BX 6217 .G5 1773a v. 2 Gill, John, 1697-1771. A collection of sermons and tracts COLLECTION O F SERMONS AND TRACTS: f IN TWO VOLUMES. CONTAINING, V O L. I. I. ANNUAL SERMONS. II. OCCASIONAL SERMON'S. III. FUNERAL SERMONS. VOL. U. I. ORDINATION SERMONS. II. .POLEMICAL TRACTS. III.- DISSERTATIONS. Several of which were never before Printed. By the late. Reverend and Learned JOHN GILL, Z). r>. To which are Piciixcd, MEMOIRS OF THE LIFE, WRITINGS, and CHARACTER of the Author. VOL. n. LONDON: Printed for GEORGE KEITH in Gracechurch-Sirett. . M Dcc Lxxiii. "^^ Of Pf^"''Cf ;^ NOV X. 2000 V .^Cn. /^«.«.. oClA\v>^>' ADVERTISEMENT, IT may be necefTary to appiife the Reader, that feveral of the Doctor's Tra(5ls are not included in this colle6lion : namely, His " Diflertation concerning the Antiquity of the Hebrew- Language, Letters, Vowel-Points and Accents j The Do6lrine of the Trinity ftated and vindicated ; The Dodrine of the Refurre6lion ftated and defended ; The Do£lrine of Juftification by the Righte- oufnefs of Chrift, flated and maintained ; The Do6lrine of God's everlafting Love to his Ele£l, and their eternal Union with Chrift ; together with fome other Truths, ftated and defended, againft Dr Taylor; The Do6lrine of the Saints' final Perfeverance, aflerted and vindicated ; The Doftrine of Predeftination ftated, and fet in a Scripture-Light, againft Mr Wefley ; The Prophecies of the Old Teftament refpefling the Meftiah confidered, and proved to be literally fulfilled in Jefus j containing an Anfwer to the Author of The Scheme of Literal Prophecy, &c. Two annual Difcourfes on the Duty of Prayer and Singing of Pfalms ; An Efl'ay on the Original of Funeral Sermons, Orations and Odes ; A brief Confefllon of Faith," &c. The reafon why thefe Trails are omitted, is, becaufe moft of thofe fubjefts are fully treated of in his Body of Divinity. Either of the above Tra6ls may be had feparately, and if encouraged, will be colle6fed into a volume, like the two already publiflied. The Editor takes, likewife, this opportunity of requefting the candor of the learned Reader to excufe any literary miftakes, which may occur in any of the quotations from the dead languages : an apology, which there would have been no reafon for offering, had thefe two volumes undergone the Doftor's laft revifal. THE THE CONTENTS. VOLUME II. I. .^J. Sermon at the Ordination of the Rev. George Braithwaite, M. A. i II. A Sermon at the Ordination of feveral Minijlers, 14 in. A Sermon at the Ordination of the Reverend Mr John Da.vis, - - 30 IV. A Sermon at the Ordination of the Reverend Mr John Reynolds, - 49 V. Truth Defended : in Anfwcr to a Pamphlet on the Supralapfarian Scheme, 65 , VI. An Anfzcer to the Birmingham Dialogue-lFriter, Parti. - - . . 107 VII. An Anfwer to the Birmingham Diakgue-lVriter, Part II. - - - 135 VIII. The Moral Nature and Fitnefs of Things, Confidered, - - - - 162 IX. The NeceJ/ily of Good ll'^orks unto Salvation, Ccnjldered, - "- - - iSi X. The Ancient Alode of Baptizing, Maintained and Vindicated, - - iy6 XI. A Defence of ditto, - - 2^b' XII. The Divine Right of Infant- Baptifm, Examined and Dijproved, - 259 XIII. Ihe Argument from Apojiolic Tradition, in favour- of Infant- Baptifm, wUh others advanced in a Pamphlet, called. The Baptifm of Infants a reafonable Service, i^c. Confidered; and alfo An Anfwer to a Welch Clergyman's Twenty Arguments for Infant-Baptifm. To which are added. The DiJJenters Reafons for feparating from the Church of England, ------- 317 XIV. Antip.cdebaptifm ; or, Infant-Baptifm an Innovation, - - - - 382 XV. A Reply to a Defence of the Divine Right of Infant-Baptifm ; with \ Strihurcs en MrBo^mcWs Vindication of Infant-Baptifm, - - 407 i XVI. The Scriptures -the only Guide in Matters of Religion, - - - - 479 1 XVII. Baptifm a Divine Commandment, - - - - --.-. 4^7 X^Ul. Infant-Baptifm, a Part and Pillar of Popery, 511 XIX. A Dijfertation on the Eternal Sonfhip of Chrifl, ----- 534 XX. A Difjertation on the Rife and Progrefs -of Popery, - . - - 565 XXI. Dying Thoughts, 5S3 ERRATA. Page 264. Line 1. sdminiftration ordinances, read of ordinances. 324. II. inliead of aa(Hrm> r. aErm. 389. 12. for hut, r. but. 413. 8. for being immiDcat, r. being immaneoL. 462. 14. for thidg, r. ihiog. II ■ 11 - ., _, . ORDINATION SERMONS. SERMON XXXVII. The Duty of XI Pajlor to his People. Preached at the Ordination of the Reverend George Braithwaite, M.A. March 28, 1734. - 2 ,T I M O T H Y JV. .16. 'Take heed unto thyfelf, and unto thy doElrine ; for in doing this, thou JJiUlt both fave thyfelf and them that bear thee.. TH E part of -the work of this day afligned to me, is to give a word of exhortation to you, my Brother ; who have been at this time folemnly ordained a paftor or overfeer of this church. Your long ftandino-, and Ufefulnefs in the miniftry, might juftly excufe every thing of this kind, did not cuftom, and the nature of this day's fervice, feem to require it. You will there- fore fufFer a word of exhortation, though it comes from a junior minifler, fince ^ou know in what fituation we are; our fenior minifters aj-e gone off the ftage tDf this world, who ufed to fill up this place, and whoTc years bed became it : Out fathers^ where are they? and the prophets, do they live for e'verf Give me leave to addrcfs you in the words of the great apoftle of the Gentiles to Timothy, Take heed unto thyfelf, and unto thy doHrine; for in doing this, thou fhalt both fave thyfelf, and them that hear thee \ fince this epiftle was written, not for his fake Only, but for the ufe and fervice alfo of other minifters of the gofpel in fuc- ceeding ages ; that they might know how they ought to behave themfclves in the houfe of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of truth. In it the apoftle gives a large account of the proper qualifications of the officers Vol. II. B of ^ A SERMON AT THE ORDINATION of churches, bifhops, and deacons-, and in this chapter defcends to fome par- ticular advice and direftions to 'Timothy, and which are defigned for the benefit and advantage of otlier preachers of the word, and paftors of churches. I fhall not take any notice of them here, feeing I fliall have occafion to make ufe of them in fome parts of the following difcourfe ; and fhall therefore immediately attend to the words of my text, in which may be obferved, I. A charge or exhortation given to Timothy. II. Some reafons to fupport it, and engage his regard unto it. I. Here is a charge or exhortation given, which confifts of three parts r Firjl, To take heed to himfelf. Secondly, To take heed to his doflrine. Thirdly, To continue therein. Firjl, The apoflle exhorts Timothy to take heed to himfelf. This is not to he underftood of him merely as a man, that he fliould take care of his bodily health, his outward concerns of life, 6r make provifion for his family, if ha had any -, not but that thefe things are to be equally regarded by a minifter of the gofpel, as by any other perfon. - Though he ought to be diligent in his ftudies, laborious \n his work, and preach the gofpel in feafon and out offafan; yet he bught to be careful of the health of his body, and not deftroy his natural conftitution. The words of the wife man are applicable to our prefent purpofe, be not righteous over-much, neither make thy f elf over-wife, why fhouldeft thou deflroy thyfelf^? The apoftle Paul, in this cpiftle, zdis\{tiTimothy to take care of himr .felfin this fen fe, feeing he had much work upon his hands, and but of a weakly conftitution ; he exhorts him^ that he would drink no longer water, but ufe a lit- tle wine, for his flomacb's fake^ and his often infirmities " j and it is alike true of a-minifter as of any other man» what is elfewhere faid, If any provide not for his own, and effe daily for thofe of his own houfe, be hath denied the faith, and is wcrfe than an infidel". But this is not what the apoftle has here in view, when he fays take heed to thyfelf. Nor is this- exhortation given to Timothy under the charafter of a believer, or private chriftian. There are fome things which are common to minifters, and private chriftians ; their cafes, in fome refpefts, are alike, and cautions to them, are equally necefTary : they have the fame corruptions, are fubjedl to the fame temptations, and liable to the fame daily failings and infirmities ; and therefore fuch, whether minifters or people, who think they ftand, fhould take heed left they fall. Unbelief, and diftruft of divine providence, prefence, power, and affiftance^ « Ecdes. vii. i6. *■ i Tim. v. aj. f i Tim. v. 8. Serm. z-]. of the Rev. GEORGE BRAITHWAITE, M.A. 3 afTiftance, have a place in the hearts of minifters as well as others, and fomet-mts rife to a confiderable pitch, and do very much prevail ; when fiich advice as this muft be needful, take heed, brethren, left there be in avy of you an evil heart cf unbelief, in departing from the living Cod. There are many inftances which might be produced, in which this exhortation would appear to be fuitable to Timothy, and fo to any otlier gofpel miniftcr, confidercd as a believer and achrif- tian. But I apprehend, that the apoflle regards him -in his minifterial capacity, as a preacher of the word ; and is defirous, that he would take heed to himfelf, as a minifler, and to the miniftry which he had received in the Lord, that he fulfil it. It becomes a minilter of the gofpel to take heed to his gifts beftowed upon him, by which he is qualified for his work, that he does not lofe, but ufe and improve them -, to his time, that he fpends it aright, and does not fquander it away ; of the errors and hcrefies which are in the world, that he is not infedled by them -, to his fpirit, temper, and pafTions, that he is not governed by them ; to his life and converfation, that it be exemplary, becoming his office, and makes for the glory of God; and to the flock committed to his care, which is the other part of himfelf. I. A minifter ought to take heed to his gifts beftowed upon him, whereby he is qualified for the.work of the miniftry. JefusChrift, when he afcended on high, received gifts for men, fuch as were proper to furnifti, and fit them for minifterial fervice ; and he has given them to men, he gave fome apeftles, and fame -prophets, and fome evangelifts, and fome paftors, and teachers ' : that rs, he gave gifts, to qualify them for thcfe feveral offices -, and he ftill continues to give gifts to fome, by which they become capable of difcliarging the work and office of paftors of churches j and where thefe are given, they ought to be taken care of. Now, a minifter of the gofpel fhcnild take heed to his gifts, that he does not lofe them. The gifts and calling of God are wilhout repentance ^ Gifts of fpecial and faving grace are irrevcrfible ; God never repents of them, or revokes them, or calls them in -, where they are once beftowed, they are never taken away ; but gifts fitting men for public work and ufefulnefs, as they may be where true grace is not, fo thdy may be removed, when faving grace never will. This' we may learn from the parable of the talents, where our Lord fays, Take there-' fore the talent from him, and give it to him -which hath Jen talents. For unto every one that bath fhall be given, and he fhall have abundance : But from him that bath not fhall be taken away even that which he hath *. IVo therefore to the Idol B 2 Shepherd * Hcb. iii. IX. * Ephei. iv. it. * Rom. xi. 29, t MaU. zzv. 29, 30. 4 A SERMON AT THE ORDINATION Shepherd'^, the fhepherd of no account, who is good for nothing-, for an idol is nothing in the world ; who leavetb the flock, makes no ufe of his gifts, deferts his ftation, forfakes the flock ; the fword (hall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye ; bis arm Jhall be clean dried up, and his right eye fball be utterly darkened. All his light and knowledge, his abilities .and ufefulnefs, fhall b>e taken from him. Hence the apoftie exhorts T/;«o/Z-'j, to keep by the holyGhofl the good thing which was committed to him ; by which he means, not grace, but either the gof- pel, or the gift of preaching it; grace cannot, gifts may be loft. Moreover, a gofpel minifter fhould take heed to his gifts, that.he ufes them : ^NegleSi not the gift that is in thee, fays the apoftie to Timothy ; which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the bands of the prefbytery ". A minifter- may be tempted to negieft, lay afide, and difufe his gifts, for want of fuccefs in his work, or becaufc of the flight and contempt which may be caft upon him, or by reafon of the rage, fury, and perfccutions of men ; fomethingof this na- ture was difcouraging to Timothy in the exercife of his gifts, which occafioned the apoftie to put him in remembrance, that, iays he, tbou ftir up the gift of God which is in thee, by the putting on of my hands ; for God bath not given us the fpirit of fear, but of power, of love, and of a found mind. Be not tbou therefore afhamed of the teflimony of our Lord, nor of me bis prifoner ; but be thou partaker ef the. affii5}ions of the gofpel, according to the power of God '. As if he (hould fay, ": Let not that gift which God has beftowed upon thee lie dormant, and be " neglefted by thee, through a timorous and cowardly fpirit ; but boldly and 'J bravely preach the gofpel of the grace of God, though thou art fure to en- *.' dure much affliiy gofpel, OT our gofpel ; not that it was a fyftem of doftrines drawn up, and compofed by him ; but what was given him by the revelation of Chrift, was committed to his truft, what he ought to preach, and in which he was made ufeful to the fouls of many. Now a minifter ought to take heed to his doftrinc, that it be according to the fcriptures, all fcripture is given by infpiration of God, and is profitable for do^rine', True^doftrine fprings from it, is agreeable to it, and may be confirmed and eftabliflied by it •, therefore if any man fpeak, let him fpeak as the oracles of God*. He ftiould be careful, that his doftrine has a place in the word of God, that it takes its rife from it, is confonant to it, and capable of being proved by it : To ihe laiv, and to the teflimony ; if they fpeak not according to this word, it is becaufe there is no light in them \ Whatever doftrines do not fpringfrom thcfc fountains of licrKt and truth, or arc difagrceablc to them, muft be accounted divers and Jlrange doiJrines. Care fhould alfo be taken by a minifter of the gofpel, that his doctrine be the doftrine of Chrift -, that is, fuch as Chrift himfelf preached, which he has delivered out by revelation to others, and of which he is the fum and fubftancc. We preach Chrifi crucified, tothejnvsafiumbling-block, and to the Greeks foolifhnefsK This dodrine is moft likely to be ufeful for the converfion of finners, and com- fort of faints -, and a man that does not bring this with him is to be difcouraged and reiefted : IVhofoever tranfgreffeth, and abide th not in the doHrine of Chrijl, hath not God: He that abidetb in the do51rine of Chrifi, be hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doifrine, receive him not into your houfe, tieitber bid him Gcd:-fpeed^. Moreover, a minifter ftiould take heed that his doftrinc be the fame with that i)f the apoftles. It was the glory of the primitive chriftians, that they continued fiedfaflly » Johnvii. i6. ' f 2 Tim. iii.i6. « i Peter iv. 1 1 . >> Jfai. viii. 23. ' 1 Cor. i. 23. ■■ * John 9- '°' Serm. 37. ., OF THE Rev. GEORGE BRAITHWAITE, M.A. 9 Jledfaflly in the apojlks doSirine ; and it muft be the excellency of a man's minif- try, that it is agreeable to that faith which was once delivered to the faints. Jefus Chrift received his doflrine from his Father, which he delivered to his apoQles : J have given unto them fays he, the words which thou gavejl me, and they have received them ' ; who alfo were guided by the fpirit of truth into all truth, as it is in Jefus ;' and under the infpiration of xhe fame fpirit have left the whole of it in writing to the churches of Chrift; which fhould be the ftandard of a gofpel- miniftry throughout all generations. " 'Befides, it becomes a preacher of the Word to be careful that thp doftrine jie teaches be according to ghdlinefs; that it is not contrary to the moral perfeftions of God, or has a tendency' to promote a loofe and licentious life ; but that it is i»grecabl. • Again, it is highly neceflary, that a paftorof a church fhould be careful that his doftHnebc fach as tnakcs for the edification of the people ; it ought to be ibVid and fabftaritial, fuited to their capacities, ^nd what is food convenient for them; he fhould not,' therefore, groe heed to fables, and endlefs genealogies ; he oughti'in his itiiriiftry, xo Jbun propbane and vain bablings, and oppcfttions of fcience, falfyfo called. He fliould not Jtrive' about words to no profit, but to the fubvert- ingof the hearers; and Ihould carefully and diligently avoid foolifh and unlearned ■gue^ions, knowing that they do geiide^ 'flrifes'^. ." ' , , .Tri a word, he Ihould take heed, that his doftrine be ToiJnd ind Incorrupt, pure and upmixed, and that it be all of a piece, and confiftent with itfclf. " He ought to j5)w^ the things which become found doHrine ; that is,' fuch things as are agreeable to" it, imd Confifteht with it, and which are wholefom and healthful to the fouls of merv. In his doftrine he ougirt to ftiew uncorriiptnrfs, gravity, Jincerity, and u(c found fpeecb, which cannot be condemned '^ ; he fhould not teach for doSrinesibe ammandmtnts of mtn^ or join, or mix divine .truths with human • Vol; N. ;•• -C ■' •■> inventions. 1 John xvii. 8. "> i Tim. i. lo, \\. « Titus ii. 1 1, 12. • 1 Tim. vi. 3 — 5. » t Tira. 1.4. & vi. zo. 2 Tim. ii.i \, 16, 23. "< Tit. ii. i, 7, 8. lo A SERMON AT TH£ 6RD'INAflON inventions. The chaff and the wheat fhould be kept fepara'te ; nor fhodd hi blend law and gofpel, grace and works together ; and Co be like them that cor- rup: the u-ord ofGcd, xawIl^luo^1(^ t« ^670l t8 em, "adulterate it, by mixing it \\\(k " their own fancies;" as unfair dealers in liquors, mix water with them, which is the fenfe of the word here ufed ; but as of firtcer\t)\ hut as of God, in the fight ef God\ fhould a gofpcl-minifter j^'^'Z^ in Cbrifl. He ought to take heed that what he preaches is confiftent with itfelf ; that it has no yea and nay, no contra- diclion in it, and docs not deftroy itfelf; and fo bring a reproach upon him, and he become ufelefs to his iiearers ; forifjhe trumpet give an uncertain faundt "^^o fhall prepare himf elf for the battle' ? confiftence, harmony, and conne(Sl;ion of things with each other, are the beauty and glory of a man's miniftry ; which^ muft needs recommend it, and make it moft ufeful, profitable and pleafant. It is alfo very advifcable that he take heed that he exprefs his doflrine in the- bcft manner, and to .the beft advantage. He '^bught to be careful about the- manner as well as the matter of his miniftry; ,tha( he fpeak plainly, intelligibly, - and boldly, the gofpel, as it ought to be fpokcn : Elocution, which is a gift of utterance, a freedom of exprcffionj with propriety of language, is one of the gifts fitting for public ufefulnefs in the work of the miniftry ; and which may be improved by the ufe of proper means. The example of the royal preacher is worthy of our imitation, becaufe the pr.eacber^ivas wife he JUll taught the people inowledge ; yea, be gave good heed, and fought oat, and fet in order many proverbs : the preacher fought to find cut acceptable words ; and that which was written was upright, even words of truth ' ; he not only fought for proper and agreeable truths, but was careful to exprefs them in the moft acceptable manner. , . To conclude this head ;. when a minifter has ufed his c^reand diligence about his doflrine, that it be according to the fcriptures, agreeable to the idodrine of Chrift and his apoftles ; that it be according, to godlinefs, and, makes for- the ufe of edifying ; that it be found and incorrupt, pure and unmixed, and con- ■ fiftent with itfelf;. and that it be exprefTcd in the beft manner, and to the bed': advantage, he ought to take heed to defend it.whenever.oppofed ; for minifters are not only fet to preach the gofpel, biit for the.defence of.itV-they ftiould ^f' found doSrine both exhort and convince gainfayers" -y for whichpurpdfe, they Ihoijld . ufe the two-eaged fword, the fword of the fpirit, which is the word of God; 'arid is both an offenfive and defenfive weapon, by which, at 6nce, error is refuted, and truth. eftablifhed. Leo on to confider, , _..•.. • ■ ■' "■ .-: •; ■ . " ' -tbirdh, ' - » 2 Cor. ii. 17. «a».iXn7o.1n, canponwites fermoncm Dei. WrtipTibra (Utfr^ Wt «b hofpitibos &' •ttupooancibus, quibus io more eft, vinnm aqua corrumpere. SicGrseci interpretant,dr, na-rriiiivn; naxivMi To» oiFO», hoc eft, vinura corrumpere, iwnXBi dicuntolim fignificavine oiForvinum. Aretius jaloc. • iCor. xiy. 8. « Ecdes. xii. 9, 10. . _» Tit. i. 9. Serm. 37, OF THE ^£v. GEORGE BRAITHWAITE, M.A. i; - Thirdly, The third part of this exhortation, which is, to continue in them. Some read the words, Continue with them ', -that is, with the people at Ephefusy yi\\txt Timothy was, and where the apoftle would have him remain; as appears from what he fays to him at the beginning of this epiftle, I befougbt thee to abide ftill at Epbefus \ But I chufe rather to confider them as they are in our cranfla- tion rendered, continue in them ; that is, in the dodtrines which thou dofl: well to take heed ynto. Much fuch advice does the apoftle give to Timothy, in his Second cpiftle to him, continue thou, fays he, in the things which thou haft learned, ■^nd haft been ajjured of, knowing of whom thou haji learned them. It is very unbe- icoming tninifters of the word, to be like children tojfed to and fro with every wind i>f do£}ritte.; daily fhiftin^ fides^ and changing fentiments. He that would be a preacher of the gofpel to others, ought fo to lludy the /criptures, and learn the doflrines of grace, as to be affured of them, to beat i. point, at a -certainty concerning them ; that he may be able to fpeak them boldly, as.they ought to be fpoken -, and when he has fo done, he ought toad- •here to them, abide by them, and continue in them ; even though a majority inay be againft: them, for we are not \.o follow a. multitude to do evil''. Truth is not to be judged of by the number of its admirers -, if this was a fure and fafe rule to go by, the church oi Rome would have the beft pretenfions to the truth p 1.3. ^ tCh^p. iii. 14. * Exod. xxiii. 2. f Rev, xiii. 3. *> John vii. 48, 49. « 1 Cor. ii. 9 — 14. ,2 A SERMON AT THE ORDINATION Nor fhould the charges and imputations of novelty and licentioufnefs frio-hten and deter the miniftcrs of Chrill from abiding by the doftrines of grace, fines ihefe were the very reproaches and caKimnics that the ikxftrines of Chrift and his apoftks were loaded with, JVbat thing is this ? What new doElrine is this ? Say fome concerning Chrift's miniftryJ; and fo the Athenians to Paul, May we know what this new do£frine whereof thou fpeakejl is ? They looked upon the more fubftantial truths of the gofpel as novelties, upftart notions, fuch as were never heard of before -, nay, they were accounted by fome as having a tendency to open a door to all manner of wickcdnefs and loofenefs Qf life ; which OGca- fioned the apoftlc to fay, y4nd not rather, as we be flanderoujly reported, and as fome affirm, that we fay. Let us do evil that gvod may cime-i wbofe damnation is jufl'. _ ' ■ ^" •- .. . In a word, it becomes Chrift's minifters to abide by, and contimje in thie- dodtrines of grace, though they ri(k their good name, credit, and reputation,, are in danger of lofing their outward maintenance, or worldly fubftance, yea,, life itfelf •, for whofoever will fave bis life, fhall lofe it ; but wbofeever fhall lofe bis- life for my fake and the gofpel's, the fame fhallfaveit'^ Inow. haften bfiefly tO' confider, ir. The reafons given by the apoflle to fupport the whole of this charge or- exhortation •, and to engage Timolhy'Sy and. lb every other gofpcl-minifter's, re-- gard unto it. Firfl, His firfl: rcafon is, For in doing this thou- fhalt fave tbyfelf. Jefus Chrift^ is the only efficient and procuring caul'e of falvation : Tbere.is no falvation in any ■ ether ; for there is none other name under heaven, given among men, whereby we ■ mufl be faved^. Minifters cannot fave themfelves. by unj. works of righteoufnefi ■ done by them;, no, not by their minfterial fervices ; it is in vain to expeft fal-' vation by any, or from any other than Chrift- Jefus : But minifters, by taking, heed to themfelves, may, through a divine bleffing, and. the influences. of the ■ Spirit of God, fave tbemftlves frony an- untoward gemration, ,zn6. be prcfcryed from xht: pollutions of the world.; may keep-thc'ir garments, . their outward con- verfation garments, fo that they do not walk naked, and. othersT^i? their Jbanu. . By taking heed to their doftrine they may fave themfelves from being infeftcd with falfe dodlrines, errors and hcrefies -, thoCc rootscf bittenufs, which fpring- ing up in churches, trouble fome, and defile others. And by continuing in their doftrines, may fave themfeves from the blood of aU men, with whom they are concerned. The work of a minifter is an awful, folemn, and weighty one ; if he does not warn and inftrudt both the righteous and the wicked, their blood will be required at his hand-, but if he performs his office faithfully, he delivers his •I Mark i. t;. Aflaxvii. 19. • Rom. iii. 8. » Mark viii. 35. i Aaj.iv. 12. Serm. z7. of the Rev. GEORGE BRAITHWAITE, M.A. M his foul, that is, he faves himfelf from fuch a charge againft him •, as did the apoltle Paul, who could fay, I am pure from the blood of all men ; for I have not fhunned to declare unto you all the counfel of God*'. Thus, by a minifter's taking heed to himfelf and to his dodrine, and continuing therein, he faves himfelf from alljuft blame in his charafler and office v and may be truly accounted a good minijler of Jefus Chrijl, nourifhed up in the words of faith ^ and of good doEirine, tuhereunlo he hath attained '. Secondly, His other reafon is, thou (halt z\[o fave them that hear thee; that is, by being an example to them both in word and converfation, thou (halt be the means of preferving them both from erroneous principles and immoral prac- tices} or, thou fhalt be. inftru mental in their eternal falvation. Minifters are inftrumcnts -by whom fouls believe, and fo are faved ; the word preached by them being, by the grace of the fpirit, an engrafted word, is able to fave them ; and the gofpcl being attended with the demonflration of the fpirit, is the power of God unto falvatioKs What can, or does, more ftrongly engage minifters to take heed to themfelves, to their dodrine, and abide therein, than this ? That they may be i>fcful in the convcrfion, and^ fo in the faWation of precious- and immortal fouls, which are of more worth than a world : Ht that convertetb a finner from the error of bis way, fball fave afoul from- death, andfhall hide a mul- titude ofj^ns". A hopeful view of this fupports minifters in their work, and carries thcmchearfully through many difficulties that attend it •, for fuch fouls whom they have been ufeful to, will be their Joy, and crown of rejoicing, in the great day of the Lord. Thefe reafons, I truft, will engage you, my Brother, who have been this day fet apart to-the paftoral office in this church, to take heed to yourfelf,, your gifts, . time, temper, life and converfation, and to' the flock now committed to your care : And I conclude, that thefe will alfo engage you to take heed to your doiftrine ; that it be according to the fcripcures, the doftrinoof Chrift,, his apoftles, and true godlinefs -, and fuch as will be pro- fitable to them that hear if, that it be found and incorrupt, pure and unmixed, and confiftent with itfelf ; that it be delivered out in the beft manner you are able, and defended to the utmoft of your ability, by which you will abide, and in which you will continue: In doing this you will be moft Jikely to be inftrumental in the converfion of Cnncrs, .and edification of faints. God give , fucccfs to all your miniftrations.. *' Adb XX. 26, 27. '1 Tim. ili. 6. *■ James v. 20.- S. E R M O N 14 A .CHARGE AT ^HE ORDINATION S JE R M O N XXXVIII. 7'he Work of a Go/pel -Minijler recommended to Confideration. A CHARGE delivered at the Ordinations of the Reverend Mr JOHN GILL, Mr JAMES LARWILL, Mr ISAAC GOULD, Mr BONNER STONE, AND Mr WALTER RICHARDS. ^Timothy II. 7. ■Conjider %ohat J/ay, and i he Lor J give thee mderjianding in all things. THAT part of the fervice of this day, which is afTigned to me, being to ,pive a word of exhortation to the paftor of this church, now appointed and .^rdained ,to that office, and invefted with it; I have chofen to do it in the words .(Tead i in which may be obferved, T .An exhortation of the apoftle Paul x.o Timothy, to confider what he had faid, was faying, or about to fay to him ; to attend to it, revolve ic .in his mind, and lay it up in his memory. II. A prayer, or wi(h for him, that the Lord would give him underftanding, in all t+iat was, or fbould be faid i and in every thing elfe that might be fcrviceable and ufeful to him. I. An exhortation to confider well what had been, or fhould be faid unto him; for it may refer both to what goes before, and to what follows after; to what goes before, to the advice given to hi ftrong in the grace that is inCbriJlJifus; to have recourfe toChrift for gifts and grace to fit -him more and more for his work, .and carry him through it ; and ftronglyto believe that there is a fulncfs of them in Chrift, and that he fhould receive a fufficient fupply from him to help him in every time of need; and alfo to the inftrudlions delivered to him, to commit the doftrines of the gofpel he had heard of him to faithful men, and fuch as were of .capacity to teach others ; and likewife to the characters he himfelf bore, as a fol- dier. SiRM. 3S. • OF" SE-VERAI> MINISTERS.. .- ss rfiei', fffoltTun'of JefusGhrift, agood foldiefof" his; and therefore fhould paflendy arid ^oriftantly endure hardfhips, reproaches, and perfccution, for the fake of him a-rt'd his gofj^el ; and fhould not unnecefiarihy entangle himfelf wkti the affairs of this life, but atteTKl to military ones, that fo he might pleafe him that had cho- ftn him t-o be a foldier -, a-nd as he was a combatant, that he mufl: not exped the oroWn, urtlefs he ftrove lawfully ; and as a hufbandman, bearing the precioui fced of the word,, that he muft labour before he could partake of the fruits of a : th tJiis mty have I'efpecft to ^what follows »ftcr; that he would confider the fom'aTid fcbftance of the gofpel be was to prCach, and for which the apoftle fuf- ^re'd, '^hich was- a rifen Saviour, and includes his incarnation, obedience, fuf- fcrings, and death, with all the dodtriries of grace in connedicin with them ; as alfo t^iat it btcdme him to be very fludious and diligent in the ufe of means, t'hat he might acquit himfelf with honour in the difcliargc of his miniftcrial work ; rhdt he might appear approved of God, -a workman not to be adiamed of his •work,- at all times rightly dividing the word of truth, fbunning every thing 6ontraf'y W faith and holinefs -, likcwife,'that he oughixo flee yaurhful lujis, his dge inclined unto, and fellow rigbieoufnefs, faith, charity and peace -, and truekly^ io iriflruH ihofe who contradifled themfclvcs and their profcffion, that, if it was f)o!rible, they might be recovered out of the fnare .they were fallen into; to fhdfc thii exhortation may refer," with other things that may be obferved in the torit?xt. What farther improvement I (hall make of it, will be to lay before 5^ou, tht^paftor of this church, for yeur confideration, various things relative to the work you -have been chofeni -and called unto,, and the office you have been inveflcd with.- • 'firfl, Confider the work iffclf, and whst a work it is you are engaged in : W\% a Work, and not ii^ne-cure, huiz fervice; there is bufiriefs to be done, and a great deal of bufinefs too 5 it is called /he IVork of theminiflry % ' from the fobjed- matter of it, the miniftry of the word, aiKl the adminiftratibn of ordi- nances ; and the ivork of the Lord and of Cbrifi ', from the concern the Lord 5efus Ghrift has init ; he is the fum and fubltance of it, he calls unto it, and qualifies for it, afhfts in it, and when it is rightly done, it makes for his glory. ■Cenfider that il is- a laborious work j minifttrs (if Cflnlt are not to be loiterers, but labourers iti his viileyard -, it requires much reading of the fcriptures, fre- ^j^jent prayer ; conftant meditation, and ftudy to prepare for it ; and much fludy 'is- a 'svearinefs to the fiefh' : and in the performance of this fervice, with that JjNral, fci'vour, and afftdiori, which arc necelTary to it, a man, to ufe the apof- <^c^ ^hxiik,- may ^end and be fpttit ''•, fpcnd his animal fpLrits until they are quite '^-■■- exhauftcd • • Ephe's. rv. 12. ■•> iCor. ivi.lo. Phil. ii. 30.- * EcCles. aii. 12. * 2 Cor. xii. I J. ■ i€ A CHARGE AT THE ORDINA.TION cxhaufted and gone -, -for this work, followed with clofe application, will try. the bcft conftitution in the world, and at length wafte and confume it : Epa- pbroditus, a faithful and laborious minifter ©f the word, wasw^i unto deaths fmr^ or through tht work of Cbriji ' : but then confider, for your encouragement, it is an honourable work -, if a man deftre the office of a bijkop^ be dtjireth a good work'-: which is pleafantly, profitably, and honourably good^ for what is more 'honourable than to be the fervancs of the moft high God, and to be em- ployed in ■fi.ich fervice of his, as to Jhew unto men the way offahation? Than to be the «mbafladors of Chrift, and (land in his ftead, and J>efeecb men to be recon- ciled to God ? Than to be Jlewards of the myjleries ofCbriJl, and of the manifold grace of God? Than to be the lights of the world, ftars in Chrift's right hand, the melTcngers or angels of the churches, and the glory of Chrift? Moreover, confider that this work well performed, is deferving of efteem from men ; they that labour in the word and doSlrine are worthy -of double honour *, of an honoura- ble-maintenance, and of -honourable pcfpeft •, they are to be received with glad- nefs, and 'had in tefuitation; and to be known, owned, and acknowJedged by thofc over whom they are as fathers, guides, and governors : and to be highly efteemed for their works fake- add to all this, ihat this is a work in which God hwith his tninifters, and they with him ; for, fays the apoftle ••, we are labour eri together with God, ye are God's bufbandry, ye are God's iuilding; the, churches are God's hufbandry, and to be manured and cultivated, planted and wa.tercd ; Tvhich is a -laborious work, and conftantly to be attended to ; and nothing can be done to any purpofe, and with any cffcxft, but through the prefencq and bleding of God -, neither is be that plantetb any thing, neither he that wateretb^ which to do is the work of gofpel-rninifters, biit God that giveth the increafe' -^ and as the people of God, in a church-ftate, are his building, and who are to be edified and built upon their moft holy faith ; except the Lord build the boufe^ ihey labour in -win that build it ^ i but when his minifters go forth in his name and ftreng-th, preaching his gofpel, and he grants his gracious prefence and aftiftance, and he, the Lord, is working with them\ itiey go on in their work with chcarfulnefs and fuccefs, . : , Secondly, Confider the fevcral parts of this work you are called ijnto .and en- gaged in, which are to be performed by you, and are as follow ; r ' ' 1. The miniftration of the word, which is a principal part of the work of a minifter of Chrift-, the apoftlcs, and firft preachers of the gofpel, befides the fpiritual, had the fec-ular affairs of the church upon their hands i which lying too heavy on them, they defired to be eafcd, by appointing proper perfons jo take -« Phil.'ii. 30. *■ 1 Tim. iii. I. t t Tim. v. 17. , •" iCoi. iJL 9. ' J £01. iii. 7. * PSi\m cxxvii. 1. ' Mark xvi. zo. -Serm. 3S- OF SEVERAL MINISTERS. ' j; take care of the latter ; that fo they might give themfelves up wholly and con- ■ Rinily to prayer, and to the minijlry of the word"' : Now confider what that is, that is to be minillered, it is the word of God, and not man ; which, as it de- mands the attention of the hearer, fo the afTiduous application of the preachtrr : it is the gofpel that is to be preached, the good news and glad tidings of peace, pardon, righteoufnefs, and falvation by Chrift; it is the gofpel, which is given in commifiion to preach , it is the glorious gofpel of the blcfTed God, which minifters are entrufted with ; and there is a wo upon them, if they preach it not; they are appointed minifters of the new teftament; not of the law, the killing letter, the miniftration of condemnation and death -, but of the gofpel, the quickening fpirit, the miniftration of the fpirit, of righteoufnefs and of life : confider, that only the pure unmixed gofpel of Chrift is to be preached, the •fincere milk of the word, unadulterated, and clear of all human mixtures -, it is not to be blended and corrupted with the doftrines of men : the word of God is not to be handled craftily -, the hidden things of diftionefty are to be re- nounced, and the manifcftation of the truth is to be made to every man's con- fcicnce, in the fight of God : and the whole of the gofpel is to be delivered -, no truth of it is to be dropped, concealed, or kept back, upon any pretence what- foevcr, though it may be difpleafing to fome ; fuch a qucftion is never to be admitted and reafoned upon one moment in your private ftudies and prepara- tions, whether fuch a truth you are meditating upon will be pleafing or difpleaf- ing i" for if you feck to pleafe men, you will not be the fervant of Chrift ; the only thing to be confidered is, is it truth ? if it is, fpeak it out, without fear of man •, and though it may be traduced as irrational, or licentious, and be loaded with reproach, and charged with dangerous confequences ; yea, it may be urged, that admitting it to be truth, fince an ill ufe may be made of it, it fhould not be preached ; but let none of thefe things move you ; preach truth, every truth, and leave it with the God of truth, who will take care of it, and ufe it to his own ends and purpofcs. Confider, that Chrift is the fum and fub- ftance of the gofpcl-miniftry -, and that he, as to his perfon, offices, and grace, is chiefly to be infifted upon ; we preach not ourfehes, but Chrift Jefus the Lord "; as the anointed prophet, prieft, and king; as Jefus the alone Saviour ; as tlic Lord our righteoufnefs, even Chrifl crucified, and (lain for the fins of men ; Lliough fuch preaching may be a flumbling-block to fome, andfoolifhnefsto others °. The great apoftle Paul, who well underftood the nature and import of the gofpel-miniftry, declares, that be determined not to know any thing, that is, not to make known, or preach any thing, fave Jefus Chrifl, and him crucified ^ ; and as Chrift is the alpha and omega of the fcriptures, fo he ftiould be of all your difcourfes and fcrmons ; whatever fubjedt you are*upon, keep Chrift in your Vol. II. D eye, ." A£li vi. 4. "2 Cor. iv. 5. • i Cor. i. 23. f 1 Cor. ii 2. ,8 A CHARGE AT THE ORDINATION eye, and let it appear, fomc way or other, it has a conneftion with him, and centers in him. The gofpel to bt preached, is the gofpel of the grace of God ; and it is fometimes called the grace of God itfeif; the dodtrines of it are the doftrines of free grace, and declare, that the falvation of men, from firft to lafl, and in all the parts of it, is of grace, and not of works; and thefe are to be faithfully difpenfed, as that the firft ftep to the falvation of men, the choice of them to it, is of grace, and not of works ; that men are jviftificd freely by the grace of God, through the redemption that is in Chrift Jefus, and not by the works of the law ; that the full forgivenefs of fins, though by the blood of Chrift, is according to the riches of God's grace; and that eternal life is the free gift of God, through Jcfus Chrift our Lord : Yea, every truth that is contained in the fcriptures, and is agreeable to them, is to be preached ; for all fcripture \% profitable for do£Jrine'^; from thence it is to be fetched, and by it to be fup- ported and maintained; this is tlie ftandard of faith and pradlice ; and as it is by this the hearers of the word are to try what they hear, and judge whether things are ri', as it was by the apodle P4ul\ according to the meafure of the gift of grace given ; and when a man preaches the whole gofpel of Chrid, and delivers out all the doftrines of it, and urges to all the duties relative to it, and declares the whole counfel of God; then may he be faid to do the work of an evangclid, and to make full proof of his minidry, and to fulfil the minidry which he has received of Chrid: and this is to be done condantly ; tbefi things, fays the apodle, / wilt that thou affirm con- ftantly ' ; the truths, before fpoken of, concerning the date of God's people in unrcgeneracy, the loving-kindnefs of God to them in their redemption by Chrid, the faving them by the wafhing of regeneration, thejudification of them by the free grace of God, and their heirfhip and title to eternal life, ijpon that ; the word mud be preached in feafon, and out of fcafon, as often a? opportu- nity offers ; and the miniders of Chrid mud be Jlidjajl, unwoveaiU-, always aboHiiding in the "work of the Lord, knowing their labour is not in vain in the Lord : and care fliould be taken, that this work is done confidently ; that the minidry h uniform, and all of a piece; that there is no contradidion, no yea and nay in it; otherwife great confufion will be created in the minds of hearers, and they will be thrown into the utmod perplexity, not knowing what to believe, or receive ; for if the trumpet gives an uncertain found, who fhaU prepare himfeif 48 the battle " .? '2. Another part of the work to be performed by you, is the adminidration bf gofpel-ordinanccs, and ihey are principally Baptifm and the J_oj-d's fupper : the adminidration of baptifm goes ak)ng with the minidry of the word; fugh, who have a commifHon from Chrid to teach and infiruH mzn, in divine tbiogs, have a ckimmilTion aHb to baptize thofe who are taught and indnuftcd by thcni, hi the jiame of the Father, of the Son, and of the holy Ghofi ; nor have a.ny other a right to do it : fome have t-hought that Philip who baptized the eunuch and others, -wzsFhilip the deacon ; but be it fo, he was an evangclid alfo, a preach- er of t^ie gofpel, as it is plain he was ; and therefore he baptized, not by vir- D 2 ■ - tue • Rom. XT. 10. » Titui Hi. 8. ■ 1 Cor. xiv. 8. 20 A CHARGE AT THE ORDINATION tue of his office as a deacon, but as a teacher and a preacher of the word of God, The apoftle Paul indeed fays, Chriji fent me not to baptize^ but to preach the gof- ^f/* ; but then his meaning is, that he was not fent only to baptize, or this was not the principal part of his miniftry ; it was chiefly to preach the gofpel, though not to the cxciallon of the admi;iiftration of ordinances ; nor does he fay this, as thinking, or fpeaking meanly of the ordinance of baptifm ; but becaiife fome perfons had made an ill ufc of their being baptized by him ; and were ready to ^oaft of it, as if they were baptized in his name. It is- incu-nbent on. you, to adminifter this ordinance to the perfons which are defcribed in x.\\e word, of God, and of which there are examples in it, and in the manner therein di- Fcftcd to, and praftifcd. The ordinance of the Lord's fupper, being an ordi- nance in the church, is to be adminiftered by the partor of it •, fuch who break. the bread cvf life in the miniftry of the word, are to break, the bread in the ordi- nance of the fupper: the apoUlc Paul broke bread ta the-difcLples, to whom he preached-, and this ordinance is to be adminiftercd frequernly,^ as is fuggefted tn thofc words, as often as ye eat this bread, &c. " ; in it. the fufferings of Chrift fhould be defcribed, and his love fct forth in the moft moving and pathcric ftrains v and he be reprefented as crucified and flain, in as lively a.manncr, a^ the adminiftrator is capable of. 3. Another part of )OUr work, is to take care of the difcipline of the houfe ef God •, for though every thing is to be done by the vote and fuffrage of the church, the power of difcipliQC being lodged In ic by Chrift,. the head of it v yet the executive part of it will He chiefly upon you v though none are to be admit- ted to, or excluded fro.m the communion of the church, but according to its voice, and with its confent: yet it fliould be greaily your concern, to examine things clofely, whether the perfons are fit so be ncceiued or rejefled ; ^nd to take care, that nothing be done through fiavour or affedion, and with par- tiality. Paftors of churches have a rule and government committed to them; they are fct over others in the Lord v they are not indeed to lord it over God's beritaoe, to rule them in an haughty and imperious manner, but according to the laws of Chrift r "which they arc carefully to obferve, and poirrt out to the church, and fee that they are put in execution ; in doing which their governr ment chiefly lies-, yoa are theinrfore tatakc car^, that every thing in the church be done decently, and in order, and according to the ryle of the divine word.: particularly, care (hould be taken that no cafe indifference, of a private nature; be brought into the church, before the rule isobfcrvcd, which Chrift has given in reference to fuch a, cafe ; thai the offended brother fhould firft tell the oflTcnder «f his fault alone, and endeavour to convince him of it j -and if he .Ihould not !...-..;; fucccedj « I Cor. i. 17. * » Cor. xi. 26, S^RM. 38. OFSEVERAL MINISTERS. 21 fucCeed, then to take one or two more, arrd try by ihem to bring him to' an ac- knowledgment of it-,.-biu, if afcer all he is obftinate and incorrigible, then bring it to the church ^ But as for thofe thaty;« openly^ that are guilty of 110- loriousand fcandalous crimes,- in a public manner, to the great difgrace of re- ligion, as well as grief of the church, thcfe are to be rebuked before a!!, without any more to do, that ethers may fear "" : the feveral rules to be attended to, with refped tO churoh-dircipline, you are to inculcate to the church, at proper times, and on proper occafions ; as to admonifh pcrlons guilty of immorality and error, to withdraw from thofe that walk dijorderly, after all methods taken to reclaim, them are vain and fruitlcfs ; and to reje£l an heretic, after the firfi and fecond ad- tnomtion *, when without effect. 4. Another part of your work, is to vifit the fcveral members of the church, as their cafes may require, efpccially when diftrefled, either in body or mind » then to pray with them, and for them, to fpeak a word of comfort to them, and give them your bed counfel and advice-, and this will introduce you into divers famil.es ; but take care not to meddle with family-aff"airs ; what you hear and fee in one family report it not in another-, this may be. attended with bad confcqucnces : and whatever differences may arife between one and another, interfere as little as podible; chufe rather that differences between members be compofed by other perfons, ihe officers of the church, than by you, that no pre- judices be entertained againft your miniftry-, and particularly be careful .to avoid that fcandalous praflice, the difgrace of the pulpit, bringing mauers of diffe- rence into it, whether between yourfclf or others, or whether between one mem- ber and another, one fide of which you may incline to take -, for why fhould the peace and edification of a whole community be deftroyed, through the noife and din of private quarrels ? As this is a praftice exceeding mean, it is very unbe- coming the gofpcl of peace, and the m.inifters of it. Moreover, you will be called upon fbmctimesto vifit fick perfons, who are not members of the church j and who may be ftrangers to the grace of God» and the way of falvation by .Chrift ; and who have been either profane perfons, or refting upon their civility • and morality, plcafing themfcLves, that they have wronged no man, and have done that which is right between man and man; and now in dying circum- fiances, hope,, on this account, things wijl be well wiih them ; and whofe re- latives may be .afraid of your faying any thing to interrupt this carnal peace;. ^et,bc fait:hful, labour to fhew the one and the other their wretched and undone .Gate, by nature -, the neceffity of repentance towardsGod, and faith in ourLord- .}cfus Chrift, in his blood, righteoufnefs, and atoning facriiice, for peace,, par- •don, juftification, and falvation. This is a cafe, 1 allure you, will require a r= .. : A ..■.' ..■, , . , ■ ■ • g°°'^ Matt, xviii. 