: ^ (0 . -"■*» 03 /? IE 3 « o -a 03 *** 15 : i *"N» h> Ol 1 # w # s> fc O h > « 8 & ^ «» Vi ^ CL BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED, JEREMY TAYLOR, D. D. LATE LORD BISHOP OF DOWN AND CONNOR WITH AN INTRODUCTION AND NOTES, BY WILLIAM ANDERSON. AraXaiTwpoj ro'ig ttoXXoT? h ^vrrrtg ?r.; a\r£ila,<;, nal fn\ to. 'ircifxa, /waXXov Tp£7royT*i. ®zvkv$i$ov Evyy^a^, A. Nee consuetudo qua? apud quosdam obrepserat, irapedire debet quo minus Veritas praevaleat et vincat. Nam consuetudo, sine veritate, vetustas erroris est. Cypriani Epist. 74. LONDON: PUBLISHED BY REST FENNER, PATERNOSTER-ROW. 1818. Printed by S. Curtis, CamberivcU Press. — , PREFACE. In submitting the subsequent pages to the Public, the Editor expects not that they will induce any of those, who are addicted to the prevailing practice, to change their opinions. When persons have taken a side, on a controverted sub- ject, they can seldom be induced to re- examine the grounds of their conviction. Their minds have such a bias, as makes them insensible to the force of the most cogent and satisfactory arguments in favour of opinions or practices, which they have rejected. To be open to con- viction, though the general profession, is extremely rare. IV PREFACE. While so many works issue from the press, against the distinguishing practice of the Baptists, if they remained alto- gether silent, it might be inferred, that they thought their cause indefensible. Some persons may not have made up their minds on the subject of baptism. If the following pages shew that our practice is supported by great appear- ance of reason, or induce any of those who have not come to a conclusion on the article, to embrace what in his judgment accords with scripture, the editor will be amply rewarded. If he has confined his remarks more particularly to Mr. Towgood's Disserta- tions on the subject of Baptism, it is not because he concurs in the panegyric of his late editors : but because, while the work exhibits, without much prolixity, PREFACE. V the strength of the arguments in favour of christening, it having been recently- very warmly recommended by eleven respectable ministers, it may be pre- sumed to possess considerable authority among our brethren. Mr. Belsham's Plea for Infant Baptism, is merely the echo of Mr. Towgood's Disser- tations ; the principal addition made by the minister of Essex-street, being the extravagant position, that the aposto- lical authority of the baptism of the decendants of baptized persons, rests on higher evidence than the authenticity of the scripture. It may, perhaps, be thought more notice should have been taken of the pamphlets called Facts and Evidences on the Subject of Baptism. I must confess, that if I had followed my own judgment, I should have left to its fate a work not less distinguished by in- VI PREFACE. accurate statement, irrelevant matter, a preposterous reasoning, than by the dis- order in which it is thrown together, and the lofty pretensions of its author. But having observed that these pamphlets were hailed as a seasonable support to a sinking cause, and that the confident tone and appearance of learning which the editor of Calmet assumed, made an im- pression on minds not capable of inves- tigating the truth of his assertions; I sup- posed that by fixing on what he most un- fortunately styled a demonstration, and the most vehement of our opponents called 1 ' The best arguments in favour of Infant Baptism they had met with,"* I should be able to expose not only the weakness of his reasoning, but his incompetency to the discussion on which he has entered. Of my success, scholars must judge. * Evengelical Magazine, 1815, p. 417. PREFACE. Vll The notes to Bishop Taylor's portion of this work, will be found inserted thus [ ] between the paragraphs to which they belong. The ensuing pages would certainly not have been published, if the views which they are designed to support, ap- peared not to be of importance. To preserve the rites of our religion in their primitive form, seems due to the great master, and is evidently essential to the perfect efficacy of the Christian institu- tion. It was established, it may be presumed, in its best form ; and every deviation from the primitive practice, is likely to impair the efficacy of its rites. Baptism administered, in what I deem the original and proper manner, is a most solemn and impressive ceremony. It is a most striking representation of the aim Vlll PREFACE. and issue of the Christian dispensation, of the change which it produces in the pre- sent and the future state, preparatory to final happiness. It tends, therefore, to serious reflection, to awaken in the minds of those who may be careless, a sense of their guilt and danger, and to enliven and invigorate the good feelings and impres- sions of those who may have professed themselves to be Christians. It generates seriousness, enflames devotion, and ani- mates hope. The corruption, which has been in- troduced, of this Christian rite, is, in my apprehension, productive of very pernicious consequences. Christianity was plainly intended to make a separation among men. Those who might yield to its influence, were designed to constitute, separate from the world, a community of PREFACE. IX holy men, distinguished by the justness of their principles, the purity of their sentiments, and the rectitude of their conduct. They were not to be conformed to this world, but to be transformed by the renewing of their mind. The christening of infants breaks down the partition, confounds the church and the world, and while it thus exposes the church to cor- ruptions in her doctrines, spirit and practice, renders her an incredibly less efficacious instrument in the reformation and happiness of men. The prevailing corruption of the rite of baptism induces multitudes to think well of themselves without reason; to consider themselves, while alienated from the life of God, as the children of the most high and the heirs of immortality. This seems not an accidental, but a X PREFACE. natural and necessary consequence of the baptism of babes. Poedobaptists must suppose, either that infants are made the children of God by being christened, which is by far the most general opinion, or that they were the children of God before they were christened. All babes who have been christened, are consequently considered as in a state of alliance with God, as the objects of his favour, and entitled to the fu- ture happiness. When they grow up, they are taught that they have been introduced into a state of salvation, or recognised as in that state. As they may not be con- scious to themselves of any thingby which such an advantage could be forfeited, they indulge hope and confidence, which in many instances prove fatal to their eternal interests. They suppose they were certainly once Christians, once in PREFACE. XI the new covenant, once the children of God ; and they are not aware of such a deterioration, as to induce a suspicion that their state is altered, or their pri- vileges lost. The practice of christening impairs the efficacy of preaching, deprives the saving truth of its virtue. Those who have been christened, must be address- ed as Christians. They possess, as they have been taught to believe, not outward advantages, but substantial prerogatives. They are, therefore, fortified against salu- tary conviction. Instructions, adapted to alarm the impenitent and unbelieving, they cannot imagine applicable to them- selves. To reach their conciences, to warn them, with any hope of success, to flee from the wrath to come, their christening must be represented as a Xll PREFACE. mere nullity; they must be stript of the advantages with which they have been invested ; they must be supposed in the world which lieth in wickedness, to be dead in trespasses and in sins. Thus con- contradiction will be introduced into the instruction designed to prepare them for eternity; and they will be in great danger of thinking that to be true, not which is the most salutary, but the most soothing. THE INTRODUCTION TO THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. THE controversy that has, for ages, been agitated between the Baptists and Christians of other persuasions, is divided into two branches : the one respecting the mode, the other respect- ing the subject of baptism. Of these branches of the subject, the latter has been treated with so much ability and success by the learned and eloquent Jeremy Taylor, in the subsequent pages from his celebrated " Discourse of the Liberty of Prophesying" that little more needs be said fully to justify the conduct of the Bap- tists. Satisfied with this apology, I have merely added a few notes ; partly for the purpose of expanding his reasoning, but chiefly in reply to B 6 IMMERSION BAPTISM. minor considerations, which he has not touched. In this Introduction, I shall endeavour to justify the mode of baptism, as practised among the Baptists; beginning with the grounds on which it rests, and proceeding to obviate the difficulties which have been raised by the learning or ingenuity of their adversaries. PART I. IMMERSION BAPTISM. t It is the general opinion of those who think it right to baptize babes, that baptism, as a religious rite, originated, not with Jesus Christ and his forerunner, but with the ancient Jews. It was the practice, it is pretended,* for proselytes to the Jewish religion to be baptized, as well as circumcised. Conceding, for the present, the accuracy of this statement, it is material to remark, that, in none of the passages adduced for the purpose of confirm- ing it, is any expression found, descriptive of baptism as administered in the churches of our * See Lightfoot's Hone Hebraica? et Talmudicae, in Mat. iii. 6. Hammond on the same place, Wall's Hist, of Infant Baptism, Intro, p. xliii. and many others. IMMERSION BAPTISM. 3 opponents. The quotations, in the writers to whom I have referred, and repeated in a num- ber of minor publications, are indeed unanimous that it was necessary for proselytes to bathe themselves. So complete was the immersion, that, according to a passage from Maimonides, " if a person washed himself all ever, except the tip of his finger, he remained unclean." If the custom of persons bathing themselves on embracing Judaism be the origin of Christian baptism, it is evidently the practice of the Baptists that bears any likeness to that custom; while their adversaries have so corrupted the rite, that no trace of the original ceremony remains. To an intelligent person, ignorant of the present controversy, who should wit- ness a christening, it must appear very strange to be told, that the rite was taken from its having been customary for Jewish proselytes to bathe themselves. This Jewish origin of Christian baptism, the Baptists deem fabulous. No sufficient proof o£ the practice, in the time of Christ, of baptizing proselytes to Judaism, has been ad- duced. It is not enjoined in the law of Moses ; no trace of it is found in the Christian scriptures; and the first Jewish writers who mention it, were not of an earlier age than the third cen- B g 4 IMMERSION BAPTISM. tury. The practice seems to have been entirely unknown to Philo and Josephus. This his- torian, indeed, relating how Hyrcanus made proselytes of the Idumeans, and Aristobolus of the Itureans, states, that both nations were obliged to submit to circumcision ; bat he says not a word of baptism.* When he speaks of John's baptism, which he represents as of the nature of the ceremonial washings, he is en- tirely silent respecting the baptism of prose- lytes, f Of this practice the fathers appear to have been ignorant. From the inquiry pro- posed by the messengers of the Jews to John the Baptist, J it should seem, he was supposed to introduce a new ceremony. The baptism of proselytes, as described in the Talmud, bears no resemblance to the rite enjoined by Jesus Christ, except it may be thought, that for a person to bathe himself, and be immersed by another, are similar rites. § * Josephi. Antiq. Jud. lib. xiii. cap. 17. p. 450, and cap. 19. p. 455. Colonise, 1691. + Antiq. lib. xviii. cap. 7, p. 626. t See John, i. 25. $ For a full illustration of the above particulars, I must refer my readers to Dr. Gales Reflections on Wall's. Hist, of Iufant Baptism, let. 9th & 10th ; the Dissertation on Proselyte Bap- tism, affixed to Dr. Gill's Body of Divinity, vol. iii. Robinson's Hist, of Bap. p. 29 — 39. Jenning's Jewish Antiquities, vol. i. p. 133—138. IMMERSION BAPTISM. 5 If the baptism of proselytes, as represented in the Talmud, be deemed the origin and ex- ample of the Christian rite, the only proper subjects of it are converts from Paganism, Ju- daism, or Islamism. It was proselytes, with their children, born before they changed their religion, that were baptized : and it has therefore been inferred, that it would be im- proper to baptize the children of Christians, whether infants or adults. This fair conse- quence Dr. Wall endeavoured to evade, by pretending that it affected not the contro- versy between the Baptists and their oppo- nents, since both concur in the universal obligation of baptism. But this leaves the argument in ail its force. It arises from principles entertained, not by the Baptists, but their adversaries ; and though the Baptists, in perfect conformity with their own views, maintain the universal obligation of baptism, no person, it seems to me, who considers Jewish proselyte baptism as the pattern of the Christian institute, can, consistently, baptize the children of Christians. It seems necessary to ascertain the mode of Christian baptism by other means than Jewish tradition. The obligation of it arising solely from the command of Jesus Christ, ■ b IMMERSION BAPTISM. when he said to his apostles, Go ye and teach all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:* if we can ascertain the meaning of the term that he employed, it will help us to a certain conclusion. Vta-KTi'Ceiv, derived from fiavTELv, a word used by the Greeks to express the practice of dyers in dyeing different mate- rials, signifies, primarily and properly, to dip or immerse. Examples, showing that this is the force of the term, frequently occur in Greek writers.f I will adduce a few. Twj/^p- rraitov Zrjpiiov to. 7roXXa vtto tov TroTafjidv 7repi\r)(j)§iv7a dtcupSeiperai /3affn£o/i*ya.+ Of the terrestrial ani- mals, many seized by the river and immersed, are destroyed. rioo-acW, says Heraclidus Pon- ticus, allegorizing the fable of Mars taken in a net by Vulcan, 3'o pvofievoq trap 'HtyaiaTOv tov "Apr;, iriSavwc, EirsidrjTrep Ik tiop j3avavaru)v hiairvpog 6 tov aicfjpov fjvcpos £\kv$£iq vdari /3a7rr/^£rat teat to * Mat. xxviii. 19. t A copious collection of passages from which the meaning of £a7TTE:v and danrri^iiv m ay be determined, may be found in Dr. Gale's Reflections, &c. Let. 3d. p. 90 — 130. From the passages in Gale, the excellent and learned Dr. Ryland, has appended to his discourse, entitled, A Candid Statement of the reasons which induce the Baptists to differ in opinion and practice from so many of their Christian Brethren, a judicious selection, enriched v> ith various appropriate examples, particularly from Josephus. ; Diodorus Siculus, lib. i. cap. 36. IMMERSION BAPTISM. 