AiWlt^i
oi ttw ^l. 184. T'eJiimonyofMr.l^QdX
Ibid. Of Mr. Brandt, Ibid. Of Capt. Dean ,
p. 186. Of the Churches of Piedmont, and the
Rife of the Waldenfes, p. 188. Tfejlimony of
Dr. Allix, and of Beza concerning their Anti-
quity ^y^. 1S9. Some Hints of Berengarius and
Arnoldus Brixienfis, p. 192. Some of the Wal-
denfes driven into Bohemia, p. 191 200.
A brief Narrative of the Sufferings of fo?ne fa-
reign Anahaptijlsy p. 207 .220.
^
The CONTENTS.
TNimadverJions on the Reverend Dr. Tho*
' mas Ridgley*x Difcourje of Infant^Bap"
tifm^ p. 223. ne Foundation of that DoBrine
examindy p. 224— — 227 Children of Infidels
baptized in AuftinV Time^ p. 22B. No Warrant
from Scripture to dedicate any Infants hy Bap-^
tifniy Ibid. ''The Argument from the Abrahamic
Covenant refum'di\>. 27,1. Natural Seed of or^
dinary Gentile Believer s^ no Children of the Pro^
mife in the Senfe of the Gofpel, p. 235—237.
The DoBrine of federal Holinefs examitid^ at
large, p. 238 — • 248, Confiderations on the
Baptifm in the Red-Sea refumdy p. 250. Tef-
timonies of Dr. Lightfoot examindy p. 254. A
pretended Piece under the Name of juflin Mar-
tyr, rejeSied, [p. 257. A Teftimony of Irenaeus
very precariouSy p, 258. G. Nazianzen a par-
tial Fee dob aptifly p. 261. The Aflembly of Di-
vines allow' d Dipping, p. 262. Refle6iions on
the Reverend Dr. OwenV Critical Obfervatiom
on Dippingy^. 267^ 274. Tefiimonies and
Citations Jrom Dr. Gale, Ibid. Divers Objecti-
ons of Dr. Ridgley'i confiderd. The Ancients
divejied in Order to be baptizdy p. 284. Tefii-
monies of Dr. Tillotfon, aiid Dr. Burnet, p. 285.
O/' Mr. Bingham, with Citations from QyrW of
Jerufalem, Amphilochius, &c. p. 286. The
ancient Order oj- Deaconefles ifeful at the Bap-,
tifm of Womeny p. 287. The Conclufion^ 'witb,
the Tefiimony of Dr. Whitby.
INFANT-
( I )
Infant-Baptifm No Inftitution of
Christ, tfc.
C H A p. I.
Remarks on Mr. Walker*^ imfatr Account of the
CommiJJion, Matt. 28. No Infants can be con^
cerned in ity according to the plain Purport of
it. The Argument from Jewifh Baptifm con-
Jiderd. Rabbinical Tejiimonies of a fabulous
Original, and too precarious to be depended upon
in this Controverfy.
R. Walker begins the Argumentative
Part of his Book in p. 8. His Words
are thefe, // is commonly faid, they
(meaning the Pcedobaptijls) have
neither Command^ Example, nor good Scripture-
Confequence to fupport their PraBice. But I
hope to make it appear to the unprejudiced Hea-
rer, that ive have all three, viz Scripture-Pre-
cepts, Precedent and good Confequejice.
I^^^M
^
B
I. As
2 Jnfant'Bcipti[m
I. As to a Command for the Baptifm oflnfantSy
I apprehend the original Command relating to
Baptifm in general^ contains in it a Command for
the baptizing of Infants: T^his we have Matt.
28. 19. Go ye therefore and teach all Nations y
baptizing them in the Name, of the Father^ and of
the Son, and of the Holy Ghoji,
Mr. W. proceeds direcflly, to make his Obfer-
vation on the Words, and on the Defign and
Purport of the Commiffion, in the following
Manner: I?i which Words we have Chriffs
Command to his Difciples, and in them tofucceed-
ing Minijiers^ to go and baptize all Nations.
I would only defire the honeft Reader in this
Place, to take Notice of this Obfervation, that
at his firft fetting out, he mutilates and tranfpo-
fes the Words of the Commiffion, in order to
pervert the Meaning of them. He fays, that
Chrifl gave Command to his DifcipleSj and in them
to fucceeding Minifers to go and baptize all Na-
tions^ whereas the Text fays, go and teach all
Nations^ &c. Here, in the Obfervation, the
Word teach is ftruckout, and the Word baptize
put in the Room of it, on purpofe to let his
Reader know, that Baptifm ought to go before
any I'eaching. This is no lefs in plain Terms,
than an Attempt toperfwade theWorld, that our
Lord did not exprefs his Meaning aright to his
Difciples, therefore Mr. JV. takes upon him to
correal the Diforder and Inaccuracy of the Com^
mifjion^ and to put it in a proper Light. *Tis e-
vident that I do not -in the leafl wrong Mr. W,
when
N'' Tfiflitution 1^/ Christ. 3
when I charge him with this violent Diftortion
of Scripture,for 'tis his main Drift in this Place,
to prove that Baptizing is ihtjirji A5i of Difci^
flings and that Teaching is only 2. fubfeguent ji£f ,
He had a Point in View, that he could not
carry without it. P. 10. his Words are t\\t[e,'Tbat
nothing can be concluded againjl Infants Right to
Baptifmj from Teaching being put before Baptifm^
is to me plain ^ from Mark i. 4. where we are told,
that John baptized and preached^ where Bapti/m
is put before Preachings and according lo this
way of arguing^ mujl go before it.
Here, we have the true Reafon, why Mr. W,
could not endure the Words of the Commiflion,
in the Order and Contexture that our Lord
fpoke them, the Word teach being put before
baptizing^ flood as a Bar in his way, and he did
not know what to do with it, and therefore
would venture to remove it, at all Hazards, to
make room for Infant-Baptifm-, for to take the
Words in the clear Connection, in which they
were delivered, they made quite againfl his pro-
fefs'd Defign. Some Art then muft be ufed, to
new model them, before they could be rendred
fubfervient to the Caufe he pleads for; there-
fore a new Tranflaticn of them is judged necef-
fary, to favour this End. P. 9. As to the common
Objection (fays he) againft this Proof for Infa?it^
baptifn^ that the Text requires teaching before
baptizing ^ I ?nujl own that in Order of Words ^
according to our Tra?ifation teach is put before
baptize, but then woiid obferve with Dr, Ham-
mond, Dr. Whitby, Mr. Sydenham, Mr, Hall,
B 2 6cc.
4 Infanf'Baptifm
&;c. ihaf the 'Text might as well have been rendredy
go and difciple all Nations, Baptifm being ap-*
pointed as the Way by which Difciples are to be
ejttred into the Chrifiian Chu7xh.
Here k may be very proper to ask Mr. W,
fome plain Queftions, as
I. What Advantage has he gain'd, by joining
with thefc learned Gentlemen, to alter our pre-
fent Tranllation : has he been able to invert the
Order af the Greek Words in the Commiffion,
and to put theWord baptizing before Difcipling ?
Or has he found that the Word fj^^^idjo^-n fig-
nifies to make Difciples any other way than by
teaching? Are not the Words Teacher znA Dif-
ciple relative Terms ? Does he know of any Me-
thod of difcipling People but by inflruding of
them? Does the Word difcipling exclude teach-
ing, or was there ever a Difciple, but who was
taught in fome Art or Science, or Point of Know-
ledge, by fome Teacher or other? This neii)
Tranflation makes for the Baptifts, and they
choofe it rather than the old one, for the Word
^oL^nK^ca.'Ti fignifies not only to teach, but to
teach to Furpofe,{o as to make a Difciple of the
Perfon taught, and to form him in the Opinion
and Sentiments of his Teacher.
II. I would ask in Confequence of this, does
Mr. W. believe in his own Confcience, that im-
mediate Baptizing was the firfl Ad; that the
Apoftles were charg'd with, exclufive of, and
antecedent to all Teaching ? Was there intended
no previous Notice^ or Infi:rud:ion to be given to
the
No Inftitution cfCKuisT, 5
the People, which might be called Teaching or
Preaching ? Were thefe Perfons of all Nations
to be taken by the Head and Shoulders, and to
be baptized without any thing faid to them ?
Were they forthwith to be admitted in their
idolatrous and heathenifli Ignorance, void of ali
Knowledge of the true God, and Jefus Chriji his
Son, into whofe Religion they were to be initiated
and difcipled ? It can't enter into my Thoughts
that Mr. W. or any other Paedobaptifl, upon
mature deliberation, can believe thefe things.
But as abfurd and ridiculous, as this Dodrine-
appears to be, he is obliged to try all the Skill
he is Mafler of, to defend it. 'Tis abfolutely
neceflary for him, to make ufe of this way of
arguing j for without inverting the Order of the
Words, or deflroying the natural Meaning of
them, he can never pretend to bring Infants with-
in the Compafs of this Commiffion, to be bap-
tized 5 for the Words of our Lord ftand clearly
and ftrongly connected, in two Evangelifls.
Matt. 2^.ig.Goye therefore and teach all Na-
tions baptizing jhem in the Name of the Fa-
ther, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghoji.
Mark 16. 15, 16. Afid he faid unto them, go
ye into all the World, and preach the Gofpel "to
every Creature. He that believeth and is bapti-
zed fiall be faved.
I confefs, I am fomewhat amaz'd that any
proteftant Minifher, while thefe Scriptures flare
him full in the Face, fliould attempt to perfwade
his Congregation from the Pulpit, and the World
from the Prefs, that our Lord Chrift rcquir'd
B 3 Baprilh,;
6 Infanf'Baptifm
Baptirm before any Manner of Teaching in the
Words of this Commiffion : But I know that
'tis no new Path of Mr. fF's beating out ; for
others labouring under the fame Difadvantagcs,
have attempted this Way before him, particu-
larly Dr Hammond 'y but then this great Man
has unhappily contradided himfelf, in fpeaking
of this Inftance of the Commiffion. For in the
* Queries, he employs all his skill to perfwade
us, that there is no previous hiftru5lion required
to baptizing', and that {j^g.^T^'jumii and ^aT^i^ovn;
to make dijciples and baptize, is all one.
But in his Paraphrafe upon the Commiffion,
and elfe where, he is quite of another Opinion :
You may confult him on the following Places.
Matt. 28. 19. where he fays thus, teach all the
'Nations, the Chriftian DoBrine, and perfwade
them to embrace it, and to live according to ity
baptizing, &c.
And upon the parallel Commiffion in Mark
16. 16. he fays thus, he that receives the Gofpel
as preached by you, and thereupon becomes a Fro-
felyte or Difciple of Chrijt, and 3fires and receives
Baptifm, &c.
Again paraphrafing on the Words of Peter,
ABs 2. 38. he fays, Peter a7ipii'ered' them, that
there was now but one poffible way left ; that was,
with true Contrition and Achiow lee' gement of their
Sin, to haften out of this hifidelity, and to receive
Baptifm Jronz the Apofiles,
But
Nolnflitution ofCwRxsT. 7
But he is notorioully plain, in his DifTertati-
4>ns on Epifcopacy, where he enlarges on the
Commiflion, thus,* Call all Nations to Difciple^
Jhip, or inJlruB them in the Faith and Di/cipliney
tejiify the R,eJurreBion of Chriji to all, and by
preaching thepofpel in all Farts, gather Difciples,
and having gathered them, baptize and t each them.
So that the Cafe is evident, that when Dr.
Hammond hiidi Infant baptifm in view, the Com-
miflion Matt. 28. puzzled him; but when he
adled the Part of an impartial Expofitor, he
could without HefitatioUjgjve a fair Account of
the Commiflion.
Befldes, 'tis to be obferved, that this Learned
-Gentleman in this Point, went diredly contrary
to the fundamental Order of the Church of Eng-
land, For in the Miniflration of Baptifm, to
fuch as are of riper Years, and able to anfwer
for themfelves, we find thefe words, viz. -f-
When any juch Ferfons as are of riper Tears, are
to be baptizd, timely Notice /hall be given to the
Bijhop, or whom he /hall appoint for that Furpofe,
— - that fo due" Care fnay be taken for their Ex-
fimination, whether they be fufficiently inflrudied in
the Principles of the Chrifiian Religion, and that
they may be exhorted to prepare themfelves with
Prayers and Faflings, for the receiving this Holy
Sacrament j and ij they JJjall be found fit, &c.
. I ' ' ' - ■ >
* AdDifcipulatum yocate, vel dilciplina Sc fide imbuire
Genres omnes, Refurre£tioncm Chnlti onxnibus reftatam
facire, & Evangelio per omr.es Oras enunciatp, Difcipulos
fongregate, Congregatos ^ctTfr't^ovm & <^tS'ii(TK0VTii. Diifert,
5. Cap. 4 (\. I.
j See Miniftration of Eaptifm In Common-Prayer.
^4 Jlencc^
8 JnfanUBctptiJm
Hence *tis undeniable that the Chureh of "Eng-
land is againft baptizing adult Perfons blind-fold,
without having them firfl: inflrudlcd, and prepa-
red for this folemn Inftitiuion. But what feems
xnoft odd and inconfiftent in Mr. W'% Condud:,
is, that the AJfe?nblys Catechifm does not ap-
prove, of baptizing any out the vifiblc Church,
till they make Profeffion of Faith. The Words
are thefe. Q. 95. Ti? whom is Baptifm to be adml^
vijired? Anf. Baptifm is not to be adminifired
to any^ that are out of the vifible Church, 'till they
fV^fif) their Faith in Chrifl a7T,d Obedience to him,
&c. This is the Catechifm, that Mr. W. profef-
fes to believe and teach, and the very Catechifm
that gave Rife to his late Book, and yet he is not
of the Opinion, of the Compilers of it. He is
for baptizing all at Random, without any pre-
vious Inftru.(5tion: the Authors of this Catechifm,
were for waiting 'till the Adult made a Profef-
fion of Faith in Chrift, and Obedience to him.
But Mr. W. does the higheft Injuflice toT)r.
Whitby^ when he endeavours to lug him in, to
fupport his own abfurd Notion of the Commif-
fion 3 for that Learned Author has cut down at
once, all that Mr. W. has been attempting to build
up, in his prepofterousAccount of theCommiffion.
T>x. Whitby % Words on Matt. 28. 'ver. 19. are
thefe. " MacSiJTi^'crKTB -mvlct nrtl l^Y), teach all
" Nations. lAa^T^Jeiv here is to f reach the
^* Go/pel to all Nations, and to engage them to be-
*' lieve if, in order to their Pr of efjion of that Faith
^' by Baptifm-, as feems appareiit {\) from the
" Pdiaikl Commijj.cn M^xk 16, 15. go preach
■ '^ '■ ''the
No Inflitution t?J Christ. 9
" the Go/pel to every Creature, he that believethy
" and is baptized, fhall be Saved. (2) from the
" Scripture-Notion of a Difciple, that being fiill
** the fame a? a Believer. And a little lower the
" fame Author adds, if here it foouldbefaid^
" that I yield too much to the Antipa^dobaptitjlSy
" by faying, that to be made Difciples here, is to
" be taught to believe in Chrift, that fo they might
*' be his Difciples-, I defire any one to tell me, how
** the Apoftles ctuld, M^^r^eiv make a Difciple
*' of an Heathen^ or unbelieving jfew, without be-^
" ing Mct^To^ or Teachers of them -, whether
*' they were not jent to preach to thofe that could
*' hear, and to teach them to whom they preached^
" that yefus was the Chriji, and only to baptize
" them, when they did believe this. This is fo ab-
" folutely necejfary in the Nature of the thing, till
*' a Chrifiian Church among the Heathe?2s, or the
** yews was founded, and fo exprefsly faid by
" Juftin Martyr, to have been the Praciice in the
" fi''^ft Ages of the Church, that to deny what is con-r
" firtnd, by fuch Evidejice ofReafon and Church-
" Hifory, would be to prejudice a Caife, which
" in my poorjtcdgment, needs not this Interpreta-
" tion of the word fjict^r<^eiv, nor needs it be af
*^ ferted that Infants are made Difciples, any
" more than that they are made Believers by Bap-
** tifm, &c. " Now, the moil favourable Con-
ftrudion that I can put on Mr. W\ Manage-
ment in this Affair, is that he either never read
Dr. Whitby on the CommilTion, or that he never
confider'd him, as he fhould -, for otherwife, he
}vould never have offcr'd fo grofsly to irppofe
upon
lo Infant'Bcftijm
upon his Reader, and fo {hamefully to abufe his
Author, as to endeavour to make Dr. Whitby a
Party, in promoting the baptizing of all Nati-
ons, before they were inftrudled in the Chriftian
Religion, and all this upon the Authority of the
Commiflion of our Lord. The very Attempt is
fliocking.
But, that I may do Mr. W. and his Argument
upon this Head all the juflice I can, I (hall go
back again to his own Words, tho' exprefs'd in
an ambiguous Manner, p. 8. they are thefe, the
SubjeSfs ofBaptiJm are to be all thelnhabitants of
a Nation embracing Chrijliafiity. As this Pro-
pofition is laid down here, 'twill be a difficult
thing to prove it true, in any fenie he can be
willing to put upon it; for,
I. If he means (by all) that every Individual
in a Nation, muft embrace Chriflianity, before
he be baptiz'd, Mr. TV. muft wait, till thefe In-
fants have embraced Chriftianity,with the other
Inhabitants, or elfe they are neceilarily excluded
Baptifm, even by his own Propofition.
II. If he intends (by all) as I believe he does,
that where a Nation in general profelTes Chrifti-
anity, it entitles every Individual of fuch a Na-
tion to Baptifm. How will theTruth of this ap-
pear ? Is Mr. JV. for baptizing the Many thou-
sands of Jews, Turks, and Indians, that are in
this Nation, before they are converted to Chri-
ftianity? And befides v/e have among us, in this
Nation, great Numbers of Idiots, Lunaticks, and
faving Madmen; fuppofmg thefe not baptized in.
their
No Inflitution d)/' Christ, ii
their Infancy, are they immediately to be admit-
ted to Baptifm ? Then they mufl of Courfe be
received to the Lord's Supper. Again, there are
vaft Numbers of profligate Wretches, who live
and glory in the mod fcandalous Crimes, as com-
mon Drunkennefs, dreadful Oaths and Curfcs,
Lying, Theft, and Whoredom, are thefe fit Sub-
jects for Baptilm, while in fuch a State? I am
fure John the Baptiji rejecfled fuch with Abhor-
rence, and fo^ will every confcientious Miniftcr
fend 'em back as a Generation of Vipers, *till
they bring forth Fruit meet for Repentance. Nor
can I fee upon what ground Mr. W. would ad-
minifter Baptifm to the Infants of thefe People:
certainly he would not offer to do it on the Ac-
count of their Parents Faith j and I am wellfa-
tisfied, that the CommifTion of our Lord never
intended, that thefe miferable Creatures whether
Parents or Infants, {hould be made Partakers of
the holy Inflitution of Baptifm, while in thefe
Circumflances.
Where does this Dodrlne tend, but to bring
a Deluge of Debauchery into the Churches of
Chrifl ? And to make more Deifls and Infidels
among us, and to encourage the gracclefs Herd
of Mankind to conclude, that there is nothing
in the Ordinances of Chriflianity, nor are any
Qualifications requir'd in thofe, who come to
partake of them.
To what purpofe then does Mr. W, tell us in
the fame page, that the Command is general a?id
includes Particulars ? This fort of Logic will
make wretched Divinity, for at this Rate, he
makes
1 2 Infant'BciptiJm.
makes no Diftindtion between the Righteous
and the Wicked, between the Penitent and Out-
rageous daring Sinners,between thofe, who hum-
bly defire to come to the Ordinances of God,
and fuch, who by the juil: Laws of the Land,
ought to be fent forthwith to the Houfe of Gor-
redlion.
Mr. W, has thought fit to give us another
Text, i;/z. Genejis 12. 18. to let us know, that
Infants are included in the word Nations j who
ever deny'd this, but they are a Part of a Nati-
on? However, I deny, that Infants are capable of
being taught in any Nation; this is what he mufl
prove, or he does Nothing. Infants, as well as
others being untaught the Knowledge of Chrift,
have no claim to Baptifm, according totheplain
Intent of this Commiflion.
We have in the next Place, a nice Obfervation
of Mr. /F's, i. e. it is 'well known^ that Laws are
inojl commonly deliver d in general Terms, and to
be interpreted in the mojl exte?iji've Senfe ; I conr
fefs, I differ from him, and am of the con-
trary Opinion ; for Laws, efpecially God's po-
ficive Laws, are deliver'd in very particular, di-
flindTerms, that there might be no Room to mi-
Hake his Meaning. We may fee clear Inflances,
as in the Building of the Tabernacle; all the
Materials and Utenfils are reckon'd up particu-
larly, as Boards, Bars, Pillars, Sockets, Staves,
Tables, Candleilicks, Lamps, Hooks, Chapiters,
Rings and Pins, ^c. The exprefs Diredion was
from the Lord, they were not to vary from his
Order. And therefore we read Exod. 39- 43.
That
Mo Injliiution of Cur i sr. 13
T'baf Mofes did look upon all the Work, and behold
they had done it, as the Lord had Commanded,
Again if we take the Cafe of Circumcifion, the
Command was given to Abraham in fuch plain
Terms, that he could not eafily mifunderftand
them.
The Flefh of the Fore-fkin was to be cut off,
of all the Male-children, of all born in hisHoufe,
or bought with his Money, and this to be done
precifely on the eighth Day after their Birth,
throughout their Generations j for my Part, I
can't fee, whatpoffible Miftake there could hap-
pen in fo plain a Cafe as this. The Point of
Baptifm, is as clear every Whit, were it not for the
cunning and fubtileDifputations of learned Men.
Are not the Words of the Commiffion deli-
ver'd in the moft unexceptionable Terms ? Go
ye and teach all Nations baptizing them, and as
many as believe and are baptized JJmll be faved.
Does it not appear from hence, that 'tis the
firft Bufinefs of Minifters, to inform the Minds
of Men and Women, as to the Knowledge of
God and Chrifl:, and upon their Convidiion, and
Reception of the Chriftian Faith, then to bap-
tize them ? What occafion is there to raife un-
necelTary Duft, to darken and deftroy the plain
and natural Meaning of this Commiffion?
But I fhall offer the following Confiderations,
farther to evince if poffible, that the Commiffi-
on to baptize was intended only for thofe who
are taught, or made Difciples before hand, and
not for any others, and confequently that Infants
are not concern'd in it,
I. The
14 infant ^Bctptifm •
I. The Words of the Commiffion take no
Notice of two forts of Subje(5ts to be baptized,
the one taught, the other untaught, if there had
been fuch aDiflindionfound out, that the Adult
were to be taught firll:, and baptized afterwards;
but that Infants were to be baptized without
any more adoe, then the Difpute would be at an
End. But the Subjedls fpoken of here, are of
one Sort : Therefore to pretend to introduce any
others, is not only begging of the Queftion in
Debate, but a dired: Violation of theCommiflion.
II. According to Mr. /^'s Argument, None
at all are to be taught, for if Infants may be bap-
tized without Inftrudion, fo may the Adult by
the fame Rule. And then the Word iJ[g.^rAi(m.'n
may be thrown out and laid alide, as ufeiefs, and
fo the matter fhould run thus,^o and baptize all
Nations^ in the midft of their Idolatry and Wick-
ednefs J and teach them afterward on fome pro-
per Seafons j but what a dreadful Idea does this
Interpretation give usof ourLerd'sCommiflion!
III. The fecondary teaching, or that fubfe^
quent to Baptifm, Ai^miovia aurtf, cannot be un-
derflood in any good fcnfe, nor in the Nature of
things, as referring to Infants j for they (Infants)
could not be prefently taught, and if the Apoflles
were ordered to wait, 'till they came to Years of
Difcretion, then they ceafed to be Infants, of 5
or 6 Days old, or in the Senfe that the Pasdo-
baptifts plead for. Therefore whether we con-
liderthe Inftrudion contain'd in fj^^^rdiazm pre-
ceeding Baptifm, or the Teaching comprehen-
ded in S\SbimoyTiS dvTvs fucceedinc: it. Infants
can
JVc7 In^itution ^/Christ. 15
can have no claim in the one, nor in the other,
upon any pretence whatfoever.
, IV. Here is, not only, an abfolute total Silence
as to Infants, but a ftrong Prohibition of baptiz-
ing any adult Perfons who are untaught, or quite
ignorant of Chriftianity. And if the exprefs Or-
der from our Lord's Mouth, was, to teach People
£rft,who would venture to contradid: it,and to ad:
Counter to it, by baptizing any before they were
taught? All politive Laws, always carry their
Negative in them, and along with them. If the
Command be given to perform fuch an Ad:ion,
and dired;ing to the Manner of Performance,
'tis plain that omitting that Adion, or varying
in the Manner of performing it, is a Breach of
that Command. When God ordered Abraham
to circumcife all the Males on the eighth Day,
there was no Need of forbidding him to meddle
with the Females, nor to forbid him to do it, on
the feventh or ninth Day ; the pofitive explicit
Command was a fufficient Diredionin that Mat-
ter. The Application is eafy in the Cafe of Bap-
tifm 3 if our Lord has given Commiffion, firll to
teach, and then baptize, there is no need to for-
bid us, to baptize fuch who were never taught ;
much lefs is there any Need to forbid the baptiz-
ing of Infants, who are not only untaught, but
incapable of being taught, at all. So that there
is nothing more foreign to the Purpofe of this
Commiffion, and nothing lefs probable to be
contain'd in it,than Infant-baptilm.
Therefore what Mr. W. advances p. 9. is weak
^nd frivilous, when He tells jUs, that thefe Words
if
1 6 Infant'Baptifm
of our Lord were fpoken to Perfom who had been
taught to look upon Children in Covenant ^ upon the
Account of their Parents^ and had always feen the
Seal of the Covefiant applied to *em, as well as
their Parents, and would be likely to do the fame,
tinlefs forbid. He reprefenrs thefe Difciples fent
forth by our Lord, as a flrange felf- willed fort
of People, what ! could they not underfland the
MefTage deliver'd to 'em, or could they not be
reclaim'd from the old Tradt of Circumcifionj
to pracStice any other way ? the new Commiffi-
on given them, was plain enough, one would
have thought, they were fent to teach the Nati-
ons the Knov/ledge of Chrift, and to baptize
thofe who were thus taught. I can't apprehend
any great difficulty, in taking in the Meaning of
our Lord in this Affair. And we have all the Rea-
fon in the World, to believe, that the Difciples
readily undcrftood the Commiffion, and apply 'd
themfelves clofe to the Execution of it. For in
the Account that the newTeflament gives us, of
the Travels and Adions of the Apoftles, we find
that Multitudes, yea many thoufands of Men and
Women were baptized by them, but no mention
in the leafl made of Infants. Nor will any im-*
partial Reader of the New Teftament wonder
at this 5 for as there was nothing about Infants,
in the Commiffion, fo we can't cxpedt to hear
any thing of them, in the Account of the Admi-
niftration of Baptifm, in the Apoflolic Church.
But Mr. JV. reprefents in the fame page, that
the Difciples would be ?nuch inclind to give Bap-
tifm to Infants J fince they had been accufiorn d to
fes
No Jniiitution of Christ. I'j
fee them received into the Churchy and even bap~
tiz'd. So that he now retreats to the lafl Re-
fuge, that feme Pasdobaptifts have to defend In-
fant-Baptifm, and that is by urging, that the
Jews md Baptifm, in receiving Members into
their Churchy and efpecially when they received
anyPro/elyteswho were of Age ^ they baptizdthem
aJid their Infaiits. And confequently from this
Jewifli Cuflom, our hord borrowed the Ordi^
nance of Baptifm. I muft confefs, that I can't
well digeft this odd Scheme, and therefore fhall
be obliged to give it a more particular Exanii-
nation.
The Authorities produc'd by Mr, W, to prove
this to have been an ufage among the Jews^ are
thefe following, viz. " Dr. Hammond tells us
" yro;;? Maimonides, Z/'/^;/ by three things thelfra^
*' elites entred into the Covenant^ by Circumci/io?z^
** Baptifm and Sacrifice He tells us too, that
** it was the Cujlom of the fews, fiot o?ily to bap-
*' tize fiich of their Profelytes as were of Age, but
*' alfo their Children, for proof of which he quotes
^' Gema. Babylon, which fays they baptize the little
** or young Stra?2ger, or Pro/'elyte; and Maimon.
*' who fays they baptize thelnfa?2t or little Strajig-
" er, upon the Knowledge or tlunderjiandifig of the
'^ Hcufe of jfudgmenf, or the Coiigregation, i. e.
'* on their Defre in the Behalf of the Children, &c.
" Z)r. Ham. 6 ^leries p. i8o. i88. We have
more of this Bifmefs, for Dr. Ham. quotes Rabbi
Jofhua who faid, " IVefind of our Mothers that
*' they were bapti'zed, and not circu?ncifed -, and
*/ Maimonides who fays in all Ages whenfoever
1 8 Infant ^Baftijm
" any Gentile was willing to enter into the Cove"
" nant, he was bound to have Circumcifton^ Bap"
" tifniy and a Peace-offeriiigr, and if it were a
«' Woman, Baptifm and SacriJice.Dr.}risim.ihid.
p. 185.184.
I have now laid before the Reader, the Ground
upon which Mr. PF. goes in proving Infant-bap-
tifm among the Jews, before the coming of
Chrift. I Ihall therefore proceed diredly to
fhev/ the Vanity and Fallacioufnefs of this way
of arguing.
I. If thtyewsuCcd Baptifm under the Law, be-
fore the Days of our Saviour, it was not of God's
Appointment, 'tis neither commanded in the
Lav/ of MoJeSj nor recommended in any Part of
the Old Teflamentj there is not jfo much as the
Shadow of it, to be found in thofe facred Writ-
ines, as an Ordinance of Gcd.
II, If it was not of God, whenfoever, and by
whomfoever this Cuflom was brought in, 'twas
the Invention of Men, and then much good may
it do Mr. W. and ibme PaEdobaptifls to build
Infant-baptifm upon the voluntary, but-finfull
Innovation of Men. They have brought the
poor Babes to a fair Pafs, and their Caufe to a
fine Condition: For Infant-baptifm, it feems, fo
frequently and fo fondly called the Seal of the
Covenant, is ?2orhing elje in the World, but a fu-
perflitious Intrufion, of the FJypocritical Scribes
and Pharifees, and their Adherents.
III. There are flron? P.eafons to conclude,
from divers PalTages of the New Teilament,'
that
No InSiitution cf Christ. 19
that Baptifm was not in Ufe amdng the Jews, as
a religious Right, neither before nor in the time
of our Lord Chrill, till it was pradiifcd by John
the Baptift.
As for Inftance, the Jdws being flartled at the*
Employment ofjohn in baptizing vaft Numbers
of People, deputed fome MefTengers to him to
demand, who he was, and what the Reafon of
his Prad:ice was? John i. 19, —■ — When the
yews fent Priejis and Levites from yerufalejn to
aik him who art thou ? v. 21. And they asked him,
"what then, art thou Eli as t ^— art thou that Pro^
ph'et F V. 25. and they /aid unto him, why
baptizefi thou then, if thou be not that Chriji, nor
JEiliaSy neither that Prophet'^
It feems to me evident^ beyond Contradidlon,
that baptizing was a ?2ew PraSfice, and that John
had at this time begun it, and the Jews were
very uneafy to know the Meaning of it. Nay,
they feem'd to iniift that no Perfon had Autho-
rity to attempt to fetup fuch a new Prad:ice,un-.
lefs he brought his Credentials along with him
from God. He muft prove himfelf to be cither
that Chriji, or Elias, or that great Prophet that^
was exped^ed. Accordingly John openly de-r
clar'd, that he was immediately fent or com*
mifiion'd from God to baptixe^ John 1.33. and
"'tis very obfervable, that John acquir'd a famous
Name by this Bufinefs,fuitable to his Profeffion,
which was Plunging or Dipping in Water, there-
fore he is called yo^7z the Baptist, or Dipper,
from that Day to this. Again, take another In-
ftance, Mark II. 30. Where our Saviour puts
C 2 the
20 Infant^BaptiJ??i
the Quefclon to the Jews, about the Baptifm of
yohnj was it from Heaven, or of Men ? Anfwer
me ; had it been a known Cuftom among the
yeijoit before Johns time, 'twould have been an
eafy Matter for them to anfwer our Saviour
roundly, that if was from Men , for they had
praftifed it long before John appeared, or pre-
tended to it. But they^^^ were confounded, be-
caufe they knew nothing of the Bufinefs of Bap-
tifm, 'till John was fent with a new divine Com-
miffion, to begin the Adminiftration of it.
Therefore the fubtile Jews anfwer'd our Lord
with a great deal of Cunning, that they could
not tell whence it was, and indeed this was their
beft way to come off. I fliall add but one In-
flance more to this Purpofe, and that is Luke 7,
29, 30. And the Fublicansjnftified God, be^
ifig baptized with the Baptifm of John. But
the Pharifees and Lawyers rejelied the Coufz-
fel of God againft themjelves, being not baptized
of him. Here Baptifm is exprefsly called the
Counfel of God, which, if it was invented before
of Men, it could not be called fo, in any tolera-
ble proper Senfe ; if the Scribes and Priefts in
their way of Caballing had found it out before,
then it could not be truly faid to be the Counfel
of God, as it is faid here to be, in an abfolute
Manner, and in the ftrongeft Terms -, for then,
it would have been only God's borrowing it from
the Jews^ and approving what they had already
prepared tohisHand. Nor can any thing be more
d.'fparaging to his Honour, or more derogating
frdm his Wifdom, than to impute fuch a thing
to
Mo hiMitution cf Christ. q i
to our bleiTed Lord. What! that he fhould be
beholden to the whimiical Brains of the Jewifh
Scribes and Lawyers, for one of the mofl folemn
Ordinances of the new Teftament ! a Thought
to be abhorred by all, who have any due Reve-
rence for divine Inilitutions !
But that I may more clearly {hew, how in-
iufficient and precarious, this way of fupporting
Infant-baptifm, is, I ihall obferve to the impar-
tial Reader, thefe following Things.
L That the earliefl Jewifh Writers take no
Notice of baptizing Infants, as a religious Rite.
'Tisnot pretended that y^/^/te, or Philo-jud^ns,
who both wrote in the iirft Century of Chrifli-
anity, mention this Bufmefs. And Jofephus is
well known, to write on purpofe to give an Ac-
count of the Cuftoms and Ceremonies of the
Jews. His Silence therefore in this Affair, feems
a ftrong Argument that he knew nothing of the
Matter. I may add further, that it is not to be
found in the Apocryphal Writings of the Jews,
which were penn'd between the Days of the
Prophet Malachi and the time oijohn the Bap-
tiji, after ih^Prophetic Spirit ceafed, in the yew--
tjh Church.
II. The Books out of which, fome have at-
tempted to prove Infant-baptifm before our Sa-
viour's time, are of too late a Date, to anfwer the
End for which they are brought. I chofc to
confirm what I now advance with the Authori-
ty of the great Biixforf, who is v/ell known to
be eminently fi^ilful in all Jewifli Learning.
And he fixes the Date of the Jewifli Books,
C 3 which
2 2 Infcint'BaptiJm
which the Rabbles eileem to a ridiculous De-
gree, and which contain the main Treafure of
their Traditions to thefe following Vtnodsjvlz,
TheMi/hna was finifh^d ^?2m Chrijii 219
The yerujalem Talmud - - - - 236
The Baby Ionic Talmud - - - - - 500
The PafTage is in hAsSynagogaJudaicaj^iXi^ for
the Satisfadion of the Reader, I fhall tranfcribc
his own Words, which arc thefe :
'^This Book (the yi\{hn2i)wasJini/hed^eJiahUJh''d
and received by the whole Synagogue of the Jews
(that all oj- them might live according to it at that
time, and their Pojlerity jor ever afterwards, as
they do at this Day) in the Year of Chrifl 2ig,
And after having mentioned one yochanan to be
Author of xhQyyerifalem Talmud, he i^2iys,'twas
compojed in^ or about the Tear of our "Lord, 230,
end had the Name given it of the Jerufalem
Talmud J which Book becaife it is objcure, hard
and difficult to be underftood, is the lefs in ufe, and
even to this Day, is not much damaged by the
Hands of the Readers.
* Hic Liber fuic abfolutus, confirmatus, tSc ab umverfa
Judasorun:i Synagoga receptus, ut juxra ilium onmes ea
tempellate Judsi, poilcriqueillorum, deince^)s femper vi-
verent, uti etiamnum hodie vivunt, Anno Chrifti ziy.
^u^r.Syn.Jiidaka, Cap. -x^.p. 52 Edit. 'Bafil. 1661.
] Poll aliquot annos exortus eft quidam Rabbi Jocha-
nan, Anno 2,50. ejusque Liber Talmudis Hierololymita-
ni nomen obnnuit : qui quoniam obicurus ell, durus, &
difficilis inteliectu, minor ejus femper fuit ufus — ■
nee ad h:sc ufque tempera, legentivim manibus valde teri-
V^r. 'JjUi.t, il/id. ;p. 6O0 ■ ■ - -
■ As
No JnBituticii of Christ. 23
" As to the "* Babylomc Talmud, he fays, T'loat it
was compleated in the Tear of Chriji 500. 'Thus the
entire Talmud being JiniJIjed and fignd, it acqui-
red the Name of the Babylonic Talmud.
Now, what I defire the Reader to obferve,
as very material in this Controverfy, is, that it
is not pretended that this Jewifli Baptifm is to
-be fouud in the MiJIma, nor yet in the "Jerufa-
Jem Talmud ; fo that the whole Authority of
this Tradition muft reft upon the Babylonic
Talmud, which is bringing of the Thing down
fo low, as 500 Years after the Days of "John the
Baptiji and our Saviour. And pray, who is
-obliged to believe thefe fabulous Writers, when
they mention a Pra(ftice, which they fay wac in
Vogue 500 Years before their Time, wiihouc
giving us any other Satisfadion, than their own
bare Word. Indeed had thefe Men referr'd us
to genuine and credible Authors, of com.petent
Date to prove this Bulinefs, it would have
been fomewhat more to the Purpofe; but to
exped: that we fliould be amufed to rely upon
their Teflimony, is mere Vanit}'', and would
be fuch a Piece of unreafonable and blind Sub-
miffion in us, as v/e fhall never pay, and the
World might juflly laugh at us, if we did.
Again, as to any Thing of this Nature, that
is urged from Maimonidcs, it flill bears the lefs
Credit, in Proportion to the Diilance of Time
* Ita ut Anno Chrilli 500. integrum Tuliuud abfjlu-
mm, obfignatum, Talmudifque Babylonici nomeu confc-
quumm Kient. BniAt. ibid, p: 61.
C ^ tha;
§4 l?2fani-Baptijm
that he lived in, after Chrift. He floiiriilied ill
the twelfth Century^ about ii 60, and what
Sandion could he give to a Tradition about a
Ceremony, faid to be pra(5tifed by his Forefa-
thers, above eleven Hundred Years before he
was. born. The Thing is ridiculous in its own
Nature. Nor can I fee, but that Dr. Ham-
mondj who lived in the laft Age, is of as good
Authority every whit, as to the Cafe in Hand,
as the famous Maimonides himfelf, who lived
about 600 Years ago.
Befides I may add, *tis notorious, that the
Rabbies difagrce among themfelves, about this
Affair of Jewifli Baptifm, the one denies it,
the other afHrms it ; thus we are every way
left in the Darkj by Perfons of indifferent Cre-
dit, and very flender Reputation at beft.
III. It may be worth our while, to confidef
the Manner of compiling thefe Works already
mentioned: and it was thus; the Jews aftef
the Deftrucftion of their City^ Temple and
Land 5 found themfelves in a very contemptible
and difperfed Condition^ and began at length
to bethink in earnefl, how they might belt
revive, and preferve and propagate among themj
their beloved oral Traditions, /. e. the unwritten
iDreams, and fuperfliticus Fancies of their Fore-
fatherSj with which they abounded. But in
procefs of Time, by the Condudl of fubtile
Dodors, and wife Rabbies, by retentive Memo-
HeS, and fruitful Imaginations, they found Ma-^
terials enough to compofe their Book, called
Mijlmai They are faid to fet about this Work,'
in
No InHitution ^/Christ. 25
In the fecond Century, and to iinifh It, either
about the latter End of that, or the Beginning
of the third. For as the Reader will find, there
is feme fmill Difference in computing the exa6t
Time of finifhing this Book, called Mifina,
However, all this was done after many Difpu-
rations and Confultations, what to put in, and
what to leave out. But for Satisfacflion in this
Pointj it may not be improper for me here, to
give a concife Account of this Matter, from
the ingenious Dr. Bray^ which he had colleded
from feveral fkilful Hands. His Words are
thefe, * The Jews diftiiignifh their Law ^ mto oral
and^Nnxxtx\^ they fay the ovzl is the Explication
ofthewntttii one. And a little lower, he fays,
it might not be foreign to the Piirpofe to conneSi
and fiibjoin a JJjort Hifory of fo famous a Sub-
jeB from Maimonides, R. D. Ganz. Hottinger,
F. Sim. a?id others.
He carries on his Account in the following
manner, -f* " In the fecond Century as the worthy
!' Hottingery^^y^j in his Hifiory^ chap. 2. the whole
Study
* Diftinguunt Juda^i legem in oralem & fcriptam, ora-
lem fcriptK explicarionem eiTe ajunt &c. — fed non abs
re forfan fuerit, hiftonolam rei tarn mfignis, ex Maimoni-
de, R. D. Ganz , Hottingero, P. Sim. aliifque contexere
& hie fubjungere. Dr^ Bray's Bibl. Paroch. p. 99.