15—1;, '« i Tim. v. zo. • 2 Thefs. iii. 6. Tit, iii. \o^ 21 A CHARGE AT THE ORDINATION- good deal of care, judgment, and faithfulnefs. And now, I doubt not, but by this time you will be ready to fay, sabo is Sufficient for theje things^? Where- fore, Thirdly^ Confider the qtialificationa necelTary to the performance of the mi- liifterial work ; and what things are requifue and ufeful for the due difcharge of it : and here let it be obferved, that there are fome things which are fcrviceable dnd ufeful in it, which, properly fpeaking, are hot the qualifications for it ; as for iriftance, the grace of God is a pre-requifite to this work; it is highly proper that thofe who are engaged in it, (hould be partakers of it in truth : yet grace IS not the miniftcrial qualification ; for this is what all the faints have in cotrv- nion, the graces of the fpirit, faith, hope, and love^ they all obtain like pre- cious faith, for nature, kind, and objeft, though not to the fame degree, one as another; they are all called in one hope of their calling, by the fame grace, to the fame glory 4 and they are all taught of God to love God, Chrift, and ■ one another -, yet this does not qualify them for minifters ef the word -, if grace was a minifterial qualification, all the Lord's people would be whatMo/fj witbcd fhey were, even all iii t\itm profhets. Human learning is very ufeful and ftrr- ■viceable to a minifter of the gofpel ; to have fuch a fhare of it, as to be capable 'Of reading the fcriptures in the original tongues in which they were written; ^nd by means of •Jcnowledge of languages, to be able to read the writings of ■many excellent good men, written therein, to their profit and advantage ; as JWell as to know the ufc of words, and the propriety of fpeech : and fuch who ;arc£alled to the work of the miniflry, who have not h-ad a liberal education, ^nd yet have time and Jeifare, are not eafily to be cxcufcd, if they do not make ■^jfe of their time, and thofe means that may be had, to improve themfelves in 4.Tfeful knowledge-, and yet, after all, the higheft attainments in human litera- ture are not minifterial qualifications; for a man may be able to read the Bible ■in the languages in which it was written, and yet not underftand the things contained in it •, for it is a fealed book, which when put into the hands of a >earncd man to read and interpret, he cannot, becaufe it is fealed. Good natu- ral pans are of great fcrvice and ufe to a minlfter of the word ; as to have a clear tindcrftanding, a folid judgment, a lively fancy, a fruitful invention, and ^ retentive memory ; but thefe a man may have, and y-et not be fit to be a mi- nlfttr of the gofpel ;' yea, men may have all the above things, grace, learning, Jand naxuralparts, and not 'be qualified for this work. "The apoftle Paul hcid all t^ -them-, .he was a man 'of good natural parts, -wiikh his adverfartes per- <:eivcd and owned; his letters, i^y i\\ry, are mighty and powerful", -wrote iri a maf- jciiline ftyle, and full of ftrOng teafonings,' and- nervous -arguments-; he bad -a large (hare of human literature, being brought up at the ket of Gamaliel, in * 2 Cor. ii. 16. '2 Cor. x. i z. Serm. 38. OF SEVERAL MINISTERS. , 23 all rhe learning of the Jews, and of other nations-, and he alfo was called by the grace of God -, yet he does not afcribe his being a minifter of the gofpcl to eicher, or all of thefe, but to a gift which he had received ; a peculiar gift, fitting and qualifying him for this important work •, for, fpeaking of the gofpel, he fays, v/hereof I -was made -a minijier according to the gift of the grace of Cod given unts we' ; with which agree the vvords of the apoftle Peter, as every one has received the gift, even fbvtinifier the fame one to another' : in fon^e this gift may be greater, in others lefs ; but in all where i< is, it more or lefs qualifies for -the fervice of the miniftry : having then gifts, differing according to ihe.grace: that is given unto us, whether prophecy. Jet us prophefy according Jo the propor- tion or analogy ■of faith ' j that is, let us interpret the fcriptures, or preach the word, agreeable to the tenor of it : Now this gift lies in a competent knowledge of the fcripiures, and of the things contained in them, and of a faculty of inter- preting them to the edification of others ; for the work of evangelical paftors or leachirrs,. is 10 feed the churches -with knowledge and underflavding ^ ; which, unlefs they have a confidcrable (hare of thcmfelves, they will not be able to do with any profit and advantage to others : thefe are fpiritual men, who having fpiritual gifts, arc capable of making-judgment of all things necefiary to be known unto- tilvation i of this knowledge and of this, gift the apoftle is fpeaking, when he £iys^ whereby when ye read ye may underjland my knowledge in the myflery of Chrijl ". . But now, befidcs this ftiarc of knowledge and furniture of the mind, there mufb, be a capacity of exprefiing it toothers, to make tip the minifterial qualification i a man muft not only have wherewiih to teach others, or matter to inftruft them in,, but he mud be capable of doing it in an apt and fuitable manner, that tends to edification ; which the .apoftle means by utterance, which is a gift, and by mens being ahle to teach others alfo, and by being apt to teach '; for it fignifies kittle what a man knows, or how oreat Ibever is the furniture of his mind, or the largenefs of his ideas, and the compafs of his knowledge, if he is not capable of clothing his ideas with apt and fuitable words to convey them to the under- ftanding of others. So then this gift confifts of knowledge and elocution-, and. on whomfocver this gift is beftowed, whether on a gracious or a gracelcfs perfon, on a John or zjudas^ ; or whether on a learned or unlearned man, on a. Paul or- J Ephej. iii. y^ • i Ptter iv. 10. ' Rom. xK. 6. t Jer. iii. 15, * Eplws. iii. 4. ' Ephes. vi. 19. eTitn.ii.z. 1 Tim. iii. 21 * ^udas had the fame call and miJion from CKrift to preach the gofpcl wich the reJlof the aportles; »nd had the fame gifts ordinary and extraordinary qualifying for ic ; and behaved fo weH in bis office, that the rcH of the difciplcs ratlier dillruftcd thcmfelves th.an him, on Chrift's declaring, one of them "(houW betray him, faying each, L it 1? *4au.x. i' — 'S. and Xxvi. 21,12. And, though I am of ©pinion, that for the mod part, God gives fpecial grace to thofe on whom he bedows gilts for tlie minillry, yet not always ; aa the inflances in Matt vii. ii, zj. Phil, i 15, 16. fliew, and is a cafe the apoftle fuppofes, I Cor. jr. 27. and xiii. i, z. and fcch may be themcans of the converfion and edification of men : the reafon of which is, it is the word of God they preach, and God can and doc3 mxkf ufc of his own word, to fiich purpofes, by what inil/ameais he pleafes. ii A CHARGE AT THE ORDIN^ATION or a Peler ; on a man of good natural parts or one of a meaner capacity ; thac is it that qualifies for the miniftry ; where indeed grace, learning, and natural parts all meet together in a man with this gift, they make him a very confider- -able and diftinguifhed man. Now, there are various things that are requifue,- in order to the due and regular cxercife of this gift to ufefulnefs. 1. There muft be a call to the exercife of it : befides the inward call or dif- pofition of the mind to fuch fervice, and which muft be fubmitted to others; for the ffifit of the prophets h fubje5f Jo the prophets *-\ there muft be an outward call by the rhurctv : it being notified to it by fome means or another, that fuch 'an one is thought to have a gift for the miniftry, the church calls him to the cxercife of it, tries his gift, and judges of it -, and upon approbation, fuch are feparated and fent forth into the miniftry, as Sanl and Barnabas were -, for no tnodeft man will take this honour to himfeif, or thruft himfelf into this work, Onlefs he is called to it ; though in this rambling age of ours, there are many run who were -never fent, and take upon them this work, without having a gift qualifying them for it, or a call from God or men unto it. 2. Where there is a gift, diligence and induftry muft be ufcd to improve it ; For otherwrfe it may decline, become lels, and in length of time ufclcfs ; yea, may "be entirely 4oft or taken away ; for gifcs are not like grace ; grace, though it may decUnc as to exercife, can never -be loft ; but gifts may, as appears from the parable of the talents, by which I undcrftand minifterial gifts •, the man that had one talent wrapped it up in a napkin, and hid it in the earth, that is, he negledled it, and made no ufe of it •, wherefore orders are given to fake it from him, and give it toothers; for unto ivery one that hath Jhalt be given, and be fhall have abundance \ every one that hath a gift, and is diligent and conftant in the ufe of it, that fhall increafe ; but from him that bath not, who, though he has a sift, is as if he had none, negle6ting to cultivate it, and make ufe of ir, fhall be taken a'O^ay even that ivhich be hath'. Gifts, like fome mrtais, unlcfs frequently ufcd, become rufty and good for nothing-, hence the cxhortanon of the apoftle to Timothy, not to negleft, but to fir up the gift of God that was .in him '", as you ftir up coals of fire, that they may give more light and heat ; fo gifts by ufe become brighter and brighter, and more beneficial. 3. Faithfulnefs is ncccftary to the due cxercife of this gift-, thofe that have it are, or ftiould be, good fewards of the manifold grace of God; and now ;/ is required in fe^ards that a man be found faithful" ; to difpenfe the myfteries of God, of which they are ftewards, unto others ; and ivbenGod has counted a man faithful, putting him into the minifiry\ he ought to continue faithful to him thac has " iCor. jiv. ji. I Matt jtxv. 29. iTim. iv. 14. 2 Tim. i. 6. " I Pet iv. 10. I Cor. iv. 2. • 1 Tim. i. 12. Serm. 38. OF SEVERAL MINISTERS. 15 iias put him into it, to the fouls of men committed to his care, and to the gof- pel, and the truths of it he is entrufted with. For he that bath my word, let him /peak my word faithfully : what is the chaff to the wheat ? faith the Lord of hofls ^ 4. Wifdom and prudence are alfo very rcquifite in the exercife of this gift, both in the choice of fubjeds, and in the manner of treating them ; a man that is a fleward mufl: be wife as well as faithful, to give to every one of the houihold their portion of meat in due feafon "> ; and a man that labours in the word and dodrine fhould be fkilful in the fcriptures, that he may rightly divide the word of truth' ; and he that has to do with perfons in various cafes, and different circumftances, had need to have the undcrftanding and /o;7g-K^o/"/,&? learned to fpeak a word in feafon to him that is weary '. 5. Minifters of the word ought to be cartful of their lives and converfations ; or otherwife, let their gifts be what they may, they will become ufelefs and unprofitable -, they therefore (hould take heed to themfelves', to condu6t and be- have becoming their work and office ; and fo to walk as to be an example of the beliroers, in word, in converfation, in charity, infpirit, in faith, inpUrity"; and to take care they give no offence to the church, nor to the world, that the mi- nifliy be not blamed" ; for it is a mod fhameful thing, that they which teach others not to fin, but to guard againft it, fliould be guilty of the fame them- felvcs ; lee Rom. ii. 23, 24. where the apoftle enlarges on this fubjcft. Fourthly, Confider the means that are to be made ufe of for the cultivation and improvement of the minifterial gift ; and for the better difcharge of the work and office to which you have been called and ordained. The diredtions the apoftle gives to Timothy on this head, are well worthy of your notice, and Ihould be clofely purfued ; give attendance to readings to exhortation, to doctrine. — Meditate on thefe things, give thyfelf wholly to them, that thy profiting may ap- pear to all'' : in the firft and chief place ftudy the Bible, read that attentively, compare one paffage with another, fpiritual things with fpiritual, parallel places together ; and particularly thofe that are more dark and obfcurc with thofe that are more clear and plain ; that thereby you may know more of the mind of the Spirit of God and Chrifl in the facrcd pages j for the infpired writings are /ro- ftabU for doHrine, for reproof, for corre5lion, for inflru5lion in righteoufnefs, that the man of God may be perfeH, thoroughly furnifhed unto all good works '' ; for thefe will furnifh out fufficient matter, both for things dodtrinal and prafbical, to be infiftcd on in the miniflry of the word ; and with whatfoever may be necefTary for the difcharge of the minifterial office. Read alfo the writings of good men. Vol. II. E for P Jer. xxiii. 28. « Lukexii.42. » * Tim. ii. i 5. ' Ifai 1.4. « Aftjxx. 28. • I Tim. iv. 12. » 2 Cor. vj. 3. » i Tim. iv. 13, 15. f 2 Tim. iii. 16, 17. »6 A CHARGE AT T'^HE ORDINATION • for thcfc are not preferved and tranfmicted to pofterity for nothing, but for ufe-, but then read them with care and caution, as human writings, liable to mil- takes, and having their impcrfeftions •, compare them with the word of God, and fo far as they agree with that, and arc confident with themfelvcs, regard them, and not otherwifr. Meditate much on divine things, on the fcriptuies, and the doflrines concained in them : it is the charaSer of every go }d man, that he niedilates in the law % or doftrine of the Lord continuiily •, and he finds •his account in it -, h\% meditation oi Gq(\, ofChrift, and of fpiritiial thincrs, is fweet % and delightful to him •, and much more fliDuId it be the conftant work and employment of a minifter of the word. Luther, as I rem-mber, it is faicl of him, that he ulcd to fay, "Meditation, temptation, and prayer, make a *' divine." For prayer is alfo very neceflary to be frequently repeated, fince this goes along wiih the mini'lry of the word, and is fo very ufeful in refpoft of it. The apoftlcs defircd to be eafed of the worldly concerns of ilie churji,. that they might give up ihemielves to prayer, a3 well as to the minijiry of the- VJord ^ ; and-to the former in order to the latter. Minifters of the gofpel fliould pray often, not only in public, but in private ; not only for others, but for themfclves ; that they might be more qualified for their work, as well as be more fuccefsful in it ; that they might have more fpiritual light, knowledge^ and underftanding, and be more capable of inftrufting and feeding the people under their care -, that they might have the eyes of their underftandings more enlightened, to behold the wonderful things that are in the law, or doiflrine of the Lord ; and be better able to p>oint them oi>t to others. Fifthly, Confider on the one hand the difficulties and difcouragements that attend the miniftcriai work ; and on the' other hand^ the encouragements to proceed on in it. 1. The difficulties and difcouragements that attend it; thefe, I would ob- ferve, not to diftrefs you in, or deter you from your work -, but that, when you meet with them, they may not feem as though fomc ftrange or uncommon thing had happened unto you. There are fome, which come from within a man's felf ; from in-dwelling fin, from a law in the members warring againjl the law of the mind ; you will find when you would do good, evil is prefent with you, as particularly to hinder you in the purfuit of your ftudies -, you will find a kind of flothfulnefs and difinclination to the work ; nay, fon^etimes when the fpiril is willing the flefh will be weak % and will make excufcs to put off prepa- ration for it to another time. Sometimes you will be in darknefs, and under divine defertions, and be in very uncomfortable frames -, yet ftill you muft go on, and prepare, in the bcft manner that you can, for inftrufbing and comfort- ing " Pfalm i. 2. • Pfalm civ. 34. »• Afls vi. 4. • Matt. ixvi. 41. 5erm. 38. OF SEVERAL MINISTERS. 17 ing others-, this is hard and difficult W-ork, but it mufl; be done: and difficui- tics and difcouragements fomctimes arifc ^om Satan's temptations, who is very bufy with all good men, cfpecialiy with miniftcrs of the gofpcl : he defircd to have Peirr in his hands -, he buffeted the apoflle Paul; he levels his arrows at thole who are the moft fruitful, flouriiliing, and ufcful -, as the archers that (hot ttX-Jofrpb, \\\zi fruitful bough by a well, and grieved him, \.\\o\ig\\ bis bo-ju abode ' in flnngth, the arms of his hands bein^ made flrong by the mighty God of Jacob. You mull: expeft Satan's temptations ; he will tempt you to thit which is uiT- becoming your charadtcr and office ■, he will tempt you perhaps to entertain groundlcfs jealoufies of one or other of the members of the churcli -, he will tempt you to drop your mir.illry, or howevrr, in this place, and to do it in a pet and humour: thcfe, and fuch like temptations, fhould be guarded againlh Other difcouragements will arife from the world, and the men of it, from their revilings and reproaches, wrath, rage, and perfecutions in one fhape or other; but none of thcfe things fliould move you from your work, or caufe you to de- Icrt it. Remember you are chofen, and called to be a foldier of Jefus Chrift i and, as a good one, fhould endure hardncfs, hard words, and iiard ufage, for his fake: yea, the difficulties and difcouragements of gofpel-miniftcrs are in- crcafcd by profeflbrs of religion themfelves -, not only by thofe of other commu- nities, who may traduce and fpeak ill of fuch, who are not altogether of the fame principles with themfelves, but by the members of the churches over which they are paftors -, feme of which are very weak and imprudent, and oftentimes make a minifter very uncomfortable and uneafy by their words and aflions j though thefe things fhould be confidered as their weaknelTes and infirmities, and to be bore with ; for we that are firong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not pleafe ourfehes ^ ; yet thefe muft be reckoned arriong a minifter's difficul- ties and difcouragements ; but, 2. You are to confider the encouragements to go on in your wprk, notwith- flanding what may be met with in it which is difficult and difcouraging ; and which is a fuperabundant counterbalance to tliat. Remember the gracious pro- mifcs Cbrift has made of his prefence with his minifters, and of his protection pffhem, and of his affiftance in their work, and of a reward, though not of debt, yet of grate, that fliaU be given them : he has promifed he will be with his miniliers in fucceffive generations, unto the end of the world, to fupply and fiipport them ; he holds them in his right hand, and will not fuffer any to fee upon them, to hurt them, until they have done the work he has called them to, and is dcfigncd to be done by them ; his power and grace are Sufficient to bear E 2 them ^ Rom. IV. I, 28 A CHARGE AT THE ORDINATION ihem up in, and carry them through whatever fervice he engages them in ; his ftrength is made perfect in their weakncfs, and as their day is, their ftrength is ; To he has promifed, and fo he performs. Remember and coafider, that they that be wife, and teach and inftruft others, fhall7&/«^ as the brightnefs of the fir- mament in the kingdom-ftate -, and they that turn many to righteoufnefs, or juftify many, by teaching the dodlrine of jultification, or diredling fouls to the righ- icoufnefs ofChrift alone for \i,fhall be as the fiars for ever and ever ^ ; that thofc who have taken good heed to their flocks, over which the Holy Ghofl: hath made them overkers, and have faithfully fed them, and carefully watched over them, when the chief fjepherd fhall appear, fkall receive a crown of glory that fadetb not away' \ and will hear fromChrift, well done, good and faithful fervant, enter thou into the joy of thy Lord'. But I proceed to obferve, II. The prayer or wifJi of the apoftle for Timothy, that the Lord would gig.' e hirtt underjianding in ail things ; and upon this I fhall be very fliort ; only drup a few things by way of explanation of it : and by all things, in which he defires he might have an undcrftanding, he does not mean all things natural and civil v indeed the underftanding of all fuch things comes from God ; every good and perfect gift in nature, or in providence, as well as in grace, comes /row the Fa- ther of lights^; all the wifdom and knowledg^e which Bezaleel'zad Aholiab had for devifing and working curioiis works for the ta.bernacle, were of God -, he put it into their hearts, and filled them with wifdom, knowledge, and under- ftanding in thefe things -, yea, even all the underftanding the ploughman has in ploughing the ground, and breaking the clods, and harrowing them, and in fowincr his feed, is all from God ; he inftrufts him to difcretion -, this comes from him who is wonderful in counfel,, and excellent in working^; and fo the fame may be faid of knowledge of all natural and civil things, of all arts and fciences,. liberal and mechanic : and. Indeed a minifter of the word had need to be ac- quainted with all things in. nature and civil life, thoroughly to underftand all thin<7S contained in the fcripturcs of truth -, fince there are fuch a variety of me- taphors, and fo many allufions to things natural and civil -, and fuch an ador- able fulnefs in them, as Tertullian expreffes it. But the apoftle, no doubt, means underftanding in fpiritual things, in the fcriptures, in the doctrines and myfteries of grace. The underftanding of man is naturally dark as to thofe things •, it is the Lord that gives men an underftanding to know them, that opens their hearts, and enlightens their minds by the fpirit of wifdom and reve- lation, in the knowledge of them ; for whatever underftanding natural men may have of natural things, they have none of fpiritual ones; there is none that un~ derjlandetby, ADan. lii. 4. • I Pet. y. .4. » Matt. xxr. 21. « Jam.i. 17. * Ifai. nvi.i. j6, 29. Serm.38. • OF SEVERAL MINISTERS. 29 derjiandetby there is none that feeketh after God''. Now, befides the iinderftand- ing of fpiritual things, which God gives in common to his people, he gives to his minifters a larger underftanding of divine things, and of the (criptures and the truths of them ; he opens their underftandings, as Chrift did his difciples, that tiiey may underftand the fcriptures ; he gives unto them to know the myf- tcries of the kingdom of heaven, to a greater degree than he does to others ; and he enlarges their underftandings, and increafes their gifts, their light, and knowledge ; which is what the apoftle in a more cfpccial manner prays for here, on the account ol Timothy \ that he might be better inftrudted in every thing relative to his office, as an cvangclift and minifter of the word, and know how 10 behave in the church of God, which is the houfe of God, the pillar and ground of truth -, and which is the principal end of his writing this; and the former epiftle to him ''. I have only one obfcrvation more to make, and that is, that the ciaufe may be confidered as an afTcrtion, or a promife, and the hard will groe thee underjlanding in all things; and fo is ufcd as an encouragement to confidcr well what had been faid, and to expedl a richer furniture of knowledge, and a larger meafure of fpiritual light and underftanding; and as Chrift gives more light to his people, who are made light by him; and there is fuch a thing as growing in grace, and in the knowledge of Chrift, and of all fpiritual things, in common chriftians ; and the path of the juft is as the ftiininglight that Opines more and more unto the perfect day v fo faithful minifters of the word, who arc diligent and induftrious in their work, may expeft, and be aftured, that God will give them an enlarged knowledge and underftanding of divine truths, and of every thing neceflary to the due performance of that facred work they are called unto, and holy office they are invefted with. I ftiall clofe, as I begun, with the words of my text, Conjider what Ifay^ or have been faying; confider the work of the miniftry, that it is a work, and a laborious one, yet honourable and deferving of cftcem from men; and that God will never leave his fervants ^n it : confider the feveral parts of it, as the miniftration of the gofpel, the ad- :miniftration of ordinances, the care of the difcipline of Chrift's houfe, and vi- fiting the afflifted and diftreffcd : confider the neceftary qualifications for it, and the things that are ufeful to the performance of it: confider the means to be jnade ufe of to enable for the better and more regular exercife of fpiritual gifts ; ^nd the difficulties and difcouragements tlut, on the one hand, attend this work; ;and, on the other, the encouragen^nts to go on in it; and the Lord give thee ^underftanding in all things ; in all divine and fpiritual things, in the truths of the .gofpel, and in every thing relative to your office, and the due difcharge of it, lyou have this day been invefted with. May the blcfting of God reft upon you, and may you have fuccefs in your work. SERMON * Rom. iij. 12. * 1 Tim. Ui. 14, 15. -^o A SERMON AT THE ORDINATION SERMON XXXIX. T/x Do5fri?ie of the Cherubim Vpened and Explained. A SERMON at the Ordination of tVie Reverend Mr John Davis, at IValtham- Abbey. Preached Augufi 15, 1764. E Z E K I E I, X. 20. ^his is the living creature, that J Jaw under the God of Ifrael, by the river of Cbehar ; and I hieiu that they wtVQ the Cherubim, BEING defired to fay fomething to you, my BrotlKr, on this occafion, re- lative to the minifterial charadler you bear, and to the work you have been called to, and to the office you have been at this time inverted with ; my thoughts have been led to this pafTage of fcripture. This is the living creature ; or crea- tures, the fino'ular for the plural; for there were four living creatures which Ezekiel faw in the vifion he refers to ; thefe he faw under the God ef Ifrael, under a firmament over the heads of thefe creatur-es -, above which was the appearance of a man in a moft glorious and iliuHrious form ; and who was no other than the Son of God, who was to be incarnate, and here called the God. of Ifrael; and which is no inconfiderable proof of our Lord's proper Deity, for the God of Ifrael muft be the true God : this vifion the prophet had by the rivir of Chehar; a river in Chaldea, where the captive Jrws alTembled, and Ezekiel with them^ and when he had the vifion, as now repeated to him, the objects in it became more familiar to him -, and he more wiftly looked at them, and perceived and was well affured, that the living creatures he faw were the cherubim ; or were of the fame form and figure with the cherubim In the tabernacle oi Mofes and temple 0^ Solomon -, for though he was not an high pried, only a common pricll, and fo could never have fecn the cherubim in the cnoft holy place himfelf, yet he mioht have had an account of them from an high prieft vrho had fecn them ; and befides there were figures of the cherubim carved upon the walls of the temple all around, and upon the doors of it-, v.'hich, as his bofinefs was to be fre- Serm. 39- OF THE Rev. Mr JOHN DAVIS. gr frequently in the temple, he muft have often feen, and full well knew them. Sfe alio vir. 15. where the fame is affirmed as here. It may fcem ftrange to you at firft, that I fhould read fuch a pafTage of fcrip- ture on fuch an occafion -, but it will not appear fo long, when I inform you lliat mv intention is, by opening and explaining the emblems of the cherubim, toby before you the qualifications, duties, work, and ufcfulnefs of the minif- tcrs of the gofpel ; to make way for which, it will be proper to inquire what the cherubim were, aqd what they fignified -, in order to which we muit look both backwards and forwards", to the account of them in fcripcure, both before and after the fe s/\{\on^ oi Ezekiel. The account begins early, proceeds gradqally, and by degrees becomes more clear, diftinct, and perfedl. The firft mention of the cherubim is \x\Gen. iii. 24. quickly after the fall of man, and at his expgl- fwn from the garden of Ed^n ; wiien Jehovah placed at the eaji of the garden of Eden, cherubim, and a fiamir.g fnord zvkich turned every tsjciy, to keep the way of the tree of life; but we are not told what thcl'e cherubirji were, whether real cr^'a- turcs or only figures, nor what their form, nor their number', only their pofition at the calt oV the garden of Eden, and their ufe, to keep the way gf the tree of life, the meaning of \Ahich will be given hereafter; only it may be oblerved, that Mofes calls rtiem the cherubim \ for the word in the original has the prepofitivc and emphjtic article; as if they were well known, as they were to Mofes, and might be to the people of Ifrael through him, who could inform them of them v for the book ot Genefis was written after Mofes had the order to make the cherubim, and place them with the mercy-feat over the ark in the holy of holies, as related \n Exodus xw. 18 — 22. from whence we learn, that the cherubim were figures of winged creatures ; that they were in number two; that they were made of gold, of the fame mafs with the mercy-feat; that they ftood at both ends of it, looking to one another and to that, and overfha- dowed it with their wings ; and were fo placed as to make a feat for the divine Majefty, who took up his refidence here, and therefore afterwards is often dcfcribed by him that divsUeth between the cheruhm. The fame figures were fet in the moft holy place in Solomon's temple ; and where alfo were two others of a larger fize, made not of gold, but of olive-wood gilded, and whofe wings Cfctended, and touching each other, reached from one fide of the holy of holies to the other; but flill we are at a lofs for the exaft form of thefe figures: this ij fupplied in the vifions of Ezekiel, related in this and in the firft chapter; in ^hich, four living creatures, he alTerts to be the cherubim, are particularly defcribcd by their faces, their uings, their hands, and their feet, and by the Ihining » In the Targumi of Jonathan »nd Jerufalcm on the place, they are fiid to be two. * a'2 -iDH na. 31 A SERMON AT THE ORDINATION fhining appearance of the whole ; but ftill we are left in the dark what thefc creatures were emblems of, until the gofpel-difpenfation took place, which brings dark things into light; whtnyobn had a vifion fimilar to thofe of Ezekiel, with a very little variation, in which he had a more perfedl: view of the livmcr creatures, and which gives a more exad defcription of them, of their fuuatioa and employment -, that they were round about the throne of God, were rational creatures, and fpiritual and conflant worfhippers of the divine Being, or how- ever, emblems of fuch-, with other marks and circumftanccs, by which it may be known with fome certainty, who they were, or who are intended by them. The vifion is related in Rev. iv. 6 — 9. and is the key to the interpretation of the cherubim. From whence it appears, Firji, That thefe were not emblems of the divine perfons in the Godhead. It is a fancy that fome of late have embraced, and are greatly elated with it, as , a wonderful difcovery, that the cherubim are an hieroglyphic, the three faces of the ox, lion, and eagle, of the Trinity of perfons in the Deity, and the face of a man joined to them, of the incarnation of the Son of God ;. and would have the word cherubim pronounced ce-rubbim, and tranflated as the mighty ones; but this is a mere fancy and falfe notion : For, 1. Jc/J'w's four beads, or rather /m«g- creatures,' zs the word fhould be ren- dered, for that of beafts is an uncomely tranflation, the fame with Ezekiel's living creatures, and which he affirms to be the cherubim, are reprcfented as worfhippers of the divine Being, and therefore cannot be emblems of the object of worfhip. They are faid not only to be about the throne of God, and to admire and adore the attribute of holinefs, and afcribe it to the almighty Being; but to give glory, honour, and thanks to him ; to fall down and worfhip God, yea, to fall down before the Lamb in a worlhipping pofturc, and to give the lead to others in divine worfhip. See Rev. iv. 8 10. and v. 8, 14. and xix. 4. 2. The cherubim are in many places moft manifeftly diflinguifhcd from the divine Being; they are reprefented as the feat or throne on which he fits, and as a vehicle in which he rides ; fo they are defcribed at the firft mention of them in Gen. iii. 24. where the words may be rendered he, Jehovah, inhabited the cherubim, or dwelt with, over, or between them ' ; and fo he did in the cherubim over the mercy-feat, from between which he promifcd to commune •wMh Mofes ; and therefore, as before obferved, is often defcribed as dwelling between the cherubim, and on which he is faid to ride. See Exodus xxv. 22. Pfalm Ixxx. I. and xviii. 10. and here the living creatures in my text are faid to be undir the God of Ifrael, and fo diftinft from him ; and in John's vifion arc defcribed as about the throne of God, and as diftinft from him that fat upon iti * Vide Texelii Phoenix, 1. 3. c. 7. p. 256, 257. S£RM.39- OF THE Rev. Mr JOHN DAVfS. .33 it; and tht ferapbim in Ifaiab's Vx^xox), the fame with xhc iberubim here, arc alfo diftinguifhed from the 'Lord fitting en a tbrone bigb and lifted up; and are reprefented as attendants on him, and worfhippers of him, Jfai. vi. i — 3. 3. If the cherubim could be thought to be emblems of a plurality in the Deity, they would be emblems, not of a trinity of perfons, but rather of a quaternity, fince the cherubim had four faces, each dillinft from one another-, yea, John's four living creatures were four diftinft animals, each having a dif- tintt head and face ; and the face of a man, both in his and Ezekiel's livino- creatures, is as diftindl a face as any of the reft ; and if they were emblems of perfons, that muft be fo too j whereas the human nature of Chrift, this is faid to be an emblem of, is no perfon ; Chrift did not take an human pcrfon, but an human nature into union with his divine perfon, for reafons that might be given ; much lefs is it a perfon in the Godhead, as this fuppofed emblem would make it to be. Befides, the human nature in Chrift is his inferior nature, whereas the face of the man in the cherubim is the fuperior face, the reft being faces of irrational animals. 4. If the cherubim were an hieroglyphic of the Trinity, this would give a fimilitude of the divine Being, and of that in him which is the moft incompre- henfible to us, a Trinity of perfons in the Deity ; and would furnifti with art anfwer to fuch a queftion, fuggefted as unanfwerable, Towbont tben will ye liken Cod ? or wkat Ukenefs will ye compare 'u.'ith him ? Ifai. xl. t8, 25. and xlvi. 5. for then it might be replied, To the cherubim : but there is no likenefs of God, nor any to be made of him •, though the Son of God often appeared in an human form, and in the fulnefs of time became incarnate ; and the holy Ghoft once defcendcd as a dove ; yet the Father's ftiape was never feen at any time, John v. 37. This notion alfo is repugnant to the fecond command, which forbids the making any likenefs of any thing that is in heaven above, Exod. xx. 4. and therr moft certainly forbids the making of any likenefs of the divine Being. Sup- pofing the cherubim at the garden oi Eden were made by God himfelf, as thofe in the tabernacle and temple were made by his order; yet he would never make nor order to be made fuch as he forbid, which he muft, if they bore the fimilitude of him; but the truth is, the cherubim were not a lik-enefs of any thing above in heaven, nor of any thing on earth ; there never having been feen nta known by any man on earth, as Jofephus^ affirms, any foch crcaTure whortv tbcy dcfcribe ; and a certain Jcwifti writer obfervcs % the making of them came not under the interdifb or prohibition of the fecOnd command ; which if made iu the likenefs of God it would. Vol. II. F 5- I'o- * Antiq. 1. 3. C.6. 5.5. • R.IfaacMofaides apud Selden.de Jure Nat. & Gent. c. 6. p. 183. 34 A SERMON AT THE ORDINATION 5. To all which may be added, if the cherubim were known emblems of the Trinity, it can hardly be thought that any man would take the name of Cherub to himfelf, or impofe it upon any of his family, or (hould be fo called by others ; yet we find a man with his family of this name, Ezra il 59. Neh. vii. 61. an J ftill lefs would it be giv-n as it is, toAntichrift, the antitype of the king oiTyre, the man of fin and Ton of perdition, Ezik. xxviii. 14. where he is called the anointed cherub •■, which can never be in allufion to the divine Being, and the perfons in the Godhead ; but may be in allufion to the miniRcrs of the word, the cherubim are the emblems of, as will be prcfcntly fcen ; fince he is an ecclc- fiaftical perfon, calls himfelf a Bifhop, an univerfal Bifhop, Chrift's anointed Vicar, and Head of the church, the fole and infallible interpreter of the facrcd fcriptures. Nor, Secondly, Are the angels meant by the cherubim ; though this is a much bet- ter fenfe than the former, and has been generally received by Jews and Chriftians : and what has led many to embrace this fenfe is, the fuppofcd allufion to the cherubim looking to the mercy-feat, 1 Pel. \. 12. where mention is made of angels being defirous to look into the myftcrics of grace ; though it may be obfcrved that miniders of the word are fometimes fo called, aad may be there meant : however, Johns four living creatures cannot be angels, fince they are fo often diflinguifhed from them •, not only by their names, the one being called angehy and the other living creatures in the fame place-, but alfo by their fituation, the living creatures are rcprefented as neareft to the throne of God, and round about it, then the four and twenty elders next to them, and round about them, and then the angels as round about both •, but what puts it out of all doubt is, that thefe living creatures are by themfelves owned to be redeemed to Cod by the blood of the Lamb, out of every kindred and tongue, people and nation : which cannot be faid of angels ; for as they never finned, they never llood in need of the blood of Chrift to redeem them. See Rev. v. S, 9, 1 1. and vii. 1 i. and XV. 7. Wiierefore, Tbirdlyy Since the four and twenty elders in the vifions of John are the repre- fcntatives of gofpel-churches, fo called in allufion to the twenty-four courfcs of the priefts, and the twenty-four Rations of the Levitcs, fixed in the times of David; who, as they in turn attended the fcrvicc of the temple, rcprefented the whole body of the people of Jfrael; fo thefe twenty-four ciders before the throne, and in the temple of God, reprefcnt the whole Ifrael of God, all the members of the gofpel-church-ftate from firft to laft ; and fince the four living creatures are clearly diftinguifhed from them both, by aan^e and by fituation, and by giving the lead to them in divine worfliip, as minifters of the word do to the churches j it remains, that the minifters of the gofpel only can be meant by 1 Serm. 39- OF THE Re^. Mr JOHN DAVIS/ 35 by the living creatures, or the cherubim '. See Rev. iv. 4, 6, 9, 10 and v. 8, 1 i» 14. and vii 11. and by confidering tlie fevcral places where ihey are made mention of, this will appear to be the truth of the matter. As, I. Gen. iii. 24. where they are firfl: fpoken of, and are faid to be placed at 4he eajl of the garden of Eden, with a flaming Iword, to keep the way of the tree of life; I am quite content to have the phrafe rendered, to obferve the way of the tree of life, as the word is often tranflated by us ^. The flaming fword may be an emblem of the fword of the Spirit, which is the word of God, and which is fliarper than a two-edged fword, and has itfelf two edges, law znd gofpel ; by the one, when it enters and cuts deep, is the knowledge of fin, and of the fad confequences of ir, and leaves a fenfe of wrath and fiery indignation -, and by the other, the knowledge of Chrift and falvation by him, and is called the gofpc! of lalvation ; and the flame of it may denote the light, heat and glory, which are in the word, when accompanied with a divine influence -, fo the che- rubim may be an hieroglyphic of the minifters of it ; and it is the fenfe of fome, both Jews and Chriftians ", that the miniftry of the word is referred to and in- tended by the whole. When Adam had finned, he was driven out of the garden oi Eden, to prevent his eating of the tree of life, Icfl: he fliould imagine that by ihat adion of his, his life was prefcrved and continued, and would be forever; teaching him thereby, that he was not to expect falvation and eternal life by any adts and works of his own, nor by any creature, nor by any outward means : «nd cherubim were placed without the garden, not to guard the way of the tree of life, literally underftood, or to prevent Adam's acccfs unto it-, that was fuf- ficiently done by his being driven out of it ; but to obferve and point out to him, for his comfort and relief, the way to a nobler tree of life than that in the garden; to the true antitypical tree of life, Jefus Chrift, that tree of life that (lands in the midft of the paradife of God, the church, of which every over- comer of fin, Satan and the world, may take and eat. Rev. ii. 7. Chrift, the "Wifdom and Word of God, who is a tree of life, the author and giver of life eternal to all thofe that lay hold by faith upon him ; and happy is every one that fo doing retains him, Prov.W'x. i8. even Chrift the way, the truth, and the life, the true way to eternal life. Now the cherubim were in this emblems F 2 of f I am not alone in this fentiment ; Dr Lightfoot is of the fame opinion, ProfpiQ of ihtTimpte, c. 38. PfeifFer. Dub. Vexat. cent. 4. loc. 4. p 407. Ofiandcr in ibid, and fo Vitringa on Ifa vi. 2. though of another mind are, Witfiui in jEgyptiac. 1. i.e. 13. J. jj. and Oecnn. Forder. 1. 4.C. 6. ^. 44. and Marckius, Fifcic. Diflertat. dif. 24. V '7i &c. hot Dr Goodwin, in his cxpoCtion of the Revelation, p. 5, 6. takes Jobn'i four living creatures to be the officers of the chrilban church. * IDiyb See Pfalm cvii. 48. Ecdcs. xi. 4. Ifii. xlii. 20. Jonah ii. 8. * Vide Fagium in loc. 36 A SERMON AT THE ORDINATION of minifters of the gofpe!, the fervants of tlx moji high God; wbofe work it is tt Jhew unio men I he way of life andfahatien by Jefus Chrijl. And this is the bitfinels that you, my Brother, fhould be conflantly employed in, in inftrodlmg men that they are not to be favcd by their own v\orks, duties and fcrvices ; that God laves and calls men, not according to their works, buc according to his purpofc and grace i that men are to cxpcdt the pardon of fin» not on the account of their repentance and humiliation, but through the blood ofChrift, and according to the riches of God's grace -, that ^ the dieds cf th^ law no fle/h living can be jujlificd in the fight of God ; but that a man is juRificd by faith in the right ecufnefs ef Cbrifl, without the deeds of the law ; chat men are not faved by the bed works ot righteoufnefs done by them, but by the abun- dant mercy and free grace of God, through Chrilt. You are to acquaint all that you are concerned with, that falvation is by Chrift alone; that God has chofcn and appointed him to be his falvation to the ends of the earth ; and that he has appointed men to falvation alone by him -, that he has fcnt him into the world to be the Saviour of them ; this is iht faithful faying, and worthy of all acceptation, you are to publish and proclaim, xhztC\\r\i\. came into the world to fave the chief of finners ; and that by his obedience, fufFcrings and death, he .is become the author of eternal falvation to them ; and that there is falvation in ■him, and in no other; and that there is no other nanie given under heaven a>nsng tncn whereby they can be faved. SouJs fenfible of fin and danger, and who arc •crying out, IV hat fhall we do to be faved? you are to obfcrve, and point cut ■Chrift the tree of life unto them ; and fay, as fome of the cherubs did to one tin fuch circumftances, Believe on the Lord Jefus Chriji, and thou fhalt be faved, -Adhxvi.gi. Yourworkis to lead men, under a fenfe of fin and guilt, to the blood of Chrift, £hed for many for the remi/Tion of fin; and in his name you are to preach the forgivenefs of it to them ; you are to dired: believers, under your care, to go by faith daily to Chrift the mediator, and deal with the blood offprinkling for the remifTion of their fins, and the cleanfing of their fools; ■which fprinkled on them fpeaks peace and pardon, purges the confciencc from dead works, and cleanfes from all fin. You arc to point out the righteoufnefs of Chrift, as the only juftifying righteoufnefs of men, by whofe obedience only men are made righteous ; the miniftraiion of the gofpel is a miniftration of righ- teoufnefs, even of the righteoufnefs of Chrift, which is revealed in it from faith to faith ; and fuch fiiould be your miniftration. You arc to acquaint men, that this righteou-fnefs is unto all, and upon all that believe; and that fuch arejuf- tificd from all things by it, from which they could not be jujlified by the law of Mafesi and that the acceptance of men with God, is only in Chrift the beloved. Y'ou are to obferve to men the atoning facrifice of thc^oa of God, and to direft them. Serm.39- of the Rev. Mr JOHN DAVIS. SI them, as one of the cherubs did, pointing to him, and faying, Behold the Lemi ef God, which taketh erj:ay the fin of the world ! JjDhn i. 29. to bid them view the fin-bearing and fin-atonrng Saviour, -and look to the Lamb in the midft of the Throne as though he had been flain -, by whofe (lain facrifice fin is put iway, and they perfected forever that are fandlified. But more of this may be obfcrved, 2. In the account of the cherubim over the mercy-feat in Exod. xxv. 18, &c. there they are faid to be two, and were emblems of the prophets of the Old ■Tcftament, and of the apoflles of the New, with their fuccefTors, the minifters of the word in all generations •, between whom there is an entire harmony and agreement ; the prophets fpoke of the fufFerings of Chrift, and the glory that ihould follow-, and the apoftle P^jk/, and the other apnftlcs, faid no other things than what Alofes and the prophets did fay, that Chrift (hould fuffer, and be the •firft that (hould rife from the dead ; they both agreed in laying minifterially Chrift as the foundation, and in direfling men to build their faith and hope upon him, as well as they themfclves were laid on him •, and therefore he is ■called the fciindation of the apefles and prophets, Ephes. ii. 20. even as the mercy- feat was the bafis on which the two cherubim ftood, and by which they were fupported : and it may be obferved, in agn'eement with the number of the che- rubim, that the fcventy difciplcs of Chrift were fent forth by him two by two to preach his gofpcl -, and the minifters of the word that prophefy in fackcloth during the reign of antichrift, arc called th^two witnefTes, Luke x. i. Rev.xl. 3. -and the addition of two other cherubim of a larger fize in Solomon's, temple, may fignify the greater perfedion of the gofpel-miniftry, and the larger number of golpcl-minifters, in the gofpel-church of the New Teftamcnt, of which Solomon's temple was a type. The maner of which the cherubim over the mercy-feat were made, was pure gold, and of the fame mafs with the mercy-feat ; denoting the rich gifts and graces of the Spirit, with which minifters of the gofpel are qualified for their work ; and which arc of the fame kind and nature with thofe of Chrift, as man; only in meafure, his without; and the rich trcafure put into thcfe earthen veflels, and the precious truths of the gofpel, -comparable to gold, filver and precious ftones, committed to their truft to miniftcr. The vfc of the cherubim was to overftiadow the mercy-feat, and therefore they are called the cherubim of glory PadcwtKg the mercy- feat, Hcb. ix. 5. which they did with cheir wings; denoting in minifters their miniftrations, the readinefs and chear- fulnefs of them ; the cherubim looked towards one another, and towards the aiercy-fear, and pointed to that. And this, my Brother, is a principal part of your work, as one of the ehcrubs, to dircft to Chrift the mercy-feat, the channel of the grace and mercy of God 10 the fouls of men i as Qto^ fet forth Chriji in his eternal purpofes and decrees to 38 A SERMON A T T H E O R D Ils^ A T I O N to be a propitiation, *Xar>i?ioi>, Rom. iii.,25. the fame word the Greek interpreters ufe for the mercy-feat in Exodus xxv. fo you are to fet him forth in your mini- ftrations as the propitiation, propitiatory, and mercy-feat : let the mercy-feat be ever in view; keep in fight in all your miniftrations the doftrine of atone- ment and fatisfa6l:ion by the blood and facrifice of Chrift; let this be the pole- ftar by which you fleer the courfe of your miniftry ; diredt fouls to the throne of grace, to the mercy feat, to God in ChriO, where they may hope to find grace and mercy to help them in time of need : and, for your encouragement, obferve the fitaation of the cherubim, tht-y were upon the mercy-feat, at tlie €nds of it, being beaten out of the fame mafs of gold with that -, denoting the jiearnefs of minifters to Chrift, their union to him, and dependence on him, and •fupport by hirn, who holds the ftars in his right hand: and alfo his prefcnce With them; for between the cherubim, the ihrkinah, or glorious majefty of God, dwelt ; and Chrift has promifed to be with his minifters unto the end of ihe world. But I go on, 3. To confider the living creatures in the vifions o^ Ezekiel iLnd John, called the cherubim ; and who will appear to be proper emblems of the minifters of the ^ofpcl, by confidering their names and number, their form in general, and the feveral parts by which they arc defcribed in particular. \Jl, Their names and number. ( I.) What both John and Ezekiel faw are called living creatures ; for the ^-^^ in John's vifionexaftly anfwer to the J~\vn in Ezekiel's, and both fignify animals that have life and breath : minifters of the word are creatures, both as men and as minifters ; as men they are the creatures of God, as others; though they are the ambafladors of God, and ftand in his ftead, yet they arc men and noc gods, frail, mortal men; the prophets, do they live for ever? no: they are alfo finful men, as the apoftle Peter, one of the cherubs, owned himfclf to be ; and men of like paftlons with others, as the apoftle Pau!, another of the che- rubs, acknowledges ; and therefore allowances muit be made for their weak- neftcs and infirmities : and they are creatures as minifters, they are made fu, not by themfclves nor by other men: Paul an apojlle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jefus Chrijl, and God the Father, Gal. i. 1. he did not thruft himl'elf mto the miniftry, but God put him into it ; nor did he become a minifter of the word by his own attainments, not by all the learning he acquired at the feet of Gamaliel, or elfewhere ; hut he wis made a minijler, as he himfclf fays, accord- ing to the gift of the grace of God given unto him, Ephes. iii. 6, 7. and fo all that are made able miniflers of the New Tejlament, arc made fo of God ; for they are not fufficient of themfclves, but their fufficiency is of God, 2 Cor. iii. 5, 6. And they arc living creatures, they are regenerated, quickened, and have fpiritual Jife in them ; and fo fay the things which they have fcen, and heard, and felt; which. Serm. 39- OF THE Rev. Mr JOHN DAVIS. 39 which, if unregenerate., they would not be able to do : and it is requifite they fliould be lively in their miniftrations ; it is mod comfortable to themfelvcs, and belt for thofe to whom they minifter, when they are lively in their frames, lively in the exercife of grace, and in the difcharge of duty ; when they are fer- vent infpirit^ while they are ferving the Lord their God; and under a divine influence, they are the favour of life urtto life; the inftruments and means of quickening dead finners, and of reviving and refrefhing drooping faints •, and happy are thofe that fit under the miniftry of the living creatures, regenerate men, the living and lively miniftcrs of the gofpel. (2.) Thelc living creatures are called cherubim. Ezekiel affirms they were the cherubim, and he knew them to be fo. Many are the etymologies given of this word, and it is difficult to come at the true meaning of it. I fhall not trouble you with every thing that is faid ', only what may feem proper, fuicablc, and per- tinent. And, I. Philo ihe ]ev/ i^iys'', ihs chcruh\m C\gn\{y tfiuch knowleJ^e ; and in which fcnfc he is followed by many ancient writers', who interpret the word of large knowledge ; Sind fulnefs of it; but for what reafon, I muft own, I cannot fee-, but be it fo, this I am furc of, the minifters of the gofpel have need of a large fbarc of knowledge, both of things natural and fpiritual ; knowledge of themfelvcs, and of their ftate by nature and by grace, and an experience of the work of the fpirit of God upon their hearts ; knowledge of Chrifl, his perfon, offices, and grace-, knowledge of the fcripturcs, which Timothy knew from a child, which are able to make men wife to falvation, are profitable for do£irine and inflruHion, and to fit and furnifh minillers for the work they are employed in--, knowledo-e of the myfterics of grace, ofGod, andofChriftj all which are quite neceflary for ihem, fince their bufinefs is to feed men with knowledge and underftand- ir>g, arid to train them up in ir, till they come to the unity of the faith, to a- pcrfcifl: knowledge of the Son of God, and to the meafure of the flaiicre of the julnefs of Chrift —2. Others think the word has the fignification of might, poiver, zn^ flrength ; in which fenfe the root of it is ufed in- the Syriac language": the minUters of the gofpel are called ftrong ; we that areflrong, Rom. xv. i. and they have need of all the ftrength they have, as to bear the infirmities of weak faints, fo the infults, indignities, reproaches and perfecutions of finful men-, ' The TalmuHirts in Chagigah, fol. 13. 2. iV Succah fjl. 5. 2. fay, the Cherub is as if it was Ce-rubya, as a yourg man ; in which fo.-m it was commonly fuppofed the Cherubim were; others AS Ce-rab, as a mailer; others as Ce-rtrb, as » multitude, ore being as a la^ge multitude See PfcifFer. Dubia Vexat. cen» 1. )oc. 10. p. 17. Hilierus in Onomaftic. Saor. derivei it from a word which (igniAct to cover, and interpret} Cherub covering. Sec Ezik. X)fviii. 14. ' De Vita Mofis, I 3. p. 668. ' Clement. Alex. Stromal. 1. 5. p. 563. Suidas in voce y^t^viiifi.. Hieron. Paulino, T. 3. fol 3. F. de Xom. Heb. in Exod. fol. 98. F. & Comment, in Efaiam. c 6. 2. Ifidor. Origin 1. 7. c 5, Vide Fromme Diflert. de Cherubim-. J. 3. " Vide Cartel. Lexic Heptaglott. in rad y^2^ 40 A SERMON AT THE ORDINATION men -, they have need to be ftrong in the grace that is in Chrift, that they may be able to do the duties of cheir office, and to endure hardnefs as good ibldiers of Chrift ; they have need to be Jirong in the Lord, atid in the power of his might ; that they may be able to wreJlU againji principalities and powers, the rulers of the darknefs of this world; they ought to be ftrong to labour in the word and doc- trine, to do the work of the Lord as it fhould be done : but who is fufficient for tkefe things? — 3. Others" obferve that the word Cherub, by a tranfpofuion of letters, is the fanie with recub, which ^\gW\?ics z. chariot ; in which form the cherubim are fuppofed to be, hence wc read of the chariot of the cherubim, 1 Chron. xxviii. 