7 (ftXoywdeg viro rrfg iSiag (jwcrewg vcari KaTCMrfievShey ava- iraveTat* Neptune delivering Mars is very in- genious. If a piece of iron, taken red-hot from the furnace, is dipped in water, the fire, extin- guished by the water, loses its peculiar nature. Speaking of a lake near Agrigentum, Strabo Says, OvCe yap Toig ciKoXvfxfiotg fiairTtfeazai. avjifimvei £v\u)v Tponov £7rt7ro\d£oucn.t Things, which usually sink, are not liable to be immersed in it, but float on it like wood. Of a rivulet in Capadocia he observes, Ty c£ tcaSUvTi atcoyTiov ayuSsy eig tov fioSpoy i) (jta tov vcWoc; avTiirpdr-Et toiX(x)y olg rat/rci EinreTaKTO okotovq kTria-^ovTog (japovvreg del 8e (3aTrTi£ovTag wg kv iraidtiji vr]^6^.evov ovic avfjKav Eoig /ecu TrayTairacnv airovi^au^ The youth having, by the exciting of Herod, mingled with them (who bathed), as darkness approached, those of his friends entrusted with the business, pressing him down * Aliegoriae Heraclidi Pontici, p. 495. t Strabo, lib. ix. p. 421. % Lib. xii. p. 809. § Antiq. lib. xv. cap. 3. p. 514. 11 Lib.iv. cap. 4. p. 110. 8 IMMERSION BAPTISM. while swimming, and dipping him, as in sport, desisted not till they had quite suffocated him. Tovc airb veicpov fXE^xiaafXEvovQ j3cnrTi£ovr£Q rfjg ritypas TavTrjg he Trsytjv zppalvov. Dipping part of the ashes in water, they sprinkle those who have been denied by a dead body. If it were necessary to strengthen the proof, which the above examples afford, that ^axn'frtv signifies to immerse, I might advert to the force of the preposition h, with which it is, in scripture, often united. Those who came to John, it is said, were baptized by him in the Jordan. 1 baptize you in water to repent- ance, said he, but he that cometh after me, shall baptize you in the Holy Ghost and fire.* This mode of speaking shows, that fia-nrl&iv signifies to immerse. In a note, indeed, to the last edition of Towgood's Dissertations on Christian Baptism, the writer is pleased to say, " The laying any weight on its being said, 'were baptised in the Jordan,' shows extreme ignorance of the original, "f That the word kv may, in many connexions, be properly rendered with and at, I have not to learn ; but that it may be thus rendered in union with fta-KTi'Cziv, I very much doubt, and • Matt. iii. 6 & 11. t p. 107\ IMMERSION BAPTISM. 9 suspect it will require all this gentleman's knowledge of the original, to evince it by unexceptionable examples. Not one will, I be- lieve, be found in the Christian scriptures. 'Ev properly and generally denotes in ; and, in construction with fiaTrrtfav, no reason is brought to justify a departure from that signification. The places chosen for baptizing, as the Jordan, Enon near Solim, seem proper only on the supposition that dipping was the mode. Its convenience for immersion was the reason that the forerunner of Christ fixed on Enon. John, says the Sacred Writer, was baptiz- ing in Enon near Salim, because there was much water there.* It is indeed, pretended, that the terms of the Evangelist by no means imply copiousness of water ; and a world of needless and ridiculous pains has been taken, not to prove that the Greek is improperly ren- dered in the common version : but that tz^an o*d, with which Uara TcoKkh is supposed to corres- pond, may mean many small streams. This may be granted ; but it would be easy to adduce examples in favour of the common version, if the palpable impertinence, which, by a different rendering, the words present, did not make it quite needless. * John iii. 23. 10 IMMERSION BAPTISM. The account of some baptisms, which the scripture records, affords a high probability in favour of immersion. Jesus when lie was bap- tized, it is said, went up out of the water. Of Philip and the Eunuch it is related : They came unto a certain water ; and they went down both into the water > both Philip and the Eunuch, and he baptized him ; and when they were come up out of the water ', the spirit of the Lord caught away Philip. Though there is not the shadow of a reason to doubt that these passages are rightly interpreted to signify that the persons baptized were actually in the water, in proof of it I may be allowed to tran- scribe the following examples. Kare/3r/6poi iDaTTTKTfxoi are to be understood of those different bathings, has, with much appearance of reason, been affirmed, by Vatabulus, Grotius, Whitby, Doddridge, Macknight, and other learned Psedobaptists. The term pairTHrpbe occurs also. Mark, cap. vii. v. 4. This example is usually ad- * Towgood, p. 83. t Do. p. 104, 108. t Exod. xxix. 4. xxx. 18, IP. Levit. xiii, and xiv. j vi. 27, 28. xv, SPRINKLING NOT BAPTISM. 21 duced with an air of confidence, as if it decided the question. " Did they wash their couches and beds by putting them wholly under water? No,"* replies " the learned and profound Tow- good ;" but instead of proof, supports himself by the authority of Lightfoot. I will venture to say, yes ; and besides alleging the authority of the very learned Hammond, who says, 11 The baptisms of cups, &c. is putting into water all over, rinsing them,"'t I will add, that it is allowed /3a7r-tcjuoe signifies dipping ; while not an instance has been brought, in which it signifies sprinkling. He who reads the injunc- tions of the Mosaic law, respecting unclean- ness, particularly the xv. chap, of Leviticus, and remembers, that the Jews were prone to enlarge rather than narrow the meaning of the ceremonial precepts, will not, perhaps, find it difficult to believe that they dipped even their couches, when they supposed them polluted. Towgood ridicules those who will not receive the accounts, which have been given by the Rabbin, of Jewish customs. The indefatigable Dr. Gill has adduced, from the Rabbinical writings, passages, which state positively that it was the practice to dip, when defiled, all the articles, specified by the evangelist. " A * As above, p. 89. t Hammond oa the place. 22 SPRINKLING NOT BAPTISM. " bed, that is wholly defiled, if it be dipt part " by part, is pure. If the bed be dipt, though " its feet are plunged into the mud at the bottom " of the pool, it is clean. A pillow, or a bolster " of skin, must be dipt and drawn up by the " fringes/'* It is likewise pretended, that " the word " ficnrTifa is generally used in scripture, wmere " the art of pouring or sprinkling, not dipping, " is intended. Luke, xi. 8. The Pharisee mar- " veiled, on 6v irp&Tov ifta-Tr-laZr}. Did he expect " that our Lord should have plunged his " whole body under w T ater before dinner I " Undoubtedly not," says Towgood ;t though I am inclined to think that the Pharisee had expected that our Lord would have bathed himself before dinner. The natural and pro- per signification of the term employed by the evangelist, is to immerse. To bathe before dinner was a common custom among the Sy- rians, Greeks, and Romans. Immersing the body being the most complete purification, was frequently practised, particularly by the Pha- risees, and might naturally be expected in Jesus, who, while he professed himself great sanctity, had assumed the office of correcting the most * See Dr. Gill's note on the place in which the references to tlie above sentences will be found, as well as other quotations establishing what I have affirmed. t Diss. p. 83. SPRINKLING NOT BAPTISM. 23 distinguished of the Jewish sectaries. That the Pharisee was surprized that our Lord had not immersed himself, has been the opinion of cri- tics of great name. Referring to Vatabulus, Zeger, and Schleusner, I will add a few lines from the very learned and no less judicious Drusius. " That he had not been baptized be- "fore dinner, that is, bathed. Without being " bathed, it was not their practice to take food. " As that was done by Christ, the Pharisee w^as " surprised ; which will not appear strange to " him who is skilled in the Pharisaiac traditions. *' From frequent bathing, indeed, they were " called fiaTrriarat ; and they were not disposed " to eat with a person, who had not been « bathed." * " Mark vii. 3, 4. The Pharisees and all " the Jews when they came from the market, airTi is used in the New Testament, affords the least countenance to the mode of baptism adopted by our opponents. They all justify our practice ; and the examples, drawn from the Septuagint, will be found not less in our favour. They are four. In Eccles. xxxiv. 26 he, who was purified from the touch of a detd body, is said to be paTrTtZonevor. The comrni nt * Baptizati sunt i. c. quasi baptizati sunt. Nubes impendebat iilorum capiti ; sic et aqua iis qui baptizantur. Mare circum- dabat eorum latera ; sic et aqua eos qui baptizantur. Grotius in Locum, SPRINKLING NOT BAPTISM. 21 of Towgood on this text, is really diverting. " The ceremony of his purification consisted chiefly," he says, " if not entirely, in sprinkling " water upon him. There is mention indeed " of washing his cloaths and bathing himself; " but this may possibly be understood of the " sprinkler. Supposing that he was obliged to u bathe his flesh ; it is most evident that this " bathing was not that application of water in " which the ceremony of his cleansing chiefly " consisted."* If the person purified from the contact of the dead, bathed himself, how learnt the "profound" Towgood that the author of Ecclesiasticus referred not solely to this cir- cumstance, when he styled him /3a7rr/£ojU£yo£ ; That the precept to bathe (Num. xix. 16.) applied to him who sprinkled the water of separation, and not to him who was defiled by touching the dead, though possible, is extremely improbable. To make sense of the passage, we must understand the command to bathe, in reference to him who was polluted, If the less defilement contracted by the priest, was to be removed by bathing, it is not likely that the greater required an inferior purification. We find from Levit. xi. 32, that things touched by a dead body were to be put into water in order * Dissertations, p. 95. d2 28 SPRINKLING NOT BAPTISM. to be cleansed ; and, as it cannot be supposed that persons were less denied than things, by- contact with the dead, it is reasonable to think that the precept in question applied to the man who had been polluted. fjorrTt^opevoQ, in Eccle- siasticus, may very properly be rendered bathed or dipped. Is. xxi. 4, fj ttyqfitfi /.it /3a7rW£a cannot be ima- gined to present any difficulty. Iniquity im- merses me, namely, in misery, while it accords with the Greek, is a mode of expression neither harsh nor unusual. Of Judith it is said, in the book of that name, chap. xii. 7, She went out in the night into the valley of Bethulia> and £/3a7rn£ero iv 7rapt^6Xri tVt T'Tjc 7n]yfjg too vIoltoq. " It is the "height of absurdity," Towgood affirms, " to " imagine that Judith bathed herself."* It may seem rash to maintain what a writer, whom his editors style " learned, acute, and profound," has pronounced " the height of absurdity." But with deference, it seems to me that the writer of the book meant to say that Judith really bathed herself in the camp. The story appears to render this opinion very credible. * Disser. p. 96. SPRINKLING NOT BAPTISM. 29 Judith, the writer informs us, having ingratiated herself with the general of the invading army, said, Let my Lord command that thine hand- maid may go forth unto prayer. Then Holo- femes commanded his guard that he should not stay her. Thus she abode in the camp three days; and she went out in the night into the valley of Bethulia, and washed in a foun- tain of water by the camp. That Judith per- formed her devotions without molestation can hardly be doubted., The authority which pre- served her from annoyance, while she offered her prayers, was adequate to afford her an op- portunity of bathing herself, if she were dis- posed. The term which the writer employs has not been proved to signify any thing except dipping ; and from the extraordinary devotion which he ascribes to Judith, it is probable he intended to represent her, as uniting bathing with prayer. The only remaining instance of the term in question is 2 Kings, v. 14. Then went he down and dipped himself seven times in the Jordan, This appears to me a plain example of the or- dinary signification of /3a7rrt£oyucu. As Towgood allows that fiaTrrifciv sometimes, in scripture, means to dip, I expected that he would have brought this as an instance of that meaning : 30 SPRINKLING NOT BAPTISM. but he actually quotes all the examples of the term, in sacred writ, and maintains that, so far from any of them signifying to dip, they all denote to pour or sprinkle. " When the prophet lt bids him wash seven times, it is much more "natural to understand it of sprinkling or pour- " ing water seven times upon the leprous part " than of dipping his whole body ; of which " kind of washing there is not the least shadow f! in the law."* Because the law commanded the priest, in cleansing a leper, to sprinkle blood and water on him seven times, this acute writer thinks " it natural to understand the words of "the prophet, Go and wash in the Jordan seven li times, of sprinkling water on the leprous part." While the priest was to sprinkle the leper seven times, with blood and water, the leper was commanded to bathe himself twice ; so true is the assertion, that of this " kind of washing " there is not the least shadow in the law." To allege the words of our Saviour, Go wash in the pool of Siloam,f as authorizing us to inter- pret the order of the prophet of sprinkling water on the leprous part, is weak and futile in the extreme. The terms in the evangelist and the Greek version of the prophet's message, are different. N/^at, the term in John, signifies to * Diss. p. 99. t John, ix. 7. SPRINKLING NOT BAPTISM. SI wash the feet or face;* while Xovaai, the term in the Septuagint, is used of the whole body, and signifies to bathe. After all, our adversaries seem to have little confidence in the countenance which sprinkling can derive from the sense of /3a7r-t£w,t in any passage that has been yet adduced. They de- pend chiefly on the design of baptism. It is a figurative thing they pretend, and what it is designed to signify, may as well be represented by sprinkling as by dipping. For this argu- ment, our adversaries are indebted to the inge- nuity of the celebrated Cyprian. About the middle of the third century, when the opinion of the necessity of baptism to salvation began to gain ground, it was thought fit by some persons to substitute, in the case of the sick, affusion instead of dipping. " Baptism of this " sort," says the learned Valesius, " was not " deemed either solemn or perfect, since it ap- " peared to be observed, not spontaneously, but * Ni^a* ^ £ ir^os-KTrov y.a.\ ttoS"*. Ammonius ttej* G/xoion Hal hx^ov Xs|ea?v. t The following sentence is often quoted from Dr. John Owen. " I must say, and I will make it good, that the word " ((SaTTT^siy) signifies to wash, as well as to dip." This seems a boast ; but it means nothing. A thing may be washed ty being dipt. 32 SPRINKLING NOT BAPTISM. " from fear of death, by persons labouring " under delirium, and no longer possessed of " reason. Besides, as baptism properly signifies " immersion, an affusion of this sort could " scarcely be called baptism. Consequently, " Clinics, the name of those who had been " baptized in this way, were prohibited, by the " twelfth canon of the council of Neocsesarea, " from rising to the office of presbyter."* This affusion, which to Christians in general ap- peared a corruption of the rite, the bishop of Carthage was pleased to consider sufficient baptism, and endeavoured to justify his opinion by passages of scripture, that have not the re- motest connection with the subject. He quotes the words of the prophet, / will sprinkle clean water on yon, and ye shall be clean. He ad- duces the precepts of the law, enjoining the sprinkling of water for purposes of purification. Hence he most ingeniously concludes that the sprinkling of water, is equal to immersion.t * It aque hujusmodi baptismus parum solemnis ac minus per- feetus habetur quippe qui non sponte sed mortis metu susceptus videtur, a hominibus delirio laborantibus et nullo amplius sensu praeditis. Accedit quod cum baptismus proprie mersationem signi- ficat ejusmodi perfusio vix baptismus dici poterat. Quamobrem Clinici (sic enim vocabantur qui ejusmodi baptismum acceperant) ad presbyterii gradum permoveri vetantur canone Concilii Neoca> sariensis. — Valesii Adnotationes ad Eusebii Hist. Ecclcs. p. 134. t Cypriani Epistola ad Magnum, p. 186. SPRINKLING NOT BAPTISM. 