"t" Secundo maxime fcculo, ut addit CI. Hottingerus in
fu4 Hiltoria C. 2. Omnis Judarorum opera occupata fuir,
in vindicandis & cOnlcribendis cfsi/TepfyVstr/, feu traditinni-
bus &)/p«t(fCtx Talmudiltas
2 6 InfaJit-Baptifm
Study of the jews was to recover, and put toge-
ther in V/riting their fecofidary Law, or their
iinw7'itten 'traditions, which till this time were
^ fcatterd, here and there, without am Order at
all. — But R. Judah Sir-named the Holy, who
" is among the Talmudijis ftiled. Rabbi, ^i? way of
*' Eminence, in the Tear of Chrijl 190, by the
*^ Favour of the Emperor Antoninus, and fearing
*^ lefl the Jews waJidring through different Nati-
" ons, fjould be deprived of fuch excellent 'i rea-
" fire, did reduce all the Laws and Ordinances of
** their Ancejiors, into general Rules. This Book
*'^ which to this Day makes up the 'Text of the few^
" if J Law, is called Mifhna, &c. And a little lower
he adds, " This Book being publickly read in the
** Schooh o/'Judea, and being explain d ajid enlarg d
'' by the various Difputations cf DoSicrs, out of all
" which put together, was the Jerufalem Talmud
*' produced, in the Tear of Chrifl 230.
As to the Talmud of Babylon, upon which
the maiif Strefs of this Jewifh Baptilm is laid, it
bears a very difagreable and indeed odious Cha-
Talmudifljis, Pvabbi, fine adjedtione per excellentiarn di-
citur, Anno Chrilti 190, indulgentia Antonini Imperaio-
ris, veritus ne Judjei inter Gentes vagabundi, tarn prscla-
ro privarentur Thefauro, Anteceflbrum fuorum Piacita^:
Conftitutiones, in Aphorifmos redegit 5 — vocatur hie
Liber, qui etiamnum hodie textum Juris Judaici confti-
Tuit, Mijhna. &c. — hie deinceps lequentibus annis, in
Scholis jud^cE, publice pr^leftus, & varus Doftorum Di-
fputationibm illuftratus (Siau(5tus e(t3 ex quibiis omnibus
in unum congeftis Anno Chrifti 230, prodiit Talmud
Hierofolymitanuni 5
34 Infant ^B apt ifm
anfwer, if he can but produce one, I fhall ht
fatisfied; and promife to difpute the Point with
him no further. But he goes on, telling us, it
was the Apojiles PraSlice to baptize whole Houfes
or Houfeholds. I can afliire him, that my Bre-
thren, the Baptifl-Minifters, and my felf par-
ticularly, would be very glad of Opportunities,
CO do as the Apoflles did, i, e. to baptize the fe-
veral Members or Branches of Families, where
the Grace of God feem'd evidently to appear
in each. Mr. W. comes to Particulars, When
we read of fo many Believers and their Houfes
being baptized, as Lydia and her Hou/hold,
Afts 1 6. 14, 15. Crifpus and all his Houfe, A(5ts
iB. 8. Stephanus and Ms Houfiold, i Cor. i. i6»
the Keeper of the Prifon, and all his, A(51:s 1 6. 3 g*^
/ think we cant but conclude that there were
Children infome ofthefe Houfes, fine e fo few Fa-*
milies are without Children^ and that they were
baptized,
I obferve, that Mr. W. fets out here In the
dark, upon a bare precarious Suppolition, and
beggs hard that his Point might be granted
him. He does not fingle out any Inftance to
argue from, but that of the Jailor, as moll
likely to do him any Service. But for the Satif-
faftion of the Reader, I v/ill examine each of
them, and Ihew that the Scripture fays fome-
thing, concerning mofl of thefe Families, that
is utterly inconfiilent with Infant-Baptifm. I
begin with that of Lydia, A5ls 16. 14, 15.
concerning whom, I would take Notice of the
following Things, i. This Woman feems to
have
No In[titution ^/Christ. 35
have been a fingle Woman, whether Maiden,
or Widow, is not material ; fince there is no
Mention made at all of her Hufband, and fhe
h reprefented, as the fole Head of her Family.
2. If (he was a Widow, who can tell, whether
fhe ever had any Children ? or whether any of
thofe Children liv'd, if any fuch were live-born?
3. She was at a coniiderable Diftance, from her
own proper fettled Habicatian; for (he was a
Woman of Thyatira^ tho' now at Philippic
upon the Account of her Trade, fhe being a
Seller of Purple; and 'tis not very probable,
that a Woman fhould encumber herfelf with
Infants, when fhe was going to diftant Towns
or Cities, on the Affairs of Merchandize.
4. As to the Quality of thofe who made up her
Houfliold, the moft rational Conjedure feems
to be, that they were Servants, who were al-
fifting to her in her Bufinefs, fince the Scripture
is totally filent, about her Hulband or any Chil-
dren. Certainly very lew People, tho' ever io
zealous, would prefume to baptize their In-
fants, upon fo dark and dubious an Authority
as this.
The next Inftance Mr. JV. gives us, is that of
Crijpus 2.nd all his Houfe, A5^s i8. 8. but, he
might have fpared mentioning this Family, fbr
it goes in exprefs Terms againft him ; for 'tis
faid»they all beheved, even the whole Houfe :
^nd Crifpia the chief Ruler of the Synagogue
believed on the Lord with all his Houje.
^ , The next Example Mr. W. produces, is the
^f^HouQiold q{ Stephujius, i Cor, 1. 16. but if he
D Z reads
36 Infant Baptijm
reads the latter End of this jEpiftle, he tvill
find hi mfelf greatly difappointed in thislnftance
alfo ; for if there were Infants in this Family,
they are faid to be fuch, as had addid:ed them-
felves to the Miniftry of the Saints, i Cor, 16. 15.
Ye know the Houfloold of Stephanus^ that is the
Jirji .Fruits of Achaia^ and that they have ad-
di^ed themfthes to the Miniftry of the Saints,
The laft Inflance, that Mr. W. produces un-
der this Head of baptizing of Houfholds, to
juftify Infant - Baptifm, and upon which he
feems to faften and to enlarge, as if he had
found fome Proof of it, is the Cafe of the
Jailor, A5ls 16. 33. But, the bare Reading of
this Text alfo, will foon fhew, that 'tis againft
him in very ftrong Terms, v. 32, 33,34. And
they [pake unto him the Word of the Lord, and
to all that were in his Houfe. And he took
them the fame Hour of the Night and wafJoed
their Streipes, and was baptized be and all his
ft rait way. And when he had brought them
into his Houfe, he Jet Meat before them, and
rcjoycd believing in God with all his Houfe.
Here are feveral Things exprefsly afTerted, that
are incompatible with the Capacities of In-
fants i as, I. that Paul and Silas (hould fpeak
the Word of the Lord, to all that were in the
Jailor's Houfe.
2. They rejoyc'd in the religious Converfa-
tion of Paid and Silas, and in the Manifefla-
tion of the Grace of God to themfelves and
others.
3. They believed in God^ in Conjundion
with
Nolnflitution of Ch k r s t. 37
with the Mailer of the Family : If thefe are
Mr. /F's Infants, I aoi of Opinion, that he will
fcarce be able to match them, or to find fuch
a Set of infantile Domeflicks, in any Jailor's
HouiTiold, throughout His Majeliy's wide and
extenfive Dominions.
I would now willingly have difmiffed this
Head, there being nothing more offer'd, that is
material in it, biu that Mr. fV. has advanc'd an
odd Notion, at the Clofe of it, p. \2. wherein
I- think, very few of his PjEdob.iptifl: Brethren
will concur with him, which is this, 'uiz. He
tells us, that if Minifiers were to co7ivert a Fa-
mily of yews or T'lirks^ they might upon the
Converfion of the Heads of the Family ^ baptize
the whole Flouje, If there were none it that re-
fufed Baptifm.
I would likewife readily excufe, his obfcure
way of delivering his Sentiments here; for he
talks iixik. of converting a Family offews and
^urksy and afterwards only of converting the
Heads of a Family^ as if there v/ere no Dif-
ference between a Family and the Heads of a
Family : Here again I am at a Lofs, what he
means by the Heads of a Family, whether the
Husband and fife, or whether he adds to them
fome prim.e Servafits, as Steward, Houfekeeper,
&c. For if I may be allowed, to gueft at his
Meaning, by the Words immediately follow-
ing, he fcems to diftinguidi between Children
in general, and this Headfl.np in particular,
whatever it confifts of But upon the Whole,
}ie roundly declares his Opinion, that at the-
P 3 ' Cojvver^
38 InJant^Baptifm
Converjion of the Heads of the Family, Minifters
might baptize the isshoU Houfe, if there were
none in it that refufed Baptifm. So that the only
Bar, or RefiriBioUy that he puts to prevent the
baptizing of the moil ignorant, and profligate
Wretches in a Family, is their refufing to fub^
wit to Baptifm. For if they are but willing to
have the A<9: performed, he, on his part, is al-
ways ready to adminlller it to them, without
any more a doe. He will, it feems, proftitute
one of the rx\o9ifacred and folemn Ordiiiances of
the New Teftamcnt, to thofe who have liv'd in
a conftant Courfe of the grolTefl Debaucheries,
that can be thought of, without any previous
Examination and Inflruftion, or any vifible
Tokens of true Repentance. If a Negroe-Slave^
juft bought, and newly imported from Africa ,
who is as flupid as a Beaft of the Field, and
is altogether ignorant of the true Gody arid of
the Chrijiian Religion, I fay, if fuch a miferable
Creature fhould be cafi: into Family, where the
Heads are converted, Mr. W. will give his War-
rant to baptize him immediately.
Humiliation and Repentance towards God,
and perfonal Faith in Jefus Chriji, are needlef?
Qualifications for Baptifm in Mr. Ws Efteem.
He does not think, that any preparatory
Knowledge of the Gofpel, is neceffary to bap-
tize a Jew', T^iirk, Indian or Ethiopian, if the
Party lives under the Roof of a Chriftian Con-
vert, for that alone will protect him, and fuffi-
ciently entitle him to holy Baptifm, provided,
that the poor Creature does not refifl, or refuf^
: . ; . • ■ ^ ■ '■ • ^ ■ ' • ' ' the
2s[o hpitution ofCwRLsr. 39
the Ceremony. And was it fo from die Begin-
ning ! No certainly. Mr. ^. has forgot the
Word of Exhortation, or Command, which
fhould have been nigh unto him, and even in
.his Mouth, and in his Heart, and which faifh
en this Wife. Go ye. teach all Natiom baptiz-
ing therdj &c. Matt. 28. Go ye into all the
World, and preach the Gofpelto ever^ Creature,
he that believeth and is baptized Jlo all befaved,
but he that believeth not fi all be damned. Mark 1 6.
16, 17.
But when he faw many of the Pharifees and
Sadduces come to his Baptifm, he /aid unto them
O Generation of ^Vipers I who hath warned you
to fee from the Wrath that is to come, briitg
forth Fruit meet for Repentance, and think not
to fay withifi your fehes we have Abraham to
our Father. Matt. 3. 7, 8.
And the Eimuch faid, fee here is Water,
what doth hinder me to be baptized^ And
Philip faid, if thou believeft with all thijte
Heart, thou may eft. A(fts 8. 36, 37.
There are divers Psedobaptifts, Vy'hofc Zeal
carries them fo far, as to think they may fafely
baptize Infants, on the Account of their Parents
Faith, without feeking any other Foundation^
to go upon. But I acknowledge, that I never
convcrs'd with any fedate Perfon, who chofe
this extraordinary Way with our Author, rajh^
ly to baptize ignorant and prophane Servants,
merely, upon the Converfion of their Mafler*
to Chriftianity. And I think that African Ser-
vant?, who are pretty numerous in this Nation,
^ 4 Hving
40 Infant -B apt ijm
living under Chriflian Mafiers^ may be thanlc-
ful to Mx.W, in that he has not declar'd it
lawful, to tie them Neck and Heels, and to
baptize them whether the^ would or not,
purely becaufe their Mailers are Chriflians.
And I fhall learn by Degrees, not to be fur-
prized at any Thing that he may advance ^s to
Baptifm, fince I begin now to be fomewhat
acquainted with his Latitude, and the Licen-
ciouinefs of his Confcience, in Lumping of
Families at this Rate, and baptizing of them
in the Grofs, without (hewing the kail Regard
to perfonal <>5uaIiiications, which are fo plainly,
and fb pofitively infifted on, ^ery where in the
New Teflament.
Chap
No Jnflitution of Christ. 41
Chap. III.
T/5^ Argumejit from the Covenant examind. A
plain and concife Definition of the Covena?it of
Grace. T^he Sentiments of thefirfi Reformers,
of the Church «?/England, and of the Afjembly
at Weftminfter about it. Divers ^eries re-
lating to it J refolved. Circumcifien no Seal of
this Covenant^ to the Jews. Baptifm no Seal
of it, to Chrifiians. Several Objedfions of
rcedobaptifis, fully anfwerd.
I Now proceed to the third Ground of
Proof, that Mr. W. offers for Infant-Bap-
tifm, viz. Scripture -Confequences,* and he be-
gins his Introduction to it, in the followinaj
manner. As to Scripture -Confequences I think
we have many, which prove Infants Right to
Bapti/m, and fuch as would be jufficient to juf-
tijy the PraBice had we no other Proof
I Ihall pafs by his Introduction, lince there
is Nothing in it like an Argument, unlefs this
fhould be thought one, viz. p. it^ where he
declares his Surprize, that thofe who allow Scrips
ture-Confequences, in the Cafe of the Womens
Right to the Sacrament (of the Lord's Supper)
and the Change of the Sabbath, will not allow
them, when brought to prove Infants Right to
Baptifm,
HerQ
4^ Infajit'B^ptifm
Here he looks upon Womans Right to the
Lord's Supper, and upon the Ground of our
Obfervancs of the firft Day of the Week, and
Infants Right to Baptifm, to be upon an equal
Foot J and he feems mightily pleafed, that he
lias found an unfurmountable Difficulty, in his
Opinion, which the Baptifts will not be able to
fet over. Therefore he repeats it again and
ac^ain, in his Treatife, However, I fhall referve
a proper Place, to give the Reader a fatisfadory
Solution of this feeniing Difficulty. But at pre-
fent I {hall advert to his Arguments, drawn
from Scripture-Confequences, to prove Infant-
Baptifm.
I. The flrfl: he produces is in thefcWords,i;/.2r.
'The Information we have from Scripture that
Infa?its always were in the Covenant of Graeme.
From whence I think dearly follows their Right
to Baptifm y the initiating Seal 0/ the Covenant
of Grace, under the Chrifiian Difpenfation, un-
lefs it can be proved that they were at any
Time caft out of Covenant, the Proof of whicki
ties on the Oppcfers of Infant-Baptifm.
This is the main Pillar, of the Strudlure of
Infant -Baptifm, and indeed the B afis u^ton
whiph, moil of the Diffenting P^dobaptifts
lay their chief Strefs, and often ierves them for
the lafl: Refort, v/hen they are fairly diilodged
from all other Holds. Therefore it deferves an
impartial Difcuffion. I obferve then, that the
former Part of this Paragraph, is laid down iq
the Form of a Propofition, mz. thus, that In-
fants always were- iri the Covenant of Grace/
Mo Inffliution of Cnn i st. 43
As this Propofition is delivered in an unguard-
ed, loofe and indefinite Manner, I openly and
abfolutely deny the Truth of it. And therefore
ihiill take the Liberty, to enquire into thefe
following Things, as preparatory to clear up
this Point, fo much infifled on by him and
others, in Defence of their Practice of baptiz-
ing Infants.
1. What the Covenant of Grace is ?
2. Whether all Children Indefinitely confi-
fidered were always in it ?
3. Whether all the Children of Believers
themfelves were always infallibly in it ?
4. Whether the Children of Unbelievers
were not fometimes in it ?
5. Whether the Covenant made with Abra-^
ham was, fimply and ftridlly fpeaking, the
Covenant of Grace?
6. Whether Circumcifion under the Old Te-
ilament, and Baptifm under the New Te-
ftament, are any where in Scripture, faid
to be the Seals of the Covenant of Gjace,
to thofe to whom thefe Ordinances were
applied ?
I. I begin with the firfi: of thefe, What is the
Covenant of Grace ? I anfwer, in the moft im-
partial and faithful Manner, that I am capable
'T'/i that folemn Cove?iaJit, wherein the Al-
mighty Gody has gracioujly ajfiired all jpiritiial
Bl0ngi both of Grace and Glory, to his own
'■ - ' ' peculiar
44 Infant-Baptifm
peculiar People y and has inviolably engaged that
they Jhall be eventually and eternally his, thrd
'J ejus Chriji the Mediator,
The Appellation, that Divines have thought
proper to give it, viz. the Covenant of Grace,
very well fhews the Complexion, the Contex-
ture and Nature of it, for the Parties refpec-
tively concern'd in it, deal all in Grace. The
Great God as the Donor ^ his favourete Ptotle as
the Receivers^ and Jelus Chriji his Son^ as [he
Mediator^ to ratify and eftablifh this kind Tranf-
2.€don. with his own Blood. ' The rvj>^ clear and
uncontefted Place of any that I know, in the
whole Bible, where this Covenant is revealed
and mentioned with Certainty, and vvith rhe
LEAST Shadow or Incumbrance, is m Heb. 8.
.IQ. For this is the Covenant that I ^joili niake
with the Houfe of Ifraei^ after thofe J^ays faith
the Lordy I will put my La%vs into tbeir Mindy
and 'write them i?i their Hearts^ and I will be
to them a God^ aJid they /hall be to me a People.,
I know not, v^^'hether this Definition may pjeafe
or not ; however I am fatisfied, that the Account
I have given as to the Subftance of it, is much
to the fame Purpofe, with this Scripture-De-
claration of the true Covenant of Grace. For
as this my/lerious Contradl, is of God's own
Making, fo there are no others comprehended
in it, but thofe of his own Putting : Neither In-
fants nor Adult, can be interefled in it, bur fuch
only concerning whom, God himfelf has freely
promis'd, that he would be their God, and they
ihQuld be his Sons and his Daughters.
No Inflitution r/ C h r i s t. 45
1 am Well aware, that the moft eminent Pae-
dobaptifl-Writers, fince the Reformation, have
taken Care to infert the natural Seed of Believ-
ing Parents, as included in this Covenant. And
tho' I pay a very Gonfiderable Veneration, to
their great Judgments, in many Points, yet I
dare neither follow nor trull them in this
Matter J being well afTured from the holy Scrip-*
tures, that the hifants who are comprized in
this Covenant, are enrolled in God's eternal and
fecret Purpofes, and concerning whom he has
unchangeably determin'd and faid, as of Jacob
when in the Womb, bejore he had yet done any
Good or Evily that he loved the Per/on. I may
add with equal Truth , that whoioever is not
in this Covenant ( by vertue of the previous
Counfel of Gqd ) in his Infancy, will never be
found in it, in his Years of Maturity. And on
the other hand, whofoever is in it, in his In-
fancy, in the Senfe aforefaid, fhall never be
permitted, to throw himlelf finally out of it.
For there is an eternal Line of Care and Love
reaching from the very firji Formation in the
Womb, thro' all the Stages of Life, to a fafe
Arrival in Glory, /. e. the Party fhall be affuredly
called in the Series of Time, by the Efficacv of
divine Grace, and (hall be kept by the m-Uhtf
Power of God, thro Faith unto Salvation ; nor
is there,^ properly fpeaking, any fuch thing, as
a Poffibility of fruftrating, or difappointing the
direct Defigns of God" in this Covenant. 'Tis
a Chain that can neither be alter'd nor broken.
Hence it is unconteftably plain, that no Man
can.
46 Jnp?if-Batfifm
can put hhnfelf into this Covenant much lefs
can he put his Child, or the neareft Relative that
be has, into it. Therefore for Parents to pre-
tend, to entail upon their Children, an Heredi-
tary Right to the Covenant of Grace, is, pre-
fumptioufly to claim a Charter, that v^as never
granted them j or in plainer Terms, to invade
God's Sovereignty, and to take his proper Work
outot his Hands.
And from hence we may further fee, how vain
and groundlefs Mr. Ws Dodtrine is, as fcatter'd
up and down in his Book, when he talks of en-
tring Children into this Covenant of Grace.
Whereas 'tis undeniably evident, from the
Scripture- Account of the Nature of Things, that
'tis God's Province and Prerogative only, to enter
or infertiSTames into this heavenly Contrad; and
upon t:as everlafling Covenant, as upon an ini'
moveable Foundation^ by a vvife Mafher-Builder,
is the eternal Salvation of the whole Church of
G od 1 a id . T^be Foufidation of God ftandeth fare,
having this Seal^ the Lord Knoweth them that are
his. 2. Tim. 2. 19. Forivhom he did foreknow ^
he alfo didpredejlinate to be cofifornidto the Image
of his Sony moreover whom he did predejlifiate^
them he alfo called, and whom he called them he
alfojuftified, andwhom he juftified them he alfo glo-
rified. What jh all we fay to thefe things? If God
be for us, who can be againfi us? Rom. 8 29, 30,
-2 1. Now if Tiiings (land thus, as they moft
certainly do in the Apoille's Eflimate, I may
venture to ask the Reader, what he thinks of
' Mr. JV's Pfopofidon .^ which is laid down in a
loofe
No JnBitution c?/ Ch r i s t. 47
^oofe and general Way, n>iz^ that Infants always
wetrein the Covenant of Grace. As if Infants in
Common, had an undiftinguifh'd Intereil in this
myfterious Covenant. Whereas the Scripture
teflifies the dired: Contrary, as may be {ttn by
the declared Cafe of Jacob and Efati before they
were born ; and which I fliall have Occafion far-
ther to improve, hereafter. But before I difmiis
this Head, it may be proper toremind the Reader,
that I have already hinted the divine Regularity,
Uniformity, and Faithfulnefs of the Covenant of
Grace.
All vt^ho are interefled in it (by the preordina-
tive or decretive Will of God) in their Infapxy,.
fhall infallibly and efFe6lually be called by the
Holy Spirit, fooner or later in their Life-time.
They fhall be made adually to lay hold on this
Covenant, and be made willing to yield themjehces^
to the Lord; for this is the exprefs Engagement
on God's Part, / will put my Laws into their
Minds, and write them in their Hearts, mid I
will be to them a God, and they floall be to me a
People. 'Tis an elTential Part of this Covenant,
for God to make them a willi?ig People in the
Day of his Power. And herein appears the Free-
dom and Fullnefs of his Grace, in that, nothing
fhall obftrucIH: the Execution of hh kind Defigns
of Love towards them. If they break my Sta-
tutes and keep not my Commandments, then will t
"oifit their ^ranfgrefjion with the Rod, a?id their
Iniquity with Stripes Neverthekfs my huijig
Kindnefs will I not ntte7'ly take from him, nor
fuffer my Faithfilnefs to fail Mv Co-^eJiant will
r
48 Infant'BaptiJm.
I not brtak^ nor alter the Thing that is gone out
ef my Lips. Pfalm 89. 31, — ^-34. Hence it is
called an everlajiing Covenant, order d in all
Things and Jure. 2 Sam. 23. 5.
A Covenant of Peace that Jh all never be removed^
Ifaiab ^^. 10. A Covenant ejiablifljed upon bet-
ter Promifes Heb. 8. 6. which Places I look
upon, to contain the everlafting and unchange-
able Nature, of the bleffed Covenant of Grace.
This was the Doftrine, upon which the glorious
Reformation was built, not only abroad, but here
at home, as may be evidently feen, by the funda-
mental Articles of the Church oi England, parti-
cularly xhtfeventeenth which runs thus j in Words
at length.
" Predefiination to "Life is the eternal Purpofe
«' ofGody whereby (before the Foundations of the
c c Jj^orld were laid) he hath conftantly decreed by
«' his Counfel fecret to us, to deliver from Curfe and
«« Damnation, thofe whom he hath chofen in Chriji
^^ out of Mankind, and to bring them by ChriJI to
<« everlafiing Salvation, as Vejfels made to Honour*
«' Wherefore they which be endued withfo excellent
«' a Benefit of God, be called according to God*s
" Purpofe hy his Spirit working in due Seafon :
" They through Grace obey the Calling : They be
^^ jufiified freely : They be made Sons of God by A-
«' doption : They be made like the hnage of his only
*' begotten Son fefus Chrift : They walk religioufiy
*^ in good Works, and at length by God's Mercy
" they attain to everlafiing Felicity.
That this Do(5lrine was ilrenuoully maintain'd,
in the moftabfolute Senfe,foraconfiderable time
in
No InBitution of Christ, 49
in the Efiablifhed Church, is undeniable, at leafl
'till towards the Middle of the loft Century. We
have an eminent Inftance, in a pious BiJIoop de-
fending this Dodrine, and feverely inveighing a-
gainft an Arminian Writer, who had dedicated a
Book to King Charles the F/?3/?,entituled an * Ap-.
peal to Cafar, But the Rev. Bijhop, who was Dr.
George Car let on, then of Chichejler,^ complains
of him in this Manner, viz. " l^he Author of the
" Appeal has troubled the Church of England,
'•^ withjlrange Do Brines in two T'hings ejpe daily ;
*^ Jirjiin theDoBrineofPredeJtination, he attempt-
** eth to bring in a Decree reJpeBi-ve^ which he tak-
*' eth for granted to be the DoSirine of our Church:
*' But this will 7iever be granted by us, ?ior proved
*' by him. Secondly he taketh it likewife for granted
** that the DoBrine of our Church is, that a Man
** may fall away from Grace totally and finally ;
" if hisMeaningbe thatfuch as are called and jujii-
^^ fed according to God'sPurpsfe may fo fall away^
*' this was never a DoBrine of the Church c^/Eng-
** land. And a little further, T^he Church of
** England was reformed by the Help of our learned
" and reverend Bifiops, in the Days ofKi?jg Ed-
" ward thefxthy and in the Begin7iingof the Reign
" o/^^^;z Elizabeth. They who then gave that
" Form of Reformation to our Churchy held Confent
" in DoBrinewith Peter Martyr and Martin Bucer,
" being by Authority appoirited Readers in the two
*' Univerfities ; and with others then livings whom '
<' theyjudgd to be of befi Learning and Soimd?iefs,
" ifi the reformed Churches.
* Anf. to the Appeal p. i — 4.
E But
go Infant ^Baptijm
But I would obferve further, that the Affent-^
bly's Catechifm clearly maintains this DoBrine of
the Gove7iant, 'Tis ask'd Quell. 20. Did God
have all Mankind to perifh in the State of Si?t and
Mifery ? The Anfwer is made, God having out of
his mere good Pleafure^ from all Eternity, eledied
fometo everlafting Life, did enter into a Covenant
of Grace to deliver them, out of the State of Sin.
and Mifery, andtohri?2g them into a State of Sal-
vation by a Redeemer. Having premifed thefe
Things, and having thus fairly ilated from .
Scripture and good Authority, the true Nature of
the Covenant of Grace, my Way is in a great
Meafure prepar'd to folve the next Querie, viz*
II. Whether all Children indefinitely, or U7ii^
verfally confdered, 'Were ahvaysin the Covenant
of Grace, according to Mr. W's Propolition ? I
may fafely anfv^er, that they were not ; nor do I
think, that he himfelf upon a Recolledion of
Things, notwithstanding ail his Latitude and ex-
tenfive Allowance for Infants, will attempt to
maintain this Poiition, that Infants, quatenus In-
fants, were always in the Covenant of Grace.
Were the Children and Pofterity of Cain, that
notorious Proto-Murderer, banifli'd into a wild
and wandering State of Life, and whofe Defcen- '
dants are diftinguifh'd from the Sqi2s of God, iii
exprefs Words, were thefe I fay in the Cove-
nant of Grace ?
Or^ were the Infants of the Daughters of Men ^
which they had, by Cohabitation v.^ith the So?is
ff God, and it feems proved to be, that formida-
ble buc impiousRaceof G/^/7/^'upon Earthy which
No InBitiition of Christ. 51
We read of Gen. 6. I ask whether i^efe were in
the Covenant of Grace ?
Agaifl, were the Infants of thofe profligate Ge-
nerations, who utterly perifhed with their Parents
in the Deluge, and who were fwallowed up by
the general Vengeance of God^ upon a brutal
World, were thefe likely to be in the Covenant
of Grace ? I am fure their Extracftion from fuch
Parents, and all other Symptoms attending them^
do not befpeak any fuch Thing of them.
Nor do I fuppofe that Mr. ^r. can imagine that
all the Infants of Mahometam^ Chine/e, Eaficrn.
^ndJVeJiern /«<3^/^/W, together with thok oWegroes
and Moors of Africa^ at this Day, are in the Cove-
nant ofGr^ce; if they are not, he mufi: either
revoke his Propofition, or cultivate and correct it^
'till it bears fome Refembiance of Truth, at
leaft* Therefore
III. I proceed to another Enquiry, ^ciz. Whe-
ther ^///^^ Children oi Believers themfelve.'y 'ivere
always in the Covenant of Grace f I anfwer^
that the Scripture gives Room and Reafon enough
to conclude, that they were not. There are ve-
ry few Divines, but what will allow, that the
Covenant of Grace, was revealed to, and efla-
bliflied with, our firli Parents Adam. and£-i't', im-
mediately after the Fall, and that they themfelveg
were included in it. Qen. 3. 15. where God pro-
mifes, that the ^eed of the IVoman Jljall bruije the
Head of the Serpent.
I Would willingly begin, with the earliefl Be-
1 levers in the Mejiah, in Order to take a View of
their Childrt/h And here I would ask, Are there
E 2 anv
5^ Infant-'BaptiJm
any Foot-fteps in divine Revelation, that lead ufi
to conclude, that Cam the very Jir/l Infant that
was born oi a Woman, was in the Covenant
of Grace as well as his Brother Abel f I confefs,
I think that the Hints we have of him in the New
Teftament, rather determine the Contrary, / e.
that he was not. i John 3.12. nof as Cain whi>
was of that wicked one, and flew kis Brother, &c.
Jude 1 1, woe unto them for they have gone in the
Way ^Cain, &c.
The Cafe feems to be much the fame, in Re-
gard to Ham or Cham, the Son oiNoah ? the Fa-
ther was not only a righteous Man, but ^.Preacher
of Right eoif fiefs ; tho* the So7i was pronounced by
the Infpiration of the Pxoly Ghofi, to be contemp-
tible among Men upon Earth, and was rejedted as
to himfelf and Pofterity with Marks of divine
Difpleafure, and from his Race came the Canaa-
nites, whom God determin'd to Deftrudtion, that
their La7id might be given to Ifraelites : But, I
chofe to inflance, in feme of the moft eminent
Believers in after-Ages, fome of whofe Children
appear not to be in the Covenant of Grace. If
we confider Abraham himfelf, there is no Body
will affirm that Ifmael was in it. Again was
Efau in this Covenant ? concerning whom the
Lord himfelf had faid, before he was bom, or hav-
ing done either Good or Evil, Jacob have I loved
and Efau have I hated. But if we take a View of
the great Patriarch David, not only a Believer,
but a remarkable Type of the Mefjiah ; we have
very deplorable Inftances, and Evidences of his
Children, who do not feem to be interefled in the
Co vena n
No InBittition ofCn r i s r . 53
Covenant of Grace, with their godly Father.
His Son Amnon committed Inceil with his own
Sifter and was flain by Abfalom, in Revenge of
the Injury and Difgrace done her, nor do we find,
that he had any Remorfe, or Senfe of that Evil
before he died.
Not long after this, Ahfalom rebells againft his
F^^^^r,commits Incefl openly in the Face of the
Sun with his Father's Wives, and dies by violent
Hands, without any Intimation of Repentance,
in the very Ad: o{ unnatural Rebellion. In forne
Time after this, Adonijah, another Son of David
proclaims himfclf King in his Father's Life- time,
contrary to the Exprefs Defign of God, and a-
gainft the Confent of his own Father, and was
afterwards fuddenly put to Death by Solomon^
probably for his private Intrigues in aiming at the
Kingdom. I can't think that any cQnfiderate
Man, nor that Mr. /F.himfelf will take upon him
to prove thefe Sons of David to be in the Cove-
nant of Grace, with the good old Patriarch. It
would be an eafy Matter, to produce more mc-
lancholly Inftances of this Kind ; but, are there
not deplorable Examples of religious Parents, in
our Days, who have wicked Children, even fach
who in all outward Appearance, live 2nd die in a
State of Unregeneracy. This is fufficient to o-
ver throw Mr. Ws, Propofition, and to demon-
ftrate that 'tis not to be depended upon, without
careful Alteration, and Corredion.
IV. I come to the fourth Enquiry, viz. Whe-
ther fome Children of Unbelievers, v\'ere noc
fometimes in the Covenant of Grace ? I anfwer
E 3 xh^X
54 Infant'BaptiJm
thftt they frequently were, and often are, ilill m
our Times. This is fo unqueftionably true, that
the Profely tes under the Old Teftapient, who im-
mediately defcended from idolatrous Parents, and
received the faving Knowledge of the true God,
by embracing the Jewi{h Religion, and trufting
in the Mejjiah who was to come,thef? I fay, were
undoubtedly in the Covenant of Grace. Ra-
hah tho' an Harlot diUd a Canaanitefs, yet was ir^
the Covenant of Grace, and being married to
Balmon, became of the Stem of the Meffiab, and
has ihe Honour to be recorded, as fuch. Mat, i. 5.
And Ruth was a Moabitifli Woman and appears tQ
bethegreat Grand -mother oiDavid^zn^ accord-
ingly they were both infertcd in the Genealogical
Lineofy^y^s Chrifl^ as the firfl Fruits of the Gen-
tiles, whofhould in time, be more fully called and
received by him. Therefore, the New Teflament
will furnifh us, with notable Initances to this
Purpofe.
As the Canaanittjh Woman, who apply'd to
pur Lord in the Behalf of her Daughter, Mat,
jc. 22. Our Saviour treated her at firfl, as if flie
had been a- kin to Dogs, or at leaft, as if fhe had
fprung from Ancellors as vile as Dogs, and yet at
3^ft, he gracioudy yielding toherRequeft, grant-
ed her the Delireof her Heart, at the fame Time
highly approving and applauding her Faith, O
Woma?! great is thy Faith I
Again, the Cafe of the Roman Centurion de-f
ferves. a particular Mention, Mat. 8. 5. he be-.
fought our Lord, on Account of his Servant that
he m'iglit be hcaiedj and he mix'd his Argu-
piepts^
No luBitation of Christ. 55
ments, with fuch a noble Exercife of Faith, as
our Lord had not found among all the Families
oilfrael v. iq. Verily I have not found Jo great
JFaithy no not in Ifrael. And I fay unto you that
manyjhall come from the Eaji and Weft, and fit
down with Abraham, and Kaacand Jacob in the
Kingdom of Heaven, and the Children of the King-
dom ft)all be caft out, &c.
Now, the Ufe that I would make of thefe, and
the like Examples, is, to fhew the Infufficiency
and Precarioufnefs of this Way of arguing, and
that no Man can determine, what Children, nor
whofe Children, are in the Covenant of Grace,
whether the Children of Belieyers or Unbelievers?
the Children of Godlyorof ungodlyParents? God
has made no Diilindion between them in the
Gofpel, nay he afTures us the contrary, that all
are Children of Wrath, and that unlefs they are
born agflin, they fiall never fee the Kingdom of
God
'Tis in yaln, for Mr. W. and others to plead,
that they have Profeffors, or Believers, as fo many
Abrahams to their Fathers, for, God is able out of
the very Stones, to raife up Child/ren to Abraham.
The Sovereign and free Grace of God, is nor to
be bounded in the C/;^;z7Zf'/ of natural Generation.
'That which is born of the Fleftois Fleftj, John 3 . 6,
And were it notfor the ilrange Prejudice of Edu7
cation, few Men would be fo rafh and thougfit-
lefs^as to conclude, that natural Birch, does by
Blood, give a Right to the Covenant of Grace ;
this is a Doclrine, that the Golpel is an utter
.Stranger to, and tends to deftroy the Method of
E ^ free
^6 Infant'Baptijm
free Grace In our Salvation, inftead of promoting
it. At this Rate of arguing, the Church of God,
now under the Gofpel, would be confin'd within
the Compafs of few profeffing Families, and en-
tailed upon them. Than which nothing is more
ridiculous, as well as repugnant to the whole
Tenor of the New Teftament. There needs no
more be faid at prefent, to fhew, that this Me-
thod of Reafoning, that Mr, W. and many oj:her
PaedobaptiUs take, is very fallible and incpn-
clulive.
V. The fifth Enquiry is this. Whether the Cove^
nant made with Abraham, Gen. 17, was^Jimply
and jlriBly [peaking^ theCovenant of Grace ?I an-
fwer in the Negative, that it was not 3 but then I
affirrh, and hope to prove thefe following Things.
I, That this was a mix'd or compofite Cove-
nant, confifting partly of temporal, and partly of
fpiric. al Conditions and Bleffings. The beftand
fafeit Way to underftand the Nature of this Co-
venant, is, for the Reader to confult the Text,
where the Terms of it are fet down at Length,
Gen, 17. v. 2 — 14. Now, "if a numerous
«« Fofierityl and being the Father of many Nati-
«« om^ and having Kings to come out of his Loins^
" and having the Land of Canaan given to him
'" and his Seed after him as a free and fettled In-
«' heritance^ and the taking of his Servants and
" Bondmen^ and all born in his Hoiife or bought
■ "'' 'isnth his' Money ^ to come under the outward
" Token of this Covenant^ and to crown all^ to
** have the Promife of God to be his God and the
^' God'of his Seedy I fay if thefe feveral Things,'
are
J^o JiiBitution of Christ- 57
are not of dijiincf Natures, if they are not diftind
Ingredients, to make up this compound Covenant,
I confefs I have loft all Ideas of Mixtures and
Compofitions. And he that can deny that temporal
Sindetermii Things, are dijiinguijhablein their own
Natures, muft firft renounce common Senfe, and
then I think, he is at Liberty to deny any thing.
2. This Covenant made with Abraham, was
a peculiar Covenant, in its Strudlure,andCircum-
ftances, or 'twas peculiarly delign'd, as a domef-
tick Covenant with Abraham. This can't rea-
fonably be deny'd, if it be conlidered, that 'tis
fuch a Covenant, as God was notpleafcdto make
with any before him, nor with any in his Time,
nor yet with any after him. Did God ever tranf-
a
hak and Shuah F Thefe multiplied to that De-
gree, that they became the Fathers and Original
of the Arabians and M/W/^;^//^^, and now all thefe
fTntomuft be owned to be truely, properly, and •
lineally the Seed of Abraham according to the
Flefh, but the Queftion I put to Mr. IV. and the
Pffidobaptijfls, is, whether they were in the Cor*
venant of Grace, with faithful Abraham ?
But, to come nearer ftill to the Bulinefs in
Hand, if poffible, let the Cafe of JacoFs Poflerity
be examin'd, and you will find that all the natu-
ral Seed of Ifraei, were very far from being in the
Covenant of Grace.
The Scripture plainly determines the Con-
trary, and affures us, Rom. 9. 27. that tho* the
Number of the Children (^/'Ifrael be as the SdndoJ
■the Sea, a Remnant fi all be faved. And v. 6, j^
8. of the fame Chaptef ,y^or they are not alllfrsiel
ivhich are o/'IfraeL Neither becaufe they are the
Seed I?/' Abraham, are they all Children, 'Thai is^
they which are the Children of the Flejh^ thefe are
not the Children of God^ but the Children of the
Frofnife are counted for the Seed.
Can any Scripture-Evidence be more pofitlv©
and convincing, as to this Matter, that the natu-
ral Seed of Abraham and Ifrael{d^f\xc\ were not
in the Covenant of Grace ? And will Mr. PF. and
fome Psdobaptifts pretend, they have fome fu-
peiiour Privilege, by urging that their Seed muil
be in it. This is, not only luting in the Chair of
Abraham^ the great Heir of the fForhl^ and the
Fatkif
No JnBitution (9^ Christ. 63
Father of the Faithful^ but alfo, advancing their
natural Off/pring infinitely above his, and all this
is done, in dired Oppofition to all Scripture -Evi-
dence. By this Time the Reader may eaiily
difcern with what little Colour of Truth Mv.fV;
could aflure the Vv'^orld, that Infants always were
in the Covenant of Grace.
VI.The lafl Enquiry propofed under this Head
is, Whether Circumcifwn under theO/yTeftament,
and Baptifnunditr xh^New, are in Scripture faid
to be the Seals of the Covenant of Grace, to all
thofe to whom they were applied f Now in An-
fwer to this Query, it may faiely be anfweredy
that Circumciiion was not a Seal of the Cove-
nant of Grace, in the ftrid: Propriety of the-
PhrafeyOv the Idea contained in it. For, Circum-
cifion was only a Signy 'Token^ or Mai^k of that
mixdy domeflick ov pecidiar Covenant, that God
made with Abraham, Gen. 17. and which we
have fpoken of already. But in Order to ftate
this Point in that fair Light that it requires, 'tis
necefiary to diftinguifh between. Seal, and Sign.
Becaufc they are really diflinguifhable in them-
felves. For, every Seal is a Sign^ but every Sip-n
is not a Seal. And 'tis evident, a Seal carries
more Certainty, Strength, and Ai^thority along
with it, than a bare Sign, docs. Therefore it has
commonly been made Ufe of to ratify D^^^.cand
Grants, or to give Sanftion to the Decrees
of P?'inces. As for Inftances, the Reader
may perufe the following Paffagcs, and fee
what Acceptation the original Word has in
the Scripture, I have fet down zho Ildrew Term,
Helfre-w
64 Infanf'Baptifm
arid how it is ufually rendered, in Greek, Latin
and Englifi ; ann HHatham, [to fed] Efih. 3.
12. Chap. 8.10. [fealed] with the King's Ringi
Fromthence comes aipn HHotham, Jbt^crJAi©^,
cq)pcityis, amiF aboliihed.