18. and nothing is more common in Jewifli writers than the mereavah, \.ht chinoz oi Ezekiel, meaning the cherubim ; and the living crea- tures, and the wheels might be in fuch a form as to refcmWe a chariot 5 and thofe who plead for angels being meant by them, with pertinency enough to their hypothefis, apply the words \n Pfalm Wv'm. ly. The chariots of Cod are twenty thcufand, even thoufands of angels, the Lord is among them as in Sinai. But why may not the cherubim, admitting this fenfe of the word, be applied to the minifters of the gofpel -, fincc they are reprefented as vehicles, as chofen veflrls to bear the name of Chrift, to carry and fpread his gofpel in the world ? and, which conveys the fame fcntimenr, are fignified by the 'white horfc on vvhich Chrift is faid to fit, and ^o forth conquering and to conquer. Sc^ AHs ix.15. Rev. vi. 2 But, 4. What I am moft inclined to give into is, that the word cherubim is derived from Carab, which in fome of the eaftcrn languages fig- nifies" to plow, and in plowing, oxen were ufcd formerly, and fo they are in- ifome places at this day : now not only one of the faces of the cherubim is the face of an ox, but that face particularly is called the face of the cherub, as may be obfcrved by comparing Ezek, i.io with chap. x. 14. See alfo 1 Kings vii.29. So that the cherubim feem to have their denomination from this particular face of theirs : and that oxen were emblems of minifters of Chr'^ft, as will be confi- dered more particularly hereafter, is evident from the apoftle Paul, who having ' quoted the law concerning not muzzling the ox when it treads out the corn, adds. Doth God take care for oxen? or faith he it altogether for our fakes ? for the ! fake of us minifters ? /<7r our fakes,, no doubt, this is written: and from oxen he catches at once the idea of plowing, and applies it to minifters, that he that ploweth fhould plow in hope, that is, of enjoying the fruit of his labour, i Cor. ix. 9, 10. There is a prophecy of gofpel-times, and of minifters in them, which runs thus. Strangers fh all fi and and feed your fkicks, and the fons of the alien fhall be your plowmen ; that is, Gentiles fliouW be paftors of chriftian churches, and feed them as flocks are fed ; and that fome of fuch who are aliens from the " De Dieu in Gen. iii. 24. GufTct. Commeni. Ebr. p. 401. ■> Chald. Syr. & Ar. vide Cand. ut fupra. Serm,39' of the Rev. Mr JOHN DAVIS. 41 • the commonwealth oi Ifrael fliould be employed in the Lord's hufbandry, and be inftruments in breaking up the fallow ground of mens hearts, and of ibwin"- the feed of the word in them , Ifai. Ixi. 5. ( 3.) To thefc nalncs of the living creatures, the cherubim, may be added that oi Jeraphim'xn Ifai-ah w\.2. The Jewifh writers ■■ are generally agreed that the vifions oi Ifaiab and Ezekiel relate to the fame thing; and whoever clofely com- pares them, will fee a likenefs between them ; and have no doubt remain, bat that the Cherubim and Seraphim defign the fame perfons : the miniftcrs of the gofpel may be called by the latter name, which fignifies burning, becaufe of their minifterial gifts, comparable to coals of fire ; and becaufe of their fervent •Jove loChrift and the fouls of men, and becaufe of their flaming zeal for the caufe and intereft of their Mafter. (4) The number of the living creatures, both in the vifKJns of Ezekiel znd jfobft, being four, as the four chariots and the four fpirits of the heavens, in the vifions of Zecbariah, chap. vi. i, 5, may have refpeft to the four parts of the world; the commifTion of gofpel-minifters being iv go inio all the luorld, and f reach the -gofpel to every creature. idly. The form of the living creatures, and the feveral parts by which they 4ire defcTibcd, agree with the minifters of the word. The general form is not agreed upon on all hands : feme think that it inclined moflly to that of the ox •or calf ; to which they are induced by what has been obferved, the face of the •ox and of the cherub being the fame 5 and fome ' fuppofe that the golden calf made by Jaron, and the calves of Jeroboam, were made after the model of the cherubim upon the mercy-feat ; but this is without foundation. Others fup- pofe ' them of a mixed form, and that their faces are not to be undcrftood of Their faces ftriftly taken, but of their general forms and appearances 5 as that they had the face of a man, the breads and mane of a lion, the fhoulders and wings of an eagle, and the feet of an ox or calf", which feems not probable : Tather the general form of them was human, and mofl: refembled that, except in the parts which arc otherwife defcribcd -, for it is exprefsly faid, they had the Ukenefs of a man, Ezck. i, 5, and the miniftcrs of the gofpel are men j they arc redeemed from among men ; their bufinefs lies with men -, they are fent to teach all nations of men, to preach the gofpel to every human creature, and to and •among the Gentiles the unfearcbable riches of Chrijt. But this will more appear by confidering the feveral parts by which the living creatures or cherubim are defcribcd. Vol. II. G (1.) By f T. Bab. Chagigab, fol. i j. ». Maimon. Moreh Ncvochim, par. 3. c. 6. s Bocbart. Hierozoic. par. i.col. 4.12. ' Moncscus de Vitulo aureo, 1. t. c. 4. Gaffarcl'i «Dheard-of Curiofuies, part I . c. i. J. 6, 7. • Pradns and Villalpand. on Eztkiel. 42 A SERMON ATTHE ORDINATION (i.) By their faces, which are four. i. The face of a mart; intimating, that the minifters of the word {hould be humane, courteous, and civil to all rr>en they are concerned with -, pitiful and compaffionate to wounded confciences, tempted fouls, troubled and diftreflcd minds> as well as to backdiders, in reftor- ing them ; and be men in tinderflanding, knowing, rational, wife and prudent ; . and be manly and courageous, quit themfelves like men, and be ftrong and va- v-jii^nt in the caufe and intereft of their Mafter, — 2. The face of a lion, ihc ftrongefl among beafts, Prov. xxx. 30. the ftrength of minifters has been hinted at already, the lion is remarkable for its boldnefs and intrepidity -, the righteous are faid to be bold as a lion, Prov. xxviii. i. to be bold and intrepid, and not fear the faces of men, is a proper qualification of the minifters of the gofpel ; fuch v/^rtjobn and Peter, and the apoftle Paul was not inferior to them in boldnefs and courage ; though to fhew how neceffary fuch a qualification, was, he defires the Epheftans to pray for him, that utterance might be given him, that he might open his mouth boldly to make known the myjlery of the gofpel, and therein fpeak boldly, as be ought to fpeak, Ephes. vi. 19, 20. Yet this was not wanting in him ; for he clfewhere fays. We were bold in our God to fpeak the gofpel of God with much con- ■Untion, i Thcfs-ii. 2. — 3. The face of an ox; a creature made for labour, and ■when in good ftate and plight, fit and ftrong for labour, and ufed.to be employed in plowing the ground and treading out the corn ; and is a fit emblem of gofpcl- minifters, employed in tilling God's hufbandry, plowing the fallow ground of mens hearts,, and treading out the corn of the word for their ufe, labouring in the word and doftrine : and, it may be, an emblem of them not only in labour but In patience; the ox that is accuftomed to the yoke, patiently bears it-, and which is fcen not only in bearing the yoke of the miniftry, but the weakncfies of the faints,- and the reproaches of wicked men -, in meekly injlruiting thofe that cppofe themfelves, and in waiting for the fruit and fuccefs of their labours.^ — +. The face of an eagle \ a creature that foars high, has a ftrong and clear fight, andean look ftedfaftly on the fun ; it efpics its prey at a great dift^nce, fcents the car- cafs where it is, and gathers itfelf and its young to it •, for wherefoevertbe carcafs is, there will the eagles be_gathered alfo. Matt. xxiv. 28. and fitly reprefents gof- pel-minifters, who have a clear fight into the fublime myfterics of grace, and fee things which eye has not feen, the vulture's eye, the moft fharp-fighted among carnal men-, and who make it their bufinefs ta preach a flain crucified Chrift, and direft fouls to him to feed by faith upon him-, we preach Chriji cru- cified, ^c. I Cor. i. 23. and ii. 2 — 5. Thefe faces were ftretchcd upwards, for fo the words may be rendered in Ezek. i. 11. thus their faces and their wings were flretcbed upwards, towards heaven; fignifying that minifters of the gofpel look upwards to Chrift in heaven for frefh fupplies of gifts and grace, an increafe of light and knowledge, of wifdom and ftrength, to fit them more for their work,. and Serm.39' of the Rev. Mr JOHN DAVIS. 43 and to enable them to perform it •, being fenfible that without him, his grace and ftrength, they can do nothing-, but through him ftrengthening them they can doall things, Pi*//, iv. 13. (2.) The living creatures, who arc the cherubim, are dcfcribed by their eyes-, particularly in John's viiion of them, where they are faid to he full of eyes, before and behind, and within. Rev. iv. 6, 8. fee alfo £21?^. x. 1 2. The eye is the light of the body -, and what the eye is to the natural body, the minifters are to the church, the body of Chrift ; yea they are the light of the world; and if the eye he fingle, if minifters be fincere, and have a fingle view to the glory of Chrift and the good of fouls, the whole body will be full of light, the church will be illuminated by them, Matt. v. 14. and vi. 22. they are y^rg-cj-like, have many eyes -, and they have need of all they have to look, into the facrcd fcripcurcs, ■which are a fealed book to learned and unlearned men, deftitute of the Spirit of Chrift ; only to be looked into fo as to be underftood by fuch who have their eyes £nlightcncd, their underftandings opened by Chrift, as were the difciples ; the fcriptures are to be diligently fearched into, and explored for the rich trea- sure that is in them ; and thofe that fearch into them, as for hid treafure, fliall find knowledge of great and excellent things -, but thefe efcape the fight of all but thofe who have fpiritual eyes to fee. Minifters of the gofpel had need to be full of eyes, to look to themfelves, and to the flocks committed to them;- to take the overfight of them, and feed them with the words of faith and found doflrinc; to take heed to themfelves and to their doftrine, that it be wholefom, pure and incorrupt ; and to their lives and converfations, that they give no of- fence to Jew nor Gentile, nor to the church of God, that the miniftry may not be blamed and rendered ufelefs ; and alfo to efpy dangers, and give warning and notice of them, arifing whether from without or from within ; to look d^\\\- ^ea([y\t:i!i 2,ny root of bitternefs, of error or hcrefy, or of immorality and pro- fanenefs, fpring up in the churches, and trouble fome and defile others -, and to watciv againft falfe teachers, and to be careful to keep up the difcipline of Chrift's houfe. They have, as they ftiould have, eyes before 3.n(\ behind; eyes behind, to obferve things paft,- the fulfilment of prophecies, promifes, and types in Chrift ; before, to look to prediftions yet to be fulfilled relating to the church and kingdom of God -, behind them, to watch againft Satan, ^\iO goes about feeking whom he may devour, and who comes upon the back of them at unawares ; and befor£ them, to watch over the flocks they have the overfight of; behind ihtm, to the twenty-four ciders, the members of the churches to whom they minifter, fo fituated with refpedt to the four living creatures ; and before them, to the throne of God and the Lamb, on whom is their dependence, fromwhom they expeft fupplies, and whofe glory they are concerned for: and they havjc alfo eyes within, to look into the finfulnefs and corruption of their nature, c 2 . and 4+ A SERMON AT THE ORDINATION and which is a means of keeping them humble under all their attainments, crifts and ufefulncfs ; and into the ftate and cafe of thei/ own fouls, and their inward experience ; which qualifies them to fpcak to the cafes of others, and by which they can make better judgment of the truth of do<5lrines, having a witnefs of them within themfclves ; and to look into the treafure that is put into them, in order to bring forth from thence things new and old, both for the profit and pieafure of thofe that hear them, (3.) The living creatures, or cherubim, arc defcribed by their wings. The cherubim over the mercy-feat had wings, but how many.is not exprefled ; bur it is the opinion of fomc', both ancient and modern, that they had fix, ^nd ib many had the Seraphim in Ifaiah'% vifion, chap. vi. 2. and the fame number had the living creatures in EzekiePs vifion ; for though they arc (aid to have four, chap. i. 6. yet not four only ; from ver. 11, 23. it fcems as if they had two more, and it is certain the living creatures in John's vifion had fix. Rev. iv. 8. and, 1. With two of them particularly they flew, as Ifaiah's Seraphim did ; -which in ininiftcrs, denote their fwifrnefs, readinefs and chearfulnefe to do the work of God, to minifter the word, and to adminifter ordinances, to vifit the mem- bers of churches when needful, and do all good offices for the faints, that lay in their power. The Greek vcrfion of Ezek. 1. 7. is, ihcir feet were winged;. cVprelTive of the fame thing, particularly of their readinefs to preach the.gofpel,. their feet being Jhod with the preparation of the gof[iel of peace; and for the fame rcafon, a fett of gofpel-minifters are reprefented by an ari-gel flying in the mid ft. of heaven, having the everlafting gofpel to preach to all nations, Rev. xiv. 6 — 2. With other two wings they covered their faces; minifters, fenfible of the pu- rity and holinefs of God, ami the fpiriluality of Jiis law, in comparifon of which- they fee thcmfelves unholy, carnal and fold under fin, blufh at their fins and imperfeftions, and are confcious of their unworUiinefe to be employed in fuch fervice, looking upon themfelves to be kfs than the Icaft of all faints, the chief of finners, and unfit to be rainifters of the word -, and areafhamcd of their poor performances, and acknowledge that they have nothing but what they have re- ceived, and therefore have nothing to glory of at beft. — ^.With other two wings- the living crea'ures covered their feet: however beautiful the feet of gofpel minifters may appear toothers, to whom they come running witbthe good ti- dings of peace, life, righteoufncfs». and falvation by Chrift \. yet they, fenfible of their deficiencies, confefs, that having done all they can, and in the beft. manner they could, they are but unprofitable fcrvants. So Ifaiah's Seraphim covered their feet with two of their wings, hMtEzekiel's living creatures covered their bodies with them, and feem to have made Kifc of four for that purpofe, cbap. i. II, 23 4. Their wings were ftrctched upwards, ver. 11, fo minifters look « Clement. AJei. Stromat. 1. 5. p. 563. FoTtnrat. Scacchi Eleochryfm, par. 2. c. 36. p; 474. Serm.39' of the Rev. Mr JOHN DAVIS. 45 Jook towards heaven, up towards Chrift, from whence are all their expeftations of grace to help them to perform their work, and of all fuccefs in it : and their wines were alfo joined one to another-, that is, the wings of one living creature to that -of another ; denoting minifters affedion to each other, their giving mu- tual afTiftance to one another, their concern in the fame work of the Lord, preach- ing the fame truths, and adminiftering the fame ordinances, having the fame zeal for the glory of God, love to Chrift and to the fouls of men, and being of the fame mind and judgment -, and cfpecially they will be fo in the latter day, when they fhall/cf eye to eye, Ifai. lii. 8 5. The found of their wings is worthy of notice, and is repeated once and again, that it might be obferved, faid to be like the noife of great waters ; as the voice of the almighty, when he fpeaketh, chap. i. 24. iii, 13. and x. 5. which is no other than the gofpel miniftered by them, a joyful found, a found of love, grace and mercy, peace, rishteoufnefs and falvation ; and which, like the found of waters, was heard at a diftance, when by the miniftry of the apoflles it went into all the earth -, the voice of Chrift, and which is the gofpel alfo, is compared to the fame, Rev. i.15. for its rapidity and force, under a divine influence; and which is not the voice, found and word of man, but of God himfelf-, which appears by its powerful effcdls on the hearts of faints and finners, when attended with a divine energy •, and indeed it is the Lord God almighty that fpeaks in minifters, and fpeaks powerfully by- them, I Thefs. ii. 13. 2 Cor. xiii. 3. {4.) Thefe living creatures, or the cherubim, arc defcribcd, by havincr /i>i?' hurnds of a man under their wings on their four Jides, Ezek> i. 8. and x. 8. this de- notes the adtivity of gofpel-minifters, who have not only the theory and know- ledge of things,, butare men of praftice and bufincfs; they have miKh work, to do all around them, on every fide -, preaching the gofpel, adminiftering or- dinances, vifiting their people, praying with them, and giving them counfel? and advice,, inftruflion and exhortation, when needful ; and they have hands «o work with and ftrength given them, and which they employ, and 3.rcjiedfafi' and immoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord; and they do it with judgment, a<5ting like men of underftanding andreafon : and their hands being under their wings, fhew, that befides their public work they do irruch in private,, in their ftudics and clofets, in meditation and prayer, where no eye fees them but the eye of God •, and alfo in private houfes where they pray, inftrudl, coun- fol and advife, as the nature of cafes that'prefent require; and whatever they do,, whether in private or public, they do it not to be feen of men ; orin an oftenta- tious way,. as the Scribes andPharifees; they boaft not of their own performances, . they afcribe all to the grace of God which is with them, and own that it is by that they arc what they are, and do what they do ; fuch is their modefty and' tumility, .which this phrafc is expreflive of. . (50 The: 46 A SERMON AT THE OR.DINAT.ION (5.) The living creatures, or cherubim, are defcribed by their /^^Z, which are faid to be firaight •■, and with them they went every ene .Jiraight' forward, and they turned not when they went, Ezek. i. 7, 9, 12. they oiade ftraight paths for their feet, and went not into crooked paths-, tiiey>turned not, neither to the rioht hand nor the left; their eyes looked right on, and their eyelids right be- ' fore them, ^nd (leered their courfe accordingly : -thus faithful minifters of the • word walk uprightly, according to the truth of the.gofpel, and go in the paths of truth and righteoufnefs ; and -neither turn to error on the one hand, nor to immorality on the other; and having put their hand to the plough of the gof- pel, neither look back nor turn back; for fuch that do fo, arcnot fit for the kingdom of God, LAike\x.6i. Moreover, it is faid of the living creatures, the cherubim, that the foU of their feet was like the fole of a calfs foot ; round, .the .hoof divided, and fit for treading out the corn, and which is more Jirm and furc than the fole x>f .a man's foot, which is apt to (lip and turn afide.; and fo may . denote the firmnefs, fteadinefs, and conftancy of faithful minifters in their work, particularly in- treading out the corn of the word for the.nourifhmcnt of fouls to whom they minifter : and it is alfo added of the cherubim, that their fectfparkled like the colour of humified brafs ; which may not only fignify the itrength and firmnefs of minifters to fupport under all .the weight of work and fufferings, exprefTed by brafs ; fo Chrift's/^^/ are faid to be like unto fine brafs, as if they burned in a furnace. Rev. i. 15. but alfo the brightnefs of their, converfations, and the (hining purity and holinefe of their lives ; and when the light of their works, as well as of their doflrines, (liine before men, they look as bright as polifhed brafs, and become txamples of the believer, in word, in converfation, in charity, infpirit, iu/ailh, in purity, i Tim. iv. 12. Moreover, the living crea- tures were diredled by the Spirit, whither the Spirit was to go, they went, £zek.- i. 12, 20. fo, as the prophets of the Old Teftament fpake as they were moved by the holy Ghoft, the minifters of the New Teftament are led by the Spirit, and collided by htm in their miniftrations into all truth as it is in Jcfus ; as well as they arc influenced by him in their converfations, xo walk as becomes the gofpel of Chrift ; and as they are qualified by him with his gifts and graces for the work of the miniftry, fo he difpofes of them where he pleafes, aad makes them overfcers of fuch and fuch flocks in fuch and fuch places, according to his will ; and they go as they are led by him, where he lias a work for them to do. A remarkable inftance of this fee in JSls xvi. 6 — 10 where the apoftles were forbid by the holy Ghoft preaching in one country; and, afTaying to go into another, the Spirit fuftVred them not ; but they were dircfted to fteer their courfe another way, and to another place, where fouls were to be converted, and a gofpel-church planted. -Once more, when and where the living creatures went, i.he wliecls went ; and according to the motion and pofition of the one, were the motion StRM. 29' OF THE Rev. Mr JOHN DAVIS. 47 motion and pofuiorv of the other : when the living creatures went, the wheels went hy them ; and when the living creatures were lift up from the earth, the wheels were lift up ; when tbofe went, tbefe went, and when ihofe flood, tbefe flood, Ezelc. i. 19, 21. and X. 16, 17. the wheels fignify the churches; and where there is the miniftry of the word by the living creatures, the minifters of the gofpel, there generally churches are raifed and formed, by them; and as the miniftry of the word is continued or removed, fo is a church-ftate fixed or changed ; .it is in this way and by this means that the candleftick is cither continued or removed out of its place : and it may be obfervcd in John's vifion, agreeably to this, that when the four living creatures gave glory to God, .the four and twenty elders fell down before him and worfhipped him, Rev. iv. 9, 10. and v. 14. Minifters begin the worfbip of God,, move firft in ads of devotion, and then the churches and the members of them follow and join with them ; and as they receive their doftrine, and are guided by then^k in matters of worfbip, fo they copy after them in their converfations : and,, generally fpeaking, as minifters be, churches are; if minifters have raifed affedions and elevated frames, fo it often is with the churches, and the members of them, that fit under their miniftrations ; if minifters arc adive and lively, the churches are fo too; but if dull, indolent, and inadlivc, fo are church-members ; if minifters are evangelical in their preaching, fo are the people that hear them; but if they minifter in a legal manner, of the fame completion, fpirit and temper, will the members and hearers be.- (6.) The living creatures, or cherubim, are defcribcd by the appearance of them, like burning coals, and like lamps, Ezek. i. 13, J4. Minifters of the gofpel may be thus defcribed, becaufe of their minifterial gifts ; the extraordinary gifts .of the fpirit are fignified by cloven tongues as of fire. Ads ii. 3. and ordinary gifts for the miniftry are reprcfcntcd as coals of fire, which are to be ftirred up and -enflamed, and not lie negleded, disufed, or quenched, 2 Tim.'i. 6. 1 Thefs. v. 19. And the cherubim or minifters may be fet forth hereby, becaufe of the clear light of truth that fhines in them, and becaufe of their ardent love to Chrift and the fouls of men, which is one qualification for the miniftry; hence fays Chrift to Peter, when he had affirmed once and again that he loved him, and appealed to his omnifcience for the truth of it, Feed my lamhs, feedmy fheep, John xxi. 15 — I 7. intimating, that fuch a lover of him was a fit perfon to feed the flock or church of God; even one whofe love is fo ardent that the coals thereof are coals of fire, which hath a mcft vehement flame, that mayiy waters cannot quench; even waters of afflidions, reproaches, perfecutions, and fufferings for the fake of Chrift and his gofpel : and by coals of fire may they be defcribed, becaufe of their iL*urning zeal for the glory of God and the intereft of a Redeemer; hence they are ■48 A SERMON AT THE ORDINATION, &c. • are called Seraphim, fiery or burning, as before obfcrved ; and it is not unufuat for minifters of the gofpel to be compared to lamp ; the-apoftles are called the lights or lamps of the world ; and^oi'W theBaptift was ajhining and burning light or lamp ; and fo others have been, holding forth the word of light and life to men : and whereas it is faid that it, the fire, ^went up and down among the living creatures; this is true of the .word cf,God, compared to fire, Jer. xx. 9. and 5cxiii. 29. by which the minds of minifters arc enlightened, their hearts warmed, and are filled with zeal for God, and become the means of enlightening and •warming others ; which /rf was bright^ clear, as the word of God is ; and out cf the fire went forth lightening ; denoting the quick and penetrating e-fficacy of the word, and the fudden increafe of the kingdom and intereft ofChriftby ir, which, like lightening, has been fpread from eaft to weft. Thus I have opened and explained the dodtrine of the cherubim in the beft manner I could, and have fhewn the agreement between them and the minifters of the gofpel. And now, my Brother, from thefe emblems you may difcern what is your jsrincipal work and bufinefs as a minifter of the gofpel •, ^hat it is to preach fal- ■vation by Chrift:, the doftrines of pardon by his blood, of juftification by his a-ightcoufnefs, and of atonement and fatisfa<5tion for fin by his facrifice, with other truths of the gofpel -, that you are to be laborious in this work, diligent and induftrious, conftant and immoveable in -it j that yoA.i are to be bold and intrepid in it, not fearing the faces of men ^ and to be watchful over yourfelf and others that -are your charge; to be tender and companionate to all in-diftrefs, •whether of body, mind or eftate, and to be humane in your deportment to all ; that you are to walk uprightly, and be an example to the flock in your life and II. H J. The 50 A CHARGE AT THE ORDINATION I. The principal thing this charge is about, the form of found -u^ords. By •words are not meant mere words, of thefc we (hould not be tenacious, when one may as well be ufed as another, to exprefs the fenfe and meaning of any doftrine •, when words are fynonymous, fignify the fame thing, and convey the fame idea, to wrangle and difpute about them would be vain and trifling > fuch mere logomachies and drivings about words to no profit, are condemned and diflluded from, by our apoftle ', Yet when words and phrafes have long ob- tained in the churches of Chrift, and among the faithful difpenfers of the word ; ilie fenfe of which is determinate and eftablifhed, and well known, and they fitly exprefs the meaning of thofe that ufe them ; they fhould not be eafily parted with, and efpccially unlcfs others and better are fubfl^icuted in their roomj for there is often truth in that maxim, qtii fingit nova verba, nova gignit dog- mata, " he that coins new words, coins new doftrincs." Should any man re- quire of me to drop certain words and phrafes in treating of divine truths, with- out offering to place others and better in their room •, I could confidcr fuch a man in no other view, than that he had an intention to rob me, to rob me of what is more precious than gold and filver, that is, truih. There are certain words and phrafes excepted to by the adverfarics of truth, becaufe they are not, as faid, fyllabically expreflcd in fcripture; but be it lb, if what they fignify is contained in fcripture, they may be lawfully and with propriety ufed, and re- • taincd in ufe: fome concern the doa//tfr«, and fo it is rendered iTim.'i. ]6. the allufion is thought to be to painters, who firft form a rough draught, or draw the outlines of their portrait, which is as a. pauern to them, within the compafs of which they always keep, and beyond which they never go. A.fcheme, a fyftem of gofpel-truths may be cxtradted from the fcriptures, and ufed as a pattern for minifters to preach by, and for hearers to form their judgments by, of what they hear ; which fecms to be what the apoftle calls the analogy or proportion of faUb, * Prov. xvi. 24- ' Rom. ii. lo. • J Tim. iii. j. • See my Comment on Hebrews vi. 1- "-Aftsxx. ai. I SERM.40. OF THE Rev. Mr JOHN REYNOLDS." 53 faith % which fhould not be deviated from : if any man teach otherwife, and con- ftnt not to wbokfom ivords, even the words of our Lord Jefus ChriJ}, and to the _ doHrine which is according to godlinefs ; be is proud, knowing nothing ^ : and again, fays the apoftle, though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gofpel unto yeu, than that which we have preached unto you, and he adds, than that ye have received, lit him be accurfed^ ; and this is the ti/t®-, ot form of doSlrine'', which is delivered to the faints, or into which they are delivered, as into a form or mold, and become evangelized by it -, and according to this they are to form their judgment of preachers, and fhape their conduct and behaviour towards them ; for if they bring not the dotlrine of Chrijl with them, they are not to rtceive- them, nor bid them God-fpeed' : if minifters, when they have* formed and digelled from the fcriptures a fcheme and fyftem of gofpel-truths, would be careful to fay nothing contradiflory to it -, there would not be that want of confiftency fojuftly complained of, in the prefent miniftry in common, nor that- confufion in the minds of hearers. I have hitherto dealt chiefly in generals, I fhall now dcfcend to the particulars- of this form of found words or doflrincs, which you, my Brother, fhould hold~ fafl: •, and ftiall begin, Firjl, With the dodrine of the Trinity of perfons in one God ; which is the 'foundation of revelation, and of the economy of man's falvation ; it is what enters into every truth of the gofpel, and without which no truth can be truly nnderftood, nor rightly explained : it confifls of various branches -, as that there is but one God, and that there are three didind perfons in the Godhead, Fa- ther, Son and holy Spirit, and that thefe are equally and truly God. There is but one God; thi^ is the voice both of reafon and revelatron ; it is the doc- trine of the Old and of the New Teftament ; it i^ the doftrine of Mofes and the prophets; hear O Ifrael, the Lard tur God is one Lord ^ : and it is the dodtrine of Ghrift and his apoftles ; of Chrift, who calls the above words, the firji of all' the commandments' ; and of the apoftles, who declare, there is one God and one Mediator ' ; to believe and profcfs this truth is right and well, thi>u believejl that there is one God, thou dejl well ^ : all profefTing chriftianity are Unitarians in a fcnfe, but not in the fame fcnfe ; fome are Unitarians in oppofition to a- trinity of perfons in one God ; others are Unitarians in perfedl' confiftence with that doftrine. Thofe of the former fort ftand. ranked in very bad company ; for a Deift who rejefts divine revelation in general, is an Unitarian ; a Jew that rcjefls . the writings of the New Teftament, and Jcfus of Nazareth being the MefTiah,, h an Unitarian -, a Mahometan is an Unitarian, who believes in one God, and ini y Rom. iii.6. * i Tim. vi.j. • Gal, i. 9, 10. *" Rom. \i.\y. * 2 John '.«.. *■ Dcut. vi. 4, '^Mark xii. 39, f 1 Tim. ii. 5., « Jamei ii. 19, 54 A CHARGE AT THE ORDINATION in his prophet Mahomet \ a Sabellian js an Unitarian, who denies a diftinflion of perfons in the Godhead; a Socinian is an Unitarian, who afTcrts that Chrift did rox exiit before he was born oftiie virgin, and that he is God, not by nature, but by oifke; an Arian may be faid, in a fenfe, to be an Unitarian, becaufe he holds one fupreme God ; though rather he may be reckoned a Tritheift, fince along with the one fupreme God, he holds two fubordinate ones. Thofe only are Unitarians in a true and found fenfe, who hold a trinity of diftinft per- fons in one God. This is the do<5trine of divine Revelation, the dodtrine of the Old and of the New Teftament, the dodlrine of that famous text before mentioned, hear 0 Ifrael, the Lord cur God is one Lard; the word for our God is plural, the word ufed is Elohim, a word of the plural number, and expreffive of a plurality of perfons ; and the fenfe of the words is, and it is the fenfe of the ancient Jews ", ourGod, Ehbenu, the three divine perfons are ontjekovah, one Lord ; and with this perfedtly agrees what the apoRle John fays, there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghoft ; and thefe three are one\ arc one God. The authenticity of this palfage has been difputed, but not difproved -, the knowledge and ufe of it may be traced up to the times ofTertullian, who lived within a hundred years or thereabouts of the writing of the autograph itfclf by the apoftley^iw; but could it be difproved, the doftrine is to be defended without it, as it was by the anticnt chrillians ao-ainft the Arians : the proof of it is abundant ; not to take notice of any other but the baptifm of Chrift, and the form of the adminiftration of baptifm pre- fcribed by him-, at the baptifm of Chrift, all the three divine perfons appeared; there was the Son of God clothed in human nature, fubmitting in that nature to the ordinance of baptifm, being baptized of Joi^n in Jordan's river; and there was. the Father, who by a voice from heaven declared, faying, this is my kekved Son, in whom I am well pleafed^ ; and there was the Spirit of God, who defcended upon him as a dove ; this was reckoned fo clear a proof of a trinity of perfons, that the ancients ufed to fay, '■•■Go lo Jordan, and there learn the " dodrine of the trinity :" and the form of the adminiftration of baptifm pre- fcribed by our Lord, which was to baptize in the name of the Father, of the Son, find of the Holy Ghofl ' ; is fuch a teftimony of a trinity of peribns in unity, that the whole herd o{ Jntitrinitarians, of whatfoever name, are notable todeftroy; 0 proof this of the divinity of each perfon, fincc baptifm adminiftcred in their ^ame, is a folcmn aft of religious worfliip, and which otherwiic would be ido- latry ; and of the equality of each perfon, fince it is ordered to be adminiftered equally in the name of the one, as in the name of the other; not in the name cf one fupreme God, and in the name of two inferior ones ; and of the diftinc- tion •" Zohir in Gen. fol, I. 3. and in ExoJ. fol. 18. 3. 4. and in Numb. fol. 67. 3. • I John V, 7. '' Matt. iii. 17. » Matt. xxTiii. 19. Serm. 40- OT THE Rev. Mr JOHN REYNOLDS. 55 tJon of thefe by the relative properties in the divine nature, paternity, filiation and fpiration ) and of their unity as the one God, fince the order is to adminif- ter baptifm not in the names, but in the name of Father, Son and Spirit. And now it is to be believed and to be held faft, that thefe are equally and truly God : of the Father there is no difpute ; and of the deity of the Son there need be no qucftion, fince of the Son of God it is exprefsly faid, ibis is the true God and eternal life '^ ; and again, unio the Sen, be faith, 7 by -throne, O God, is for ever and ever"; the divine names he bears, and the divine nature and perfec- tions, and the fulnefs of them he is poflefied of; the divine works which arc attributed to him, and the -divine ■'worihip paid him, are full proofs of his true and proper deity : and that the holy Spirit is truly and properly God, is mani- feft in that, lying to him is called lying to God : the mmt Jehovah is given him v»hich belongs only to the moft High -, he is defcribed as a perfon, having un-' derftanding and will, and to whom perfonal adl ions are afcribcd, and as a divine perfon, poircfTcd of eternity, immcnfity, omniprcfence, omnifcience, i^c. and the dodtrine of the deity of thefe perfons fhould be held faft, fince this has aa irtfruenceon the works afcribed to them, and without which they could not have been performed by them : and along with this is to be taken the doftrine of the eternal generation of the Son of God, and which, with the reft, rny Brother, you are'to hold faft ; fince this is the hinge'on which the doftrine of the trinity dejjends, without this it cannot be fupported ; take away this, and it falls to the ground ; this the Antitrinitarians of every name are fcnfible of, and there- fore bend all their force and fpite againft it, and is a reafon wliy it ftioiild be held faft by us : that Chrift is the Son of God, is attefted by the divine perfons themfclves •, and has been acknowledged by angels and men, good and bad ; but the thing is, in what iimfc he is fo : notin any of theSocinian fenfes -, I fay, not in any of them, becaufe they are many, which fiiows the wretched puzzle • and uncertainty they arc at about it-, for there can be but one true fcnfe in which Chrift is the Son of God : he is not called the Son of God, becaufe offome Hkencfs in him to God, as they fometimcs iay ; nor becauie of the affcdion of God to him, as at other times ; nor is he fo by adoption; nor on account of his miraculous incarnation ; nor of his rcfurrcftion from the dead ; nor of his mediatorial office : but fince he is faid to be the begotten Son of God, and to be the only begotten of the Father, and the Father is faid to be his own Father, his proper Father, and fo not in an improper, figurative and metaphorical fcnfe, he appears to be the Son of God by the generation of him, who faid, Thou art my Sen, this day have I begotten tbee ° : how and in what manner the Son is be- gottei* » I John r. 20. ■ H«b. i. 8. • Pfalra ii.7. 5$ A CHARGE AT THE ORDINATION gotten of the Father, I do not pretend to explain, nor ought any ; but I ErrnVf believe he is, and that for this very good reafon, becaufe the fcripture aflerrs it i we beheld bis glory, the glory as of the only hegotten of the Father p.-, we know but little of our own nature, and ftill lefs of -the nature of God, and {hould be content with the account which he himfelf has given of it, who bed underftands it. For -what is his name? that is, his nature, and what is -his Son's name, if thou canfl telh ? I have faid, ihat " the dodtrine of a trinity of perfons in the *« unity of the divine eflcnce, depends upon the article of the fon's generation, " and therefore if this cannot be maintained, the other nuift fall of courfe -," and for my own part, could J be prevailed upon to part with this article of faith, J would at once give up .the doftrine of the. trinity, as quite indefenfible -, and indeed it would be the height of.folly ' to talk of a diftindlion of perfons in the Deity, when. the foundation of fuchdiftinftion is removed; for we pretend to no other dillinftion in it, but what arifes from the internal relative properties in God, as paternity, filiation and fpiration, the ground of which is, the eternal generation of the Son.; for without that there can be neither father, nor Son, nor Spirit. The works of God done by him, fuch as thofe of creation, redemp- tion and grace, and offices bore, ferve to illuftrate the dillindtion made, but •could ncvcrtnake any : the works of God are ad extra, and are common to the three perfons, .and therefore do not diftinguiO: them ; for though fome works .are more. peculiarly. attributed to one than to another, each has a concern in them all: befidesthey come. too late, they are wrought in time, whereas the nature ■of God, .be it what it may, is eternal ; and if there is any diftindion in it, it muft betiatural, original and eternal; and indeed the Father was never without the Son,.nor the Son without thePather, but was the eternal Son of the eternal father ; -and neither of them without their breath or fpirit, the Spirit which pro- cecdcth from the Father, and is the Spirit of the Son : befides, as what God is, and he is what he always was, he is, and was fo ncceflarily ; and if there -is any diftindion in his nature, it is of neccfTity, and not of will ; whereas the works ofGod are arbitrary things, which might or might not have been, ac- .cording to the wUl and pleafure of the divine Being; butGod would have been what.he.is, and if there is any diftindion in him, it muft have been, if thefe had never •f 'John i. 14. ' Prov. xxt. 4. r Of fuch tbfurdity and inconCflence the l»te Dr Ridglej was guilty ; exploding the doaiine of rthe generation of the Son of God, and adopting the Socinian notion of Sonfhip by office; and yet at the fame time declaring for a dininftion of three divine perfons in the Godhead. A flrarge paradox this! and it is a difgrace to that body of men of whofe denomination theDoflorwaj. that none of •hn brethren attempted to refute him, though they in general didiked his opinion and diffcnted ftom him : perhaps they thought the contradiaion was fo glaring, that hii own notions confuted thun- fcjve* i this ii ;he beft apology 1 can make for them. Serm.40. of the Rev. Mr JOHN REYNOLDS. ' 57 never had been -, if there never had been an angel created, nor a man redeemed, nor a finner fan6tified, nor any office iufta'med. by Chrjft as mcd,ia*qr, which is ar- bitrary alfo. This then being the cat, if the artideief the Son's gcnerat-ion can- not be maintained, as then there can be no diHindion of, persons, ,w?., mufl: un-. avoidably fink into the Sabellian foUy ; therefQre, my Brother, holdfaft this part and branch of the fyrm of found words. ; - ■Secondly, Another part of this form of found words to be held fad, ts the doc- trine of the everlafting love of the three perfons to the eleft ; the love of the Rather in chufing them in Chrift, -providing a Saviour for them, and fending him in the fulncls of time to work out their falvation i (he love ot the Son in becoming a furety for them, in the afllimption of their nature, and in fufter- ing and dying in their room and flead, to obtain their eternal redemption-, and the love of the Spirit in applying grdce unto them, implanting it in them, in being their Comforter, tlic Spirit of adoption to them, and the earned of thei-r inheritance,- and thefealcr of theni up unto the day of redemption : this loveis to be held, and held fall, as being fovcie'gn and free ; not arifing from any •caufe or caufes in men, from any motives and conditions in them; not from- their lovcline.'s, being defiled and lothefom a; others, and by nature children of wrath; nor from their love to God, fince he loved them firft, andwhen they did not love him ; nor fcom their obedience and good works, fince v/hile they werc^ foolifh and difobcdicnt, the love and kindnels of God the Saviour towards man appeared ; but froni the will and pleafure of God, who loved them becaufe he would love them. And this doftrine of the love of God is to be held, and held fafi-, as being fpccial and difcriminating; not as a love of all, but of fome only ; for tl'^ugh the eartli is full of the goodnefs of the Lord, and all the inhabitants of it partake thereof, and fliare the bounties of his providence; his tender mer- cies are over all his ucrks, and he caulcs lus fun to fiiine, and rain to defccnd on the juft and unjuft; yet he has a peculiar people whom he has chofen for himfelf, and to whom he bears a pecuhar love; hence Dnvid defircd', that he wo-uld remember him ivilh the favour he bore to his oivn people. This IhoulJ be held, and held faft, as being what commenced froni everlafting, and conti- nues to e-verlafting; it was taken up in tiK? heart ot God before the world was, and he rcfis and abides in his love, and nothing is able to feparate from it: it is as immutable and invariable as himfelf; as he is the Lord that cham^cs no: fuch is his love, yea, lie himfelf is love^. Cod is love\ the flates aiul conditions of men are various, but the love of God is the fame in all ; he may change his difpenfations, but he never changes his love ; when he hides his faCv.-, he fiiJl Jov.es ; and when he chides, chadifcs and corrects, he does not utterly take av.ay Vol. JI. I • • ■ nor ' Pfalni £vi. 4. * J Jol.xi iv. j6. 58 A CHARGE AT THE ORDINATION nor at all take away his loving-kindncfs. This dodlrine in this light is to be held faft, bccaufe the cverlafting love of God is the bond of union to him, and is the fource and fprir>gof all the blefilngs of grace, which are exhibited and held forth in the fcveral dodtrincs of grace. Thirdly, The doctrine of eternal, perfonal, and particular eleftion, is another part of the form of found words to be held fafl; as that elc(5lion is eternal, was from the htginning, as the apoftle tells the Thefialonians " -, not from the begin- ning of the golpel coming unto them, or from the beginning of their conver- fion and faith, but from the beginning of time, or before time: for the phrafes, from (heieginning, znd from tverlajling, are the fame, as appears from Prov. viii. 23. Bcfides, the apollle exprefsly fjys, this choice was made before the foundation ef the world, Eph. i. 4. It is alio perfonal and particular; not a choice of pro- pofitions and chara(5ters, but of perrons, he bath chcfen us, as in the fame place ; not a choice of whole bodies of men, of nations, and churches, but of particular pcrfons, known to the Lord byname; the Lord knoxvs them, that are his"" \ I know whom I have chofen, fays Chrift "^ : they arc as if they were particularly named: hence x\\t\T names are faid ' to be written in the Lamb's book of life. This- choice is of pure grace; not on the forefight of faith ; for faith is the fruit of it, flows from it, and is fecured by it ; as many as were ordained unto eternal life, believed"^: nor on the forefight of holinefs, or on account of that; for God chofe his people, not becaufe they were holy, but that they might be fo : he chofe them through fandlification before time, and therefore calls them to holi- nefs in time : nor becaufe of their good works ; for the children net being yet born,. neither having done any good or evil, that the purpofe of God, according to eleHion,. might fl and, not of works, but of him that calleth'. And here it is called the eleiJion of grace ^, and ftrongly argued not to be of works, but of the pure fove- reign grace of God : and it is both to grace and glory, to fpecial blelTmgs of grace,, of fiaith, and holinefs, to conformiry to the image of Chrift now, and. to eternal glory and happinefs hereafter, which is enfured by it ; for, whom he predeflinates, he alfo glorifies. Now, this part of the form of found words is to be held faft, becaufe it Hands foremofl. in the blefiings of grace,^.and is the ftand- a.rd and rule according to which God proceeds in difpenfing the reft; for he blcflcs his people with all fpiritual bleffmgs in Chrifl^ according as he hath chofen. them in him '. Fourthly, The doflrine of the covenant of grace is to be held fad, made be- tween the eternal three, when there were none in being but themfclves ; no crea- ture,. • I Thefs. ii. 13. " zTim.ii. 19. * John xiii, j8. ^ Phil. iv. 3. Rev. xiil. 8. aDdxvii. 8. and XX. 15. * Ails xiii. 48. 'Rom. ix. 14. * R«ni,ii. 5< 6. * Ephes.i. 3,4- Serm. 40. OF THE Rev. Mr JOHN REYNOLDS. 59 ture, neither an angel, nor a man, nor the foul of a man ; none but God, Fa- iher, 5on and Spirk., between whom and them alone the covenant-tranfaftions were ; even before ihp world was, or any creature whatever in beincr -, hence k is called an ever lajiaig covenant^, being from everlafting •, as well as it will continue to everlafting ; which appears fromChrift's being fet up fo early as the mediator of it, from the provifion of bledings of grace in it- fo early, which were given to the elc(ft in Chrift, and they were blelTcd with them in him before the world was ; and from promifes made in it fo early, particularly the promife of eternal life, which God, thai cannot lie, frcmifed before the world began". It is abfolute and unconditional; no conditions in it but what were engaged to be performed, and have been and are performed by the Son of God, and by the Spirit of God: with relpedl an nature of Chrift: but then that did not defcend from him by ordinary generation, but was brought into the world in a fupernatural way, and fo efcaped the contagion of fjn. Now it is nccefTary that this doclrine fliooW be held faft, fince it accounts . for the corruption of human nature-, fliews the reafon of mens bciivg fo prone ro fin, and biafed ta-it ; fo impotent ta tliat which is good, and fo averfe-to it : and alfo fhews the necefTity of redemption,, regeneration, and fancftification. Sixthly., The doflrine of redemption by Chrift, is another part of the form of found words to be held faft -, as that it is fpecial and particular; though Chrift gave his life a ranfom for many, yet not for all : thofe that are redeemed by him are redeemed from among men, out of every kindred, tongue, peopU, and nation : they are Chrifl's fpecial- people he came to fave : his fheep the Ei- ther gave him, and he undertook the care of, he hid down his life for :■ the chil- dren of God, that were fcattered abroad, he came to gather together by his fufFerings and death ; and his church he gave himfclf for, even the general affern- bly and church of the firfl -horn, which are written in heaven .-and that this rcdemp- lion is procured by way of fatisfaftion to the juftice of God ; he redeemed his people by paying a price for it, even his precious blood. Redemption was ob- 'laincd by Chrift through his fufferings, the jtift for the unjuft ; by his being wounded, bruifed, and ftricken, for the tranfgrcfflons of his people ; by bear- ing their iniquities, and the punifliment of them ; by his being made fin and a curfe for them, thereby redeeming them from fm and the curfes of the law-; and this doflrine of redemption by the blood of Chrift, and atonement by his •facrifice, fhould be held faft, it being the foundation of a finner's peace, joy, and comfort. Seventhly, The doftrine of juftiRcation by the imputed righteoufnefs ofChrift, is another branch of the form of found words to be held faft : this proceeds from the free grace of God, through the redemption that is in Chrift ; the matter of it is what is commonly called the acftive and pafTive obedience of Chrift, which, with the holinefs of his nature, are imputed for juftification, being what is • Job xiv. 4. Serm. 40. OF THE Rev. Mr JOHiN' REYNOLDS. 