33 To the arguments of Cyprian, and to all others of a like nature, which modern Paedobaptists have constructed, it might seem sufficient an- swer : that Christ commanded the apostles to dip those whom they might have taught : that dipping was the mode of baptism which they observed : that no trace of any other mode occurs till the middle of the third century, when affusion, though admitted in case of the sick, w T as generally reprobated as imperfect baptism: and that, while those who think a mode, dif- ferent from that which Jesus Christ enjoined, the apostles practised, and the primitive church observed, equally expressive of the design of baptism, appear to be guilty of presumption ; we consider it more becoming, as well as satis- factory, to adhere to the precept of our divine master, and tread in the steps of the first Christians. What baptism is designed to signify, Paedo- baptists are not agreed. Some say it represents the sprinkling of the blood of Christ on the conscience ; others the effusion of the Holy Spirit; while others contend that it is significant of both these objects. That baptism represents the application of the blood of Christ, which qualifies his disciples to serve God, is an opinion that has not the least foundation in scripture. 34 SPRINKLING NOT BAPTISM. It is a pare fancy. It seems that according to the words both of John the Baptist and of our Lord, the apostles were actually immersed in the Holy Spirit. Suddenly there came a sound from heaven, says the historian, as of a rushing mighty icind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.* This I deem the baptism of the Holy Spirit; and how well it agrees with the notion of immersion, will appear from the following words of Casaubon. " Although I "do not disapprove of retaining in this place " the term baptize, that // avrt-rfVt? may be com- " plete ; yet I think a regard ought to be had " to the proper signification of the word. " Ba-W,W is to dip, as if to dye ; and, in this " sense of the word, the apostles are said /W- M Tiazrjvai. The house, in which this was ef- fected, was filled with the Holy Spirit; so " that the apostles appear to have been plunged " into it as into a sort of bath. This remark " of the Greeks is worthy of notice ; the wind " filled the whole house, filling it up in the " manner of a bath ; as it had been promised " them that they should be immersed in the Holy " Spirit. Hence what I remarked on v. 5. of the " former chapter, is evident, that we ought to at- f tend to the proper signification of ( oa--t,*av."t * Acts, ii. 2. t Etsi nou improbo ut hie quoque retineatur verbum baptizare SPRINKLING NOT BAPTISM. 35 Water in baptism, it is said, is the emblem of the Holy Spirit ; and, as God promises to pour out his spirit, or is said to have poured it out, that rite is very properly administered by sprinkling. If from this figurative mode of representing the donation of the divine in- fluence, it is fairly concluded that sprinkling is baptism, it may, with equal reason, be in- ferred that, because God says, / will put my spirit within you, and the spirit is said to be in the faithful, to put a little water into a per- son's mouth is to baptize him. That this is not a caricature of the reasoning of our op- ponents, appears from the following words in the Facts and Evidences on the subject of Baptism. The author, after quoting different scriptures which describe the imparting, or effects, of the divine influence, thus proceeds, in his peculiar and inimitable style : " These quo plena sit h avT&es-n;; tamen habendam hoc loco proprije significationis rationem : (SaTnifyiv enim tanquam ad tingendum mergere est : atque hoc sensu vocis dicuntur apostoli £a7rTt;vat. Domus enim in qua hoc peractum est spiritu sancto fuit repleta, ita ut ia earn tanquam in xoXujuCa&pav quandam apostoli demersi fuissa videantur. Notandum Graecorum haec observatio : Wxfyaxrs tov omov oXov '« won xoXujM.^nS'paf t«£iv avcLKhvipoZa-a 'wtii STTriyye'h'ro auroiQ iv irvevfjcari Bairric-^na-icSau ; unde apparet quod superior! capiti notavimus v. 5, observandam esse propriam voeis fair- ■n'fsw significatioaem. — Casaubon in Actar. Apostolorum, I. 5, II. 2. 36 SPRINKLING NOT BAPTISM. " passages give us as synonymous with bap- tize, 1, sending down ; 2, coming; 3, giving; " 4, falling ; 5, shedding ; 6, pouring ; 7, sitting, "or abiding; 8, anointing; 9. filling ; 10, seal- "ing. 1 '* The absurdity of this is palpable; but it is only pushing to the extreme that mode of reasoning, which pretends to determine, from the terms employed to signify the im- parting, or operation of the Holy Spirit, the form in which baptism ought to be adminis- tered. The manner of the agency of God in imparting his influence is involved in mystery, not less than the process of its operation on the human mind. Baptism represents the effects of God's operation on the mind, rather than the way in which his agency is exerted. A singular mode of baptism is suggested in the following words of Towgood : " The " state of those in the ark," says this ' acute 1 and profound' writer, " is said to be a figure \* of Christian baptism ; but they only had water " poured down upon them."f Hence it appears, that a person sitting in his house during a shower of rain, may very properly be said to be baptized. Attempts have been made to justify sprink- ling by the appearance of example, in the • Letter I. p. 8. t Disser. p. £4. SPRINKLING NOT BAPTISM. 37 ling by the appearance of example, in the first ages of the ehurch. It seems highly im- probable that Paul, or the jailor and his family, were dipped ; or that the multitudes baptized by John, or on the day of pentecost, were immersed. * On this high improba- bility, the following remarks may be made. In the apostolic age, there was but one baptism in the church. If there were the slightest reason to imagine, that the converts were baptized in different modes, Paul informs us, in plain and express terms, that he was dipped. Know ye not, says he, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death. Therefore we are buried with him by baptising Among the Greeks and Romans, jails were not with- out the convenience of a bath. Socrates bathed in the prison, just before he drank the poison. £ There is no difficulty, therefore, in supposing, that the jailor and all his were immersed. Mr. Robinson describes a baptism, which took place at Wittlesford, near Cambridge, when the nephew of the late Dr. Andrew Gifford immersed, in a short time, forty-eight persons. § * Disser. p. 116. % Platonis Phaedo. t Rom. vi. 3, -1, § Hist, of Bap. p. Ml. 38 SPRINKLING NOT BAPTISM. As there were, at Jerusalem, twelve apostles and seventy disciples, authorized to teach and work miracles, if they had baptized not thirty-seven persons each, they would easily have dipped the three thousand said to be added to the church, on the day of Peter's memorable sermon. Though it is said by the evangelist: Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, and were baptized of him in Jordan,* nothing can be concluded from hence in favour of sprinkling. Besides, that the proper meaning of (3cnrTi£eu/ is to dip, and, to use the words of that zealous advocate of sprinkling, Dr. John Lightfoot, " That the " baptism of John was by plunging the whole " body, seems to appear from those things " which are related of him, namely that he " baptized in Jordan, that he baptized in " Enon, because there was much water there, "and that Christ being baptized, came up "out of the water ;"*f- the words of the evan- gelist are unquestionably hyperbolical. Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John.\ The number of John's disciples, therefore, was not greater than he could immerse. • Matt. iii. 5, 6. t Works, vol. II. p. 12 J. + Joljp, iv. 1. SPRINKLING NOT BAPTISM. 39 No instance, it appears, of /3a7rr/£a*> in the sense of sprinkling, has been adduced. To justify the practice of sprinkling, by expres- sions which describe the communication of the divine influence, is a mode of reasoning, that, when carried to its legitimate conse- quences, appears very ridiculous and absurd. Those who plead for sprinkling, as a proper form of baptism, may be safely challenged to bring an example of this practice, earlier than the middle of the third century. e 2 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. BY JEREMY TAYLOR, D. D. Late Lord Bishop of Down and Connor, Although the denying of baptism to in- fants be a doctrine justly condemned by most sorts of Christians, upon great grounds of reason, yet possibly the defence of the Ana- baptists may be so great, as to take off much, and rebate the edge of their adversaries' as- sault. It will be neither unpleasant nor un- profitable to draw a short scheme of plea for each party, the result of which possibly may be, that though they be deceived, yet they have so great excuse on their side, that their error is not impudent or vincible. The bap- tism of infants rests wholly upon this dis- course. THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 41 When God made a covenant with Abra- ham for himself and his posterity, into which the Gentiles were reckoned by spiritual adop- tion, he did, for the present, consign that covenant with the sacrament of circumcision: the extent of which rite was to all his family, from the major domo, to the proselytus domi- cilio, and to infants of eight days old. Now the very nature of this covenant being a cove- nant of faith for its formality, and with all faithful people for the object, and circum- cision being a seal of this covenant, if ever any rite do supervene to consign the same covenant, that rite must acknowledge circum- cision for its type and precedent. And this the apostle tells us in express doctrine. Now the nature of types is to give some proportions to its successor the antitype ; and they both being seals of the same righteousness of faith, it will not easily be found where these two seals have any such distinction in their nature or purposes, as to appertain to persons of dif- fering capacity, and not equally concern all ; and this argument was thought of so much force by some of those excellent men which were bishops in the primitive church, that a good bishop writ an epistle to St. Cyprian, to know of him whether or no it were lawful to baptize infants before the eighth day, because 42 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. the type of baptism was ministered in that circumcision, he in his discourse supposing that the first rite was a direction to the second, which prevailed with him so far as to believe it to limit every circumstance. And not only this type, but the acts of Christ which were previous to the institution of baptism, did prepare our understanding by such impresses as were sufficient to produce such persuasion in us, that Christ intended this ministry for the actual advantage of in- fants as well as of persons of understanding. For Christ commanded that children should be brought unto him, he took them in his arms, he imposed hands on them and blessed them, and, without question, did by such acts of favour consign his love to them, and them to a capacity of an eternal participation of it. And possibly the invitation which Christ made to all to come to him, all them that are heavy laden, did in its proportion concern infants as much as others, if they be guilty of original sin ; and if that sin be a burthen, and presses them to any spiritual danger or inconvenience. And it is all the reason of the world, that since the grace of Christ is as large as the prevari- cation of Adam, all they who are made guilty by the first Adam should be cleansed by the second. But as they are guilty by another THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 43 man's act, so they should be brought to the font, to be purified, by others; there being the same proportion of reason that, by others' acts, they should be relieved who were in danger of perishing by the act of others. And therefore St. Austin argues excellently to this purpose : " Accommodat iliis mater ecclesia aliorum " pedes, ut veniant ; aliorum cor, ut credant ; " aliorum linguam, ut fateantur : ut quoniam " quod aegri sunt, alio peccante praegravantur, " sic cum sani fiant alio confitentesalventur."* And Justin Martyr, " a^v-ca k } rwv lib. t5 " /3arrtVjUaroc aya$wv ra fipedt] tij iti-el tu>v " TrpofTcpspoprwy aira rw /3a7r~((7yuari." f But whether they have original sin or no, yet take them in puris naturalibus, they can- not go to God, or attain to eternity: to which they were intended in their first being and creation, and therefore much less since their naturals are impaired by the curse on human nature, procured by Adam's prevarication. And if a natural agent cannot, in puris natu- ralibus, attain to heaven, which is a superna- tural end, much less when it is loaden with accidental and grievous impediments. Now then since the only way revealed to us of ac- quiring heaven is by Jesus Christ ; and the * Serm. X. de verb. Apost. t Resp. ad Orthodoxos, 44 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. first inlet into Christianity, and access to him is by baptism, as appears by the perpetual analogy of the New Testament ; either infants are not persons capable of that end which is the perfection of human nature, and to which the soul of man in its being made immortal was essentially designed, and so are miserable and deficient from the very end of humanity, if they die before the use of reason ; or else they must be brought to Christ by the church doors, that is, by the font and waters of bap- tism. And in reason, it seems more pregnant and plausible that infants rather than men of under- standing should be baptized : for since the efficacy of the sacraments depends upon divine institution and immediate benediction, and that they produce their effects independently upon man, in them that do not hinder their opera- tion ; since infants cannot by any act of their own promote the hope of their own salvation, which men of reason and choice may, by acts of virtue and election ; it is more agreeable to the goodness of God, the honour and excel- lency of the sacrament, and the necessity of its institution that it should in infants supply the want of human acts and free obedience. Which the very thing itself seems to say it does, because its effect is from God, and re- THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 45 quires nothing on man's part, but that its effi- cacy be not hindered : and then in infants, the disposition is equal, and the necessity more; they cannot ponere obicem, and by the same reason cannot do others acts, which without the sacraments do advantages towards our hopes of heaven, and therefore have more need to be supplied by an act, and an institution divine and supernatural. And this is not only necessary in respect of the condition of infants in capacity, to do acts of grace, but also ia obedience to divine pre- cept. For Christ made a law whose sanction is with an exclusive negative to them that are not baptized. Unless a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven; if then infants have a capacity of being co-heirs with Christ in the kingdom of his father, as