No JnBitution c^/ Christ. 73
al)oliflied, does it follow that the other muft be
appointed ? Where is the Reafon of this Confc-
quence ? Nay the profound Silence wherein In-
fant-Baptifm, is paft by, in the Gofpel, fuffici-
ently indicates, that it was never dcfign'd to
fucceed Circumcifion.
3. As to the Qualifications, pre-requlfite to
Baptifm according to the Gofpel, tho' they ex-
clude Infants, from any Share in that Ordinance,
yet do they by no Means affed; their Salvation.
Indeed, if Circumcifion had been an infallible
Seal, to fecure the Salvation of all the Infants,
to whom it was applied, 'twould be no Wonder
to hear Parents Crying out, for fomething to
fucceed it, of equal Virtue and Authority.
But we know, that Circumcifion was only a
temporary Inftitution, to anfwer fome particular
Ends, in the Families of Abraham and the Ifra-
elites. And when thofe Ends were anfwer'd,
that Ordinance ceafed, without any Ways af-
feding the State, or Salvation of Infants in the
leaft. They are as fafe without it as with it.
The Cafe is the fame as to Baptifm at prefent, it
can neither put them in, nor out of a State, of
Salvation. And what makes it altogether infig-
nificant to them, is this, that there is no Direc-
tion from God in this Matter. Therefore there
is.no need of flraining and vvrefting the Gofpel,
to bring Infants to Baptifm ; nor of hurrying,
as a great many weak and zealous People do, to
have it adminifler'd to them, left they fliculd
die before-hand. If they had a clearer Appre-
henfion of the Way of Salvation, in the Gofpel,
they
74 Infant'B^^ptifm
they might foon be deliver'd from this llavifh
Fear.
4. If Inllead of Infants from Abrahatns Li-
neage thro' Ifaac, God has taken in, all the Fa-
milies of the £^r^^ under Gofpel, upon Faith
and Kepentance. This certainly makes abun-
dant Amends for the Lofs that is complain'd of,
by Mr. JV, and others. Undoubtedly, all the
Nations of the Earth are more numerous, than
Abrahams Pofteritycan be fuppofed to be. God
has given his So/ijcr Sahatiqn to the 'Ends of the
Earthy and ordered the Gofpel to *be preached to
every Creature, and as many as believe and are
baptized fio all befaved. He has alfo promifed to
pour down of his Spirit upon all Flefh^ the Promife
is unto all that are afar off^ eve?i as many as the
Lord our GodfJmll call. And is not all this to be
looked upon, as a full Compenfation, for abo-
lifhing the carnal Ordinance of Circumcifion,
which was limited to the Jews, and few Profe-
lytes, with Slaves and Bondmen in their Fami-
lies ? Surely any one may rcadilyjudge, which i$
the more eligible of the two Difpenfations. And
the unprejudic'd Reader may plainly difcern,
from thefe Confiderations, what little Force
there is in Mr. W's ObjeBion, v^hen he asks, can
we fuppofe that God's Goodnefs to Believers and
their Seed is any Way diminifed by the Gofpel ?
Who fays it is ? the Baptijis always affirm, the
Grace of God is enlarged, iincethe Middle Wall
ofPartition^ between Jews^cndi Gejitiles^ is broken
down ; and the Children of the Gentiles^ if thefe
Children fear God^nd believe in Chrifi, and not
otherwife.
No InBitution ^/Christ. 75
otherwife, have the fame fure Title to his Fa*
vour, as the Children of the mofi: eminent y^ic;f
under the Old Teflament, once had. For, this
is the declared Method of Salvation, to as many
as receive him, to them he gives Power to become
the Sons of God^ even to them that believe on his
Name, l^'hich are born not of Blood, nor of the
Will of the Fie fh, nor of the Will of Man^ but of
God. John 1. 12, 13. Our Lord, in this and other
Places, abfolutely cuts off, all Pretenfions by
Blood, to the Priviledges of the Gofpel, and the
Favour of od.
II. Another Objecftion is this, Mr, JK fays,
p. 32. that the B apt i (is put the Children of Chrif-
tians upon a Level with the Children of jews, Turks
^W Infidels, i. e. leave them to the uncovenanted
Mercies of God. I anfwer,
1. I defire to know, what difference there is
by Nature, between the Children of profeffing
Chriftians, and'the Children of others. Are they
any Way better than their Neighbours ? The
Gofpel knows of no Convenant made with the
Children of believing Gentiles, any otherwife,
than with the Children of their Neighbours.
2. Therefore, 'tis to no Purpofe for Mr. W^
and others to pretend, to a groundlefs Priviledge
that can't be maintained by any found Doctrine ;
and 'tis an eafy Matter to talk of a baptijmal Co^
venant of Infants : But the Scripture is wholly
iilent about thisBufinefs. Tho' ourAuthor fpeaks
of it, in ds familiar a Manner, as if he had read
it in the C-' of pel, p. 64. where he advifes Pa-
rents, early to ac(^uaint their Children, with the
Nature
76 Infanf'BaptiJm
Nature of the Baptifmal Covenant: and a little
lower, he tells us, that Mr. Philip Henry dre^v
Zip a JJ:iort Form of the baptifmal Covenant. But,
1 defire Mr. W. to inform the World, who
,made this infantile baptifmal Covenant. For
'tis evident from the ooipel, that v od did not
make it. And I am fure, the Parent has no Au-
thority to make it, nor to ftand Proxy for his
child in any baptifmal Engagement. Again,
the Minifter has no Power, to make fuch a Co-
venant for his own Infants, much lefs for thofe
of others J and laflly the Child himfelf, is utterly
ignorant and incapable of making any fuch Co-
venant, fo that the Refult oi the Matter is this,
here is an amufive Scheme, of a b apt if mal Com q-
nant, projeded, that has no Manner of Footing
in. the New T^eftament.
3. When Mr. W. charges the Baptifls with
leaving their Infaiits^ to the uncovenanted Mercies
of God i I defire to know, whether they are not
left in gracious, wife, and all-fufficient Hands ?
or does he think that fprinkling a little Water
upon them, will mend their State ?
4. Mr. W. confefies himfelf, that 'tis at their
Baptifm, Children are enter'd into this Cove-
nant, be it what it will ; and that no lefs thai]i
three times in the Compafs of few Lines p. 32.
33. where he is endeavouring to excufe their Ig-
7iorance of the Covenant^ which they are enter d
into by Baptifm. . If they are enter'd into it, at
that Time, they m^ull have hten out of it, before
their Baptifm, for they can't be faid in any pro-
' pricty of Speech, or ccnfiflent with Senfe, to be
er^red
No hiBitiition of Ch r i s t . ^^
Cntred into it, if they were iJi it before. And if
Infants are not in this Covenant before their
Baptifm, muft not Mr. ^.own, that^/V Infants,
(during that Spacej are left to the imcovef2a?Jted .
Mercies of God, as well as thofe of the Baptiils ?
And according to this Way of arguing, the
Almighty Qod left all the JewifJd Lifants, that
died under Eight Days old, before they were
circun cifed, to his uncoven anted Mercies. It
might be proper for Mr. W. to elucidate this
Point a little, and to give a better Solution of
this Difficulty, before he delivers his Opinion,
i<:i peremptorily concerning the Baptifis, that they
put their Children upon a Level, with Jews,
lurks and Infidels ; i. e. leave them to the imcove-
nanted Mercies of God.
Perhaps, af^er all that has been faid, Mr. W.
will tell us he only intended, that Infants were
always under the outward Adminifiration of the
Covenant of Grace, /. e. admitted to Circumcifion
and the Pafiover. I have already granted, they
were undoubtedly admitted to both. But then,
has our Lord any Vvhere direded they fliould be
received to Baptifm, and the Supper^ in breaking
of Bread ? Why will Men make Parallels \vhtv&
Chrifl has made «o;2^.^ If the Adminifiration of
Gofpel-Ordinances mufl be made every Way ade-
quate to that of the Law^ Chrifi is no longer
allowed his Authority, nor is he permitted to
be Mafier in his own Houfe. If Men are fo fond
of flying back to the Mojdic Model, what fignlfy
the Regulations that Chrifi has made under the
Ni^ Tefament ?
Befides.
^^ InJant^BaptiJm
Belides, being under the outward Admini-.
flration of the Covenant, is, I hope, a quite dl'*
ftindt Thing, from being in it.. Is there no
Difference betwixt being in a Court or Tard be-
longing to a Houfe^ and being in the In^de of the
Houfe itfelf. Was there no Difference betwixt
being the outjide of the Arkj and being fecured
the injide of it in the Days of Noah ^
And upon the whole, where is thi§ outward
Covenant, or outward Adminifiration of it, pe-
culiarly afTign'd for the Children of Profejfors^
any more than for thofe of the Prophane f The
Gofpel knows nothing at all of fuch a Thing.
This is the Point in Debate. Let Mr. /F. or fome
Pcedobaptijis giveafolid Proof of it. Otherwife
the Baptijh think 'tis full Time for them to have
done with groundlefi 'Declamations about a mere
imaginary Intereji, their Children have in this
Covenant.
Thus, I have chofen, to lay open Mr. W's Ar-
gument from the Covenant, and to examine eve-
ry Thing I thought material in it, and to anfwer
the mofl/'o/'z^/^^^ObjedionSjthat are fram'dfrdm
that Topick, that the Reader may fee Things ia
their Order, and in one View in this Place.
CnAPi
No Inflitution ^JC hr i s t. 79
Chap. IV.
Mr. W. repeats his Argument from Adts 2. 3S,
'iy^^tono Purpofe. The Baptifm of the Ifrae-
lites, in their Paffage thro' the Red Sea, coytfi-
derd, Chrift'i receiving Children into his Arms,
and hlejjing them ^ Mark lo^andyidXi. ig.no
Ground for baptizing Infants. The cutting off
the Jews, and ingrafting the Gentiles on the
the Stock of Abraham, explained^ and vindi^
cated from the falfe Glojfes of divers Pcedo-
baptijis. A tranfient View ofWomefis Right to
the Lord's- Supper, of the Obfervance of the fir ji
ID ay of the Week, and the pretended Claitn of
Infants to Baptifm. .
II. I" Now proceed, to Mr. W'% fecond Scrlp-
X_ ture-Confequence, to prove Iiifant~Bap-
tifm, p. 1 6. which is thus, the Affurance we have
that the Promife belongs to Children, this St. Peter
declares, K^s 2. 38, 39. I anfwer, this Tex r^
it feems, is prefTed to very hard Service, and is
of double Ufefulnefs in this Argument, /. e. ic
ferves at one Time for a plain Command to bap-
tize Infants, but another Time, only for a Con^
fequence, viz. that Infant -Baptifm may be inferrd
from this Place. Accordingly we have a Repe-
tition of the fame Arguments, drawn from this
Text, as thus, If any one asks, who they were that
he com7nanded to be baptized, the ajfwer is plain,
every one who had Interejl in the Promije, now
thejf
So Infant-Baptifm
thefe were Parents and Children, I think I have
fully and clearly fpoken to this Text, and to thfe
Confequences from it, already, when 'twas urg-
ed a Command to baptize, and fince there is no-
thing ^^i£^ of any Moment, added to it, I have
no Buiinefs to flay much longer here. Andihall
only obferve, that it will be found as great a
Difficulty, to prove, that the Word TiWoi* in
this Paffage, fignifies Infants^ and not PoJierit)\
as it will be found to fliew, that the Armies of
Ifraelwho fought under Jofljua, againft the Ca-
naa?2iteSy were Infants^ becaufe they were fo
often called the Children of IfraeL And I have
iliewn that Dr. Hajmnond feem'd to be much of
the fame Opinion. But Mr. W. is fo ready to
catch at every Twig, that wherever he finds
the Word C/j//Jr£'-?2, he thinks thc'iv B a pti/m mud,
be nigh at Hand, how far foever this may be,
from the Defign of the holy Penman.
III. I pafs on, to Mr. Ws third Scripture-
Confequence, which is this, viz. ^he Account
we have of the Infants of Jews, beiJtg baptized
under the Law^ and the Infaritsof Chriftians he-
ing in all RefpeSis^ as capable of Bapfifn , under
the Gofpelj I tnay refer to the ^ejiimonies already
produced in Prcof of this. I anfwer if Mr. /F.
has no better Proof, than what he has produced
hitherto, 'twill never fatisfy the Baptijis^ nor
many wife and coniideratc Men, among the
P(2dobaptifts. He has certainly here forgot him-
felf, for he was to have brought us Scripture-
Confequence^ but he puts us off, with the ridicu-
lous oral Traditions of fonie doting RabbieSi and
does
No InBitutiQU ^/Christ. 8i
/. As particularly their luft-
ing, and murmuring in a iinful Manner, againfl
God and his Providence. Compare the Paflage
with Exodus 1 6. i, 2, 3. -and all the Con-
gregation of the Children of Ifrael catne unto
the Wilder nefs of Sin^ which is between Elim and
Sinai, o« the fifteenth Day ofthefecond Months af-
ter their departing out oj the Land 0/" Egypt. And
the whole Congregation of the Children of Ifrael
murmured, againft Mofes and Aaron in the
Wildernefs,
And the Children of Xixz-^f aid unto them, would
to God, that we had died by the Hand of the Lord
in the Land o/'Egypt, when we fat by the Flejh-
Tots, and wheji we did eat Bread to the full :
And in the 17 Chapter, v. 3. the People murmured
againft Mofes, and f aid, wherefore is this that
thou haft brought us up out of Egypt, to kill us
and our Children, Sec. Mr. W. would have us be-
lieve, that ihefe were the Infants, who but few
Weeks before, were in their Parents Arms in the
Red Sea : Whereas the Text fays, they had long
before fet down by the Flefh-Potsin Egypt, and
even that they had Children of their own.
Hov/ever our Author is very pofitive, p, ig.
that he has found out Infant-Baptifm in this
Place: For he fays, we have here an undeniable
Inftance of Infatjt^ being bapfizd, and not only
fo, but 'twas performed by fprinkling, and could be
done no other Way. P. 20. T'hey were baptizd by
fpri7ikling, this was the 07ily Baptifm they could
han:e,, they were not plung'd into the Cloud or the
Sea, but fprinkled by the Gentile dropping of the
Cloud
ISlo Inflitution of Ckri sr. 83
Cloud upon them^ and fpmkUng of the Tfaves as
they paffed along.
Mr. W. talks of this memorable Tranfadlion,
with as much Jijfiirance^ and in as familiar a
Stile ^ as if he had been an Eye-Witnefs to it.
And yet that the Sea on either Side^ fprinkled
any Water upon them, or that the Cloud drop-
ped any fVet upon them, thefe are T'hings that he
knows nothing of. Nay the Hijiory feems to be
againft him in this Point : For, i. the Scripture
fays as to their Pajj'age thro the Sea^ that they
. walked upon dry Land, not the leafl; Mention
being made of Slitne^ Mudd, or Puddles. Exod.
14.29. but the Children o/'Ifrael walked upon dry
"Land in the Midji of the Sea. 2. As to the Sides
of the divided Waters, on the Right and Left
Hand, 'tis faidin the fame Verfe already cited, and
the-lVaters were a Wall unto them on their Right
Hand and on their heft. And no Manner of
Mention made of Waves in pouring, dafioing or
fprinklingVL^on them. 3. As to the Cloud, the
Hiftory is very particular and exprefs about it,
the one Side of it was very dark, and the other
Side was very light, as a bright Pillar of Fire :
And it was the bright, clear Side, that was to-
wards the Ifraelites. Exod. 14. 19, 20. And the
Angel of God, which went before the Camp ^Ifrael,
removed and went behind them, and the Pillar of
the Cloud went, from before their Face, and food
behind them. Atid it came between the Camp of
the Egyptians a?id the Ca?npof\(xdi&\ -, and it was
a Cloud and Darknefs to them (to the Egyptians)
but it gave Light by Night to thefe {tliQl/raelites)
G 2 fe
84 Infant-Bapiijra
£0 that here is not the leqfi Intimation of any
Droppings of the CloUd, upon the Ifraelifes, nor
any rational Ground to believe, that it did wet
them. For as the Text fays, it was the bright
afid light Side, that was towards the Ifr a elites
to lead them comfortably thro' the Sea. And be-
fides what has been faid already, this Allujion of
the Apojile, does not necefTarily imply, nor with
any certainty denote, that the I/raelites were wety
ib much, as either in Regard to their Feet^ or
even as to their outward Gar?nents. For the
Strength of the Allujion and of the Apojlles Rea-
fonifjgy lies in this, viz. that as the I/raelites wers
formerly fufficiently encompaffed with Water ^
having the Sea as Walls on each Side of them,
and a Cloud of Water and Fire above them, they
might be figuratively faid to be baptized unto
Mofes. And 'tis in Rejemhlance of this, that
People now under the Go/pel are plunged into
Water, and covered all over with Water, in be-
ing baptized imto J ejus Chrijl. And before all
impartial and equitable Judges, this will appear
to be the genuine, and eafy Meaning of the Paf-
fage. It makes evidently for the Baptijis, in
fliewing that Perfons muft be plunged or over^
whelm' d inafufficient Depth of Water, when they
fubmit to this Ordi^iance. So that Mr. TV. has
loft the moft famous Inftance, he thought to
have retained, in Favour of the Caufe oijprink-
ling Infants,
IV. I come to his fourth Scripture-Confc-
quence, to prove Infant-Baptifm,/. 20. which is
thus, viz. We are told that Chriji during his In-
carnation^
No IfiBitiition of Christ, 85
carnatioti, welcomed Children to his Artns^ blejfed
them, and declared them SubjeSts of his Kingdom^
which, I thinkiis a fiifficient hidication of his Mind,
that they Jfjould be received into his Church by
Baptifm: I anfwer, the Text that he cites and
refers to, is Mark 10. 13 16. for of fuch is
the Kingdom of God.
I. It feems very clear from this Place, that
'tis the Kingdom of Glory, that is intended; for
the Context runs thus v. 14, 15. fuffer the little
Children to come unto me, and forbid them not^
for of fuch is the Kingdom of God Verily I fay
lint you, whofoever fiall not receive the Kingdom
of God, as a little Child, he Jh all not enter therein^
The Baptiils don't difpute the Salvation of In-
fants. Secret 'things belong imto the Lord our
God, but thofe Things which are revealed, belong
unto us a?2d to our Children for ever, Deut.29. 29.
2. If I fhould grant, that our Lord'm fpeaking of
thefe Children, Mat. 19. 14, fliould mean, the
Kiiigdojn of Grace -, for the Text fays, of fuch is
the Kingdom of Heaven, this would be of no Ser-
vice to i\ieP(^dobaptifs,^ov it would give Infants a
full Title to Church-Communion, and the Lord's-
Supper. For, will any People take Children
into' tilt Kingdom of Grace, and not give thepoor
Babes tht Food qL\.\\q Kingdom. This would
look unreafonabie and very hard. Therefore,
when Mr. W. fo zealoufy pleads, p. 21. 22. JJoall
we rejcB them, whom Chrift bids welcome"^ Or
hok upon them as unfit Members of the Church of
Chrift, whom he aSfually declares fuch f The
Baptjfls may very jiiftly anfwer in this Cafe,
G 3 why
86 Infant-Bctptifiri
why do you dijlike the Company of Infants at the
Lord's T^able f If they are fit for the Life of An-
geh above, furely they are fit ^ for the pur eft Ordi-
nances and Societies here below ; and fo you may,
if you pleafe, pradlice accordingly. 3. the very
Circumftance of tht Difciples oppofing the bringing,
of thefe Children to Chrift^ is an Argument that
they knew Nothing of Infant-Baptifm, or elfe
they would not hinder the bringing of them.
And tho' our Lord had a fair Opportunity to
mention their Right to Baptifm, if any fuch
Thing had been in Pradtice, yet he fays not one
Word of the Matter, therefore 'tis to noManner of
Purpofe, for any to pretend, to build Infant^
Baptifm on this Text.
V. I come to Mr. W\ Fifth Scripture-Confe-
quence, to prove the baptizing of Infants, and
'tis as follows/'. 23. Tihe baptizing oj Injants ap-
pears to me a Jiecejfary Confequence^ from the cut-
ting 0^ the ]&YJS frojn, and admitting the Gen-
tiles into Cove72ant with God, and to a Partici-
pation of the Privi ledges oftheGofpel. To which
I anfwer, that the fews were cut off, for their
Unbelief and RejeBion of the MeJJiah, is readily
allowed 5 but that the Gentiles were admitted,
into the Abrahamic or Mgfaic Covenant, in the
Senfe and Latitude, that the fewijh Nation was,
I abfolutely deny. Mr. W. fhould have diftin-
guifhed, between thofe Priviledges of the Jews,
"which the Gentiles wQXQ'let into, and tho/e v/hich
they were not let into. Inftead of this, he runs
on, repeating, if the Root be holy fo are the Branches
p. 23. 24. -^-s if every profeffing Mafter in a
Gentile
Mo mfliiutiofi ^/Christ. 87
Gentile ^ Family\ wa& to be underftood by this
Root^ and the cardial Seed of fuch to be under-
^obdhyxhs-^Q holy Branches.
This is a great Miftake^ that many Fadobap-
tifts are brought up in, they are taught to think,
that if a Majler of a Family be a Believer , ox a
ProfeJJor^ that therefore he prefently ftands in
the Capacity of Abraham to his Children : T-hat
he is an Abraham^ a /^^/y i?c?(?/ from which i'Oi^
Branches do naturally fpring. This Mifiake
3cads them on, to look upon them/elves as /^^//^r
and greater y than they r^^7//y are ; and this prompts
them to plead for fome Priviledges to their ^- liif-
drcn, as if they had been dXX fanSiiJied ixom tKe
Womb : they imagine that, becaufe Abraham had.
fome fpecial Marks of Favour, granted to his
Pojlerity^ there ought to be fome diflingui(hing
Prerogatives belonging to their Children. 'Xis
upon this Foot that they are fo zealous to have
Baptifm come in the Room of Circumcifion.
For they think, thatbecayfe Circumcijion was to
be adminiftred to the Children of Abraham^ at
eight Days old^ there ihould be fomewhat done to
their Children^ rnuch about the fame Age. And
'tis evident that upon this P/<;^77 Mr. /F. goes,
when he endeavours, to accommodate thofe
Words, i^(??^. 11^ J 6. to believing Parents, if the
PjQOt be holy, fo are the Branches. Whereas, by
Kogt intbisPlace, is undoubtedly intended Ahra-
hamy^nd by Branches are meant the Pojlerityof
Abraham. And can any thing be more vain and
-aiTuming, than for every ordinary Profefj'or to
think himfelf inverted with the Dignity ofAbra-
! G 4 i)am^
S8 hijant^Baptifm
haniy and to imagine, that the Scripture gIveS ilg
Xeave, to call fuch a Profeffor^ a holy Root^ and
his natural Seed, i^o/y Branches ?
Whereas we are faid to I?e born^ like wild Ajfes
'Colts, Job. II. 12. and are all equally concluded
under Sin, ajid are openly declared to be by Nature
Children of Wrath, even like others, Eph. 2. 3.
Therefore, I would endeavour, farther to clear
up this Matter, in the following Obfervatioris.
1. Believing G6'«/'//^Parentsthemfelves, are but
Branches xs.'^onxkm^QQX.', fo that they are not,
cannot be the Root itfelf. The Apoftle is exprefs
as to this, Rom. 11. 17, 18. A?id if fome of the
Brafichesbe broke?! off, and thou being a wild Olive
T^ree wert grafted i?i among them, and with them
partakefl of the Root and Fatnefs of the Olive-
T'ree, boafi not again the Branches, but 'if thou
boaft, thou beareftnot the Root, but the Root thee^
2. The /^^/zV-wV/g- Children, of finful Gentile
Parents, are as good Branches, as any others, upon
this Root, and are equally interefled in it, and
grafted upon it. v . 20. thouflandeft by Faith.
3. K%x.Q\\\^u7iregenerate,unbeUeving0^^^x\Vi^
of Gentile Parents, they have no Communication
with this Root, nor 2ny Claim to it. They are
not the natural Branches of it, neither are they
ingrafted Branches into it y for the Gofpel re-
quires true Faith in order to become of the Stock
o/* Abraham. So that Mr. W% arguing after
this Manner, is of no Force at all, to favour the
Caufe of Infant-Baptifm, both Root and Branch
being ill grounded, and will bear no Weight
at all.
But
JSIo InBiiiition of Christ: 89
But, he lidp^s to have fome Relief, from
I Cor. 7. 14/ Where he cells us, tbaf the CbiU
dren of one believing Parent are holy, which Holi-
72e/she thinks not onlyqiialifies them for, butentitUs,
them to Baptifm. I anfwer, the Text is read thus,
for the unbelieving Hmband isfanBified by the
Wife, and the imbelieving Wife isfanBifedbythe
Husband, elfe we're your Children unclean, but now
they are holy. In order to take in the Apoftle's
Meaning in this Place, we mufl advert to the
Scope and Aim of the Context. The greateft
Part of the Chapter is taken up, in treating about
Marriage, or fome Circumftances belonging to
the conjugal State : In the 12 and 13 VerfeSjthe
Apoftle exhorts and determines, that if any were
married in a State of Hethenifm, and' that the
Husband was converted afterwards to Chrijiia-
nity, he was by 7io Means to put away his Wife,
if fhe remain'd an Infidel ; provided fhe w-'as
willing to live with him : On the other Hand, if
the Wife was converted to Chriflianity, and thd
Husband remain'd an Infidel, fhe was by no
Means to leave him, if he was pleafed to dweU
with her. So that the Gofpel does not feperate
Husband and Wife, merely becaufe the one is a
Believer and the other an Ujibeliever. But they
Mfanilified by one another, and to one.anotherj
in the honourable State of Marriage, ' art Ordi-
nance appointed by God himfelf. Otherwife fays
the Apojile, if it was abfoluiely unlawfid, for a
Believer to cohabit with an Unbeliever, hxihat Con^
fiifionwoidd enfue, how many Marriages mufi be
di^'olved I And the Children reckon d 7io better than^
.Bafiards^
go Injant'Baptifm
Bajiardsy an unclean Breeds i. e. begot and born m
Uncleannefs ! But upon the Parents keeping to-
gether, in Conjugal AfFedion and Union, not-
withflanding any Difference in Religion, their
Children will be look'd upon as holy in a civil
Senfe^ as being the IJJue o^ 2i lawful Bed, accord-
ing to an Ordinance of God. And tho' this 1 ext
has been often warp'd and wrefted fincc the Re^
Jormation^ to mean 2uyewiJlo HolinefSy yet accord-
ing to the Context, and the common Rules of In-
terpretation, 'tis down-right Legitimacyy is in-
tended in this Place. But, I may add thefe fol-
lowing Obfervations. I. If it be granted Mr.
W. and the Psedobaptifts, that *tis, feminal or
feeder al Holinefs is intended here, all this is very
remote from Infant-Baptifm, Since there is
nothing can be fairly inferr'd from the Text or
the Scope of it, as looking that Way, for of what
Advantage foev6r this fuppofed Holinefs may be
to the Children, yet 'tis not io much as fuggefted
that it entitles them to Baptifm.
2. If this feminal HoVineis of thp Children
gives them a i^/^i)^. to: Ordinances, why may not
thcfaderal San^if cation of the unbelieving Wife,
entitle j'd'r to ho^ Baptifm and the Lords-Sup-;
per ^f ox fie is f aid to befanSlified by her Husband?
and all the World will allow, that a Wife is as
near a-kin to. the Hush and, as a Child', and there-
fore there is a plain Parity of Reafon, why the
believing Husband fhould impart egual Qualifi-
cations to the one as to the other. \ \\
Thus I have carefully examin d, Mr. ^s
Ground- Work j or Foundation that he has at^
tempted
No InBitution ofCnmsr: g i
tempted to lay in Scripture, for Infant-Bapfifm:
Firft from Precept or Command, fecondly
from Precedent or Example, and thirdly from
good Con fequencci and upon a full and impar-
tial Examination, there is not o;/^ of tht^c three
Things, to be found in the holy Scriptures. What
Succefs he has met with hitherto, gives veiy little
Hopes of the remaining Part of his Book ; for if
there be neither Command, Example nor Con-
fcquence, in Support of Infant-Baptifm, 'tis left
in a very defencelefs and weak Condition.
.. )Vlr. TF. proceeds to anfwer fome Objecflions of
the Baptijis, againftthePradiceof /^^///^^V;^/;?-
fants. And, I wonld only remark, as I pais
along, thatheftates thefe Objeftions in a ver/
imperfed Manner, i. e. as he thinks fit. How-*
ever fuch as they are, I {hall attend to them.
I. The firft Objedion he puts thus ^ viz. It h
cbjeBed againft Infant-Baptifm jhere isna exprefs
Command for y nor cle2ir Exa?nple of it yin the New
Tejiament. ^ He might have added, when his
}l2indi_W2iS\.n, nor any good Confequence. For he
has been toiling hard, to find all, or even dne,'bi
ihefe Things, but has hitherto met with nothing
but Difappointment. He tells us, that fart of
this ObjeBion, goes upon a Suppofitio?i, that nothing
ought to bepraSiifedhy Chriftians, but what is
commanded in fo many exprefs Words, whereas the
Qppofers of Infant -Baptifn, admit Women to the
Lord's Supper, for which they have no litter at
Command. And ?nany of them keep the firfl Da^
of the Week, as .the Chrijiian Sabbath
, , Mr,
9^ Infant'Baptifm
Mr. :^. thinks, by this Way of Rcafoning, to
turn the Edge of this Objection, againil the
Baptifts, by puzzlifig them with the Cafe o^Wo-
^men's coming to the Lord's Table, and the Oh-
fervance oixSx^Jirji Z)^^ of the Week. But, j
hope to make it very plain to the Reader, that
• there is a vail Difparity between the Inftances,
which he fuppofes to be Parallel.
For I. as to Women s coming to the Lord's
*Table, there are no Qualifications required of
•chem, but what are very confiftent with their
State ; whereas in Point of Baptifm, there are
Faith and Repentance required every where, the
Want of which altogether difqualifies Infants^
and excludes them, this Ordinance, if we keep to
the Rules of the Gofpel. 2. To put the Matter
put of Doubt, we have a clear Account of Wo*
metis \iiNm^ commun'd at breaking of Bread^
wnh lYiQ Church ^^ Jerufalem, Ads i.' 13, 14,
And whefi they were come in^ they went up' into an
upper Koom, where' abode both Peter, ^;z^/ James,.
xind John a?2d Andrew ^;/<^ Philip, and Thomas,
Bartholomew and Matthew, James the Son of
Alpheus, Sirtion Zelotes, and Judsis the Brother oj
James. Thefe all continued^ with one Accord in
Prayer and Supplication with the Women, and
Mary the Mother of Jtins, v. 15. the Number
of the Names together, were about a7i hundred and
twenty, Ch. 2. v. 42, and they continued Jledfaji-
ly in the Apojiles T>o5trine, andPellowfloip, and in
breaking of Bread, and in Prayers, v. 44. and all
that believed were together, v. 46. and they
continuing daily with one Accord in the Temple
a?i
Mo InBiiufion ^/Christ. 93
hnd breaking of Bread from HoufetoHoife^v. a^j^
end the Lord added daily to the Church fuch
as fhould be faved. Now if Mr. JV. can pro-
duce, but a Quarter-Part of ilich a Scripture-
Hiftory of hifants being baptized^ I promife
freely, to be of his Opinion. Again, as to the
Bufinefs of the Obfervance of ih^frji Day of
the Week, we have the Rule ofthe^z)^/?/^'^, and
of the C/'z/r^^f'j-, meeting, to performfomeof the
moft folemn Duties, and ABs onVorfiip, on that
Day. Adts 20.7. And upon the Jirji Day of the
Week, when the Difciples came together to break
Bread, Paul preached unto them, i Cor. i6. i, 2.
iVi?'^ concerning the Colleciion for the Saints, as I
have given Orders to the Churches of Galatia, even
fo do ye. Upon the firfl Day of the Week, let e-
very one of you lay by him in ftore, as God has
profpered him, that there be no Gatherings when.
I come.
Now, let Mr. W, give fuch evident jBa:-
amples of the Practice of Infant -Baptifm, and
I fhall be fully fatisfied for my Part. For the
Baptifis pay as much Deference to the Autho-
rity of Scripture-Precedents, as he can pretend
to do.
II. The fecond Objedion that Mr. W. flates,
is thus, viz. It is commonly f aid that Repentance
and Faith are necefjary to Baptifm : to which he
anfwers after this Manner, that in adult Per fons,
who have bee n guilty of aSfual Sins, againfl the
Law of God ; Repentance is necefary to qualify
for Baptifm. And a little lower in the fame Page,
the Want of it (Repentance) would render an
adult
94f InJanUBaptiJm
^dult Perfon, unfit for that holy Ordinance. Here
I would aik Mr. W, fome Queftions, as,
I. How is this Conccffion, 'viz, that Repen-
tance isneceffdry to qualify the adult for Baptifniy
reconcileable to what he has advanced before,
p. 9, I o. where he has been attempting with all
his Might, to put baptizing^ before teachings in
the Words of the Commiffion, Nay, he has
been endeavouring to precipitate all Nations to
Baptifm, without any. regard to any Knowledge,
Faith, or Repentance at all. Again, how will
this comport with his Opinion, p. 12. where he
tells the Reader, that iipon the Converfion of the
Meads of a Family, the whole Houfe may be bap-
tized , if there be none in it that refufe Baptifm,
Can thefe Doctrines ftand together ? or where
Ihall we believe Mr. W. and find his Principle ,
if he has any ? in the Beginning, or Middle, or
'End of his Book? fince he is fo very unaccount^
ably inconfiflent with himfelf.
2. Where does the Diflindtion appear in the
Word of God, between the Qualifications of
the Adult, and the Qualifications of Infants for
Baptifm ^ for he tells us, that Infants have not
been guilty of aBual Sins, fo that there is no need
of Pepentance on their Part, and therefore their
being incapable of exercifmg Pepentance, does by
no means incapacitate them for Baptifm, Does
he think that his bold Aflertion, and bare ipfe
dixit, will fatisfy the Confciences of People,
who are daily fearching the Scriptures^ whether
things are fo or no*
3. Does
I\[o Injlitution ^J C h r i s t. 95
3". Does Mr. W, believe, that Tnfant-Baptifm
can wafli away original Sin ? when he fays,
therefore they are baptized^ that the XJncleannefi
ef their Birth may be purged away^ according to
Ov'igQVi s Argument of Infant-Baptifm^ P- 5^. if
he does not believe it, his Employment is fo
much the more bafe, and unworthy, in endea-
vouring to inftill this fottifli and dangerous No-
tion of Origen, into the Minds of divers honefl
People, in his own Congregation and elfewhere.
As to hisftarting any pretended Difficulties, in
Regard to our Saviour s fubmitting to yohns
Baptifm ; the Scripture exprefsly determines
our Lord's dired: End in fo doing, 'twas to ful-
fil that Pare of Right ecufnefs and Obedie?7ce, thzt
he owed to the Father, and to give a Pattern, of
all dutiful Submillion to divine Ordinances,
Matt. iii. 15. for, tho' he '^joere a Son, yet learned
he Obedience. Heb. v. 8. But, there is fome-
thing more than common Inadvertency, wrapt
up in Mr. /F's Words, p. 3 1. which are thefe,
'viz. Now ifjohn required of all that came to
his Baptifm Confefjion of Sin, and yet for good
Reafons baptized Chrift, who had no Sins to con^
fefsy why may not we admit Infants to Baptifm
without Repentance, when they have done nothing
to repent of^ Would he offer here, to compare
the unclean znd guilty Offspring of Adam, to the
immaculate Lamb of God ? Are the Infants of
the Apojlate Race, (tho' profeffing Parents) up-
on a Parity of Reafon, to be admitted to the
facred things of God, with the bleffed Mediator
li^mfelf? This is a furprizing Flight of Zeal
indeed.
qS Infant ^Baptifm
indeed, to make way for Infant-Baptlfm ! As
to what he urges from Dr. Whitby in the fame
Page, mz. that they who hence conclude^ that In-
fants are not capable of Baptifm (for want of
Faith) muji alfo conclude they cannot befaved ;
Faith being more exprejly required as necejjary to
Salvation, than Baptijm. I anfwer that Dr.
Whitby and himfelf agree, that Infants may be
faved without Faith^ without Repentance, and ^
without the Lord's Supper, and pray what is the
Reafon that they may not be faved, upon the
fame Ground, without Baptijm ?
III. Mr. /ir's3d Objection is ftated thus, 'u/2;. It
is often [aid that Children are not capable of un*
derjlanding the Nature of that Covenaiit, into
which they are entred by Baptifm, nor of giving
Content to it, and therefore baptizing Infants, is
Cozening injiead of Chrijiianing of them. To
which Mr. W. anfwers, that Infaiits are as ca^
pable of underjlanding the Nature of the Cove-
nant they are entred into, by Baptifm, as the
yewifh Infants were of under (iandijtg that CovC'-*
nant, into which they were entred by Circumci/ton,
'Tis fufficient by way of Reply, for me to ob-
ferve, that this Objedion is in a great Meafure
of his own making, for the Baptifts have no
need, to lay any Ilrefs upon fuch a way of rea^
foning ? but if he can produce, fo good a War-
rant from Scripture, to enter Children into Co-
venant by Baptifm, as there was for entring of
them by Circumcifion, theBaptifts will promife
10 have done objeding againft the Prai^ice.
As
No InBitution cf Christ, 9^
As for his Way of arguing from the Principle
of Reafon and Nature, to inftituted Worfhip, as
he does P- 33> ^4j 35- And by fuch Dedudlions,
to fhew the natural Right that Parents have to
baptize their Children, this Method is fo nofo-
rioujly weak and fallacious, that I utterly reje^//;z^ Infants: But let
all impartial People read the New Teftament,
and compare the Pradice of the Apoftles and the
Apojiolic Churches^ with the CommiJJion of our
Lordy for they are the beft Interpreters of it,
and they will find Tubings, as I reprefent them
to be. I may further add, that it the Trmtjla-
tors of our BiMe had done Jufiiice, as they in
fome other Countries have done, in rendring the
Words, Baptiji and Baptifm^ in plain Englijh
Dipper and Dipping, I am of Opinion, it would
have prevented many tedious Difputes, and that
this Ordinance ot Chrif would have been better
underflood, and better treated than it is, by ma-
ny well Meaning People in this Nation^ who
either through Ignorance, or rather thcPrejudice
of Education now trample upon it.
It remains ftill, that I confider Mr. W\ Way
of ftating the other Part of the Objection, p, 38.
'uix. Chrift's being baptized at 30 Years of Age :
And he tells us a little lower, that if the Bap-
iifls think this Example binding, wly do they bap-
tize
No Insiittition of Ch r i s t . 107
Cize any before they hanje attained to the Age of
Thirty ? I anfvver that this Way of arguing is
devifed by himfelf, he raifes Batteries at his own
Pleafure, and then throws them down as he
thinks fit ; I know of no Baptijis^ who reafon in
fo trifling a Manner, and therefore I need take
no further Notice of it. But what he hints in
the next Paragraph is pleafant enough, 'viz. that
one Reafon why they (the Baptifts) defer Baptifm,
is, , becaufe they require a Confeffion of Faith from
the Perfon to be baptized. He may affure him-
felf that this is the fixed Principle of the Bap-
tifts, and they endeavour to practice in Confor-
mity to the Apoflolic Churchy thepureft and moft
unexceptionable Pattern. And Mr. W, if he
pleafes may read the Qualifications of //'.5/^Z)^ji',
when the Strefs was laid on Faith in Chrifi^ in
Order to fit the Perfon for Baptifm. ABs 8. 36,
37. What doth hinder me to be baptized^ And
Philipy^/^, if thou believeft with all tlmie Heart
thou mayefi. And Tertullian about two hun-
dred Years afterwards feem'd to be much of the
fame Opinion. Efpecially fpeaking of this In-
ilance in his Book of Baptifm, where he is ex-
horting Perfons to be very cautious to whom
they adminifter Baprifm, left it be given to thofe
who are unfit for it, and unworthy of it ; he has
thefe Words, " * Give not holy Fhings to Dogs, a7id
*^ ca[i not your Pearl before Swine, afid lay not
" Ha?tds
* Nolite dare fanftum Canibus, &, porcis projicere
Margariram vcltram, & manus ne facile impofueris, ne
participcs
I o S Injcmt'Bctptifm
** Hands fuddenly on an)\ left you be Partakers of
*' their Sim. For ifPhiW^fo eajily baptized the
'^ Eimuchy let iis remember, that the manifefi
«« Worthinejs of our Lord interpofed in that Cafe ;
■^ the Holy Ghoft cojjimanded Philip to go before
*' handthat Way, and the Rimuch himfelf was not
*' found idle, nor did he deftre to be rafhly baptized^
" but had been at the I'emple to pray, and his Mijid
" being imprejfed with the holy Scripture-^ fuch
" a one ought to be received, to whofn Godfent the
*' Apoftle, whom the holy Spirit commaiided to
'^^ join hi?nfelf unto the Char riot, the Scripture
*' readily occurs to his Belief, he is taken and in-
" ftruSfed in due 'T'ime, the Lord is manifefted to
" him^ his Faith admits of no Delay, Water is
*' not wanting^ and the Apoftle having finifhed the
" Wo7'k, is caught away, &c.
And in very few Lines further, Tertullian de^
ciares himfelf againft giving Baptifm to Infants^
and indeed he v/as againfl: adminiilrating it to
any young wanton People, 'till they fhould
participes aliena deH6ta 3 fi Thillppus ram facile tinxit
Eunuchum, recogitemus, manifeftam . ibid. p. 144.