6i is required to it by the holy law of God ; and ht-nce fometimes men are faid to be made righteous by the obedience of Chrift, and fometimes to be jujiified by b.s blood^y which is put for his whole fuffcrings and death ; by the one Chrift has fulfilled the preceptive part of the law ; and by the other has bore the penalty of it ; and by both has given full fatisfaction to it : the form of it is the imputa- tion of righteoufnefs without works, by an afl of God's grace: this righteouf- nefs, is revealed in the gofpel from faith to faitli •, and faith is wrought in the foul, to lay hold on it, receive ir, and plead it as its juftifying righteoufnefs, ffom whence much peace and comfort flow. Jullification may be confidered as a fentence conceived in the divine mind from eternity ■, and as pronounced on Chrift, the head and furecy,of his peoi)le, when he rofc from the dead, and ■upon them in him -, and as it is again pronounced in the confcience of a believer, when the righteoufnefs of Ghrill is revealed to him, and received by him-, and as it will be notified, and be openly and publicly pronounced before anoels and men, when all the feed of I/rael, or the whole elcdt in a body, fliall be juflified and (hall glory. This is to be held fad ; for, as Luther called it, it is arliculus Jiantis vel cadentis eccleJiiC, " the article by which the church ftands or falls." Eighthly, The doiflrines of pardon, peace, and reconciliation by the blood of Chrift, are parrs of this form of found v.'ords to be held faft -, that the pardon of fin is through the blood of Chrid, which, as it was died for the remifTion of fin, through it we have it, and rhrough that only, and not on account of repentance, humiliation and confefTion, as meritorious or procuring caufes of it; and that peace is made by the blood of Chrift, from whence peace of con- fcience flows •, and that both reconciliation for our fins, and reconciliation of our perfons to God, is made by the deatli of Chrift -, hence the gofpel which publifties \.hh\s czWed the word of reconciliation., and ihc gofpel of pesce\ which therefore fhould be held faft. Ninthly, The doctrines of regeneration, cffcftual calling, converfion, and fandlification by the fpirit, power, and grace of God, are parts of the fame form and fyftem ; the neceffity of regeneration, without which there is no feeing nor entering into the kingdom of God, muft be aflerted ; and that it is not of man, of the power and will of man, but of the power and will of God: that effcftual vocation is by the grace of God, and not according to the works of men -, that converfion is not of him that wiUeth nor runneth, but of the mighty power of God, who works in men both to will and to do; that fandification is abfolutely necelTary to falvation, for without holinefs no man fhall fee thcLord ; that this is the work of the Spirit of God, and is therefore called ihz fan^ifica^ lion: * Rom. V. 9, 19. ' zCor. V. 19. Ephes. vi. 15. -62 A CHARGE AT THE ORDINATION tion of the Spirit '", and which he gradually carries on, and will perform until the day of Chrin. Wherefore, Tenthly and laftly, and which bring up the rear, the doftrine of the faints final perfeverance is a part of this form of found words to be held fad ; even that all that are chofen by the Father, and redeemed by the Soo, and fandti- fied by the Spirit, fliall perfevere in faith and holinefs to the end •, being incir- cled in the arms of evcrlafting love, fecureddn the everlafting covenant, united to Chrift their head, furety, and faviour, built on him the rock of ages, againft which the gates of hell cannot prevail, and fo are like mount ZioTL, which can never be removed ; and being in the hands of Chrift, out of whofe hands none can pluck, and who is able to keep them from falling ; and being kept by the power of God through faith unto falvation. Thefe are at leaft fome of the principal things which make up the form of found words, which you, my Bro- ther, are to hold faft, maintain and publifh in your miniftry. What remains now to be confidered are the exhortation to hold it faft, and the manner in wiiich it is to be done, on which 1 fliall not long dwell. II. The exhortation refpeding the form of found words,, hold fajl. This fup- pofcs a man to have it, as all fuch exiiortations fuppofe perfons to have what they are exhorted to hold, and hold faft; and which is fomccimes expreflcd -, as, Jhat which ye have already, hold faft till l^ome; and again, hold that faft ivhich thou haft, .that no man take thy crown "-• and Timothy, to whom the exhortation in the text is given, was in poflcfTion of the form of found words -, it was a fa- cred dcpofitum committed to his truft. Hence it follows, that good thing, which was committed unto thee, keep by the holy Ghoft which dwellelh in us ; it was in his hand, in his head, and in his heart ; the word is nigh thee, .even in thy mouth. and in thy heart •, .that is, the word of faith which we preach' \ and what is had (hould be held.; it fhould be held forth, holding forth the word of life', and the word of light. Minifters are lights, and have light communicated to them, which fhould fhine forth, and not be put under a bufhel ; what they have " freely received they fhould freely give; what is told them in private in their ftudics, they fhould publicly declare, and affirm thofe things conftantly ; they fliould hold faft the faithful word, as they have been taught, and have taught others, and tenacioufly abide by it ; fo Timothy was exhorted to do, and which will ferve more fully to confirm and explain the exhortation here, continue thou in the Jhings which thou liaft learned, and baft been affured of, knowing of whom thou haft learned them "". This exhortation to hold f eft the form of found words, is oppofed to dropping or departing from it, which may be done by thofe who have had it; men may receive -* i Pet. i. 2. ■ Rev. ii. r;. and iii. II. rRom.x.8. pPhil.ii. i6. 12 7101.111.14. Serm.40. of the Rev. Mr JOHN REYNOLDS. 63 receive the grace of Cod in vain ; that is, the doflrine of the grace of God -, they may firft receive it with feeming pleafure and fatisfaction, and afcerwards rrjedt iti they may fail of the grace of God in this fenfe, and fall from it partiAlly or totally -, fo fuch that feck for and hold juftification by the law, are fallen from grace ' ; from the do(ftrine of grace, and particularly from the do6trine of jufti- fication by the grace of God through the righteoufnefs of Chrift: and as pri- vate profcQbrs may drop and depart from the doiftrines of the gofpcl formerly received and held by them, fo may minifters of the word drop and depart from found words and dodlrines they have formerly profeflcd anJ preached. And it is oppofed to wavering about the form of found words, and infta'oility in it -, and fuggefts, that fuch who have it fhould not be like children, tofltd about with every wind ofdodtrine, nor be carried about, like meteors in the air, with divers and ftrange dodtrines, dodtrines various in themfclves and fo- reign to the word of God; but fhould affirm conftanily wich boldnefs, confi- dence and courage, the truths of the gofptl •, for this alfj ftands oppai'ed to timidity, cowardice and pufillanimity ; when they fhould be valiant for tlie truth, ftand faft in the faith, quit themfclves like men, and be fbrong •, and not give way, no not for an hour, that the truth of the gofpel might continue with the faints. Moreover this exhortation^ confidered in this light, fuppof.-s that Timothy, and fo other gofpel-miniflers, may at times be under temptations to let go the form of found words, or drop the truths of the gofpcl, through fear of men, and becaufeof the obloquy, reproaches and perfccutions of men, fee v. 7,8, 12. they may be tempted hereunto, as on the one hand to cfcape being cenfured as bigots, enthufiafts, narrow-fpirited men, and void of common-fenfe and reafon ; and on the other hand to obtain the characters of men of fenfe, of moderate principles, of candor and ingenuity, and of being polite and rational preachers. And it alfo fuggefts that there might be fuch perfons who fought every oppor- tunity to wring this form of found words out of the hands oiTimothy, and fo of any other minifter of the word, as well as of thofe under their miniftry ; men that lie in wait to deceive, to beguile and corrupt the minds of men from the fimplicity in Chrift, and therefore to be guarded againft. III. The manner in which the form of found words is to be held faft;. in faith and love, which is inCbrifl Jefus : which words may be connefted with the phrafe vjhich thou bafi heard of vxe. Timothy had heard the apoftle preach thofc found dodlrines with great faithfulnefs •, for he was a faithful minifter of the gofpel, who kept hack nothing that was profitable, and fhunned not to declare the whole coun'- felofCod; he had heard him fpeak the truth in love, with great warmth of affcflion,. ' aCor, vi. i. Heb. xii. 15. Gal. v, 4. ■'64 A CHARGE AT THE ORDINATION, &c. affcdlion, with much vehemence and fervency of fpirit-, and he himfelf had heard and received the word preached in faith, and had mixed it with faith, and digcfted it by it, and was nouriflied with it -, he had received the love of the truth, and the truth in the love of it: and the phrafe, viewed in this light, contains a rcafon why therefore he fhould hold fad the form of found words he had received in fuch a manner : or they may be confidered as connected with the form of found iiDcrds ; as if faith and love were the fubjeds of it ; that rt lay in things to be be- lieved, as the gofpel does; and therefore called the word of faith, the faith of the gofpel, and the faith once delivered to the faints^; and in duties and ordi- nances to be obferved from love to God and Chrift -, and fo is a reafon as before, ■why it fhould be held fall : or elfe it is to be connefted wich the exhortation hold fafi; and fo dire61s to the manner in which it is to be held •, the faithful word, the word to be believed, is to be held, held forth, and held faft in faithfulncfs; he that bath my zvord, this form of found words in his head, and in his mouth and heart, let him f peak my word faithfully ; uihat is the chaff to the wheat ? faith ihe Lord' \ and this word of truth is to be held fait and fpokcn in love ; in love to God, to Chrtft, to the word, and to the fouls of men. It follows, which is in Chrifl Jcftts; cither the form of found words is in him ; all truth is in him, he is full of that as well as of grace ; all the treafures of wifdom and knowledge, of the myfteries of grace, are bid in him', and they come from him-, the words or doftrifies of wifdom and knowledge are given from one fhepherd", Chrift, to bis under ifhcpherds, to feed his churches with knowledge and underftanding : or elfe this is to be undcrftood of the graces of faith and love, in the exercife of which the word is to be preached, heard and held faft •, thefe are originally in Chrift, and come from him; the grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with faith and love, ivhich is in Chrifl Jefus"; as well as they are cxercifed on him as the object of them. Thus have I confidered this charge of the apoftle to Timothy, in the method .propofcd; and you, my Brother, fliould receive it as if it had been delivered to you, it being what conc<;rns and is obligatory upon every minifterof the gol'pel : Ifhall clofe with fonie other branches of the apoftle^s charge, zoTimotby, which you would do well alfo to advert unto; Be thou an example of the believers, in I -^.-ord, in converfalion, in charity, in fpirit, in faith, in purity. — Give attendance I to reading, to exhortation, to doHrine—neglc^ not the gift thai is in thee— meditate upon thefe things, give th^felf wholly to them, that thy profiting may appear to all.— Take heed unto thyfelf, and unto the doHrine, continue in them; for in doing this, thou fhali bolhfnve thyfelf and them that hear thee \ I have done ; G.od give fuccefs 10 vour miniftrations. ^ TRUTH ' Jer. xxiii. 28. " Colofs. ii. 3. • Ecdes. xii. u. " iTim.i. 14- » j Tim. iv. 12—1.6. TRUTH DEFENDED: Being an ANSWER to an Anonymous Pamphlet, intkled, Some DoSf fines in the Supralapfarian Scheme impartially examined hy the Word of God. LATELY came to my hands an anonymous pamphlet, intitled, Sot)ie Doc- trines in the Supralapfarian Scheme impartially examined by the Word of God. The author of it is right, in making the word of God the rule and ftandard by which doftrines and fchemes are to be tried and examined. To the law and to the tejlimcny ; if n'.^n fpeak not according to this word, it is hecaufe there is no light in ihem^. He fcts out with large declarations of his regard to the facred writ- ings, which to I'wcU the performance are too often repeated, even ad naufeam ; and )ct, in his verv firil paragraph, drops a fcnience not very agreeable to them, if any fenfe can be made of it : "All opinions and maxims, he fays, that cor- " rtfpond not with this divine rule, we fliould either entirely rejefl, or at liajl " rcfiife to admit as articles of our faith ^" But why not entirely rejcdt them, without any hefitation ? why this disjunftive propofnion ? why this fofcenin"- tlaufe added ? If it can be thought to be fo, or to convey a different idea from the former, as it is defigned it fliould •, though I fhould think, to rcfufe to ad- mit doftrines and maxims as articles of faith, that do not correfpond with the cUvine rule, is the fame thing as to rejcft them as articles of faitii. The man Icems to write in the midft: of hurry and furprife. Since he has met with fchemes and opinions fo exceedingly fhocking and flunning, it would have been advife- ablc for him to have fat down and waited until he was better come to, and more'compofcd, before he put pen to paper, and committed his frightful ap- prehenfions to writing. And indeed one would have thought he has had time enough to have recovered himfelf from the furprife he has met with, feeincr jt h uczr four years ago, fince the more moJern pieces he has taken notice of were publifhed to the world. I. The examination begins with the foundation-principle of the Supralapfa- rians, as he calls it, that " God chofc his people without confiderincr them as *' fallen creatures'." He docs well to begin with their foundation-dodrinc ; for if he can dcmolifli the foundation, the kiperflrufture nuift fall ; if he can pjuck up what he fuppofes to be the root of many falfe optnions, the branch^es Vol. H. K which ' Ifai. viii. 20. b Supralapfarian Scheirc, p. i. « Jd. Ibid. p. 3. 66 TRUTH-DEFENDED.- which grow from it will die in courfe. But though this received opinion of theirs, as our author fliles it, is a denomination one, or that from which they are called Siipralapfarians ; yet it is far from being a foundation-principle, or a fundamental article of faith with them-, nor do they confider this point, in which they differ from others, as the principal one in the dodtrine of eleftion : They and the Sublapfarians are agreed in the main points refpeding that doc- trine; as, that it is an eternal aft of God ; that it is of certain particular per- fons ; that it is unconditional, irrefpeftive of faith, holinefs, and good works, as caufes and conditions of it -, and that it entirely fprings from the good-will and pleafure of God. The Contra- Remonftrants were not all of a mind concerning the objeft of predeflination, but did not think it worth their while to divide upon that account. Nay, fome ^ of them were of opinion that it was not ne- cefTary to be determined, whether God, in choofing men, confidered them as idllen, or as not yet fallen -, provided it was but allowed that God in choofing confidered men in an equal (late, fo as that he that is chofen was not confidered by God either of himfelf, .or by his own merit, or by any gracious eflimation, more worthy than he who is not chofen. That famous Supralapfarian, DrTwifs % declares, that " as for the ordering of God's decrees, upon which only arile " the " different opinions touching theobjecl of predeflination, it is merely apex logicus, " a point of logic." The decrees of God may bediftinguiflied into the decree of the end, and the decree of the means, that they may the better be conceived of by our finite underftandings •, which arc not able to confider all things at once, and together, as they lie in the divine mind, but of one thing after another-, and that without dividing and feparating of God's decrees, or fuppofing any priority or pofteriority in him. Now the decree of the end muft be confidered before the de- cree of the means ; and that what is firft: in intention, is lad in execution, and Co vice verfa. Let then eternal life and glory, or a ftate of everlaifing communioa with God, be the end of eleflion, as it is with refpeft to man, then the creation, permiffjon oi Adam'% fall, and the recovery out of it, are the means in order to that end. It follows, that, in the decree of the end, man could not be con- fidered as a fallen creature, but as yet not created ; becaufe the creation and the pcrmifTion of the fall belong to the decree of the means, which is in order of nature after the decree of the end. For if God firft decreed to create man, and to permit him to fall, and then decreed to bring him to a ftate of eternal life and happincfs -, according to this known rule, that what is firft in- intention is Jaft in execution, this ftrange abfurdity will follow, that man will be firfl brought into a ftate of eternal life and happinefs, and then created and permitted to fall. Let the end be the manifeftation of God's glory, which cer- tainly. * Vid. Aft. Synod. Dordr. par. i. p. 48. • Riches of God's Lov*, asainft Hord, par. i. p, 35. TRUTH DEFENDED. e^ uinly is -the fopreme end of eleflion, then the means are creation, permifTion of fin, redemption, fanftificacion, and, in a word, compleat falvation ; which, thouoh they are materially many, yet make up but one formal decree, called the decree of the means. Now according to the former rule, the intention of the end mud be firft, and then the intention of the means ; and, confequently, man cannot be confidered in the decree of the end, the manifcdation of God's glory, as yet created and fallen •, becaufe the creation and permiflion of fin belong to the decree of the means, which in order of nature is after the decree of the end. But if, on the contrary, God firfl: decreed to create man and per- mit him to fall, and then decreed to manifcft the glory of his grace and mercy, in his eternal falvation -, according to the above rule, that what is firft in inten- tion is laft in execution, and fo vice verfa, it will follow, that the glory of God's grace and mercy are firft manifeltcd in the eternal falvation of man, and then he is created and fuffcred to fall. Likewife it is to be obferved, that the feveral things mentioned in the decree of the means, creation, permifTion of fin, and falvation, are not to be confidered as fubordinate, but as co-ordinate means, or as making up an entire, compleat medium. We are not to fuppofe that God decreed to create man that he might permit him to fall, or that he decreed to permit him to fall, that he might fave him ; but that he decreed to create him, permit him to fall, and to fave him notwithftanding his fall, that he might glorify h.is grace and m-ercy. Nor are we to conceive of them after this manner, that God firft decreed to create man, and then decreed to permit him to fall -, for it would follow that man, in the execution of thefe decrees, is firfl: permitted to fall, and then he is created : Nor thus, that God firfl: decreed to create man, and permit him to fall, and then decreed to fave him; for, accord- ing to the former rule, man would firft be faved, and then created and permit- ted to fall. Thefe are fome of the reafonings of the Supralapfarians ; particu- larly of Dr Tuifs, as may be fcen in h\s Ft udici^, and in his Riches of God's love, fgaitijl Hord. This poor man, that takes upon him to write againft the Supra- lapfarians, would do well to try his flx.ill in unravelling and deltroyincr this kind of reafoning : But alas ! his capacity will never reach it. I am afraid the very mention of thefe things will increafe his furprife and fright. Howe\'er, fines he has taken upon him to objcdt to this opinion of the Supralapfarians, i: will be proper to hear what he has to fay. And, I. He propofes to fliew, that this doftrine is deftitute of fupport from the fcripture, and tells us \ he has often wondered what part of facred writ can be produced to fupport it -, and that he has lieen fearching and trying to know the language of the divine word concerning eledion -, and fliall therefore mention, and, in a few words, coinment upon thofe fcripcures, which, fays he, Ijud^c^ K 2 are f Supral.-ipfarian Scheme, p. 4. 68 TRUTH DEFENDED. are only tiecejfary to be confidered in this difpute; and thefe are, i Peter \. 2. Epb. i. 3, 4. Rom. viii. 29. If the man is really ignorant, as I am inclined to think he is, and does hot know what parts of lacred writ the" Suprahpfarians have produced to fupport their doctrine, he has aftcd a weak part in meddling with the controverfy ; if he does know, he has afted a worfc in concealino- of them. He promifes to mention and comment on thofe fcripcures -which he judges are enly necefiary to be confidered in this difpute •, but he ought to have mentioned the fcriptures, which the men he oppofcs judge necefTary to be con- fvdered in this difpute ; and to have fhewn the mifapplication of them, and that they are not pertinent to their purpofe : is this impanially to try and examine, by the word of God, the Supralapfarian fcheme, as his title promifes? every "one knows, that knows any thing of this controverfy, that the fcriptural part of it is about the fenfe of the ninth chapter of the epiflle to the Romans ; and the qucftion is, whether the Sublapl'arian, or the Supralapfarian fcheme, concern- ing the objefts of cledion and reprobation, is moll agreeable to the fenfe of the apoftle in that chapter; parCiculaily, whether theSupralapfarian fcheme, ofGod's chufing fome, and leaving others, confidered as unfallen, as having done nei- ther good nor evil, does not bcft agree with tlie account the apoftle gives in vcr. II — 1 3. of the t\e6\.\onoi Jacob., and rejc61ionof Z,,'^// •, and more efpecially whether Jt does not beft agree witli the fame apoflle's account, in ver. 2 i. of the potter's making of the jame lump on; -jcjjdunto hoiiour., and another unto dijJoonour ? This author fhould have mentioned thefe fcriptures, and commented upon them, and anfwered the arguments of the Supralapfarians from them; in parti- cular, thofe of that eminent Supralapfarian, Theodore Bcza, in his notes upon the laft of thefe texts, which I fhall tranfcribe for this man's fake ; and he may try whether he is capable of anfwering of them. " Thofe who, by the mafs, '* or lump, fays this great man, underftand mankind corrupted, do not fatisfy " me in the explanation of this place : for fird, it feems to me, that the phrafe *' of informed matter, neither fufficiently agrees with mankind, either made " or corrupted. Moreover, if the apoftle had confidered mankind as corrupted, " he would not have faid, that fome velfcls were made to honour, and fome to " difhon«ur; but rather, that feeing all the veflcls would be fit for difhonour, " fome were left in that diflionour, and others tranfiated from that difhonour to ♦' honour. Laftly, \f Paul had not rofe to the higheft degree, he had not fatisfied " the queftion objeded •, for it would always have been queried, whether that " corruption came by chance, or whether indeed, according to the purpofe of ^' God, and therefore the fame difficulty would recur. I fay, therefore, Paul " ufing this moft elegant fimile, alludes to the creation oi Adam, and rifes up ♦' to the eternal purpofe of Gcd, who, before he created mankind, decreed of " his TRUTH DEFENDED. 69 « his own mere will and pleafure, to manifeil tiis glory, both in faving of fome « whom he knew, in a way of mercy, and in deftroying others, whom he alfo " knew, in righteous judgment. And verily, unlcfs we judge this to be the *' cafe, God will be greatly injured •, becaufe he will not be fufficiently wife, " who firft creates men, and looks upon them corrupt, and then appoints to •'what purpofe he has created them: nor fufficiently powerful, if, when he ^ has taken up a purpofe concerning them, he is hindered by another, fo that " he obtains not what he willed -, nor fufficiently conftant, if, willingly and " freely he takes up a new purpofe, after his workmanfhip is corrupted." As for the fcriptures mentioned by our author, as oppofing the Supralapfa- rian fcheme, I fhall not trouble the reader, by obferving the rrungled work he makes with them, and the low and mean comments he makes upon them -, I fhall only fay, that it will be readily owned, that fanftification, obedience, and confonnity to the image of God and Chrirt, are things included in the decree of ck(5tion : but do thefe things necelTarily fuppofe, that the perfons whom they concern, were, in that decree, confidercd as impure, unholy, dilobedicnr, and in a want of conformity to the image of God and Cbrift ? were not the cUrcft an- gels chofen to fanclification, obedience, and conformity to the image of God ? will any one fay, that thefe things fuppofed them to be, or that in the decree of clcflion, they were confidered as impure, unholy, dilobedient, and in a want of conformity to the image of God ? But, adn-iitting that thefe things, widi rcfpciS to men, fuppofe them in fuch a cafe-, it fliould be obfervcd, that they belong TO the decree of the means, and therefore fall fliort of proving that God, in the decree of the end, or in decreeing men to eternal life and happinefs, for the glorifying of himfelf, confidered them in fuch a ftate ; fmce the decree of the end, in order of nature, is before the decree of the means ; unlcfs we can fuppofe the all-wife being to ad in fuch a manner as no wife man would, name- ly, firft fix upon the means, and then appoint the end. Now if God firfl de- creed to create man, permit his fall, and then fanrtify and conform him to the image of his Son, ijefore he decreed to glorify himfelf in his falvation, the con- fcquencc will be, that God is firft glorified in the falvation of man ; and afccr that, man is created, fuffered to fall, is lanftified, and conformed to the image of Chrift; becaufe, what is firft in intejition, is laft in execution. There is one thing more I would obferve, and that. is, that this author ^ delivers it as the fet- tled opinion of the Supralapfarians, "that we were not eleded as holy and obc- " dicnt beings, but to the end we might be fuch :" And I am much miftakcn,. if this is not che fettled opinion of all Sublapfarians, except fuch as are in rhe Arminian fcheme. But what is this mentioned for? why, to ffiew that the Su- pralapfarians » Supralapfarian Scheme, p. 5. 7.0 TRUTH D E F E N D E D. firalapfarians are inconfiftent with themfelvcs, and guilty of fo flagrant a contra- •didion, as h not to be reconciled by any. ' But where does it lie ? " why, whcre- ^' as they affirm, that we were fiot the almighty's choice, becaufe we were holy ; *,' but that •fae didchufc us to be made holy, and yet, in that choice, beheld us »' free from all defilements and deformity." But this author mufl: be told, if he does not know it, that theSupralapfarians, in confidering men not yet creat- ed, and fo not fallen, as the objedls of eleftion, fuppofe them neither good nor bad, righteous or wicked, holy or unholy, but in the pure, that is, in the, mere mafs of creaturefhip, not yet made, much Icfs corrupted, ;and as having done neither good nor evil ; .now is tliis Tuch a flagrant contradiftion, never to be reconciled, that men confidered neither as holy or unholy, as-obedient or dif- obedient, fhould be chofen to holinels and obedience ? 2. This author ' proceeds to fhew, that " the doftrine of the Supralapfarians is " repugnant to their own opinion of God's eternal foreknowledge, according to " which he was pleafed to make his choice." To which I reply ; that the Supra- lapfarians will readily own, that the omnifcient Jehovah did, at one view, fee, and pcrfe6lly behold, whatfocver -would come to pafs, throughout all ages of time; and that he has an univerfal prcfcience of all creatures and things, in their different ftates and ci^rcumftances', but then they will deny that elccftion pro- ceeds upon, or -that God has been pleafed to make his choice according to this his general and eternal prefcience. It is true, that thofe who arc elefted, are «le(5ted according to the foreknowledge of God the Father ' ; and whom be did. fore- know, he alfo did fredeflinate to be conformed to the image of his Son. But thefe paflages are not to be underftood of the univerfal prefcience and foreknowledge of God ; for then all men would be eledted and prcdeftinated, for whom be did foreknow, he alfo did predejlinate; but all men are neither conformed to the image of Chrift, nor predeftinated to be fo : it remains, that the foreknowledge, ac- cording to which eledtion and predeftination proceed, is God's fpecial foreknow- ledge of his own people, and which is no other than his cvcrlafting love to them, vyhich is the fource and fpring of his choice of them -, and the meaning is, that whom be foreknew, that is, in his eternal mind knew, owned, approved -©f^^ ioved with an cverlafting love ; he cbofe them to falvation, and predeflinated them CO be conformed to the image of his Son. ■ 3. This writer ^ goes on to obferve, that " this doftrine of God's choofing " his people without confidering them as fallen creatures, tends co leflcn the ■«' infinite grace and mercy of God in their cleftion." I reply ;, that though- it' ^as been a matter of controvcrfy between the Supralapfarians, and others, -whe- '" '' '-' -ther 'v. * Supralapfarian Scheme, p. 7. '1 Pet. i. 2. Rom. viii. tg. * Supralapfarjan Scheme, p, 8. - - - TRUTH DEFENDEir. 71 tlier ele^//(7« ;V faid to be of God, that fheweth mercy, Rom. ix. 15. Their reafons, among many others ", too many to mention, why it cannot be an aft of mercy, are, becaufe the angels are elefted, but not of mercy -, the human nature of Chrift is eledtcd, but not of mercy. They argue, that fuppofing it fliould be admitted, that election is an aft 6f mercy, it mufl: either be aHus eli- citus, an aftual will of being merciful, or a£iu5 imperatus, the aft of flTewino- mercy itfelf : not the latter, becaufe that fuppofes perfons not merely foreknown as miferable, but in aftual being, and in real mifery, and is a tranfient aft up- on them •, -whereas eleftion puts nothing in the perfons chofen : if it is an aft of mercy, it muft be the former, God's aftual. will of being merciful ; but this does not neceffarily prefuppofe mifery, or miferable objefts, it being internal, and immanent in God, and the fame with his mercy itfelf; and would have been the fame, nor would God have been the Icfs merciful, if the world had not been, and there had never been a miferable objeft on whom to difplay it. The aft of eleftion does not prefuppofe men finners and miferable, nor indeed can it; for fliould it prefuppofe fin, it would prefuppofe the decree of the permif- Con of fin ; and the permiflion of fin would be firfl: in God's intention, than man's falvation of God's mercy, and confequently would be lafl: in execution; than which, nothing can be thought of more abfurd. Bcfides, though election is not an aft of mercy, yet it is far from having any tendency to leflcn the mercy of God, and does, even according to the Supralapfarian fcheme, abundantly provide for the glorifying of it ; fince, according to that, the decree of tlie end is, the glorifying of the grace and mercy ofGod, tempered withjuflice: The decree of the means provides for the bringing about of this end, which includes creation, the permi(r:on of fin, the miflion of Chrifl, fanftification, and com- pleat falvation; fo that the elcft of God may well be czWed vejfels of mercy ; fince through fuch means, they are brought to eternal life and glory ; though, in the decree of the end, they are confidered as not yet created and fallen, than which, nothing can more tend to advance the free grace and mercy of God. 4. This author" urges, that " this way of fliating eleftion flrikes fcvercly *' againft the juftice of God, in pafling by the relt of mankind, not included in ' Rom. xi. J, 6. ™ Vid. Twifs. Vir.diclx, 1. i. p. i. D'gr. iv. c. i &: Di^r. ix. c. i — 4^. • Sopralapfar'an Schera :, p.. 9. •Tt TRUTH DEFENDED. «' in this decree ; for hereby they are rejefted as creatures only, and not as fin- " ful creatures." It is very ftrange, that election fliould feverely ftrike againft thejuftice of God, when, according to this way of flatitig it, it is a choice of perfons to eternal life and happinefsfor the glorifying of the grace and mercy of God, mixed with his juftice •, and fo as much provides in end and means, for the honourof divine juftice, as for the glory of grace and mercy : and it is ftrang- cr ftill, that eleftion fliould be a pafTing by the reft of mankind, not included' in this decree : I fuppofe he means reprobation ; for he has an extraordinary hand at putting one thing for another. Now let it be obferved, that though the Supralapfarians do not confider reprobation as an afl of juftice, but of fovc- reionty, yet not of injuftice; nor does their way of ftating it at all ftrike at the juftice of God. They fuppofe, that God, in the aft of preterition, confidcred theobjedts of it, as not yet created and fallen ; and determined, when created,- to leave them to their own will, and deny them that grace which he is not oblig- ed to give : and where is the injuftice of all this ? But then, though they do not premilc fin to the confideration of the zt\ of preterition, yet they always premife it to the decree of damnation ; which tiiis author, as is generally done, con- founds together. They fay, that as God damns no man, but for fin, fo he de- creed to damn no man, but for fin : and furely this cannot be thought to ftrike feverely againft the juftice of God. It is true, they do not look upon fin to be the caufe of the decree of reprobation, quoad aSium vokntis, which can only be the will of God; but quoad res voliias, the caufe of the thing willed, damnation. Befides, this way of ftating the decrees of elcftion and reprobation, refpedtin.cr men, can no more ftrike at the juftice of God, than the way of ftating thefe decrees, rcfpeifling angels, does ; which cannot be done in another way : for the elefl angels could never be confidered as fallen ; and therefore the other an- gels, who were paffed by, and rejefted at the fame time, muft be rejected as creatures only, and not as finful creatures ; unlefs it can be thought that the an- gels were not chofen and pafted by at the fame time, nor then confidered in a like ftate; and that God chofe fome of them upon ilieir forefeen holinefs and obedience, and rejefted the reft upon tiieir forefeen rebellion and difobedience ; and iffo, why may not the cleftion and rejeftion of men, bethought to pro- ceed upon the fame foot ? which none, tliat I know of, will come into, buc fuch that are in the Arminian fchcme. Tliis theme, our author fays, he ha? been always cautious of meddling with, left he fliould darken coiinfelfcr wxnt ef knozvled^e ; and it is pity he meddled with it now, fince he difcovcrs fo much ignorance of it : who can forbear thinking of the common proverb ? Thushiv- intr confidered what he calls the foundation doftrinc of the Supralapfarians, he proceeds, II. To TRUTH DEFENDED. ji II. To examine fome of the doflrines ° which grow .from this root, as the natural offspring of it, and appear with the fame completion ; and begins, I. With their doftrine of eternal juftification. What this author fays, I am perfuaded, will never meet with general credit, "that eternal juftification is the " natural offspring of the Supralapfarian dodrine, refpedting the objeds of clec- " tion, not confidered as fallen creatiires." He goes all along, I obferve, upon a falfe notion, that whatever is thought, or faid to be done in eternicy, is a Su- pralapfarian dodlrine : whereas, the Sublapfarians themfelves allow eledion to be from eternity, before the foundation of the world, and fo before the fall of Adam, though not without the confideration of it; and in this th?y differ from the Supralapfarians. 1 know a reverend Divine, now living in this city of London, who, if I miftake not, reckons himfclf among the Supralapfarians, and fays, that they dig deepeft into the gofpel -, and yet is a ftrenuous oppofer of juftification from eternity, and even before faith : on the other hand, there have been fome who have thought, that the objecl of eleiflion is man fallen, and ycc have been for juftification before faith. For my own parr, I muft confefs, I ne- ver confidered juftification from eternity, any other than a Sublapfarian doc- trine, proceeding upon the furetyftiip-engagements of Chrift, and his future fatisfafiion and rightcourncfs ; upon wliich foot the Old-Teftament-faints were opcnlyjuftified, and went to heaven long before the fatisfaftion was really made or thcjuftifying righreoufnefs brought in i and, indeed, if the objcds of juftifi- cation are iheungodly, as the fcripture reprcfents them to be, they muft be con- fidered as fallen creatures. However, if the doflrine of eternal juftification is the natural offspring of the former, and appears with the fain e compleflion, and is to be maintained with equal force of argument, we have no reafon to be aftiam- ed of It •, and I am fure we have no reafon to be in any pain on the account of the oppofition this doughty writer makes unto it : he fays, we have exceeded all the bounds of revelation in our inquiries after it, and then barely mentions three or four places of fcriptures, which fpeak of juftification ^>' faith •, and concludes, that therefore there is no juftification before it •, an extraordinary way of arguing indeed ! When juftification by faith no ways contradifts juftification before it-, nay, juftification perceived, known, enjoyed by faith, fuppofes juftification be- fore it ; for how (hould any have that {cn^e, perception, and comfort of their juftification by it, if there was no juftification before it.'' He proceeds p to ob- ferve the order or chain of falvation, \n Romans \\\\. ^o. where calling is rcpre- fented as prior to juftification ; an objeftion I have formerly anfwered in my Doc- trine of Juftification'*^ to which I refer the reader, and take the opportunity of. Vol. II. L obfcrving ' Supra'apfatian Scheme, p. lo. ' Ibid. p. ii. ' Page 70. 74 TRUTH DEFENDED. obferving, that neither this author, nor any other, have attempted to anfwer the arguments there made ufe of in favour of juftification before faith : I will not fay they zre unmifwerabk \ but I may fay, that as yGtx.\\zy 2.rcunanfivered : this au- thor, if he pleafes, may try what he can do with.them, and it might have been expected in this his performance •, but inftead of this, h*e fets himfclf, with all Jiis miglu, againft fome other doftrines, which he reprefents as Supralapfarian, as calculated to favour the fcheme of eternal juftification, and as branches of it j as, I. " That God was eternally reconciled to the eleift ; and that no fcripturc *' can be produced to prove that the Lord Jefus did come to procure reconcili- " ation for them -,. and that wherever Chrift is faid to make peace by his blood, "^ it is to be iinderftood only of his reconciling the finner to God-'." Whether he refers to any thing that has been publifhed, or dropped in private converfa- tion, or who the perfons are, that affirm this, I know not: I greatly fear he tias beth mifreprefented their words and meaning. I m.uft own, I never heard of any fuch thing as an eternal reconciliation of God to the eleft. Reconciliation fuppofes former ffiendfhip, a breach of it, and a conciliation of it again; which is inconfiftent with the everlafling, invariable and unchangeable love of God to them. Cod was indeed from everlafting r^fo/;c;7;«^, ■ not himfelf to the world, but she world of his eleft to himfelf' \ that is, drawing the fcheme and model of their reconciliation by Chrift, or fettling the way and manner in which reconci- liation, atonement, and fatisfatftion for their fins, fliould be made ; and accord- ingly made a covenant of peace with his Son, appointed him to be their peace, and in the fulnefs of time fcnt him to make peace by the blood of his crcfsy and laid upon him the chaflifement of i\\c\r' peace ; and who has aftually made recon- ciliation for their fins; and fo they, even when enemies, were actually reconciled; that is, their fins were aftually expiated and atoned for to God, by the death of his Son. This is the doftrine of reconciliation the fcriptures fpeak of, and which I never knew before was ever reckoned a Supralapfarian dodtrine : for furely reconciliation, atonement, or fatisfaftion for fin, which are fynonymous terms, cxprefllveof the fame thing, muft fuppofe perfons finners herein concerned. Let it t>e farther obferved, that God from all eternity loved his eledl with an invari- able love ; that he never entertained any hatred of them, or was at enmity with them ; that there is no fuch thing as a change in God from hatred to love, any more than from love to hatred ; that our Lord Jefus Chrift did not by his aton- iniT facrifiie procure his Father's love to the cleft, feeing his being a propitiation for fin was a fruit, cfFeft, and evidence of that love. Agreeably, the fcriptures never fpeak of God's being reconciled to his cleft either in eternity or in time, but of their being reconciled to him ; and not fo nnich of the reconciliation of their » Supralapfarian Scheme, p. 12. '2 Cor. v. 19. -TRUTHDEFENDED. 75 their pcrfons, as- of a reconciliation for their fins-, whereby their perfons are reconciled, not to the love and affcftions of God, which they always (hared in, but to theya/?;Vtf of God, which infifted upon a fatisfaftion to a broken law; which being given, both love and jaftice are reconciled logether, righteoufnefs ar.d peace kifs each other, in the affair of their faliration. Now there is nothing in this doftrine of reconciliation that is oppofue,. ( I.) To the fin-ofterings and peace-offerings under the law; fince thefe were made to the God of Ifrael for the people of Ifrael, whom God loved above all people that were upon the face of the earth, and were typical of that atoning facrifice, in which indeed were difcovered the fevereft rcfentmentof jufticeagainfl: ftn, and yet the cleareft evidence of ftrong love and affedions to perfons then enemies, and defticute of love to God: Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and fen t his Son to be the propitiation for our fins \ In this both type and antitype agree, that the reconciliation is not of God to men, but for men to God ; though this author fays, " it is part all difpute, that the party " to be reconciled is God " ;" when it is the very thing in difpute between us. It is no where faid of the facrifices of the law, that God was reconciled by them to the people oi Ifrael; and it is no where faid of the facrifice of Chrilt, the antitype of them, that God .is by it reconciled to his eleft; though I am content that God flioukl be faid to be reconciled to his elcd by the death of Chrili:, provided no more is meant by it than fatisfying of his juflice, not a conciliating or procuring his love and favour. The author's reafoning on the denial of this, that the reconciliation muft be made to the houfc of Ifrael, or for the God of Ifrael, or with the finner or the fin, is fo ftupid and f&nfclcfs, that it delerves DO confidcration. (2.) Nor does this dodrine, which denies that Chrift came to reconcile God to finncrs, oppofe, as is fuggefted ", what is prophefied of him in the Old Tcftamenr, or whir is affirmed of his perfornjance in the New; fince though it was prophefied of him, that God fliould make his foul an offering for fin'' ; and it is affirmed of him, that he gave himfelf for us, an offering and a facrifice to God -" ; yet it is neither faid that he fliould, or that he did do this for the elcil, to re- move any enmity in tlie heart of God againft them, or to turn any hatred of bis into love towards them, or to purchafc and procure the love and affctflions of God for them : fo far from this, that becaufc they had a peculiar fhare in the love and affedions both of the Father and the Son, the Father made the foul of his Son an offering for them, and the Son ^avc himfelf an offering unto God on their account. The Old TelUment fays, that the Lord is wellpkafed for his righteoufnefs fake ; he will magnify the law, and make it honour able "^ ; and L 2 the ' 1 John iv.io. • SupralapfarUn Scheme, p. 15. * Ibid. p. 15. ' H'ai. liii. 10. 1 Ephes. v. 2. - » Ifai. ilii. 21. 76 TRUTH DEFENDED.- the New Teftament fays, that Chrift has fo loved his, that he has given blmfelf for them, an offering and a facrifice to God, for a fweet-fmelling favour * ; but nei- ther the one nor the other fay, that either God was to be, or that he is hereby reconciled to his elefl, or they hereby ingratiated into his affeftions. What is written in Colos.'i. 20. iCor. xv. 3. Hei.n.iy. Colos.u. 1^. Ephes. i.y. per- feflly agree with the doflrine of reconciliation I am now contending for; nor does this oppofe that plain fcripture, Rom. v. i. Therefore being jujlified by faith, 'it:e have peace with God, through our Lord Jefus- We have no need to remove the flop in the text; though how this author dare venture to alter the reading of it, and render the words peace in Cod, or what is his reafon for it, I know not. The peace the text fpeaks of, does not defign the peace, reconciliation^ and atonement made by the blood of Chrift, but the effect of it ; even an in- ward confcience peace, which believers have with God, or God-ward, through. Chrift the donor of it, fpringing and arifing from faith's apprehending an inte- reft in the juftifying righteoufncfs of the Son of God. . (3.) Nor does this docftrine lefTen, or tend to fruftrate the great and importanr ends of our Saviour's fufferings and death, as this author attempts to prove '. The ends of his fufferings and death were to bring the elcfl to God, to make re- conciliation for their_/7;;j, to reconcile them to God ; and accordingly they "U-'ere, even when enemies, reconciled to God by the death of his Son '. Where does the fcripture ever reprefent the end of Chrift's fufferings and death to be to recon- cile God to his elcft ; that is, to remove any enmity in his heart againft them, or to procure for them his love and favour ? but on the contrary, it reprefents the fufferings and deathof Chrift as fruits and evidences of his matchlefs and furprifing love to them. Cod commendetb bis love towards us, in that while we were yet finners, Chrijl died for us^. The dodrines of reconciliation and jufti- fication, thus viewed in the light of fcripture, can never clafh with the fatisfac- tion of Chrift, nor tend to Icffen and fruftrate it ; fince reconciliation is no other than fatisfaftion and atonement to thejuftice of God, and juftification proceeds upon the foot of fatisfaftion, and everlafting righteoufnefs. "Nor is there room or reafon for that ftupid inference and conckjfron, that becaufe Chrift came to reconcile finners to God, therefore he became an offering to the finner, and not to God. There is a twpfold reconciliation the fcriptures fpeak of; the one is obtained by the price of Chrift's blood, the other by the power of his grace ; you have them both in one text, Rom. v. 10. For if when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more heing reconciled, we fhall he faved by his life. The meaning of which is-; that if, when the elcft of God were in a ftate of nature, and fo of enmity to God, atonement was made for their • Ephes V. t. * Suprahpfarian Scheme, p. 19. * t Pet. iii. 18. Dan, Ix. 24. Heb. U. 17. Rom. v. ic. •* Rom. v. 8. TRUTHDEFENDED. -77 their fins by the facrifice and death of Chrift, which is ftrongly exprefTive of the amazing love of God to them ■, then much more being by the Spirit and grace of God reconciled to this way of peace, pardon, atonement, life and fal- vation, they fhall be faved, through the interceding life of their Redeemer. (4.) This doftrine, as it has been dated, does not render the offices of Chrifl, as mediator,. intercelTor and high prieft, needlefs, yea, of none effeft -, unlefs this author can imagine, according to his own fcheme, that it is the fole work of the mediator, interceflbr and high pried, to reconcile God to the eleft. This we indeed fay is no part of his work, in fuch fenfe, as to conciliate the love and favour of God to them ; but does it follow, from hence, that his office is need- lefs, and of none effed ? Is it not needful, to reconcile the eledt to God, to make reconciliation for their fins ? Is he not ufeful, as mediator, to be their advocate and intercefibr, their way of accefs to God, and acceptance with him, and of conveyance of all the bleffings of the covenant of grace to them, whence he is called the mediator of it ? I would alio afk this author, if he thinks when God is reconciled to the eleft by the death of his Son, or rather when they believe ; for it fcems there is no reconciliation before faith in Chrid, the blood, facrifice and death of Chrid will not cffetft it, according to thefe men, till faith has given the finidving droke : I fay, I afk this author, whether he thinks that the office of Chrid, as mediator, ceafes ? for, according to his way of reafoning, it fhould ceafe, when reconciliation is really made. Whereas Chrid, after believing as well as before, is the mediator between Cod and man, and ever lives to make intercejfion for us'. We are able to prove that Chrid was fet up as mediator from everlading ; that his mediation was always neceffary, and ever will be ; that as he is the medium of all grace now to us, he will be ■ the medium of all glory to all eternity. To conclude this head -, our ''author feems to be convinced thzijohn iii. 16. exprefics the love of God to his eledc, antecedent to his giving and fending of his Son to be the propitiatory facrifice -,. fince he does not attempt to offer any thing againd the expofition, or to give atnother fenfe of it. 2. " Another branch of their (the Supralapfarians) eternal jufiification, is- ♦' faid « to be their refufing to pray for the pardon of fin, any otherwife than " the manifedation of it to their confcienccs." Strange ! that pardon of fin fhould be a branch of eternal juftificatlon, when it is a dillinft bleffing from it-,. as, I think, I have fufficiently made to appear in my treatife " concernin-T it: ftranger dill ! that refufing to pray for it Hiould be deemed a branch of it : and what is of all mod wonderful, is, that this fliould be reckoned a Supralapfarian poinr,, « I Tira. ii. 5. Heb. vii. 25. ^ Supralapfarian Scheme, p. 24. » Ibid. p. 25. ' Do^^rine of JuftificatioD, p. 2—5, 78- T R U T H D E F E N D E D; point, when pardon of fin fuppofes fin, and fin fuppofes the fall ; and whether it is to be conceived of as in the divine mind, from eternity, or as pafTing into fuccefTive ads in time, as men fin, or as manifefled to their confcienccs, the objefls of it cannot be confidered otherwife than as finncrs, fallen creatures; and therefore is a Sublapfarian, and not a Siipralapfarian dodtrine. Is this man qualified to examine the Siipralapfarian fcheme? He proceeds to try this prac- tice of refufing to pray for the pardon of fin, any otherwife than the manifefta- tion of it to the confcience, by the example of the holy men of God, and by the advice and diredion of our bleffed Lord and Saviour. He might have fpared the pains he has taken in collcdting the Lnftanccs of praying for the par- don of fin, fince the quefiiion is not, whether the faints, in any fenfe, (hould pray for it -, for we allow, that they have done it, that they are direfted to it, and fhould do it; but the queflion is, in what fenfe they have done it, and fhould do it ? Now we apprehend, that when believers pray for the pardon of fin, that their fenfe and meaning is not, nor fhould it be, as if the blood of Chrift fliould be fhed again for the rcmilTion of fin, or as if compleat pardon was not procured by it, or as though this was to be obtained by their praying, tears, humiliation, and repentance, or that any new aft of pardon fliould arife in the mind of God, and be afreQi pafled ; but when they pray in this manner, their meaning is, either that God would, in a providential way, deliver them -out of prefent difiirefs, or avert thofe troubles and forrows they might juftly fear; or, that they might have the fenfe and manifeftation of pardon to their fouls, frcfli fprinklings of the blood of Jefus, and renewed applications of it to fheir confcienccs ; and this, we believe, is both their duty and intereft to do daily, fince they are daily finning againft God, grieving his Spirit, and wound- ing their own confcienccs '. The inftance of the apoftle's advifing Simon Magus to pray, is not to pray particularly for the pardon of fin, or that the evil thought of his hjeart might be forgiven him, as liiis author fuggcfts '' ; but to repent and pray in general ; and this is added by way of 'encouragement. If perhaps the thought cf ihine heari may be forgiven thee. However, I will not contend with him about it, fince nothing in this controverfy depends upon it. He goes ' on to obferve, that, 3. ■'* The third branch of their eternal juftification is, that God loved and de- '♦ lighted in the eleft as much while in their finful ftate, and in the height of their " rebellion againft his laws, as when they are converted, and made obedient to « his ways." That God loves his ele^' « -zjo^Xa juw^ok nv, " but what *' was much more-," for he does not exprefs the habit, but the quality; he " does not fay, he made him a finner, but fin itfclf ; that we might be made, " he does not fay righteous, but righteoufnefs, even the righteouinefs of God." So Oecumenius '' ; " Chrifi:, fays he, Hefl-fo/^jt Afxa.flaKQ-j " was the great finner," " feeing he took upon him the fins of the whole world, and made them bis own."' So Jujiin'' ; "He, that is, Chrift, is fin, as we are righteoufnefs; not our " own, but God's ; not in ourfelves, but in h\m ijicut ipfe peccalum, non fuinn- " fed nojirum, even as he himfelf is fin ; not his own, but ours ; not in himfelf,. " but in us." Some of them have been very exprefs, as to Chrifi's bearing the filth of fin; particularly Grt'_|cry of iVy^a ; "For, fays he ', fpeaking of " Chrift, m«7b5«( yif «e?f iaxi\ov nv -jay i/Mit cLunfTiiv ft/wf, having tranOatcd to ♦' himfelf the filth of my fins, he imparted to me his own purity, and made me " a partaker of his beauty." And in another place \ fays he, " the pure and " harmlefs one, Toe rm AydfaTirnf De Beatitud. Orat. 1. p. 767. • Id Diem. Nat. Cbrift. p. 787, Vol. II. ^ Supralapfarian Scheme, p. 35, 36. TRUTH DEFENDED. 