Christ affirms they have, by saying for of such is the kingdom of heaven, then there is a necessity that they should be brought to baptism, there being an absolute exclusion of all persons unbaptized, and all persons not spiritual from the kingdom of heaven. But indeed it is a destruction of all the hopes and happiness of infants, a denying to them an exemption from the final condition of beasts and insectiies, or else a designing of 46 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. them to a worse misery, to say that God hath not appointed some external or internal means of bringing them to an eternal happiness : in- ternal they have none ; for grace being an improvement and heightening the faculties of nature, in order to a heightened and superna- tural end, grace hath no influence or efficacy upon their faculties, who can do no natural acts of understanding : and if there be no external means, then they are destitute of all hopes, and possibilities of salvation. But thanks be to God, he hath provided bet- ter and told us accordingly, for he hath made a promise of the Holy Ghost to infants as well as to men : the promise is made to you and to your children, said St. Peter; the promise of the Father, the promise that he would send the Holy Ghost : now if you ask how this promise shall be conveyed to our children, we have an express out of the same sermon of St. Peter, be baptized, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost ; # so that therefore be- cause the Holy Ghost is promised, and baptism is the means of receiving the promise, therefore baptism pertains to them, to whom the promise which is the effect of baptism does appertain. And that we may not think this argument is * Acts,ii. 38,39 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 47 fallible, or of human collection, observe that it is the argument of the same apostle in ex- press terms : for in the case of Cornelius and his family, he justified his proceeding by this very medium, shall we deny baptism to them who have received the gift of the Holy Ghost as well as we ? Which discourse, if it be re- duced to form of argument says this : they that are capable of the same grace are receptive of the same sign ; but then (to make the syllogism up with an assumption proper to our present purpose) infants are capable of the same grace, that is of the Holy Ghost (for the promise is made to our children as well as to us, and St. Paul says the children of believing parents are holy, and therefore have the Holy Ghost who is the fountain of holiness and sanctifica- tion) therefore they are to receive the sign and the seal of it, that is, the sacrament of bap- tism. And indeed since God entered a covenant with the Jews, which did also actually involve their children, and gave them a sign to esta- blish the covenant, and its appendant promise, either God does not so much love the church as he did the synagogue, and the mercies of the gospel are more restrained, than the mercies of the law, God having made a covenant with the infants of Israel, and none with the chil- 48 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. dren of christian parents ; or if he hath, yet we want the comfort of its consignation ; and unless our children are to be baptized, and so intitled to the promises of the new covenant, as the Jewish babes were by circumcision, this mercy which appertains to infants is so secret and undeclared and unconsigned, that we want much of that mercy and outward testimony which gave them comfort and as- surance. And in proportion to these precepts and revelations was the practice apostolical : for they (to whom Christ gave in precept to make disciples all nations baptizing them, and knew that nations without children never were, and that therefore they were passively concerned in that commision) baptized those families, par- ticularly that of Stephanus and divers others, in which it is more then probable there were some minors if not sucking babes. And this practice did descend upon the church in after ages by tradition apostolical : of this we have sufficient testimony from Origen ; Pro hoc Ec- clesia ab apostolis traditionem accepit, etiam parvulis baptismum dare : # and St. Austin ; Hoc Ecclesia a majorum fide percepit : f and generally all writers (as Calvin says) affirm the * In Rom. vi. torn. ii. p. 543. } Serm. X. de verb. Apost. c. ii. THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 49 same thing : for nullus est scripior tarn vetus- tus, qui non ejus originem ad Jpostolorum sceculum pro cerlo refer at.* From hence the conclusion is, that infants ought to be baptized, that it is simply necessary, that they who deny it are heretics, and such are not to be endured because they deny to infants hopes and take away the possibility of their salvation, which is revealed to us on no other condition of which they are capable but baptism. For by the insinuation of the type, by the action of Christ, by the title infants have to heaven, by the precept of the gospel, by the energy of the promise, by the reasonableness of the thing, by the infinite necessity on the infant's part, by the practice apostolical, by their tradition, and the universal practice of the church ; by all these, God and good people proclaim the law- fulness, the conveniency, and the necessity of infants' baptism. To all this, the Anabaptist gives a soft and gentle answer, that it is a goodly harangtie, which upon strict examination will come to nothing; that it pretends fairly and signifies little ; that some of these allegations are false, some impertinent, and all the rest insufficient. For the argument from circumcision is * 4 Instir. cap. 16. § 8. F 50 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. invalid upon infinite considerations : figures and types prove nothing, unless a commandment go along with them, or some express to signify such to be their purpose : for the deluge of waters and the ark of Noah were a figure of baptism, said Peter ; and if therefore the cir- cumstances of one should be drawn to the other, we should make baptism a prodigy rather than a rite : the paschal lamb was a type of the eucharist, which succeeds the other as baptism does to circumcision ; but because there was in the manducation of the paschal lamb, no prescription of sacramental drink, shall we thence conclude that the eucharist is to be ministered but in one kind ? And even in the very instance of this argument, sup- posing a correspondence of analogy between circumcision and baptism, yet there is no correspondence of identity : for although it were granted that both of them did consign the covenant of faith, yet there is nothing in the circumstance of children's being cir- cumcised that so concerns that mystery, but that it might very well be given to children, and yet baptism only to men of reason ; be- cause circumcision left a character in the flesh, which being imprinted upon infants did its work to them when they came to age ; and such a character was necessary because there THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 51 was no word added to the sign ; but baptism imprints nothing that remains on the body, and if it leaves a character at all it is upon the soul, to which also the word is added, which is as much a part of the sacrament as the sign itself is ; for both which reasons, it is requisite that the persons baptized should be capable of reason, that they may be capable both of the word of the sacrament, and the impress made upon the spirit : since therefore the reason of this parity does wholly fail, there is nothing left to infer a necessity of complying in this circumstance of age any more then in the other annexes of the type: and the case is clear in the bishop's question to Cyprian, for why shall not infants be baptized just upon the eighth day as well as circumcised I * If the correspondence of the rites be an argument to infer one circumstance which is impertinent and accidental to the mysteriousness of the rite, why shall it not infer all I And then also females must not be baptized, because they were not circumcised : but it were more proper, if we would understand it right, to prosecute the analogy from the type to the anti-type by way of letter and spirit, and signification; and as circumcision figures baptism, so also the adjuncts of the circumcision, shall signify * L. 3. Epist. viii. ad Fidum. F 2 02 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. something spiritual, in the adherencies of bap- tism : and therefore as infants were circum- cised, so spiritual infants shall be baptized, which is spiritual circumcision ; for therefore babes had the ministry of the type, to signify that we must, when we give our names to Christ, become vfoioi ev TrovrjpLy children in ma- lice, for unless you become like one of these little ones, ye cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven said our blessed Saviour, and then the type is made complete. And this seems to have been the sense of the primitive church ; for in the age next to the apostles they gave to all baptized persons milk and honey, to repre- sent to them their duty, that though in age and understanding they were men, yet they were babes in Christ, find children in malice. But to infer the sense of the paedo-baptists is so weak a manner of arguing that Austin, whose device it was (and men use to be in love with their own fancies), at the most pretended it but as probable and a mere conjecture. And as ill success will they have with the otter arguments as with this ; for from the action of Christ's blessing infants to infer that they are to be baptized, proves nothing so much as that there is great want of better arguments ; the conclusion would be with more probability derived thus : Christ blessed children and so THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 53 dismissed them, but baptized them not, there- fore infants are not to be baptized: but let this be as weak as its enemy, yet that Christ did not baptize them, is an argument sufficient that Christ hath other ways of bringing them to heaven than by baptism ; he passed his act of grace upon them by benediction and imposi- tion of hands. [From the passage here considered, together with the words of our Lord to Nicodemus, Except a person is born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God, Towgood has framed the following ar- gument for the baptism of babes. One passage declares that they are subjects of the heavenly reign ; while the other states that to be admitted into the kingdom of God, it is essential to be baptized.* This argument destroys itself. The children brought to receive our Lord's benedic- tion, it is allowed, were not baptized; but as they were subjects of the kingdom of God, to admission into it, baptism is evidently not necessary. The proposition that of such is the kingdom of heaven, whatever it may signify, is universal, applicable to all children, to those of unbelievers as well as to those of believers. That the children brought to our Lord belonged to his disciples, is not pretended. If this argu- * Dissertation, p. 33. 54 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. ment, therefore, is of weight, it follows that all children ought to be baptized. It will not be denied that children are capable of deriving advantage from the sacrifice of Christ ; but if, because they may be supposed capable of re- ceiving the regenerating virtue of the Holy Spirit, they ought to be admitted to baptism, because they may derive advantage from the death of Christ, they ought to partake of the memorials of his sufferings. If, because they are subjects of the heavenly reign, they are to be baptized, for the same reason they are to be placed at the Lord's table, and partake of his supper. Indeed, there appears not any argu- ment for the baptism of children, that is not equally conclusive for admitting them to the communion of the body and blood of Christ.'] And therefore, although neither infants nor any man in pur is naturalibus can attain to a supernatural end without the addition of some instrument or means of God's appointing, ordi- narily and regularly, yet where God hath not appointed a rule nor an order, as in the case of infants we contend he hath not, the argument is invalid. And as we are sure that God hath not commanded infants to be baptized ; so we are sure God will do them no injustice, nor damn them for what they cannot help. THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 55 And therefore, let them be pressed with all the inconveniencies that are consequent to ori- ginal sin, yet either it will not be laid to the charge of infants, so as to be sufficient to con- demn them ; or if it could, yet the mercy and absolute goodness of God will secure them, if he takes them away before they can glorify him with a free obedience : Quid ergofestinat innocens cetas ad remissionem peccatorum, was the question of Tertuliian, (lib. de bapt.) he knew no such danger from their original guilt as to drive them to a laver of which in that age of innocence they had no need, as he con- ceived. And therefore, there is no necessity of flying to the help of others, for tongue, and heart, and faith, and predispositions to baptism; for what need all this stir ? as infants, without their own consent, without any act of their own, and without any exterior solemnity, contracted the guilt of Adam's sin, and so are liable to all the punishment which can with justice descend upon his posterity who are personally innocent; so infants shall be restored, without any solem- nity or act of their own, or of any other men for them, by the second Adam, by the redemp- tion of Jesus Christ, by his righteousness and mercies, applied either immediately, or how or when he shall be pleased to appoint. And so Austin's argument will come to nothing without 56 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. any need of god-fathers, or the faith of any- body else. And it is too narrow a conception of God Almighty, because he hath tied us to the observation of the ceremonies of his own institution, that therefore he hath tied himself to it. Many thousand ways there are by which God can bring any reasonable soul to himself: but nothing is more unreasonable, than because he hath tied all men of years and discretion to this way, therefore we of our own heads shall carry infants to him that way without his direc- tion. The conceit is poor and low, and the action consequent to it is too bold and venturous, mysterium mihi et jiliis domus mece : let him do what he pleases to infants; we must not. Only this is certain, that God hath as great care of infants as of others ; and because they have no capacity of doing such acts as may be in order to acquiring salvation, God will by his own immediate mercy bring them thither where he hath intended them : but to say that there- fore he will do it by an external act and minis- try, and that confined to a particular, namely, this rite and no other, is no good argument, unless God could not do it without such means, or that he had said he would not. And why cannot God as well do his mercies to infants now immediately, as he did before the institu- tion either of circumcision or baptism I THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 57 However, there is no danger that infants should perish for want of this external ministry, much less for prevaricating Christ's precept of Nisi quis renatusfuerit, &c. For, first, the water and the spirit in this place signify the same thing j and by water is meant the effect of the spirit, cleansing and purifying the soul, as ap- pears in its