" her
112 lufant'Baptijm
«' her to uSy as we were celebratmg the Lord's^'
<* Slipper. And the Girl behig placed among the
«' Saints^ could not bear our Prayers and Suppli- -
«' cations^ began now to fldriek bitterly^ a?id to be
<* dreadfully tojfed and tormented in her Mind ^ and
<* as if an Executioner was forcing a Confefjion front
<* her J Jhe in the jimplicity of her Soul^ acknow-
<* ledge d by all the Tokens Jhe could at that tender
<' Age, 'the Confcioufnejs of the FaB. The Confe-
<' cration of the Elements being over^ the Deacon
<* bega?2 to offer the Cup to thoj'e who were pre fent^
<* and among others her Turn came ; Jhe through
** a divine Infi?iB turnd away her Face^Jhut her
" Mouth hard and faji, refufmg the Cup, The
** Deacoji perfifted to give it her^ and though Jhe
** refifted^ yet he poured dowji by Force into her
** Throat fome oj the Sacramental Wine. Imme^
•' diately followed Jobbing and vomitiiig. The En-
'^ chartjt could ?iot continue in a Body and Mouth
*'^fo defiled with Idolatry. The Drink fanSiified
** in the Blood of our Lord, forced ifs Way out of
" her polluted Bowels, Sec.
Here is the clearefl Proof, that can be ex-
pc6led , that Cyprian gave the Lord's-Supper to
Infants. So that if any Strefs can be laid upon
h\s giving Baptifm to them, the fame Strefs may
be laid upon his giving the Eucharifi ; if his Au"
thority be goo^ in the one, 'tis good in the other.
And if Mr. W. rejects the Pradice of Cyprian in
the Bufinefs of the Lord\ Supper, why may not
the Baptijls rejed his Pradice of baptizing In-
fants, for the Scripture is equally a Stranger to
both thefe Things. What I obferve further is this,
that
No hiBitution of Christ. 113
that thcCc'Tivm-Errors Ceevn to be equally antient ;
and Cyprian hidiS fair eft ^ to be the Jirfi Father
who openly pleaded for both ; if any one can
trace thefe Things higher, I fhould be glad to
fee it.
*Twas Pity that thofe Gentlemen^ who re-
formed the Abufe of the Lord's Supper, did not
conlidcr the Cafe of Baptifm at the fame Time,
and reduce that alike to the Standard of tho. Gof-
pel. For (ince both Abufes feem to have crept in,
Ha?jd in Hand, they {hould by right have been
caflout together.
VI. I proceed to the fixth Objedion as given
us by Mr. W. which is thus, 'viz. the Oppofers of
Infant-Baptifm pretend that none are truely bap-
tized, but thofe who are dipped, and therefore In-
fant-Baptifm performed by pouring or fprinkling
is not Chriftian Baptifm. Certainly, he has a
very odd Way of ftating the Objections of other
People, for all who know the Baptifts, do know
ialfd that they objed; to both the Subjedl and the
Mode. This is the main of the Controverfy
between them and the Pasdobaprifts. They firmly
hold that if Infants "wqxq dipped, tv en fo regularly,
'tis noChrifianBaptifin -, becaufeChrifl never ^/>-
pointed any fiich 'thing \ the Reafon is plain
enough. However Mr. W. has chofen in this
Place to give us fome fliort DilTertations on thefe
three Points.
1. XJp07i what Argument this Opinion of the ne-
cefjity of Dipping is founded.
2. Why he looks upon Pouring or Sprinkling as
lawful and 'valid as Dipping,
^ • I V IFhy
5 14 Infant ^B apt ijm
3. IFIoy he prefers Pouring or Sprinkling t^
Dipping,
Now, fincc our Author, has divided his Ar-
guments into thefe three General Heads, it may
not be improper for me to make fome general
Remarks upon them. As, i. Since the Greek
Word [Baptifm] {^ocns^iaixcc or ^a^iapios) does un-
doubtedly fignify Dippifig, if he cannot mani-
feftly pro^e, that it alfo lignifies Wajhing with-
out Dippings his Enquiry will amount to no
more than this, whether Dipping be neceflary
to Dipping. Jull as if a Man took the Pains to
examine, whether Eiciting be neceffary to the
Eating, in the Lord's-Stfpper, 2. I obferve, that
he freely aMows the Lawjubiefs and Validity of
Dipping ; if it was not of divine Authority, it
€o u Id neither be lawful nor valid. This is doing
uncommon Jujlice to the Baptijis, to allow
their Way to be lawful and valid, notwith-
Itanding the ///^/^ and ;;7f<3:« Things, that come
afterwards in his Book, about the Danger of
their PraBice in Dippifig, all whom they baptize.
3. He muft prove two Ways at leafly of admi-
niftring the Ordinance of Baptifm. For he al-
ready grants that of Dipping to^ be valid 5 he
muft find out another Way, that the Scripture
mentions and approves, otherwife 'tis not law»
ful. So that Mr. JV. is not at his Liberty to
ehoofe which Way he will, for he mufl be deter-
mined by the Scripture. And if there be no
other Way mentioned and prefcrib'd there, it
|bllov»^s by a clear and unavoidable Confequence>
that tliere is no other Wayy lawful ajid valid.
No InBitution r/ Christ. 115
But I mufl attend to what he fays to thefe Things,
in a more particular Manner.
I. He acquaints us . 45. As to the Arguments
upon which the NeceJJity of Dipping is founded^
they are many and i^arious. In Support of this
Opinion we are commonly told^ with a great deal
of Ajfurance that the Words (^ai<7^a> and ^(x.-ir'rfy
always fignify to dip or plunge. And we are told
by Dr, Gale that the proper and primary ^ignifi-
cation oftheWords^ is to dip or plunge. And that
they never fignify to fpr inkle or pour, or any
thing lefs than Dipping, '^he contrary of which
will appear to thofe who are confer [ant in Greek
Authors, who ufe thefe Words in a great Latitude ^
according to the well known Copioufnefs of the
Greek Language. To which I anfwer.
I. When Mr. W. talks of the Ajfurance of ths
Baptijls, in urging that iSa'-ff^ao and /3a7r-n<^c«i dO
properly never fignify any thing lefs than Dip-
pirig. He would do well to think of himfelf,
when he tells us in the next Words, the vefj
contrary will appear to thofe who areconverfant in
Greek Authors, lince he has not thought fit to
give us fo much as o?ie Example of this Nature.
One who talks at this high Rate againll: ih^ poor
Baptijis, and who is fo converfant in Greek Au^
thorSy fhould have given us clear Injl am es, where
(ioi'Traj and (ix-n-ri^w do fignify Pouringox Sprijik-
ling. 2. When we are told by him, that thefe
Words are ifed in a very great Latitude, accord^
ing to the well known Copioufnefs of the Greek Lan-
guage, Does Mr. IV. judge iht Copioufnefs of a
Language to confifl in being cbliged to make ufe
I 2 of
1 1 6 Tnjant^Baptifm
ox few JVords to fignify a great many Ideas ? Or
does it not rather confift in having a Plenty of
Words to exprefs all diJllnSl and fuitable Ideas ?
And hence is the Phrafe^ Copia Verboru?n. So
that feme nice Readers conclude, that he has loil
a learned Remark by this Bargain. Not but 'tis
granted that the Greek Language is Copious^ and
has plenty of Words to fignify the different Sorts
of V/aJhings ; and /3a<^a> and jSaTrn'^o) are two
Words, that may ferve to illuftrate this, for they
both iignify to wafi by dipping. 3. He obferves
that Dr. Gale took a great deal oj Pains in quot^
ing the Greek Authors who have made ufe of one
or other of thefe Words, but Mr. W'5 intejided
Brevity will not admit him to examine many of
thcfe Rotations. And does he think that this
flight Way of paffing it over, will give inquifi-
tive People, Satisfaction in a Point of this Im-
portance ? Ir he had not Leifure to examine this
Buiinefs to the Bottom, which is fo very mate-
rial in this Controverfy, he fliould have left it to
fomebody elfe who had Leifure and Skill, and all
Qxh^x Salifications equal to the I" ask: Or have
taken \i fairly upon himfelf, to make it appear
to the World, from genuine Greek Authors^
that |3awfa) and ^oL-n^t^o^ do not necefjarily imply
Dipping. The Baptijls have long waited for
fome demonflrative Performance of this Kind,
from a capable Hand, but in vain.
. Now lince Mr. W. has thought fit, only to
fingle out fome few Inftances, from Dr. Gale^
I fhali examine what he favs to them.
I. He
No InBitutkn cf Christ, ii^
I. He obferves that Z)r, Gale produces t^omsr*
as ujing the Word of a Smith hardening a Hatchet
or Pole-ax^ which he (JiaM^i) dips in cold Water,
Mr. W. in Order to enervate this Inflance, lets
us know, that a Smith by hardening an Edge-
Tool^ puts the Edge of the Tool a little Way into
the Wat er^ as far as the Steel goes ^ then takes it
out to judge of the. Temper by the Colour ^ after this
the Smith takes a little Water into the Hollow of
his Haiid, and pours on fojne Places of the Edges y
and drops it off his Fi?igers, and lajl of all puts it
under Water, To which I reply, can any thing
be more weak and ridiculous than this Method of
arguing ? For Mr. W. grants all that P)r. Gale
defired j for 'tis confeffed that the Smith, puts the
Tool at lafi under Water ; and this is what Homer
and Dr, Gale call, ^oCiHei, or he dips the Tool
in Water.
2. The next Inftance he produces from
Dr. Gale J is, of one wkofe Face was Jmear^d o^cer
with tauny Colours^ upon which Account it is J aid
to be fia.'K\l\}^j^ baptized. Which is taken out of
Ariftophanes, who Ipeaking oj the homely Eiitcr-
tainments of the St age ^ before the life of Masks \
tells us how Magnus an old Comic of Athens,
daub'd his Face, which Mr. W. lays was not do7ie
by dipping his Face into thefe Colour Sj but by lay-
ing them on his FacCy with his Finger, Spunge,
or other Injirument. To which I reply, that Dr.
Gale fairly allowed all this ; that the Colour was
laid on, but that the Man afterwards lojk'd, as
if /SaTrTcVV^^j dipfd into ; he Colour. He -e is the
Strength of the Propriety and Sjgnifcatio i of the
i 2 Word
1 1 8 Jfifant-Baftijm
Word retain d^ notwithflanding the Figure of
Speech. If Mr. ^. will not allow of Figures in
Languages, we {hall make wretched Work with
all Authors^ and indeed with one another, in our
ordinary Difcourfe, Don't we commonly fay,
fuch a one isfunk (in the WorldJ or he is plunged
in defperate Circumftances. Was it not 2.known
Pbrafe inthe fatal Tear, 1720, to {ay Jucb a
Man is dipt in the South-Sea, meaning that he
vas deeply engaged in that pernicious Scheme,
Surely, an ordinary Capacity will readily appre-
hend the Meaning of fuch a Way of fpeaking,
that *tis not to be taken in a litter al Senfe.
3. The nextlnftance of Tiv, Gale's, taken No-
tice of, is that from Strabo, as ufing this Word
oi Alexanders Soldiers, who marching a whole
Day thro* the Waters (^^antTxtpixAvoyv) dipt up to the
Waft. And Mr. W. makes this Remark upon
the PafTage, 'viz that the Word does not always
JigJiiJy a total Immerfion, I fliall only reply,
that if they had been but dipt to the Ankle,
'twould have been proper dipping fo far, for 'tis
t' y-i^rnijication of the Word that we are en-
quiring after, the Idea in this Place, will anfwer
for itfelf. For if you dip youx Hand, your Hand
is truely dipt, and if you dip but your Finger,
your Finger is certainly and undeniably dipt.
There are few People that love cavilli?ig fo well,
as to iland long to difputefuch a Thing.
4, The next Inftance of Dr. G^/^"s, is from
Plutarch, of a Roman General, who a little be-
fore be died of his Wounds, fet up a Trophy,
on which, having dipt h'S Hand in Blood, he
wote
No JnWitiition ^jT Christ. 119
wrote an Infcription. Mr. W. would invali-
date this Paflage, by appealing to all who carefully
confider this ABion, whether ^ct-nrnraAi necejfarily
empties, dippijzg ifi this Place ; and had not been
better rendred wajhing orjiaining, ajid whether
the Nature of the A5iion does not lead us to believe y
that this was perjorm d by the Blood of his Wound
running upon his Hands or Fingers. To which I
reply, that this would be downright abufing the
Hijioriajz^ for he fays, that he dipt bis Hand i?t
the Bloody not that the Blood run upon his Hand -,
if Mr, fV. will take the Freedom to alter Hijiory,
he may alfo take the Liberty to change the
Meaning of Words.
As to what follows, where he fays, that
Dr. Gale ownSy that it may be inferred froTnW'^,
9. 19- where we have an Account of yio^Qsfpr ink-
ling the Book and the People after he had read the
Law to theniy that the Word ^oL-jfu^oi does not fig-
nify total Immerfiony or dipping the Thing fpoken
of all over, &c. To which I reply, that
the dired: Defign of Dr. Gale in citing this
Text, Heb. 9. 19. was to provCy that Water
was mixt with the Blood of the Bird that
was kiirdy whereifz the living Bird was to be
dipty according to Levit. 14. 5 1. And that it was
not only vQ,vy pofibky but very probable y that the
living Bird'VJ2iS properly ^//'Z in the Blood of the
dead Bird, when this Blood was fnixty with a
Quantity of Water in a fu i table Ve (Tel, accord-
ing to the Commandment : therefore Dr. Gale
only brings ii/f^. 9. 19. todemonflrate that 'twas
ufual to mix Blood and Water together in their
Purif cations. But Dr. G^/fwas well aware (cho'
I 4 Mr.
1 20 hifajit-Baptijm
Mr. W, does not feem to be fo) that the Word
f^'CCTT'Ti^a) is not in the Text Hek 9. 19. When
Mofes — — took the Blood of Calves, and of GoatSy
with Water, and Scarlet Wool, and Hyfop, and
f eppoivnoi J Jprinkled both the Book and all the
People. Therefore Dr. Gale a.vgucd Jlrongly, and
clearly confiftcnt with his own precedent Reajon-
ing, tho' Mr. W. does not feem to have under-
flood him.
The next Ohfervation that we have upon Dn
Gale, is, that he owns that the Man purified by the
I pr inkling of the Water of Seperation on him, is by
Jefus the Son c/Syrach called, /SaTrfx^oju^j©* Eccl.
34. 25, But he lays the whole Strefs of his Purifi-
cation upon the Mans bathing himfelf in Water,
To which I reply, that Dr. Gale does not lay the
whole Strefs, of the Man's Purification on his
bathing himfelf, but fairly confelTes the contrary ^
that Jpr inkling was Part of the Work, and the
Scripture is plain that it wasfo. Numb. 19. 19,
But then Dr. Gale jullly obferves, that bathing
was necefary, and it feems to have been the chi^
and finifhing Part of the Ceremony. Therefore
Dr. Galew2iS certainly in theright of it, to lay the
Strefs oftheMan's being called^a7fli^o/>i^j©s,on his
having bathed according to the Commandment,
For this Reafonwhat Mr. /F. urges in the follow-
ing Paragraph, that the Purification of the Man
conffied infprinkling, is not only, of no Weight in
this Matter, but h^KoagainJl plain Scripture, for
if tlie Party was fprinkled never fo often, yet 'tis
evident from the Text juft nov7 cited, Numb.
19. 19. that the Ceremony was to be compleated
by Bathing.
Chap.
No hBitution of Christ. 121
Chap. VI.
ThtLexicographefs, and Criticks favour Dipping.
Some Jewifh Lotions confiderdy and Obje£i ions
Jrom thence anfwerd. Divers Scriptures pro-
ducd by the Baptifts to prove the Mode oj ^x'l-
mmvQBapti/mj vindicated. Remarks on Mr.
W'>f mean Way of arguing about our Saviour'^
Burial a?id the Refemblance oj Dipping to it.
Sprinkling does not anfwer the Scripture-De-
fcription^ nor the true Idea of Baptifm. A
Tejiimonyofthe learned *$*/> Norton Knatchbull
in favour of the 'BiL^ii^s. Sprinkling or Pour-
ing occafon d DiJ[atisJa£iion in Cyprian'j lUme,
TFIE next Account that we have from Mr. JV,
is, that if we f 07//5^/i' Stephanus, Suidas,
Scapula, Arias Montanus, and Leigh'j Critica
Sacra, we fiall find (ioiTrroo and ^ajrlt^eo to have
thefefour Significations.
1. Mergere & immergere to plunge or droiim,
2. Tingere to die or dip.
3. Imbuere & madefacere to moifien or wef.
4. Abluere & lavare to wafio orcleanfe.
To v^hich I anfwer, i. That all this makes
for ihtBaptifis^ and againft MrJV. 'Tis plain that
the two firfi Significations, are the genuine and
proper Significations of the Words, merrere,
immergere, lingere, tophmge, cr drown^ to die or
dip. This is all we plead for. 2. T\\Qtwo other
Signiiicaiions
12^ Injant-Baptifm
Significations axe confequential 2indi arc ftrongly in
our Favour; imbuere, and madefacere^ abluere
and lavare, to moiften or wet^ to waJJs or cleanfe ;
and is it not common in Wales, to take a Slice
of Bread, and to moiften or wet it, by dippi?ig it
in a Cup of good Ale ? Again is it not common to
wafh Blankets, Sheets and Shirts, by dipping them
in a Vejfel of Water ? Tlie moijlening, wettings
^ajhing and cleanfing, are infeperable A5is from
dipping, fo that the Words ^aLir\(a and /BaTrii^flo ne-
ceffarily imply thefe Things. Hence 'tis evident,
that thefe Teftimonies, inflead oi weakejting the
Caufe, I endeavour to defend, do it a real
Service.
He farther obferves in the fame Page, that
'tis tinreajonable tofuppofe that our Lord intended,
that this Word which he made ufe of here, to ex^
prefs the Modes ofBaptifm^ fljould be fo limited to
me particular Meaning, as that all other Modes
cf Baptifmfiould be ejleemed invalid. To which
I anfwer. How many Modes of Baptifm has
Mr. W. found in the Gofpel ? Why fhould he
think it unreafonable ^ that our Lord fhould make
ufe of a Word, which is fuited to the Nature of
the Ordinance to be perform'd ? Was not our
Lord a competent Judge, what Word would beft
exprefs/y^/V ABion ? Or does our Author want an
ambiguous Word, or at leaft to render this Word
of our Lord doubtful ? and that on purpofe to in-
troduce Sprinklings or any other Method inflead
of DippiJ^gy foi" ^^y ofh^^ W^y will do well
enough in his Account. But he fhould confider
our Lc'rihas given us. but one Word to fignify this
Aviiony
No hiHittition of Christ. 123
Adiim, and his holy Spirit accordingly affure«
us there is but one Baptifm, one Lord, one Faitb^
one Baptifm. For this Reafon, we might well
think, that People fhould be more cautious, in
their Enquiry into the Mode of Adminifiring
this Ordinance. Since there can be, but one
true Way of it*s Adminiftration.
In the fame Page, Mr. W, acquaints us, that
the Words ^ttir'nCjui and ^ec7r'nqji,oi,are ufed ofwajh^
ing Hands, Cups^ Tables and Beds, Mark 7. which
he Jays were not all of them wajhedby dipping. To
which I anfwer, that he feems to be greatly mif-
taken in this Place, for when the Text verfe 3.
fpeaks of wafhing of Hands, it does not make
ufe of (Sa-TT-n^w but of another Word; Idv ^n
mvyxvi vi'\o)v'^ tsU ^TfoA, and even this Word
'TTvyfj.yi joined to vi-^mviwh denotes, that they wafh-
ed their Hands very carefully^ (o far, as up to
the Wrifi or Elbow. Tho' it will by 7io Means
follow from hence, that y/\[^y7Tx^ and fioLTmagevTixji
are equivalent Terms.
2. When 'tis fa id, that the Pharifees wafhed
themfehes upon their coming from the Market, *tis
to be underllood of xS\€\i bathing themfelves, and
therefore 'tis properly expreffed by/SaTriiOTyi'Tafjthey
plunge or dip, to wafh away the fuppofed un-
cleannefs they had contrafted in the Market,
And 'twas cufiomary with them upon every flight
Occafion to do thus. For this Reafon they are up-
braided wiihfoolifi Superjlition.
3. When/SaTrTKTT^Loi is applied to their wa(hing
o£Cups,Pots, Fejfels and Tables, 'tis very eafily ac-
counted for. They fuperflitioiiily abufed a Ce-
remony
1 24 Infant-Bctptifm
Ceremony 6^ God's own Appointment. Lev. 1 1.32'
For the Lord had commanded that whether it he
a Vejfel of Wood, or Raiment^ or Skin^ or Sack^
*whatfoever Vejfel it be, it miijl be put into Water,
But how thefe Things could be put into Water,
without dipping of them, can't well be imagin'd.
And if legal Pollutions required the wafhing of
Garments, Skins, and Sacks, and Utenfils of all
Sorts, except earthen Veffeh^ which were to be
broken^ then, I fay, 'tis no Wonder, that thefe
fanciful People the Jews, abus'd the firft Infti-
tution of this Ceremony, by ridiculouily wafh-
ing almofl every thing, and their Beds, amongft
other Implements.
Mr. W. proceeds, to confider thofe Scriptures
that are produced by the Bapiijis, to prove that
Baptifm is to be performed by dipping only. p. 49.
50. and the firft Inftance he gives, in John 3.23.
John baptized in i$^non near to Salim becaufe
there was much Water there, i. He denies the
Confequence, that the Reafon why John bap-
tized in i^non was becaufe there was much Wa-
ter there, and alledges that the Reafon why
'John chofe this Place, was, that thofe who came
to his Baptiftn might not travel far for the Ordi-
nance. To which I anfwer, that this Method
of arguing is not only fubverfive of the natural
Meaning of the Scripture in this Place, but is
^\{o f elf -contradictory. For the Inhabitants of
thofe Neighbourhoods and of the adjacent Coun-
try were to come to M'rion, for the fake of a
Suficiency of Water to dip them in. . For this
Reafon they were lo travel to the Place that the
Adminiftrator
No InBitution cfCnv^isT: 125
Adminiftrator had chofen for a Time, merely on
Account of the convenient Depth of Water that
vfzs found there. Mr. /^. is againli their tra^ueU
ling^ the Scripture gives the Reafon of their tra-
velling, I would ask the Reader, which of the
two beft deferves our Attention and Belief? Be-
fides, * Mnon "w^iSdi fmall Town or Village not far
from Jordan, and we are clearly inform'd that
the People did once travel from yerufalem and all
Parts of Judea, even to the very River Jordan^
to be decently baptized there, of John, And
pray what is the Reafon that People might not
as well travel to this JEnon, as others had once
done to Jordan, to have a Sufficiency of Water
for the eafy Adminillration o^ Baptifm ?
2. Mr. JV. urge J, that Water was very fear ce^
in thefe hot Countries. I would ask him, was
Water fcarce in the Land of Canaan, to whom
fhall we give Credit in this Cafe again ? to him
and fome few prejudiced Pcedobaptifs, or to the
blefled God? Who gave this CharaBer of the
LaJid in general, both as to the Hills and the
Valleys, Deut. 8. 7. For the Lord thy God bring-
eth thee into a good Land, a Land of Brooks of
Waters, ofFoufztains, and Depths that fpring out
of Valleys and Hills. So that in thofe Places
where they had not Brooks running upon the
Surface o£ the Earth, they had IVel/s and Springs
in the Earth, which fupplied their Families
with neceffary Water. And every confiderate
Man knows, that one Pail, Pitcher, or Bucket
* Locuii J-iilaiitiuK ad Jordanem rlu. Car, Stepb, Diet.
Hiit. Geo. '^c.
full
1 26 Infaut'Baptijm
full of Water, would have been as good for
fprinkiingy (had that been the Cuftom) as a large
River, Therefore if this had been Johri% Prac-
tice, he would have no Need, to come to JEnon
becaufe there was much Wdter-y but the Reafon
that the Scripture offers, fpeaks aloud, that
a fmall ^antity would not do, therefore the
People to be baptized ^ mud go to John, where
there was much Water. As for Mr. W'^ Criti-
cifm^ that the Original, udk/a 'tuMoc, had been
better tranflated many Waters^ he might have
fpared it, for it neither does him Credit nor Ser-
vice i and he may eafily fee, that when "* ctdAu
is applied to oJ^p, or when -TroMa is applied to
JcTaTa, whether the Phrafc be in ih.Q fingular or
plural Number, it denotes a great ^antity of
Water, both in the holy Scriptures, and in other
Authors. And with all, one Jingle Rivulet having
Pools, oi fair and deep Water, would have been
as fit for Johns, Purpofe, as if he had twenty,
wherein to adminifter the Ordinance of Baptifm,
For he and his deputed Difciples might in their
Turns, relieve one another, and confequently
baptize many hundreds in a little Time. And
again, if we take many Waters to fprinkle with,
would not one Spring, or Fountain, or Well, afford
'\N2iW[ enough to (prinklQ inany thoufands. There-
fore take this ojicious Tranflation of many Wa^
ters, inftead of much Water, in what Light you
will, it appearsy>7\Wi?wji and indeed only ferves,
to {hew the V/eaknefs of that Caufe, that
wants fuch trifling and groundlefs Remarks.
* See the laft Chapter cf this Book.
2. The
No InSiitution (?/ Ch r i s t. 127
2. The fecond Scripture that Mr. ^. brings,
is Matt 3. 16. where Chrifl is faid to go up
firaightway out of the Water, And where our
Author asks this Queflion, what if we fay that
am tS vibilQ* had been more properly rendred
from the Water f by the Help of which Tranf^
ktion he would perfwade us, that our Lord was
not in Jordan, only upon thcBrmk or Bank of it;
I anfwer, 'tis a wretched Shift, that he and others
are put to. Let him compare this Account with
that in Mark i. 9. udnd ]efus was baptized of
John in Jordan, the Greek is «$ ^ lopSitv'u/ he wai
dipp'd into Jordan, lethimftretchall the Wit and
Thought he has, and try whether the Bank, or
rifng Ground, was the objecSiive Matter into
which the Body of our Lord was baptized. Was
he baptized into the Water, or into xhitfolidEarthl
Again, where does the Scripture declare fohn.
and the Perfons he baptized, to be ? Upon dry
Ground or in the Water ? for Satisfa<5tion in this
Cafe we are told exprelly, he baptized them in
the River Jordan, and not upon the Banks of
that River. Mark i. 5. — and were all baptized
of him in the River Jordan Qvtca Up^vri -TDTau&V
I hope that every Body underftands the Diffe-
rence, between a River and a rifing Ground,
And now, why will Mr. W. make ufe of falla-
cious Doubling, and Winding, to impofe upon
the fimple and unwary Reader, to make him be-
lieve, that our Lord was not in the Water of Jor-
dan, when the Scripture fays plainly ^ that hs
was baptized in it, and into it t
But
1 2S hifant-Baftifm
But Mr. ^. does not think himfelf fafe as yet,
he feems to carry a Confcioufnefs along with
him, that John did really baptize by dipping ;
for he lays p. 5 1. that JohnV Baptifm is not to be
the Chrijiian Pattern , as to the Mode of it,. I
Vv'ould ask him, who alter'd the Mode ? Our
Lord did not, nor his Apoflles after him, nor did
they that fucceeded them alter it 'till above 200
Years after our Saijiou/s I'ifne. With what
Face then would Mr. l^F, fuggeft, that our Lord
in the Words of tha CommiJJion gave Authority to
filter the Mode of Baptijm ? Is there any fuch
Thing hinted there, as a Change of the Mode of
jidminiftring this Ordinance? No, far from it,
for our Lord confirm'd the Mode of Baptilm in
the Way and Manner, that John had pradiced it
from the Beginning, adding a fettled Form of
Words, in the Adminiilration of it, to the End
of the Worlds
But I proceed to the third Scripture that Mr.
W. produces, as that which the Baptifts urge in
Proof of Dipping, which \s A^s 8. 36. 39.
Wherein the Account of the Eunudo% Baptifm,
we read Verfe 38. that they went both down i?itQ
the Water^ and Verfc 3 9. they came both up out of
the Water 6k t5 t/'dVI(^. In Anfwer to which Mr.
W, fays, here is not one Word of Dippijig, No !
What isit not faidVerfe38. that Philip baptized
the Eunuch in that Water ? And did not our Au'
thor jufl: now confefs that the Word [60,7^^00 fig-
nifiesto dip F Did he not bring Criticks and Lexi-
cographers to vouch the Signification of the
Word|2a*;Ti2fe-,as well as i3ccV7a', to denote, ^^^^r^f"-
re
No Inflitution ^/Christ. 1 29
re & immergere, tingere, to plunge or drown^ td
dye or dip ? 'tis flrange if there fhould not be a
Word here of Dipping, when by the Confeflion
of himfelf and others, the chief and primary Sig-
nification of the Word is to dip. Nor is Mr. W'^
nor any Body elfe able to fhew, one Inftance,
out of any Author, where the Word is ever
ufed to fignify pouring or fprinkli?ig. Since the
native and proper Meaning of it, always imports
Dipping.
But becaufe his Reafoning in the Paragraph
following, is. fomewhat remarkable, I fhall
briefly take Notice of it. He fays, they (the
Baptijls) will ask perhaps what Philip and the
Eunuch did in the Water. Mr. TV. anfwers, bap^
tize the Eunuch, but whether by dipping or fpr ink-
ling, remains yet a ^ejiion notwithjlanding this
Text. To which I reply, that the Queftion re-
mains only with prejudiced Minds, who are
willing to bafflle Scripture-Evidence, for mofl
of the beft Afmotators and Expojitors that he can
confult, agree that the Eunuch •Wd.^dipfd. But
we are told, that Perfons who wore Sandals^
might with a little Trouble, go a little Way into
the Water, and when there, Philip 77iight take up
fonhe of the Water in his Hand and pour it upon
the Eunuch. To which I reply, \l\2x pouring or
jprinkling, or taking Water up in the Hands, to
adminifter this Ordinance with, did not come ia
Fafiion for a great many Years after Philip' i
Time, you muit wait 'till Father Cyprian's Days,
before you hear, of any Plea in Favour o^ fprink-
ling. The primitive Chriilians made ufe of
K Rivers
130 Injant'Baptifm
Rivers,: Brooks or Lakes, or had their Baptifte-.
rjes and proper Places and Conveniences to dip
in, by Way of clear Conformity to Scripture-
Precedents of baptizing or dipping in Jordan^ in
JEnon^ and in this fVater, where the 'Eunuch was
baptized. I may add further, that if taking
Water up in the Hand would have done, then
neither Philip nor the Eunuch had any Occafion
to go into the Water at all\ but only to goto the
Water-fide^ and Philips by taking fome up in the
Hollow of his Hand, might do the Bujinefs. Nor
indeed was there any Occafion for the Eunuch to
come out of his Chariot, for he might as well
have ht^nfprinkled there, fitting, as the Clinicks
and fick Perfons were baptized in their Beds in
Cyprians Time. The Eunuch-T^reafurer might
eafily have order'd one of his Attendants to fetch
fome Water to the Chariot-Door. Tho' indeed
Reafon feems fufficiently to intimate to us, that
a Perfon of his ^ality, did not undertake fuch
a Journey, without Vejfels of Wine and Water,
to refrefh himfelf and Retinue, in travelling
thv o' fandy and defert Countries, to get Home to
Ethiopia j and fo a little Water out of his own
Bottle, would have done as well for fprinkling,
as that which they met with by the Way, But,
they both went down into the Water, both Philip
arid ^i?(? Eunuch, that this eminent Cow'u^'r/ might
be baptized or diffd therein, according to the
Inftitution of our Lord. What follows from
Mr. W. is fo mean and filly, that I am very fen-
fible the Repetition of it will be fulfome to the
Reader, mz.ijthe Eunuch was dippd, it isplain
that
No Inflitution oJCkrist. 131
fbaf his whole Body Wd^ not dipp*d by Philip.'
For according to their Argument and Fradiice^
he went into the Water ^ and Jo dipped Fart of
his Body himfelf, and if FhWip plung'd him/twas
only that Fart of his Body that he had not plungd
himfelf. Any one may ea01y obferve, that our
Author does not know what to do with this.
Inftance, he would fupprefs it, if he could, and
fmother the Evidence of Truth, that appears fo
glaring in it. He feems to confefs by halves,
that Philip dipp'd Part of the Eunuch^ but 'tis
with Regret, that this partial Confeffion comes
thus dribbling from him. And therefore, I pro-
ceed to what Mr. W. advances p. 52. where he
tells us, that the Scriptures which the Author of
' the RejleSlions (Dr. Gale^ upon Mr. Wall, and
others lay great Strefs upon^ and often quote in
Froof of Dippings as Rom. 6, 4. and Coll. 2. 12.
where Chrijlians arefaid to be buried with Chrift
in Baptifm, but he tells us, that it falls out un^
happily^ that neither of thefe 'Texts relate to the
Mode ofBaptifm. So that thd they (houldproduct
ten thoufand Rotations out of fuch as underjiood
them in this Senfe, it will be nothing to the Fur"
pofe. To which I anfwer, I imagin'd that Mr.
W. paid greater Veneration, to thofe very able
and learned Psdobaptifl-Expofitors, who give
their Sentiments againfl him, and who explain
thefe Places as referring to the antient, and
Scripture- Mode of baptizing; nor is it poffible,
to give a rational and fair Account of thefe Ex-
preffions, without giving this Interpretation of
them, i. e. that they fiew the Refemblance there
K 2 is.
132 In^ant-Baptijm
is, between our Baptifm send the Death of Chriflj
as well as our Death to Sin ; and between his
ReftirreStion^ and our rijing again to a Life of
Right eoujnefs. We are buried with him by Bap^
tifm into Deaths and plafited together in the Like"
ne/s of his Death, alfo in the Likenefs of his
RefurreBion. Now if Mr. W, thinks fit, to de-
ny the Truth of this Expofition ten thoufand
Times, I promife not to believe him, fo that I
am jufl: even with him, for his Pojitivenefs in
this Matter. What we have in the next Para-
graph is the fame Sort of ridiculous Logic, with
that which I have but juft now tranfcribed p. 52.
where he fays, that there is no good Refemblance
betwixt Chrift's Burial and Dipping in Baptifm^
his RefurreBion a?id their coming out of the Water,
or from under the Water ; it will be owrid that
Chrifl was carried to the T'omb, fuch as aredipp'd
go thefnfehes into the Water. Chriji in the Lan-
guage of Scripture lay three Days and three Nights
in the Tomb ; the^ never continue three Minutes
under Water. Ckrifs Burial was not by plung-
ing into the Earth, but laying him in a Tomb cut
of a Rock, which for ought they know, was with-
out fo much as covering him with Earth, they are
plungd ififo the Water,
Now, tho' this loofe and romantic Way of
talking, does fufficiently expofe itfelf, and needs
no Remarks, yet for the Satisfa(ftion of the Rea-
der, I fhall obferve thefe following Things.
I. Mr. W, knows that Similitudes were never
defign'd to run exaBly parallel, there is a Parity
and Difparity always allowed in Metaphors.
2. When
No InBitzition of Christ, i^^
2. When he talk^ o^ continuing three Minutes uh^
der Water ^ I never heard of any who were con-
tinued half one Minute there ; for 'tis not the
Length of Dtiration, but the Nature of the
ASiion. and its Conformity to the Comniand of
Chri/i^ that muft render the Ordinance valid y
3. When he fays, that Chriji's Burial was 7iot by
plunging him into the Earthy but laving him in a
Tomb cut out of a Rock^ which for ought they
know, was without fo much as covering him with
Earth. I anfwer, ih2Lt our Lord W2.s buried af-
ter the Manner of the Jews, and of the bejl Fa-
mi lies among them i yojefhof Arimathea in whofe
Tomb he was laid, was a Perfon of Honour, and
a Member of their Sanhedrim, and we find that
Abraham purchafed the Cave ofMagpela for an
hereiitary Place oi Burying after this Manner.
Gen. 23. 20. It may not be improper to infert
here, what the learned Cafaubon has given us, in
a Dijjertation on the yewifh Way of burying in
thefe Caves or Tombs. Where he informs us,
that after the Cave was dug or made, there were
feveralPits or Holes in the Form of Or^'u^^, made
at the Bottom, to place fo many Corpjes in. And
according to this Account, every Qr/'J muft be
doubly buried, Jirji in the Cave, afterwards in
lis proper Hole. His Words are thefe.
* But in the Cave there were eight, or as others
will have it thirteen Holes made, to place di£e-
K 3 rent
* In ea autcm Caverna o<^o (alii volunt tredecim) oa-
vandaerant foraminvi, ad I^ngula Corpora rcponenda.
to turn
134 Infant'Bciptifm
rent Corpfes in, — the Ground was all flony round
about Jerufalem, the Place where the Body of our
Lord was laid, was one of thofe eight or thirteen
Holes, and in the next SeBion, he tells uSythat
theje Fits or Holes,were dug fe'uenCubits deep, &c.
And now, pray, is there no good Refemblance
and Analogy between our Baptifm, and the Bu^
rial of our Lordf He was decently laid in the
'I'omb or Cave^ in the Heart of the Earth, and.
they who are baptized, are decently- laid in
the. Heart of ih^JVater. He was raisd again to
a never dying Life, they who are baptized, are
raifed again to a ProfeJJion of Newnefs of Life,
and into the Belief of Chrifs RefurreBion, So
that Mr. W. may oppofe and deny this Refem-
blance as long as he thinks proper, but he will
thereby only manifeft his own impotent Preju-
dice, he will never be able to deftroy the Signi-
ficancy of Dipping, in the Ordinance of Bap-
tifm, fince the Scripture fo plainly declares the
Likene/s there is between it, and the Burial of
Jefos Chrift. 2. It may be worth while to con-
sider that Dr. Hammond, who feems to be a Fa-
n^ourite- Author with Mr. W. does not fcruple to
aflert the Refemblance between Primitive-Bap-
tifm, and the Burial of our Lord. The Doc-
tor's Words on Rom. 6. 3. are thefe, 'tis a
totum circa Jerufalem folum efle faxofum. Locus ubi
pofitum eft Corpus Domini, unum erat ex illis ofto vel
tredecim forammibus foramina in quibus Corpora
condebantur, ad feptem cubitorum altitudinem folere ca-
varij &-C. Cafauboni Excercit. ad Card. Baron, f. 470, 471,
'Thing
Mo Infliiution of Cn r i s t. 135
^hing thas every Chrijlian knows, that the Im-
merfion inBaptifm, refers to the Death ofChriJi,
the putting of the Perfon baptized into the Water,
denotes and proclai??2s, the Death and Burial of
Chriji. and certainly, there can't be a concifer
and fairer Account, of the meaning of the
Place.
3. When Mr. W, would fuggeft, that the Bo-
dy of our Lord was not fo much as covered
with Earth when he was buried, I would afk
him, if a Corps was depofited after this Man-
ner in a Cave, dug in the Side of one of the
Hills, or Rocks, not far from Abergavenny, whe-
ther the faid Corps, would not be judg'd to be
fuffciently and properly interred ?
I come now to Mr. /F's Reafons, why he
looks upon Baptifm by fprinkling or pouring, as
valid as that perform'd by dipping, p. 53. where
he tells us, / think the Command to baptize re^
quires no more, but that it jhould be done by Ap^
plication of Water, without determining how the
Water is to be applied. To which I anfwer,
I. That 'tis a manifefl RefleBion upon the Wif
dom of our Lord, as well as an Infult upon com-
mon Senfe, to attempt to perfuade People, that
all Nations are left to their Liberty, how they
adfninijler a Gofpel-Ordinance 5 and that there
was, no fettled way, of adminiflring this Inftitu-
tion 2iX.frf, but that it was carelefly left to the
various Humours and Fancies of whimfwalM^n,
One may eafily perceive the Reafon of Mr. Ws
Indifferency in this Point, 'tis that he may be at
Liberty tofprinkk\ but if he could find Sprink-
K 4 ling
136 Infant'Bciptifm
ling, once us'd in Scripture, he would foon con-
demn all other ways, and plead for that only :
but becaufe hey^^^ arid confejfes, that Dippmg
was ufcd in the Primitive Times, therefore he
is for any other way to avoid that, for it does
not pleafe Kim at all; this is the 'u//?^/^ State of
his Cafe.
2. Who gave him and others Authority to
diverjify the Mode of the Adminiitration of Bap-
tifm ? is he to a£t as his Fancy leads him, in //-
cencioujly altering an Inflitution of Chrijl^
3. I would fain know, whether he would be
fatisfied, if fome of his Brethren fhould take
upon them, to fprinkle the Feet inftead of the
Face, or to fprinkle the Hands inftead of all the
reji ; would this be valid F would it anfwer a
good Confcience towards God, in obeying him in
this Ordinance ? did our Lord leave it at fo loofe
and indifferent a Rate, as that People may with
Safety take fuch a Liberty^
4. When Mr. TV, talks of the Application of
Water in Baptifm, the Phrafe fuits well enough
to the Praiiice of Sprinkli?2g, but does by no
means agree with the Idea the Scripture gives
us of the Adminijiration of Baptifm : for in a
jlri5i logical Sen(e, in the Cafe of Baptifm, the
Water is not fo much applied to the Body, as
the Body is applied to the Water : thus John
baptized in the Waters of Jordan and JEnon by
putting the Bodies of Men and Wojnen into
thofe Waters. And Philip and the EUnuch, went
both into the Water, 'tis not faid, that it was
brought to thenty nor is it faid to be applied to
the
2\& InBitution of Ch r r s t i 37
the Eunucb, but his J5(?i;' was baptized or dippd
in i/ : fo that according to the true Idea of Ad-
miniftration, and the proper way of fpeaking of
it, the Body is the Subject y which is applied to
the Water, as the ObjeB^ into which 'tis bap-
tized. And indeed the Method of Sprinkling of
Infants, deflroys the njery Scripture-Notion of
true Baptifm ; both the SubjeB and the Mode
are incompatible with the Defcription of the
Gofpel ; and any unbiased Judge (a T^urk, JeWy
or an Indian) in reading the New Teftament,
would wonder, how it fhould enter into the
Heads of People, to fubflitute Sprinkling, in the
Room of Dipping, which the Scripture con-
ftantly refers to, and to content themfehes with
Babes, inftead oi penitent Men and Women, who,
by Right ought to make an open Confeflion of
Sin, to God and his Church, before they are ad-
mitted to this holy Ordinance. The Innovation
is furprizing, to any, except thofe, who are edu-
cated in Favour of it.