83 and then by an afterifk, we are direded to the margin, where, for the fake of the poor, illiterate Supralapfarians, a definition is given of a metonymy, which is this; " a metonomy is a changing, or putting one thing, or more, for an- " other:" " and, fays he, in the body of his work, fometimes you have the " caufe for th-e efFeft, and fometimes the efFcfl put for the caufe •," and among the inftances, he produces this is one, t\i^i unbelief is put for faith. Now, not to take notice that a metonymy is a trope, and not a figure, nor of his mifcall- \ng\x. met oncm)\ m^lczdoi metonytny., which might have been thou^rht to have been an error of the prefs, but that it is fo often repeated ; I fay, not to take notice of thefe things; he fays, " a metonomy is a changing, or putting one " thing, or more, for another;" but furely it is not a changing, or putting any one thing for another ; it looks as if he thought fo, feeing, among his examples, he vaakcs unbelief to be put for faith. There is a metonymy of the caufe and cffed, fubjedt and adjundl, but never of contraries ; as grace and fin, vice and virtue, faith and unbelief are : this looks more like the figure antiphrq/is, than the trope metonymy. Our author, by his new figure in rhetoric, will be able, in a very beautiful manner, to bring off the vileft of creatures, that call evil good., and good evil; that put darknefs for light, and light for darknefs \ that put Utter for fweet, and fweet for bitter'. Let me afk this author, fince he has put this inftance among his examples of a metonymy of the caufe for the effefl, and of the cffeft for the caufe ; let me, I fay, afk him, whether he thinks unbelief is the caufe of faith, or faith the caufe of unbelief; and feeing he has got fuch a good hand at metonymies, we will try what life he can make of them in ex- plaining the fcripiures in this controverfy. (6.) The fcriptures made ufe of to prove the imputation of fin to Chrift, or ' in our " name; and, as a finner, be condemned, not for his own, but the offences " of others ; feeing he was pure, and free from all fault, and underwent punifii- " ment due, not to himfelf, but to us :" which agrees with what he fays on CaLWi. 13. " Becaufe he fuftained our perfon, therefore he was z finner, and " deferving of the curfe ; not as in himfelf, but as in us." Beza on the place, has thefe words ; that " the antithefs requires, that rather Chrift ihould be " faid to be made fin for us, that is, a finner ^ not in himfelf, but on the ac- •' count oi xht guilt of all our fins, imputed to him; of which the two goats " were a figure, mentioned Z-^i;. xvi." Pifcator, as well as ^f^j, having men- tioned the other fenfe of Chrift's being made a fin-off"cring, adds, " rather fin " here, by a metonymy of the adjunfl, fignifies fumrnum peccalorem" " the " chief finner; " inafmuch as all the fins of all the eleft were imputed to Chrift; ** which expofition the following antithefis favours, that we might be made the " rigbtecufnefs of God in bim ; that is, " righteous before God ; namely, by a " righteoufnefs obtained by the facrifice of Chrift, imputed to us by God." So that though the words may be wken in a metonymical fenfe ; yet tliey are not " Supralapfarian Scheme, p. 41, /^3. ■ Ibid. p. 49. ,^-S6 T R U T H D E F E N D E D. fiot a metonymy of the caufe for theeffeft, but a metonymy of the adjunfl: fo /cehis is put for fcelejius, by Latin authors, as here fin for the finner. I now proceed to what our author has to fay to I/ai. liii. .6. The Lord hath laid -on him the iniquity of us all. This text, he fays % Dr Crifp makes the founda- tion of his feveral fermons, to prove that our bleffed Lord was made a finner; •and fays, that he very injudicioufly affirms, that it is the very faulr, or tranf- grefTion itfelf, that the Lord laid upon Chrifb; but he purpofes to make it plain, that he is miftakenin his opinion about this text, and that it was not the crime or fault, but the puniftiment due to us for our fins, that was laid upon Chrifl, which, he thinks, is evident from ver. 5, 7. To which I reply; that the pu- ■nifliment due to us for fin, could not have been laid upon Chrift, nor could he have been wounded few our tranfgrenions, or bruifed forour fins, 0; have been opprefil'd and afilifted, had he not had our fins laid upon him, that is, imputed to him : nor is it inconfiftent with the holinefs of God, to take either original (in, or our adtual fins and tranfgrefTions, even particular fins, and by them upon Chrift; fince this was done in order to fiiew his infinite holinefs, his indigna- tion againft fin, and the ftridtnefs and fcverity of hisjuftice in the puniflimenc of it ; nor is this inconfiftent with the nature of fin, nor any rude and extrava- gant way of thinking of it, which furely may as truly and properly be put, or iiid upon Chrift, as the iniquities and iranfgreffions of the children of //risJin all their fins, which mean thcirvery crimes, were typically put and laid upon the fcape-goat. This writer '' goes on to obferve, that the prophecy in Ifaiah liii. 4. Surely he hath home our griefs, and carried ourforrows, was fulfilled by our Lord's healing the difeafcs of the people. Matt. viii. 16, 17. and argues, that if the text in Ifai. liii. 4. is to be conftrued in the fame method as the fixth and eleventh verfes arc, the confeqiience will be, that our Lord bore the palfy of the Centurion's fervant, and the fever of Peter's wife's mother : this, he thinks, •will greatly hamper our fcheme, fo that we ftiall not be able to produce any thing confiftent with it, free from inexplicable perplexities and vile nonfenfe. But what reafon can 'be given, why the expreftions in the feveral places, fhould be interpreted in the fame way ? What though our Lord, in his ftatc of incar- nation, beincr a wan of forrows and acquainted with griefs, is faid to hear the griefs, and carry the forroijos of men, becaufe he had companion on them, and I'ympathized with them in their ficknefs, which put him upon healing of them ; and in fuch fenfe, bore them as a parent bears the ficknefies of a child, or a .■hun)and bears the infirmities of a wife ; for we have not an high prieji which can- not be touched with the feeling of our infirmities : does it therefore follow, that this ^uft be the fenfe of Chrift's bearing our fins, when he fuffered for them as our furety i -* inpralapfarian Scheme, p 41}. ' Ibid. p. 46. TRUTH DEFENDED. 87- fijrety ? Can it bethought that lie fympathized with our fins, or with us on the account of them, which put him upon fuffering for them, as he is faid to bear or fympathize with mens fickneflcs and difeafes, or with them upon the account of them, which put him upon healing of them ? (7.) The imputation of the filth of fin toChrift, and his bearing of it, would come next to be confidered ; but our author has not thought fit to make ufe of any arguments againfl: it, and therefore I do not think myfelf obliged to en- large upon it ; only would obferve, that filth and guilt are infeparable from fin; and therefore, if fin Is laid upon Chrifl, and imputed to him, guilt and- filth muft be likewife : nor can I fee how we can expedl to be cleared of the one and cleanfed from the other, unlefs Chrift bore them both, when his foul was. made an- offering for fin, and his blood was (hed to cleanfe from it. This writer would, indeed, be nibbling at it, but knows not how to go about it; and only cavils at fome cxprelTions of Mr Biiffey'% concerning it. Whether, in Pfalm c. 7. there is any allufion to the brook Cedron, or Kidron, over which ourLord went into the garden, I will not fay ; but I fee not why that black and unclean brook, or common-fewer, may not be an emblem of the pollutions and defilements of fin ; which being laid on Chrift when he pafled over that brook, made him fo heavy and fore amazed in his human nature, as to defire the cup might pafs fronv him. As to what Mr Hujfey fays of our iniquities being put into this bitter cup, and of his drinking of ir, and of the torrent of our fins and blacknefics runnino- into his foul with that wrath ; this is:not to be underftood of fin being inherent in him, or of his being defiled with it, the contrary to which he folidly proves ; but only of the imputation of them to him, and of his fufception of them ; for he fays % " It was not pain or torture abftracftly in the bitter draught, but polki- ** tion, the dregs of our fins, fin being the only impure thing in God's account, " and fo the fpot of fin, the filth and pollutions of fin, were imputed to him by " his Father, and put upon Chrift's account, and mingled with his wormwood " cup, that it made his holy foul to tremble." Nor is the fimile he makes ufe of a foolifh one, of a drop of ink, or poifon, falling upon a fiery globe of brafs, without leaving any fullying mark upon it, or receiving any (lain or pollution by it ; nor does it tend to extenuate the flood of the filthinefs of fin, that has been running ever £\r\zc Adam; nor is it unfuitable to the imputation and fuf- ception of it; which is all he means by his drinking of it ; but is defigned to fet forth the infinitenefs of Chrift, and of his power to refift the infefhion and ftain of fin ; as may be ken at large' in this valuable writer; who himfelf frankly owns ', " that the fimilitude is impcrfefl, to fet out the matter in the ** deep myftcrics of this gold tried in the fire, or the perfon of Chrift in his fuf- fcrings ; • The £l07 of Chrift unveiled, p. 497. » Ibid. p. ^98. ;83 TRUTH DETENDED. " ferlngsj the greatefl: of which was, the Father's imputation of our fins to " him." What our author further obfervcs concerning feme texts of fcripture, engaged by the Supralapfarians, to fpcak for their opinions of eternal juftifi- cation and adoption, being what is introduced by him, with reference to a living author, I leave it to him to anfwer for himfelf -, who, I doubt not, will make a proper and fuitable reply. 'I proceed, - Secondly, To defend the doctrine o^ -eternal union, which this author calls ' a -" branch which grows from the fruitful root of the Supralapfarian tree; which, *' fays he, they ftile eternal, adtual, union." As this author particularly refers to myfelf, throughout his performance on the head of union, I take leave to afk him. Where has he found eternal union in any writings of mine, fliled eter- nal, diiual uvi\on ? I have carefully avoided calling juftification, or union from eternity, aflual -, though for no other reafon than this, left any fliould imagine, that! confidered them as tranfient adls of God upon the eledt, which require their perfonal and adual exiftence ; for orherwife, as I believe, that eternal eleftion is adtual, and eternal reprobation is aftual, as they are immanent afls in God ; fo, 1 believe, eternal juftification is aftual, as it is an immanent aCt in God that juftifies ; and eternal union is aftual, as it is an adt of God's ever- laftincr love to his ek6t, whereby he has knit and united them to himfelf. I go onto afk, where have I faid, or who lias told tiiis man, that a non-entity was united to an exiftence ? The language wnh which this exprefTion is cloathed, manifeftly Oiews it to be of his own fhaping. The eleft of God, though they have not an ejfe a£iu, an a6lual being from eternity -, yet they have an ejj'e repre- fentatrjum, a reprefentative being inChrift from everlafting, which is more than other creatures have, whofe future exiftence is certain ; and therefore at leaft capable of a reprefentative union from eternity, and which has been readily owned by fome divines, who are not altogether in the fame way of thinking with myfelf However, it feems eternal union is a branch which grows from the fruitful root (not from the body) of the Supralapfarian tree. Poor crea- ture ! it is plain he knows nothing of the Supralapfarian tree, as he calls it, ei- ther root, body, or branch ; for as he is pleafed to explain the meaning of eternal, aftual union, it is this, " that they (I fuppofe he means the eledt) had *<■ aftual union with Chrift, whilft they were in their fins •," and if fo, they mult be confidered in their union with Chrift, as fallen creatures; and then it will follow, that this is a branch which grows from the Sublapfarian, and not the Supralapfarian tree. But pafting thefe things, I (hall now attend to what he lias to objcft to what I have written " on the fubjeft of union. And, (i.) Whereas * Supralapfarian Scheme, p. 74. u In a Letter to Mr Abraham Taylor, p. 29. &c. TRUTH DEFENDED. 89 ■( 1.) Whereas I have undertaken to prove that it is not the Spirit on Chrift's ■part, that is the bond of union to him, I endeavoured to do it by obferving that the Spirit is fent down, and given to God's eleft, in confequence of an antecedent union of them to Chrift; and that he, in his perfonal inhabitatior, operations and influences of grace in them, is the evidence, and not the efficient caufe of their union. That an elect perfon is firft united to Chrift, and then receives the fpirit in meafure from him, and becomes one fpirit with hirr, I thought was pretty evident from i Cor. vi. 17. He that is joined Unto the Lord, 4S one fpirit. From whence I concluded, and ftill conclude, that a perfon's be-- •coming one fpirit with Chrift,'or receiving the fame fpirit Chrift has, though in meafure, is in confequence of his being joined or united to him -, and not that Jie firrt; becomes one fpirit, or receives the fame fpirit from Chrift, and then is joined or united to him. The fenfe of the text is evident, and admits of no difficulty : But, fays " this writer, " it evidently proves that the Spirit of Chrift *' dwells in all that are united to him." I grant it, that the Spirit of Chrift dwells in all that are united to him, fooner or later ; but the queftion is, whe- ther the indwelling of the Spirit is antecedent to their union, or in confequence of it ? If it is in confequence of it, then that is not the bond of union : If it is antecedent to it, it muft be before faith; for, according to this man's fcheme, union is by faith, and there is none before it: and fo the abfurdity he would fain leave with me, follows himfelf ; " that the holy Spirit dwells with unbelievers." To illuftrate this matter, of a perfon's receiving the Spirit from Chrift, in con- fequence of union to him, I made ufe of a fimile taken from the head and mem- bers of an human body, and the communication of the animal fpirits from the one to the other, in confequence of the union between them. This author, though in his great modefty he owns that he is poorly fkilled in philofophy, a conceffion he needed not have given himfelf the trouble to make ; yet thinks himfelf capable to make it appear, that I am not a little wanting in the applica- tion of my argument : I fuppofe he mea.ns fimiie ; for I am often obliged to guefs at his meaning. But what is it he fancies is wanting ? In what is it inap- plicable ? Does it not exa61:ly tally withwhat I am fpeaking of .-' But inftead of fhewing the want of application, or any difparity in the cafe, which he docs not attempt, he puts me upon proving *, " that there is any life in the head of " a body natural, when the members are all dead ; or that the life of the natu- " ral body is all extindt before the head dies, or that the head can fubfift with- " out any living members, or that the body natural is deftitute of natural life, " when united to a living head ■" things I have no concern with, and which are no part of the fimile I make ufe of; and which is made ufe of by me only to fhew, that as the animal fpirits from the head are communicated to the mem- . Vol. II. N bers " Supralapfarian Scheme, p. 76. ' Ibid. p. 77. 90 TRUTH DEFENDED. . bers of the body, not antecedent to union between them, or in order to efFe6l: ir^ but in confequence of it : fo the Spirit of Chrift is communicated from him the head to the members of his body, not antecedent to their union, or in order to ef- fect it, but in confequence of it : whence it follows, that he cannot be the bond of this union; and by this I abide. For the proof of the Spirit's bein^ the evidence of communion, and fo of union, and therefore not the bond of it, I produced 1 Johi iii. 24. and chap. iv. 13. Only the firfl: of thefe fcriptures is taken notice of by this writer"; who fancies that the former part of this text was difagree- able to me, and therefore left out by me. I declare I was far from thinkinor ir to be fo ; and am well concent it fhould be tranfcribed at large, i: being a wit- nefs for, a;id not againll my new notion, as he is pleafed to call it : /f«i he that keepeth his commandments dweUcth in him., and he in him ; and hereby we kno-jo that be abidith in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us. The meaning of which is, that thofe perfons, who under the influences of the Spirit of God are enabled to keep the commandments of God, dwell in him, and he in them-, that is, they have communion with him, as the effcfl of union to him -, for thefe ads of indwelling are not uniting afts, but ads of communion, in confequence of union ; of which the Spirit being given them, is an evidence. Now could it be proved that Chrifl dwells in his people by his Spirit, though the fcripture no where fays fo, but that he dwells in their hearts by faith -, yet it does not fol- low that he is united to them by his Spirit, becaufc this aft of indwelling is an ad of communion : not this, but his everlafling love, which is the foundation of his dwelling in them, is the bond of union. That the Spirit is the feal of covenant-love and of union with Chrift,. will not be denied : But then his being a feal, is no other than his being a certifying evidence and witncfs of thefe things. Now from the Spirit's being a witnefs and feal of union, this man fuggelts ' that he mud be the bond of it-, becaufe the party that feals, is the principal of the bond : where his poor wandering head is running upon z pecuniary bond, a bond in writing, by which a man is bound to another •,. and in which he moft miferably blunders ; feeing it is not the principal, or he to whom the bond is made, but the debtor, or he who obliges himfelf to the other, that figns and IJcals : Whereas the thing in difpute is, a bond of union between perfons, by which they are united to each other. Nor will it be denied that the Spirit quic- kens and regenerates us, begets and maintains fpiritual life in us -, but then all this is in confequence of union to Chrift : nor is it by this fpiritual life which he begets and maintains, that we have union with our living head, but we have this fpiritual life as the efird of that union, and thereby have communion with him; and though the elcd of God, whilftdead in trefpaflcs and fins, have no communion with Chrift, yet there is a fenfe in which they are united to him then ; which union is the ground.and foundation of their being quickened. (2.) Ihave » Supralapfarian Scheme, p. 79. 1 Ibid. p. 81. 1 TRUTH DEFENDED. 91 (2.) I have alfo affirmed that faith is not the bond of union to Chrift, and defired thofe who plead for union by faith, to tell us whether we are united to Chrift by the habit or aft of faith; and fince there are different afts of it, whe- ther our union is by the firft, fecond, third, &c. afts of believing ? To which our author has not thought fit to return any anfwer. I go on to argue, that if union is by faith as an habit, it is not by faith on our part, becaufe "faith, as fuch, is the gift of God ; and if it be by faith as an aft of ours, it is by a work, for faith, as fuch, is a work •, and then not by grace, fince works and grace cannot be blended. To which this author ' replies : " what if we have union " with Chrift in that part which lies on our fide the queftion, by afls of ours, ' " unto which we are enabled by the Spirit of God, who works faith in us-, does " this tend to leflen the exceeding grace of God ? " I anfwer, that what he fays of the Spirit's working faith in us, is right, but that regards faith as an habit ; though that there is a part lying on our fide the queftion, to bring about our union to Chrift by an atl of ours, I utterly deny : Strange ! that an uniting aft, or a bond of union, muft ht parted, that there ft)0uld ht2.part belon^r to us, and another to the Spirit of God .? But to his queftion I anfwer, that to afcribe our union to Chrift in part to afts of ours, though enabled to them by the • Spirit of God, does leflen the grace of God : and I argue thus, that if to afcribe eleftion in part to works, to any afts of ours as to faith, though enabled to it by the Spirit of God, would tend to lefl"en the glory of grace in it ; fo to afcribe our union to Chrift to any afts of ours, to faith as fuch, though enabled to it by the Spirit of God, would tend to IcfTcn the glory of that grace and love of Chrift, which is the alone bond of it. This writer * farther fuggefts, that I incline to admit the grace of love to be the union-bond ; and argues, that that being an aft of ours, it muft confequently be efteemed a work, and fo be liable to the fame difficulty : whereas, though I obferve, that had our divines fixed upon the grace of love as the bond of union, it would have been more plaufible and feafible than their fixing upon faith; yet I am far from an inclination to admit of it, when I affirm, in fo many words, that " it is not our love to " Chrift, but his love to us, which is alone the real bond of our union to him." I proceed to obferve, that " faith is no uniting grace, nor are any of its afts " of a cementing nature." This man ''fancies I am guilty of fuch a flagrant contradiftion, as is not to be produced in any book befides ; becaufe I add, " faith indeed looks to Chrift, lays hold on him, embraces him, and cleaves " unto him ; it expefts and receives all from Chrift, and gives him all the glory." Thefe fentences, it feems, are clofely united ; and yet an agreement between them cannot be proved. I own, I am not fo quick-fighted as to fee any con- N 2 tradiftion, » Supralapfarian Scheme, p. 82. • Ibid. p. 83. * Ibid. p. S3, n 92 TRUTH DEFENDED,. tradidlion, much lefs a flagrant one, in them. Was I fenfible of it, I fhould- be thankful for the difcovery. I perceive that the afls of laying hold on, em- bracing and cleaving to, are thought to be uniting acEls. I confcfs 1 never thought that whatever my hand lays hold on, is united to it, or one with it. L now lay hold on my pen, and hold it in my hand, make ufeofit, take it up, and lay it down at pleafure ; I do not find they are one, but two diftindt things; my pen is not one with my hand, nor my hand v.ith my pen, nor do they both make one third thing. I never knew that one perfon's embracing another was an uniting their perfons together, or that any union or relation between them, commenced upon fuch an aft. When the apofHes exhorted fuch who were par- takers of the grace of God, to cleave to the Lord with purpofe of heart, it can ne- ver be thought that their exhortation was to unite themfelvcs to the Lord with purpofe of heart, fince thefe were perfons already united to him. All thefe atls of looking to Chrift, laying hold upon him, embracing of him, and cleaving to him, are afts of faith performed under the influences of the Spirit, in con- fcquence of union to Chrift; and arc fuch, in which believers have commu- nion with him. He feems difpleafed with what I fay, that " afoul can no more " be faid to be united to Chrift by thefe a6ls, than a beggar may be faid to be M united to a pcrfon, to whom he applies, of whom he expefts alms, to whoni '^ he keeps clofe, from whom he receives, and to whom he is thankful." This, he fays ', dcfcrves no anfwer. The reafon I guefs is, becaufe he can give none. However, I will take his own inflancc, of a diftreflTed beloved child's looking to, embracing of, cleaving to, and hanging about its tender father, with in- treaties and expeftations of fupply •, and deny that thefe are uniting adls, or fuch as unite the father to the child, or the child to the father ; but are all in confequence of a relation, a relative union, that fubfifted between them, ante- cedent to thefe acfls. I farther obferve, that union to Chrift is the foundation of faith, and of all the afts of believing, or feeing, walking, receiving, i^c. That, faith is tlie fruit and effeft of union, even of what is commonly called vital union : for as there muft firfl: be an union of the foul and body of man, before he can be faid to live, and there muft be life, before there can be reafon ; fo there muft be a union of the foul to Chrift, before it can fpiritually live : and there muft be a principle of fpiritual life, before there can be faith. This I thought allb was fully and fitly exemplified in the fimile of the vine and branches, which muft firft be in the vine, before they bear fruit; and may be illuftratcd by the in- grafture of the wild olive-tree into a good one ; and concluded, that union ta Chrift is before faith, and therefore faith cannot be the bond of union. The fubftance of what is replied '' to this is, " that though we cannot produce good _" fruit * Sopralapfarian Scheme, p. 84. * Ibid. p. 85, 86. 1 TRUTH DEFENDED. 93 •* fruit until we are in union with Chrift the living head, yet there is no abfur- " dity in faying, that there is life produced in the foul, previous to our union " with him-, — and that a fpiritual work (an aukward way of talking-, why not " the Spirit ?) which begets a fpiritual life in us, is neceffary to meten (meeten) " us for union to him the living head." And though he approves the argument, yet docs not believe the application of it agreeable to truth ; namely, that becaufe there is an union of the foul and body of man before he can be faid to live, that therefore the foul of man muft be united to Chrift before he has fpiritual life. In a word, though he agrees that there muft be a principle of life, before there is any cxercife of faith, yet denies that there was union to Chrift, before this principle was wrought. Now let it be obferved, that the union I am here fpeak- ing of, is what is commonly called vital union; an union in time, at converfion, which is no other than Chrijl formed in us; upon which a principle of fpiritual life is immediately produced : for he that hath the Son, hath life; and then fol- low faith, and the exercife of it. Therefore this union cannot be by faith, nor faith be the bond of it, fince it follows upon it : for though, as upon the union of the foul and body, life is immediately produced -, yet the union, in order of nature, muft be confidered previous to life. So though, upon the formation of Chrift in us, called the vital union, the principle of fpiritual life is immediately produced -, yet the formation of Chrift, or the union of him to us, muft be confi- dered antecedent to this life. No, fays this man -, there is life produced in the foul, previous to our union with Chrift, in order to it -, yea, to meeten for it : whence it muft unavoidably follow, that a man may have a principle of fpiri- tual life, and yet be "jjithotit Chrijl; be feparate from him, and without union to him ; contrary to the exprefs words of the apoftle, He that hath not the Son ef God, hath net life'. Bcfides, does this docftrine give honour to the glorious head of influence, Chrift Jefus, which teaches that a man may have a principle cf fpiritual life, without union to him, the living head ; and in order to meeten for it, and confequently elfcwhere, from another quarter ? What appears moft plaufible, at firft view, in favour of this prepofterous notion, is the inftance' of- the fcion, that muft have life previous to its ingrafture. But pray what kind of life is it, that the fcion of the wild olive-tree lives, before its ingrafture into the good olive-tree ? it is a life agreeable to its nature ; it is the life of the wild olive-tree, not of the good olive-tree. So men before converfion, before Chrift is formed in them, live, not a fpiritual life, a life of grace, but a life of fin ; there is no principle of fpiritual life, before Chrift is formed in the foul. The Cmile of the vine and branches, in John xv. 4, 5. he thinks' is of no fervice to me, but rather againft me-, fince there would be no need of the exhortation, abide in me, if no a6t or aftsof ours are concerned about maintaining union with Chrift.: • 1 John V. 12. 5 Supralapfarian Scheme, p. 89. t Ibid. p. 86, 88. 94 TRUTH DEFENDED. Chrifl: : and obferves, that abiding inChrift is by faith, and the fame with (land- ing by faith, Rom. xi. 20. and argues, that if onr {landing and abiding in Chrift are by faith, then do we hold union thereby -, and whatfoever holds us to union, is the bond of it. To which I need only reply, that the phrafes of abiding in Chrift, and ftanding by faith, regard the perfeverance of the faints, in confe- quence of their union to Chrift. Now though perfeverance is by faith, or faith is the means of perfeverance, under the powerful influence of grace ; yet it does not follow that it is the bond of union ; fince both perfeverance, and faith, by which we perfevere, are the effedls of it. 1 obferved, from the above paOage, that "faith is a fruit of the Spirit, which grows upon the branches that are in " Chrift the vine; and that thefe branches muft be firft in the vine, before they " bear this fruit." This author wonders "' who will attempt to deny it. Very well; if no body will attempt to deny it, the caufe is given up, the point is gained: for if perfons muft be firft inChrift the vine, that is, united to him, be- fore they bear the fruit of faith, that is, believe in him; it follows, that union is before faith, and that faith is the fruit and effedl, and not the bond of it. The Cmile of the wild and good olive-trees, he fays', I have borrowed piece-meal, and have omitted to quote it (the text) in the margin.. I own, I borrowed the fimile from Rom. xi. 17, ^c. as being an appofite one ; but never thought, nor do I think now, that thepaffage has any reference to the ingrafture of fouls into Chrift, but into a vifible church-ftate : For if ingrafture into Chrift is intended, it will follow, that perfons may be ingrafted into him, that is, united to him, and yet be broken off from him ; which fuppofes their intire apoftacy from him; which none will give into, unlefs they are far gone into Arminian principles. The plain meaning of the pafTage is, that the Jews, who rejeftcd the MefTiah, were broken off from their vifible church-ftate, or from being the vifible church of God ; and the Gentiles, that believed, were taken into it; and that the Jews, when they believed, would be again grafted, or taken into a vifible church-ftate. Hence the whole of our author's reafoning, about the necefTity of faith, and the removal of unbelief, antecedent to an ingrafture into Chrift, as founded upon this fcripture, comes to nothing. ( 3.) Having proved that neither the Spirit on Chrift's part, nor faith on ours, is the bond of union, I proceeded to fhew that the everlafting love of the Fa- ther, Son and Spirit, is the bond of the union of the eledl unto them. To this, not one fyllable is replied : But whereas I obferve that there are feveral things which. arife from, and are branches of this everlafting love-union, and which I apprehend make it appear that the clefl are united to Chrift before faith ; this ■ author has thought fit to make fome remarks upon them. I obferve, * Supra!apfarian Scheme, p 88. ' Ibid. p. 90. TRUTH DEFENDED. $5 I obferve, from Ephes. i, 4. that there is an eleftion- union in Chrift from everlafting : my meaning is, that eleflion is an aft of God's everlafting love, in which the objefls of it were confidered in Chrift; and how they could be con- fidcred in Chrift, without union to him, is, what I fay, is hard to conceive. So that I apprehend, that as eternal eledion is a difplay of God's everlafting love to his people, it is an inftance alfo of their eternal union to Chrift. No, fays '' this man; eledtion is a fore- appointing perfons to an union ; as the choice of ftones for a building, or of a branch for ingrafture. Had the text in Ephes. i. 4. run thus, according as he hath chofen us to be in him, or that tve might, or Jhould be in him ; this fenfe of eleflion would have appeared plaufible: but the words in connexion with the preceding verfe run thus, who bath blejfed us with allfpiriiual blejfmgs in heaiienly places in Chrijl, according as he hath chofen us in him ; and therefore will not admit of fuch an interpretation as this, " that " it was according to the eternal defign of God, to beftow divine and fpecial " favours upon them, when in Chrijl ; or that they were chofen to divine and " fpecial blclTings, through Chrift ; " but that they were blefted with thefe di- vine and fpecial blefTings in Chrift, according as they were chofen in him. I do not fay that eleflion is the uniting afl, that is, the everlaftino- love of God ; nor do I fee any abfurdity, in fuppofing union previous to this choice, though 1 think they go together ; but this I fay, that in eleflion men are confidered in Chrijl, and fo is a proof of eternal union to him; and by this I abide, until fomething elfe is offered to confront it. I have alfo faid, that there is a legal union between Chrift and the elefl from everlafting, the bond of which, is the furetyfliip of Chrift, and fo he and they are one, in a law-fenfe, as furety and debtor are one : and likewife, that there is a federal union between them from everlafting ; Chrift being confidered as head, and they as members with him in the covenant of grace. This ' writer is of opinion, that the legal and federal union is one and the fame; I am content they fhould be thought fo : my defign hereby is not to multiply unions, or as though I thought there were fo many diftinfl ones, believing that God's everlaftinc^ love is the grand original bond of union, and that thefe are fo many difplays of it,, prov- ing it; and particularly, that it is before faith, the main thing I had in view. The relations of furety and debtor, head and members, conveying different ideas 1 thought it proper to confider them apart; however, I am willing they fliould go together, provided neither of them is loft : but I obferve, the former of thefe'is entirely funk, by this author, and no notice taken of it : for though they both relate to one and the fame covenant, yet are to be diftinflly confidered ; and if Chrift is not to be confidered as the furety of his people, as one with them, in a law- fenle,, * Suprabpfarian Scheme, p. 79, 92—95, ' Ibid. p. 78, 92,95. 96 TRUTH DEFENDED. fenfe, as furety and debtor are one ; what foundation is there for his fatisfaftion for them ? nay, not only fo, but even the relation of head and members is dropped by this author, under a pretence that it has been already proved, that there is no being in Chrift before faith, as members of his body -, and goes on to confider the relation of hufband and wife, which is not at all mentioned by me; and calls '" upon the men of the Supralapfarian fcheine, to produce any text of fcripture that informs us that God, in either of the perfons of the God- head, calls any of the children of men his fpoufe, or wife, or bride, before they are made fo by a mutual covenant. The reader will be apt to conclude, from a large citation out of Dr Goochvin, that it was made by me under the pre- fent head -, whereas it (lands in another part of my book, and made, together with fome others, from Dr fVitftus, and Mr Richard Taylor, with no other view than to obfcrve to the Gentleman I wrote the Letter to, that there was no rea- fon why the afTertors of eternal union ftiould be treated as ignorant and enthu- fiaftic preachers, when men of fuch charaders as above, had, in fome fcnfe, afTcrced it. Now, though I do not think myfclf obliged to take any further notice of this citation, not being made to vindicate my fenfe of union, yet I cannot but obferve the rudenefs and pertnefs of the man, in treating fo great a man as DvGcodivin was, in the manner he does ; and at once pronounce, that what is faid by him, is not worthy to be efteemed either good divinity, or good arc^ument. He next falls " foul upon a pafTage of mine in another part of my book, and upon another fubjefb, where I fay that the gift of God himfelf to his people, in the evcrlafling covenant, is a gift and inllance of his love to them before convcrfion. This he denies, and fays, the fcriptures which mention this gift, evidently prove the contrary; the fcripture he produces, is Heb. viii. lo. from Jer. xxxi. 33. and obferves, that this covenant is a mutual agreement be- tween God and converted people ; for you read here, fays he °, that the laws of God were to be written upon their hearts, and in their minds, before God is their God, and they are his people. To which I reply; that there is not the Icaft evidence from any of thefe pafTages, that this covenant is a mutual agree- ment beiween God and any people, converted or unconverted ; nor is there any fuch thing as a mutual covenant between God and fallen creatures; the mutual covenant talked of at converfion, is all a dream and fancy. The cove- nant here fpoken of, is wholly and entirely on the part of God, and fcems ra- ther to refpcft unconverted than converted perfons ; fince one branch of it re- gards the writing and putting of the laws of God in their hearts and minds, which converted ones have already; nor is this mentioned as the caufe or con- dition of,his being their God, but rather, his being their God in covenant, is the m Supralapfarian Scheme, p. 96. " Ibid p. 99. ° Ibid. p. lOC. T R U- T H DEFENDED. 57 the ground dnd foundation of this; fi nee this is mentioned in y^r. xxxii. .38. previous to his promife of giving one heart, and one way, and putting his fear into them-, all which fuppofe them unconverted. In a word, our author thinks ^ that the covenant of grace is not a uniting covenant, no relation arifing from ic between God and his people, bciween Chrift and his members ; it is only a fet- tling the conditions, and laying a fure foundation for a federal union with his people, that "is, upon the conditions of faith and repentance-, fo that the cove- nant of grace from eternity, is only a foundation for a covenant. I am concent he fhould enjoy his own fentiments, without reproaching him with inexplicable nonfenfe. But fince he has called upon the Supralapfarians to produce a text, wherein any of the children of men are called by God, in either of the perfor.s of the Godhead, his fpoufe, wife, or bride, before they are made fo by a mu- tual covenant, I propofe to his confideration, Ifaiah liv. i, 5, 6. where Chriil is called the hujlmnd of the Gentile church, and fhe his iiinfe, long, before it was in being : and even in the text he himfclf mentions, Ephes. v. 23. Chrifl; is faid to be the head of the church, even as the hufband is the head of the wife; which includes the whole general affembly and church of the firft-born, even all the eleift, converted or unconverted. The next union I mention, is the natural union that is between Chrift and j his people ; in this, our author fays % is nothing but what agrees with the holy | fcriptures, and fo it pafles without a ccnfure. The laft 1 take notice of, is a '■ reprefentative one, both from everlafting and in time. This man imagines ' I have given away the caufe, by acknowledging that the natural union was not in ■; eternity, fince hereby the notion of an eternal reprefentative union is entirely .i deftroyed ; for, adds he, it is exceeding remote from all the rules of argument, to fuppofe that Jefus Chrift reprefented the eleft people as members in him, when he had no meaner nature than divine. This writer is, no doubt, acquainted with all the rules of argument: but what does the man mean, when he talks of Chrift's having no meaner nature than divine .? I hope the reader will excufe my •warmth, when fuch a horrid reflexion is made upon the divine nature of the Son of God; no meaner nature! This fuppofes, indeed, the human nature to be meaner, but implies the divine nature to be mean ; or, where is the degree of comparifon ? he fuggefts ', that Chrift could not reprefent the t\t£i in eternity unlefs he had human nature from eternity ; and that there coulJ no: be a real union of the perfons of the eledt in eternity, without their real exiftcnce. I re- ply ; that it was not neccftary, in order to Chrift's being the Mediator, Head, and Reprefentative of the eleft in eternity, that he fliould be then actually man,- only that he (hould certainly be fo in time: befidcs, there was a federal union of the human nature to the Son of God from eternity, or the human nature had '' Vol. II. O aco- 1" Supralapfarian Scheme, p. 101. « Ibid. p. 102. ' Ibid. p. los. • IbiJ. p.103. 98 TRUTH DEFENDED. v?nanr fubfiftence in the fccond pcrfon from cverlafting. Nor -was the real exlf- tence of the pcrfons of the eledl neceflary to their real union to-Chrift, only that they fliould certainly exift : I call their union real, in oppofition to that which is imaginary ; for furcly the love of Chrift to the cledl, from everlafting, was real, which is the bond of union, though their perfons, foul and body, did not really, or aftually exift. He proceeds ' to confider the import of fome other /?;«■// of fcripture, which, he fays, we are fubjedl to imagine favour our fond notion of eternal union ; though he confiders but one, and that is 2 Tim, i. g. IVho hstb faved us, end called us with an holy calling ; not according t& our ivsrksy hut according to his own purpoje and grace, which was given us inChriftJefus, before the world began. This grace he fometimes takes for a promife of grace, fome- times for grace in the covenant iifclf ; yea, he fays, it evidently intends our call- ing; fo that, according to him, our calling muft be before the world bega-n. But be it what it will, whether a promife of grace, or a purpofe of grace, or grace itfelf, it was given to us in Chrift, before the world began, and on that our argument depends : if we were in Chrift when this grace, or promife of grace^ was given, we were united to him -, for how we could be confidered/w >^/»:, without union to him, he would do well to acquaint us. I muft, in juftice to this author, before I conclude this head, acquaint my reader, that he has quoted " fome, what he calls plain texts of fcripture, to fhew that the facred book does moft evidently let afide the opinion of eternal union, yea, or of union before faith: the fcriptures are, Rovt.Mm.^, andxvi.7. 2 Cor. V. 17. all v.'hich I have before taken notice of in the Letter he refers to i and all that he remarks is", that I will needs have ir» that thefe fcriptures intend only the evidence of union with Chrift from everlafting; which fenfe "he does not attempt to fet afide •, only that the phrafe, If a man is in Chrift, he is a new creature, he fays, fuppoTes that none but new-born fouls are united to him ; whereas the mcaniag is, that whoever profcflcs himfclf to be in Chrift, ought to appear to be fo : and yet, after all this, this man has the front to fay ", that men are not united to Chrift until they believe, has been proved by almofti irt' numerable fcriptures and argununts \ when he only produces thres fcriptures, and not one argument from them. This man is refolved to carry his point at any rate, right or wrong ; he fticks at nothing. Thirdly, We are now came to a point this author difcovers a great itch, and eacrer dcGre to be at, namely, the dodrinc of God's love and delight in his ele(5b before converfion. He has been two or three times nibbling at it before, and 1 have already cxpofed his folly in placing it in the Supralapfarian fcheme, whcQ it can be no other than a SubJapfarian dodlrinc. I. In • Supralapfarian Scbtme, p. 104. " Ibid. p. 77. * Ibid. p. 128. TRUTHDEFENDED. 99 1. In my Zf/Z^r above referred to, I write concerning the invariable, un- chancreable, and everlafting love of God to his e\c&, and give inftances of his love to them, not only in eternity, but in time, and that even while they are in an unconverted eftate, from Rom. v. 6, 8, 10. ijohrt iv. 10. Epkes. ii. 4, 5. Titus iii 3 — 6. which this writer thinks fit to pafs by in filence. I tlien men- tion three gifts of God, which arc inftances of his love to his people before con- vcrfton, not to be matched by any after it -, namely, the gift of Himfelf, the gift of his Son, and the gift of his Spirit. This man denies that either of thefe arc given to the eleft before converfion. 'As to the firft, he fays, " God never " gives himfclftoany of the children of men until they believe';" and fuggeft-;, that the fcripture I produce, I 'u.'ill be their God, and they Jhall be my people, proves it; being, as he thinks, a mutual covenant between God and con- verted people : but I have fhewn already, that it is not a mutual covenant be- tween God and others ; and that the promifcs of it fuppofe the perfons it con- cerns unconverted ; and, indeed, God's being the God of his people, is the firft ground and foundation-bledrng of the covenant; and the reafon why anycove- nant-blefTing, and among the reft, converfion, is beftowed upon any of the fohs of men, is, bccaufe he is their covenant-God and Father; fothat, confequently, he muft ftand in this relation to them before converfion. Bcfides, if they are his people before converfion, though not openly to themfclves and others, \Pet.\\. 10. yet fecretly to him, Pfalm ex. 3. Matt. i. 2 i. he muft be their God before con- verfion ; for ihefe two relate unto, and fuppofe each other. He does not deny that Chrift was a gift of God's love before converfion ; but fancies that I have feccded from what I propofed ; fincc, as it is expreficd by me, he is only given for ihcm. lanfwcr; My propoficion is, to fhew that there are fuch gifts of God before converfion, as arc inftances of his love to his people then ; and furely Chrift being given /itt them, is an inftance of God's love to them, John iii. 16. He fcems to triumph upon this, and fays'", "could he have proved " his propofition, he had certainly laid a ftrong, if not an improveable (I fup- " pofc it ftioukd be immoveable) foundation for his dcxftrine." Well, if this will do, I am able to prove that Chrift was given to his people in his incarna- tion, before he was given for them in his fufferings and death ; To us a child is icrn, to us a fon is given, Ifai. ix. 6. and 1 hope it will be allowed, that the gift tf Chrift, in his incarnation, extended not only to the believers of that age in ■which he was born, but to all the clefi:, to all the children, for whofe fake he partook of flefii and Hood. As to the third and laft of thcfe gifts, he judges', " that the Spirit is not jgiven to any of the children of men till they are converted, " or at that very inftant ;" and gives broad intimations, as if he thought he was o 2 not »' Supralapfarian Scheme, p. no, too. i Ibid. p. in. »Jbid.p. iiz. 100 TRUTH DEFENDED. not given at all, until he is given as a comforter. The tex-t in John xvi. 8. which my expreflions refer to, he feems to intimate, does not regard the convidtion and converfion of men, but the reproving' of the world. I will not contend with him about the {tn{i:. of the text •, it is -enough to my purpofe, if it will be but allowed, that the Spirit of God is the author of real convidtion and conver- fion ; who therefore muft be confidered as fent, and given, antecedent to con- vidtion and converfion, in order to begin, which, watching in it, and abiding by it, Timothy would do the work of an evan- gelijl, and make full proof of his tniniflry, ver. 5. Sound doHrine, m Titus i. 9. is the faithful word of izlvztion alone by Chrift and his righteoufnefs, which is to be held fafi in fpite of all gainfayers, unruly and vain talkers, fuch as our author declares himfelf to be. To he found in the faith, ver. i j. is oppofed to giving heed lojewifb fables- and commajidmenls of men, ver. 14. to infidelity, and a mind and confcience defiled with bad principles, ver. 15. which it is no wonder fhould be attended with bad pracftices, notwithdanding their profeffion of knowingGod when they have no regard to the Lord Jcfus Chrift, ver. 16. • Sound doHrine, in TitusW. I. is diftincft from the praftice of virtue and- morality, and the rules thereof, given to both fcxcs, to young and old, in the following verfes : thefe are not the found dodrine itfclf, but the things which become it, as this author might have learnt from the text itfclf. To he found in faith, ver, 2. is firmly to believe the dodrine of faith ; to he found in charity, is to love theLord, his peo- ple, truths and ordinances, with all the heart and foul; and to he found in patience, is chearfuUy and conftantly to bear whatever w^ are called to fuffcr forChrift's fake and his gofpel. Sound fpeech, ver. 9. is the dodlrine of grace delivered in the wholefom words of our Lord Jefus, without corrupting the word of God ; fpeaking it with all faithfulnefs, integrity and finccrity, as in t!ie fight of God. Upon the whole, it is eafy to obferve that the contexts of thefc feveral texts do not countenance the expofition this writer has given of them I (hall now at- tend to what he has taobjed to thofc doflrines which he' undertalces to oppofe ajid refute ; as». I. The dodrine of Chrift*'s deiry and equality with the Father. In his debate on this fubjed, I obferve the following things : I. That he holds ' that Jefus Chrift is a God, but not the mofi high God. The reafon why he believes him to be a God, is, becaufe the Father has given him divine perfedions, univerfal dominion or headdiip, authority to judge, and has commanded all men to worftiip him ; but he thinks he cannot be the moft high God, becaufe there is but one moft high God, who is the God and Father of Chrift ; for both to be fo, appears to him a contradidion, and he cannot be-: iJevc two contradidory propofitions ; and befides Chrift, before he became man, came ^ Dialogue, p. n. 1,2 AN ANSWER TO THE came from the Father, was fcnt and employed by him, he obferves ; •which would be a thought abfurd and blafphemous, and to be abhorred, if he was the fuprcme God. To all which I reply, if the Father has given to Chrift di- vine perfeflions, for which reafon he is God, or a God ; he has either given him only fome divine perfections, or all divine perfeftions -, if he has only given him fome divine perfedions, then he k imperfe<5l:ly God, or an imperfeft one ; if he has given him all divine perfeftions, then he muft be equal to him ; and, indeed,^// that the Father iath are h\&^ -^ not by feis gift, or as arifing from and depending upon his will and pleafure, but by necetTjty of nature, as being his own and only begotten Son. Univerfal dominion, or headfhip and authority to judge, are indeed given to him, not as the Son of God, but as the Son of man. Again ; if the Father only is the mod high God, and Chrift is a God, that is, a God inferior to him, whom he has commanded all men to wor- fhip •, then there are two diftinfb Gods, objefts of religious worfhip, diredtly contrary to the exprefs words of the firft command, Thou Jhalt have no other Gods before me ". Moreover, if the moft High over all the earth is He whofe name alone is Je^-wvah, and Chrift's name is Jehovah ; if the fame things which prove the Father to be the moft high God, are faid of the Son, as they are, why may he not be thought to be the moft high God equally with the Father? To fay, indeed, that there are two fuprcme or moft high Gods would be a contradic- tion ; or to fay that the Father is one moft high God, and the Son is another moft hi"h God, would be two contradifbory propofitions. But who fays fo ? We fay, that Father, Son and Spirit are the one moft high God •, and to fay and believe this, is not to fay and believe two contradictory propofitions, for there is but one propofuion, and no contradiftion in it. Once more; though Chrift, before his incarnation, came from and was fent by the Father as the angel of his prefence, to redeem Jfr ad out oi Egypt, to lead them through the Red fea and wilderncfs into Canaan's land, yet this no ways contradidts his pro- per deity and equality with the Father; for though he agreed to be fent, as an equal m?.y by agreement be fent by another, and which may be thought and faid of tht divine perfons in the Godhead, without abfurdity and blafphemy ; and though he condefcendcd to take upon him an office for the good of the .people of Ifrae!; yet he appeared with full proof of proper deity, of his equa- lity with the Father, from whom he came, and of his being with him the one moft high God ; for he calls himfelf /i>^ God of Abraham, the God of Ifaac, and the God of Jacob, Exod. iii. 6. and I am that i am, ver. 14. and Jehovah fays of him, that his nan:: was in him, chap, xxiii. 