parallel place of Christ baptizing with the Spirit and with fire. For although this was literally fulfilled in pentecost, yet morally there is more in it, for it is the sign of the effect of the Holy Ghost, and his produc- tions upon the soul ; and it was an excellency of our blessed Saviour's office, that he baptizes all that come to him with the Holy Ghost and with fire ; for so St. John, preferring Christ's mission and office before his own, tells the Jews, not Christ's disciples, that Christ shall baptize them with fire and the holy Spirit, that is, all that come to him, as John the Baptist did with water, for so lies the antithesis. And you may as well conclude that infants must also pass through the fire as through the water. And that we may not think this a trick to elude the pressure of this place, Peter says the same thing; for when he had said that baptism saves us, he adds by way of explication, not the washing of the Jiesh, but the confidence of a good con- science towards God, plainly saying that it is 66 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. not water, or the purifying of the body, but the cleansing of the spirit, that does that which is supposed to be the effect of baptism ; and if our Saviour's exclusive negative be expounded by analogy to this of Peter, as certainly the other parallel instance must, aud this may, then it will be so far from proving the necessity of infants' baptism, that it can conclude for no man that he is obliged to the rite ; and the doctrine of the baptism is only to derive from the very words of institution, and not be forced from words which were spoken before it was ordained. But to let pass this advantage, and to suppose it meant of external baptism, yet this no more infers a necessity of infants' baptism, than the other words of Christ infer a necessity to give them the holy communion. Nisi comederitis carnem filii kominis, et biberilis sanguinem y ?ion inlroibiiis in regnum ccelorum; and yet we do not think these words sufficient argument to communicate them ; if men therefore will do us justice, either let them give both sacraments to infants, as some ages of the church did, or nei- ther. For the wit of man is not able to shew a disparity in the sanction, or in the energy of its expression. And therefore they were honest that understood the obligation to be parallel, and performed it accordingly; and yet, because we say they were deceived in one instance, and THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 59 yet the obligation (all the world cannot reason- ably say but) is the same ; they are as honest and as reasonable that do neither. And since the ancienc church did with an equal opinion of necessity give them the communion, and yet men now-a-days do not, why shall men be more burthened with a prejudice and a name of ob- loquy, for not giving the infants one sacrament more then they are disliked for not affording them the other. If Anabaptist shall be a name of disgrace, why shall not some other name be invented for them that deny to communicate infants, which shall be equally disgraceful; or else both the opinions signified by such names, be accounted no disparagement, but receive their estimate according to their truth ? Of which truth, since we are now taking account from pretences of scripture, it is con- siderable that the discourse of St. Peter which is pretended for the intitling infants to the pro- mise of the Holy Ghost, and by consequence to baptism, which is supposed to be its instru- ment and conveyance, is wholly a fancy, and hath in it nothing of certainty or demonstration, and not much probability. For besides that the thing itself is unreasonable, and the Holy Ghost works by the heightening and improving our natural faculties, and therefore is a promise that so concerns them as they are reasonable 60 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. creatures, and may have a title to it, in propor- tion to their nature, but no possession or recep- tion of it, till their faculties come into act ; besides this, I say, the words mentioned in St. Peter's sermon (which are the only record of the promise) are interpreted upon a weak mis- take : The promise belongs to you and to your children ; therefore infants are actually receptive of it in that capacity. That's the argument : but the reason of it is not yet discovered, nor ever will; for to you and to your children, is to you and your posterity; to you and your chil- dren, when they are of the same capacity in which you are effectually receptive of the pro- mise. But he that, whenever the word chil- dren is used in scripture, shall by children understand infants, must needs believe that in all Israel there were no men, but all were infants ; and if that had been true, it had been the greater wonder they should overcome the Anakims and beat the king of Moab, and march so far, and discourse so well, for they were all called the children of Israel. And for the allegation of St. Paul that in- fants are holy, if their parents be faithful, it signifies nothing but that they are holy by designation, just as Jeremy and John Baptist were sanctified in their mother's womb, that is, they were appointed and designed for holy THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 61 ministries, but had not received the promise of the Father the gift of the Holy Ghost, for all that sanctification ; and just so the children of Christian parents are sanctified, that is, designed to the service of Jesus Christ, and the future participation of the promises. [As great stress is laid on this text, by the most moderate and judicious of our opponents, it may be proper to give it a little further con- sideration. It seems plain that, in whatever sense the children of a Christian are holy, his wife, though she believe not, is likewise holy. It is because the unbelieving wife is made holy (ftyiaarat), that the children are holy (ay«x). If the holiness of the children, which arises from the sanctity of the parents, qualifies them for baptism and admission into the church, the holiness of the unbelieving parent must qualify her for admission into the society of the faithful. The exposition of this passage, which as- cribes to the children of a Christian a relative or federal sanctity, is very exceptionable ; be- cause it may be justly questioned whether, under the Christian dispensation, any such sanctity exists. To interpret holy (uytd) as signifying legitimate, is not authorized by any example, from sacred or profane writers. An explanation of the passage, different from both these, has been given by the ingenious Dr. G 62 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. Macknight. " The infidel husband," he para- phrases the text, "is sanctified, is fitted to remain " married to the believing wife, by his affection "for her, and the infidel wife is sanctified to " the believing husband ; otherwise certainly " your children would be neglected by you as " unclean ; whereas indeed they are clean ; " they are the objects of your affection and " care."* If this interpretation, which is more probable than any other that has been proposed, be admitted, the text will not afford the least countenance to the baptism of babes. This seems the place to advert to Romans xi. 16 and 17. If the first fruit be holy, the lump is also holy ; and if the root be holy, so are the branches : and if some of the brajiches were broken off, and thou, being a wild olive, wert graffed, in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree, boast not against the branches. Though in this passage there is not a syllable of children nor any allusion to baptism, it is said to furnish a most clear and strong argument for the bap- tism of infants. If we believe the " learned" Towgood, the covenant made with Abraham is the olive-tree, and its root and fatness the privileges of that covenant. Of these privileges * Macknight on the place. THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 63 one lay in this : the faith of the parent brought his children "into a covenant relation to God;" and as the believing Gentile occupies the place of the unbelieving Jew, he must partake of this as well as other church privileges. " What " part of this argument," asks the confident author, "can possibly be denied!"* Every part, it may be replied ; as will be evident, if we attend to the scope and meaning of the pas- sage. The apostle treats of the rejection of the Jews and of their subsequent conversion in the latter ages. That their conversion might be expected he concludes, because from them the first converts to Christ had been drawn. These converts were, so to speak, the first fruits, which being offered to God, sanctified the mass. They formed the trunk into which other con- verts were inserted as grafts into a stock. The privileges of the new dispensation denoted by the root and fatness of the olive-tree, belonged first to the Jewish converts, and were afterward imparted to believing Pagans. That the faith of a convert extended the permanent advan- tages of the dispensation to any, besides himself, there is no reason to believe.] And as the promise appertains not (for * Dissertation?, p. 29, 30. G 2 64 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. ought appears) to infants in that capacity and consistence, but only by the title of their being reasonable creatures, and when they come to that act of which by nature they have the fa- culty ; so if it did, yet baptism is not the means of conveying the Holy Ghost. For that which Peter says, be baptized and ye shall receive the Holy Ghost, signifies no more than this : First be baptized, and then by imposition of the apostle's hands (which was another mystery and rite) ye shall receive the promise of the father : and this is nothing but an insinuation of the right of confirmation, as is to this sense expounded by divers ancient authors, and in ordinary ministry the effect of it is not be- stowed upon any un baptized persons ; for it is in order next after baptism ; and upon this ground Peter's argument in the case of Cor- nelius was concluding enough, a majori ad minus. Thus the Holy Ghost was bestowed upon him and his family, which gift by ordi- nary ministry was consequent to baptism (not as the effect is to the cause or to the proper instrument, but as a consequent is to an ante- cedent in a chain of causes accidentally, and by positive institution, depending upon each other), God by that miracle did give testimony, that the persons of the men were in great dis- positions towards heaven, and therefore were THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 65 to be admitted to those rites, which are the ordinary inlets into the kingdom of heaven. But then from hence to argue that wherever there is a capacity of receiving the same grace, there also the same sign is to be ministered, and from hence to infer psedo-baptism, is an argument very fallacious upon several grounds. First, because baptism is not the sign of the Holy Ghost, but by another mystery it was conveyed ordinarily, and extraordinarily, it was conveyed independently from any mys- tery, and so the argument goes upon a wrong supposition. Secondly, if the supposition were true, the proposition built upon it is false ; for they that are capable of the same grace, are not always capable of the same sign ; for wo- men under the law of Moses, although they were capable of the righteousness of faith, yet they were not capable of the sign of circum- cision ; for God does not always convey his graces in the same manner, but to some medi- ately, to others immediately ; and there is no better instance in the world of it, than the gift of the Holy Ghost (which is the thing now instanced in this contestation) ; for it is certain in scripture, that it was ordinarily given by imposition of hands, an$ that after baptism (and when this came into an ordinary ministry, it was called by the ancient church chrism or conlirma- 66 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. tion) ; but yet it was given sometimes without imposition of hands, as at Pentecost, and to the family of Cornelius; sometimes before baptism, sometimes after, sometimes in conjunction with it. And after all this, least these arguments should not ascertain their cause, they fall on complaining against God, and will not be con- tent with God, unless they may baptize their children, but take exceptions that God did more for the children of the Jews. But why so? Because God made a covenant with their children actually as infants, and consigned it by circumcision. Well ; so he did with our children too in their proportion. He made a covenant of spiritual promises on his part, and spiritual and real services on ours ; and this pertains to children when they are capable, but made with them as soon as they are alive, and yet not so as with the Jews' babes ; for as their rite consigned them actually, so it was a national and temporal blessing and covenant, as a separation of them from the portion of the nations, a marking them for a peculiar people (and therefore while they were in the wilderness, and separate from the commixture of all people, they were not at all circumcised) ; but as that rite did se^al the righteousness of faith, so by virtue of its adherency, and re manency in their flesh, it did that work when THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 67 the children came to age. But in Christian infants the case is otherwise : for the new- covenant being established upon better pro- mises, is not only to better purposes, but also in distinct maimer to be understood ; when their spirits are as receptive of a spiritual act or impress as the bodies of Jewish children were of the sign of circumcision, then it is to be consigned : but this business is quickly at an end, by saying that God hath done no less for ours, than for their children ; for he will do the mercies of a father and a creator to them, and he did no more to the other ; but he hath done more to ours, for he hath made a cove- nant with them, and built it upon promises of the greatest concernment ; he did not so to them : but then for the other part, which is the main of the argument, that unless this mercy be consigned by baptism, as good not at all in respect of us, because we want the comfort of it ; this is the greatest vanity in the world ; for when God hath made a promise pertaining also to our children (for so our adversaries contend, and we also acknowledge in its true sense), shall not this promise, this word of God, be of sufficient truth, certainty, and efficacy to cause comfort, unless we tempt God and require a sign of him. May not Christ say to these men as sometimes to the Jews, a wicked and adul- 68 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. terous generation seekcth after a sign, but no sign shall be given unto it ? But the truth of it is, this argument is nothing but a direct quarrelling with God Almighty. [The reasoning in this, and a former paragraph, seems fully to obviate the argument which our opponents deduce from the covenant made with Abraham and his posterity and the practice of circumcision. But as it is the incessant theme of our adversaries, and occupies so many pages in the Dissertations of Towgood, I may be allowed to make some additional remarks. In the management of this argument, which he repeats in various forms, Mr. Towgood can hardly be acquited of presumption. He pro- fesses to know the conduct which it is fit for the divine being to observe toward infants. From what he thinks it rational to presume, he infers what has been done. The conduct of God, however, is regulated by the dictates of his perfect intellect, not by our views of fitness. As if probabilities were insufficient, Tow- good rests the practice of infant baptism on demonstration. It is evident, he says, that in former dispensations infants were admitted with their parents into covenant with God. This being a great privilege, which, as it appears not to be revoked, must be supposed to subsist m all its force ; the infants of the faithful have THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 69 a right to admission into the covenant with God, and consequently to baptism the ceremony of admission.