Therefore, what he fays in the Paragraph
following, is to little Purpofe, viz. that a little
Water is asfgnificant of the Blood of Chriji, and
the Graces of the Spirit, as a great deal. For
reducing the ^antity of Water, from a fuffi-
ciency to dip, only to a fufficiency to fprinkle^
dejiroys the very Being of Gofpel-Baptifm. For,
as difmall Quantity of Wiiie, only to wet the
hips, or T^ip of the 'Tongue, in the Lord's Sup-
per, cannot be called Drinking, and confequent-
ly can't anfwer the End in that Ordinance ; fo
a little JVater only fufficient tofprijikle, can't be
faid
138 Jnfant-Baptijm
faid to be Gofpel-Baptifm, for the Nature of the
Ordinance requires dipping : the formal Caufe
here enters into the *v€ry Nature of the Thing
it felf It may not be improper in this Place, to
lay before the Reader* feme Obfervacions of the
Learned Sir Norton Knaichbull, in his Annota-
tions on that PafTage of the Apofile Peter, i Pet,
3, 20,21. < wherein few^ that is., eight
Souls, were faved by Water : the like Figure
whereunto, even Baptijhi, doth alfo now fave us
(not the putting away the Filth of the Fle/lo, but
the Anfwer of a good Confcience towards God) by
the RefirreBion cf fefiis Chrijl, After having
elaborately explain'd the Words, he fays, ' fo
* that in Conclufion we may pofitively affirm,
' that Baptijm is properly and folely a Type of
« the RefurreSlion : and to this Truth do give
* their Suffrage the Apojiles, Fathers, Schoolmen,
* almoji all Interpreters ancient and modern,
* and even our Eriglifh Church it felf, its Judg-
* ment being manifeft in the Kubrick of the
* Common Prayer, which enjoins the dipping of
* Infants in Baptifm, allowing only in fome Ca-
* ies the Liberty of Sprinkling or Perfufon. The
* Thing it felf is fo manifeft, that there is no
« Need of Teftimonies to confirm it ; but be-
' caufe there be not a few which teach other-
* wife, led thereunto by Example and vulgar
* Error, it will not be amifs, if but to free my
* felf from the Imputation of too much Confi-
* dence, out of innumerable Teftimonies, to
* cite fome few. And we firft begin from the
* Apoftle Pauly'll ayvQ^iii onj tavi k^cL^K^yd^.,
&c.
ISlo In Bit ut ion vo\ r avcc^cnooi dvT^ f^vw^ by
his Baptifm ye may be made Partakers of his
Refurre^ion, Ignat. Ep. ad Trail, ^d^iayucc
eii rnp ^tovd'wv tS Kv^a ^S^fj^^jovj Baptifm was
given to fet forth the Death of the Lord. Ep.
ad Philadel. in the Name of Ignatius, ^he
Death of Chrifl, Conft. Apoft. rrS 7ra9»< ^
cmfxCo?^^ in Baptifm we perform the Signs of
his Paffion and RefurreSiion. JufI:. Mart, we
kjiow Ofie /aving Baptifm, fince there is but one
Death for the Worlds and o?ie RefurreBion^ uv
mjrTDi egi it) (iocrriicjAo., whercof Baptifm is the
'Type^ 5cc. Bafil Mag. hear what St. Paul
faith
140 ' Infant-Baptijm
faith, they were all baptized in the Cloudy nnd
in the Sea, ^ocTr^Kjjjuct xaA« twV ^aAflsrTws aSby
he calleth their PafTage through the Sea, Bap^
tifm ) for it was an Efcape from Death, &c.
Balil. Seleuc. olav fjL€??\.oiMev /3a7r7i'^«j', when we
go about to baptize^ we bid to fay, I believe in
the RefurreSiion of the Dead, and in this Faith
we are baptized. Chryfoft. Baptifms Re-
furredtionis pignus & imago, Baptifm is a
Fledge and Figure of the RefurreSlion, Amb'r.
Baptifmus Arrabo Refurre(Stionis, Baptifm is
an Earnejl of the RefurreSiion ; Land:. Aqua-
rum Elemento fepelimur, we are huried in the
Element of Water ^ Anfelm. Merfio Mortis
& fepulturas formam gerit, Immerfon bears
the Form of Death and Burial, Bernard. Lau-
dabilius, & tutius, & communius, &c. Bap"
tifm is performed more laudably, more fafehy
and more commonly by Dipping, for by Dippings
the Figure of Chriji's Burial is reprefented, T.
Aquin. Ipfum baptizandi verbum mergere
figniiicat, t^c. T^he Word Baptifm does fignify
Dipping utider the Water, and it is eviderit the
ancient Church ifed the Ceremony of Dippings
Calv. Baptifmus Graeca vox eft, &c. Baptifm
is a Greek Word^ andfignifies properly Immer-
Jion in the Water, and this Signification does
agree with our Baptifm, and hath Analogy to
the Thing fignified, for by Baptifm we are bu-
ried together^ and as it were drowned with
Chrifi, being dead to Sin, Sec. Zanch. ■
I fhall only add the Judgment of an ingenious
and learned Man, whofe Teflimony in this
* Matter
No hiBitiition c?/ Christ. 141
' Matter is not to be fufpeded or refuted. His
* Words are thefe, " Porro quamvis immer-
" iionis Ceremonia, & olim fuit Communlor,
** &c. Tho' the Ceremony of Immerfion was
" anciently more common, as appears by the
" unanimous Difcourfe of the Fathers when
" they fpeak of this Matter, and doth more
" lively reprefent the Death, Burial and Refur-
" rediion of the Lord and us, which are myfti-
" cally done in Baptifm ; the which Significa-
*' tion of Immerfion the Fathers do fo often
" urge, &c. from whence St. Thomas affirms,
" that the Ceremony or Rite of Dipping is the
" mofl commendable. Yet there have been
" many Reafons, for which it was fometimes
" convenient to change this Cuftom of Dipping
" into fome other Kind of Ceremony near unto
*' it, &c. From hence therefore the Ceremony
** of Perfufion, or pouring on of Water, as
" middle between Sprinkling and Dipping j was
" much in Ufe; which Cuftom Bonaventure
*' faith, was in his Time much obferved in the
" French Churches and fome others, tho' he con-
" fefles the Ceremony of Dipping was, the
" more common, the more fit, and the more
" fecure, as St. T^homas teacheth, &c.- Thus
* far Eftius^ in whofe Words, we have a mani-
* feft and ingenious Conceflion, that Dipping'
* was the ancient Ceremony, which cojijiantly
* the Fathers taught^ as more lively reprefenti?ig
* the Deathy Burial^ and RefiirreBion of Chrijl
* and US', that the Schoolmen held the fame, for
* the moft fecure and commendable Ciijlom :
Thai
142^ JnjanuBaptifm
* That the Cuftom of Perfulion crept unawares
* into the Churchy iox what Caufes he mentions
« not/ — and a little further , * to put an
* End to this Difcourfe (fa^s xKisLearned Knight)
* I do ajirm with Alexander da Halys, TifiBio
* eft formalis Caufa Baptifmi ; that Dipping is
* ih.Q formal Caujeoi^di-^lii^m^&c.'* Now 'tis
a very light Matter with the Baptijis^ what Re-
gard Mr. W, or fome of his Brethren^ may pay
to thefe I'ejiimonies, Suffrages and ConceJ/ions ;
'tis fufficient to obferve, that fuch a Cloud of
Witnejfes, ApoJIles, Fathers, Schoolmen and Re^
formers, are infinitely above his Contempt, and
they all jointly refieB, a fingular Honour on the
PraBice oj the Baptiji -Churches ; which have
the Courage to affert and lopraBice this Truth,
in a?i Age, x}i\2xjhame fully runs with the Stream,
of Popidarity, in the negledt of a due Submif-
iion, to a folemn Ordinance of fefus Chrijl,
But what Mr. W. fays /• 54 is remarkable,
that He can't think, that all who were baptized
in the Apoftolic Age were dipfd, &c. I anfwer,
his Incredulity is of no Weight, in this Contro-
verfy, 'tis fufficient that he confeffes they dipfd
in the Apofolic Age. But 'tis material for him
to acquaint us, whether they ufed two ways, or
any other way than Dipping, in that Age, and
let him ihew us where he has found it, and
what that particular other way was. This is
what the Baptifts require a Proof of, if he or
^ny others can produce it.
As to what he fays p. c^t^, ^hat St, Cyprian
in a fet Difcourfe on this SubJeBj declares Bap-
tifm
No hi Bi tut ion of Christ. 143
fifm by Sprinklings as valid as that by Immerfion.
I anfwer, that this is not a fair Reprefentatioa
of Cyprian'^ Cafe. For
1. Cyprian does not reprefent Sprinkling as
the ordinary Sind Jiated -wzy of Baptizing, but
as a Thing that might in his Opinion be excufed
in Cafes and Inftances of /;>z£'r^NecefIity. There-
fore this Method of Sprinkling was only ufed to
Perfons, who were Sick, Weak, and Bedrid^ who
were in eminent Danger of Death, and who
could not come out of their Beds, to be baptized
in the ufual way of Dipping : For this Reafon
they were called, Clinicks.
2. Cyprian does not fo much as pretend that
Sprinkling was ever made Ufe of by the Apojiles^
therefore he does not offer to urge theirAuthori-
ty in Defence of it, but humbly and modeftly pro-
pounds his own Opinion in this Matter, nor was
he over eager, to impofe his Sentiments upon
others, but leaves them to theirLiberty to judge,
and adt in the Cafe as they thought fit and mofl
reafonable. The Ground that he argues from,
is, the fprinkling of Waters under the Ceremo-
nial haw, on fome Occafions, and fome 7neta-
phorical Sprinkling mention'd by the Prophet
Ezekiah^ Num. 19. 4. and 19. 19. Ezek. 36. 25.
Surely this is too flight and far fetch'd a way of
Reafoning, tp determine the Mind of any con-
fiderate Man, about an Ordinance of the New
Te/lament.
3. This A^oW way of Sprinkli?ig that Cyprian
was willing to recommend in fome necejjitous
Cafes^ it feems, gave Scandal and Offence to
other
144 Infant'BaptiJm
other Chriftkns, as appears by divers Inflan-
ces from himfelf: The very Epiflle that he
wrote to Magnus, fufficiently fhews the Difla-
tisfaftion and Scruple that Magnus had in his
own Mind about this Bufinefs. For the ^ef-
tion v/as, whether fuch were to be accounted
lanjoful CbrifiianSy who had been only fprinkled
in their Beds, and not baptized by Dipping ac-
cording to the fiated Method of the Church,
Now Cyprian to foften the Matter, declares that
he was not for prefcribing to any Body. And
indeed the Epiftle to Magnus is full of Difficul-
ties and Objections thrown in his way, on the
Account of this newly invented Practice of
Sprinkling the Clinicks, which he endeavours
modelHy to remove, and to anfwer. He begins
in ftating of the Queflion thus. * " Tou ask me
" dear Son, what I think of thofe, who have ob"
." tairid the Grace of God in their Weaknefs and
*' languifiing State, whether they are to be ac-
•' counted true Chrijtians, fmce they have been only
" perfusd (or fprinkled) and not wafied all over-y
" in the Saving Laver.
He anfwers him in this Manner, " -f tny Mo-
^' defy will not allow me to prepojfefs the Minds of
others
* Qu^fifti ctiam J^ili charhTime, quid mihi de illis
videatur, qui in mfirmiratc & languore, Gratiam Del
confequantur, an habendi iint legitimi Chriftiani, eo
quod, aqua falurari, non loti fint, led perfufi ? Cyp. Ep.
ad Mag. Edit. 'Paris. 1643.
I Qiiain parte Nemini Verecundia & Modeftia noftra
pracjudicat, quo minus un^^qui^que quod purat, lentiat,
No InBitution of Cb.v.1 ST' 1.45
" others with my Sentifnents^ let every one rather
" think a,nd judge as he pleajes, and a5l accord-
" ?«g"/K> ^nd a little further he fays, that
" in the Saving Sacraments^ when NeceJJity obit"
" ges^ and God granting his Indulgence^ Abridge-
" ments of divme Things^ will confer all that is
** neceffary on true Believers.
As he proceeds, he is obliged to anfwcr di-
vers Objedlions, made by thofe, who were a-
gainft this Sprinkling, where he fays, " * It
" ought not to make any Body uneafy, in that
" the Sick are fprinkled, or have Water poured
** upon them, moreover there are fome,
** who will not give the Name of Chriftians,
** but Clinicks^ to fuch as have obtained the
" Grace of Chrift, by the Saving Water (of
*' Sprinkling) and true Faith, I cannot find where
" they picked up this Name.
And towards the End of this Epiflle, there is
mention of a DifHndlion between pouring upon
the ClinickSy and the wajhing of the other Chrif
Sc quod fenferit faciat. in Sacramentis falutaribus,
neceffitate cogente, & Deo indulgentiam fuani largicnte,
totum credentibus conferunt Divinai. Compendia. Cjp.
Jbid. ad Alag.
* Nee quemquam movere debet, quod afpergi vel
perfundi videnrur a-gri, . porro autem quod
quidam, cos falurari aqua & fide legitima,Chnili gratiani
coniecuros, non Chriliianos, led Clinicos vocant, non in-
vcnio unde hoc nomen aifumant, ^c. Ibid.
\ Utrumne lorifint, an pertufi, utrumne Clinici lint,.-
anperiparctici, Cyp. Jbid. fub finem.
L tians.
146 Jfifant'Baptifm
iians, who had been baptized in the regular
way, by Dipping,
And 'tis certain that they were againfl admit-
ting /uch to the Minijiry, who had only receiv'd
this Clinick Baptijm, fo that Sprinkling was but
very poorly efteemed of, in thofe Days, and the
Authority and Influence o^Cypriany could fcarce
Toake it go down with the People of Africa,
Chap.
iV^ InSiitutio7i of Christ, 14^
Ch A P. VII.
Mr.Vy^s Reafofis for Sprinkling, and agamft
Dipping, ji^-ZWo^^i and imcharitable. His Pre*
tenjiom to Antiquity examind^moji of his 'Tefti-
monies fpurious, or of no Weight. T^he two
firfi Centuries of Chriftianity, declare for the
Baptifls. One unfcriptural PraBice leads to
another, as^ pleading the Necef/ity o/Infant-» ,
Baptifm, brought on Infant-Communion.
TO follow my Author, It may be expecfled,
that I jdiould take a little Notice, of the
Reafons, which induce Mr. W, to make Choice
of Sprinkling before IDipping, which are to
this Purpofe ; In fame Places^ he tells us, and
at fomc Times of the Tear^ Dipping would be
very dangerous. To which I anfwer, 1. Does
he think that our blelTed Lord did not know and
confider, the Confequences of the Mode of this
Ordinance, when he infkituted it, and order'd
it to be performed in all Nations, to the End of
the World ? Or are fome Men in our Day grown
more wife and wary, than the great Divine
Law-giver himfelf ? 2. I would fain know
what they did in the Land of Canaan, and in
other Eajiern Countries, in cold Weather, for
they have Frof and Snow in their Seafons, there ^
did they dip in warm Weather, and fprinkle in
cold Weather, according to the Variety of the
JU 8 Sea-
148 Infant -Bctf tifm
Seafons? 3. How did it fare, with the People
of thefe Wejlern Nations, even with tender Itt'
Jants before ^een Elizabeth's Time? for 'tis
acknowledged on all Hands, that Dipping was
the general Pradiice to Young and Old 'till that
^ime. 4. Does he imagine that Ki^ Surmizes
vf Da7igers will pafs for Arguments ? when the
greateft Fhyfxia?is of the Age, who fliould befl
underftand Caufes and EffeSfs m our Conftitu-
tions, alTures us, 'tis a Jalutary Pradtice j and
confequently they recommend Dipping at all
'Seajb725 of the Year, in this Climate^ for the
Sake of Health, And now, whom fhall we
believe in this Bufinefs, a Pcedobaptiji Writer
fiU'd with Prejudice againft this Pra(5lice, or
Learned, profefs'd Phyjicians who impartially
confult the Common Good^ but Mr. W, infi-
nuates, that many weak Conjiitutions^ have fuf-
ferd by imfeafonahle Dipping. I anfwer, if he
had known any Injiance^ that he dar'd have
'ventured to piiblijh^ of any who had fuffer'd by
being baptized this way, I am fatisfied, he would
have founded the Trumpet as loud as he could,
nor would he conceal fuch a l^hifigy as might
have reflected any Degree of Dijhonour upon
this way. Witnefs his painting out, to the
Reader J a vile Scene conceived in his own Ima-
. gination, of baptizing People Jiark Naked, and
that before a mixd Company of Men and Wo-
men, p. 56. there he remarks upon the immodejl
Forwardnefs of Women particularly, in appear^
ing before others in loofe Garments, in order to be
baptized. But here, p. 55. he Vforks fubtilly
" upon
No hiBituticn of Christ . 1 49
upon the Faffion of Fear\ that if poffible, he
may frighten iioeak and timorous People from
their Duty, by urging that the Health of Per^
fons is endanger d. He does not offer to pitch
upon any Inftance, left he fhould be called upon
to prove itj but his good Will is the fame, for
he leaves a bafe innuendo with the Reader, as if
piany weak Conftitutions had fuffer d by this Prac-
tice. An excellent Specimen this, of the ful-
fome Grimace, of his Prejace^ 'varniflded all
over with Charity !
In the next Paragraph, we are told, that
whe?! Perfons are dipped in Garments^ it may
happen that fome Part of the Body Jloall not be
toucfjd with Water ^ and then there is not a total
Tmrnerfion. No ! fure^ if they are put under
Water, they are immers'd, if the Water fhould
not touch the Skin, for Immerfion, I hope,
does not confift in Wetting, but in Dipping.
What ! is not a Stone immers'd, when thrown
into the Bottom of a deep River, tho' the Wa-
ter, by its moiftening Quality, fhould not reach
the Infide of it, even for a confiderable Space?
but if it fliould be taken up again, in i(t\Y Mi •
nutes, it may be faid, to have been truely, and
properly immersd. Let Mr. W. review this Sore
of Reafoning, and he will find his Objediion
very leaky, and will Unk of icfelf. As to the
fublequent Part of his Argument, upon this
Head, I have fully confider'd it, elfcvvhere, and
therefore {hall proceed to his next Objedion.
Obj.^VIJ, Lifant'Baptifm is a new Invention,
Here ftill, the Reader is to remember, that 'tis
L 7, the
150 Injant-Baptifm
the Objedlion of the Baptifis, as flated by
Mr. W. But I muft acquaint him, that the Bap-
tijis don't fay, that 'tis a new Invention ; on the
contrary they confefs, that 'tis an old Invention,
even of 1400 Years ftanding. Therefore this
Pra(flice can't in any Colour of Reafon, in our
Day, be called a new one. The Baptifts indeed
urge, and that with good Evidence, that this
Bufmefs is not of God, nor any where to be found
in his written Word. And 'tis this occafions the
Difpute between the Pcedobaptijis and them.
Mr. W. undertakes to anfwer the Objection
againft the Noijelty of the Pradtice, by referring
VIS to Antiquity, particularly to Dr. Cave's Pri^
mitive Chrijtianity. Parti. Ch. 10. to the Au-
thor of the Enquiry into the Cojijlitution, 6cc. Part
II. from p. 44 to p. 55. to Dr. Hammond' s Tract
of Injant-Baptifm, and to Mr. Wall's Hiflory.
Here, I may very well aik, why did not Mr. W,
fipgle out, fome Proof from genuine Autiquity^
as quoted by thefe very Learned Writers^ and
lay it before us ? if he could in any of thefe
'worthy Authors, find competent Proofs of In-
fant-Baptifm, within two Hundred Tears after
Chrijl, it would have been worth his while to
have produced fuch. This would have been
fomewhat effedlual to his Purpofe. But inflead
of this, we are put off with Citations, which
are fcandalouHy precarious, fome out oi Suppo-
ftions orfpurioiis Authors, and others fo late, as
towards the middle or latter End of the third, if
not the fourth Cejzfury.
Of the former Sort is that pretended one of
Jujiin
No JnBitution of Christ. 151
yufiinMartyr^ quoted by Mr. W. out ofDr.Ham-
mond', but the Unhappinefs is, that Dr. Hajn-
mond htmfelf^ was not fure who wrote that
Book, Refp. ad Orthod. he only calls it an A'd-
ctent Piece; and therefore a Quotation upon
fuch a doubtful and precarious Foot, can be of
no Force with an impartial Reader: For if it
be uncertain who writ a Book, and at what
Time ic was written, the Credit of that Book,
as an hifiorical Evidence^ mufl: fink in Propor-
tion.
Of the fame Sort is another Citation brought
by Mr. W.owx. of Dr. Hammond^ viz. that the
Church had receiijed T'radition from the Apojiles,
to give Baptifm to Infants-, but 'Dr. Hammond
confeffes, that he is more uncertain about the
Author of this Treatife than the other; and
brings Mr. Caufabon to vouch in the Dark for it;
but it falls out, that he neither could tell who
writ it, and he owns that there v/as a great De-
bate as to the Author of it, about the Year 420
after Chrift.
Again, of the fame Sort is another Quota-
tion, taken by Mr. JV. out of Dr. Hainmond^
from the Confiitutions^ Lib. VI. Ch. 15. ,but
Dr. Hammo7jd is at a great Plunge, who to make
the Author or Authors of this Work, as any of
the former; and to mend the Matter, there is
No Body can tell when, nor by whom thefc
Co7iJlittitions were written ; and very few Lear-
* Dr. HcMmo}id\ Queries, p. 251.
L 4 ned
152 Infant 'B apt ifm
ned Men at this Time of Day, lay any Stefs on
this Performance, but rather treat the Work
with Negledt and Contempt, as to its being of
an Apojlolick Original,
Therefore fuch Citations as thefe, are not
likely to eftablifh any fcrupulous Pcedobaptijf,
nor ever to carry Evidence fufhcient with them,
to convince SiViy prof effed Bapti/i.
Therefore I come to the other Sort of Tefti-
monies produc'd by Mr. JV, and they are from
Origen, Cyprian^ and Aiigiifiin. From Origen,
as cited by the cxctWent Author of the Enquiry^
Part II. p. 45. vi^here I obferve, that they are
not the Words of Origen himfelf, but the Ex-
preffions of a Tranflation made of him, and
there are grievous Complaints among Learned
Men, about the Tranflations of this Father
(Origen) in particular : That his Works are fo
corrupted, alter d and interpolated, that a Man
fcarce knows, whether he reads him, or fome
other officious Cofjimentator, in his Room. Gro-
tius fays, a great Deal of v/hat is afcribed to
him, is an unknown Author s, and a great Deal
interpolated. And Huetius fays, that his Works
are deform d by preverfe hiterpretations. There
are divers others, who complain to the fame
Purpofe, as the Reader may find in Dr. Gale's
RefeSiions, more at large. Particularly Mr. Du
Pin fays, thofe Pieces we have in Latin, are
tranjlated by Ruffinus and others, with Jo much
Liberty, that it is a diffxult Matter to difcern
what is OrigeJi s own, from what has been foijled
in by the Interpreter, Now, this is enough to
difcre-
]\ToInBitutiou of Christ. 153
difcredit the Tranflations that are handed to us,
of this Father 'y and his own proper Greek Works,
are fo far loft, that the moft ftri(^ Searchers into
his Remains, are not able to produce out of him
any Thing in Favour of Infant-Baptifm, But
fuppofe that the Tranflation expreffes the Senti- -
ments of Origen, yet he does not pretend to
ground Infant-Baptifm upon any Revelation in
the New Teftament; but argues from fome
PafTages in the Old Teftament, out of Job and
, Ifaiah, as his Fancy led him ; for he imagin'd,
that their Baptifm would v/afh away Infants
Original Pollution, and for this Reafon he
thought it was necejjary to adminifter it to them;
but he does not offer to plead one Word from
Chrifi's In/iituiion, or any Example in the New
Teftament : and withal, this Father flourifhed
about 230 Tears after Chrifi, and we allow that
Infant-Baptifm began to be inrroduc'd towards
the middle of the Third Century. So that if this
Proof was good 'and valid, it would very little
affecft the Controverfy in Hand.
The next Citation we have, is that oi Cyprian
Anno 250. and here 'tis readily acknowledged,
that he pleaded for Infant-Baptifm ; but then
'tis very ftrange, that an African Bifloop (Fidus
by Name) fhould be uneafy to know the proper
Time, to baptize Infants, whether in the Com-
pafs of two or three Days, or the Space of eight
Days after th^'w Nativity -, and that this fhould
be a Bufinefs to be determined in a Synod. It
gives every impartial Enquirer^ very ftrong
Ground of Sufpicion, that this was a novel
PraBice^
i 54 Infant ^Baptifm
TraSiiee^ at that Time, for the Regulations of
it were not, it feems, well fettled as yet. Where-
as, if the Pradice had been handed down, from
the Apofiles Days^ as a great many coniidently
pretend, what Need were there of a Synod to de-
termine the Time, when Infants might be bap-
tized? Or, this Bifhop mull be very indifferently
qualified for the Duties of his Office, that he
was no better acquainted with a Bufinefs of this
Nature, himfelf. But when new Laws are
enadted^ People are commonly cautious at jirjiy
how they put them in 'Execution^ and 'tis very
probable that this was the Cafe of Fidus.
As to the laft Teftimony produced by Mr. W,
out o^'Di^Hammojid, from St. Augujiin, I freely
confefs it, but then St. Aiigufiin lived in the
Fourth Century, when Infant-Baptifm had got
Urong Footing, and it has held it trorn that Day
to this. The Baptifis never pretend to deny
thefe things.
What we expe<5t and require of Mr. TF. and
the Pcedobaptifis, is to produce fome Vouchers
of received iVuthority, out of the two firfi hun-
dred Tears, for this Pracflice of Sprinkling In-
fants, which none of them have been able to do,
hitherto. 'Tis an eafy Matter to prove Infant-
Baptifm from the 'Third Century downward, but
what we want, is to trace it upward^ thro' the
Second 2indiFtrf Centuries, to the Days of the
Apoflles; and to give tolerable Evidence that
they pradifed it. If any one can do this from
Authentic Records, we fhall be very thankful
^o him. 'Till this be done, 'twill be to little
Purpofe
No Inftitution ^/Christ. I5S
Purpofe for Mr. W. to tell us, as he does, p. 59*
that many more T^eftimoniesfrom Antiquity might
have been added-, and a little lower, he fays, all
the Strefs that he lays upon thefe Tejlimonies, is to
Jhew, that they who lived in the Apojiolic Age,
and therefore had the hefi Advantage of knowing
their Sentiments and PraBice, in this Point, did
themjelves praciife Infant-Baptifm ; and declared
it to be a divine T'radition, I anfwer, would not
any one think, from this grave Conclulion, that
our Author had efeciually proved Infant-Bap-
tifm, to be derived from the very Apoflles them-
felves ? Whereas, on the Contrary, I have fhewa
from Dr. Hammond, whence Mr. JV, took thofe
Citations, that the very Paflages, they lay the
greateji Strefs upon, deferve no Credit. Neither
the Authors, nor the Time o^ vfntmg thefe Paffa-
ges can be found out, and Dr- Hammond him-
felf, acknowledges all this. With what Face
then, could Mr. fF. urge it to his Reader, that
thefe Teftimonies came from fuch as lived in the
Apoftolic Age?
Having now difmifs'd what Mr.^. had to of-;
fer from Antiquity in Defence of Peedobaptifm,^
I come to confider his Surprife, that the Bap"
tijls, the Oppofers of Infant-Baptifm, Jhould pre-
tend to Antiquity on their Side aifo, p. 56. To
which I anfwer, that I can fcarce think, that
he will difpute Sacred Antiquity with us, I
mean the Hi/loricai Accounts, which we have
recorded in the New 'Teflament. For as Things
are left there, they fpeak aloud' in Favour of
. the Baptifis, and there is not one Word of men-
tion
1 56 Infant'BaptiJm
tion made of Padobaptifm. Will he pretend
that yohn the Baptiji baptized Lifants f let him
and others confider and examine all that is faid
or written of that great Man -, and they will
find, that he baptized vafl Numbers, even Mul-
titudes, from Jerufalem and Judea^ and the i?^-
giom round about yordany confejjing their Sins,
Which fhews beyond Contradidion, that they
were Adult Perfons which he had to do with.
Again let the Minijiry of our bleflcd Lord and
his DifcipleSy be narrowly examined, and there is
not the leaft Account of Infants^ at any Time
admitted to holy Baptifm. Further, let the Re^
cords of the Churches^ and of the A^s of the
Apnjlles be confulted, and there is not to be
found the leafl Footftep, of Infants being bap-
tiz'd, and admitted Members of the Chrifiian
Church. But on the Contrary, the Nature of
the Hiftory, and the Account we have of the
Condud: of the Apojiks, in framing and model-
ling th^firjl Churches, give no Ground to be-
lieve that Infants were baptized. There were
many Thoufands of Men and Women, admit-
ted to this Ordinance, and to the Lord's Supper,
and exprelly faid to be added to the Churchy but
not one Infant reckon'd among all ihefe. So
that Mr. W. is utterly excluded all Manner of
Claims to Scripture- Authority y whatever Suc-
cefs he may hope to meet with in the Ecclefia-
fical Accounts of the following Ages oi ChriJ-
tianity. And tho* divers Innovations ci^ept in,
immediately after the Days of the ApoftleSy yet
there are fome Remains in the Writings of their
Succef-
Uo InBitution qf Christ. 157
SuccelTors, as to the Nature of the Ordinance
of Baptijm, and of the Circumftances of Perfons
fubmitting to it in thofe Days, which fairly de-
termine Things in Favour of our Perfwafion,
and againft Padobaptijm. And for this Reafon,
it may be very neceffary to give the Reader fome
tranficnt Talle, of their Way of Speaking, and
keafoning about Baptifm, by which he may
judge of their Sentiments in that Matter. And
I {hall inftance in St. Barnabas^ for this holy
Writer having quoted fome PafTages of the jirji
Pfalniy as particularly he jhall be like a "Tree
planted by the Rivefs of Water, that brlngeth
forth hh Fruit in his Seafon, obferve, fays
St. Barnabas, how he dejcribes the Water aiidthe
Crofi together. '^^ for,^ he fays thus, they are blef
" fed, who placing their Hope on the Crofs, have
*' gone down into the Water.
And a li!:tle lower he cites a Paflage out of
theProphetE^?^/^. Ch.47. V. 12. and by the Ri-
ver upon the Banks thereof, on this Side, and on
that Side, fi all grow all frees for Meat, whofe
Leaffiall not fade, neither Jhall the Fruit thereof
be confumed: 6cc. Whereupon St. Barnabas
makes this Remark: " f We go down into the
« Water full of Sins and Defilements, and come
Tii , V,A''''^M(tV Sif TO llAp. \ ^ , „ , ■
* R'ijXi? y-iV Kttjuoaivoy.iv iif TO vS'eof yifjLovjif rtuapT/wC
x] poxK, jy AVA^oiU'oy.iV Ka.f7ro(^oe9vvjii iv Tm ka^J^U f\y.uv rhv
poCov )u rhv kh'Tr'iS'A in toc U(Tovy tx°^1^f }*' '?'« ':ryiCuaj<.
Barnab.Epift. Cap. II- Edit. Amftd. 1724.
158 Infant-Baptifm
" up out of it, bringing forth Fruit in our Hearts^
** having Fear and Hope in Jefm, in our spirit.
Again we may take a Paffage or two out of
St. Hermas, who fpeaking of the Church, un-
der the Emblem of a Vifonary Tower ^ and of the
Stones which were of diferent Sorts, towards
the Building of it. Y\q fays, * Borne fell befdes
the Water ^ and could not be roWd into the Water,
In the feventh Sediion of the fame Villon we
are told, whom thefe Stones reprefented. " -fBut
" what are the reft which fell by the Wafer-Side^
" and could not be roWd into the Waters f they
^^ are fuch as have heard the Word, and were
" willing to be baptized in the Name of the Lord j
*' but when they call to mind what Holinefs the
" Frofejfon of Truth requires, they withdraw
** themfelves, and walk again according to their
** own wicked Defires.
Again we have a further Account in another
Place where he is fpeaking of the abfo-
lute Neceffity and Mode of Baptifm, afking this
Queftion, " |j Why I fay, have thefe Stones
afcen"
* Alios cadentes lecus aquam, nee poCfe volvi in
aquam. SanB- Herm. Lib. i. Vis. 3. Se6l. 2. Edit.
Amftel, 1724.
I C^teri vero qui cadebant juxta aquas, & non pote-
rant volvi in aquas, qui funt ? ii funt, qui verbum audie-
runt, volentes baptizari in Nomine Domini, quibus cum
venit in Memoriam Sanditas veritatis, retrahunt fe, am-
bulantque rurfus poll Delideria fua Scelefta. Ejufdem
Zib.Se£i. 7. _ ■ . . ■
* Quare, inqiiam, de profundo hi Lapides aicenderunt.
No l7i[liiution of Cur i st. i 59
*« afc ended out of the Deep^ and are placed in the
« Building oj this T'owerf — -— he faith 'tis
** necejfary that theyjhould afcend thro' Water, in
*' order to reft. They could not otherwife enter into
*' the Kingdom of God. Therefore they being dead
** arefealed with the Seal of the Son of God, and
** have enter d into the Kingdom. For before a
" Man receives the Name of the Son of God, he is
" ordain' d to Death ; but when he receives that
'* Seal, he is freed from Death, and deliver' d unto
" Life : Now that Seal is Water, into which Men
" defend under an Obligation to Death, but af
" cend out of it, being appointed to Life. —
*' They have defended therefore with them into the
" Water, and afc ended out of it with them again.
The Reader may take the learned Mr. Le
Clerc's Notes, upon this laft Citation, they are
thefe. " * They have deft ended with them into
*' the Water, in the fame Manner., in which Philip
& pofiti funt in StruQuram turris hujus ? .— — Ne-
cefle eft, inquit, ut per Aquam habcnt afcendere, ut re-
quiefcant. Non poterant enim aliter in Regnum Dei in-
trare. lUi igitur defunfli, figilio Filii Dei fignati funt,
& intraverunt in Regnum Dei. Antequam enim accipiat
homo, nomen Filii Dei, morti deftinatus eft ; at ubi ac-
cipit illud Sigillum, liberatur a morte, & tradimr vitas.
Illud autem Sigillum aqua eft, in quam defcendunt ho-
mines morti obligati, afcendunt vero vitas affignati.
Defcendcrunt igkur in aquam cum illis, & iterum afccn-
derunt. Ejufdem Lib. 3. Se£i. 16.
* Dcfcenderuntque cum illis in aquam 5 eo modo, quo
Philippus & jEunuchus A^s 8. 38. defccnderunt m
aquam, ut hunc ilk baptizaict., arq^uc ex aqua afcende-
runt- IIpH,.
"and
i6o Infant' Baptifm
** and the Eunuch went, Adls 8. 38. they defcend^
** ^,ed into the Water ^ that he might baptize him^
*' and they afcended out of the Water,
Thefe are undeniable Paflages, from Authors
of received Credit, and who lived v^ithin the
Compafs of the Firji Century. They clearly
ihew that the Perfons who were baptized were
Adult, and that they went down into the Water
to be dipped. Let Mr. W, or any other Paedo-
baptift produce as plain Inftances of Infants hav^
ing been fprinkled in that Age ; and if he can
make fuch a Difcovery, 'twill deferve the com-
mon Thanks of all the learned Advocates of P^-
dobaptifm. No fuch Thing having ever been
done by any of them as yet.
I may now enquire a little, into the Teftimo-
nies of the Second Century , and they will appear
to be unqueftionable Vouchers for the Pra&ice
of the Baptiji-Churches at this Day. That Ja-
mom Paflage of Jiiftin Martyr^ in his Apology to
the Emperor Antoninus Pius, being the Place re-
ferred to, and cited in Part by Dr. Whitby ^ in his
Paraphrafe on the Commijjion^ Mat, 28. will give
fufficient Satisfacftion in this Point. And be-
caufe 'tis a noted Piece ^ and a noble Monument of
Chrijiian Antiquity y I {hall tranfcribe it, as far
as it appears neceflary to give Light into this
Affair. His Words are thefe,
-(- " Anxi now we will explain after what
" Manner, when we were renewed by Chriji, we
" devoted
No InBitution of Christ, 1 6l
«* devoted our felves to God, left in omitting it>
«* we fliould feem to prevaricate ' in our Rela-
" tion. As many as are perfwaded, and be-
" lieve that thofe Things vv^hich we teach and
" publifli are true, and engage to live accor-
" dingly, are admonifh'd to addrefs themfelves
" to God in Prayer and Supplication, with Faft-
" ing, for the Remiflion of their paft Sins?
'* while we faft and pray together with them
" We then bring them where there is Watery
" and they are regenerated with the fame Kind
** of New Birthy wherewith we ourfelves were
" regenerated y for they are ih^n wajhed in JVa-
•* tery in the Naine of the Father y and Lord
" God of the Univerfe, and of our Saviour ye^
" fus Chrijiy and of the holy Spirit. And a
little lower, he adds, " the Reafon of this (So-
** lemnity) we have received from the Apoftles.
And a little further he fays, "This^^-^
" ing is called Illumination, becaufe it imparts
" Light to the Underftanding of thofe who
M ** learn
S'Q^u^if '7rov^fi\)iiv ri c-v th l^mymei.. Ccoi dy 'Trt^a^uai )^
Tii'cvua'iv rtAflfln TT^Zrct rd 5?' yifxaf S'tS'a.o'K'o^zva. }y KzyoiMiva.
vnavovfetf 'TTAfai TTov QioHiuv 7r^tiy.Afrt)i^iVeov d.Tov Trcirpoi tu»
%Kav )^ J^iUTTojov Qioh }y Toy y fir civoua-roi J'i hxroZ
JrjcroZf nra.v\u., o ipccri(^'of.'.ivo( Kcvucfjc, Ibid. fag. i6o.
Huiif J'i y.ira, 7h ovrc^Ji Kovscu rh 'wnniayivw, ^ (XvyKctja.-
n^triyivov, iTi 7ovi KiyoyJiVav? aS'ihzovi dyoui-y, h&a. (Tvvny-
ct>wTii^i]v]o?, Kj ci?^?.eov rrcf-vlciyjiZ 7ra,v]ocy iCjoycof, oTreoi jtA/etf/wr
BiiKdLKii Tcov ^vjfra.hy.^l^u■,' ovfiwycu, orrvi Tny ctiKVioy ffcoitipiav
^^filAAy, fit^/^-JlAC^i <^l?si\l/.ATt AS-TA^'cUi^A rTAV(jAlJ.iVOl Tiip
Mo Inftitmion ^/"Christ. 163
through the Name of the Son^ and of the holy
Spirit -y he returns ahb many Thanks 10 God
for the worthy Things received from him.
Prayers and Thankfgiving heing thus ended,
the whole x^ffembly fignifies full Confent, by
fayingj A?ne?2; an Hebrew Word, which fig-
nifies, So he it. The Prefidcnt having return'd
Thanks (as aforefaid) and the Aflembly decla-
red its Concurrence with a loud Voice^ thofe
whom we call Deacons^ diftribute among the
Affiftants, the Bread, and the Wine mixt with
V/ater, for which Thanks had been returned,
and they carry Part of them (even) to thofe
v^ho are abfent. This Food we call, Eucha-
rift^ of which, 'tis not lawful for any to par-
take, but for him ivho believes our 'Dodirine to
be truf, and has been waJJ:ed in the Laver of
Regeneration^ for the Remi/Jwn of SinSy and
.who does like wife live as Chriji has comman-
M 2 " dedj
ivy^ct^v, et«ta pj^poTi^opsTa^ to T(>oi?a>rt ray dJ^iK^^y ctproi, ;^_
'TTOTiDC-iov vJ^arof, x) Kfdy.djoi }^ ovrO{ KetliuV, efJiVov K^ J'o^cty -rU
rrArfi ray 'i\uv iS^id ro'v o/oy.eLToi rov qsT, x) TiStI Tyi-vy.a.Toi rov
ttyiov^ etveiTTiijiTrei. K) cAjyjteii'i^v VTrk^ rov KATt\^ja^iu rovray
rreip avtqZ t-TTt TToKv TToizirau. at (TvyTiki-crctyTrci ra,? zv^cc? )y rtiv
it'X^e'.a'ict.v, -ziraii o Trctpc^v Keto'; i-^iv^ti ij.il Aiyuy, Ay.ny, to Jeir.o dicat, nunquid ipiis aquis tingimur, qua: nunc in
primordio fuerunt ? non utique ipfis nifi ex ea parte, qu-a
Genus quidem ununi, Species vero complures : quod au-
tem Generi adtributum elt, etiam in Specie redundat :
jd^ocjue nulla Diftinftio eft, Mari Quis an Stagno, Flu-
mine
No InBitution ofCu-RrsT 165
** or in a Standing Pool j in a River, or in a
'* Fountain; in a Lake, or in the Channel of a
" River: Nor is there any Diftindlion to be
" made, between thofe v^hom Joht dipped in
*' Jordan, and thofe whom Peter dipp'd in the
" 'Tibery unlefs it be fuppofed that the Eunuch
" whom Philip dipp'd in the Water, which
** they happened to meet with on the Road
" thereby obtain'd more or lefs Salvation. .
And in few Pages he adds, " that the Command
" of Dipping is laid upon us, and the Manner
" prefcribed. Our Lord fays, go ye and teach
" the Nations, dipping them in the Name of
" the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
" Ghoft. That Account may be compar'd
" with this Command, unlefs a Man be born
*' again of Water and of the Spirit, he fhall not
*' enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. He has
" tied Faith to the Neceffity of Baptifm : there-
" fore all who believed afterwards were dipp'd.