2 1. and intimates that he could, though he would not, pardon iniquity, which none can do but the moft high Xjod. 2. I K John xvi. .1;. * Ejtod. jnc j. BIRMINGHAM DIALOGUE -WRITER, Part I. iij 2. I obferve, that he feems to be aware that the paflage of fcripture, Pbil. ii. 6. where it is faid, that Chrift i/eiag in the form ef God., thought it not robbery to be . equal with God, ftands in his way, fince it exprefsly aflerts Chrift's equality with God; and therefore he attempts to remove it, by faying', that that tranOation, he thinks, is given up by moft learned men, becaufe it correfponds not to the original Greek. Who thofe learned men are that have given it up he does not tell us, nor point out in what it does not correfpond to the original Greek, Arians and Socinians have quarrelled with it, but learned Trinitarians have ftiffly de- fended it: however, this dialogue-writer^ " thinks it muft be wrong," ( r.) Becaufe it no way fuits the context, which fpcaks of " the fame perfon " in the fame image or likenefs of God, as obedient toGod and exalted by him." But what this author obferves, is a reafon why it ihould be right, and not wrong; for if Chrift was in the form of God, if (M^^n 5««, in the efTential form of God, for no other can be intended ; if he exiftcd in the nature and effence of GoJ, was arrayed with the fame glory and majefty, and pofTcfled of the fame perfec- tions, he muft be equal to him ; nor could it be thought by Chrift, nor fliould it by any other, a robbery, to aflert his equality with him ; for, as to be in the form of a fervant, is to be really and truly a fervant ; to be in the likenefs of a man, and to be in fafhicn as a man, is to be really and truly man ; fo to be in the form of God., is to be really and truly God : and if Chrift is really and truly- , God, he is equal with the Father. And whereas in the context he is repre- fcntcd as obedient -unto death, not unto God, as this author inadvertently cx- prefleth it, and exalted by God ; thefe things arc evidently faid of him as man, and cxprcfs both his humiliation and exaltation in the human nature; and no ways contradi£t his equality with the Father in the divine nature. (2.) Another reafon why this tranflation is thought to be wrong, is, " becaufe " it is contradidtory to the reafon God has given us, as our higheft guide, to " conceive that the Son, who was begotten by the Father, came from him, " has his life, power, dominion, glory, as a gift and reward from him, fhould " be equal to him." I take no farther notice of this man's great encomium of reafon, than juft to obferve, that whatever guide reafon is to us in things natu- ral Mid civil, it is a very poor one in religious affairs, in things which concern our fpiritual and eternal welfare, being fo wretchedly corrupted by fin : how-- cver, one would think, in matters of revelation, the revelation itfelf, the fcrip- turcs of truth, fhould be a higher guide to us than reafon, efpecially the Spirit of God, who in them is promifcd to guide us into all truth. But what contradic- tion is it even to reafon, to conceive that the Son, begotten by the Father, ftiould be equal to him.^ Was fuch a thing never known in nature, that a Son was equal Vol. II. Q^ to I Dialogue, p. u. " Ibid. p. 12. 114 AN ANSWER TO THE tp a Father ? And why fhould it be thought contradiftory to reafon, that the only begotten Son of God, who is the brigbtnefs of his Father's glory, the exprefs image of his ■perfon, in whom the fulnefs of the Godhead dwells, Ihould be equal to God ? His coming from God, and having his life, power, dominion and glory from him, as a gift and reward, and all thofe fcriptiires which fpeak of them as fuch, are to be underftood of him in his office-capacity and relation, as he is man and mediator; and not of him as a divine perfon, as God over all, blefled for ever; who, as fuch, does not derive his being, life and glory from another, but equally enjoys them with his Father, without derivation. (3.) A third Tczfon given is, " becaufe it is a fenfe contrary to all thofe plain *• texts which fpeak ofChrift as theexprefs image of the Father, as commiflioned " by him, as doing his will, (j?c." I reply, that this fenfe is not at all contrary to thofe fcriptures which fpeak ofChrift as the image of God, but perfeftly ac- cords with them; fince Chrift is the cfTential image of God, and as fuch par- takes of the fame nature, eflence, . perfeflions and glory with his Father, and therefore muft be equal to him. As for thofe fcriptures which fpeak of him as commiflioned by the Father, doing his will, feeking his glory, praying to him for his original glory; and, as appointed by him univcrfal head and judge, thefe are to be underftood of him as Man and Mediator, and fo are no contra- diftion to his equality with God in the divine nature. This writer fetshimfelf^ with all his might, againft this great truth of the Son's equality with the Father ; but is it to be wondered at, when he even poftpones Jefus Chrift to the apoftles Peter and Paul, and that more than once in this dialogue ? Speaking of the fruits of the Spirit: " they are, fays he', fuch as we find in the life and fermons of " St Paul and of his mafter Jefus Chrift." And in another place", " the Jews. " did fo, that is, fct up their judgment againft their teachers, in following Pf/^r " and Paul, and Jefus Chrift." 3. Whereas it is obferved to him what Chrift fays, John x. jOv I and the Fa- ther are one : he replies ", " would you have Chrift contradidl himfelf in the ♦' fame breath, by faying, we two perfons are one perfon, one Being, one God? " The eafy, natural and juft fenfe, he fays, is, that he and the Father were " one, as he did the Father's will and adled by commifllon from him, and pur- " fued the fame end and defign ; and not to be underftood of his unity of eflence, " for he cannot think that a begotten and an unbegotten eflence are the fame." To which I anfwer, that though there are two perfons fpoken of in this " text as being in fome fenfe one, I, as one Perfon, and my Father as another Perfon j yet we do not fay that the meaning is, that thefe two Perfons are one Perfon, this would be a contradidion ; but that thefe two Perfons are of one and the fame 1 Dialogue, p. 6, 7. ■» Ibid. p. 16. " Ibid. p. iz, 13, BIRMINGHAM DIALOGUE -WRITER, Part I. 115 fame nature, which is no contradidlion. This writer thinks, that to underftand the words of unity of will, or rather of doing the Father's will, beft fuits the context -, whereas Chrift, in the context, is fpeaking not of unity of will, but of famenefs of operation, and of his having the fame power the Father has, to keep his fbeep from perifhing, which he proves from their being one ; and from whence fhould famenefs of power arife, but from famenefs of nature ? Nor is the cflence of the Son begotten, and the effence of the Father, as diftindb from that of the Son, unbegotten, none ever thought or faid fo, that I know of. The Father, as a divine Perfon, begets; the Son, as a divine Perfon, is begotten in the divine nature and cfTcnce; but that nature or eflcnce is not begotten, but in both the fame. Tliis man calls himfelf a Churchman , did he pay any regard, as he does none, to the Articles of the EJlabliJhed Church, he might obferve this doctrine, he is militating againfl:, fully cxprefled in them : in the Jirji Article are thefe words, «' in unity of this Godhead there be three Perfons of onejubjlance, •' power and eternity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghoft." The begin- ning of the fecond Article runs thus : " the Son, which is the word of the Father, *' begotten from everlafting of the Father, the very and eternal God, of one fub- •• fiance with the Father, took man's nature in the womb of the bleflcd virgin, " of her fubftance." 4. This writer feems ° very defirous, that " perfons, under a notion of fpeak- *' ing honourably of the Son, would be careful of eclipfing the glory of the " Father, and of difhonouring him, by fetting up a rival with him in fupreme " empire, and of affronting and difpleafing the Son, by belying him, as the *' Jews did, when they faid he made himfelf equal with God." But what dan- ger can there be of leffening or fullying the Father's glory by afferting the Son's equality with the Father ? Nothing is taken from the Father and given to the Son ; the fame things are faid of the one as of the other ; the fame nature, per- feflions and glory are afcribed to the one as to the other; nor need we fear af- fronting and difpleaGng either the Father or the Son, by giving equal honour to them ; fince as the Son has thought it not robbery to be equal with God^, God has declared it is his will, that all men fhould honour the Son as they honour the Father'^; which is done by aflcrting that they are of one and the fame eflcnce, fubftance and eternity; and are what may be underftood by the words co-effential, con-fubflantial, co-eternal : though this writer calls them great fwelling words, hard and unintelligible names '. That the Jews belied Chrift^, when they faid he made himfelf equal with God, does not appear; our Lord never charged them with belying him, nor did he go about to convince them of a lie or a Q^z miftake ; • Dialogue, p. 13. ' Phil. ii. 6. 1 Johnv. ?3. ' Dialogue, p. 14.] 1,6 AN ANSWER TO THE miftakc ; but afterv,'ards faid thofe things which were enough to confirm thfm, and any one elfe, in the truth of his equality with the Father. 5. This man laughs, as thofe of his comple6lion generally do, at myfterics in religion, and at this doftrine being a myftery, though revealed, and as being above, though not contrary,- to reafon : he fays ', that " if any dodrine was a " myftery before, revealing it has made it no longer a myftery." It is true, that when a thing is revealed, it is no longer a myftery that it is, but may ftill remain a myftery how it is, what it is : as in the cafe before us, it is no longer a myftery, now revealed, that the three perfons. Father, Son and Spirit, are one God ; but bow they are fo, is ftill a myftery. The incarnation of Chrift, God manifeft in the flefti, is not a thing hidden from us, being revealed ; but how the word was made flefti, will ever continue a myftery to us. It is .no longer a myftery, that the living will be changed at Chrift's fecond coming; but how they will be changed, is a myftery to us. So the refurredion from the dead is a certain part of revelation ; neverthclefs, it is myfterious to us hvw it will be brought about -, and our ideas of rifing from the dead, and living again, muft be oreatly ftiort of the things thcmfclves : though this author fays ', he "very " well undtrftands what rifing from the dead and living again means, as well ♦' as he does rifing from flcepand living again." I fuppofe he would have faid, beinf^ awake again, means -, for I hope he does not think that men are dead when afleep, and come to life again when they rife out of rt. Thefe dbdrrnes inftanced in are above our reafon, and feera as contrary to our ideas of things, and the didates of reafon, as what we have been conftdering may be thought to be. I go on, II. To confide* what he has to^ fay to the dodrrne of cterrral Eleftion, though he chiefly militates againft that of Repyfobation. Our aiJthor's harangue upon this head is mere pi'agiarifm, being ftden out of Dr IVhitby upon the Fivt PoiTifs, as any one may eafily obferve, by comparing it with the fecond chapter of his firjl difcourfe concerning EUSlion and Reprobation, and many other pafiages in that performance ; and fince I have latcl-y confidered the arguments arrd rcafon- ings of that writer, 1 might at once difmifs this fubjeifl, by referring the reader to the anfwer I have already given ; but as. that may not be in the hands of every one to whom this may cotrtc. I choofe to take fome notice oi what is here advanced. The fum of the charge, againft this doftrine is, that " it is "• unmerciful, unjuft, infincere, and uncomfortable." I. It is charged with cruelty and unmercifulnefs; God is faid to be "", accord- ing to this doctrine, " a moft cruel Being, and more hard-hearted \}mViPharaoh" but • Dialogue, p. 15. * Ibid. p. ij. ? Ibid. p. 19, 20. BIRMINGHAM -DIALOGUE- WRITER, Part 1. 1.7 but I hope it carries no mark of cruelty and unmcrcifulnefs in it to the eleft, who are vejjeb of mercy afore prepared unto glory : it can only be thought to do fo to the reft, for whom God has ordained no help; and to raife the idea of cruelty towards them, they are reprefented ' under the lovely charafters of God's offspring, his creatures, and his children ; but not a word faid of their rebel- lions, fins and tranfgrcfTions, or of their being " the children of wrath, the chil- " dren of hell, and the children of the Devil ;" and to increafe this idea, they are confidered ' as in diftrefs and mifery, in a perifhing condition, through fomc misfortune, and not upon the account of any fin or iniquity they have been guilty of. "With the fame view their number is taken notice of; " the human '• race is faid to be infinite, and help decreed only for a very few ; whilfl: God " has rcfolvcd not to help millions of undone creatures, and to torment them " milliorts of years and ages, for what they could not help ; and this only to " fhew what his power and wrath can do, or from pure ill nature." But fup- pofing God had decreed help for none of the infinite race of his fallen offspring, as this author calls them, but had determined to leave them all, being fallen to the perverfity of rhcir hearts and ways, and to punifh them for their fins and iranfgrcfBoTis committed againft his righteous law ; would this have been deemed cruelty and unmercrfulnefs ? Has he not proceeded in fuch a manner with the whole body of the apoftate angels, thofe millions of undone perifhing creatures, whom he has rcfolvcd not to help, and who are equally his offspring, his crea- tures, and his children, as the fallen race of Adam, fo confidered ? And is this ever eftcemed fr«^//v, and pure ill nature ? Now if it was not afling the cruel and tmmerciful part, not to ordain help for any of the fallen angels, it would rot have been afting fuch a part, had God refolved not ro help any of the fallen T^zcof Adam; and if it would nor halve been an aft of cruelty to have deter- mined not to help any of the race of mankind, furely it can be no adl of cruelty or unmcrcifulnefs to ordain help for/owi? of them, when he could in jufticc have condemned all. The dodtrine of Eleftion is no unmerciful one, yea, it is more mercifoi than t1ic contrary fcheme, fince it infallibly fecures the falvarion of fome ; whereas ttie other does nofafcertain the falvation of any fingie pcrfon, but leaves it uncerrain, to the precarious and fickle will of man. 2. This dodlrine b charged >" with injuflice, and God is reprefented as " a mofl " unrighteous Being; fince, according to it, he threatens a feverer damnation, " if men accept not his offer, which he knows they cannot accept; has decreed " fo damn millions of men for being fallen in Adam ; a decree, it is faid % " which none but a Dm/ could make ; and a thoufand times more unjuft than ♦' the decree of Fbaraoh to drown all the male children, becaufe (hey were born " of * DTalogoe, p. 17. ' Ibid. p. 18 — 20. J Und, p. 19. * Ibid. p. zl, iiS AN ANSWER TO THE *' of Ifraelitijh parents, or were born males; and alfo has decreed to damn men " for not believing in a Chrift who never died for them, andfor not being con- " verted, when he has decreed not to convert them." To all which I reply, that God's aft of cledlion does no injuftice either to the cleft or non elcft ; not to the eleft, to whom it fecures both grace and glory -, nor to the non-eleft, or to the reft who are left out of it : for as God condemns no man but for fin, fo he has decreed to condemn no man but for fin. And where is the unrighteouf-- nefs of Aich a decree? It would have been no unrighteoufnefs in God to have con- demned all mankind for fin, and would have been none in him, if he had decreed to condemn them all for fin. If therefore it would have been no injuftice in him to have decreed to condemn all mankind for fin, it can be none in him to decree to condemn fome of them for fin, when he could have decreed to have condemned them all. Herein he Qiews both his clemency and his juftice -, his clemency to fome, his juftice to others. As to the things particularly inftanced in, I anfwer, that when this author points out any offers of help in a faving way God has made to all mankind, or to any to whom he has decreed no faving help, and then threatens them with a feverer damnation for non-acceptance of them, I ftiall attend to the charge of unrighteoufnefs. That all men finned in Adam, and that by his offence Judgment came upon all men to condemnation, the fcriptures declare ' ; and therefore to fay that God condemns men, or has de- creed to condemn them for the offence of Adam, or for their finning in him, and being fallen with him in his firft tranfgreftion, cannot be dilagreeable to them ; though we do not fay that any of the fons of Adam, who live to riper years, are condemned only for the fin of Adam, but for their numerous aftual fins and tranfgreffions^ And as for infants dying in infancy, their cafe is a fecrec to us ; yet inafmuch as they come into the world children of wrath, ftiould they go out as fuch, would there be any unrighteoufnefs in God ?. Again -, as God will not condemn the heathens, who never heard of Chrift, for not believing in him, but for their fins againft the law and light of nature ; nor fuch as have heard of him, for not believing that he died for them, nor for not being con- verted, but for their tranfgrefilons of God's law-, of which condemnation, their difbelief and contempt of Chrift and his gofpel will be an aggravation, of which they had the opportunity of being informed : fo we do not fay that God has de- creed to condemn or damn men for the things mentioned by this writer. 3. The doftrine of God's chufing fome, and leaving others^ is charged '' with infincerity, and with reprefentingGod as " the moft deceitful and infincere Being; " yea, as the great ejl 0/ all cheats, when he offers to finners a falvation never pur- " chafed for them, and which he has abfolutely decreed never to give them ; . " and when he offers it upon conditions they cannot comply with, without irre- « fiftibJe f Rom. T. 12, 18. * Dialogue, p. 191 22, 23. BIRMINGHAM DIALOGUE -WRITER, Part I. 119 " fiftible grace, and he has decreed never to give them that grace-, and when " he threatens a heavier damnation if they do not believe and obey the gofpei, ] " which he knows they cannot do." To which I anfwer, that falvation is not i offered at all by God, upon any condition whatfocver, to any of the fons of men, 1 no, not to the eledl : they are chofen to it, Chrift has procured it for them, the gofpei publifhes and reveals it, and the Spirit of God applies it to them -, much j kfs to the non-eledl, or to all man'kind ; and confequently this dodrine, or God ' according to it, is not chargeable with ddufion and infult. When this author j goes about to prove any fuch offers, I fhall attend to them ; and if he can prove ! them, I own, I mufl be obliged to think again. - j 4. This doflrine is reprefented ' as " very uncomfortable, becaufe it leaves I " the reft of thefe children, and millions of his creatures, inhelplefs mifery for i " ever; and makes it a hundred to one to a man that he is not elefted, but | *' muft be for ever damned." But when it is confidered that thofe children are I rebellious ones, and thofe creatures vile and wicked, who are thus left, it can give no unlovely and horrid image of God to fuch who know that he is righte- ous in all his ways, and holy in all bis works "■. Should it be faid, thztfucb are alfo the men that are chofen v it is very true, and therefore they admire and adore eledling grace, and receive abundance of fpiritual comfort from it : nor is it fuch a chance matter or uncertain thing to a man, as a hundred to one, whether he is elefted or no, to whom the gofpei is come not in word only, but alfo in power, and in the holy Ghofl \ who from hence may truly know and be com- fortably affured of his ele5lion of God'. What true and folid comfort can arife from the univ^rfal fcheme, or from God's univerfal love .'' When nocwithftand- ing that, and redemption by Chrift, and the general offers of mercy, yea, grace ilfelf beftowed, a man may be loft and damned. One would think, that fince this writer takes upon him the name of a Church" man, he might have been more fparing of, and lefs fevere in, his refledions upon this doflrine, feeing it is fo expre/sly and in fuch ftrong terms aflerted in the feventcenth Article of the Church of England, and there reprefented as a very comfortable doftrine. The Article runs thus : " Predeftinacion to life is the " cverlafting purpofe of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world " were laid) he hath conftantly decreed, by his counfel, fccret to us, to deliver *♦ from curfe and damnation thofe whom he hath chofen in Chrift out of man- " kind, and to bring them by Chrift to everlafting falvation, as veftels made " to honour. Wherefore they which be endued with fo excellent a benefit of " God, be called according to God's purpofe, by his Spirit working in due " feafon -, they through grace obey the calling; they be juftified freely ; they *'^ be made fons of God by adoption; they be made like the image of his only ' " begotten. ' Dialogue, p. zi, 23. * PCalm cxlv. 17. « LThefi. i. 4, 5. D" ,2o AN ANSWER TO THE " begotten Son Jefus Chrift ; they walk religioufly in good works •, and at " length, by God's mercy, they attain to everlafting felicity." And then it is afterwards obferved, that " the godly confidcration of predeftination, and our " clcftion in Chrift, is full of fweet, pleafant and unfpeakable comfort to godly " perfons, and fuch as feel in themfelves the working of the Spirit of Chrift, " mortifying the works of the flefh, and their earthly members, and drawing " up their minds to high and heavenly things ; &s well becaufe it doth greatly " eftablifh and confirm their faith of eternal falvation to be enjoyed through " Chrift, as becaufe it doth fervently kindle their love towards God." 5. Before I quit this fubjeft, I would juft remark the fenfc this author gives of feveral texts, which plainly aflert a predeftination and cleftion, in the epitlles of Paul and Peter ; by which, I fuppofc, are meant, Rom. viii. 29, 30. and ix, J I, 23. and xi. 5-^7. Ephes. i. 4, 5. t Thep. ii. 13. i Ptt. i. 2. The fcnfe of them, according to his reading and judgment, and according to others, whom he efteems the beft writers and preachers, is this ' \ " Thofe texts, fays he, " are to be undcrftood of God's firft eledting and adopting the feed of Abra- »' bam ; and then, upon their crucifying the Son of God, and rejecting his «' gofpel, God's choofing, electing or adopting all the fpiritual feed oi Abraham, «' though amoncrft the Gentiles ; all virtuous and good men, all who believed «< the gofpel ; and this agreeable to his ancient dcfigns, before he laid the foun- " dation of the Jewifh ages." But thefe pafTages of fcripture have not one word, one fyllable, one jot nor tittle in them of God's clefting and adopting the feed oi Abraham, the natural feed oi Abraham, or the Jewifh nation, as fuch -, but of fome perfons only from among that nation, and from among the Gentiles -, and that not upon the Jews' crucifying Chrift, and rejeding his gofpel, or before the foundation of the Jewifti ages were laid •, but before the foundation of the world, from the beginning, even from eternity: and though all the fpiritual feed. of y^3r Verfe 3. BIRMINGHAM DIALOGUE -WRITER, Part I. la; ful obedience, as fays" this man; but the objeftof his faith, the righteoufnefs of the Mejfiah, in whom he believed ; for that which was imputed to Abraham, ■was not imputed to him only, but to others, even to believers under the oofpel difpenfation. l>}ow it vjas not it^ritien, fays the apoftle, for his fake alone, that it was imputed to him \ hut for us-alfo, to whom it JhaU he imputed, if we helieve en him that raifed up Jefus our Lord from the dead°. So Chrift is made unto us righteoufnefs', by the imputation of it, not to himfelf, but to us-, nor is the meaning, as this author'' would have it, that the dodlrine, example, life and death of Chrift, are the means of making men righteous; but he himfelf ;V»2«^^ itnto them righteoufnefs, and they are made the righteoufnefs of God in him, through the imputation of his righteoufnefs to them, as he is made fin for them, through the imputation of their fins to him '. Add to all this, that in the fame way that we are made fmners hy the difohedience of one, which is by the imputation of his difobedience to us, are wcmade righteous by the obedience of one, of Chrift, namely, by the imputation of his obedience or righteoufnefs to us '. 3. This writer fuggefts ', that the " doftrine of Juftification, by the imputed *' righteoufnefs of Chrift, is a poifonous dodtrine ; and afierts it to be an cncou- ** ragemcnt to bad men and loofe women to go on in fin, and adifcouragemenC <« 10 good men to perform duty." To which I need only fay, with the apoftle ", Do we make void the law through faith ? that is, by the doftrine of juftification by faith in the righteoufnefs of Chrift, which is the doftrine he was fpeaking of ? God forbid] yea, wi eflablifb the law. Nothing can lay men and women under a greater obligation to live foberly, rigbteoufly and godly, or has a greater ten- -dcncy TO make them tarcful to maintain good works, than this dodrine of grace, or the confideration of this, that being juflified by grace, they are made heirs ac- cording (e the hope of eternal tife^. In this, as in other dotftrines, our author, fhews himfelf to be no true Churchman ; and, for the future, ought to drop that charadlcr. The doftrine of Juftification is thus expreflrJ in x.\\e eleventh Article oi thcChurch of England: "Wc are accounted righteous beforeGodonly for the merit " of our Lord and Saviour Jefus Chrift by faith, and not for our own works or " defervings ; wherefore, that we are juftified by faith only, is a moft wholcfom *' doftrine, and very full of comfort; as more largely is expreficd in the Homily of " Juftification." Nor did the compilers of this Article reckon this dodlrine a licentious one, or a difcouragemenc to good works, as appears by the Article concerning them, which follows upon this. yj. The » Dialogoe, p, 3J. • Rom. iv. 23, 24. r \ Cor. I. 30. 1 Dialogue, p. 35. » zQoi.v.ix. • Rom. v. Ig. \ Dialogue, p. 34, 3J. » Rom. iii, 3U * TiL ii. 1 1 , 12. and iii. 7, 8. ',28 AN ANSWER T O THE ' ' " :' ' :' VI. The dodrine of Perfeverance is next introduced into the dialogue ; an3 the writer of ir, " ,-...,:.. ,■ . . . 1, Hopes " that every truly good man will perfevere in' his goodnefs ; hvn '" cannot fay it is impofTiblefor a righteous man to turn from his righteoufnefs, '" or for one that has tajled the biavenly gift, and has partook of the holy Gboji, to ^' to fall away; elfe, what need of fo many cautions given to perfons and '" churches: befides, Dau/i and P^/fr did apoftatize and fall away as well as ■" Judas ^" To which I anfwer •, it is well this author has entertained any hope of a truly good man's perfevering in his goodnefs; but why not believe it? 'fince it is promifed, that the righteous fhall bold on bis way, and be tbat bath clean bands Jhall be Jironger and Jlronger '' . The apoftle Paul was confident of ibis very thing, and fo may we, that be which bath begun a good work in the faints, will ■perform it until the day of Cbrifl '. A righteous man, one that is only fo before ■ men, and in his own apprehenfions, who trufts to and depends upon his own righteoufnefs for juftification before God, fuch an one as is defcribed in the xviii'" and xxxiii" chapters of Ezekiel ; fuch a righteous man, I fay, may indeed turn from his own legal righteoufnefs to an open courfe of fin, and die and ■perilh eternally. But this is no proof of a truly righteous man, one that is ■made fo by the obedience of Chrift, who has a principle of grace wrought in him, in confequenceof which, he lives foberly, rigbteoujly and godly, turning from his righteoufnefs, and falling into fin, fo as to be loft for ever. For, "fhould this be, how could the righteoufnefs by which he isjuftified be called an everlajling one, as it is in Dan. ix. 24 ? Nor could it be faid, with truth, that whom Cod juflificd, them he alfo glorified, Rom. viii. 30. . So, a man who has only a tafte, a fuperficial knowledge of the heavenly gift, and has partook "of the holy Ghoft, either of the ordinary or extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, may fall away, fo as not to be renewed again to repentance; but this is no in- ■flance of a man's falling away, who has truly eat the flcfh and drank the blood ■ of Chrift by faith, and has been made a partaker of the fpecial ^nd internal 'grace of the Spirit of God. The cautions given to perfons and churches to ' watch and pray, kft they enter into temptation, to bold fafi, to continue in well ■doing, (^c. are not arguments againft, but means which the Spirit of God ; makes ufe of to fccure the perfeverance of the faints. Befides, though true 'believers cannot fall from grace totally and finally-; yet inafmuch as they may fall fo as to wound their own confcicnccs, ftumble others, and difhonour the , name of God, there is room and reafon for fuch cautions. Though David ind Peter fell, yet not as Judas did, which is fuggeftcd ; otherwifc, why are they put together.'' Judas fell from a profefTion of Chrift, and from his apoftlefhip, but ■* Dialogue, p. 36. ^ Job xvii. 9. » Phil. i. 6. BIRMINGHAM DIALOGUE -WRITER, Part I. 129 but not from the grace of God, which he never had. David and Filer fell into great fins, but not totally and finally -, there was a principle of true grace ftill in them, which was revived and excited by the Spirit of God, whereby they were enabled to turn from their iniquity, and do that which was right. " Bur, fays this man % as it was pofTible for them to fall into fin, mortal fin ; " fo it was pofiible for them to have died in the fin they had finned, and how ** they would have fared in that cafe, he leaves us to judge." One would be tempted to conclude from this pafTage, that our Churchman is rather a member of the church of Rome, than of the church of England; fincc he feems to give into the popifli diftindion of fin, ]nio mortal a.nd venial, otherwife, why fhould he be fo careful to explain fin, by mortal fin? Is not every fin mortal, that is to fay, dcferving of death ^ And though it was pofTible for David d^nd Peter to fall into mortal fins, fins deferving of death, as they did -, yet it was not polTible they fhould die in them, fince it is the will of God that none of his beloved ones, as David and Peter were, fhould periJJj, hui jhould come to repentance; and fince Chriit undertook to die for their fins, and their fins were adually pardoned for Chrift's fake. 2. Under this head, is brought in the dodrine of Qod^% feeing no fin in his people, as he looks upon them through Chrift, and as clothed with his rightcouf- nefs i which is reprefented as " a dodlrine immoral and abfurd, unworthy of ♦' God, and fhocking to a pious mind '." But why fhould it be thought to be fo, when it is cxprtfsly afiertcd in the facrcd writings ? He hath not beheld ini- quity in Jacob, neither hath he feen pcrverfenefs in Jjrael\ With refpeft to the attri- bute of God's omnifcicncc, it is freely allowed, that God fees all perfons and things jufl as they are; he fees the fins of David and Peter, and he fees the fins- cf all profeflbrs of religion, even of his own people ; and, in a providential way rcfents them, and chafiifes them for them, though he does not impute them to them, or punifh them for them. But with refpeft to the article of Juftification by Chrift's righteoufnefs, and pardon by his blood, God fees no fin in his peo- ple ; their fins are covered from the fight of juftice, they are all difcharged, for- given, blotted out, and done away ; fo \.\\z\vjhen they are fought for, there fhall ienotH, and they fhall not be found*. Now, as this dodrine docs not impeach the omnifciencc of God, and perfectly accords with hisjuftice, which is fatisfied by the blood ar>d righteoufnefs -of Clirift, it cannot be abfurd and unworthy of God ; and fince it leaves room for, and fuppofes God's refentment of fin in his people, and hb chaftifcment for it, it cannot be an immoral one, or fhocking to a pious mind. Vol. II. S 3. The • DiaJogue, p. j6, 37. ' Ibid. p. 37. * Numb, xxiii. 31, ^ Jer. 1. »o. ISO , AN AT^SWER TO THE 3. The abfolute and unconditional promifes of the covenant, mentioned in Jer. xxxi. 32, 33. and Ez.ek. xxxvi. 26. are produced in favour of the faints per- feverance; whereas they belong to the dofhrine of efficacious grace in conver- fion, and under .that head fhould have been placed and confidered : but this au- thor is pleafed to make K\sBaptiJl fay any thing which he thinks fit, that he may make him appear weak and ridiculous, and himfelf a match for him. Of this conduft, his whole Dialogue is a proof. The prophetic texts ufually brought in favour of the final perfeverance of the faints, are, Ifai. liv. 10. and chap. lix. zr. Jer. xxxii. 3S — 40. Hof. ii. 19. which this writer was either ignorant of, or per- haps did not care to mention them, nor meddle with them, as furniOiing out ar- guments in proof of this dodtrine beyond his capacity to reply to. Vll. The lad thing confidered in this debate is, the ordinance of Bapiifm ; and it would have been writing out of charafter, indeed, to have attacked a Baptijl, and not have meddled with his denomination principle. And, I. I obferve, " that the controverfy about the, time and mode of baptifm, ap- " pears to him of no great moment ; feeing baptifm itfelf is an outward ordi- " nance, or a mere ceremony, though ofChrift's inftitution : nor is it men- *' tioned in the commifiion given to Sz Paul, who was the apoRie of the Gen- " tiles'." But pray, were not all the apoftles fent to the Gentiles, Jn(o all the ivorld, to teach all nations ? And was not the ordinance of baptifm in tlie com- miTion given to them all ? What, though baptifm is an outward ordinance -, yet, fince it is ofChrift's inftitution, it muft be of confiderable moment to know and be fatibfied, who are the proper fubjedts of it, and in what manner it ftiould be performed. An ordinance of Chrift fhould not be treated as an indifferent thing, to whom, or how it is adminiftered ; or whether it is attended to or not. 2. This man has many wife reafonings upon the mode of baptifm : " I allow, " fays he '', that if baptifm with water be efficacious, and -does operate to the " purifying of the confcience, and clcanfing of the heart, then the more water " the belter." I do not tranfcribe the fentence that follows, to avoid defiling of paper with the indecency of his cxpreffions, fince they add no force to his argunient : would he be concluded by his own reafoning, he, and the reft of the Pccdcbaptijls, ought to be the laft that ftiould drop the praftice of immer- fion ; for wiio are they that fay that baptifm is efficacious to internal purpofes ? Not ihe Baptijis, who infift upon perfons making a profelTion, and giving proof of their repentance towards God, and faith in Chrift i of ihcir being regene- rated, and having their hearts and confcicnces cleanfcd and purified by faith In the blood of Chrift, before they are admitted to this ordinance: But thofe who ' Dia'ogue, p. 41. ^ Ibid. BIRMINGHAM DIALOGUE -WRITER, Part I. 131 who fay, that " by baptifm original fin is taken away, perfons are regenerated, " made members of Chrift, and inheritors of the kingdom of heaven-," who behave as though they thought there could be no falvation without baptifm ; when, upon the lead indifpofuion of a new-born infant, they are in a hurry to fetch the minifler to fprinkleit; thefe, according to this man's reafonino-s,. and his own principles, ought to plunge it. He goes on : " but if baptifm " be only declarative zudfignificative, then a handful of water, poured or fprin- »' kled on the face (the chief part of the body, and the feat of the foul) may an- " fwer this purpofe as well, if a ferious profeflion of chriftianity go alono- with " it, as well as fprinkling the whole congregation o{ IfraeU Exod. xxiv." Here our author entertains us with confiderablc hints: not the heart, asfome-, nor the brain, as others-, nor the glaftdula pinealls, but the face is the feat of the foul. He docs not, indeed, tell us what part of the face ; but leaves us to conclude it muft be the forehead, fince there the fign of the crofs is made in baptifm : but be it fo, that the face is the chief part of the body, and the feat of the foul -, and that baptifm is declarative and fignificative, as it is of the fuf- ferings, death, burial and refurredlion of Chrift, fee /?ow. vi. 3 — 5. Colofs. W. 12. Not fprinkling or pouring a handful of water upon the face, but immerfion or covering the whole body in water, only can be declarative and fignificative of thefe things ; and therefore the. former cannot as well anfwer the purpofes of baptifm as the latter. Bur, fays this man, " it may'^do as well as fprinkling *' the whole congregation of I/rael" Very right, provided it was done by the fame authori;y, and for a like end; but then, this is no inftance of a. pari being put for the i£;^c/^, or of they?f» put for the thing fignified. This our author, upon a review of his work when printed off, faw -, and therefore, in his taile of the errors cf the prefs^ one big enough for di folio volume, and which might have been ftiU made larger, he has correfted this pafiage-, and would have it read thus, "as well as fprinkling the twelve pillars, fervcd inflead of fprink- " ling the whole congregation oi Ifrael." Bat how does it appear, that not the people, but the twelve pillars, were fprinkled inftead of them ? not one fyllable is faid of fprinkling the pillars in Exod. xxiv. only the people-, for it is cxprefsly faid, thnMofes took the bleed and fprinkled it on the people; and the au- thor of the cpidle to ihc Hebre-iX's cov.hrms n., by faying, that he fprinkled both the book and all the people^. However, if fprinkling water on the face in bap- tifm will not do as well as this, it will " as well, fays this writer, as eating one " morfcl of bread and tafting wine may fignify and declare a perlbn's faitii in " the death, and the fccond coming of Chrifl, to as good purpofe, as eating a " meal or drinking a full cup in reraem.brance of him.'' I anfvter, the cafe is s 2 no: » Hcb. ix. tg. •132 ■ AN ANSWER TO THE not parallel, for biptifm docs not merely fignify and declare a perfon's faith in the fufFerings,, death, burial and rcfurreftion of Chrift, but the things themfelves; and therefore, though eating a morfel of bread and tafting the wine may, in the Lord's Supper, anfwer the purpofe of that ordinance, as well as a full meal or cup ; yet fprinkling or pouring water on the face in baptifm will not anfwer the end of that ordinance, as well as immerfion or covering the body in water. After all, a clogging claufc is put into this argument, which is, that this may do a* well, *' if a' fcrious profefTion of chriftianity go along with it." And of the fame kind is the following paragraph, " if there be the anfwer of a good confcience, " or a fincere profcITion of chriftianity, and a hearty refolution to ferveChrift, " which is the jjjorrt/, or fpiritual part of baptifm, I do not think our Lord and " Mafter will be fo fcrupulous as fome of his ,difciples are about the mode." But where is tbt anfwer of a good conjcitncc, or a fincere profelTion of chriftianity, or a hearty refolution to ferveChrift, in infants, for that of others for them can be of no avail, when water is fprinkled or poured upon their faces? We are ■obliged to this man, that he will vouchfafe to own us to be the difciples of Chrifl:, we dcGre to be followers of him in every ordinance, anc^ in this'; the mode of which he has taught us, without any fcruple, by his own example. Our author goes on, and obferves, that " if the waftiing the principal part, inftcad of the " whole, be a more fafe way for health, and a more decent way upon the rules " of chaftity, I think it the better way j and that there is room to apply that " facred proverb, which our Lord applied on another occafion, God will have *' mercy, not facrifice ; for he always prefers morals to rituals." This is the old rant, that has been anfwered over and over-, and muft be defpifed and treated as mere calumny, by all that know the fafety and healthfulnefs of cold bathing, which now generally obtains-, or have feen with what decency this ordinance is performed by us. He adds, " If StP^«/made fo little account of the external *' part of baptifm, i Cor. i. 13 — 17, what would he have faid to a controverfy " about the mode of ufing it ?" It feems from hence, that baptifm has an in- ternal part as well as an external one-, though before it is called an outward ordinance., and a mere ceremony. But what was the little account the apoftle Paul made of it ? Though he was not fent oily or chiefly and principally to baptize, but to preach the gofpel -, and he thanks God, that he had baptized no more of the Corinthians, fince they made fuch an ill ufe of it : yet it docs not appear, that he at any time, or In any refpeifl, made light or little account of it -, fince no fooner had he any intimation of it, as his duty, but he fubmitted to it -, as did Ly^/'a and the Jailor, with their houfholds, and many of the Corinthians, if not as adminiftered by him, yet by hi^ order, and with his knowledge and con- fent ; and, was he now on the fpot, would foon put an end to the controverfy about BIRMINGHAM DIALOGUE - WRITER, Part I. 133 about the mode of ic, could he be attended to, though I fear he would be little regarded by perfons of this man's complexion ; for fince fo little regard is had to his doftrines, there would be very little fhewn to his fenfe, either of the mode or fubjefts of an ordinance. 3. The //ot£ of baptifm is next confidered, which, with this writer, is but another word for the fubjeHs of it •, for we have no controverfy about the precife lime of baptifm, the queftion with ms, is not whether an infant is to be bap- tized as foon as born, or at eight days, or when a month old ; but whether it is to be baptized at all or no ; nor whether adult perfons are to be baptized at thirty years of age, or whether at I'Vhitfuntide^ or any other time of the year j but whether believers, and fuch that profefs themfelves, and are judged to be fo, and ihty only, are to be baptized. This author fays, that " it is certainly " very proper that parents devote their children to God -, which they may do " by prayer, without baptizing, for which they have no warrant; and that they " enter them as infant-difciples in the fchool of Chrift, in order to become iiis " aftual fcholars as foon as capable " But this is beginning wrong, and per- verting the order which Chrift has fixed, that perfons fliould firft be taught and made difciples, and then baptized j and not firft baptized, and then made dif- ciples. He afks, " Is it not as proper that this be dorte by the vifible ceremony " of baptifm, as for the Jevvifli children to be entered into their church by cir- " cumcifion ? " He ought firft to prove, that Jewifli children svere entered into their church by circumcifion -, and then that it is tlie will of God, or ap- pointment of Chrift, that infants fliould be entered into the chriftian church by baptifm ; and that baptifm fucceeds circumcifion, and for fuch a purpofe-, nei- ther of which can ever be made good. He further aflcs, " If parents make a " profefTjon of the chriftian faith at the baptifm of their children, and alfo " enter into public engagements to give tliem a chriftian education, are not " as good ends, as to pradtical religion, anfwered by the baptifm of chriftians '• children, as by the baptifm of adult perfons ?" I anfvvcr, tliat parents may do thefe things if they pleafc, without baptizing their infants ; nor were thefe ever defigned as ends to be anfwered by baptifm in any-, a profefTion of faith fhould be made by the party baptized, and that before baptifm. After a little harangue upon the virtue of wafhing the body with water, intimating, that this cannot make a perfon one jot holier, or fecure from fin in future life, which no body ever affirmed, he owns, that " penitent confeftion of fin, profefTion of " faith in Chrift, and engaigement to a new life, were the conditions of baptifm " to ail Jews and Gentiles •," which, as we believe they are, we defire to have them continued fo ; for this we contend. This Dialogue is concluded with fome diftinftions about zeal, and fome ccn- fures upon the Particular Baptijls, and their preachers, for their blind, bodily, immodeft 134 A N A N S W E R, &c. immodeft and uncharitable zeal ; which, if guilty of, this man is a very im- proper perfon to be a rebuker, fince he has fhewn fo much intemperate heat againft men, whom he himfelf owns to be the difciples of Chrift; and againft dodrines held by all the reformed churches. I wifh he may appear of another fpirit in h\s feconJ part, which he has given us reafon to expeft. I would fain perfuade this author, to leave this pamphleteering way of writ- ing, and appear undifguifed. He fcems to be fond of engaging in a contro- verfy with the Baptijis upon the above points, which require a larger compafs duly to confidcr, than he has taken. I am a Baplijl, he may call me, if he plcafcs, a new Bapiiji, or an old Cahinijlical one, or an Antinomian ; it is a f ery trifle to me, by what name I go. I have publifhed a (reali/i upon the dodlrine of the 7r;«/0', another upon the dodtrine oi J ujlif cation by the imputed rightc- oufncfs of Chrift ; and \zi<:\y three volumes di0 3.\n{\. iht Arminians, and particu- larly Dr fVbitiy ; in which are confidered the arguments, both from fcripture and reafon, on both fides of the queftion -, and am now preparing z fourth, in which the fenfe of the chriftian writers before yfr{/?/« will be given upon the points in debate : if this Gentleman thinks it worth his while to attend to any, or all of them, and enter into a fober controverfy on thefe fubjefls, I fhall readily join him •, and, in the mean time, bid him farewel, till his feeond pari is made public. A N AN ■ - A N S WE R TO THE BIRMINGHAM Dialogue-Writer's Second Part, Upon the following Subjects: The Divinity Of CHRIST, I Free -Will, Election, I Imputed Righteousness, Original Sin, Perseverance, and Free-Grace, | Baptism. THE 5/r;;;/»^/?)/7?j; Dialogue- writer has, at length, thought fit to publiOi the fecond -part of his Dialogue between a Bapiifl and a Churchman. Never was fuch a medley of things, fuch a parcel of rambling (luff, coUefted together; he is refolved to be voluminous at any rate: If he thus proceeds, we may indeed expedl to fee the works of the Confident Chrijlian xn folio. I could wi(h he had anfwered to his motto in the title-page, taken from an apccnphal wr'ncr \ Blejfed is the man that doth meditate ho)ieJl (good) things by (in) hisivifdoui, and that rea- Joneth of holy things by his underflanding; for the things he has meditated are nei- ther ^W, nor bonefl, nor holy; unlefs things contrary to the divine perfeftions, to the honour and dignity of Chrifl, and the dodtrine of the infpired writings; unlefs to mifreprcfenc an argument, which he frequently does, and mifquote an author, as he has Nir Millar " particularly, can be thought to be fo. I (hall not difturb him in his vain mirth, but let him have his laugh out, at the theatrical Ijehavlour, as he calls it, and geftures of preachers, and at myfteries in religion ; only let him take care, left he fhould find by experience the truth of that faying of the wife man. As the crackling of thorns under a pot, fo is the laughter of the fool : this alfo is vanity', A man of no faitii, ' or whofe faitii is worfc than none, or good for nothing, may go on to dcfpife Creeds, Catechifms, Confc/Bons and Articles of Faith : the Riglu of private Judgment will not be difputed ; both minilJ-ers • Ecdes, xiv. 20. * Page 65, lot. ' Ecdes. vii. 6. ,3€ AN ANSWER TO THE minifters and people have undoubtedly a liberry of fpeaking and writing what they believe to be truth, provided they do not abufe this liberty to the difhonour of Gof,], the gratification of their own pafTions, and the injury of their neicrhbours. What I fhall attend unto, will be the following things; the Divinity of Chrift, Eleflion, Original Sin, Free-will, and Free grace, Imputed Righteoufnefs, Perfevcrance, and Baptifm •, things that were the fubjefts of the former party «nd are now brought on the carpet again, and re-confidered in this. I begin, I. With the Deity. of Chrift. This writer very wrongly diftinguiflies between true, real, and /iro/)fr Deity, and al'foltitely fupreme Deny ; as if there could be true, real, and proper Deity, and yet that not be abfolutely fupreme ; whereas Deity is cither fidlitious or true, nominal or real, proper or metaphorical. There are many who are called gods, that are not really fo •, there are fuch who by nature are no gods, fidVitious deities, the idols of the heathens-, and there arc fuch who are fo only in an improper fenfe, as civil magiftrates : Now none of thcfe are truly, really and properly gods ; there is but one that is truly, really and properly God, and who is the only abfolutely fupreme God, Father, Son, and Spirit. To fay, there are more gods than one, who are really, truly, and properly fo, is to introduce the Polytheifm of the Gentiles. To affert that the Father is the abfolutely fupreme God ; that the Son is truly, really, and pro- perly God, but not the abfolutely fupreme God-, and that the holy Spirit is alfo really, truly, and properly God, but not the abfolutely fupreme God ; is to afiert one abfolutely fupreme God, and two fubordinate Gods, who yet are truly really, and properly fo. The arguments for and againft the fupreme Deity of Chrift, and his equality with the Father, are as follow. I. This writer having afferted in his frjl p^rt "y that Chrift is God, or a God, becaufe the Father hath ^/I'fw him divine perfeftions, the following argument was formed inanfwcrto it: " If the Father has given toChrift divine perfe(5tionj, *' for which reafon he is God, or a God, he has either given him only fome *' divine pcrfeftions, or all divine perfcflions -, if he has only given him fome " divine perfeflions, then he is imperfeftly God, or an imperfeft one ; if he " has given him all divine pcrfedlions, then he muft be equal to him'." Now this was argumentum ad bcminem, an argument formed on his own principles, and not mine, as any one who has the leaft (hare of common fenfe and undcr- ftanding will eafily obferve ; and yet this man, cither ignorantly or wilfully reprefents it as an argument proceeding upon my own principles -, whereas ic is he, and not I, that fays, the Father has ^/v^« to Chrift divine perfeflions. I affirm, that all the Father hath are hisj he pofTefTcs and enjoys all divine per- fect ions. * Page II. * Anfwer, p. 13, 14. BIRMINGHAM DIALOGUE -WRITER, Part II. 137 feftions, not hy gift, but in right, and by necefTity of nature : that no divine perfeflion is given him as the Son of God ; though all power, dominion, and authority to judge, are given him as the fonofman. Hence the abfurdity of communicating any thing to the fclf-exiftent fupreme God, and the fclf-con- tradiftion of neceflity and gift, are impertinently alledged, and the argument, as formed on his own principles, ftands unanfwered ; which has brought him into a dilemma, out of which he knows not how to extricate himfeif: For if the Father has given him divine perfections, it muft be either fome, or all •, if only fome, then the fulnefs of the godhiad does not dwell in him, nor can he be truly, really, and properly God ; if all, and fo no perfection of Deity is wanting in him, then he muft be equal to the Father. 