* This argument, unhappily termed a demonstration, proceeds on the supposition of a correspondence between circumcision and baptism, and is, therefore, liable to all the ob- jections which have been urged against that fancy. It also labours under other serious de- fects. The dispensation which began with the calling of Abraham, and attained its mature form when the Israelites were settled in Canaan, subsisted only one-half of the period that elapsed from the creation of the world to the appear- ance of Christ. It subsisted not from the begin- ning, and it was peculiar to Abraham and to a part of his offspring ; for it appears not to have embraced devout men of other nations, or more than the half of Abraham's posterity. It was temporary, so far as it affected Abraham's de- scendants, and secular, and has been super- seded by a covenant founded on better promises, and ensuring more permanent advantages. The right to admission into the covenant with God, and an actual interest in it, are iden- tical. Admission into it depends not on the will of man, and is not a privilege inherent in blood or birth. The covenant, of which our * Diss, p, 18, 19. 70 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. adversaries speak, is a pure fiction. The in- fants of the faithful never were, in consequence of their relation to their parents, in that covenant by which Christians are allied to the divine being and invested with the dignity of his chil- dren. This seems to me to be clearly and positively stated by the apostle Paul. They are not all Israel^ says he, which are of Israel; nor because they are the seed of Abraham are the}} all children* f f he general doctrine of the Christian scriptures appears to be that no in* ward or permanent distinction among men is conveyed in the blood or transmitted like a secular inheritance. Think not, said the fore- runner of the Messiah to his countrymen, to say within yourselves we have Abraham to our father. When the privileges of the Jews are enumerated by the apostles, they appear to be all outward, none of them affecting the state of their minds, or their relation to the supreme arbiter. The advantages of being christened, are quite imaginary. Towgood, indeed, though afraid to assign immortality as the prerogative of sprinkled babes, yet specifies two advantages which they possess. God, he says, has been pleased to engage by a more particular promise * Rom, ix. 6, 7. THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 71 to raise them to future happiness, and in a fu- ture state, they will be in happier circumstances than those who have not been christened.* If this were true, every man ought by all means to have his children christened. But unhappily the particular promise is not found in scripture. If the condition of infants in another life, will be affected by the devotion of their parents, why the prayers of a Baptist should not be as availing, in this case, as those of a Paedobap- tist, is extremely difficult to conceive. That the children of the faithful are born iu covenant with God, as the present argument asserts, seems inconsistent with experience. If this were the case, the children of real Christians might be expected to exhibit the moral qualities of their parents ; since an essential part of the new covenant is a promise, by which the divine being engages to put his laws into the minds of those who are interested in its privileges and write them in their hearts. It is because this promise is accomplished in the faithful that they are distinguished in their character, from their fellows. Hence arise their devotion and bene- volence ; which, on the other hand, betray the divine agency, and are signs of their alliance with God. Of this relation to God, the only * Diss. p. 15. 72 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. proof is their being conformable to his precepts. If the children of believers were in like relation to God, they would partake of its most essen- tial and distinguishing advantage. They would be formed for the service of God. They would exhibit the moral lineaments of their parents. It is fact, however, that they discover no such likeness, and that they are precisely like the children of other men, except so far as they may have been improved by a more salutary education. Under a similar education they shew no symptoms of difference. To maintain that they are in covenant with God, while the contrary is obvious fro 1 ?* their conduct, is to contend with experience and allow agreeable fancies to prevail against the reality of facts.] Now since there is no strength in the doctrinal part, the practice and precedents, apostolical and ecclesiastical, will be of less concernment, if they were true as is pretended, because actions apostolical are not always rules for ever ; it might be fit for them to do it pro loco et tempore as divers others of their institutions, but yet no engagement past thence upon following ages ; for it might be convenient at that time, in the new spring of Christianity, and till they had engaged a considerable party, THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 73 by that means to make them parties against the Gentiles, superstition, and by way of pre- occupation to ascertain them to their own sect when they came to be men ; or for some other reason not transmitted to us, because the question of fact itself is not sufficiently deter- mined. For the insinuation of that precept of baptizing all nations, of which children certainly are a part, does as little advantage as any of the rest, because other parallel expres- sions of scripture do determine and expound themselves to a sense that includes not all persons absolutely, but of a capable condition, as adorate eum omnes gentes, et psallite Deo omnes nationes ierroe, and divers more. [The precept of Christ, in which the obliga- tion of baptism originated, appears to present insuperable difficulties to the practice of infant baptism ; and the remarks made upon it, furnish examples of the perplexities into which advo- cates of that practice are thrown. It is most evi- dent, that the original term /uaS?;rei'aj', signifies to make disciples by teaching; the only way indeed of making disciples. That this is the force of the word is generally allowed ; and, if it is doubted by any person, he may read Dr. Gale's eighth and ninth letters,* in which the point is esta- * Reflections on Wall. H 74 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. blished by examples and authorities to super- fluity. Infants fall not within the scope of the commission given to the apostles. They are as incapable of being the disciples of Christ as of Newton or Werner. This urgent difficulty has obliged our adversaries to invent the chi- mera of a disciple, who neither is, nor can be, taught. To be a disciple seems, from the com- mission, an indispensible qualification for bap- tism ; and, as it is a qualification of which infants are incapable, to baptize them must be altogether unwarrantable. This difficulty is not in the least removed, by translating the commission Go and proselyte all 7iations. The religion of Christ is mental ; and consists not in outward rites or corporeal observances. To be a proselyte to it, a person must entertain the doctrine of its author, yield his mind to the impress of that doctrine, and comply with the precepts of scripture. The process must take place within him ; for no impress on the body, nothing which others may perform for him, can make him a proselyte to Christianity. Till the truth inform his mind, till he is created anew in Christ Jesus to good icorks, he is an alien from his religion. To proselyte the nations, therefore, is the same as to make them disciples by teaching. They are identical, and altogether inapplicable to infants. THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 75 An excellent person, indeed, the Rev. W. Millar, of Chesham, has recently published a pamphlet to evince that infants are comprized in our Lord's commission to his apostles.* This gentleman denies not that fia^rjTsveiv signifies to make disciples by teaching. " Infants," he confesses, " are incapable of being actually " taught." It seems to follow, therefore, that he attempts to prove that our Lord commis- sioned his apostles to endeavour an impossibi- lity, namely, to make disciples, by teaching, of those who are incapable of being actually taught. Of the same nature with this hopeful at- tempt, is the following question, by the learned Towgood. " Are not infants of Christians as " capable of fxa^revea^ai of being discipled, as H the infants of the Jewish priesthood were of " being enrolled in the temple register and " entered as ministers to Aaron." t None of my readers, I hope, can be so dull as not to perceive that though it was easy to write the names of infants in a register, it is impossible to make them disciples by teaching. A disci- ple, who is not taught, is an absurdity. * See The important Question between the Baptists and Predobaptists — are infants included hi our Lord's commission — ■ examined. f Diss. p. 38. H 2 76 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. It can scarce be necessary to notice so pal- pable an error as is implied in the reasoning of many of our opponents, that because we think t improper to christen infants, we are of opi- nion they are to be neglected and abandoned to the domination of evil. While our opponents employ an unauthorized and useless expedient, which aids rather than counteracts the princi- ples of evil that may operate on their children, we conceive ourselves bound to commend ours to the care and blessing of God ; and, when They are capable, to endeavour by instruction, discipline, and example, to prepare them for eternity. We train them to the practices of our religion, both public and private. If our adversaries will shew one article, in which their children have the advantage of ours, ex- cept that a few drops of water have been sprinkled upon them, and they are hence in danger of thinking they were born again, or made Christians, they will have some ground for their declamation. Till they specify some substantial prerogative evidently peculiar to their children, while they descant, in swelling terms, on our practice as exposing infants to the malignant influence of ,evil, and upon sprinkling as provision for their moral wants, they must necessarily appear dealers in sense- less vituperation and ridiculous panegyric. THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 77 Our opponents seem to allow that they have no express authority in scripture, of precept, or example, for the baptism of babes; but they pre- tend that we are in a like condition . The scripture affords no example, they say, of the children of Christians baptized in mature years. " Where is " the precept, where the example, for baptizing " the descendants of baptized persons, whether "infant or adult?"* These interrogations are, no doubt, supposed to present us with an extreme difficulty ; but on our principles they admit of an easy and satisfactory answer. We know of no difference between the children of Christians and of infidels. No person is a Christian, because he may have sprung from Christian parents. Till he understands the doctrine of Christ, and submits to his precepts, he is not in any advantageous, or even intelli- gible, sense a Christian. He falls within the scope of the commission given to the apostles.] As for the conjecture concerning the family of Stephanus, at the best it is but a conjecture, and besides that, it is not proved that there were children in the family ; yet, if that were granted, it follows not that they were baptized, because by whole families in scripture is meant all persons of reason and age within the family ; for it is said, of the ruler at Capernaum, that * Belsham's Plea for Infant Baptism, p. 55. 78 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. he believed, and all his house. Now you may also suppose that in his house were babes, that is likely enough ; and you may suppose that they did believe too before they could understand, but that is not so likely ; and then the argument from baptising of Stephen's household may be allowed just as probable ; but this is unman-like to build upon such slight airy conjectures. [On the subject of this paragraph, the editor of Calmet has, in his pamphlets, called Facts and Evidences on the Subject of Baptism, insisted at great length. It is difficult to say, whether this person has, in his crude and tedious pages, discovered greater ignorance or assurance. If he had been more competent in Greek learning he would have spoken with less confidence, if not suppressed altogether what he has published. Respecting the import of two words, of very frequent occurrence, he professes to have made discoveries, that had escaped the most profound and accurate scholars. He boasts of having invented a demonstration in favour of infant baptism ; and wishes it to be supposed that not to acquiesce in his groundless assertions, is a degree of obstinacy equal to not believing Moses and the prophets/* I will shew that the distinction essential to the argument of this vaunting per- * Letters iv, v. vi. p. 30. 21. Letter iii. p. 14. THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 79 son has no existence ; and that, to give colour to his affirmations, he has misrepresented the scripture. If I am more extended than may seem necessary, the pertinaciousness of the editor of Calmet must be my excuse. Ohoc and olicia, this writer pretends, far from being synonimous, are essentially different both in their primary and secondary significa- tions. The former properly signifies a dwell- ing-house, separate from out-houses ; the latter a dwelling-house, with out-houses. Meta- phorically, the former denotes what is contained in a dwelling-house, namely, a family exclusive of servants ; the latter a family with servants.* That these distinctions exist only in the ima- gination of this fanciful writer, the following considerations will, perhaps, evince. Both terms denote a house, in the usual sense of that word,t and, accordingly, are indiscriminately employed in the Septuagint to render n>n. Gen. cap. xix. v. 3. They went into his (oIkov) house ; v. 4. The men compassed the {phiav) house. Jer. cap. xxix. v. 5. Build ye houses (olKovg) : v. 28. Build ye houses {oIkiuq). Gen. cap. xxxix. v. 8. In his house {pkoj) : v. 9. In this house (ohdy) : v. 11. Joseph went * Letter iii. p. 4 — 7. t Vide Stephanura, Scapulam, Hedericuru, Schleusnerum, aliosque Lexicographos sub vacibus. 