—■ ■ And a little further, where he diflwades
M 3 from
mine an Fonte, Lacu an Alveo diluatur, nee quicquam
refert inter eos, quos Johannes in Jordane, & quos Pe-
trus in Tiberi tinxit. Nili & ille fpado quern Piiilippus
inter vias fortuira aqua rinxit, plus falutis aut minus re-
tulit. 'leny.l. Lib. de Saf). f. 70;. 704. Edit.'Baf. \^6z.
Lex cnim tingeyidi impofita elt, & Forma prarfcripra.
ite (inquir) docere T^ationes, tingentes cas, in nomen Pa-'
tris, & Pilii & Spiritus fan61:i; huic Lcgi collara derini-
tio ilia 5 nifi Quis rcnatus fuerit ex aqua 6c Spiritu, non
intrabit in Regnum Ccelorum : obilrinxit fidem ad Bap-
tifmi neceffitatem. Iraque omnes exinde credcntes, tm-
gebantur.
-T-~ Itaquc
1 66 Infant-Bctptijm
from giving Baptifm to Infants, he fays thus,
Therefore according to every one's Condition,
and Difpofition and Age, the Delay of Bap-
tifm is more profitable, efpecially in Regard
to Infants. For v/bat Neccffity is there, for
Sureties to run any Rifk, fince they may fail
of performing their Promifes thro' their own
Mortality, and be deceived thro' the Untow-
ardnefs of thofe that they promife for. Indeed
our Lord fays, do not forbid them to come
unto me j let them come then, when they
are grown up, let them come when they
learn, when they are taught whither to come,
let them become Chriftians when they are
able to know Chriji. Why doth their inno-
cent Age haflen to the Remiflion of Sins?
Men adl more cautioufly in Secular Affairs,
than to commit divine Things, to fuch as
would not be entrufled with earthly Subltance.
Let them know how to defire Salvation , that
you may appear to give to him that afketh.
If any rightly Underftand the Impor-
*' tance
Itaque pro cujufquc perfens condirione ac dif-
pofitione etiam setate cunitatio JBaptifmi utilior : prceci-
pae tamcn circa parvulcs ^ quid enim neceiTe efl, i'pon-
lores etiam periculo ingeri, qui & ipfi per monaliatcm
deftituere promifliones fuas porfunt : ait quidem ])onu-
nus, nolite illos prohiber'^ ad me venire : vtniant ergo,
dum adolefcuiit, veniant dum difcvint, dum quo veniant,
docentur, iiant Chrifti-ini quum Chriuum node potuerint.
Quid feftinat irnocens xtas ad llemifTionem peccarorum ?
caurius agetur in fcculari'ous, ut cui fubftantia terrena
non creditur, divina credatur. Nonnt petcre ralutem, ut
petenti
No hiSiitution of Christ, i 67
" tance of Baptifm, they will be more afraid
" of the Accomplifliment of it, than the De-
" lay of it. And towards the Clofe of
this Treatife, fpeaking of the ufual jTimes of
adminiftring Baptifm, being at Eafier and tVhit-
jimtide in fome of the Primitive Churches^ he
fays thus; " but every Day is the Lord's, Bap-
" tifm may be had at any Hour, and at any
" Time. If there be a Senfe of the Solemnity,
*' there is no Doubt of the Grace of God. It
" behoves thofe who are entring upon Baptifm,
'^ to be frequent in Prayer, Fafting, and bend-
*' ing their Knees and watching to pray, with
*' Confeffion of all their paft Sins, tha,t they
" may explain the Baptifm of yohn^ of whom
" *tis faid they were dipp'd, confeffing their
" Sins.
Thus upon a fair Examination of thefe Au-
thors^ the Baptifls may juftly lay Claim to the
Suffrage of the firfl two hundred Years. There
is no Infant-Baptifm to be found as approv'd of,
in thefe Authors. But on the other Hand,
there is fuch a Defcription of Chriftian Baptifm,
perenti dediflc videaris. ■ — Siqui pondus imelligant
Baptifmi, magis timebunt coniecurioneni quam dilatio-
nem. cjererum oninis Dies Domini elt, omnis ho-
rvi, omne tenipus habile Baptifmo. Si de folemnitate
imercll, dc gratia nihil refcrt : ingrcffuros Baptilinum,
orationibus crebrLs, jcjuniis (:k geniculationibus, vSc pervi-
ciliis orare, oportct, ik cum confellione omnium retro de-
licl:orum j ut cxponant etiam Baptifmum Joannis, tinge-
bantur, mquir, confitentes d^lida liia, Terttd. Ibid.
p. 710, Til.
M 4 and
1 6 8 JnJanf'Baptif/n
and of the Pcrfons fubmitting to it, and their
Qualifications, together with the Places and
Manner of Adminiftration, as evidently ap-
pears to be inconlillent with the baptizing of
Infants; and to confirm the Matter further,
^ertullian offers flrong and clear Reafons againfl
this Pra(5lice, fo that Infants are by him, exprefs^
lyfaid, to be utterly unfit Subjects for this Ordi-
nance.
The Teflimony of this Father is the more
remarkable in this Cafe, becaufe he was a Pref-
byter of Carthage^ the 'uery City^ where Cyprian
about Fifty Tears afterwards prefided as Bijhop,
and who may well be fuppofed to be one of the
Jirfi that gave full Countenance to Pasdobap-
tifm in Africa^ and the njery firji that openly
pleaded for Perfiifion or Sprinkling in any Coun-
try whatfoever. For, as has been hinted already
in his Epiflle to Fidus, he endeavours to fay
Something of the Time of baptizing lufantSy
but in a poor Manner j and in his Epiftle to
Magnus^ he attempts to give Satisfadion to the
African Chriflians about Sprijikliitg^ for it feems
they were furpriz'd at the Neijonefs of the Prac-
tice, and gave the odd Name of Clitiicks^ to thofe
who were fo baptized^ And indeed 'twas no
Wonder, that the Africajis were affronted at,
and made Light of this Innovation', for it was
a very wide Step of Variation from xhtfitfi In-
ftitution of our Lord^ to make Uje but of 3. few
Drops upon the Head or Face^ inflead of bury-
ing and wafhing the whole Body in Water, But
'tis ftill more amazing, that Gentlemen o^ Senfe,
Probity
No In Bit ut ion ^J Christ. 169
Probity and great Learning in our Day, and in
their full Health and Strength, fhould tamely
content themfelves to have been baptizd after
this Invention of Cyprian, which feem'd to be
an Expedient calculated only for Cripples, or at
leaft for Crazy, Bedrid and dying People.
But upon a flrift View of the Hiftory of
thofe Times, even after the Admiffion ofP^do-
baptijh, yet it was accounted by divers, but an
itidifferefit Thing, which might be let alone.
This is evident beyond Contradiction, from the
Cuftom of the Churches in thofe Days, to ad-
minifler Baptifm but twice a Year, and in fome
Places, but once. This (hews they did not judge
it neceflary, to give it to Infants newly horn.
What I now aflert, is further confirm'd, by
Inftances we have recorded of eminent Men^
who were defcended from Chrijiian Parents,
and yet were not baptized in Infancy. As Gre-
gory Nazianzen. Chryfojiom, Conjiantine, Am-
brofe and Augnfime, What could be the Reafon
of this Omijjicnf 'tis a clear Argument to me,
that the Pirents either were not fully fatisfied
in the Pra entice, or that they laid no great Strefs
upon it ^^ beji. But when Baptifm came to be
urg'd as abfolutely necejfary to Salvation, Parents
were alarm* d and frighten d, this foon fpread
and promoted the Ufe of Pcedobaptifm. And
St. Augufine is obferved to be ih^firfl, who
tranfported by his Zeal againll Pelagius, had
the Boldnefs to broach that defperate Dokrine,
of the Damnation of Infants dying without Bap--
tifm. Thus one Error frequently leads to ano-
ther.
1 70 Infant-Bctptifm
ther. A Perfwafion of the Nqccffity of baptiz-
ing Infants^ foon brought on the Cuftom ofgiv-
ing them the Eucharift. And both thefe PraBices
were founded, on a 'miftaken Senfe of fome Paf-
fages of Scripture. The former^ on that Place
of John 3. 5. except a Man be born of Waer
and oj- the Spirit^ he cannot enter ijzto the King-
dom of God, T^he latter j on thofe Words of the
fame Evangelijl ; Ch 6.53. except ye eat the
Flejh of the Son of Man, and drink his Blood, ye
have no Life in yon. And it feemSj in Courfe
of Time, Things were carried xo fuch a Lengthy
that if an Infant was dangeroufly ill, there were
fome Remains of the Eucharift referv'd ready,
to be given him, left he fhould die without it.
Thus, Suicerus informs us, his Words arc
thefe; " * This Cuftom which was anciently
" received, afterwards prevail'd fo far, efpe-
" cially in the Time of Charles the Great, that
** the Euchariji was given to Infants, not only
^* in the publick AJfembly of the Church after
^* Baptijm, or at other I'imes, when the Church
♦' was wont to come together to the holy Com-
^^ munion', but fome of the £rf<^^ of the Lord's
** Supper vi^as referved, to be given to fuch In-
*' fants as were fck, as well as Adult Perfons.
" '^An-r^
* Mos hie receptus antiquitus, ufque adeo invaluit po^
jflea, maxime Caroli M. Seculo^ ut non modo InfantiSus
JEuchariitia daretur in publico Eccleiice ca:tu poft Baptif-
mum, vel alio tempore, quo Eccleiia ad facratn Synaxin
convenire lolebat : verum etiam panis ccena aflervabarur
parvulis ^grotantibus perinde ac adultis exhibendus. An^
fegifus,
No InBitution of Christ. 171
" Anfegife an Abbot of Leige, who recites a
" Canon of the faid Charles (in the firft Book of
*' the Laws of the Franks, Chap. 145.) pub-
" lifhed on this Account, gives us a very full
** Teftimony of it. For the Words of the Ca-
** mn are theie : Let a Presbyter have the Eucha^
** rift always ready ^ that when any Man is Jicky
" or any Infant is weak, he may immediately
" give it him, that he may not die without the
** Communion^
Such was the Proftitution of this Ordinance
in the Time of Charles the Great 1 who liv'd
about Anno 794. tho' the Seed of this Evil had
baen fown long before, i. e^ in Atigujiins and in
Cyprian's Days j and feem'd to be but the natu-
ral Confequence of Crying up the abfohite Ne-
cejjlty of baptizing Infants,
fegifuSy Abhas Leodienfis, qui Canonem Carolimim^ Lib. i.
• de Legibus Francorum, Cap. 145. fuper hac re editum
recitat, hujus nobis rci teltis locuple;> efle poteft. Sic
enim Canon ille habet: 'PrefbyterF :;: imri[iiam femper h€-
heai faratam^ ut quando %uis infirhmtusfuerit^ aut par-
isidus infirmus fuerlt, Jlatim eum communicet^ ne fine Com-
wunione moriatur. Suiceri Thclaur. Eccles. fub voce
aivci^ii, Tom. 2. p. 1138.
Chap.
172 Injant-Baptifiii
Chap. VIII.
■Mr. Ws charging the Baptifls ivifh novel Prac-
tices and Opinions^ Jhewn to be groundlefi and
frivolous. T^he Vanity a7id XJnfairnefs of fome
. Paedobaptift- Writers 0/ //'i' /^/?v%^, inraiji?ig
Calumnies againfi the Baptijis. T^he Apojiolic
dftd Primitive Church unanifnous for Dippifjg,
Baptijleries with FoJits in them to dip Men
and Womeny eredied in ancient I'imes. Our
Conformity to that laudable PraBice: Divers
^ejlimonies againfi Infant-Baptifm^ long be-
fore the Reformation by Luther md Calvin.
Brief Hi?its of the ^njferings and Char adders
of fome f reign Anabaptifts.
I come now to confider an odd Sort of a
Charge which Mr.W. advances againfi: the
Baptifls, p. 60. viz. " that denying Baptifm to
" Infants, and rebaptizing fuch as were hapt|z'd
" in Infancy, gain'd little Ground till after the
"Year 1522." To which I anfwer, that there
was no need of denying Baptifm to Infants, 'till
Some-body prefented or oifer'd them to be bap-
tized ; as foon as that was done, 'twas denied
them, as I have undoubtedly fhewn from the
Teflimony of Tertullian already cited. For
from the Days of the Apoftles to his Time, we
don't find that any pretended that Infants had a
Right to Baptifm, and confequently they did
not trouble them with it ; and 'tis an eafy Mat-
ter
Mo hf Hut ion oj Christ. 175
ter to {hew, that the Order of Catechument, L e.
the training u p of young (or more aged) People m
the Knowledge and Belief of the Chrifltan Reli-
gton before they were baptized, continued in the
Church for feveral hundred Years after the Apof-
ties. For tho* Infant-Baptifm prevail'd in Africa
and fome other particular Places, yet according
to the Accounts of very learned Men, it was
not generally eftablifh'd, 'till the Fifth Century,
*Tis evident that this was the Cuftom in the
Diocefe of Milan, in St. AmJbrofe\ Time ; and
the Learned * Dr. Allix, who with great Pains
and Exadnefs, had examin'd the State of this
Diocefe, fays, that Si. Ambrofe dAQdAnno i,()y,
after having poffefs'd the See of Milan twenty
three Years. That he baptiz'd upon Catechetic
InJiruBion, his own Words teflify, which arc
thefe. " + Thou waft afked, doft thou believe
" in God the Father Almighty? thou faidft, I
" do believe and was dipp'd, that is, thou waft
" buried. Thou was afked again, doft thou
" believe on our Lord Jefus Chrift, and his Cru-
" cifixion ? thou faidft, I believe and was dipp'd
" again , and fo was buried with Chriji, Thou
" was afked the third Tin;ic, do thou a lib be-
" lieve in the holy Spirit ? thou anfweredft I be-
" lieve, and was dipp'd the third Time.
* Reniarlvs upon the ancient C\\nvch.oi ''Piedmont.
I Interrogatus es, credis in Dcum patrem oinnipoten-
teni, aixifti, credo, Sc merfiili,hoc clt, Sepukus es, L^r,
jimbrof. dt Sacramm, Lib. a. Cap. 7.
174 Injant^Baptijm
But it is not my Bufinefs to defend this trine
Immcrfion, which obtain'd pretty ^ly in the
Church, and is frequently mention 'd by ancient
WriterSj and was mofl certainly pradlis'd by ma-
ny Primitive Chriftians: 'tis abundantly fuffi-
cient to my prefent Purpofe, that here is an un-
deniable Account of baptizing People bred up
in the Principles of Cbriftianity^ and profeffing
their Faith in an open Majiner^ before they re-
ceived Baptifm j and that they were dipfd is ex-
prelly afTerted : nor are the Words of St. Am-
brofe capable of any other Meaning, merjifti
&Jepidtus es -, thou hafi been dipfd and buried.
To confirm this, was there any reafonable Occa-
fion for it, th^ fame Father gives us an exadt Dc-
fcription of the Font or Pool, wherein thefe Ca^
techumeni were dip'd, on the ProfeJJion of their
Faith. His Words are thefe : " * Tefierday we
" treated of the Font of Baptifm^ the Shape of
** which, is, as the Form of a Sepulchre, into
** which, we, believing in the Father, Son and
" holy Spirit, are received, are dipp'd, and rife
" again, that is, are rais'd again.
Now, if any Man fhould have the Forehead
to deny, that Perfons at this Time, and in this
Diocefe, were dipfd, on Profefjion of their Faith,
in the Ordinance of Baptifm, I fhallpity him in-
* Hefterno die de Fonte baptifmatis difputavimus, cu-
jus Species, velnti quaedam Sepulchri forma eft, in
Quern, credentes in Patrem, & Fiiium & Spiritutn fanc-
tum, recipiraur, demefgimur, & refurgimur, hoc eft»
rcfufcitamur, Ambrof. de Sacrament, Lib-. $. Cap. i-
flead
No InBitution c?/ Christ. 175
ftcad of giving him any Anfwer. And thus, it
feems, Things flood at the Period of near 400
Years after Chri/i,
Nor did thefe Things reft here, for the Me-
thod of Catechizing was continued with great
Care and Pains, in order to prepare Perfons for
Baptifm, and commodious Baptijieries were
built for the decent Adminiftration of this Or^/-
nance^ and the Jiated Method of Dipping was
religioufly obferv'd for a very confiderable Time
after the Days of St. Ambrofe^ and may be
trac'd down as low at leaft as the Sixth Century,
And Learned Men obferve, that there are fome
Remains of thefe Baptijieries^ as Monuments of
the ancient Way of Baptizing to be feen in Ital'^
at this Day. They take Notice further that
thefe Baptifteries were without the Church, or
diftin<5l Buildings and Apartments. To confirm
this, I fhall offer the Authority of the late ex-
cellent Antiquary^ the Reverend Mr. Jofeph
Bingham, in his very learned and elaborate
Works, Origines Ecclefiafiicct. Where fpeakino-
of this Cuftom, he has thefe Words, " || So
" that the firfl Ages all agreed in this, that
•* whether they had Baptifteries or not, the
" Place of Baptifm was always without the
" Church. And after this Manner Baptifterie$
" continued to the fixth Age, as appears from
" what Durantus obferves out of Gregory of
j) Via. Origin. Ecckf. Vol. I. Book VHI. Chap. 7.
" Tours,
1 76 Infant^Baptifm
" TourSy that he fpeaks of Baptifleries ftill
" without the Walls of the Church. And
" the Baptiftery of St. John Later an at Rome^
" is ftill after the ancient Models if Durantus
" rightly informs us,
It may not be amifs to obferve to the Reader
in this Place, that there was a real Difference
between a Baptijiery and a Font. The Baptif-
tery was a Building (without the Walls of the
Church) which contain'd the Font. And we
are aflured from the learned Author^ but now
mention'd, that thefe outward Buildings, called
the Baptifleries^ were in fome Places very Lrgc.
His Words are as follow, " * Thefe Baptifte-
" ries were anciently very capacious, becaufc as
" Dr. Cave truly obferves, the ftatcd Times of
" Baptifm returning but feldom, there were
*' ufually great Multitudes to be baptized at the
*' fame Time. And then the Manner of bap-
" tizing by Immerjlon or Dipping under Water,
«* made it neceffary to have a large Font like wife.
** Whence the Author of the Chronicon Alexan-
" driitum^ ftiles the Baptiftery, whither Baji»
** lifcm fled to take Sandtuary, iag>a (pw^^j-Mg/oi',
** the great lUuminary or School of Baptifm.
" And in Venantim Forttinatus, it is called Aula
" Bapti/matis, the large Hall of Baptifm;
" which was indeed fo capacious, that we
" fometimes read of Comicils meeting and fitting
*' therein." — And a little further he adds
* Origines Eccleflafticje. Ibid.
« For
No hiBitution ofCu r i s t: i 7*^
<* for the Baptijieryy properly fpeaking, was the
" whole Houfe of Building, in which the Font
" flood, and where all the Ceremonies of Bap-
*' tifm were perform 'd ; but the Font was only
" the Fountain, or Pool of Water, whereia
** Perfons were immers'd or baptiz'd, &c,
I may now very feafonably remark the plain
AlTimulation there is, in the Practice of the pre-
fent Bsptift -Churches (in Great-Britain, Ire^
land^ and fome of his Majefty's Foreign Planta-
tions) to the laudable Cuilom of the Ancients,
They had their Baptijieries and Fonts, fo have
we in divers Places. There are two in the Vi-
cinity of the great and flourifliing City of Lo?2^
don, the one having its Bafon or Font in a Court
Yard, under the open Heavens, with Conve-
niency for the Flux and Reflux of fair and frefh
Water at Pleaiure j there are likewife fuitable
Accommodations, and difiinci Apartments for *
Mfwand Women, with proper Habits prepared,
to fecure the utmoil Decency and Chrijiian So^
lemnity in the Adminiftration of this Sacred Or-
dinance, Nor are Strangers, Young or Old, if
they behave with Gravity, forbid or prevented
a Sight of the Adminiftration. The other Ba--
Jon or Font, is in the Body of a handfome Meet-
ing-Place; which is ftatedly ufed for Divine
Service. And I know where ibere are Conve-
niencies of this Nature^ in other Parts and
Counties of England, But then I would readily
acknowledge, that where they are not furnifh'd.
with the like Accomfnodations, they do as the
earlicji Chrijlians undauntedly did, i, e, gQ to a
N Eiver
17S' Infant'Baptifm
River, Brook or Pool of fair Wafer, and there
difchafge a good Confcience towards God, in
fubmitting to their Duty in the Face of the Sun;
having the Baptifm of 'John, and of our hord
Chriji in the River Jordan, as a fiifhcient ^«-
//^onVy to bear them out. And it feems tome
clear, that fuch v^as the Simplicity of the Pri-
mitive Chrijiia?2s, that they proceeded in this
plain Way f(A: a confiderable Time after the
Apoftles Days. And perhaps it will be a diffi-
cult Matter to prove that they had any artif^
cial Baptifteries built, in Jujlin Martyr\, or
indeed in I'erfullians Time, about Fifty Tears
afterwards. For the Former talks of leading the
Catechumen, to a Place where there was Water -,
and the Latter juflifies baptizing in Rivers,
Ponds, Lakes ^ or in the Edge of the Sea it felfy
and allures us that the Water of the 'Tiber, was
every way as good as that of Jordan. All this
is evident from the Citations already produc'd
fron;! tnefe Authors. And 'tis natural to con-
clude, that each of them fpoke of the common
and fated PraSiice of the Age wherein he liv'd.
And "now it may be neceSary to make thefe
brief Remarks.
T. Thefe Tellimonies put together are a flat
Gontradi6tion to Mr. JVs ftrange Interpretation
of. the Commifion, as if Perfons were to be bap-
tiz'dfrji without any Inflru5lio7i, and fo be
taught afterwards. The Primitive Church
knew nothing of fuch a Sinifter and rafh way of
proceeding.
2, I ohi^YVQihQ An'i^CQ oi Learned Men iincQ
ihc
Mo InBitutioii of Christ, 179
the Reformation^ in railing fo much Duft, un-*
der a Pretence of finding out the Original of
the Baptijis. What a Pother have our Englifh
Writers of the laft Age, made about this Bufi-
nefs, as if they had never heard or read of Dip-
ping Perfons in their Bapti/m, on Profejjion of
Repentance ! How have Dipping and Blunging
been hooted and ridiciil'd^ as if fuch Things
were unheard of in the World till thefe Two laji
Centuries ! 'Twas not but that fuch learned Gen^
tlemen did underftand Antiquity^ as well, and
better than any of their Neighbours; but how
thick was the Paint laid on, to amufe the Vul-
gar ! as if the Baptijis had fprung from inja'
mous Wretches, whofe Opprcffions indeed, as
well as Enthuliafm, had made them and others
mad, in fome of the Cities of Germany about
Luther^ Time ! could our learned Adverfaries
find no elder Date^ nor a more honourable Stem^
whence they might account for the Extradlion
of the Baptifts ?
Let the honefl Reader impartially look backj
to the Hiftory of the New Tejlament, he will
find nothing elfe there but baptizing by Dipping
in "Jordan^ or other Rivers and Places, where
there was much Water, to anfwer that End,
Again let him pleafe to review the Ages imme-
diately fucceeding the Apojiles, this religious
Cuftom was pun(5tually obferv'd, and openly
confefs'd and couragiouQy defended before the
Emperor and Senate of Rome -, as may be feen in
the famous Apology of fujlin Martyr, referred
to already. Further, would any one be i.hform'd,
N 2 who
i8o Infant ^Bciptifm
who publlckly oppos'd the introducing of In-*
Jant-Baptifm into the Chriflian Churchy 'twas
that gnat Carthaginian Prefiyter (Tertullian by
Name) whofe memorable Writings will be an
everlafting Teflimony againil that unfcriptural,
and (as he will have it) irrational Pra.O:icc, Upon
thefe Confiderations, the Baptijis need not in the
leaft to be afhamed of their Original, nor of the
'venerable Authority upon which they ad:. Nay,
they may venture to vie with their Padobaptiji^
Neighbours, and even challenge them to pro-
duce but a tenth Part of fo good Evidence for
their Pradice.
But I have a Jealoufy that Mr. IF, would
willingly compound with us, and overlook the
earlieft Antiquity becaufe it makes, thro' the
Succeffion of many hundred Years, io dired:ly
againfl himj and fo would fain confine our
View, to the Year 1522; about which Time,
he is willing to acknowledge, that the Baptifts
began to appear. Now, whether it be, that
Mr. IV, only takes upon him to know no better,
or that he is not duely inform'd of the true State
of the Primitive Church, I fliall not pretend to
determine. However I may hint briefly, how
Things flood at the Period which he himfelf
chofes to fix for xh& Jirfi Rife of the Baptijis^
i. e. about the Year 1522.
I. Let it be cbferv'd, that at this Time,
Great-Britain lay in the profound Darknefs of
Popery. And it is worth noting, that Dipping
w^as the general Pradlice, fo that the whole Na-
tion confifted of Baptijis, in this llrid Senfe,
they
No JnBitution of Christ* i8r
they had been all dipfd in their Baptifin. If
any one queftions this, he may fatisfy himfelf
in perufing the excellent Works of the learned
Knight Sir John Floyer^ who proves this Point
beyond Contradidion. A Prad:ice, which con-
tinued in the Church above 1300 Years, but is
at this Day (thro' Inconfideration) laughM at by
half the Kingdom; io wanton and fickle are the
frothy Humours of ignorant Men !
The Precedency which Luther and Zuinglius
got in the Reformation abroad, is but very in-
fignificant ; efpecially fince the Rife of them,
and of the Baptifls being compard, will appear
to be thus: I'hefe began to preach openly againft
the Errors of the Church of Rome, in the fol-
lowing Gradations, viz,
Luther in the Year - - - - - "^S^J
Zuinglius - - - - - - - - 1519
^heBaptiJis -----*- 1522
That this is ajuft Reprefentation of the Cafe,
may be feen from that faithful Dutch Hiftorian
Gerard Brandt; his Words arc thefe, " * The
** Reformation exclufive of Infant-Baptifm, was
fet on Foot in Swiff'erlaJid^ about the Year
1522 by the Zeal oi Conrad Grebeld^nd Fcelix
Maizs, both Men of Learning, who fell out
with Zuinglius about the fald Opinion. But
we are told that this Falling out cofl them very
dear, for the Hiflorian informs us in the next
Paragraph, that, " upon Account of this Dif-
ference, was the firft Edidl againfl Anabap"
N 3 tip.
it
iSs Infant -B apt I Jm
" fijlsj publifhed at Zurich-, in which there
" was a Penalty of a Silver Mark, or two
" Guilders Dutch Moneys fet upon all fuch, as
" fhould fuffcr themfelves to be re-baptiz'd, or
*' fhould with-hold Baptifm from their Chil-
" dren. And it was further declared, that
'' thofe who openly oppos'd this Order, fhould
*' be yet more feverely treated. Accordingly,
" the faid Fcelix was drown'd at Zurich, upon
^' the Sentence pronounc'd by Zuinglius in thefe
'^ four Words, ^li iterum mergit^ mergatur-,
'' that is, he that re-baptizes with Water, let
• • him be drowned in the Water. This hap-
*' pen'din the Year 1526. but about the fame
^' Time, and fmce, there were more of them
*^ put to Death: A Procedure that appear'd very
** flrange to fome." Strange indeed ! and very
meknchoUy Times! that a Proteftant and a
J^inijier too, fhould proncunce a barbarous and
inhuman Sentence upon his Brother^ fer difput-
ing againfl /«/^;z/^-B^//i/;/7 : a Thing which at
beft, has but fome dark Tradition to fupport it.
For there is not ont Jingle Text in the whole Bi^
hie that will plainly warrant it, and many Pa^
dobdptijis confefs fo much.
But if 'MvJF. will judge of the Truth of
Opinions and the Soundnefs of Parties by their
exifting or not exifting about the Year 1522. I
am afraid that the Proteftant P^eligion it felf,
will iland but a poor Chance in his Efleem.
And that he will be much puzzled to defend the
Orthodoxy of the Reformation. For I have ob-
ferved already that Great-Britain lay faft afleep,
within
No InBitution cfCn ris t. 183
within the dark Curtains of Popery, to fhade off
the Light of the Gofpel from Chining into it, as
yet. And it was about this Time, that Henry
the Eighth, Khtg of England acquir'd from the
Pope the 'Title of Defender of the Faith, for
writing againft Luther and the Reformed Reli-
gion. And pray, is it not a common Queftion
for Papijis to put to ProteJiantSjVjh^vQ Vf2i%your
Religion before Luther ? and is it not common
for tile Proteftants to anfwer, truly, it was in
the Bible. The Appiicatio'fT is eafy, if Mr. W.
afks, where was our DoBrine before 1522 ? We
anfwer, 'twas in the ISIew Teftament, in the
CommiJJion of our Lord and elfewhere, and will
remain there as long as the Earth remains.
'Tis fo interwoven in the Pages of the Gofpel ,
like Phidias^ Shield in the Statue, that it can't
be eras'd, having the San6lion of a fpecial Pro-
mife oi Chrifl\ Pre fence with thofe who accord-
ingly fubmit to their Duty, alway even to the
End of the World.
But left Mr. W. fhould be too much elated,
and look down upon the.poor Baptift-Congrega-
tions in England and Wales, with Contempt,
by over-rating the Seniority of his own Denomi-
nation, and undervaluing theirs, it may not be
improper to give a (liort comparative View of
their refpedive Standings. Every Body knows
that the Church of England feparated from the
Church ofKome, in the Reign of Kifig Edivard^
the Sixth, and in the Beginning oi ^leefi Eliza-
beth's. And tho' the Purita?is of thofe Days
difagreed to many of their ways and Ceremonies;
N 4 yes
! S4 Infant-Baptism
yet the different Orders of Dijfenfers^ under the
prefent Denominations, did not fake Rife till
fome Years afterwards And according to the
elaborate Examination of the Reverend and
Learned Mr. Neal, their gradual Succeflions
3\ ill appear thus, *
The firft Englijh Presbyterian Church was
conftituted Anno - - 1573
V\r^ Independant •> - - 16 16
Fird Bapti/l - - - 1 640
If there be any Miftake in thefe Calculations
1 fhould be glad and thankful to be better in-
form'd. Nor can I difcern what Improvement
may be made of any pretended Antecedency of
Date, in this Cafe. For if Mr. /F. fhould
think he has fome Advantage over the Bapti/is
in this Point, the eftablijifd Church has the
like over him. But if that fhould be thought
of any Service, *tis plain thete were fome Exile-
Anabaptifis in England in Henry the Eighth's
Time, as is evident from Brandt's Account.
His Words are thefe, " -f In the Year 1539 there
*' were put to Death at Delft, one and thirty
f* Anabaptifis, that fled from England-, the
l[ Men beheaded, and the Women drowned.
About this Time the Perfecution was very fe-
yere againfl them abroad, and they hoped to
«^ Mr. Neal's Hifl. Pur. Vol I. p. 301. Vol. II. p. icg.
^ Eiandt's Hift. Refon Vol. I. B. 3 p. 77.
find
No InHitution of Christ. 185
find more favourable Quarters in England, but
it feems they were greatly njiilaken. F05
King Henry the Eighth had drawn up with his
own Hand, a little before this fell out, a very
hard F rote jl ag^iinii them and Pelagia?2s in parti-
cular. The Article runs after this Manner.
** * That Baptifm was a Sacrament inftituted by
<' Chrifiy that it wasnecefTary to Salvation, that
«' Infants were to be baptiz'd for the Pardon of
*" Original Sin, and that the Opinions of the
* Anabaptijis and Pelagians were deteflable Hc-
^ relies.
So that thefe unhappy People being difap-
pointed of a peaceable Settlement in Ejigland,
were forc'd to try the Event once more abroady
but their Lot was according to the known Pro-
verb, Out of the Frying-Pan into the Fire.
However 'tis certain that there v/as a fepa-
rate Congregation, form'd of foreign Atiabap-
tijis in London in the very next Reign. So Brandt
affures us. *' f that in the Year 1553, the
" LoW'Country ExileSy who in the Time of
« Edward FL had gathered a Congregation at
" London (which upon his Death v/as difperfed
" by ^een Mary) after a dreadful Northern
" Tourney in which they fuffered fo much from
" the Luther afis, found at Wifmar two diftind
" Communities oi Anabaptijis.''
I defign no more by thefe Things, than to
* Mr. J^eaW Hift. Pur. Vol. I. p. 22.
t Hift. Refor. Vol. I. Book IV. p. i04i
1 86 InfantSaptiJm
convince Mr. JF. and others that Anahaptifm
has the Precedency as to Date, of either Presby-
tery or Independeficy in this Nation. And to
argue for the Soundnefs of Principles in anv
Party upon fuch a Foot, is a poor way of Rea-
foning. I would obferve further that the true
Occafion why the Englijh Baptijls could no
foonerform themfelves into Societies, was, be-"
caufe of the violent Perfecution of Puritans of
all Sorts : And the Baptifts could expedl but the *
ieafl Favour in thofe Times, becaufe they dif-
fer'd from the EJiablifiment in a Pointy where-
in others did not. However, there were Num-
bers of this Perfwafion, long before they could
fettle in feparate Congregations j this is evident
from the judicious and learned Capt. Richard
DeaUy in his Letter to the late Right Reverend
Dr. BarloWy Bijhop of Lincoln, who, by the
Way (whilft in his private Station at leaft) was
no Enemy to the Baptift-Principle. The Let-
ter has thefe Words, " * I have been inform'd
" by credible Perfons of fome of this Sedl be-
** ing in your Lordfhip's Diocefe, in and long
^* before the Reign of King James the FirJ't.
" And I have feen an humble Supplication (re-
" printed Anno 1662, with another fhortTrea-
" life, entituled, Perfecution for Religion judged
and condemn d, but before printed, Anno 1620.)
*^ prefented to King y antes, and the Parliament
" then fitting, which fets forth among other
i^/;x, Ibid, p^ r88. 1^1.
O a '^hi*^
ig6 Infant-Baptijm
Albigeois^ has thefe Words, " * I cannot deny
^ that the Albigeois for the greateft Part were of
" that Opinion (/. e. againfl Infant-Baptifm) and
'* that which confirms me yet the more in the
" Belief of it, is , that in the Hiftory of the
" City o^ Treves J there were fome who denied
** that the Sacrament of Baptifm was available
" to the Salvation of Infants. And one Cathe-
" vine Saube, who wzs burnt at Montpellier in
** the Year i4i7for being of the Mind of the
** Albigeois, in not believing the Traditions of
** the Romijh Church, had the fame Thoughts
" concerning hifaiit-Baptijm. " The
** Truth is, they did not rejed: this Sacrament,
'* ot fay it was ufelcfs, but only counted it un-
" neceflary to Infants, becaufe they are not of
" Age to believe, or capable of giving Evidence
** of their Faith. Upon which Mr. Stennet
leaves his Remark, in thefe Words, *• that this
*' Hiftorian who was a Pcedobaptijl, and who
** fays he collected this Hiftory from two an-
'^ cientManufcripts, one o1 which was written
" in the Languedcc Tongue, and the other in
" Gld French, declares himfelf convinc'd that
" the grcateft Part of the Albigeois were againfl
" hifant-Baptifm,
Mr. Stennet further adds out of Caffandcr's
Preface to his Book of Infant-Baptifm, that this
Principle Vv^as imputed by that learned Author
to Peter de Briiis and his Difciple Henry^ from
* Mr. Stmnen\ anfwer to RuJJen, p. 82, (^3.
whom
No InBitution ^-f Cm r i s t . 1 97
whom the Fetrobrufians and Henriciam took
their Name, the Words of Cajfander, in fpeak-
ing of their Dodrine, are thele, * " Which
" Herefy firft openly condemn'd Infant-Bap -
« tifm, and ftifly afferted that Baptifm was fit
** only for the Adult, which {Bo5lrine) they
« both verbally taught, and really pradifed in
" their Adminiftration of Baptifm.
Ifhali tranfcribe one Inflance more from
my late learned Friend, Mr. Stemiett, and that
is of Prafeolus, who fpeaking of the fame Peter
de Brill's, fays, f " He averted that Baptifm
" was ufelefs to Children, who wanted the Ex-
" ercife of Reafon, becaufe Infants, who want
" the Ufe of Reafon, can't have Faith, fo as
« to believe the Word of God when preach'd
« to 'em, which he afferted to be abfolutely ne-
" cefTary to every one who fubmicted to Bap-
" tifm J fo that if any one fhould be baptiz'd
<' without previous Faith, he faid his Baptifm
«' would be of no Ufe to him. This Author
♦ Qu» Hxrcfis prima Infantium Baptifmum aperte
damnavit, & adukis tantum convenire, & verbis docen-
do, & re ipfa baptizando, pcrnaciter afferuit. Gcorg.
Caffand. in Prsf. fib. de Bapr.Inf. Apud Stenn. p. S3.
f Aflerebat autern hic Parvuiis ufu ranonis carentibus
non prodciTe Baptiima, quod Parvuli qui funt rationis cx-
pertes, fidem habere r.equeant, nee Dci vcrbo, quod il-
lis prcedicatuni fuit, credere hoc autem affeverabat fum-
me forenecefiariurn cuicunque Baptifma fakipienti : adeo
fane ut fi quis fine prcevia fide Baptiliiia fufcepiflet,
nihil ei prodciTe Baptiitna diceret. 'Fyateol H^ref. Iy»
14. cap. 18. & L. Z- c. 7. Jpui Stenn. p. 85, 84.
O 2 charges
19^ Injant'Baptifni
charges the fame Opinion on Henricus the Dif-
eiple of Peter de Bruis.
Mr. Stennett has immediately fubjoined this
ObfervatioHj viz. That thefe Perfcns lived i?t
the 1 2th Century after Chrijl^ &c.
It may not be improper now to return, and
to fliew how thefe brave People (the Waldeji-
fes) difieminated their Principles^ and maintain^-
ed their Rehgion, thro' unheard of Cruehies
"which they chearfully underwent for Confci-
ence Sake ; and they became the more famous
by the Accefficn of the Difciples oi Peter WaU
do, who agreed very much in their Opinions
with the more antient Eiibalpini^ and the Inha-
bitants of the Valleys of Piedmont. I have al-
ready obferved from Dr. AUix^ that this Ac-
cefTion of Numbers gave a Handle to fome
pop'ifh Writers and others, to reprefent them
as the very fame People ; and indeed the Simi-
litude of their Name, as well as their Religion,
gave fomething of a fair Colour to this Pre-
tence j whereas, in Reality, the Vallenfes exifted
long before the Valdenfcs or Waldenfes^ if an-
cient Records may be depended upon. However,
it pleafed God eminently to blefs Waldo and his
Followers, and to fpirit them up to ftand as
faithful Witneifes to very important Truths,
in Oppofition to the fcandalous Corruptions of
thofe ignorant and licentious Times. Mr.
Brandt J^td^m^ of Waldo^ fays, " * The Succefs
*Brandt'sHifi.Pve£ Vol. L B. L p. 12-
he
<(
No InBitution of Christ. 1 99
« he met with, and the Number of his Fol-
•c lowers were Co great in a ^f Space of T.me,
<■ that the Clergy pronounced hun =i Hereuck
.' andraifedfuchaPerfecution agamft thofe of
- his Perfuafion, ^s difpers'd them into f.eal
Parts of Europe, and even filled the Nether,
lands (whithe/ he himfelf alfo fled) wuh Re-
■• fugees. They were not only ftiled Ifa-
" deljh (or Vaudoh) from their Leader, btt
•■ likewifethe Poor of Lyons, ovUontfts Abtj
" gen/k, Angennenfers, Touhfrs BuJganan
«• pLrds, Weavers, FerfeBifls, ^umfP,hi-
.« fabbatates, Cathari, or Gazarilh,C,nenafds,
" or Caignards, Frcfons, Dulans, LoUards, lur-
" lupinel Paterines. PtpUes, Popehcm'S, Pub-
«' licans Paff-agim, Petrobrufians Henrman^
.' yofephines Arnaldijis; and afterwards aho,
«■ FrJtresBoheml,^nAHuptes: All which 4-
■' pellations were beftowed on thera.either trom
•■ fhe Country or Place where their Opinions
" prevailed, or from fome Crimes of which
" fhey were accufed; or laftly, from fome Body
" or other that had profefs'd t^ie fame Prui-
" ciples, either before or after Waldo ; for
" feme think it very certain, ^YJc)Zl
"felf learned thefe Doftrlnes firft from fome
« of the People inhabiting the mountainous
" Frontiers of Erance, &c." , r i?
'Tis very natural to iudge from thefe Ex-
preffions, that the Author intended the Fron-
tiers of Fra7?c^ bordering upon /?j/v, and loo..-
ins towards iv;t'5y. So that according to this
Account, Peter 'Waldo is reprelented as having
O 4 '"^
(C
i|feoo Infant-Bciptijm
as having derived his Religion from the Inha**
bitants of the Valleys of Piedmont. What I
obferve further, is, that they v^ere called Fra-
ires Bohemi and Kuffites^ which fhews that their
Religion was introduced amongft the ancient
Bohemians. I have already hinted that Dr. u4I-
lix allows this, and that there were fome of
them who made light of hifant-Baptifm, I
fhall only add a {hort Paflage or two from him
to this Purpofe. His Words are thefe, " * The
^' fame Inquifitor whofe Extrad: I have but
" now given, gives us an Account of the Man-
" ner how the Bohemians^ who were a Colony
*' of the Waldenjes managed their Controvcrfies
"" with the Church of Rome^ &c. In another
Place he fays thus, " Now becaufe the WaU
" denfes being driven into Bohemia^ have con-
-' tinued there feveral Years, it is but reafon-
^* able for us, with fome Attention to take a
'* View of the State of thofe Churches j this,
'* as on the one Hand, it will give us a jufl:
" Idea of the Purity of [that Spring, from
'* whence this Rivulet was fupplied with Wa-
" ter, &c. And a little lower, he mentions
one of their Errors as charged upon them by
the aforefaid Inquifitor, viz. " Concerning the
*' Sacrament of Bapcifm, they fay, that the
*' Catechilm fignifies nothing j that the Abfolu-
" tion pronunced over Infants fignifies nothing ;
*' that the Godfathers and Godmothers do not
*' underiland what they anfwer the Prieft.