2. Another argument againft the fubordinate Deity of Chrift, and in favour of his equality with the Father, is this : " If the Father only is the mofl high " God, and Chrift is a God, that is, a God inferior to him, whom he has com- " manded all men toworfhip-, then there are two diftinCt Gods, objefts of religi- " ousworftiip; dirediy contrary to the exprefs words of the firft command, Tbou " yZ)j// have no other gods before me\" This is an argument reducing to a mani- feft abfurdity, and the Dialogue-writer's replies to it fhew him to be in the ut- moftdiftrefs; he is confounded, and knows not what to fay. Firfi, he fays '', that " if there be any abfurdity, any contradidtion here to the firft command, " it falls not direflly on him, but on Chrift and his gofpel, from whence he " borrowed thefe truths." But does Chrift in his gofpel ever teach, that the Father is the moft high God, or even the only true God, diftinft from, and exclufive of the Son; and that the Son of God is a God, inferior and fubordinate to the Father.'' Next, he obferves ^ that the firft command fpeaksof one per- fon only to be worfhipped as God fupreme, and not of more perfons than one. Be it lb. Since then, according to this man's principles, Chrift is a God infe- rior and fubordinate to the moft high God, he muft be a diftind perfon from him, and confequently ftandsexcluded from divine worfhip by the firft command; wherefore the gofpel-doctrine of worftiipping the Son, cannot be taken in con- fiftency with that: and, on the other hand, if Chrift, a fubordinate God, is one perfon with the fupreme God, this would deftroy his fubordination, and give him fupremacy, contrary to this author's notions. If this will not do, he goes on and tens'" you, "You may fuppofe that God himfeif, in commanding men " to honour his Son, has repealed fo much of the firft command as is inconfiftent " with the New-Teftament-command to honour or worftiip his Son." This is cutting the Gordian knot indeed ! This man, I fuppofe, would not care to be called an Antinomian ; and yet the grofTeft Antinomian that ever lived upon Vol. II. T the t Anfwer, p. 14. f Dialogue-writer, Part II. p. 28. « Page 29. * lbi^, an equal governor of the univerfe with him. Hence it is clear, that the Father is not alone the fupreme governor of the uni- verfe. Moreover, the minor propofition of the argument brought in proof of this, that the Father is alone the governor of the univerfe, muft alfo be denied ; I mean that part of it on which the proof depends, that "every other perfon " whatfoever always afts in fubjedlion to his, the Father's will :" For though the Son of God always a<5ls in agreement, yet not always in fubje£Iion to his Father's T 2 will; • Dialogue, Part 11. p. 30, 31. ' Pfilm xxii. 2$, ' John t. 17. J40 ANANSWERTOTHE will; though he always afted in fubjeftion to his Father's will in the human na- ture, yet not in the divine nature; particularly in the works of creation and providence; in ihefe there is an agreement with, but not a fubjedlion to his Father's will ; all things were made by him in agreement, but not in fubjedion to the will of the Father; by him all things ccnjiji, and he upholds all things by the WQrd of bis power ' ; agreeable to his Father's will, but not obliged as by any power or authority fuperior to him. • 5. This writer, in h\s Jirjl part ', argues againft the fupreme deity of Chrift, in this manner: " Before the Lord Jefus Chrift became man, he came from the " Father, was fcnt and employed by him ; therefore it is impoffible he fhould " be the fupreme God." It is readily granted, that Chrift before his incarna- tion came, though he is not cxprefsly faid to he/ent, to redeem Ifrael, lead them through the Red fea and wiidernefs, and bring them to Canaan. And it has been obferved ', that he appeared with full proof of his equality with the Father, fince he calls himfelf the God of yfi'r 65. _• Markxvi. 15. BIRMINGHAM DIALOGUE -WRITER, Part II. 147 by him. The minifters are kji^vxh, criers or heralds ; their bufinefs is ».r,fv7trnf^ to proclaim aloud, to publifh fafts, to declare things that are done, and no: to offer them to be done on conditions ; as when a peace is concluded and finifhed, the herald's bufinefs, and in which he is employed, is to proclaim the peace, and not to offer it-, of this nature is the gofpel, and the whole fyftem of it; which preaches, not offers peace by Chrift, who is Lord of all. As for the texts of fcripture produced by this writer, feveral have nothing in them refpefting par- don, life and falvation, and much lefs contain an offer of either; as I have fhcwn at large in my Jirji part of TheCaufe of God and Truth ; whither I refer the reader; fuch as Gen. iv. 7. Deut. v. 29. Prov. i. 23. Ezek. xxxiii. 16. Affs iii. 19. others are gracious invitations to the means of grace, and promifes of pardo.T and grace to poor fenfible finners ; as Jfai.lv.i, 7. Rev. xxii. 17. A3s u. '^S. others, exhortations to duty with encouragements to it; zsPfalm]. 23. Mai. iii. 7. Mali. vi. 5, 6, 15. and vii. 21. i Tim. iv. 8. 2 Ccr. vii. i. Rev xxii. 14. 4. This dodtrine is reprefented as a very uncomfortable one ; fince it makes it a hundred to one to a man that he is not eledcd, but mufl be for ever damned. To which anfwer has been made ', it is not fuch a chance matter, or uncertain thing to a man, as a hundred to one, whether he is elcSed or no ; to whom ihe gcfpel is come, not in word only, biU alfo in power and in the holy Ghojl ; who from hence may truly know, and be comfortably affured of h\%de£lion of God This man has now lowered his number, and made \iten to one, whether a man is eledled or no, to whom xhc gofpel is preached ; but it is no odds at all to a man whether he is elefted or no, to whom the gofpel is preached ; and to whom that is made the power of God unto falvation, or who is converted by it, which is the inftance given. To which this writer replies °, " then the gofpel is glad tidings *' to no finner in the world, unlefs he is aftually converted.*' Why, ■truly, it is not glad tidings to fuch pcrfons, nor is it judged fo by them. It is fo far from being good news to unconverted finncrs, thntit is difputed, defpifcd, hated arnl abhoned by them ; jufl as it is by this Dialogue -writer. Thrre is no doftrine of the gofpel that is really comfortable and truly delightful to a man in a ftatc of nature : the dodrine of regeneration, delivered by Chrift in thefe words *, except ■a vian be bom again, he cannot fee the kingimn of God, can TKver be comfortable to an unregenerate man : nor can even any dodlrine in which fuch as call the.Ti- fclvcs chriflians, -are agreed ; is for inftance, the "dodrine of an univerfal judg- ment, when all men muft app>ear beforeGod, and be accountable to him for the «6tions of their lives : this is a doftrioe, to ufe this author's words, that all the world have rcafon to be affrighted at, and which no foul can pofTibly take any comfort from, till he doesadually love God, and is irrefiflibl}' drawn to him ; V 2 ■ but « Anfwer, p. 30. " Part II. p. 67. ' John Hi. 3. 148 AN ANSWER TO THE but it is not a whit the lefs true becaufe it is uncomfortable to fuch perfons, any more than the dodrine of elcdtion, which, however frightful it be to uncorv- verted finners, yields true peace and comfort to thofe who are born again, and have ihc faith of God's eUn ; though they take no pleafure in the rejeftion of others, but wifely leave it to the fovereignty of that God, who does whatfoever he pleafes. Nor can the univerfal fcheme afford fuch comfort to a converted man, as that of fpecial grace does -, fince, according to the former, he may be loft and perifli, when the latter fecures certain falvation to him. To clofe this head ; it feems, according to this writer", that as the nation of the Jews are called God's ekSl, in like manner, the kingdom of Chrift, con- verted ones, have the fame title applied to them, not in iht'w perfonal, hm facial capacity, as chriftian churches : fo the whole church at Theffalonica are called God's ekn, not with refpedl to fingle perfons, but on the account of their being called by the gofpel. But, furely, the calling of the Theffalonians by the gof- pel, mud he pcrfoiuil, and not facial, or as a chriftian church; and therefore their elcdion muft be perfonal too, of which their calling was an effedt, fruit and evidence. And though the nation of the Jews are called God's elefl, or cbofen, as fuch, and were diftinguifhed by many favours, as a nation, from the reft of the world ; yet there was a fpecial, perfonal and particular elecflion among them, a remnant, according to the ekHion of grace '' : nor are all that bare that name under the gofpel, or in the kingdom of the Meffiah, churches, but par- ticular perfons : the/fw, Chrift faid, viere. chofen, when many were externally called by the gofpel, were perfons, and not nations or churches ; thefe are the eleil, for whofe fake the days of tribulation will be fhortened, whom falfe pro- phets cannot deceive, and whom the angels will gather from the four winds : not churches, nor all the members of churches, are the poor of this world, whom God has chofen, and made rich in faith, and heirs of a kingdom : the ele£} Lady, and her fifter, and Rufus, chofen in the Lord, and the ele5} flrangerSy were perfons chofen before the foundation of the world in Chrift, to be hoLy and happy ^ I go on to confider, III. The do(5lrine of Adam's fall, and original fin. Under this head our author endeavours, I. To prove the entire innocence of infants from fcripture'. The paffages be produces or refers to, are Jer. ii. 30. and xix. 4. Matt, xviii. 3, 4. the two firft of thefe feem rather to be underftood of the prophets, as they are by feve- ral " Part II. p. 60, 67. r See Rom. ix. 6, 7, 8, 27, 29. and xi. j, 7. * M*tt. xr. 16. and xxir. 22, 24, ji. Jam. ii. 5. ijohni.jj. R01n.xvi.13. jPct.i.1,2. Ephcs. i. 4. » Pirtir, p. 73. BIRMINGHAM DIALOGUE- WRITER, Part II. 149 ral expoficors, than of infants -, the former of them has no apparent reference to children, and the latter of them diftinguifhes innocents from the fons, or the children that were burnt with fire, for burnt-offerings to 5<2a/; and both fcem rather to regard the prophets ; who, though not free from fin, yet were inno- cent as to any crime for which they fuffcred, and their blood was fhed. And fuppofing infants were intended, they are only called fo in a comparative fenfe,. in comparifon of others, who have added to their original guilt and corruption many actual fins and tranfgrefTions •, and as for the words of our Lord in Matf. xviii. 3, 4. the meaning Is not, that men muft be perfcdly innocent, and en- tirely free from fin, or there can be no expe(5tation of entering the kingdom of heaven ; for then no man could hope to enter there -, but that men muft be born again, and appear to be fo, and, in a comparative fenfe, muft be holy, and harmlefs, ircc from pride, ambition, malice and envy. And even his learned Cicero, to whom he has recourfe, helps him off but very lamely ; for in the very citation he makes from him, he fays, " We are no fooner born, but we fall into " a wretched depravity and corruption of manners and opinions ; fo that we " feem almoft to fuck in error with our mother's milk." 2. This writer endeavours ''to fct afide the proof of the imputation oi Jdamh Cn to his pofterity, and the corruption of human nature by it, taken from Pfalm \\. 5. Rom. V. 19. Ephes. ii. 3. by giving different turns to, and falfe glofTes on thefe padages : As to Pfalm li. 5. he infinuates, that David might be bafe born, or unlawfully begotten, and fo fhapen in iniquity, and afks, is this a proof that other men are fo, or that all men are fo ? This is a glofs which is formed at 'the expence of the charadters of David's parents, of whom there is not the leaft fuggeftion of this nature in the word of God, but the reverfe ; for they are re- prefentcd as holy and religious pcrfons : this fenfe of them makes David illegi- timate, who, therefore, muft have been excluded from the congregation of Jfraely whereas we have no intimation of any fuch exclufion ; but, on the con- trary, that he frequently went into the houfe of God with company ; befides, he is not fpeaking of any fin his parents were guilty of, when he was conceived and fhapen, but of fin and iniquity, in which he was conceived and fhapen ; nor would it have been agreeable to his defign and view, to expofe the fins of his parents, whilft he was lamenting his own. Our fenfe oi Romans v. 19. that all mankind are made finners by the imputation of y/iaw'sdifobedience, is 'faid to be " contrary to reafon, to the context, to known truths, to other more plain " fcriptures, to be in injurious to God, and abufive to mankind." It is not con- trary to reafon ; imputation is not ufed by us in a moral fenfe, as when a man's own perfonal aftion, good or bad, is accounted to himfelf; but in a forenfic fenfe, » Part II. p. 74, &c. • Ibid. p. jS. J I50 AN ANSWER TO THE fenfe, as when the debts of one man are, in a legal way, transferred and placed to the account of another ; which is neither contrary to reafon, nor the praftice of men : nor is it contrary to the context, which, this writer fays, leads us, by Jinners to underftand/Kj7>rfrj, mortal men liable to die, z%ver. 12, i^c. but this is to make the apoftle a moft miferable reafoner, and guilty of proving the fame thing by the fame •, the fenfe of whofe words, death pajfed upon all men, for that ell have finned, mufl: be, according to this interpretation, all men die becaufe they die, or all men are fufFercrs becaufe they are fufferers -, whereas the apoftle in thcfe words, and throughout the context, fhews, why death pafied on all men, •.why many were dead, why death reigned as it did, why judgment came upon all men to condemnation •, becaufe all finned in /idam, and by his difobedienoe were made, reckoned, and accounted finners. Nor is this fenfe contrary to known truths, and other more plain fcriptures ; as to the latter, this author <3oes not pretend to mention any to which it is contrary ; and as for the former, though nothing can aft perfonally before it has an adlual perfonal being ; yet as men may have a reprefcntative being, before they have an adiial one, fo they •tnay aft in their reprefentative, as Levi paid tithes in Abi-aham before he was .born 1 and though fin is a perfonal a6t, and a tranfgreffion of a law, yet it may be transferred to another, by imputation, not in a moral way, but in a judicial ^ne : nor is our fenfe injurious to God, his being and perfeflions, or contrary to his methods of proceeding, who, in many cafes, has vijited the iniquities of the fathers upon the children: nor does it abufe mankind, but only reprefents how mankind are abufed by fin -, to which is owing all the miferies and calami- tics endured by man in this, or the other world. On the whole, our fenfe of the paflage before us ftands firm, without giving up any plain rule of interpre- tation of fcripture, and which is further confirmed by the other claufe in the text; for as men are made righteous in a forenfick fenfe, or are juftified, and have a right to life, through the righteoufnefs or obedience of Chrift, which this author owns, fo they are made finners in a forenfick fenfe, by the difobedience oi Adam, that is, by imputation ; and this gives light to another paiTageofthe apoftle's"', in Adam all die \ and fhews a reafon for it, becaufe fl//_y?«nfi in him, or were made finners by his difobedience. The text in Ephes. ii. 3. And were hy nature children of wrath, even as others ; is not forgotten by us to be undcr- ftood of God's clc(ft ; who, confiflent with their being beloved in Chrift with an evcrlafting love, may, confidered as the guilty and polluted defcendents of- Adam, be called children of wrath ; that is, deferving of it ; for fo they are by nature, guilty through the imputation of fin unto them, being the natural pof- izniy oi Adam, and filthy through a corrupt depraved nature, propagated and communicated * 1 Cor. XV. 20. BIRMINGHAM DIALOGUE -WRITER, Part II. 151 communicated to them by natural generation •, for whalfoever is born of the fiejh isflcjh, carnal and corrupt, and not by cuftom or habits of fin, which become fecond nature. 3. We are called upon to prove that God made a covenant with Adam and all his pofterity, which is the ground of his imputing fin unto them. That there was a covenant made with Adam, I fuppofe, will not be denied, fince a promife of life was made to him upon his obedience, and death was threatened in cafe of difobedience, to which he agreed in his ftate of innocence ; all which formally conftitutes a covenant, and is fo called, Hof. vi. 7. They, like men, or Adam, have tranfgrejfed the covenant. That this covenant was made with Adam and his pofterity, in which he was jheir federal head and reprefentative, appears from his being called the figure of him that was to come ' ; which is to be under- ftood either of all mankind, who were to fpring from him, or of the Lord Jefus Chrift, who was to come in the fulnefs of time ; if of the former, it proves that Adam was a type or figure of all his pofterity, that he perfonated them all, and that they were all reprefented in him and by him, which is the very thino- it is brought to prove -, if of the latter, that is, of Chrift, Adam could only be a type or figure of him, as a public perfon and a covenant-head -, and the parallel between them, as fuch, is clearly run by the apoftle in the context, and in another place ''•, fhewing that as the one conveys fin and death to all' his pofterity, the other conveys grace, righteoufnefs and life to all his. Without allowing fuch a covenant made with Adam and his pofterity, in which they were to ftand or fall with him ; and without confidering him as a covenant-head, and reprefentative of them, in whom they finned and fell, it cannot be accounted for, how Adam's fin ftiouJd " bring death on many, or render them liable to be treated as finners, ♦' or make them more liable to both fin and death, or that they ftiould fliare " in the fatal confcquences of his difobedience j" all which is acknowledged by this writer ^. IV. Free grace and free-wil] come next into debate. I. This man's notion of free grace is, that it is free and common to all men ; upon which fcheme he is alked '', what grace is that in God to decree to fave all men conditionally, to fend his Son to redeem all mankind -, and yet to whok nations, and that for many hundred years together, does not fo much as afford the means of grace, of the knowledge of falvation, nor vouchfafes his Spirit to make application of it to them, but leaves them in their fin, and eternally damns them .'' To which he anfwers ', " When we are upon the nature of the " gofpel * Rom.v. 14. » 1 Cor. XV. » Part II. p. 77, 78. * Anfwer, p. 39, 40. •Partll. p. 81, ,52 AN ANSWER TO THE ** gofpel and the univerfality of its offers, there is no need to evade the argu- " menr, by transferring the fcene to the heathen world." I am at a lofs to know what argument is evaded by putcing the queftion ; for, if grace is free and common to all men, if God's decree of falvation is univerfal, and reaches to all the individuals of mankind, and Chrift has died for them all, then, fiirely, the heathen world has a concern in thefe things ; and it muft feem ftrange, if all this is true, that the knowledge of falvation, and the means of ir, fhould not be afforded them, and they left in their fins to perifh without law. Where is the grace of this fcheme ? What is now become of free, common, and uni- verfal grace ? And an idle thing it is, to talk of the univerfality of the offers of t^e gofpel, when the gofpel is not preached to a tenth part of the world, nor any thing like it ; when multitudes, millions, whole nations know nothing of it. What this man means by faying that this is equally a difficulty againft God's government of the world, I know not •, fince this argument does not concern God's government of the world, but the adminiftration of his grace to the fons of men. 2. That there is a free-will in man, and that man is a free agent, is not de- nied by US; the natural liberty of the will, and the power of man to perform the natural and civil adlions of life, and the external parts of religion, are owned by us. We affcrt, indeed, that there is no free-will in man of himfelf to do that which is fpiritually good, nor any power in him to perform it. This is the ac- count of free-will which we have ^already given, though this author fuggefts, that we have given no other than he has done, and dare not define it ' : he thinks that man cannot be free who is under a necejfitating decree to fin -, and, that if man has no power to do any thing fpiritually good, and yet obliged to do it, then he is obliged to impoffibilities, and damned for not performing them. To which may be replied, that whatever concern the decree of God has in the fins of men, it does not necefTitate or force them to do them -, it does not at all infringe the freedom of their will, or deftroy their free agency ■, as appears in the cafes oijofeph's being fold into Egypt, and the crucifixion of Chrift ; which were both according to the decree and counfcl of God; and stijofepys brethren and the crucifiers of Chrift, afted as free agents, and with the full liberty of their wills. The things fpiritually good which man cannot do, have been in- ftanced in"; as to convert and regenerate himfelf, to believe in Chrift, and to repent of fin in an evangelical manner;, and thefe are things which he is not obliged to do of himfelf, and will not be damned for not performing of them. There are indeed things which man is obliged to, which he now cannot do, as to keep the whole law ; which impotcncy of his is owing to his fin and fall, by which ^ Anfwcr, p. 41. ' Part II. p. 84. "■ Anrwer, p. 41. BIRMINGHAM DIALOGUE -WRITER, Part II. 153 which we mean the fin and fall of Mam, and of all mankind in him ; and this author may make what ufc he pleafcs of it. , 3. An 0_>w iscried, and all men are de fired to attend " ; to what? to this -, " Writers on your fide have not the courage and honefty plainly to deny that " that men are in a.Jiate 0/ trial, though a confequence of their principles -, yet " now and then they craftily infinuate this article of their dark and hideous " fcheme." That the faints whilft in this life, are in a ftate of trial, that is of their graces by afflidions, temptations, (dc. is readily owned-, but then all man-' kind are not in fuch a fi:ate, only converted perfons, who only have grace to be tried ; but if by a ftate of trial is meant, as I fuppofe it is, that men are upon probation of their good or ill behaviour towards God, according to which their ftatc will be fixed as to happinefs or mifery, that being as yet unfixed, fo that whilft this life lafts it is uncertain whether they will be faved or loft : if this, I fay is meant, I have had courage and honefty, as this man calls it, plainly' to deny it years ago, and have publiftied ° my arguments and reafons againft it, which this writer, if he pleafes, may try if he can anfwer. 4. This writer thinks ' that the drawings oi God are necefiary to converfion •, but that thefe arc only by moral fuafion, and not by any powerful influence of divine grace, and fo not irrefiftible. He owns irrcfiftible evidence, illumina- tions and conviflions j but fuch as may be refifted, and ftifled, and come to nothing: how then are they irrefiftible ? to ufe his own words, "If they may " be refifted, then they are not irrefiftible''." We own, indeed, that the grace of God may be refifted, but not fo as to be ftifled, and come to nothing, to be overcome, and entirely fruftrated. The inftances given of God's grace being fruftrated, and of refifting internal operations, are not at all to the purpofe; fincc the paflages allcdged, Hof. vii. i. Luke xiii. 34. and xix. a^z. A5ls xx'v'ui. 24 — 27. regard not fpecial grace, and internal operations, but external, temporal things, or the outward miniftry of the word. It has been urged ', that if no man can come to Chrift unlefs irrefiftible grace draw him, then there can be no fault in not turning to him. To which it has been anfwered ', that " to live in fin, is ♦' blame-worthy; and though man, by finning, has involved himfelf in a ftate *' out of which he cannot extricate himfelf, yet is he not the lefs culpable on " that fcore, for living in it :" which anfwer ftands good, for any thing this man has replied to it' ; fincc men are involved in this ftate not merely by ano- ther's, but by their own fin, and their continuance in it is of their own free- will. The argument from the offer of help has been fet afide already, by de- nying there is any. The inftance of a man's drinking himfelf into a fever, and Vol. II. X continuing » Partll. p. 3j. 0 The Caure of God and Truth, parti. ' Dialogce. part H. p. 87. Mbid. p. 89. ' Parti, p 31. • Anfwer, p. 42, 43. « Part II. p. 88. 154 AN • ANSWER TO THE continuing in it, notwithftanding commands of recovery, and offers of remedy, is ftupidly impertinent -, fince not continuing in a fever, the confequence of his drinking, but in the fin itfclf, of which fuch an habit may be acquired he can- not break, can only have any fhew of agreement with the cafe before us. We readily allow, that no internal operations are employed, as to thoufands who hear the gofpel. But then, fays this writer ", fuch cannot believe and obey, and therefore cannot be juftly punifhed for not believing and obeying. I reply, that fuch indeed cannot believe with the faith which is of the operation of God, nor perform new and fpiritual obedience, to which the Spirit of God is neceflary, and for which he is promifed in the covenant, and therefore will never be pu- nifhed for not believing and obeying, in this fenfe : but then, without internal operations, or fpecial grace, fuch as are favriMred with an external revelation, are capable'of believing the outward report of the gofpel, and of yielding obe- dience to it ; that is, of attending on the miniflry of the word, and performing the external parts of religion •, and in failure of thefe, may bejuflly punifhed for their unbelief and difobedience. I take no notice of our fcheme being called by this m7iz\ Antichrijiian znd Dial?olical ; I am now pretty well ufed to Tuch lan- guage, and indeed expedl no other from men of modern charity. V. The dodlrine of juftification, by the imputed righteoufnefs of Chrifl, comes next under confideration. And, I. Some pafTages of fcripture, as Ifai. Ixiv. 6. Phil. iii. 9 jwhich rcprefcnt the infufficiency of man's righteoufnefs to juflify him before God, a.re brought under examination. As to Ifai. Ixiv. 6. our author feems to be at a lofs whe- ther he fhould follow the interpretation ofGroliiUy or Henry "^ However, thac the prophet fpeaks of a hypocritical people, he thinks is a clear point, for this wife rcafon ; bccaufe it is faid, at the end of the verfe, we all do fade as a leaf., and our iniquities like the wind have taken us away : whereas hypocrites are not fo free to own their declenfions and tranfgreJTions, and to confefs the impurity of their hearts, and the imperfetftion of their obedience-, they generally make the leafl: of their fins, and the mod they can of their righteoufnefs : So that thefe words are a reafon againft, and not for, his fenfe of the pafTage. St Paul, in Phil. iii. 8, 9. he fays, only renounced his ceremonial, not his moral righteouf- nefs. But It is not the righteoufnefs of the ceremonial, but of the moral law, which the apoflle continually oppofes to the righteoufnefs of faith; be Romans iii. 20 — 22. and iv. 13. and ix. 30, 31. and x. 5, 6. And when we fay, that he renounced this righteoufnefs, he.knows very well our meaning is, not that he renounced doing it, or obicdted to the performance of it ; but that he difclaimed all dependence upon it for juflification before God-, and, in refpcfk to • Part II. p. 89 • Ibid. p. 91. o BIRMINGHAM DIALOGUE -WRITER, Part II. 15 to that, defined only to be found in Chrift : which is not to reprefent the apoftlc falfly and abfurdly, but perfedily agreeable with himfelf, and his principles. 2. This man has no other notion of imputation, but of accounting that to a man which is done by himfelf, and not what may be done, or contraded by another; contrary to the apoftle's fentiments, Romans iv. 6, 1 1, 23,24. Philem. ver. 1 8. He argues againft the imputation of Chrift's righteoufnefs in this man- ner " } if no one fingle afl of the righteoufnefs of Chrift is imputed to us, then the whole of it is not. Very right -, for how indeed fhould the whole be imputed, if no one part of it is ? But whaciare the particular afts of Chrift's righteoufnefs ? His Incarnation, Baptifm, Poverty, Fafting, his Viftory over Satan, Preaching, Miracles, his Confeffion before Pilate, Obedience to death, giving a CommitTion to his apoftles, his IntercefTion, and governing and judging the World. All falfe. Not thefe, but the feveral adls of his obedience to the moral law, are the righteoufnefs of Chrift, by which men are made righteous, and by which they can only be made fo, by the imputation of it to them; the ground of which imputation is Chrift's being their head, furety, and reprefentative ; fo that the righteoufnefs of the law being fulfilled by him, in their room and ftead, it is all one as if it was fulfilled by them, and is faid indeed to bt fulfilled in them : which does not exempt them from fervice to God, orobedience to his law, but lays them under greater obligation in point of gratitude to an obfervance of it, though not in order to juftification by it. 3. It is ftill infifted on, that there is no text of fcripture to be found, proving the imputation of the righteoufnefs of Chrift. As for Romans iv. 3. he ftands to it, that it muft be underftood of y/^rji>itw's faithful obedience, or obeying faith, and not the objeft of it ; which, he fays '', was the promife of God that he fhould have a fon, that was imputed to him for righteoufnefs. Now what- ever may be faid for the imputation of /1brabam'% aft of faith to himfelf for righteoufnefs, nothing can be faid in favour of the imputation of the aft of faith, that he fhould have a fon, to us, for righteoufnefs, if we believe on him that raifed up Jefus our Lord from the dead ; where the apoftle clearly afterts that that it, which was imputed to Abraham for righteoufnefs, is alfo imputed to all them that believe. To which this man makes no reply. Nor does he take any no- tice oi Romans iv. 6. i Cor. i. 30. iCor. v. 21. which were produced as proofs of the imputation of Chrift's righteoufnefs to his people. He allows that we are made righteous by the obedience of Chrift, in the fame fenfe we are made finners by the difobedience oi Adam ; and fince he owns before ', that we are made righteous by the obedience of Chrift, in a forenfic fenfe, it muft be by the imputation of it to us. X 2 .4. This » Part II. p. 95. r Ibid. p. 98. » Ibid. p. 78. ,56 AN ANSWER TO THE 4. This author having fuggefted that the dodrine of imputed righteoufnefs was a poifonous one, and tended to licentioufnefs -, the contrary was proved from Romans Vu. 2^- Titus W. 11,1 z. and iii. 7, 8. which he has palled in filence ; and inftead of offering any thing in fupport of his former fuggeftion, he runs to the do6trine of Reprobation, of God's feeing no fin in his eleft, and of irre- fiftible grace ; to which he adds a teftimony of Bifhop Burnet's, concerning fome perfons in King Edward the Vr'"s time, who made an ill ufe of the doc- trine of predeftination. This is no new thing with this writer ; nothing is more common with him, than to jumble doctrines together; never was fuch a lum- bering, immethodical piece of work publifhed to the world. It would be eafy to exculpate the above doftrines, as well as this of juftification, from the charge of licentioufnefs ; and I have done it already % to which I refer the reader. I go on to confider, VI. The dodlrine of the faints perfeverance. Under which article, 1. Some pafTages of fcripture, made ufe of in favour of this doflrine. are re- prefcnted '' as a fandy foundation to build it upon. It feems that Job xvii. 9. is not a promife of God, but only the fentiment oi'Job. Be it fo : Since it is a good one, and God has teftified of him that he fpoke the thing that was right, it fliould be abode by. Moreover, fince Job fpake under divine infpiration, why fhould not thcfe words be efteemed a promife of God by the mouth oi Job ? The good work, mentioned in Phil, i, 6. which the apoftle was confi- dently perfiiaded, not barely hoped, would be performed until the day of Chrifl', he intimates, was either planting the church at Phitippi, or an inclination to li- berality ; he does not know which. What fhould induce him to propofe the latter fenfe, I cannot imagine; fince there is not the lead hint, in the text or context, of the liberality of thefe perfons : And as for the former, that can never be intended; fince planting of a church was a good work external and vifible among them, and not a good work begun in them, in their hearts, and that in each of them fingly and feparately, as this was; for the apoftle fays, 1 even as it is meet for me to think this of you all. The everlajling righteoufnefs, fa id to be brought in by Chrift, Dan. ix. 24. is fuggefl:ed to be a covenant, whofe terms of acceptance are unalterable. But the covenant of grace never goes by this name ; and was it fo called, it mufi: be with refpefl to the cverlafting righ- teoufnefs of Ch rift, which always continues a juftifying one to thofe intereftcd in it; and therefore they fhall never enter into condemnation, or finally and totally perifh. Befides, the covenant confirmed by Chrifl, is fpoken of ver. 26. as * In a Sermon, called, The Doflrioe of Grace chared from the Charge of Licentioufnefs ; »nd in another, intitled. The Law eftab i(hed by the Gofpel. * Part II. p. loi, 102, BIRMINGHAM DIALOGUE -WRITER, Part II. 157 ! as diftinft from this righteoufnefs. Once more : If the juftification and glori- fication of converted Gentiles are infeparably connedted together, Rom. viii. 30. I then thofe who are truly converted, and arejuftified by the righteoufnefs of | Chrift, fhall certainly be faved ; and which is a doftrine to be defended, with- j out cftablifhing the principle of fatality, or ftoical enthufiafm. The prophetic j texts in Ifai. liv. 10. and lix. 21. Jer. xxxii. 38—40. Hof. ii. 19. in favour of the faints final perfeverance, are left untouched, and are not meddled with by this writer. 2. Such pafiages of fcripture as feem to militate againfl; the perfeverance of the faints, are brought upon the carpet ' ; particularly, we are charged with giving an abfurd and contradictory turn to Ezek. xviii. 24—26. in fuppofing that the prophet, by a righteous man's turning from his righteoufnefs, means a hypo- crite's turning from his hypocrify, from his feigned righteoufnefs. But this is to give a perverfe turn to our words and fenfe ; for we fay not, that the pro- phet means an hypocrite turning from a counterfeit and hypocritical righteouf- nefs to a real one, but a man's turning from an external moral righteoufnefs to an open, fhameful courfe of finning : All mere outward righteoufnefs is not hypocrify, as the cafe oi Paul before converfion fhews, A£lsx\\W, i. Phil. iii. 6. which a man may have, deftitute of the true grace of God, and may turn from into open fin ; and is no inflance of the apoftacy of a real faint, or a truly jufi man ; which this man is not faid to be, in the pafTage referred to ; and is elfe- whcrc defcribed as one thzt trujls to his ozvn righteoufnefs, and ccmmitleth iniquity ''. The text in //f^. vi. 4 — 6. is only tranfcribed at large, and the reader left to judge of the meaning of it. The fpiritual meat and drink, i Cor. x. 3 5. the Ifraelites partook, of in the wildernefs, were the typical manna, and the water cut of the rock ; which they might do, and not partake of the fpiritual bleffincrs of grace fignified ^y them : though, no doubt, many of them did ; for the temporal calamities that befel them in the wildernefs, are no proofs that they pcrifhed eternally. See Pfalm xcix. 8. To perfevere in grace and holinefs, is a bleffing of grace beftowed upon truly converted perfons ; to make ufe of means of enjoying this bleffing, is a duty, fuch as to he Jirong in the Lord, to watch in prayer, i^c. Ephes. vi. 10, 19. and which the apoftle Paul himfelf made ufe of: Though, when he fays, Leji J myfelffhould be a cafl-away% the word oAiuiiJQ-t which he ufes, does not fignify a reprobate, or one rejefled of God, but one rejeftcd and difapproved of by men ; his concern was not left he ftiould fall from the divine favour, or come fhort of happinefs, of both which he was fully perfuaded, Rom.win. 38, 39. iTim. i. 12. which pcrfuafion was not built upon his own refoluxion and watchfulnefs, but upon the nature of God's love, and. « Part II. p. U32, 103, " *■ Ezek. xxxiii. 13. « i Cor. ix. 27.. ,58 AN ANSWER TO THE and the power of Chriftj but left by any conduft of his, his miniftry fhould be rendered ufelefs among men. The inftances of David- z.nd Peter are no proofs of the final and total apoftacy of faints, fince they were both recovered from their falls by divine grace. Judas, indeed, fell from his ele(5tion to an office, but not from eleiflion to grace and glory, in wh'ch he never had any intereft ; and alfo from his miniftry and apoftleftiip, which is never denied to be an out- ward favour, though no inward fpecial grace, and fo nothing to the purpofe. The chapters referred to, i Cor. x. Hel>. vi. and x. Rev. ii. and iii. Ezek xviii, 2 Peter ii. I have largely cohfidered elfewhere % and have ftiewn that they have nothing in them repugnant to the faints final perfeverance ; where I have alfo conGdered the feveral cautions and exhortations given to the faints refpedling this matter ; and have ftiewn the nature and ufe of them ; to which I refer the reader. 2. Under this head is again introduced ^ the doftrine of God^s feeing noftn in his people. In order to fet this do6trine in a proper light, we diftinguifti between God's eye of omnifcience and of juftice; with the one he does, and with the other he does not behold the fins of his people, being juftified by the righte- oufnefs of his Son : we alfo diftinguifh between the corredtion or chaftnfement of a father, and the punifhment of ajudge j which diftinftion we think might be allowed, and thought fufficient to keep the door ftiut, and not to open it to all manner and degrees of immorality, falftiood and lewdnefs, as this man fuggefts " ; thoufrh we do not diftinguifti, as he fooliftily infinuatcs ', between being cbajlened and punijhed in hell fire : who ever talked of fatherly chaftifements in hell .'' The text \nNumb. xxiii. 21. He bath not beheld iniquity injacob, &c. he fays'', is fpo- kcn of the whole body of Ifrael, all the pofterity of Jacob, who apoftatized, rebelled fell, and were cut off'through unbelief, and fo no ways ferves ourcaufe. I anfwer, that that whole body of people were a typical people, typical of all God's eled, or his fpiritual i/rflf/, and what is fpoken typically of them, is really true of the other; and as all that people were, on the day of atonement, typi- cally cleanfcd from all their fins and tranTgrenions, hence God, in refpeft to that, beheld no iniquity in them; fo the whole fpiritual T/ra^/ of God, or all God's elefl, being cieanfed from their fins, and having them all really expiated by the blood and facrificc of Chrift, God fees no iniquity in them to take ven- geance on them for it. But if this will not do, this man has more to fay, and that is, that learned men fay, for he is no judge himfelf, that the Hebrew ori- ginal will juftify another reading, namely, be doth not approve of outrage againfi tbefoflerity of Jacob, nor vexation againfi Ifrael. I reply, that as our verfion agrees f The Ciufe of God and Truth, Parti. » Part II. p. 106. * Part II. p. 107. ' ItJid. p io5. *■ Page 107, 108. BIRMINGHAM DIALOGUE -WRITER, Part II. 159 »grces with the context and defign of the writer, fo it entirely accords with the original Hebrew ', and much more fo than this other reading does ; and is con- firmed by the Samaritan^ Syriac and Arabic verfions, and by fuch learned men as Vatablus, Pagnine, Arias Montanus, Junius and Tremellius, Druftus, Fagius, jiinfworth, &c. and could this new tranflation, though it is wholly borrowed from Gataker^ be juftified, it would be fo far from militating againft, that it would rather cftablifh the doftrine we contend for ; for, if God difapproves of outrage and vexation againft his people by others, he himfelf will give them none ; or^ in other words, he fees no fin in them fo as to punifh them himfelf: moreover, if this text was out of the queftion, the doftrine we plead for will ftand its ground, we are not in fuch poverty and diftrefs; for befides Jer. 1. 20. which has been produced already, though this writer takes no notice of it, we have many others which contain the fame truth; keP/alm xxxii. i. and Ixxxv. 2. and 1. 2. and li. 7. i John t. 7. Cant. iv. 7. Ezek. xvi. 14. Ifai. xliii. 25. and xliv. 22. Col. i. 21, 22. and ii. 10. Rev. iii. 18. and xir. 5. VII. We are now come to the laft thing in the debate, the ordinance of Bap- tifm. What is faid upon this point may be reduced to thefe two heads, the fub- ^dl;s and the mode. 1. The fubjedbs. The probability of the Jews baptizing the children of Gen- tile profelytes ; of the apoftles underftanding and executing their commiffion, in conformity to their Jewifh notions and cuftoms ; and of the early baptifm of infants in the chriftian church, this writer thinks is ground fufficient for the pradtice "", that is, of infant-baptifm. But is it probable that there was fuch a praflice among the Jews, before the coming of Chrift, to baptize their profelytes and their children? fince there is not the leaft hint of it, nor any allufion to ic in the writings of the Old Teftament, in which difpenfation this praftice is faid to obtain •, nor in the apocryphal writings of the Jews ; nor in the writings of the New Teftament ; nor in thofe of Philo and Jofephus, both Jews, and well verfed in the cuftoms of their nation ; nor even in the Mi/na itfelf, a colledtion of their traditions ; the authors and compilers of that have not the leaft fyllable of this praftice in it. This man, therefore, has either miftook his authors, or they have milled him: the truth of the matter is, this rite is firft mentioned, not in the Mifna, but the Gemara, a work later than the other, of fome hundred years afterChrift: and was this cuftom probable, is the probability of it a fufficient ground to eftablifti fuch a pradlice upon, as a New-Teftament-ordinance .-' Is it probable that the apoftles underftood and executed their commilTion according to their Jewifh notions and cuftoms, though it does not appear, nor is it pro- bable ' biiiw'2 bay n^-i io- i6o AN ANSWER TO THE bable that they had any fuch as this ; and not rather according to the plain mind and meaning of their Lord and Mafter, who by his example and dodrine had taught them both how, or in what manner, and whom they fhould bap- tize ? what probability is there of the early baptifm of infants in the chriftian church ? and, if there was, is that a fufficient foundation ? Should there not be a plain proof for what claims the name of an ordinance, a pofitive inftitution, a part of religious worfhip ? does it appear that any one infant was baptized by John, by Chrift, or his orders, or by his apoftles, or in the two firfl: centuries ? There was a talk about infant- baptifm in the /i'/ri century, but it will be diffi- cult to prove a fingle faft, even in that; and if it could be proved, would this juftify a pradlice that has neither precept nor precedent in the word of God ? But it feems it was agreeable to the Jewifh cuftoms, to admit profelytes and their children by circumcifion, and as foon as capable, to inftrudl them in religion" ; and that thejewifli children were entered into their church by circumcifion, and fo baptifm is the only fign of admiffion into the chriftian church. To which I an- fwcr, as to Jewifh cuftoms, we have feen already what foundation there is for them, or probability of them ; and as for the Jewifti church, it was national, and the children of the Jews, as foon as born, before they were circumcifed, belonged unto it, and therefore were not entered by circumcifion. The inftancc produced by this man clearly proves it -, for the little children reprefented in Deut. xxix. II, 12. as entering into God's covenant, and belonging to the con- gregation oilfnul, were not as yet circumcifed, ktjojhua v. 5. and confequent- ly could not be entered this way. Nor is baptifm any admiffion, or a fign of admifilon of perfons, infants, or adult, into a vifible church of Chrift -, perfons may be baptized, and yet not admitted into a church : what vifible church of Chrift was the eunuch admitted into, when he was baptized, or his baptifm a fign of his admiffion into ? 2. The mode of it. That there is any efficacy in baptifm, to regenerate per- fons, take away fin, or make men more holy, is what is never afTerted by us ; nor do we think that a quantity of water is of any confequence on that account : we affirm it to be declarative znd Jignijicaiive of the death, burial, and refurrec- tion of Chrift -, for which reafon we contend for the mode of immerfion, as be- ing fo, and only fo. The wafhing a part, the principal part of the body, this author thinks ° may ftand for the whole. The inftance with which he fupports this, is in Exod. xxiv. 8. His fenfe of that pafl^age is, that not the people, but the pillars were fprinkled •, which, he imagines, muft appear to every man in his fenfes : though, according to his own account, it did not fo appear to fome, who thought the twelve young men were fprinkled, inftead of the people ; and though Part II. p. 113. • Ibid. p. 110, HI. o BIRMINGHAM DIALOGUE -WRITER, Part II. ,6i though rejedled by the learned Rivet, and others; yea, though Mofes, and the author of the epiftle to iht Hebrews, fay not a word of fprinkling the pillars, but affirm that the people were fprinkled. And if this man was in his fenfes, he would have feen which of thefe fenfes would have fcrved his purpofe beft ; for if not the people, but the pillars were fprinkled in their ftead, then not a parr, ^ principal part, nor any pare of them, were fprinkled; and fo no inftance of fprinkling or wafhing a part of the body for the whole. He is now brought to allow that fprinkling, or wafliing the face, does not fignify the death, burial and rcfurreflion of Chrift ; though dipping the face or head in water, may do it. But why not go further, and rather fay, dipping the whole body in water does it? fince we are faid \.obz buried withC\\r\^ in baptijm, Rom.vi. i. Col.ii. 12. which men of fenfe and learning allow to refer to the ancient mode of baptizino- by immerfion. Baptifm is never aWcd circumcijion ; nor are perfons in baptifm faid to be crucified av'/i' Chrift, but to be baptized into his death, and to be buried with him; and which can be reprefented by no other mode than that of immer- fion, or covering the whole body in water. But, after all, this way muft ftill be infinuated to be unfafe, and indecent; and the old rant and calumny conti- nued, againft the cleareft evidence, and fuUeft conviflions to the contrary. Thus have I confidered and replied to the material things objedled to the doc- trines before in debate. One might have expefted, that, in th\s Second Part, the author would have proceeded on fome new fubjefts. This, to be fure, can- not be the Second Part he formerly intended. Perhaps his long harangue on the freedom of fpeech, and liberty of writing, is to pave the way for what he has farther to communicate. I am very defirous he fhould fpeak out freely, and write all he has to fay. What it is he has farther in defign, does not yet appear : we muft wait patiently, and in the mean time bid him adieu, until he obliges us with his Third Part. [ Not(, The pages in the foregoing marginal Notes in general refer to the Oftavo Edition, ] Vol. II. Y THE liz THE MORAL NATURE AND FITNESS THE MORAL NATURE AND FITNESS OF THINGS CONSIDERED. Occasioned bt Some Passages in the Reverend Mr Samuel Chandler's Sermon, lately preached to the Societies for the Reformation of Manners. NOTHING is more frequently talked of in this enlightened age, this age of politenefs, reafon and good fenfe, than the nature and fitnejs of things ; or, the reafon and nature of things-, phrafcs, which to many, at leaft, that ufc ihcm,' are unmeaning and unintelligible founds; and ferve only as a retreat, when they have been fairly beaten out of an argument by thefupetior force and evidence of divine revelation. It may cafily be obfcrved, how glibly, and wiih what volubility of fpeech, with what a fagacious look, and an air of wifdom, thefe words arc pronounced by fome, who, when afked, what things are meant ? what the nature of them ? and, what the fitnefs which arifes from them ? are at once filenced and confounded. This mud be underftood of your lower-fized folks, who take up thefe fayings from others, and ufc them as parrots, by rote. It muft be prefumed, that their learned mafters, from whom they have received them, better underftand them, and are capable of explaining the meaning of them -, among thefe, the Reverend Mr Samuel Chandler makes a very confider- able figure; whofe Sermon, lately preached to the Societies for the Reformation of Manners, lies before me; upon which I (hall take leave to make fome few ftrifturcs. This Gentleman, not content to aflcrt, that the difference between moral good and evil is certain and immutable, which will be readily granted ; further affirms, that " this arifes from the nature of things ; is ftriflly and pro- *' perly eternal; is prior to the will of God, and independent of it; is the inva- " riable and eternal rule of the divine conduft, by which God himfelf regulates «' and determines his own will and conduft to his creatures; the great reafon and " meafure of all his adlions towards them, and is the fupreme original, univer- " fal, and moft perfcft rule of aftion to all rcafonable beings whatfocver ; and " that OF THINGS CONSIDERED. , 5j «' that there are certain fitnefles and unfitnefles of things arifino' from hence, " which are of the fame nature with this diftindtion ; and that this difference, " and thefe ficnefles and unficnefTes are as eafily difcerned by mankind, as the " differences between any natural and fenfible objcds whatever." One would be tempted to think, if all this is true, that this fame nature and ficnefs of things is Deity, and rather defcrves the name of God, than he whom we call fo ) fince it is prior to, and independent of his will-, is the unerring rule of adlion to him, and the fupreme, univerfal, and mofl: perfcft rule to all rcafonable beings whatfoever ; and that itfelf is not diredted and influenced bv any rule or law from any other. Surely that mufl: be God, which is poffeffed of fuch perfeftions, as neccffary exiftcnce, eternity, independence, fupreme power and authority over all reafonable beings. And if this is the cafe, we ought to worfhip and give homage to this Deity ; this fhould we invoke, blcfs and adore ; and not him, who, under the Oid-Tcftament-dil'pefifation, went by the name of the God of Jfrael, or the God oi Abraham, Ifaac, and Jacob; and who, in the New Tcftament, is fliled the God andFatha- of cur LcrdJefusChriJl. To this eternal and invariable rule fliould we yield a chearful and univerfal obe- dience, and not to the law and will of God -, unlcfsthat (liall appear to be di- rc(5tcd and conducted by this fupreme and mod perfcft rule of adlion. But bclorc we fall down, and proftratc ourfclvcs to this new deity, and pay our de- voirs to it, it will be proper, firft to examine the feveral magnificent thincrs which are predicated of it ; and begin with, I. The original of it. The moral nature and fitnefs of things is reprefented as fomcthing to be confidered abftrafted from God, and independent of his will, and fo confequcntly as neceffarily exifling ; for whatever exifls inde- pendent of the divine will, neceffarily exifts, or cxiRs by ncceffity of nature : and could this be made out, that the moral nature and fitnefs of things ne- ceffarily exifls independent of the will of God, it mufl: be allowed to be a deity indeed ; for nothing exifls by neceffity of nature, independent of the will of God, but the being and perfc6lions of God : either therefore this nature and fitnefs of things is fomething in God, orfomething without him; if it is fomc- tiiing in him, it mufl be a perfeiftion of his nature, it muft be himfelf ; and therefore ought not to be confidered as abflraded from him, if it is fome- thing without him, apart from him, which exifls independent of his will, that is, neceffarily ; then there muft be two neceffarily exifting beings, that is, two Gods. It is faid ', that " the difference between moral good and evil, virtue " and vice, as between darknefs and light, and bitter and fweet, is a difference " not accidental to, hui founded in the nature of the /ij/w^j themfclvcs; not mere- " ly the refult of the determination and arbitrary will of another, but which Y 2 . *' the • Sermon, p. 5. 