80 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. into the house (oikUw): v. 16. His Lord came home (elg tov 6'tKoi'). Aware that, if no difference subsists in the primitive meaning of oIkoq and okla, his argu- ment is inconclusive, the editor of Calmet has, in his fourth pamphlet,* employed all his learning and ingenuity to establish a distinc- tion. He thinks it decisive that the words are of different genders ; ignorant, I presume, of that which every school boy ought to know, that in Greek, as well as in Latin, the same substantive is sometimes of different genders. Having learnt from Hesychius that oIkoq some- times signifies part of a house, he enlarges on this circumstance, with peculiar complacency, and intimates a suspicion that oIkoq, denoting a division of a house, is of more frequent occurence than critics have remarked. To supply their omissions, he adds, " The labyrinth u of Egypt (Herod, lib. i. cap. 148.) is an in- " stance in point/' On turning to the section referred to in Herodotus, I found not a syllable of the labyrinth ; and in the passage,t in which the historian describes that structure, I could not discover oIkoq. The divisions of it are called olKr^fiara not oIkoi. If the editor of Cal- met had not been as inattentive to what he has transcribed into his own pages, as he appears * P. 24—31. t Lib. ii. 3. 148. THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 81 to be ignorant of Herodotus, he would have perceived the weakness of concluding that because oIkog signifies, at times, part of oucia, the terms cannot be interchangeable. He has quoted a passage from Biel, in which the term uIkoc is applied to the temple and to the apart- ments belonging to it. The whole of the temple is called oIkoq $eou ; while the same term is applied to the parts of it styled the holy and most holy places, as well as to the rooms in it, occupied by the priests. Examples of all these applications of oIkoq occur, 1 Kings, cap. vi. v. 1. 2. 26; 2 Paralip. cap. iii. v. 5. 8; Jer. cap. xxxv. v. 4. If a part, and the whole, though not the same, may be called by the same name, that they are denominated by two terms, proves not that those terms are essentially different in signification. It could hardly be expected that this writer should know that ofefa, as well as oJxog, denotes part of a house. " Okla," says the learned and accurate Schleus- " ner, " sometimes signifies, by a metonemy, " part of a house ; for example, a parlour or " dining-room. John, cap. xii. 3. ?) ce oUfa " ETrkripioSi] he tt]q 6afxr}c, rov /xvpov. The odor of " the ointment spread through all the parlour."* * Ojjtt* interdum per metonymian partem domus notat, v. e. caenaculum triclinium. John xii. 3. h h olnia i7r\npu$n e* t>jc hs-(j.r,<; rov fAvpov, et hujus unguenti odor totura csenaculum peue- travit. Lexicon in N. T. sub voce. 82 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. To this I will add another example. Matt. Cap. V. V. 15. Xv-^vog Xdfnrei Ttaai roig kv rrj oiKiq, " the candle gives light to all that are in the room." " Okoe," our author observes, " de- " scribes the meanest shelter possible, a bird's " nest, a tent ; oUla implies spacious premises, " a gentleman's seat, premises extensive, spa- " cious, wide, large, broad. With all these " distinctions, am I," he asks, " to be persuaded u that these terms are interchangeable in their " proper acceptation."* Of what this writer may be persuaded, it would be vain to con- jecture ; but of his knowledge of the terms in question, the following particulars will enable the reader to form a just estimate. Otaa, equally with ohog, is applied to the slightest structure, and oIkog, not less than olda, to the most ample residence. Having referred to a passage in which ohog means a bird's nest, the editor of Calmet quotes a line from Lucre- tius, in which domus has the same signification, and adds, " This will remind the reader of the " Psalmist's expression, the sparrow hath u found a Jwuse ; and again, as for the stork, " the fir-trees are her house" f The reader of the Septuagint will remember that in both these passages oL«a, not oIkoc, is the term used. OtV/a, which our author so learnedly maintains * Letters iv, v. and v'. p. 27. f Ps. Ixxxiv. 3, civ. 17. THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED 83 implies capacious premises ; is applied to that " extensive, spacious, wide, large, broad" structure the human body. The earthly house (okui) of this tabernacle* In the sense of tent it also occurs. Jacob dwelt in a tent (oldav) t f While oucim denotes structures of the smallest dimensions, as a bird's nest, the human body, a tent, olxog often designates the largest man- sions. In the sense of palace, it is very common ; kv roig o'iwtg rwv fiaaCkiuv, in king's palaces ; ixJvot tv tolq oiKoiQ livTuyv, dragoiis in their pa- laces.% It likewise denotes heaven, the habitation of the supreme being ; or ig liogoltcou iXavveie. " When thou drivest to the residence " of Jupiter. "§ Qvpavov 8K efxeyripap zyziv siricai- mov oinov, " They envied thee not the posses- " sion of heaven, a house fit for feasting." || The unhesitating ignorance, which this writer has discovered, in attempting to settle the primary meaning of the terms in question, is, if possible, still more obvious in what he delivers respecting their secondary significa- tion. From denoting a house, both words are used to signify what it contains, namely, a family. That ohog has this sense, the editor of * 2 Cor. v. i. t Gen. xxv. 27. X Matt. xi. 8. Is. xiii. 22, § Callimachi Hyrani in Dianam, I. 138. || Ejusdem Hymni in Jovem. f. 59. 84 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. Calmet maintains ; but contends that okla, be- sides the family, denotes also the slaves and attendants.* Though this is frequently affirmed, with the utmost confidence, by this gentleman, the following passages will shew that it is a palpable mistake, and place it beyond a doubt that ohta means family, exclusive of domestics or slaves, e-l rr\v rvoawiK))v ohiav, " x^gainst the " royal family :"+ ohd^s o'v (pXavpo-iprjc, " of a " familv not inferior : ? '^ ofociifs fitv kovra ayaZijc, " being of a respectable family :"§ r>)v ouuav £'£a-a n]v ayafiov, " having exterminated "the family of Ahab:'i| avrw tea X ra 7repl Tt]v oida ec-aataoZr), " the affairs of his family were " involved in confusion*." rtrpayf.Livi]v avro> rrjy ofriav Kara\ci^i3ayei, " he finds his family in con- " fusion *. ^T -povfjaivE ce ne ra Kara ttjv crrdaiv rj/c; oiv/ac, " the distentions of his family always increased:''** *£ra ^ olna ?/ Trarpitcij, " all his father's house :' eyu) cia$pi(p(o vfddg Kal rag olKiag vfxwv y " 1 will nourish you and your little ones:"tt -;}c TTCirpiicijQ olxiae avrcv i'tp-^crreg ekOctUvo^ " of his * Letter iil p. 6. Letters iv. v. and vi. p. 3 — 37. t Demosthenis Olinthica Secunda, p. 95. Oxonii, 1807. ♦ Herodoti, lib. i. 99. p. 58. Oxonii, 1814. S Ibidem, 107, p. 61. (I Josephi Antiq. lib. ix. cap. vii. p. 310. If lb. lib. xv. cap. ii. p. 513. lb. cap. xi. p. .T ** lb. lib. xvi. cap. vi. p. 553. 1 1 Gee. i. 8 and 21. THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 85 father's house twenty and two captains :" * Tracav rt)v oldav ap^a/jety, M the whole house of the Rechabites."f The three subsequent exam- ples are added, because, though it may be doubted, whether they are to be understood of families, having been interpreted by the editor of Calmet in that sense, he must allow them to be conclusive. Evfpay^tjffri kv 7rdcrt toIq ayaSoig oiq edojKe aoi Kvptog 6 Seoq q CI 'X * va T0V T0V ^ £tov nporov iiT£ipa. cicfttopoi iiafj.£vovffi.* " Many both men " and women of sixty and seventy years of " age, who have been the disciples of Christ " from their youth, remain uncorrupted." From this sentence, which is an unexception- able version of the words of Justin Martyr, nothing surely can be inferred in behalf of infant baptism. In his book against heretics, * Justinini Martyris. Ap. Secun. 102 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. Ireneeus says of our Saviour: Omnes venit per semetipsum salvare ; omnes inquam, qui, per eura renascuntur in Deum, infantes, et parvalos, et pueros, et juvenes, et seniores.* " He came to save all by himself; all, I say, " who by him are born again to God, infants " and little ones, and children and youths, and " elder persons." As evidence of the practice of infant baptism in the time of Ireneeus, this passage is liable to weighty objections. There are some signs that the passage is spurious. We have only an execrable version of this part of the work of Ireneeus, and have no means, therefore, of determining the original words.f Nothing, as has been remarked by Le Clerc,J appears in the passage respecting baptism. It is not mentioned in the preceding or subse- quent words. By him may be properly referred to Christ, who may renew and sanctify infants. The translator uses renasci in a sense different from baptism. The lack of evidence in earlier times is ill supplied by Tertullian. He was unquestionably an Antipeedobaptist. He is cited, it is to be remembered, in evidence of the apostolical authority of infant baptism. Observe his de- position. Opposing the admission of children * Adv. Ha*. Lib. ft. t See Gale's Bef. p. 464, &c \ Historic Eccl. p. 7?8. THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 103 to baptism, he says, " The condescension of " God may convey his favours as he pleases ; " but our wishes may deceive ourselves and 11 others. It is, therefore, most expedient to " defer baptism, and to regulate the adminis- " tration of it according to the condition, the " disposition, and the age of the person to be " baptized, and especially in the case of little " ones. What necessity is there to expose " sponsors to danger. Death may incapaci- " tate them for fulfilling their engagements, or " bad dispositions may defeat all their endea- " vours. Indeed, the Lord said, ' forbid them " not to come unto me ;' and let them come " while they are growing up ; let them come " and be instructed ; and when they under- " stand Christianity, let them profess to be " Christians. Why should that innocent age " hasten to the remission of sins?"* In this deposition there is no allusion to the apostles as the authors of the practice, which the witness disapproves, no intimation that it was generally adopted in the Christian church. The utmost that can be proved from Tertullian is, that some persons in his time proposed that baptism should be administered to little ones. Of the * Tertullianus De Baptismo, cap. 18. Robinson's Hist of Bap. p. 175. 104 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. practice, which he is the first person that men- tions, he is the decided enemy. To illustrate the weakness of this pretended proof for the apostolical authority of the baptism of babes, I have only to adduce the testimony of the same writer in behalf of the authenticity of the scripture. lean only exhibit its substance. " I will take my proofs," says he, " from the " New Testament. For, in the gospels and " the apostles, I perceive God visible and " invisible. Among the apostles, John and " Matthew teach us the faith ; among aposto- " Heal men, Luke and Mark refresh it. We " lay it down for certain, that the evangelic " scriptures have for their authors the apostles " and apostolic men. Not only with the " apostolic churches, but with all who have " fellowship with them in the same faith, the " Gospel of Luke has been received from its " first publication. The same authority of the " apostolic churches will support the other gos- *' pels, which we have from them." # He quotes all the Pauline epistles, and recommends those who would exercise their curiosity profitably in the business of salvation, to visit the churches of the apostles, in which their authentic letters were recited. " In this one Christian author," * Lardner, Vol. I. p. 420—324. THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 105 says the temperate Lardner, " are, perhaps " more, and larger quotations of the small " volume of the New Testament, than of all " the works of Cicero, in writers of all charac- " ters for several ages."* Compared with the " noble testimony" which Tertullian bears to the authenticity of the Christian scriptures, the evidence drawn from his tract on baptism, that the baptism of babes was at all practised, even in his own age and country, weighs less than the dust on the scales. Mr. Eelsham cites Tertullian, as the " first writer who explicitly " mentions infant baptism," strongly objecting to the practice, and then employs more than a page to express surprise and wonder that it should have crept in without opposition. Speaking of the use of sponsors, Mr. Towgood observes, " Tertullian is the most " ancient author in whom any mention of it is " made. But, by this time, it is well known, " a great variety of superstitious, and ridicu- " lous, and foolish rites were brought into the *' church. "f The application of this just re- mark to the baptism of babes is left to the reader. The witness usually cited, after Tertul- lian, to depose in favor of infant baptism is • Lardner, Vol. I. p. 435. t Towgood's Letters on Dissent, p. 155. 1817. 106 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. Origen, the most learned of the Greek fathers. It is unnecessary to spend much time in the examination of this witness ; for, in the first place, no evidence for the practice is found in the original works of Origen, the passage from his commentary on Matthew being inap- plicable to babes.* They cannot desire the sincere milk of the word. This objection, which, though Mr. Belsham says, " it is of " little weight," seems fatal, is strengthened by what follows. Having proposed whether the angels take charge of the little ones, intended by our Saviour, from their birth, or from the time in which, by the washing of regeneration, whereby they are renewed, they desire, as new born babes, the sincere milk of the word: as making for the last supposition, he states, that the time of persons' unbelief is under the angels of Satan ; but that, after their new birth, they are delivered to good angels. Origen might be of opinion that our Saviour, in the text referred to, speaks of men who have the likeness of children. If a person cited into a court of justice, not to state what he knew, but what he had heard stated by another, should confess that he delivered not with religious fidelity the original averment, but what, in his opinion, * See Wall's Hist, of Inf. Bap. p. 35. THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 107 would better answer the purpose, his deposition would not be received as the evidence of the original witness. Rufinus and Jerome, the translators of Origen, acknowledge that they exhibited his works altered, abridged, and en- larged, as they thought fit. Is any confidence to be placed in a testimony thus modified? The deposition of the next witness, Cyprian, is, I admit, clear and satisfactory to establish not the apostolical authority of infant baptism, or its general prevalence, in his time, in the Christian church, but the existence of the prac- tice in Africa No other witness occurs till toward the close of the fourth century, about which time the practice, I confess, seems to have been pretty generally adopted. Augustine appears to be the first writer, who ascribed the baptism of babes to apostolical authority. From the foregoing induction, it may be remarked, that the evidence for the authenticity of the scriptures preponderates by incalculable degrees, beyond the historical proof of the apos- tolical origin of infant baptism. The dispro- portion, in the evidences of these two articles, appears so great, that he who asserts their equality, might, with not more extravagance assert, that the Alps are equal in weight to the whole earth. Then, while the strong evidence that establishes the genuineness of the Christian 108 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. scripture, has never been adduced in behalf of any writing professedly supposititious ; historic proof equal to that which, it is pretended, evinces the apostolical authority of infant bap- tism, may be alleged in favour of rites that are allowed to be the invention of a later period. To confine myself to those connected with bap- tism : those to be baptized professed to renounce the devil, as well as to believe the articles of the Christian faith. The minister, breathing into their face, exorcised them, or expelled the devil from them. The baptismal water was consecrated. The candidate for baptism was thrice immersed. After being thus immersed, he was anointed with oil, signed with the sign of the cross, received a mixture of milk and honey, and confirmed by the imposition of the minister's hands. Children were admitted to the Lord's supper.