Dr, ^lUXi ibid. p. 21 l, 214., 221.
I Oiall
No JnBitution ofCiiRvsT, 201
I {hall conclude the Citations of this Nature
with a judicious Obfervation of the late Re-
verend Mr. Beftjamin Stinton, on an Extrad of
a Letter preferv'd by Cohmejius^ but wtitten to
Erajmis out of Bohemia, dated OSioher lo*
15 19, in which an Account is given of a Sed:
then in being, and which had been in that
Country for above 90 Yerrs. The Letter delcribes
'em, among other Things to have aded thus,
" ^ Such as come over to their Sed, muli
" every one be baptiz'd anew in mere Water ;
" they make no bleffing of Salt, nor of the
" Water, nor make any Ufe of confecrated
" Oil." Upon which Mr. Stinfon makes this
Remark, ^hat this Defcription does almojl in
every T'hing Jit the Modern Anabaptifls, efpe-
■cially thoje in England, and gives them a better
Right y than any other ProteJiantSy to claim
ihej'e People for their Predecejfors.
Now let any one impartially examine thefe
Accounts, and confider the Evidences offered
from Gundidphus's Time, in the Year J025, to
Er ajm us' sDsiys 15 19, and the Appearance of
Falix Ma?2S in 1522, and the Witneffes fucceed-
ing one another, and who feemed to be no Fa-
vourers of Infant-baprifm, will fill up the Space
of near 500 Years before the Reformation ob-
tained by Luther and Calvin. I may add to this
Confideration, that the Baptijleries in the Man-
ner defcribed already, to dip the Catechumens
I Colomejius's Collc(5lion of Letters of Men of Note,
Ep. 30) Mr, St hi tons MS. before me,
in
202 Jnjard'Baptifm
in their Baptifm, fubfifted till the Sixth Centu-
ry ; and if the intercurring Centuries between
the fixth and the tenth Age, were almoft bu-
ried in the Obfcurity of the Ignorance and
Barbarifm of thofe Times, *twas no new Tbincy
that befel the Church of God. Did not Mofes
fee the Bufh all on Fire, and yet it was not
confumed ?
Did not the Prophet Elijah complain that
the Body of the Je-wiJIo Church had forfaken
God's Covenant, and that he was left alone to
witnefs for him ? but the Lord anfwered that
he had a fecret Referve of Seven I'houjand in
Ifraely all the Knees which had not bowed unto
Basl. There is fome good Ground to believe
that it was thus, in regard to Gofpel-Baptijm,
even in the darkefi Ages of Chriftianity.
But I muft return to take fome Notice of
what Mr. W. has aflerted, p. 60. viz. that the
pernicious Principles of Nicholas Stock (the
Man's Name was Stork) and Thofnas Muncer
maintained bj them and their Followers^ occaforid
fnoji of thofe grievous ^'roubles this Nation felt,
in the Times of the late TJfurper Oliver Crom-
well. The Principles he tells us, were fuch as
Community of Goods, Multiplicity of Wives, the
Lawfulnefs of propagating their DoBrine by the
Sword, and that pernicious Principle of Domi^
nions being founded in Grace. Here I deiire to
know, in whom thefe Principles appeared ?
There were no Germans of this Sort that came
over hither to ad: under Oliver Cromwell -, the
Munfierian FaBion both of ^^//?/?j and Pcedo-
babfifls
No Inflitiition of Cur i st, 203
haptifls had been dead and buried above an hun-
dred Years before this Time.
There were no Britijh Baptijis, that ever en-
tertained, or at^n oi Roufen, and earned away to L# ; a-
Song thofe-^ was John Dejwarte, a Minifter.
^°th his Wife and four Sons. The two young-
Tfi of his Children not being at home when the
■ Luifitor hrokc into the Houfe, were warnd
bv the Neighbours to efcape ; but one of them
faid to the other. Let us not Jeek to fave our
reives but rather die -with our Father and Mo-
iher In the mean Time they carried the Fa-
ther' out, who feeing his Sons, faidthusto em
Will ye go alfo to the New Jerufalem? One of
them who was fcarce Sixteen, cried, Tes, we
220 Infant'Baptifm
will. Father: and fo they furrendred them-
felves. Together with them, two other Per-
fons of the fame Perfuafion, who happened to
be in the Houfe, were likewife feized as alib
two married Couples, and one fingle Woman •
all which, (except one Woman that^ recanted)
and a Man that called out to them and com
^ forted them, were at feveral Times burnt at
Ltjle.
But I have already exceeded the Bounds I at
firft propofed to my felf ; now thefc fhort Me^
moirs, which I have faithfully tranfcrib'd are
out of Mr. Brandt' % firft Volume of the Refor-
mation : where, any one may fee a great many
more Inftances to this Purpofe. For I have
carefully told over Five hundred and Seventy
odd Perfons {all Anabaptifts) who were put to
Death, merely on Account of Religion ; ex-
clufive of, and in Contradiftindion to, any who
fuffered as chargeable with Treafon, Rebellion
Sedition, &c, nor have I reckoned into the
Number, a whole Affembly of thefe People
which was betrayed at Rotterdam in the Year
1544 3 for I could not make an Eftimate of
them : But all that were caught of thefe were
executed. Upon a fair Computation then this
Scantling of Anabaptifts, who fuffered abroad
m and about the Low Countries, for their Re-!
liglous Principles, amounts confiderably to
above the highefl Number of thofe, of what-
foever Denominations, who v/^vt put to Death
m
No JnBitution (?/ Christ. 221
in England, on Account of the Reformation.
What I further obferve, is, that in the Judg-
ment of Chriftian Charity y there appeared in
thefe. not only equal Firmnefs of Mind, and
the Traces of a good Spirit, but they had
fuch divine Tranfports, and folid AfTurances
before their Exits^ as eminently attended our
glorious Britifi Martyrs,
The Conclusion.
It now only remains, that for Form's Sake,
I (hould take Notice of the laft Objection, as
ftated by Mr. W. which is this, P. 61. We
are often told, that Baftijm is of no Ufe to
Children^ that they are not any Tubing the
letter for being baptized. To which he an-
fwers, that he hopes to make it appear, T!hat
Baptifm, if duly improvd, is of real Service,
without fuppofing it abfolutely necefjary to Sah
nation. And to which I reply, that there
being no Argument from this Place to the
End of his Book, only Expoftulations with,
and fome Hints of Inftrudion given to, Pa-
dobaptijisy I am no farther concern d therein.
"XheEndoJ the Anfwerto Mr. Fowler Walker,
( 223 )
ANIMADVERSIONS on the
Reverend Dr.Jdomas Ridg/eysDiC-
courfe of Injant-Baptifmj in his Se-
cond Volume of Divinity, publifh-
ed jdnno 1733.
INCE every private Member in a
Commumty has an undoubted Right
to judge, of what is oflFer'd to the
Publick, there needs little or no
Apology for this Undertaking. It
may be fufRcient for me to affure any Gentle-
men, to whom I may be an entire Stranger,
that, 'tis not any inward Pleafure I take in
Religious Conteils, nor any Secret Thirft I
have to engage in Difputes with Men of
diftinguifli'd Characters, that induc'd me to
make the following Refledtions : If the Rea-
der would know the Motives, they are thefe.
Having fometime ago fccn the Reverend Dr.
Thomas Ridgley's firft Volume of Divinity, I
was defirous to perufc the Second -, and as I
fincercly
2 24 Auimadverfions on a T)iJcourJe
iincerely profefs a great Refped: for that excel-
lent Gentlemen's Perfon,and heartily agree with
him in the moft important Truths oiChrifii-
anityy fo I unfeignedly wifh good Succefs to
his pious Labours both from the Pulpit and
the Prefs, fo far as I have Reafon to efteem
*em confiflent with the Scriptures of Truth.
When I found in his fecond Volume a Dif-
fertation on Infant-Baptifm^ I promifed my
felf a View, as in Miniature^ of what might
be faid upon that Subjed, reprefented in the
flrongeft Light. The Author's known Acu-
men of Judgment, his great Acquaintance with
Books, and confummate Skill in the Contro-
verfies of the Age, farther heighten'd my Ex-
peftation ; nor am I difappointed in the Peru-
fal : For I think, that this Learned Gentle-
man has fuggeiled full as much as can be,
and more than ought to be advanced ,
in Defence of that Pradice. And hav-
ing fome Sheets of my own at that Time in
the Prefs, upon the fame Subjed, in Anfwer
to fome Books difpers'd in Wales^ I thought
it but juft and reafonable to confider all the
Arguments I could meet with in my Way.
When I have faid this, I apply my felf with-
out Lofs of Time to examine his Ground-
work 5 for 'tis not any eafy Matter to pitch
upon a proper Foundation, whereupon to raife
the Superftrudure of Fcedobaptifm. And 'tis
eafily obferv'd, that the moft learned Advo-
cates of this Doctrine differ, in chufing their
Mediimy and often change it, in their De-
bates upon this Head : and even at beft, 'tis
but
of Inja?2t'Bapti[7?i. 22^
but an accumulative Proof, (partly from un-
certain Antiquity , and partly from remote
Confequences, and thefe artfully intermix'd
or elaborately amafs'd togethery) that is offer'd
in Evidence in this Caufe. But the learned
Doctor has varied from a great many, and if*
I apprehend aright, he does not fcruple to
make Natural Religion the Bajis^ upon which
he wouXdhmXd Infant-Baptifm. Accordingly^
when he enters upon the Proof of this Point,
he lays down this Preliminary, njiz, That it is
the indifpenjible Duty of Believers^ to devotit
themfehes^ and all they have, to God j which
is founded in the haw of Nature, and is the Re-^
fuli of God's Right to us and ours, p. 408. In
^QW Lines further we are told, That, this is irt '
a pa^'ticular Manner to be applied to our Infant-
Seed, whom it is our Duty to devote to the Lord,
ai we receive themjrom him. This looks like
giving up all Claim to Revelation, as infuffi-
cient to fupport thisPradlicej and he confef-
fes, that this Affair is not contained in fo ma-
ny exprefs Words in Scripture 5 and introduces
the learned Dr. Light foot, as alfo owning the
like Silenceof the Scripture, as to this Matter,
p. 413. Notwithftanding thefe ConcefTions,
he does not refign circuraftantial, confequential,
and comparative Reafonings and Evidences, as
he thinks deducible from Revelation : So that
'tis upon this mix'd or aggregate Foundation
he proceeds, and forms this Propolition, viz,
'That Baptifm, in the general Idea thereof is an
Ordinance of Dedication or Conjecration of Per-
2 26 j4uimadverftons on a T)i[coUYJe
Jons to God, .p. 408. Bat being' very fenfiblc
that a material Objedlion would follow this
Propofition dole upon the Heels, therefore he
was obliged immediately to attempt the re-
Jnoving of it : The Reafoning in this Paragraph
feems to me to be fomewhat involv'd, if not
perplex'd : However, he informs us, that what
he would more diredly affert, in Anfwer to
this Objedlion, is, T'hat Baptijm is an Ordi-
nance oj Dedication, either of our fehes or c-
thers ; provided the Per/on who dedicates, has
a Right to that which he devotes to God, and
can do it by Faith. Upon this Propofition all
the enfuing Dedu(9-ions and Arguments depend,
and upon this Balis, the whole Strefs of Infants
Right to Baptifm, is laid. Part of my prefent
Bufinefs feems to be, to examine whether Pee-
dohaptifm, according to this Propofition, is not
rather built upon Natural than Reveal'd Reli-
gion. And,
1. I readily allow that Baptifm is an Ordi-
7iance in the common Acceptation of the
Term, i. e. 'tis appointed of God.
2. I agree, that it is an Ordinance of Dedi-
cation, from the Nature and Manner of its
Inftitution : Hitherto we jointly proceed
on the Foot of Revelation. But,
^. I abfolutely deny that 'tis an Ordinance
of Dedication, either of our j elves or others 5
here we take our Leave oi plain Revela-
tion
of Injcmt-Baptifm. 227
tion, and launch out at once, upon the
hazardous Bottom of either Fancy or pre*
tended Reafon. For, where has God
given Intimation in any Part of his
Revealed Will, that any one Man^
has Authority to dedicate another
(whether hifant or Adult) to him by
Baptifm ? The Reverend Dodlor is too
well vers'd in the Maxims of Theology ^ and
too nicely skill'd in the feverer Rules of
hogtc and Ratiocination^ not to know, that
from Natural Reafon to inflituted Wor-
{hip, Is! on valet Argumentim, And if we
take in the Sahatotj Claufe in the Words
immediately following, provided the Per-
Jon who dedicates has a Right to that mohich
he devotes to God^ yet this Do(5trine, even
with this Provi/o, cannot be defended :
For a Mafter has an undoubted Natural
Right to an Infant-Slave, which he has
fairly purchas'd or procur'dj but the
Queftion is, whether he has a Right to
devote him by Baptifm to God ? I do
not fuppofe the worthy Dodlor will avovr
this for Orthodoxy.
And yet I mull own, he goes a great Length
towards it, in this, and in the following Para-
graph , where he fays thus , When I do, as it
were, pafs over my Right to another, there is
nothing requird in order hereunto, but that I
can lawfully do it, confidering it as i:iy Property :
Here we have the Bufinefs of Padobaptifm
Q^ quite
2 28 AnimadverJJons 071 a T)iJcourfe
-quite taken off, from any Dependency on Re-
velation, and plac'd upon the Foot of Natu-
ral Right. But whether the Argument wilt
bold good in this Cafe, from Natural Right to-
FaB, I muft leave for all judicious and impar-
tial Readers to determine. Nor can I difcern
at prefent, according to the Dodor's own Pro-
t)ofition, but that the Infant-Slave honeftly
purchafed, may come in, as well as the Infant-
Seed, for this Proxy-Dedication. I am fure ac-
cording to the Rules of Circumcilion, he has a
Right, he ought to come in. If the Doctor
thinks he has no Dire6lion in Regard to the
■ Slave^ I would ask him, where has he any bet-
ter Diredion in Regard to the Infant F If he ia
afraid of Will-w^orfhip in the one^ how will
he o"et clear of it in the other ? If it be natu-*
ral Right without the Guidance of Revelation,
that gives a Title to this Sort of Dedication,
then he may certainly venture upon the Jhr-
mer as well as the latter,
I choofe to offer this, not only becaufe 'tis
a parallel Cafe, but becaufe 'twas patroniz'd
■by St. Aujlin in the primitive Church. I fhall
only give a fhort Paffage out of the learn'd
Mr. Bingham^ and refer the Reader to fee Things
more at large, either in him or in St. Aujiin;
whofe Words are thefe, * This Grace is fome^
times
* AliquariJj Filiis inSdelium prjeflatur hsc gratia ut
baptiz-entur, cum occulta Dei providenria in mar.us Pri-
orum q[uoniodocunque peveniunt. 'rUig. de Grat. &Lib.
ArbJt.Cap. az. Tom, 7. p. 5^7. "' Vi-
of InfmUBaptifmi 229
times vouchfafed t^ the Children of hifideh, that-
tkey are baptized^ ivhen by fome Menus thro\
the jeer et Frovidence of -God^ they happen to
come into the Hands of pious Chrijlians. " Some-
** times they were baught or redeem'd with Mo-
" ney,fometimesmade la\yful Captives in War,"
** and fbmetimes taken up by charitable Perfons
" .when they were expos'd by their Parents. In-
" all. which Cafes, either the Faith or Promi-
" its, of the SponforSj or the Faith of the Church
" in general, who was their common Mother,
** and whofe Children they w^re now fuppos'd
" to be, was fufficient to give them a Title to
•* Chriftian Baptifm."
And indeed I can't fee, that there is any
better Scripture-Warrant for dedicating Infant-
Seed, than Infant-Slaves, in this Sort of Bap--,
tifni.
But there is another reftraining Claufe in the
learned Dodlor's Propofition, upon which, if I
rightly judge he mail lay confiderable Strefs,,,
'uiz. "That the Per/on who dedicates another by ■
Baptifm, miifi doit by Faith ^ p. 409. And as
to this, I would, .offer thefe following Confix
derations. i ;
I. If he means true Faith, then there are
but few Infants who are truly baptized: For
none can have the Faith which is^of the Opera--'
_« ■ , -- ■ , --x
Vidcas multos non offerri a parentibus, fed etiam a'
quibuslibct Extraneis, ficut a Dominis lervuli aliquaiidb^
oftcruntur, &c. Ejufd. Ep. a 3. ad' Bonifac. apUd Biti^"
bam. Orig. Eccl, Vol. I. p. 485. y .
Q 3 tm
!S^ jhiffi^dverfons on a T)i\coiir^e
ihn of God, the Faith of God's EleB^ but thofe
CiiXy who are God's peculiar People. So that
tipon the whok, there is not fuch a wide Dif*^
ference between the worthy Doftor's Judg*
ment and ours, in this Cafe ; we fay, that lid
Infants at all ought to be baptized, and he will
admit only thofe of true Believers : If it be
not true Faith which he intends, then all In-
fants have an equal Right to Bapt fm Whofe
Parents are Nominal ChrifiaJis. And fo this
provifional Claufe comes to nothing.
2. True Faith was not required, of old, in
dedicating Infants to God by Circumcifion .*
the Infants of wicked and irreligious Jews had
a Right to it, as the Seed of Abraham j nay,
Infants born in his Houfe, of what Seed fo-
ever, were to partake of this Ordinance. And
if true Faith be required under this Difpenfa- >
tion, to dedicate l;y Baptifm 5 then the Reve-
rend Ajfembly of Divines and Dr. Ridgley, have
curtailM the Privileges of the Gofpel, and mad^
'em a great deal lefs, than thofe of the Law j
which is an Argument the Fdedobaptifts (the
Dodor has not omitted it) dr^ very foiid of
turning againft the Baptijis.
But I can't forbear wondering, that this
learned Gentleman, fhould lay himfelf fo open
as he does, in^ the enfuing Paragraph, It fol-
lows from the laji Head, that Fare/its mho^
have a Right to their Infant -Seed, may devote
thetn to God in Baptifm, provided they can do
i$ by Faith ; and therefore a ProfeJJion of Faith
is only necejary in thofe who are active, in this
Ordinance,
of Injant-Baftifm. 231
Ordinance^ not in them that are merely pajjive '
^his we are obliged to mai?itain againji thof
who often intiraate that Children are ijot to b^
baptized y bee ail fe they are not capable of believ
ing. The Reiult of this Way of Reafoning Is
a fair Conceffion, that the Vcedobaptifh are o-
blig'd to maintain a Dodlrine which is not
maintainable by Revelation: And the taking of
xhisPofiulatum for granted, is no other than
downright begging of the Queflioii in Debate ;
which no Man will allow to be a legal Mq-
thod of difputing : And from this fummary
View of the worthy Dodlor's Scheme and Way
of proceeding, we may difcern, that he does
not pretend to build Infant-Bapttfm upon
Scripture, but upon a certain Train of De--
dudtions and Argumentations which cannot be
made good from any clear Revelation. An^
yet the Point he contends for, is a pofifive Inr^
Jlitution of the New Tefament, a Matter that
depends folely on the Will of the Law-giver,
?nd without whofe Authority, we ought not
to take one Step about it.
II. As to his fecond Argument, which is
this, T^he Right of the Infant-Seed of Believers
to Baptifnjy may be farther provd^ from their
heifjg capable of the Privileges fignified therein :
and under an indifbenfible Obligation to perform
the DutieSy which they^ who dedicate them to
Gody make a publick Profefjion of as agreeable
to the Defign of this Ordinance, p. 409.
There is nothing in this Pofition, nor in the
Piflindions precedent and fubfequent, that
0^4, " fbouid
232 ^Animddverftons en a X'ijcotirfe
fliould hinder this Dodrine being applied, to
an Infant- Slave fairly purchas'd : for the Slave
■when dedicated by his Maimer, in Baptifm, is as
capable every Way of the Priviledges of it, as
the Infant-Sccd of the faid Mailer ; unlefs the
Dodor v^^ill fay, that the Infant-Seed is more
fufceptive of Divine Grace, than the Extras
fieous Slave. And if he aflerts this, it will ef-
fedualiy deftroy the very Notion of fovereign
and free Grace in our Salvation. But I would
ask, Was there not as much Reafon to hope,
that Abraham {hould have religious Servants
after they were circumcifed, as that his Seed in
iPdmael and his Fofterit)\ {hould attain to the
Privileges intended by Circumcifion ? The E-
Vent (hews that he had good Servants j witncfs
that Religious Man train'd up in his Houfe,
who was fent to obtain Rebekah for Ifaac. But
there is no great Reafon to boafl of any Good-
pefs that appear'd in Ifhmael.ov in his Pofterity.
Befides, if Chriftian Mafters would follow
the Pattern of Circumcifion, which they all
pretend to, (the Dodor among the reft) they
fhouldtake their unbaptiz'd Servants and dedi-
cate 'em by Baptifm, as well as their Infant-
Seed. For Abraham took all, young and old^
and made them fubmit to Circumcifion, as foon
as ever he found that God had commanded it.
If this be jhe Pattern after w^hich we are to
copy, why don't the Pcedobaptiffs conform to
it? If it be not the Pattern, then they muft
confefs, that they go to work in the Dark, as
their Fancy leads them, without any Divine
BiredioDo The
of Infant'BctptijnL 233
The Truth of it is, they are willing to re-
tain of this Bufinefs of Circumcilion, as much
as will ferve their Turn at prefcnr, and leave
all other Confiderations belonging to ir, as an-
tiquated Ufages that may be caft away at Plea- .
fure. Whereas if the Laws of Circumcilion
are to be obferv'd in Baptifm, why are they
not all religioully perform'd ? if they are abo-
lifh'd, why are fome of them reviv'd, and fo
zealouily pleaded for ? Butif thefe Things were
not abfolutely necefTary to give fome Counte-
nance to a Practice, which is not fo much as
once mentioned in all the New Teilamenr, the
Circumfiantiah of this abrogated Ceremony,
would not be fo much infifted upon.
III. His third Argument is taken from the
Promife of God to Abraham, I will eftablijh
my Covenant between me and thee^ and to thy
Seed after thee, to be a God unto thee^ and to
thy Seed after thee, p. 411.
I anfwer, that tho' I have faid already in the
Third Chapter of this fmall Treatife, more
than I exped: to be fairly anfwer'd upon the
learned Doctor's Principles ; however I fhall
add thefe Particulars.
I. That this Promife in the formal Manner
it was made to Abraham, and in the Senfe which
the Padobaptifls urge it, is never refum'd in
the New Teftament. Or in plainer Words,
God has no where promifed to be the God of
the Natural Seed of Believers under the Gof-
pel. He has promifed to be their God and their
Father y and that they Jhould be his People^
and
234 Animadverficns on a Dijcourfe
and Sons and Daughters -, but he has laid him-
felf under no Engagement to take in a Succef*
ilon of their natural Seed. On the other hand,
he has left himfelf at full Liberty, tq call in
whom he pleafes. And when the Apoille, ^^s
2. 39. made ufe of the Argument of the Pro-
mife of the Spirit, to prefs his Audience to re^
pent and be baptizd, 'twas to the Jews diredlly,
that he fpoke ; the Promife is to you and to your
Children^ or Pofterity : But when he turned his
Thoughts to the Gentiles, the Language is
changed, 'To them that are afar offy even as ma-
ny as the Lord our God jh all call. 'Tis not
faid, jTo them that are afar ojf, and to their
Children or Seed in the Stile of the Abrahamic
Covenant ; but to as many as the Lord our God
fJoall call J from what Blood or Kindred he plea-
fes. This Dodlrine is confirm'd throughout
the New Teftament ; God is no RefpeSier of
PerfonSy but in every Nation he that fear eth him
and worketh Righteoufnefs is accepted with him^
Aars 10. 34, 35.
The Reverend Dodor, in the Sequel of his
Reafoning, makes ufe of a Method that de-
ferves more llrid: Notice ; for in fpeaking of
the Words already cited, A£ls 2.39. A7ui t$
them that are afar off^ that is, fays he, the Gen-
tiles, who might claim this Promife when they
beltevdy whom the Apojlle calls elfewhere Chil-
dren of the Promife as Ifaac was, /. 41 1. Her?
I would obferve.
I. That if the Dodor means, that Believers
of the Gentile Race, may lay Claim to the Pro-
mife
cf Infant^B^ptifm. s^^
mifeof the Holy Ghoft, which kthc c^jief, if
not the on/y Promife fpoken of in this Chapter,
and intended here, I ag'-ee with him.
2. If he means that individual Believers a-
mong the Gem ties, are the Children of the Pro^
mife^ according to GaL 4. 28. which he cites
in the Margin^ I agree with him again, and
fo does the Scripture in general. Bur,
3. If he means that the natural Children
defccnding from thefe Gentile Believers, are
the Children of the Promife^ to their refpe(ftive
Parents, as Jfaac was to Abraham^ I utterly
deny it, and 'tis groundlefs to affirm any fuch
Thing. And yet I cannot guefs what he aims
at, unlefs it be fuch an unaccountable Thing
as this. 'Tisnot only unwarrantable, 1)ut .ri-
diculous to pretend, that ordinary Infants in
cur Day, are Children of the Promife^ to their
feveral believing Parents, as Ifaac was to A-
braham. Neither can I help taking the learned
Doctor in this Senfe, from what he roundly
declares in the Paragraph immediately follow-
ing. T^hefe who are filled before Converfon^ a
People afar off, were after it reckoned the fpi-
ritul Seed ^Abraham, aJid fo had a Right to
the Blefjings of the Covenant y that God would be
a God to them ; and by a Parity of Reafon, in
thejame Senfe in which the Seed of Abraham
•were the Children of the Promife, the Seed of
all other Believers are to be reckon dfo, &c. Now I
I can't conceive of any Senfe, in which this Pro-
pofition may befaid to be true ; there are divers
Refpedls in which k wiU appear not to. t>e fo :
for
33^ Animadverfions on ajDifcourfe
fbr "twas Ifaac, as given by Prbmife in an ex-
traordinary Manner to Abraham^ and as an emi-
nent Type of Chriji, and of all the EleB and
true Believers in him, that gave Rife to thefe
Phrafes, the Children of the Promife^ and the
fromifed Seed fo often mentioned in the Gofpel :
and if none but the Eledt of God, and true Believ-
ers, and thefe only, are called the Children of the
Promife, in the Language and Senfe of the New
Teitament, and that the Infants of Gentile Be-
lievers, as fuch, are never filled nor reckon'd
fo J then the Dodlor's Propofition muft be ab-
folutely falfe. What will further confirm that
' which I now infifl upon, is, that the unbe-
lieving Defcendants of Abraham thro' IfaaCy
are exprefly faid, not to be the Children of the
Promife, Rom. 9. 6, 7, 8. For they are not all If-
rael, which are of IfraeL
Neither becaufe they are the Seed of Abraham,
are they all Children : but in Ifaac fiall thy
Seed be called.
T^hat is, they which are the Children of the
Plefh, thefe are not the Children of God : but the
Children of the Promife, are counted for the
Seed.
Gal. 3. 29, For if ye be Cbrif's, then are ye
Abraham* s Seed, and. Heirs according to the
Promife.
Chap. 4. 28- Now we Brethren, as IJaac was,
are the Childreii of the Promife.
From thefe and other Places, I argue, that
unbelieving Jews, tho' of Ifaac s Lineage are
not.
of hifafit'BaptiJm. 237
not, in the Language and Senfe of the Gofpel,
called the Children of the Promife. And that
only the EleB cf God and true Believers^ are
ftrid:ly fo meant, and fo called ; and that the
Infants of Gentile believing Parents never go
under that Chara<5ler, and 'tis an Abufe of the
Phrafe, and of the Import thereof, to iHle them
fo.
'Tis added farther, that, in the fame Se?jfe
in which the Seed of Abraham were Children of
. the Promife, the Seed of all other Believers are
to be reckoned fo, till by their own A5i and Deed,
they renounce this external Covenant-Relation^
p. 411. But it fhould be firil proved, that
the Infants of believing Parents among the
Gentiles, are in fuch a Covenant-Relation to
God, before v^e are formally told of their Re-
nunciation of it. This is the Point before us.
We abfoluteiy deny that there is any fuch
Thing under the Gofpel j and confequently the
advancing of this Dodrine is merely prefump-
tive and unfcriptural ; 'tis calculated purely
to maintain Pcedobaptifm. And what is fup-
pofed of thefe Infants, and indeed often comes
to pafs, as they grow up, viz, their renouncing
their Covenant-Relation, is, incompatible with
the State of the proper Children of the Promife.
And the Reverend Dodor knows and believes
this : For the Scripture fays, The Foundation
of God ftandethfure, &c. and again, T'he Pro^
mife isfure to all the Seed, i. e. to every //?-
dividual of the t7'ue Children of the Promife.
Therefore, I urge,, that to attempt to ulher in,
the
238 Animadverfons on a T)i^ course
the natural Offspring of Gentile Believers, uh-
der the folemn Character of the Children of the
Fromife, is an unwarrantable Alienation oi the
Intent of thofe Expreffions, and againft the
Meaning and Spirit of the New Teftament.
4. I obferve that the Learned Dodtor has ta-
ken a great Deal of ingenious Pains, to defend
the celebrated Dodrine oi federal Holinej 5 ; and
I return him my humble Thanks for fo doing ;
for it having pafled fuch a Hand, I do not ex-
pe6t it fhoiild be much mended by any other.
And as I never could form any Conception of
it Under the New Teftament, fo I am now bet-
ter fatisfied than ever, that there is nothing in
it. For he fays, That he does not intend^ whe?i
he /peaks of the Infants of Believers^ as an holy
Seed J that they are internally regenerate or fane -
tifed from the Wofnb, but that they are includ-
ed i7i the external DiJpQnfation of the Covenant'
of Grace^ p. 411. Here I think the learned
Dod:or has Recourfe to a ftale Set of unmean-
ing Terms : For I never could as yet prevail
with any Body to explain, what is intended by
the external Difpenfation of the Covenant of
Grace, as limited to the Infants of Believers,
rather than to others. If by it is meant, that
they have a Right to Ordinances, 'tis a fruit-
lefs begging of the Queftion in Debate ; if it
be any Thing elfe, I delire to know in plain
Words what it is. Are not the Infants of irre-
ligious Neighbours under the external Difpen-
fation (in this City for Inftance) as much as the
Infants «f Believers ? Are not the Doors of
Churches
of hifafit-Bctptifm. 239
Churches and of Places of Worfhip open, equal-
ly to inftrud each of thefe, in the Knowledge
of the true God, as they grow up to Years of
Underftanding ? Are they not born under the
fame external Difpenfation of the Gofpel ? I
readily acknowledge, that the Prayers and pri-
vate Inftrudtions of pious Parents, are very great
Privileges to their Children ; but what are
thefe Things to make up a federal HoUnefs f
Is there any greater Aptitude or natural Incli-
nation in the Infants of believing Parents, than
in others, to be truly religious ? If the Doc-
tor will affert this, *tis affirming fomething to
the Purpofe, provided it can be prov'd. But
when he ferioufly refleds upon the great Licen-
cioufnefs, and dark Degeneracy among the ri-
fing Generation of the prefent DifTenters, he will
have no great Reafon to build upon this pre-
tended y^^^r^/ Holinefs. The greater is the
Pity, and the more is the Cafe to be lamented,
they wofully fwerve from the exemplary Piety
of their Anceflors ; many of them are very in-
different what Form of Religion to take up,
and whether any at all. -f*
But 'tis added, 7 hat God muji befuppofed t$
have a greater Regard to them than unto others,
who are Jli led unclean J p. 411. Now, becaufe
the Word Believer , is, by the Propagation of
the Gofpel, become a Sort of an ambiguous
I See the Reverend Mr. j4. "Taylor^ Sermon in Lime-
Term,'
^4^ Animadverfiom on a 'Dijcoiirfe
Term, it may be neceflary to explain this Mat-
ter a little, A Believer, at the firft Promul-
gation of the Gofpel, was one who acknowledg-
ed the true God, and profefTed Faith in the
Mejjiah, in Oppofition to an Infidel, i. e. an
Idolater ; but a Believer in the common Ac-
ceptation in our Day, is one who has zheFalfb
oj the Operation of God ^ or the Faith of God's
BileSl, in Contradiflincliori to a Nominal Chrifti-
an, who /'ftriftly fpeaking^ has only a notional
Faith in the Exiftence of the true God and
Chrift. I defire to know where the Children
of thefe merely Nominal Chriftians (who in
Reality muft be Unbelievers) are ftiled Un-
clean f as the learned Dodtor exprefTes it. If
they are no where called unclean^ then they
muft be clean or holy in his Senfe, for there
is no Medium in this Cafe. And we are not
fpeaking of Children between a Chriftian and
an Idolater, as was the Inftance of the Apoftle,
I Cor, 7. 14. but we are fpeaking of Children
between Nominal Chrifiian Parents ; if thefe are
clean and holy, then they have as much Right
to Baptifm upon this Foot, as the Children of
the flriftefl Believers, who have the Faith of
God's EleB. Therefore the Senfe of the Re-
verend AfTembly of Divines, and of theDoftor,
mull be, that the Infants of Nominal Chrifti-
ans have an equal and undiftinguifh'd Right to
Baptifm } unlefs it be faid, that their Claim
rifes or falls, as there feems to be more or lefs
Religion appearing in the Parents, which I
think^ is trifling with the poor Babes to a great
Deeree,
of Infant 'B apt ijm. 2 4 f
Degree. And I have obferv'd already, that the
Infant of a gracelefs Jew, had as much Right
to Circumcifion under the former Difpenfation,
as the Infant of the hoi left Man in the Land ;
and fo have the Infants of all Nominal Chrif-
tians an equal Claim to Baptifm, or there is
nothing in the Pretence of Fcedobaptifm in ge*
neral. I add further, that when the worthy
Dodor fays, God miifi be fiippofed to have a,
greater Regard to the Children of true Believers
than to thofe of Nominal Chrijliam ; as I have
fairly ftated the Diilinction, this Proportion is
not defenfible ; for both Scripture and Expe-
rience contradict it j in fhewing that, the Chil-»
dren of ignorant and profane Nominal Chrif-
tians, are thro' fovereign Grace, often efFe^lu-
ally called ; when fometimes on the other Hand,
the Children of True Believers (and that in the
beft Judgment of Charity) are fuffered to go
on in Sin. Therefore this preferable Regard^
fo much infifted on, whatever it be, is not
worth mentioning, as a difcriminating Charac-
ter of any Sort of Infants among us, to give
them a Title to Baptifm.
I muft not difmifs this Head, without tak-
ing fome Notice of the Holinefs mention 'd by
the Apoflle, i Cor. 7. 14. Elf'e wene your ChiU
dren unclean^ but now they are holy j becaufe
it is thought the ftrongefl Ground in the New
Teftament, in the Efleem of divers great Men,
for the Defence of Padobaptifm, And I ob-
ferve,
R I. It
242 'Animadverftons on a T)i[courJe
1. It cannot be 7^ic'//7j HoUnefs of Seed, that
is intended here j for the Jewijh Holinefs con-
fifted in the lawful IlTue of a JewiJJj Man, and
a Jewijh Woman : But if a Jewijh Man coha-
bited with a Heathen Woman, and even mar-
ried her, to have Iflue by her, yet that was not
accounted the holy Seed : as may be eafily feen
in the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah,
2. The Apollile fpeaks here of a Heathen-
Couple, the one converted to Chriflianity,
and the other remaining an Idolater ; affuring
them, that if they did not part wilfully, their
Difference in Religion need not part them at
all. Now this is far from being like the Jew-
ijh Holinefs ; for that did flridly forbid their
intermarrying with Idolaters; nay, they were
obliged to put away their Heathen-Wives,
even after having Children by them. So that
there is no rational Proportion between thefc
two Points ; and therefore it cannot well be
fuppofed, that the Apoftle fliould make ufe of
the Expreflion, with any View to this federal
Holinefs of the Jewifh Kind.
3. If a Jewiffo Man and Wife parted upon any
Score that could not bejuftified, their fucceed-
ing Children by any others, would be unclean
and unholy^ by the Law of God. Rafh Divor-
ces being fuch Things as God never approv'd of;
and what our Saviour condemned in the Jews*
And this feems to be what the Apoflle was
laying before the Corinthians^ as if he had faid,
" Should a Man obilinately put away his Wife
« upon the Account of Religion, when flie is wil-
!* ling
of Infant'Baptifm. 1243
" ling and defirous to abide and live honeilly
** with him -, or fliould a Wife wilfully depart
** from her Husband, when he civilly and af-
** feftionately entreats her to abide in her con^
" jugal Relation, the one or the other being
*' guilty in this Cafe, the future Children had
*' by any others, would be accounted unclean ; '*
Nay there was a double Mifchief attended fuch
a Separation ; not only the fucceeding Children
born to the guilty Perfon by another, would
be fure to be unclean, but alfo their Childrea
had before this Separation, would be in Dan-
ger of being reproach'd as infamous : for the
World would be ready to pafs a very hard Sen-
tence upon the Offspring of fuch Parents, as
play'd fail and loofe with their Marriage-State ;
nor would fuch a Cenfure be pafs'd withouir
fome Colour of Reafon : For the ufual Dif-
tind:ion in all civiliz'd Nations, between Chil-
dren born in Marriage and out of Marriage, has
always been, that of clean and unclean : there-
fore, 'tis no wonder that the Apoflle in this
Place, fpeaking of Marriage (not of Baptifm)
fhould conform himfelf to the common Mode
of Speech, in calling Children cleaji or unclean^
holy or unholy^ according as their Parents either
kept together, in the honourable State of Ma-
trimony, or parted at Pleafure, as unclean Peo-
ple do, after they have liv'd together in a vile
Manner for fome Time. And indeed holy Ma»
tritnony is a known Phrafe in the Englijb
Tongue ; and the Scripture-Terms run much
upon this Strain, as for every one to know how to
R 2/ pojcji
244 Animadverjions on a Dijcourfe
poffefs his Vejfel in SanBiJication and Honour*
Marriage is hotiourable in all^ and the Bed un-
defil'd. Thefe PalTages illuftrate arid juftify the
Apoftle's Didion and Phrafeology in i Cor. 7.
14' without having any Manner of Regard to
either, the Baptijin^ or federal Holijiefs of
Children, in the leaft.
'Tis very obfervable alfo, that after the
learned Dodor had trac'd this Bufinefs by a
nice and skilful Difquifition, he was not able
to fix a determinate Idea to it. But having re-
prefented it in the Negative, he is loth to come
to any pofitive Conclufion ; and yet he fays,
^tis not a Word without an Idea ^ffix'd to it,
'Therefore (he adds) we muji underjiand thereby,
an HoUnefs in the Iqwefi Senfe of the Word, asr
Children are f aid to be an Heritage of the Lord,
and the Fruit of the Womb his Reward.
I cannot readily difccrn any more in thefe
Texts, than that it is the abfolute Prerogative
of God, to give or deny Children to married
People. And if this be the Sum of what this
Matter amounts to, then divers of the moil
ignorant and profane People in this Nation,
have as large a Share of this Bleflieg oi fede-
ral HolinefSy as any the mofl religious Families
among us. And thus it feems, this Priviledge,
pretended to be deriv'd from Father or Mother
only, to the Children, upon a clofe Examina-
tion and Purfuit of it, difappears like a Phan-
tome, and dwindles into nothing.
On the other Hand, I mufc freely acknow-
ledge, that lean form a fatisfadory Concep-
tion
' I j» - ^ _
of Infant^Baptiffji: 245
tion of the Ahrahamic federal Hoiinefs. For
God fingled out Abraham and his Poflerity,
from all the Nations of the Earth ; to be to
him a chofe7i People^ a peculiar T^reafiire. He
allotted them a noble hereditary JPatrimony,
granted them fignal Privileges and Immunities,
took 'em under his fpecial Tuition, gave 'em
holy Lavi^s, fuch as w^ere given to no other
People, and order'd them to keep themfelves
diftinft and feparate from all other Nations, by
marrying purely among their own Tribes, that
the holy Seed might be preferv'd entire. But
there were very important Reafons for this Sort
oi federal Hoiinefs ; for the Mejjiah was to come
out of Abraha?n\ Loins : Nay farther, Abra-
hanty and his Seed thro' Ifaac^ were typical of
Chrift and the Eleci under the New Teftament.
Here is a vifible Foundation for eftablifhing fe-
deral Hoiinefs in the Houfe and Lineage of A-
braham. Befides, God had determin'd to raife
out of the Seed of Abraham^ not only a large
and a powerful Nation, but alfo 10 ered: to
himfelf a very glorious Church, wherein there
appear'd extraordinary Men, Fatriarcks^ Pro-
phets and Kings, eminent for Hoiinefs.
