing which I 
 have faid, will be conceived to have arifen from a prin- 
 ciple of refentment againft my quondam friend Mr. BiRT. 
 I folemnly aver that it has not. Moft cheerfully would 
 
 i Matt, vii. 12. 
 
 I give 
 
[ -88 ] 
 
 I give him the right hand of fellowfhip. Moft fihcerely 
 would I wifli to live on terms of friendfhip with ^m, 
 (while he obferves that golden rule of equity enjoined by 
 our Lord) and with all who love the Lord Jefus Chrift, 
 during my abode in this world. And it is my fervent 
 ^nd unceafing prayer that I may dwell with them in 
 thofe happy regions, where all the inhabitants are of one 
 heart and one Tbul-— where no jarring fentiment, or dif- 
 cordant paffion ftiall ever interrupt the endearments of 
 
 an EVERLASTING FRIENDSHIP] 
 
 S' i ;n I s. 
 
r^ 
 
 ■-v 
 
 J/l f/ 
 
 1 
 
•-v^^ --^-i 
 
 (J 
 
 >T 
 
 
 ^^'^-^^C'fy'^'' 
 
 ^^ 
 
 ■J 
 
 
 ■- .< ) 
 
 
 ^"^'