* It is a most strange pro- cedure in our adversaries, while, by the neglect of these rites, they degrade the authority of the fathers which has consecrated them, to recur to that authority, as if it retained its force, in behalf of infant baptism.] * Instead of quoting passages from the fathers attesting the existence of these practices at as early a period as there is any proof that babes were baptized, it may be sufficient to refer the reader to Wall's Hist, of Inf. Bapt. p. 462—518. Lord King's Inquiry into the Constitution of the Primitive Church, Part II. cap. 3 & 4. THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 109 But, however, it is against the perpetual analogy of Christ's doctrine to baptize infants ; for besides that Christ never gave any precept to baptize them, nor ever himself nor his apos- tles (that appears) did baptize any of them. All that either he, or his apostles, said con- cerning it, requires such previous dispositions to baptism, of which infants are not capable, and these are faith and repentance ; and not to instance in those innumerable places that re- quire faith before this sacrament, there needs no more but this one saying of our blessed Saviour : He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned : plainly thus, faith and baptism, in conjunction, will bring a man to heaven ; but if he have not faith, baptism shall do him no good. So that if baptism be necessary then, so is faith, and much more : for want of faith damns absolutely : it is not said so of the want of baptism. Now if this decretory sentence be to be understood of persons of age, and if children, by such an answer (which indeed is reasonable enough), be ex- cused from the necessity of faith, the want of which regularly does damn, then it is sottish to say the same incapacity of reason and faith shall not excuse from the actual susception of baptism, which is less necessary, and to which L 110 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. faith and many other acts are necessary pre- dispositions when it is reasonably and humane- ly received. The conclusion is, that baptism is also to be deferred till the time of faith : And whether infants have faith or no, is a ques- tion to be disputed by persons that care not how much they say, nor how little they prove. 1. Personal and actual faith they have none; for they have no acts of understanding; and besides, how can any man know that they have, since he never saw any sign of it, nei- ther was he told so by any one that could tell? 2. Some say they have imputative faith ; but then so let the sacrament be too, that is, if they have the parents' faith or the churches', then so let baptism be imputed also by deriva- tion from them, that as in their mother's womb, and while they hang on their breasts, they live upon their mother's nourishment, so they may upon the baptism of their parents, or their mother the church. For since faith is necessary to the susception of baptism (and they themselves confess it by striving to find out new kind of faith to daub the matter up), such as the faith is, such must be the sacra- ment: for there is no proportion between an actual sacrament and an imputative faith, this being in immediate and necessary order to that: And whatsoever can be said to take THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. Ill off from the necessity of actual faith, all that and much more may be said to excuse from the actual susception of baptism. 3. The first of these devices was that of Luther and his scholars, the second of Calvin and his ; and yet there is a third device which the church of Rome teaches, and that is, that infants have habitual faith : But who told them so? how can they prove it 1 what revelation, or reason teaches any such thing? Are they by this habit so much as disposed to an actual belief without a new master? Can an infant sent into a Mahometan province be more confi- dent for Christianity when he comes to be a man, than if he had not been baptized ? Are there any acts precedent, concomitant or con- sequent to this pretended habit ? This strange invention is absolutely without art, without scripture, reason, or authority: But the men are to be excused unless there were a better; but for ail these stratagems, the argument now alleged against the baptism of infants is de- monstrative and unanswerable. To which also this consideration may be added, that if baptism be necessary to the sal- vation of infants, upon whom is the imposi- tion laid? To w T hom is the command given? to the parents or to the children? not to the children, for they are not capable of a law ; h 2 112 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. not to the parents, for then God hath put the salvation of innocent babes into the power of others; and infants may be damned for their fathers' carelessness or malice. It follows that it is not necessary at all to be done to them, to whom it cannot be described as a law, and in w r hose behalf it cannot be reasonably in- trusted to others with the appendant necessity; and if it be not necessary, it is certain it is not reasonable, and most certain it is no where in terms prescribed, and therefore is is to be pre- sumed, that it ought to be understood and administered according, as other precepts are, with reference to the capacity of the subject, and the reasonableness of the thing. For I consider that the baptizing of infants does rush us upon such inconveniences, which in other questions we avoid like rocks, which will appear if we discourse thus. Either baptism produces spiritual effects, or it produces them not: If it produces not any, why is such contentions about it, what are we nearer heaven if we are baptized ? and if it be neglected, what are we the farther off? But if (as without all peradventure all the Pcedo- baptists will say) baptism does do a work upon the soul, producing spiritual benefits and advantages, these advantages are produced by the external work of the sacrament alone, or THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 113 by that as it is helped by the co-operation and predispositions of the suscipient. If by the external work of the sacrament alone, how does this differ from the opus- operatum of the papists, save that it is worse ? for they say the sacrament does not produce its effects but in a suscipient disposed by all requisites and due preparatives of piety, faith, and repentance; though, in a subject so dis- posed, they say the sacrament by its own vir- tue does it; but this opinion says it does it of itself without the help, or so much as the co- existence of any condition but the mere recep- tion. But if the sacrament does not do its work alone, but per modum recipientis according to the predispositions of the suscipient, then because infants can neither hinder it, nor do any thing to further it, it does them no benefit at all. And if any man runs for succour to that exploded Kprjaipvyerov, that infants have faith, or any other inspired habit of I know not what or how, we desire no more advan- tage in the world, than that they are constrain- ed to an answer without revelation, against reason, common sense, and all the experience in the world. The sum of the argument, in short is this, though under another representment. l3 114 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. Either baptism is a mere ceremony ', or it im- plies a duty on our part. If it be a ceremony- only, how does it sanctify us, or make the comers thereunto perfect? If it implies a duty on our part, how then can children receive it, who cannot do duty at all? And, indeed, this way of ministration makes baptism to be wholly an outward duty, a work of the law, a carnal ordinance, it makes us adhere to the letter, without regard to the spirit, to be satisfied with shadows, to return to bondage, to relinquish the mysteriousness, the substance, and the spirituality of the gospel. Which argument is of so much the more con- sideration, because under the spiritual cove- nant, or the gospel of grace, if the mystery goes not before the symbol (which it does when the symbols are seals and consignations of the grace, as it is said the sacraments are) yet it always accompanies it, but never follows in order of time. And this is clear in the per- petual analogy of holy scripture. For baptism is never propounded, men- tioned, or enjoined as a means of remission of sins, or of eternal life, but something of duty, choice, and sanctity is joined with it, in order to production of the end so mentioned. Know ye not, that as many as are baptized into Christ Jesus, are baptized into his death ? There is THE BAPITISTS JUSTIFIED. 115 the mystery and the symbol together, and de- clared to be perpetually united, oaoi ipaTma^fx. All of us who were baptized into one, were bap- tized into the other, not only into the name of Christ, but into his death also. But the mean- ing of this, as it is explained in the following words of St. Paul, makes much for our pur- pose. For to be baptized into his death, sig- nifies to be buried with him. in baptism, that as Christ rose from the dead, we also should walk in neiwiess of life ; that is the full mystery of baptism. For, being baptized into his death, or, which is all one in the next words, iv o^oiajfiart 75 Savarov cWs into the likeness of his death, cannot go alone, if we be so planted in Christ we shall be partakers of his resurrection, and that is not here instanced in precise reward, but in exact duty, for all this is nothing but crucifixion of the old man, a destroying of the body of sin, that we no longer serve sin. This indeed is truly to be baptized both in the symbol and the mystery. Whatsoever is less than this, is but the symbol only, a mere ceremony, an opus operatum, a dead letter, an empty shadow, an instrument without an agent to manage, or force to actuate it. Plainer yet; Whosoever are baptized into Christ have put on Christ, have put on tJie new man: But to put on this new man, is to 116 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. be formed in righteousness, and holiness, and truth. This whole argument is the very words of St. Paul: The major proposition is dog- matically determined, Gal. iii. 27. The minor in Ephes. iv. 24. The conclusion then is obvious, that they who are not formed new in righ- teousness, and holiness, and truth, they who remaining in the present incapacities cannot walk in newness of life, they have not been bap- tized into Christ, and then they have but one member of the distinction, used by St. Peter, they have that baptism which is a putting away the filth of the flesh, but they have not that baptism which is the answer of a good conscience towards God, which is the only baptism that saves us. And this is the case of children ; and then the case is thus. As infants by the force of nature cannot put themselves into a supernatural condition, (and there ore, say the Pcedobaptists, they need baptism to put them into it,) so if they be baptized before the use of reason, before the works of the spirit, before the operations of grace, before they can throw off the works of darkness, and live in righteousjtess and new- ness of life, they are never the nearer; from the pains of hell they shall be saved by the mercies of God and their own innocence, though they die in puris naturalibus, and THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 117 baptism will carry them no further. For that baptism that saves us, is not the only wash- ing with water, of which only children are capable, but the answer of a good conscience towards God, of which they are not capable till the use of reason, till they know to choose the good and refuse the evil. And from thence I consider anew, that all vows made by persons under other's names, stipulations made by minors, are not valid till they, by a supervening act after they are of sufficient age, do ratify them. Why then may not infants as well make the vow de novo, as de novo ratify that which was made for them ab antiquo when they come to years of choice { If the infant vow be invalid till the manly con- firmation, why were it not as good they staid to make it till that time, before which if they do make it, it is to no purpose ?# This would be considered. And in conclusion, our way is the surer way, for not to baptize children till they can give an account of their faith, is the most propor- tionable to an act of reason and humanity, and it can have no danger in it. For to say that infants may be damned for want of bap- tism, (a thing which is not in their power to * Vide Erasraum in pnsfat ad Annotat. in MftttJ 118 THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. acquire, they being persons not yet capable of a law) is to affirm that of God which we dare not say of any wise and good man. Cer- tainly it is much derogatory to God's justice, and a plain defiance to the infinite reputation of his goodness. And, therefore, whoever will pertinaciously persist in this opinion of the Psedo-baptists and practise it accordingly, they pollute the blood of the everlasting Testament, they dis- honor and make a pageantry of the sacrament, they ineffectually represent a sepulture into the death of Christ, and please themselves in a sign without effect, making baptism like the fig-tree in the gospel, full of leaves but no fruit; and they iavocate the holy Ghost in vain, doing as if one should call upon him to illuminate a stone, or a tree. Thus far the Anabaptists may argue, and men have disputed against them with so much weakness and confidence, that they have been encouraged in their error* more by the acci- dental advantages we have given them by our w r eak arguings, than by any truth of their cause, or excellency of their wit. But the use I make of it as to our present question is tj-a&poVc TAurnv SnpuovTs;, as Nazianzen observes of the case of the church in his times. THE BAPTISTS JUSTIFIED. 119 this: That since there is no direct impiety in the opinion, nor any that is apparently con- sequent to it, and they with so much probabi- lity do, or may be, pretend to true persuasion, they are with all means, Christian, fair and humane, to be redargued, or instructed, but if they cannot be persuaded they must be left to God, who knows every degree of every man's understanding, all his weaknesses and strength, what impress each argument makes upon his spirit, and how unresistible every rea- son is, and he alone judges his innocency and sincerity ; and for the question, I think there is so much to be pretended against that, which I believe to be the truth, that there is much more truth than evidence on our side, and therefore we may be confident as for our own particulars, but not too forward peremptorily to prescribe to others, much less damn, or to kill, or to persecute them that only in this particular disagree. FINIS. Printed by S. Curtis, Camberwell Presx.