Now, I would ask, where {hall we ftnd the
Perfon or Perfons, the Family or Families, the
Nation or Nations , with whom God has en-
ter'd into Covenant, or t^-s^AiihtQ Jederal Ho-
linefsy after the Abrahamic Model '^ Where,
and to whom was there a 'J'ransfer made of
this federal Hoiinefs^ to be deriv'd from Father
10 Son, as 'twas in Jeivi/h Line ? I perfuade
R 3 my
S46 Animadverfions on a J)iJcourfe
my felf, that no Diftincflion of Men will open-
ly avow, that this Bufinefs is confin'd to lome
particular Societies. This would be fuch a bare-
lac'd Afrumpti6n> and indeed a Violation of
Chriftian Charity, net to be overlook'd by o-
ther Denominations. But if it be faid, that this
federal Holinejs was tranfmitted from the fews
to the Gentiles in the Lump, upon their Con-
verfion by whole Nations to Chriflianity j if this
be the Cafe, I fay, then Infant-Baptifm ought
to be fupported upon a National Foot, as Cir-
cumcifion was among the JewSj i. e. allow'd
in common without Exception to all the Ifrael-
itijh Families. And indeed Padobaptifm feems
to me a more rational Pradice upon this Plan,
than upon the odd Method fix'd by the Reve-
rend AfTembly of Divines, and defended by the
learned Dodor, in diftinguifhing Families in a
Chriftian Nation into Believers or Unbelievers ;
and then to be fometimes forc'd to fubdifting-
uifli again, between the Parents, the one be-
lieving and the other not believing (tho' both
thefe formally own the fame God and Saviour)
before their Infant's Claim to Baptifm can be
fecured. I add, that if it be fljfly infifted up-
on, that xhh federal Holinefs under the Gofpel,
is confin'd only to Believers in the ftridefl: Senfe,
(i. e. the Eled) thefe Confequences muft un-
avoidably attend it.
I. That 'tis a very nice and hazardous Point
to baptize Infants 5 for, who knows what their
Parents are ? Since a Hypocrite often makes as
fair an outward Shew, as a real Saint.
2. This
of Infant-Baptifm. 24*7
2. This Dodrine mufl fuppofe the Eled to
beget Eledt, and that there be a Succeflion of
them 3 or it cannot be a permament Thing :
For if the immediate Children fhould prove
wicked Men and Women, then the Infants of
the third Generation have no Right to Baptifm;
uniefs you will go back over the Heads of the
proper Parents, to the Grand-father or Grand-
mother, to prove their Claim to it. If it be
faid, that 'tis fluctuating ond tranfient, from
one Family to another j this renders it, a ililt
more difficult Task, to find out the myfterious
Nature of this fleeting federal Holinefs among
the Geniiles. Whereas the Thing was lineal
and fuccefllve in the Nation of the Jews.
3. 'Tis not only certain, but obvious, that it
comes to pafs in the Methods of Providence,
that the Children of very indifferent, nay,
wicked Parents, are themfelves iavingly con-
verted; or, in plainer Terms, become true
Believers. Thefe being defcended from fuch
Parents, had no Right to their Baptifm in
Infancy ; for there was ViO federal Holinefe in
the Cafe ; how then can their Baptifm be
jullified ? Either they had a Right to it, or
they had not ; if they had, I would fain
know upon what Ground : for it feems it
can't be defended upon the learned Doctor's
Principle ; becaufe he requires, that one of
the Parents, at leafl:, fhould be a true Believer,
in order to baptize the Children. If they had
not a Right to it, how can it be valid ? Or'
ought not thefe Perfons rather to be baptiz'd
R 4 after
$4^ Animadverfwns en a i)ijcourfe
after a due Manner, upon their own perfonal
Profeffion of Faith ? I chofe to put this Cafe,
becaufe 'tis what frequently occurs to us in
our Baptifl-Congregations.
So that the plain Truth feems, to me, to
be this ; When the Jews rejeded the MeJJiah,
God was pleafed to diflblve, or at kail to
fufpend his Covenant with them for a Time.
From that Period all federal Holinefs ceafed, or
departed from them. But the blefled God
has not thought fit ever fince, to enter into
any fuch Meafures with others, fo as to en-
gage with any other Perjon, Family or Na-
tion^ to fecure a Succeffion of People to him-
felf, as he had done till that Time, out of
the Lineage of Abraham, He does not ftand
fo related now to any People upon Earth ;
nor does this federal Holinefs fubfift in any
Blood or Kindred at prefent, that we know
of ; much lefs is it defigned to be the Founda-
tion of Gofpel-Baptifm. The New Teflament
has furnilhed us, with exprefs and ample Di-
redlions, how and to whom we are to admi-
nifter this Ordinance, without having Re-
courfe to fuch a dark, and indeed unintelli-
gible Schenie j| efpecially upon the learned Doc-
tor's Principle. And yet as groundlefs as this
Pretenlion of feminal or federal Holi?iefs
iecms to be, I ani fenfible, 'tis very plaufibly
urg'd ; and by help of the skilful Refinements
Sti learned Men, in the lafi: and prefent Age,
it proves one of the mofl engaging Motives,
for many aifedionate Parents to give Baptifm
to
of Ififant'Baptifm. 249
TO their Infants : For herein they are made to
belivc, that they Hs-xid as fmaller federal Heads,,
and in fome Sort of Imitation of the great
Patriarch Abraham.
There are but few Things more,' in Re-
gard to the Subjedls of Baptifm, which I
ftiall take Notice of.
I. We are told, that the Lord's Supper is
hijlitiited in the Room of the Pa [[over, and thut
baptifm comes in the Room of Circumci/ion, p.
414, Now fuppofing this might be allowed
in the general, without any Difficulty, yet it
cannot be admitted in the particular Appli-
cation of Circumilances. The Padobaptijis
themfelves will not agree to it. As for In-
i^ance, the Infants of the fewifi Families, were
to partake of the Paffover j 'twas their Rights
and the Duty of their Parents,as far as I can fee,
from the Inftitution of it, to admit them to it.
For I think, 'tis no difficult Matter to prove,
that the Child ten of their Families, did eat of
the FalTover, as foon as they could eat Flefh
and Bread, which is known to be pretty early,
and long before they come to Years of Under -
ftanding. For this was the plain Rule, They were
to take a Lamb either for one ivhole Houfe, or
for two adjoijiing HotfeSy according to the Num-
ber of the Souls, accordijtg to their Eating, they
were to make Count for the Lamb. Exod. 12.
Now, if the Padobaptifts will not conform to
the Rules of the Paffover, in bringing their
Infants to the Lord's Supper, why fhould they.
unrea-
250 Animacherficfis on a 'Dijcourfe
unreafonably expert us to bring our Infants to
Baptifm, according to the Rules of Circum-
cifion ? If it be faid, that there are peculiar
Qualifications requir'd for the Lord's-Supper ^
we urge with equal Reafon, that there are pe-
culiar and exprefs Qualifications requir'd for
Baptifm.
2. As for the Baptifm unto Mofes m the Red-
Jeay p. 113. there are but few People, of true
Judgment, who will take it'Jna literal Senfe ; 'tis
an Allegory, and the Apoftle only alludes to it.
And the learned Do(5lor himfelf feems to be
of this Opinion, when he agrees with Dr.
Ligbffiofy in fuppofing, Tba^ the whole Con-
gregatiofz, of which the Infants, which they had
in their Arms, were a Part^ were folemnly de^
vofod to God at that 'Time ; which he cannot
but conclude to be more agreeable to the Senfe
ef the Word baptize , than that which fome Cri-
ticks givCy who fuppoje that nothing is intend-
ed'' by it, but their being wet, &c. p, 413.
Bu/ I have fhewn already elfewhere, that no
Man can prove that the Ifraelites were wet,
fo much as in Regard their outward Garments 5
much lefs is it probable, that their little In-
fants, tenderly wrap'd up in their Parents Arms,
ffiould be expofed to the Daihings of the
Waves. The Ground of this Miftake feems
to be this ; fome Writers have hadily conclu-
ded, that 'the Pafi^age thro' the Sea, v/as, but
as a Lane of few Feet wide; and that both
the Cloud and the Sea drop'd upon the People
as
oj Infant-Bctptifm. 251
as they went] along. Whereas the Scripture
fays nothing of either of thefe Incidents • but
declares the contrary, that they went as on dry
Land and that the Waters were as a Wall to
them on the Right Hand and on the Left. And
whofoever will duly advert to the Number of
Perfons that pafs'd, Exod 12. 37. they are faid
to be Six hundred 'Thou/afid on Foot, that were
Men, befides Children ; and a mixd Multitude
(of Egyptions, or others, who followed them)
went up alfo with them j and Flocks and Herds,
even very much Cattle. Now let any confide-
rate Man judge, what Front fuch an Army
muft make in their March, and to perform it
in about Twelve Hours ; for they had but one
fmgle Night to go thro' the Sea ; as may be
feen by a careful Reading of the Hiflory : How
extenfive then muft their Front be, to facilitate
and expedite the Motion of fo many Hundred
thoufand Men, with their Women, Children,
and mere Infants, in Proportion -, together with
their Flocks, Herds and Beafts of Burden for
their Baggage, &c. All thefe Circumftances
duly weigh'd, the Opening of the Sea, muft;
in all Reafon, be fuppofed to be feveral Fur-
longs wide; and I think it can't well be ima-
gin'd, that the Daftiings of the Waters reach'd
the Center of this vaft Army ; much lefs did
the Wet affed: the tender Infants, who, to be
fure, on this Occafion were moft carefully fe^
cur'd by the indulgent Parents. But if it be
ftill urg'd, that the Sprinklings of the Waves,
and Dflfiings of Sea did reach the very Center
252 Anhmdverfions on a T>ifcourje
of this huge Multitude, then I alledge, that
the Ranks v/hich were nearcft the Sea on both
Sides, on the Right and left, were in a mifer-
ably wet Condition : And what I affirm further,
is, that this Suppolition flatly contradidts the
Scripture ; For 'tis faid^ the Children of Ifrael
walked upon dry Land in the midjl of the Sea,
But the learned Dodtor feems to have a fingular
Notion of this Haptifm unto Mofes, when he
tells uSj T^ioat the Apojlles Meaning is, that the
whole Congregation was baptized i?tto Mofes , foo^t
after they were delivered from the Egyptians,
while they were encamfd at the Sea-Jhore, p.
414. But as this is a mere Conjecture, and no
where grounded in Scripture, I am not concern-
ed to refute it. As to the Cloud in this Tran-
facftion, it confifted of a dark and a bright Side';
the dark hinder Part might break in a Tempefl
upon the Egyptians, as appears from FJ'alm jj,
ij, but the bright Fore-part, was a fiery, fhin-
ing and comfortable Guide for the Hebrews, in
their Night's Journey. So that I apprehend,
'tis invpofiibie to prove any literal Haptifm from
this Inftance. But I fhould think, 'tis a very
remote and improper Way of attempting the
Proof of Infant-Baptifm, in any Senfe whatfo-
ever.
The learned Dr. Lightfoot is introduced as
having taken a Method to account for the Si-
lence of the Scripture, as to the Matter of P^-
dobaptifm, 'viz. That Baptiffn was well enough
known to the Jews, as pradfijid by them, under
the
oj Infant'B^ptifm. 253
fh^ Ceremonial LaWy p. 413. T^he Reverend Br,
Ridgley declares him/elf of this Opinion^ p.
414 Now, I defire to know (and my Requefl
is but very reafonable) where the PafTage is,
in the Ceremonial Law, which fhews that God
had inftituted fuch a Baptifm. If there be no
fuch Paflage to be found, as I am well fatis-
fied there is not, with what Delign can thefe
learned Gentlemen pafs their Authority and
Credit from one to another, to make the com-
mon People believe, that fuch a Baptifm
was appointed of God under the Ceremo-
nial Law ? If it be faid, that the Jews did
pradtife it, whether it was of God, or
thcmfelves ; this is fo far from mending
the Matter, that, in my Opinion, it makes it
much worfe : For "^tis , in Effect , char-
ging our Lord Chrift with having borrowed
Gofpel-Baptifm, from a fuperftitious Invention
of the Jews j and a greater Reproach, I think,
cannot be deriv'd upon this Ordinance. So that
in what Light foever we take this Affair, ic
bears no good Face. Befldes there are fome
very ancient Writers among the Jews, who al-
together deny this Pradice, as Rabbi Eliezer
for Inftance, and he is thought to be of the Side
of theiir^rr^/,or Scripturarians,and confequently
may deferve greater Credit. And the learned
* Sir 'Norton K?iatchbiill, mentioning him and
i. 161. of this Trea-
tife. The fmall Tafte which wc have of it,
feems to dired: us to that. Now, I defire any
impartial Reader to confult the Place, and he
will find there is no Regard had to Infant-Bap-
tifm. But on the other Hand, there is a fair
Account of their admitting Perfons to Baptifm
upon Profeflion of Faith, after Cateche-
tick Inilru(ftion ; and of their leading of them
where there was Water, in order to baptize
them. Jiifitn upon this Occafjon, had the fair-
efl: Opportunity imaginable to mention Infant-
Baptifm, had any fuch Thing been pradlifed
in his Time. For he profefles that he related
their Cuftom in an honeft and undiflembled
Manner : So that I conclude that this Citation
alfo is of no Ufe at all to the learned Dodor.
The next Authority that is offered, is that
of Irenceus 5 but there are feveral Things may
be urg'd to the Difadvantage of this Evidence.
'i. Some learned Fcedobaptifis have queftion'd
the Geauinnefs of this Chapter, and Cardinal
Bm-'onhis.
of Injcmt'BaptiJm. ' 259
BaJ^onhis, in particularj thinks 'tis fpurious*
For the latter End of it contradicts the Begin-
ning, and makes our Saviour near 50 Years
of Age when he died. The late learned Dr.
Gale infifls upon this very juftly againft Mr.
Wall y that if an Author appears to be noc
only inconfiftent with himfelf, but alio to op ^
pofea Truth fo well known, as the Age of our
Lord when crucified, fuch a one's Teftimony
is not much to be depended upon, in that Pare
of his Works at lea ft : and it looks as if an
unskilful or defigning Tranflator had a Hand
in corrupting this Chapter.
3. Since the whole Strefs of the Pa(lage in
this Argument, between the Pcedobaptijis and
us, depends upon the Meaning of the Word
Rcnafcuntur, I fliall tranfcribe the Words of
IrenceuSy as far as they are neceflary to give
Light in this Affair. Speaking of our Lord
Chrift-, as having arrived at Years of Maturity,
and having become a Teacher ^ and having pafs'd
thro' the previous Stages of Life, he fays,
" * Sandlifying every Age thro' that Liknefs
" which it bore to him. He came to fave all
*' by himfelf j all, I fay, who are born again
* Sed omnem ^etarem fiinflificans per illam, quje ad
ipfuni erat, iimilitiulincm. Omncs enim vcnit per fem-
et ipfuni falvare : oiiines, inquam, qui per earn renaf.
cuntLir in Deum, Infantes, ik parvulos, & pueros, &
juvenes, & leniores.
Iren. Lib. 2. cap. 21. Edit. Parif. 1710,
S 2 God,
26o Animadverfons on a T>iJcourfe
** unto God, Infants, and little ones, and Chil-
" dren, and young Men and old Men.
Now, allowing this Paflage to be truly tran-
flated, and that it expreffes the genuine Senfe
of Irenaus, I don*t think *tis fufficient to fay,
that he means being baptized, by Renafcunfur
(born again) in this Place. For 'tis certain,
that Infants are born again, of the Spirit, in
the flridt Senfe of the New Teftamenty or they
cant enter into Heaven. Befides the Words im-
mediately following in this Chapter, fhew plain-
ly, that the Defign of the Author was to prove,
that our Lord had fanftified every Stage of Life
by taking our Nature upon him, and living
therein. 'Tis faid therefore, "* " He pafs'd thro'
<' every Age, and became an Infant to Infants,
«* fandifying Infants ; he was a little one in
" little ones, fan(5tifying thofe of this Age, and
" becoming an Example to them of Piety,
" Juftice and Subjevfirt]( ii Cu'Cji Cj/ Tft> 'KKU, %V KOU ^ATrjlffdil
ely.iivov yiv. Thcmi^nOraf. j.. p. 133.
N. B. Thcfe Inftances, with others of the like Kind, are to be
found in Dr. G^/A Refledlions, p. 95, 96, 1 15, 117, 123, 129.
mife,
of Infant^Baftifm: 273
mlfe, that the Holy Ghoft JJoall be poured on
them -J it may be jullly anfvvered, that if tfjis
interpretative Way be allowed, then the Word
(baptizing) may as well (ignify, pending or giv^
ing ; for we read of fending the Comforter y and
giving the Holy Spirit ; and fo we fhall never
be able to come at the true literal Signitica-
tion of the Word.
As for the Phrafe oi being baptized with the
Holy Ghofi, the Idea is eafily comprehended;
'tis having fuch a Meafure of the Power, Grace,
and Influence of the Holy Ghofi^ as to be as ic
were fur rounded therewith , or overwhelmei
therein , and hence we read of being and walk-
ing in the Spirit ; and this very well fuits wi; h
the Notion of being baptized with the Holy
Ghofi.
Again we are inform'd by the fame worthy
Gentleman, that in Af^ri 7. 2, 4. in^-^ which
fignifes to wafh, aiid is fo tranflatedy is e>:^
plain' d in the Word immediately following ^ as
fignifying to baptize. Now, 'tis very natural,
for any one to conclude from this Way of ar-
guing, that n';r^c«) and (Sa7ri';^^/> are equivalent
Therms j whereas the former is confin'd moflly
in the New Teftament (and even in this Paf-
fage) to wa/Jo Hands or Feet, and is never made
ufe of in the Adminifiration of the Ordinance
oi Baptifm, And howjufl it was in the learn-
ed Docftor to confound two Words that are
applied to dillind Ufes and Ideas, and to tell
us they explain one another, I fliall leave for
die equitable Reader to judge.
T Again,
-74 Animadverfw7is on a Difcourfe
Again, we are told by the fame Reverend
'Author, that m Luke ii. 38. // is /aid y that
the Pharifees marvelled that onr Saviour had
not wajhed before Dinner : The Word in the
Greek /^ soa-airT/^M: To whom he replies, in
the following Verfe, Te Pharifees make clean
the Outfide, &c. So that the Word Cccifli^M fig'^
7iifies there to cleanjc, or to make ufe of the
Means of Cleatifmg. To which it may be an-
fwered, that this is a very uncertain and re-
mote Way of concluding, if not a very dan-
gerous Way of Writing : For immediately after
the Scripture Expreffions , Te Pharifees make
clean the Outfide, &c. 'tis remark'd ; So that the
Word CocttJi^u) ftgnifes there , to cleanfe. Where-
as the Word is not ufed there ; 'tis xa-Sccp/^aT?.
And if any one would be fully fatisfied, whe-
ther the Word baptizing may be ufed in the
Room of that Word, let him apply it in Mark
7. 19. and I doubt not he will be perfectly
convinc'd. Andgoeth out into the Draught,
ococ^TSLf'i^or, purging (or baptizing) all Meats.
rhave very little more at prefent, to fay to
thefe Criticifms -, 'tis the Love I bear to Truth
and Juilice, that prompted me to offer what I
have faid : And I will venture farther, to de-
clare my free and unreferved Sentiments, viz.
That if the great and Reverend Dr. Owen were
alive, neither his JiriSl Honour, nor his profound
'Judgment, nor his exquifite and mofl: extenfive
Learning, would ever fuffer him to perfift in
the Defence of thefe Remarks, that bear his
Name. And the plain Reafon is eaiily difcern-»
of Infant-Bapfifm. 275
ed, that in many Inftances they appear to be>
not only beneath^ but injurious to, his dijii-d-
guijh*d Character.
2. I come briefly to confider another Ob-
fervation that the Reverend Dr. Ridgley makes
in Favdiw of Sprinkling ; 'viz. T^hat Spi'inkling
or pouring is Jbtnetimes ufed in Scripture^ ^^fiS'
nify the conferring of thofe fpiritual Gifts and
Graces which arefgnified in Baptifm -, — and
therefore, in a fpiritual Senfe^ Sprinkling is caU
led cleanfing from Sin ; and the Graces of the
Spirit conferred hi Regeneration, are reprefent-
ed in Ezek. 26. z^y—ij. by fprinkling clean
Water, p. 417. I am very fenfible, that di-
vers Padobaptijis think, that this is well urg'd,
and that it is a good Solution of the Difficul-
ty: But upon a due Reflection, it does not
reach the Cafe in Difputej for if the Sprink-
ling under the Ceremonial Law, might inter-
pretatively be underftood of moral and fpiritual
Cleanfing, that is no Rule why Baptifm fhould
be adminiflred by Sprinkling j fince the Word
baptizing, can never be prov'd to fignify
Sprinkling : Why then fliould we be tied down,
in the Mode of a Go/pel-Ordinance, by fome
jfcattered ExprefTions, that are merely allufivc
to fome Pradlices under the Ceremonial Law.
This is a very unjuft and unfafe Way of argu-
ing : And 'tis very obfervable, that Cypriaft
the zealous Patron of SpriiikUng, and who
ieems to be the famous Founder of it, only
pleads for it in Cafes of ab Joint e NeceJJity. He
T 2 does
^76 Animd(her[w7is on a ^ifcourfe
^oes not infift that it was, nor ought to be the
•Ordinary Pradice of the Church ; his Words,
in the Paflages I have already cited, clearly
prove this -, Necejjitate cogent e^ Neceffity com-
pelling, were his Expreffions. And he makes
a manifefl Diftindlion between Walhing, and
SprinkUfig or Fouring ; as when he dates the
Queflion put to him, whether they were to be
accounted true Chriftians who had been fprink-
led, Bj> quod non Loti Jint, fed perjuji, becaufe
they had not been ivafiedy but perfuid, or
fprinkled. And again, he fays,' it ought not to
move or make any Body uneajy, ^od afpergi
irl perfundi ijidentur agri, in that the Sick
are fprinkled or perfusd. And further, he fpeaks
of diftinct Adions, when he fays, Utrumne loti
fint anperfuji. Whether they be wajhed ov per-
fiisd.
There is no Body who has read Cyprian^ but
mull allow that he mean't diftind: Ideas by
thefe different Terms, and that Wajhing and
Sprinkling were quite different Actions, in his
Thoughts. Wajloing the whole Body regarded
Perfons in their Health, who were baptized in
the flated Way of the Church, and Sprinkling
refpcftedfuch as were Bed-rid, and for that
Reafon were called Clinicks. 'Tis impoffible,,
likewife, in reading of him, not to obferve,
that he was at a great Lofs what to offer in
Defence of Sprinkling ; that it w^as then a no-
vel Pradice jufl introduced, or rather intro-
ducing, and that pure Necefhty was the true
Moiher of that Invention.
3, The
of Infant^Baptifm. 277
3. The learned Dodlor is pleas'd to obferve,
as to the Greek Particles, ii<; and hy which \vc
often render mfo and out of-, that the former,
often fignifies /
this R.emark 5 for there is No-body ever appre-
hended, that this Queen flatted /row the Bowels
of the Earth of that Country 5 but that fhe had
liv'd in that Climate^ trode on the Ground^ and
walked in the a^nbient Air of that Country : Nor :
is there any one that fuppofed Philip and the
Eunuch were all over, and properly with their .
whole Bodies i at the Bottom of that Water, but .
that they firft flood in it, and that Philip put
the whole Body of the Eunuch entirely under the
Surface of the "Water, fo that he might befaid
to be all over covered therewith. And after-
wards, they both wefit or walked out of the Wa^
tery Qv Jrom the Water ; for it makes no Dif-
ference, which of the two Ways it be rendred ; .
tho' the former is the mofl proper Exprcflibn.
But the learned Dr. has hit upon as odd a No-
tion of coming out of the Water^ as, I think,
was ever h^ard of j when he fays, /. 4 1 8. Where
Perfons arefaid to come up out of the Water, it
denotes an ASiion per form d with Defign, and the
per feci Exercife of the Under jianding in him that
does it ; which feems not dgreeable to one who is
at the Bottom of the Water, and can^t well come
up from thence, unlefs by the Help of him that
haptizd him. Now for this very Reafon which
the Dod;or offers himfelf, 'tis probable, that
'tis the firfl Time that this Motion was ever cal-
led, Coming out of the Water-, the Scripture
never
of InJant'BaptiJm. 279
fiever calls it fo, that I know of: For in flritfl
Propriety of Speech, and good Senfe, this Pare
which we are fpeaking of (emerging) fhould be
called Riftng, or being raisd out of the Water ^
Accordingly, St. Ambrofe calls it, Refurgimur;^
refufcitamur, i. e. we are rifen, or rais'd again.
But then, it is eafy to conceive, that when a
Perfon has been thus rais'dy and plac'd upon
his Legs after his Baptifm, he may make ufe
of his Under/landing, in going or walking up
cut of the Water, Dr. Hammond was fo well
fatisficd in this, that when fpeaking of the Bap-
tifm of our Lord, he fays. He went out of the
Water before John. And 'tis very natural to
conceive thus of this Affair :1 For the Adtnifii-
fir at or is commonly the firft who goes into,
and the lafi who comes out of the Water, in
performing the Ordinance of Baptifm. I ob-
. ferve further, that the worthy Dr. Ridgley re-
pears the Term, Bottom of the Water, in this
Difpute. There is no great need for this
Phrafe ; for we never delire to put Perfons to
the Bottom of the Fo?2ty but only under the
Surface of the Water ^ fo as that their Bodies
may be once covered all over, and then they are
immediately rais'd up, and this is fufRcient to
anfwer the End of the Ordinance.
What he fays,/?. 418. of the Pfahnifl^ fpeak-
ing of them going dorai to the Sea in Ships, he
does not mean thejn to go to the Bottom of it :
therefore going down in the Water, does not al-
ways fgn if y being piling d in it, I anfwer, in my
Opinion, this Inllance had better been let alone,
T 4 foi:
sSo 'Animactcerfio7tson a ijifcourfe
for it will manifeftly turn againft him ;; for a
Ship when firft launch'd, enters diredtly feve-
ral Feet deep into the Water, continues fo the
Coarfe of the Voyage, and often touches tho
Bottom upon Rocks, Shelves, Sands or Banks ;
and in tempeiluous Weather, is frequently fur-
rounded with Seas J runnii^g and rolling Moun-
tains-high above it; and if, thro' Mercy, the
poor Mariners are faved, yet any experienc'd
Sailors will inform us, that 'tis common for
luch Waves to pafs over the Vx^hole Body of the
Ship> and all that's contain'd in it, and entire-
ly to cover it for a fhort Space. This is not
the leafl: of the Wonders of the Lord in the Deefy
feen by them who go down to the Sea in Ships ^
that do BufMeJs in great V/aters, Pfalm
jo'7. 23.
But f am very fenfible, that the Aim of the
learned Docftor, is to perfuade us, that the Ad-
minijirators and the Perfons to be baptiz'd, did
not go into the Water^ left it be concluded, that
the baptiz'd Party was difd-, but only, that
they v/ent to the Water-fide, and fo Sprink-
ling might be perform'd upon the Dry-land,
clofe by the Water-Side. I anfwer, if fort Ar-
gument Sake we lay afide the Signification of
the Word CxTrViCcf) in this Cafe, yet it appears,
that the Perfons baptiz'd were actually in the
River Jordan. Thus it is faid, T^hey were bap-
tiz'd of him ff-v) in Jordan^ conf effing their Sins.
What Occafion was there of going into the Ri-
ver to be fprinkled ? Would not a Bafon or a
Cup do as v/ell, to take a little Water up, to
fpr inkle
oj Infant'Baptifm, 281
fprinkle them with ? And then the Account
(houldrun thus, and he fprinkled them upon the
Banks of "Jordan^ with fome Water taken out
of the River. This would be the true Relation,
but what a llrange Alteration would it make
in the Hiftory of the Gofpel ? Again, if we con-
iider the Cafe of our Saviour s Baptifm, Mark
I. 9. *tis faid, he was baptizd fiicj to or into
Jordan, Let the worthy Dodlor tranflate the
Part-'cle in his own Way, he was fprinkled to
yordany I am fure 'tis no good Senfe. But let
it be rendred, he was difd into Jordan, 'twill
make a true grammatical Tranflation, and clear
current Senfe.
Farther, to put it beyond any Scruple, as to
the Spot upon which John perform'd his Of-
fice, we are aiTur'd 'twas in the River Jordan ;
not upon any Bank or Plain, or Field adjacent
to it, but in the River itfelf ; Mark i. 5. and
were all baptizd of him in the River Jordan.
I don't fee how 'tis poffible for any Thing to
add to the Strengeh of this Evidence, unlef^
it were ocular Demonftration. 'Twas necef-
fary, I think, for John and the Perfons bap-
tiz'd, to go ifito the Water ^ or elfe it could not
be faid, that the Thing was done in the River,
And hence it appears, that the learn'd Do6tor's
critical Obfervation is of no Weight ; for 'tis
evident, that the People to be baptiz'd, went
not only to, but into, the Water; and went not
^nXy from it^ but out of it ; we urge therefore
juftly, according to the Meaning of the Word,
and the Circumilances of the Hiftory, that they
were
282 Animacherficns on a 'Difcotirfe
vrcre£p'd; but *tis his Part to prove that they
were only fprinkled in the River.
As to what he offers, p. 419. T&af it doet
not fufficiently appear to bim, that ^non af*
jorded Water deep enough to be baptized after
this Majiner (of Immerfion) forit feems to be a
(mall I'radi of Land, &c. 1 anfwer, that this
V/ay of arguing is both unfatisfadlory and in-
fignificant j for every one, who underftands the
Situation of Grounds, knows, that the fmallefl
Field, or Inclofure belonging to a large Tra(5l
of Land, may have the beft and moft capacious
Spring, Pool, Pond or Lake in it, or Rivulet
pafTmg thro' it, of any Part of that Land.
Of the fame Sort, is, what he adds a little
lower, viz. If there had been a great Collec-^
tion ofJVaten there^ there would have been In^
dicatiom thereof at this Day, &c. And I an*
fwer, 'tis very rational to conclude, that the
like Waters remain there to this Day ; has
any living Perfon of Veracity been there to exa-
mine the Matter ? let him prove the contrary;
What fignify precarious Conjectures andj Sup-
pofitions, made in dired: Contradidion to plaia
Scripture-hiflory ? Which latter, we delire for
ever clofely to adhere to. And the learned
Do dor may eafily fee, that the Phrafe, ritany
Waters, intends a great CoUedlion of Waters^
in many Places of the Scriptures, as Ffalm 93.
4. T!he Lord on high is mightier than the Noife
tf many Waters, Sept. 'j^arcov ito/\?^m* Rev. 1.15,
and his Voice as the Sound of many Waters^
Vd.a.'xm iroA?i^v Chap. 14. 2. j^Jid I heard a
Voice
cf Infant 'Bap tifm. 2 8 j
Voice from Heaven, as the Voice of many Wa^
ters, v^aTMv moXAriv Chap. 19. 6. And I heard as
it were the Voice of a great Multitude y and
as the Voice of many Waters, tj^ara^v ttoAAwv
Let any Man of common Senfe judge, whe-
ther thefe Places do not mean, a Colleclion of
many Waters,
Again, when Solomon fays. Cant, 8. 7. Many
Waters can*t quench Love^ CD*51 D*0. The
Septuagint render the Words in the iingu-.
Jar Number vS^o^^ iroXv j. e. much Water^ or a
great ^lantity of Wafer cannot do it : 'Tis
plain, that this was the Meaning of the Paflage ;
and indeed v^cttct Tro^Act feems to be a mere
Hebraifm^ exprefling many Waters, but intend*
ing much Water, And in this Senfe, 'tis evident,
that John repair'd to Mnon, becaufe there was
much Water, fit for his Purpofe, to baptize
Perfons therein, by dipping them. But *tis
very remarkable, that the Epithet -jroAt) is not
only applied to an ordinary Collection of Wa-
ters, but to '7riAa^(^ , the Sea itfelf ; which
fhews the Ufage of the Phrafe to denote much
Water, in Quantity. Thus the Poet is intro-
duced by * Grotius, faying, l^he Fire (the
Torch ) of Love is eternal, it cannot be ex-
tinguiffd by the great (much) Sea, in which it
was born.
AuCipat. apud Grot, in Cant. 3. 7.
As
sS^f Animadverpons on a T>iJcourfe
As to what the learned De^or and others
infift upon, in regard to the Scarcity of Wa-
ter in the Land of Canaan^ I have confidered
it elfewhere ; But if this Argument was al-
lowed him in its full Force, it will turn a-
gainft him ; for it may be anfwered, that Wa-
ter was not fcarce in Jordan and in JRnon,
there was Plenty of it there : *Twas for this
very reafon, that yohn came to Jordan and
Mnon, that he might have fufhcient Depth ©f
Water in order to dip the Perfons to be bap-
tized.
There is but one Thing more that I fhall
take Notice of, as urg'd by the Reverend Doc-
tor, />. 420. viz, Ihat it does not Jufficiently ap^
pear to him, that John ufed Immerjion in Bap*
tifm, hi as much as there was no Convenience
for Change of their Garments, nor Servants ap--
pointed to help them therein. To which I an-
fwer, I. That it was not particularly told us
in the Old Teftament, that they put off their
Cloaths everyTime they bath'd themfelves ; and
yti *tis certain they did put them off in that
Ceremony ; for they were commanded to wajb
their Cloaths as well as to bathe their Flejlo. So
they muil of Courfe have put on other Cloaths
in the mean time, i^'z;. 15. 8,11, 13. x^nd
in the Cafe of Naaman the Syrian 2 Kiiigs 5.
When he dip'd himfelf feven Times in Jor-
dan^ there is no mention of \\\% putting off, and
putting on his Cloaths, and yet there is no
doubt but thefe Aiftions were performed,
2. I
of Jnfant'Baptif/n. 2S5
2. I don*t think the New Teflament is Co
iilent about this Matter, as the learned Dodtor
imagines it to be. Thefe Phrafes, Putting of
the old Man^ and putting on the new, and put-
jon Chrijiy are perhaps beft underftood as refer-
ring to this Cuftom of uncloathing and cioath-
ing again at Baptifm.
And feme very great Men, and ^Archbi-
fhop Tillotfon in particular, thought that the
Apojtle alludes to this Practice in feveral Paf-
fages of his Writings. And -f Dr. Burnet^ late
Bifhop of Saruntj fays, that when Perfons were
baptizM, they had no other Garments, but what
might cover Nature.
3. Divers of the ancient Fathers mention
this Cuftom in the mofl open and clear Man-
ner. As St. Chryfojiomy Ambro/e, and Cyril of
yerufalem. I would urge here their naked
Teftimonies, but that I think they are better
reprefentcd by that excellent Gentleman || Mr.
Bingham. His Words are thefe ; — " The
** Ancients thought, that Immerfion or bury-
" ing underWater, did more lively reprefent the
" Death and Burial, and Refurrecftion ofChrift,
*' as well as our own Death unto Sin, andj ri-
*' fing again unto Righteoufnefs ; and the di-
" vefling or uncloathing of the Perfon to be
" bapriz'd, did alfo reprefent the putting oft
*' the Body of Sin, in order to put on the new
* On 2 Tim. 2. 19. f Exp. i-th. Arric. \\ Ori.
gin. JtLcclIiail Vol. i. p. jzi.
«* Ma7t
286 Animadverjicns on a Dij course
«* Man^ *which h created in RighteQufnefi\ and
«• true Holineji : For which Reafon they ob-
•* fervid the Way of baptizing all Perfons na-
** ked and diveftcd, by a total Immerfioa un-
«* der Water, except in fome particular Cafes
** of great Exigency, ^c. -— That Perfons were
** diverted in order to be baptized, is evident
<* from exprefs Teftimonies which affirm it ;
•* and alfo from the Manner of baptizing by
** Immerfion, which neceifarily prefuppofes it.
And having given the Teftimonies of ^t.
Chryfojiom^ and St. Ambrofe^ he fays, * That
** Cyril oi yerufalem takes Notice of this Cir-
** cumftance, together with the Reafons of it,
*' when he thus addreffes himfelf to Perfons
** newly baptiz'd : As foon as ye came in to the
** inner Part of the Baptijlery, ye put off your
** Cloaths, which is an Emblem of putting off
** the Old Man with his Deeds,
So alfo Amphilochius in the Life of St. Bajil,
fpeaking of his Baptifm, fays, " He arofe with
" Fear^ and put off his CloathSy and with them
« the Old Man,
The fame learned Writer adds, " That no
** Indecency might appear in fo facred an Ac-
** tion, two Things were efpecially provided
" for by ancient Rules, i. That Men and
" Women were baptiz'd a-part ; to which Pur-
«* pofe the Baptifteries were commonly divided
" into two Apartments, the one for the Men,
** the other for the Women. 2. There was an-
** cicntly an Order of DeaconefTes in the Church,.
" and one main Part of their Bufinefs was to
«' affift
of Infant-Bctptifm. 287
" afTifl at the Baptifm-^f Women r where for
«* Decency's Sake they yere employed to di-
<* veft them ; and fo td order the Matter, that
** the whole Ceremony both of Undtlon and
«* baptizing might beperform'd infuch aMan-
<* ner, as became the Reverence that was due
" to fo facred an Aftion. — Pcrfons thus di-
•* veiled or uncloath'd were ufually bapdz'd
** by Immeriion or Dipping of their whole
«* Bodies under Water, — — there are a great
<« many PafTages in the Epijiles of ^i. Paul,
« which plainly refer to this Cuflom ; and as
«' this was the original Apcjiolical Pradice, fo
«' it continued to be the univerfal Pra(flice of
•* the Church for many Ages. *
Farther this learned and Reverend Author,
takes Notice of the proper Garments for Mini-
ftcrs, and for the Perfons baptiz'd, being re*
ferv'd in the Baptifteries for that Ufe ; thus,
fpeaking of the Ornaments of thofe Places, he
fays, " If the Garments of the Minifters
«* baptizing, or the white Robes of Perfons
** newly baptized, which were referv'd in thefe
^* Baptifteries as Monuments and Tokens of
•* their Profeffion, may be reckon'd Ornaments
*' of thefe Places, the Baptifteries had always
** thefe Things from their firft Eredtion, And
in another Place, fpeaking of the ancient Cuf-
toms of Cloathing the newly baptiz'd in white
Garments^ he adds, " Thefe Garments were.
Ibid. p. 52a.
" commonly
2 S 8 Animadherfions on a J)ifcourJe
*.« commonly worn eight Days, and then laid
^ up in the Church. St. AuguftifJCy or fome
*' one under his Name, fpeaks of the Sunday
<* after Eajler^ as the Time appointed for this
** Purpofe. That was the Conclufion of the
** Pafchal Fejlivaly and then the Neophytes.
«* chang'd their Habit -, whence that Day is
*' thought to have the Name of T)07ninica in
^^ Albis : And White-junday is faid to be fo.
•* called from this Cuflom of wearing white
*! Kobes after Baptifm. *
As I have no Inclination, fo I am not oblig-
ed to defend thefe circumilantial Ceremonies
©f the primitive Chriftians ; 'tis fufficient to my,
Purpofe, that they baptized by Immerfion, and
that there was Change of Garments, or divefl-
ing and cloathing again at the Adminiftratioa.
of this Ordinance. Nor is there any Manner
of Need to add more Teftimonies to prove this
Point, Therefore I conclude, that whofoever
will take upon him to difprove DipptJtg to
have been the Prad;ice of the primitive Chrif-,
tian Churchy will have a very hard Task of it j.
for he muft oppofe the moft natural Senfe of
the New 'Tejiamejit, he muft difown the loud,
unanimous and clear Voice of all Antiquity,
and he muft ftiffly fide with a modern Sort of
Writers, who, at all Hazards, attempt to de-
fend fprinklingy which indeed is indefenlible.
* Ibid. p. 310. 54 r,
and
oj InfanUBapfifm. 2S9
lihd a Thing not known, till within thefe two
laft Centuries, in thefe Nations.
Upon the whole, Baptifm was left by the
Apoftles to reft on the explicit Authority of
Chrijiy to be adminiftred to thofe only, who
ftiould be difcipled by Inftrudion. If it had
been defigned that the Infants of Converts from
Judaifm or Heathenifm, Ihould be baptized, the
Scriptures would have told us fo : And ther6
were many Thousands of fuch Converts in the
^ime of the Apoftles, if the Holy Ghoft had
thought fie to give us any fuch Notice. But it
is palTed over in deep Silence .* And where
there is no Revelation, there is no Authority
to ad in inftituted Worfhip. Therefore Fado-
haptifm muft be either abfolutely de jure hu-
fnanOy or mere Guefs-work at beft; and yet this
Pradice by Degrees, has found means tojuftle
out, the only Baptifm our Lord ever inftitut-
ed (that upon Profeffion) and got the quiet
Pofleflion in its Place: How this Exchange
will be accounted for, without any Licence or
Intimation from the Law-giver, I can't dif-
cern.
As for Sprinkling, 'tis well known it was
contriv'd in Cafes of great Exigency, to fup-
ply the Room of the true Method, by Way of
Difpenfation or Courtefy, But ftridtly fpeaking,
it cannot be called Baptifm in a literal, fcriptu-
ral, nor yet in an Ecclefiaftical Senfe : for it
never received fo much as the Sanation of a
general Council-, but it has unaccountably crept
into Fafhion in thefe latter Ages, contrary to
U the
290 Animatherficns on d^ijcourjh
the Ruhrick of the Church of England in Kingt
Edward the Sixth's Time, and the Rules of all
Antiquity. I clofe with the Words of the late
hariid Dr. Whiffy, on Rom, 6.4. Speaking of
leing buried with Chriji in Baptifmy he fays,
*' And this Immerjion being religioufly obferv-
*' ed by all Chrijiiam for T^hirteen Centuries^
*' and approved by our Churchy and the Change
*' of it into Bprinklingy even vi^ithout any Al-
*' lowance from the Author of this Inflitution,
« or any Licence from any Council of th6
" Churchy hdng that which the Romanift flill
^« urgeth, to juftify his Refufal of the Cup to
** the Laity. It were to be wilh'd, that this
" Cuftom might be again of general Ufc, and
" Afferjion only permitted as of old, in Cafe
of the Clinicii or in prefent Danger of Deatk
it
FINIS.
E RR A'T A. ,"
PAGE 224, Line 2, read Gentleman. P. 205, Line rx.
X. Gentleman, ^. zoy.h. i<^,r..Janabaptil}s. Ibid..I<.24^
V P/r/l/ih/ifititl
t.
Padobapttji,
m
',"-<*