1^4 THE MORAL NATURE AND FITNESS " ihe very ideas of the things themfelves do really and necedarily include." Or, as it is fli'twhere exprefled ^ " the diftindion between moral good and evil doth " (o arife out of the nature of the things tbemfelves, as not to be originally and " properly the mere effect of the divine order and will^ fo as that it never would " have been, had notGoJ willed and commanded it to be." But from whence do things morally good proceed .'' Do they not come from God, from whom is every good and perfeSf gift ? As all natural and fupernatural good comes from him, the fountain of ail goodnefs ; lb all moral good takes its rife from him, and the moral perfeftion.s of his nature-, which, and not the nature of things, are the rule of his will, determinations and a6lions. Who puts this nature into things, by which they are morally good, but the God of nature, of his own will and pleafure -, and, what fettles the difference between thofe things, and what are morally evil, but the nature and will of God ? Or the will of God, which moves not in an arbitrary way, but agreeable to the moral perfeftions of his nature. As for things morally evil, which lie in a defeft of moral good, are a privation of it, and an oppofition to it, though they are not of God, nor does he put that evil nature into them that is in them, for he cannot be the au- thor of any thing that is finful -, yet thefe things become fo by being contrary to his nature and will. The difference between moral good and evil lies in, and the fitneffcs and unfitneffes of thefe things are no other than, the agreement and difagreement of them with the nature and will of God •, and whatfoever ideas we have of thefe things, and of their different natures, fitnefles and unfitneffes, we have from God ; who of his own will and pleafure has implanted them in us, and in which we are greatly affifted in this prefent ftate of things by his re- vealed will ; confifting of dodrines and inftruftions, rules and precepts, found- ed in, and agreeable to the pcrfedions of his own nature. Befides, if the dif- ference between moral good and evil is founded in, and arifes from the nature of the things themfclves, and is not originally and properly the effeft of the di- vine order and will, then it cannot be faid to be, as it is % 2. Striftly and properly eternal-, for thefe things mufl: exift, and this nature muft be in them, from whence this difference arifes, ere there can be this diffe- rence •, wherefore if the things themfclves arc not ilriftly and properly eternal, then the nature of them is not ftriftly and properly eternal •, and confequently the difference which is founded in, and arifes from that nature, is not ftridly and properly eternal. Moreover, nothing is ftridly and properly eternal but God. If the nature and fitnefs of things is eternal -, if there are eternal, cvcr- lafting, and unchangeable fitneffes of things, thofe fitneffes mufl: bcGod. Should it be faid, as it b ^ that *• fuppofing the eternal and immutable exiftence of " God * Sermon, p. lo. • Sermon, p. 6. * Ibid. p. to. OF THINGS CONSIDERED. 16 D " God, the ideas of thefe things (good and evil, virtue and vice) mud have -»' been the fame in his all-perfeft mind from eternity, as they now are -, and have " appeared to his underftanding with the fame oppofition and contrariety of *' nature to each other, as they do now — and of confequence, the diftinftion " between moral good and evil is as eternal as the knowledge of God himfelf, " that is, flriftly and abfolutely cternaP; — and that before ever any created " being received its exiltence, God had within himfelf the ideas oi zW pojfible "■ futurities; of the nature of all beings that Ihould afterwards have life; of their " fcveral relations to himfelf, and one another-, and faw what fitneffes, obliga- " tions and duties, would, and muft rcfult from, and belong to creatures thus " formed and confl;itutcd^ —which fitne/Tcs orunfitnefrcs were eternally prefenc " to the all-comprehenfive mind of God, and as clearly difcerned by him, as the " natural differences of the things themfelves, from whence they flow ^" It will be allowed, that there is in God an eternal knowledge of all things pofTible and future; he knows all things poffible in the perfedtion of his almighty power, who could, if he would, bring them into being; but then this knowledcre of his does not arife from, and depend upon the nature of the things themfelves, which may be, or may not be ; but it arifes from his own all-fufficiency. Poffible futurities, ot pofftble fijall-be's, I do not underftand. "What foever is pofTible may- be, and it may not be; but what is future (hall be, and fo not barely pofTible, but certain. A pofTible futurity feems to be a contradidlion. God knows what- ever is pofTible for himfelf to do ; that is, he knows what his power can do j and alfo what his will determined to do, or (hall be done : the former is called poffible, the \ai:er future. God's knowledge reaches to both, but then every thing that is poflible is not future. All thatGod knows might be accomplilheti by his power, he has not determined that it fliall be ; and whatfoever he has de- termined fhall be, is future, and ccafes to be barely pofTible. God fees and knows all things future, in his own will, purpofes and decrees ; for as it is the power of God that gives pofTibility to things pofTible ; it is the will of God that- gives futurity to. things that fhall be. SoGod faw, knew, and had within him- felf the ideas of the nature of all beings that fhould afterwards have life; their fcveral relations to himfelf, and one another ; and all fitneffes, obligations, and duties belonging to them; becaufe he had determined within himfelf to bring fuch creatures into being, beflow fuch natures upon them, put them into fuch a relation to himfelf, and others; and make'fuch and fuch duties' fitting for them, and obligatory upon them.. In this fenfe it will be readily granted, that the ideas of all things that come to pafs in time, were in his all-perfeft mind from- eternity, as they now are ; becaufe he determined within himfelf they fhould come • Sermon, p. 7. ' Ibid. p. 8. * Ibid. p. 14.. i66 THE MORAL NATURE AND FITNESS come topafs in the manner they now do. The fitneffes and unfitnefles of things were eternally prefent to his all-comprehcnfive mind, becaafe he willed they Ihould be, either by his efficacious or pcrmiffive will. But then the eternity of thefe things in this fenfe, or the eternal difference of good and evil, as found- ed upon the eternal knowledge of God, arifing from, and depending upon his own will, ftrongly militates againft what is further faid of this nature and ficnefs of things, or of the difference between moral good and evil, as that it is '', 3. Prior to the will of God, and independent of it. By the will of God is meant either his will of purpofe, and is what the fcripture calls, The counfel of his will'; or will of precept, which is that fyftem of moral laws, God has given to rational creatures as the rule of their aftions. The Gentleman I am attend- ing to, ufes the phrafe fomecimes in one fenfe, and fomecimes in another-, and fometimes takes in both in one and the fame paragraph -, and plainly fuggefts, that this difference is prior to the will of God, and independent of it, taken in either fenfe -, his words are thefe* ; *' this difference did originally and eter- " nally fubfift in the mind of God, as certainly as the difference between light •' and darknefs ; and was in idea ever prefent with him, before ever it became *' the law of bis creatures, and appeared to them as the matter of his command " and will; and is itfelf that neccffary and invariable rule, by which God him- *' felf regulates and determines his own will and condufb to his creatures ; and " which, therefore, as a rule of adtion to himfelf, muft be fuppofcd to be inde- " pendent of, and prior to, not the exiftence of God, which is abfolutely eter- *< nal, b\i\. to the will oi iht eternal God, and to be, indeed, the great reafon " and meafure of all his actions towards his creatures." Now, though it {hould be admitted, that things are fit and proper, juft and good, antecedent to the revealed will of God, or his will of command ; and that God wills thefe things, that is, commands them, becaufe they are fit and proper, juft and good ; and not that they are fo becaufe he commands them; though one fhould think, what- ever God commands muft be fit and proper, juft and good, for that very rea- fon, whether we can difcern any other reafon or no, becaufe he commands it ; fmce he can command nothing contrary to his nature, and the moral perfcdtions of it; yet, neverthelefs, thefe muft be fubfequent to the iccret will of God, or the counfel of his will, as that is within himfelf determining, fettling, conftitut- ing, or permitting the order and fituation of things, their natures, beings, and relations to himfelf and others ; from whence the fitneffes and unfirneffcs of things, and the difference of moral good and evil are faid to arife. Whatever may be faid for the independency of thefe things on the will of God, they can never be prior to it: For if the produdion of creatures into being is owing to the will of * Sermon, p. 11. ' Ephes. i. 11. * Sermon, p. 10, u. OF THINGS CONSIDERED. 167 of God, and follows upon it -, if the fcveralxekiions they ftand in to one ano- ther are folely of his appointment and forming, then furely what is fit, or not fit to be done, in fuch a fituation, muft be fixed by, and be the reiult of his own will, as determining them according to the moral perfeftions of his nature; which determinations of his fecret will being revealed, become the law of his creatures j and being fo, this law is the fureft rule of judgment to them, with refpefl to the difference of moral good and evil -, what lays the ftrongeft obli- gation upon them to do the one and avoid the other; ahd fo muft be the beft rule of action to them. Mr Chandler himfclf owns ', that " God might have " formed other creatures than what he hath -, or produced fome, or all of thofe ♦' which now exift, in a different manner from what he aftually hath done ; he " might, for inftance, have ftockcd our earth with inhabitants at once, and " formed them in the fame manner as he did our firft parents. And of conl'c- " quence, as the prefent frame of things is owing to the wifdom, the good plea- " fure and will of God, fo the fitneffes of things which now aftually take place, " and that particular fyftem of moral virtue which mankind are obliged to re- " aard, and conform themfelves to, muft, as far as it is a conftitution of things " aftually exifting, be relblved into the fame good pleafure and will of God." Now, as the formation'of creatures, and their produdlion in this or the other manner, entirely depends on the will of God, and according to the variations of them the fitncfles of things muft have altered; there would not have been the fame fitneflcs and unfitncffes, obligations and duties; fo it wholly depend- ed on the will of God whether he would create any or no; and if he had never formed any creature, in any manner whatever, as he might not have done, if he would, where had been this eternal nature and fitnefs of things ? As there- fore the formation dt creatures follows upon, and is owing to the will of pod, the nature and fitnefs of things, with rcfpeftto thefe creatures, cannot be prior, but muft befubfequent to the will of God. Yea, this fame Gentleman fays", that " the will of God is not any thing diftin£l from the everlafting fitneffes of " things, but included in them, and indeed a neceflary and cffcntial branch »' of them." If therefore the will of God is not diftinft from them, is included in them, and a neceffary and eflential branch of them ; then the nature and fit- nefs of things is not without the will of God, is not prior to it, and independent of it. And though this fame writer boldly aflerts in one place", that the cer- tain and immutable difference of things is entirely independent of the will of God ; yet in other places he feems to ftagger a little, and fays", that this dif- tinftion is not originally and properly the mere cffcft of the divine order and will, and is not merely the refult of the determination and arbitrary will of another; as ' Sermon, p. 15. ■ Ibid. p. 22. » Ibid. p. 9. * Ibid. p. 10, 5. ._J '16^ THE MORAL NATURE AND FITNESS as if ic was fo in pare, or in fome fenfe, though not wholly and entirely fo. He fcems to be fearful, that if the didindtion of moral good and evil, and the fic- nefles and unfitncfies of things, are placed to the will of God, and made to de- pend upon it, the confequencc may be, that thefe things will not continue the fame''; vice may be virtue, and virtue vice-, "impiety, injuftice, and cruelty, «' may be fubflituted in the room of piety, juftice, and charity-," and, "that " there can be no poiTible certainty that God fhall always will that which is now *« good, in oppofuion to what is now called evil •, but the one or the other, as " caprice and humour Jhall dire^ him, which immediately becomes either good " or evil-, and on the contrary, evil or good, for no other reafon, but becaufe *' he, without reafon^ wills them to be fo." Not to take notice of the inde- cency, and irreverence of thefe exprefTions -, the infinuations and fuggeftions of inftability and change in the divine will, are groundlcfs and unrealbnable, fince the will ofGod is as immutable as himfelf -, and though it is not determined by the intrinfic difference of things without him, yet it is deterniined mvaria- bly by the rcdlitude of his nature -, he cannot determine, or do any thing con- trary to his moral perfections -, he cannot deny himfelf. There is much more reafon to fear thefe things -may change, if the diftincftion between them lies in fthe nature and fitnefs of things, of which not only fallible men, but finful men, men prone to vice, are the only judges; who being either led into a falfe way of reafoning, or influenced by their interefts and pafTions, may put *' evil for " good, and good for evil." Moreover, why fhould not the diflindlion of moral good and evil be attributed to, and confidered as dependent upon the unalterable will of God, fince all moral good flows from him as the fountain of it ? Nor could there have been any moral evil withouc^^his permifilve will ; even as the produdtions of light and darknefs, of bitter and fweet, are the efFcfls of his will, and plcafure. Light and darknefs are his own formation; I form the light, and create darknefs; I make peace, and create evil; I the Lord do all thefe things'*. It was he that faid, by his almighty power, and according to his own will. Let there be light, and there was light. What difference fhould we have been capable of difcerning between light and darknefs, if God, of his own pleafure, had not divided the light from the darknefs, as he did ? Nor have we any idea of the diftindlion of thefe things, but what that God of his will has .given to us, who called the light day, and the darknefs night '. As natural light and darknefs are of God, and the divifion between them is made by him ; fo moral light and moral darknefs are, the one by his effeftive, the other by his permiflive will ; and the difference between them fettled by the determinations of his unchangeable mind, agreeable to the perfeftions of his nature. It is he that ' Sermon, p. 13, 14. < Ifai. xlv. 7. ' Gen. i. 3, 4. OF THINGS CONSIDERED. 169 that has made bitter and fweet, and of his own will and pleafure has put thefe different qualities in things; the fitnefles and unfitneflrs of which are their agree- ment and difagreement with thofe laws and rules of nature, which God, of his own will, has placed in fenfitive beings-, and even fo moral fitnefles and unfic- nefles are their agreement and difagreement with thofe moral laws, which are the determinations of God's will, according to the rectitude of his nature; which of his own pleafure he infcribcd on the heart of man in his creation, and has fince delivered in writing, as the rule of his aftions. To all which I only add, in oppofition to this notion, that if this diftinflion of moral good and evil, this moral nature and fitnefs of things, is prior to, and independent of the will of God, it muft be prior io the firjl caufe, which is a contradiftion in terms ; for the will of God is the firfl: caufe of all things ; nothing in the whole compafs of being exifts without the will of God, but his own being and perfedlions ; and if this is co-eternal with God, and is as independent of his order or will as his own being, perfeftion, and happinefs ; it muft, as has been already obferved, ncceflarily exift, and confequently, muft be God ; yea, fupcrior to him whom wc call fo ; fince, • 4. It is faid ', that this " is itfclf that necefiTary, invariable, and eternal rule, " by which God himfcif regulates and determines his own will and conduft to " his creatures, — is the great reafon and meakire of all his atftions towards his " creatures,— is the one certain and unerring rule of God himfcif';" than which nothing is more contrary to divine revelation, which affures us, that our God is in the beavers ; he bath done 'xhatfoever be f leafed " ; that he works all things after the counfel 0/ bis own will ' ; and, that he does according to his will in the army of the heavens, and among the inhabitants of the earth >'. Whereas, according to this notion, not the will of God, but fomething prior to it, and independent of it, is the necclfary, eternal, invariable, unerring rule, reafon, and mcafureofall his actions, towards his creatures. This Icems fomething like the Stoical fate and ncccftity, which give laws to God and man, and equally bind and oblige both'; though fometimcs the Stoics" indeed confiJer fate, and the nature of things, not as things diftindl from God, but as being himfcif, his own will ; in which their notion is greatly to be preferred to what is now advanced. Be it fo that the moral nature and fitnefs of things is a rule of aclion to men ; that which is a rule to them cannot in every thing be thought to be fo to God ; for inftance, let it be admitted, that it is agreeable to the nature and fitnefs of things, and to the original difference between moral good and evil, that one man fliould Vol. II. Z noc » Sermon, p. 11. t Ibid. p. 19. ■ Pfalm cxv. 3. « Ephes. i. 11. 1 Dan. iv. 35. » Vid. Lipf. Phyfiolog. Stoic. Diflcrt. 12. p. 62. » Ibid. Differt. 5. p. 23, 24. & Manudua. ad Stoic. Philof. Diflcrt. 16. p 1S6, 187. 170 THE MORAL NATURE AND FITNESS not take away the life of another, and that law, Thou /halt not kill, is cftablifhed upon this certain and immutable diftinftion and fitnefs, and fo is a rule of aftion to men ; yet this is no rule to God, nor any meafure of his aflions ; who, as he gives, and has power over, the lives of men, can take them away at his plcafure ; as well by ordering one man to flay another, as Abraham to facrifice his fon ^, and the Ifraelites to flay " every man his brother, every man his com- " panion, and every man his neighbours when there fell that day, and in thac " manner, about three thoufand men •," as by fending a fever, a dropfy, or any other diftemper. Again, let it be allowed, that it is one branch of this moral nature and fitnefs of things, that one man fhould not take away the property of another i and that that law is founded upon it. Thou Jhall not fteal : yet God is not bound by this law ; for, as the earth is the Lord's, and the fulnefs thereof ^^ he difpofes of it as he plcafes, and takes away that which was one man's property, and gives it to another; which he has done in ten thoufand inftances of provi- dence ; and what is more, and full to our purpofe, he could, and did order the Ifraelites to " borrow of the Egyptians jewels of filver and of gold, and " raiment," whereby they were fpoiled % and plundered of their property. To fay no more, if this nature and fitnefs of things is a rule of adlion toGod, it muft be fomething both before him, and above him ; it muft be his fuperior ; fince it muft beconfidered as giving laws for the regulation and determination of his will and condudt to his creatures; though, as this writer well fays', " he hath •* no fuperior, can receive laws from none, nor have any external power to *' oblige and conftrain him." And what he further adds is right, " that he »» hath a reafon and rule of adtion within himfelf, is as evident as that he ever " a£ts at all ; and as certain, as that he will always aft wifely and well." Upon which I would obferve then, not any thing without him is'a rule unto him ; not the nature and fitnefs of things, as of an abftradt confideration from him ; as prior to, and independent of his will; nor is it, as is fuggcfted, his all-comprehen- fivc knowledge of the nature of things, the relation beings ftand in to him and one another, the fitneffes and unfitnefTes which belong to them, the meafure and degree of their powers and faculties, and all the feveral circumftanccs of their being ; fince thefe are thfc determinations of his will, and his knowledge of them arifes from thence; he knows all thefe things will be, becaufe he has determined that they fhall be. It remains then, that nothing can be a rule to God but himfelf, his own nature, and the perfeftions of it. In all things of a moral nature his moral perfcftions within himfelf arc the rule of his will and conduft. But, 5. Let * Gen. xxii. 2. « Exod. xxxil 27. * Pfalm xxiv. i. • Exod.jui. 36. ' SeriaOD, p. ig. • OF THINGS CONSIDERED. 171 5. Let us next examine, whether this difliniflion of moral good and evil, as founded in the nature of things, together with the original and unalterable fic- neflcs arifing from it, is the fupreme, original, univerfal, and moft perfed rule of a(51:ion to all reafonable beings whatfoever, as is alTerted ^. If this be true, all laws of God and men are to be difregarded -, and indeed, they are all plainly fuperfeded by it -, for if this is the fupreme, original, and univerfal rule to all reafonable beings, then all inferior, fubordinate, and particular laws as all the after-laws of God and men mufl: be thought to be, merit no regard ; at lealt are no further to be regarded than as they may be thought to acrree with and are reducible to this grand one -, and if it is the mojl perfeEl rule, then certainly there is no need of another. Yea, it is affirmed, that " it is impolTible that " there can be any rule of aftion more excellent in itfclf, or more worthy the " regard of reafonable beings." What need then have we of the law of God ? This may lead us to queftion, whether indeed there is any law binding upon us ; at leaft it tends to weaken our obligation to duty, as arifing from the will of God. Indeed we are told ", that '■'■the will of God is a rez] znd immiaaile " obligation upon us, to which we fhould always pay the highefl: deference and " fubmifTion." What, the i^/g-Zj^/? deference and fubmifTion ? No furely, that mud be paid to the tnoji perfeSi rule, that rule which regulates and determines the will of God itftlf. And truly, this real and immutable obligation of the will of God I AJpon us, is immediately brought under the general notion of the original fit- 1 nefles of things, and is not allowed to be an obligation of a diftinft nature and i kind from them. So that as all morility is founded in the nature and fitnefs of ; things, our obligation to it arifes from the fame, and our obedience and dif- obedience to be confidered as an agreement or difagreement with that fcheme i of things. Sin was therefore wrongly defined by our forefathers ', who, in j anfwer to that queftion, " What is fin ? " fay, " Sin is any want of conformity i " unto, or tranlgrefTion of any Jaw of God given as a rule to the reafonable I " creature." They fiiould have faid. Sin is any want of conformity unto, or | tranfgrcfrion of the nature and fitnefs of things, which is the unerring rule of ! God himfclf, and the moft perfeft one to all reafonable creatures. How the I apoftlc John himfclf will come off, I fee not, who fays, that_/?« is the tranfgrejfion I cf the law^, unlefs, by fome dextrous management, infteadofthe law, ftiould i be put the nature and fitnefs of things. But furely, to derive moral obligation \ from the will of God, muft be of more ufe and fcrvice to engage perfons in (the pradice of moral virtue, than to derive it from the nature and fitnefs of things, of which men themfclves muft be judges. A rule of fitnefs may be a z 2 guide * Sermon, p. 19, 20. * Ibid. p. zi. • The Aflembly'i larger Catechifm. Queft. 24. '' i John iii. 4. 172 THE MORAL NATURE AND FITNESS guide in fome cafes -, but the law of a fupcrior, who has a right and power of enforcing it by fanftions, properly obliges. In the other cafe, there is nothing to hope for in confequence of agreement with it, and nothing to fear by ftraying from it J fo that this immutable, and eternal obligation of moral virtue, will be found to be very little, if any at all, as derived from the nature and fitnefs of things-, at mod cannot rife higher than mens perception of the nature and fitnefs of things ; for the nature and fitnefs of things can be no further a guide unto men, or obliging upon them, than as known by them ; and if God had not made fome notification of his will, with refpeft to moral good and evil, by giving us laws' as the rule of moral conduft, our perception of thefe things would, in many cafes, have been very deficient in the prefcnt ftate of things ; and confcquently moral fitnefs, as perceivable by us, would have been a defec- tive rule, and not that univerfal and mod perfeft rule of aftion it is affirmed to be. But we are told ', 6, That " this difference between moral good and evil, and the fitnefTcs and « unfitnelTes which they ncceflarily infer, is as eafily and certainly to be dif- " ccrncd by mankind, as the differences between any natural or fenfible objedl «» whatever." The natural and fenfible objects particularly referred to, are light and darknefs, bitter and fweet ; which fuppofe natural and fenfible capacities and powers, fuitcd to the difcernment of fuch natural and fenfible objefts ; otherwifc they cannot be eafily and certainly difcerned : A man blind from his binh, will not be able to diftinguifh between light and darknefs ; and one whofc natural taftc is vitiated, will not eafily and certainly difcern between fwect and bitter. So likewife there mufl be moral capacities and powers in men, fuited to the difcernment of moral good and evil ; if thefe fhould be wanting, or impaired and corrupted, the difference between moral good and evil will not be fo eafily and certainly difcerned. Now the moral capacity of man is greatly impaired and corrupted in the prefent ftate of things; men deftitutc of the light of grace, arc darknefs itfdf'^; the underjianding of men, even in things moral, is greatly darkened by fin, and they are alienated from the life of God \ averfe to living foberly, righteoufly and godly, through the ignorance that is in thenty becaufe of the blindnefs of their hearts ". The moral light of nature is very dim, and has (hone out very faintly even in thofe who have made the grcaieft advances in moral fcience, deftitute of a divine revelation, and without the affiftance of God's grace. The moral tafte of man is vitiated -, he favours the things of the fielh; rclilhes fin, which he rolls in his mouth, and. hides under his tongue, as a fweet morfcl ; fo that through the blindnefs of his heart, and the viciofity of bis tafte, he is far from a clear difcerning of the difference of moral good and evil, ' Sermon, p. J J, ■ Ephei. v. 8. ■ EpheJ. iv. i8. OF THINGS CONSIDERED. ,73 eviJ, of the fitneflcs and unfitnefles of things; of the amiablenefs of virtue, and the uglinefs of vice. But, man is reprefented in a quite different light, as far from having his moral powers and capacity in the leaft impaired or corrupted by fin. It is faid ', that " nature itfelf hath fccmed to have been friendly to " mankind in thjs refpefl, which hath implanted a kind oi conjlitutional abbor- " r^«f/ny3 from thy tefiimonies, that thou haft founded them for ever. Ver. 160. Thy word is true from the beginning; or as the words J~13S 1">2"I til'MT may be rendered, The beginning of thy word is truth, and every one of thy righteous judgments is for ever. All which indeed clearly prove the perpetuity of the moral law, its immutable obligation upon us, the veracity and juftice of God ; which appear in it, and will abide by it, and continue with it, to defend the rights, and fecure the honours of it -, but, what is all this to the nature and fitnefs of things ? or. How do thcfe pafTages prove the eternal and immutable obligation of moral virtue, as prior to, and ind-pendent of the will of God ? When thePfalmift is only (peaking of the will of God as revealed in his law and teftimonies ; from whence, and not from the narure and fitn-fs of things, he had learned of old, many years ago, the truth, righteournefs, and continuance of thein. The only fingle pafTage in the New T'cftaincnt that is produced, is, Phil. iv. 8. l-Fhatfoever things are true, whatfoever things are homfl, ■wbafoever things arejufl, what foever things are -pure, whatjoever things are lovely, whatfoever things are of good report ; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praife ; think on thefe things. That thefc exprefllons neceffarily fuppofe, and infer, that truth, honedy, juftice, and purity, are eflcntialiy different from their contrary vices, are lovely in their nature, praifc-worthy in their pradlice, and which both God and man will approve and commend, will be eafily granted ; but ftill the queftion returns, what is all this to the nature and fitnefs of things ? To the immutable and eternal obligation of moral virtue, as prior to, and in- dependent of the will of God .'' Does , the apoftle make moral fitnefs, in this fenfe, the rule of adtion, or of judgment, with refpcdt to truth, honefty, juftice, and purity, and not rather the revealed will and law of God ? The latter feems to be manifcftly his fenfe, fince he adds, thcfe things which ye have both learned and received, and heard, and feen in me, do, and the Cod of peace fhall be with you. Whence it appears, that the things he advifcs them to were fuch as he had taught them, according to the will of God, and which they had received upon that foot, and had feen praflifcd by himfclf, in obedience to it. I conclude with obferving, that this notion of the moral nature and fitnefs of things, as prior to, and independent of the will of God, feems to have a tendency to introduce and eftiablifh among us, Polytheifm, Deifm, Antinomianifm^ and Libertinifm. Vol. II. A a i. Polytheifm^ 178 THE MORAL NATURE AND FITNESS 1. Polytbeifm, or the having more gods than one. It feems to favour the ' diftinflion of a fuperior and inferior deity ; for, as has been obferved, if the mo- ral nature and fitnefs of things is eternal, does ncceflarily exift, is prior to, and independent of the will of God, and is the fupreme rule of aflion to all rea- i fonable creatures whatever, it muft be God ; yea, fince it is the unerring rule of God himfclf, by which he regulates and determines his own will, it muft be both before, and above him ; it muft be fuperior to him ; he can ena£b no law but what that is the rule and meafurc of; his will is no obligation of a dif- tinci kind from it ; he appears to have no power or authority but what is derived from it. I am forry to obferve, agreeable to this notion, how diminutively Mr C/t'i3;7^/^r fpeaks of the divine being. You read nothing throughout the whole dilcourfe of God being a leg'fiator, cnafling laws of his own will and pleafure, agreeable to the perfeftions of his nature; as armed with power and authority to enforce them, and as claiming obedience from his creatures to them, as being his w/ilj, and founded in the reflitude of his nature; but on the other hand, he is thruft down into the place of a reformer : He is indeed.called " the great re- former of mankind, and has the honour to be accounted the Head of the Societies for the Reformation of Manners in England"; though no more is allowed him in this work of reforming mankind, than what the Societies themfelvcs do; namely an " endeavouring to promote their happinefs by methods difcouraging their " vices, and exciting them to the love and practice of univerfal virtue ^" After this it is no wonder it ftiould be fuggefted, that the great defign of our bleffed Saviour's coming into the world, and the mifTion of his apoftles into it, were only the reformation and amendment of mankind ; and that there can be no other valuable end of a ftanding miniftry in the chriftian church, than to carry I on the fame defign. This ftrengthens my apprehenfion, that this notion has i a tendency to introduce, 2. Deifm, or to explode divine revelation, with all the dodrines and ordi- nances of it. And indeed, if this nature and fitnefs of things is the univerfal and mojl perfe5i rule of aftion to all reafonabje creatures whatever, then what necefTity is there, or can there pofTibly be, of a divine revelation ? This is univerfal, and comprehends every thing fit to be known and praftifed ; it is r,7oJi perfeH, and therefore nothing can be added to it ; it is as eafily difcemed as the diftindlion between light and darknefs, fweet and bitter, and therefore needs no revelation to explain and enforce it. Admitting a revelation ; the things contained in it muft be brought to this teft and ftandard, the nature and fitnefs of things, to be tried by, and judged of Let the revelation come ever fo well fupported, and the evidence of things, as they ftand in it, be ever fo clear j * Sermon, p. 40. • Ibid. p. 42, P Ibid. p. 4.0. OF THINGS CONSIDERED. 179 clear -, yet if poor, fallible, Ihort-fighted men, cannot fee the fitnefs of them, they muft be at once rejefted, and confequently the revelation icfelf. So if Bap- tifm and the Lord's Supper,- the peculiar ordinances of the chriftian revelation ; if the dodlrines of the divine perfons in the godhead ; of the decrees of God -, of the union of the two natures in Chrift ; of the expiation of fin, in a way of fatisfaftion ; of juftification by the imputed righteoufnefs of Chrift ; of the refur- jeftion of the fame body, or any other doftrines of the chriftian religion, how clearly foever they may be revealed ; yet if men do but once take it into their heads, that they do not agree with the nature and fitnefs of things, they muft be exploded ; and the next that follows, is revelation itfelf. Whether the abet- tors of this notion really defign to encourage and eftablifh Deifm, I know not; but this I am fure of, the Deifts are capable of improving it greatly to their pur- pofe. 3. yintinomianifm, or the fctting afide of the law of God as a rule of aftion, feems to be the neceflary and certain confequencc of this principle. For if the moral nature and fitnefs of things is the /upreme, original, univerfal, afiJ mcji perfeSl rule of adlion to all reafonable beings whatfoever, prior to, and inde- pendent of the will of God, then what need is there of the law of God ? or, what regard fhould be paid to it ? Since, as it is faid ^ " It is impofiible that " there can be a rule of adion more excellent in itfelf, or more worthy the regard " of reafonable beings." Now, to fet afide, and difregard the law of God, as a rule of life and converfation, or adion, is ftridlly and properly Antinomianifm. For my part, I have been traduced as zn Antinomian, for innocently aflercing, that the cflence of juftification lies in the eternal will of God ; my meaning is, that God in his all-perfefl and comprehenfive mind, had from all eternity, at once, a full view of all his eledl ; of all their fins and tranfgrelTions -, of his holy and righteous law, as broken by them, and of the compleat and perfe6l righteouf- nefs of his Son, who had engaged to be a furety for them •, and in this view of things he willed them to be righteous, through the furetifhip-rightcoufnefs of his Son, and accordingly efteemed, and accounted them fo in him -, in which will, efteem, and account, their juftification lies, as it is an immanent adt in God. By this way of thinking and fpeaking I no ways fet afide, nor in the leaft oppofe, the doftrine of juftification by faith; I afllert, that there is no knowledge of juftification, no comfort from it, nor any claim of inrercft in it, until a man believes. I abhor the thoughts of fctting the law of God afide as the rule of vvalk and converfation ; and conftantly affirm, that all that believe in Chrift for righteoufnefs, (hould be careful to maintain good works, for ne- ceflary ufes. The cry of Jndnomiani/m, upon fuch a principle as this, muft be mere noife and ftupidity. But here is a Gentleman that talks of fomething A a 2 prior 1 Serir.on, p. lo. i8o THE MORAL NATURE AND FITNESS prior to, and independent of the will of God, and antecedent to any law of his, as the fopreme, original, univerfal, and mod perfeft rule of action to reafonable beings ; as the immutable and eternal obligation of moral vinue, or from whence moral obligation is derived ; whereby all authority on God's part, and all obedience on ours, are at once entirely deftroyed. One fliould think, for the future, that not 7^/^« G;7/, b\ii Samuel Chandler, muft be reckoned the Antino- mian. 4. Libertinifm is another confequence, which, it may be juftly feared, will follow upon this notion-, for if men can once eftablifli fuch a principle, that fome- thing prior to, and independent of the will ofGod, is the rule of aflion to them, called the nature andfitnefs of things^ of which they themfelves are the fole judges, as ihey may in confequence hereof be led on to explode divine revelation, and fct afide the law of God as a rule of adtion \ fo what through a falfe way of rea- foning, and the prevalence of their lufls, pafHons and interefts, they may per-, fuade ihemftlves, that it is moft fitting and agreeable to the nature of things, that they fliould do what makes mod for their own pleafurc and profit. This fecms to be the fource of all that wickednefs and licentioufnefs afted by the Jews in the times oi Ifaiah, which occafioned the words, the fubjeft of Mv Chandler's diicourfe. They were not the meaner fort of the people, the refufe of the na- tion ; they were the politer fort among them, that were wife in their own eyes, and prudent in their own fight ' \ men of reafon and good fenfe, as fuch vain mor- tals love to flatter one another ; they were men of bold and flrong fpirits, as men of atheiflical and dciftical principles delight to be called -, in a haughty and dar- ing manner, they faid ', let him make fpeed and hajlen his work, that we may fee it i and let the counfel of the holy One of Ifrael draw nigh and come, that we may know it. They were indeed the Deifis of that generation, the contemners of revela- tion ; who cafi away the law of the Lord, fct up fomething clfe as prior to it, and defpifed the word of the holy One of Ifrael; and fo being guided by the falfe rca- fonings of their minds, and influenced by their own lu(h, called evil good, and good evil. I would be far from fuggefting any charge of libertinifm againflMrC/^-aW/^r, or any others, who are in the fame way of thinking with him-, or that he or they are abettors of any of the above confequences -, for though principles may be charged, perfons mufl not on that account. I judge it moft unreafonable to charge perfons with holding confequences which they themfelves deny, though thefe confequences may follow never fo clearly from principles held by them. But I cannot forbear faying, that for Mr Chandler to reprefent ftage- plays, cards, and other fathionable games and divcrfions, by which the nation is ' Ifai. V. 21; • Veife 19. OF THINGS CONSIDERED. i8i is fo much debauched, as notjiri^ly criminal in themfehej, is ailing out of cha- rafter as a moral preacher -, unfuitable to a Reformation Sermon ; unferviceable to the defign of the Societies to whom he preached ; and if thcfe can be thought to be agreeable to the nature andfitnefs of things, from all fuch fitnefles the Lord deliver us ! THE NECESSITY OF GOOD WORKS UNTO SALVATION, CONSIDERED: OcCAtlOMEO BY lOMK Reflexions and Mifreprefentatlons of Dr Abraham 'Taylor, in a Pamphlet of his lately publifhed, called, An Addrefs to young Students in Divinity, by way of Caution againji fome Paradoxes, ivbich lead to DoStriftal Antinomianifm. A'^OyY. fix years ago I fent a printed letter to the Gentleman whofe name ftands in the title-page to thif, on account of fome ill ufage of myfclf, and contemptuous treatment of fome doflrines of grace -, to which he never thought fit to return an anfwer. The imprefTion of that letter quickly went off", and I have frequently been folicited by my friends to reprint that, and my Difcourfes on Jufiification ; but could never be prevailed upon to do any thing of that kind till now : for no other reafon but this ; I faw that he and his friends were not inclined to enter into a controverfy about thefe things, and I did not choofe to move it afrefh, or appear forward to it, which I thought re-printing would look like, or might be fo interpreted ; and therefore I determined to fie ftill, and only defend myfclf when any attacks were made upon me. In this re- folution I have perfified, notwithftanding the little, mean, znddifingenuous methods this Gentleman has made ufe of, to render my charadter odious among men. The let-tcr above mentioned was not written with any defign to provoke to wrath - i i82 THE NECESSITY OF GOOD WORKS wrath and anger-, nor is there a fingle fentence, that I can remember, inMt, that has any tendency that way : But it feems a grudge was conceived, which has been broiling upon his heart ever fince, and now at this diftance of time he takes up a fingle phrafe, and inveighs againfl: it with the utmoft wrath and fury ; whereby he has moft fadly verified that obfervation of the wife man, that anger rejieth in the hofom of fools. A controverfy has of late been moved, or at lead revived, by fome minifters cf the Independent denomination, about the duty of unconverted perfons to believe in Chrift, or about the nature of that faith which fuch are obliged to ; a con- troverfy in which I have had no immediate concern : And whereas it has been given out, that a book publifhcd not long ago, called, A further Enquiry after Truth, is of my writing, though another man's name ftands to it; I take this opportunity of declaring to the world, in juftice to the worthy author of it whofe name it bears, and that I may not take the credit of another man's la- bours, that there is not one fingle fentence of mine in it ; nor did I fee the au- thor when he came to town to print, nor his performance, until it was in the prefs-, who I doubt not will give a proper reply to the notice taken of him. The Gentleman I am now concerned with, has thought fit to nibble at this contro- verfy i and which he might have done without meddling with me, fince what he has broke his gall about, has no relation to that. He tells " the fociety to whom he dedicates this miferable pamphlet, that he " was glad that an oppor- «' tunity offered to declare againfl: tenets, which can anfwer no purpofe, but to " weaken mens obligation to duty and holinefs, and to lead to grofs Antino- « mianifm." But had he not an opportunity yJx ox f even years ago of declaring againfl:, not only this fingle tenet he has now taken notice of, but feveral others which he imagines has the fame tendency, and of attempting a confutation of them, had he either a head or a heart for fuch a fervice ? For fome months pafl-, we have been alarmed of this mighty work, that a learned do5lor had conceived, and that in a fiiort time the mountain would bring forth. But while we were waiting for, and cxpefting to fee the wondrous birth, out turns z filly moufe, according to the poet's words i Parturient mantes, nafcetur ridiculus mus. The particular tenet, or principle ftruck at, is, " that good works are not « neceffary to falvation, not in any fenfe ; no, not as the antecedent to the « confequent." This is called " a filthy dream, a dangerous paradox, an un- " fcriptural abfurdity ', an extravagant pofition ^ a dangerous tenet, big with " abfurdity ; a horrible blafphemy ', the fenfelefs paradox ', rude and ignorant blafphemy; * Dedication, p. 3, 4. ' Addrefj, ^e. p. 5. '' Page 6- • P«E«7- ' P»ge9- UNTO SALVATION CONSIDERED, &c. 183 V blafphemy'^; theblafphcmy invented by oneof the vileft and lewdeft heretics'; " the draff of thofe who turned the grace of God into wantonnefs; and, toclofe " all, an Antinomian paradox '." When thefe ill names and hard words arc taken out, there is very little left for me to reply unto. And whether the doftrine oppofed deferves fuch ill language, will be better judged of, when the terms of this propofition, " Good works are not neceffary to falvation," and the fenfe of it, are explained, "Qy good works are meant, not the work of fandiHcation, a principle of grace or internal holinefs, which though it is fometimes ftiled the good work ^^ yet is .not the work of man, but the work of the Spirit of God, and is therefore called $he fan5iification of the Spirit \ This I firmly believe is abfolutely nccelTary to eternal happinefs, both in infants and adult perfons, and that without it neither the one nor the other can ever fce the Lord ; fanfhifying grace being an elTen- tial and initial part of falvation, or that branch of grace and falvation which the elcdt of God and redeemed of the Lamb are firft made adually partakers of in their own perfons, in order to their enjoyment of the heavenly glory. This man muft be confcious to himfelf that I have exprelTed myfelf to this purpofe in my letter to him ; and yet he mofl: bafely infinuates that I hold, and repre- fcms me as laying, that " A conformity to him (Chrift) in holinefs, is not an- " tecedently neceffary to our reigning with him in light and glory "." If by- conformity to holinefs, is meant that internal conformity of the foul to Chrifl, the produce of divine grace in regeneration and fanfbification ; it is a thought that never entered into my head nor heart, and which I abhor. PafTive holinefs, or that holinefs of heart which makes a foul like to Chrift, and is no other than Chrift formed in it, or his image inftamped upon it, in the produdlion of which it is entirely paflive, is abfolutely neceflary to the everlafting enjoyment of him; yea, 1 believe that an outward conformity to Chrift in converfation, or adtive holinefs, external holinefs of life, is abfolutely neceffary to evidence the truth of holinefs of heart in all that are faved, who are either capable, or have an opportunity of performing it, and fhewing it forth. This writer almoft all along takes the liberty of altering the flate of the queftion before us, and in- ftcad of good works puts holinefs; thereby to fuggeft to his readers that I deny. the necef^ty of fanftification to complete happinefs ; -which as it is an iniquitous proceeding, fo it gives us a fpecimen of his fkill in the management of a regular controverfy he prates about. Nor by good works are to be underftood the inter- nal afts and exercifcs of grace, as faith, hope, and love ; for though thefe are our a6ts, under the influence of divine grace, and fo may be called our works. though » P«ge 10. * Page 12. • Page ij. ^ Phil. i. 6. ' 1 Pet. i. 2. z The&. ii. 13. » Addrefs, is'c. p. 13. i84 THE NECESSITY OF GOOD "WORKS though not with much propriety, and' as fuch good ones ; yet thefc do not ufually go by the name of good works, either in fcripture, or in the writings of good men, or in our common way of fpeaking. This I mention to flop the •mouths of fome filly cavillers, who I perceive arc fond of objefling thefe things. Though even thefe ads and exercifes of grace cannot be thought to be fo abfolutely ncceflary to falvatlon, as that it cannot podibly be without them ; fince infants, as foon as born, though they may be capable of having the prin- ciples of faith, hope and love, implanted in them, yet I apprehend they can- not be capable of adling or exercifing thefe graces : If therefore without thefe 'afts and exercifes of grace pcrfons cannot be faved, thefe mufl: Hand excluded from the kingdom of heaven. By good works, I undcrftand a feries of external holinefs; not a finglc aftion or two, but acourfe of living foberly, righteoudy, and godly ; a conftant performance of religious duties and exercifes, in the out- ward life and converfation : In this fenfe, and in this only, am I to be under- ftood in the propofition before us, and in all that I have faid, or fliall fay con- cerning it. It may be proper next to inquire what is the meaning of the word necejfary, and in what fenfe good works are fo. That they are neceflary to be done, or ought to be done, by all that iiope to be faved by the grace of our Lord Jcfus Chrift, is readily granted ;' but not in point of falvation, in order to that, or with a view to obtain it. Good works are neceflary to be done, on account of the divine ordina- tion and appointment; for fuch as arc ihcu^orkmarf/hipofGody are created in Chrijl Jefus unto good works, ivhicbGod hath before ordained, that they Jhould walk in them". They are ntct^zry,neceJJitateprecepti{^debiti,on account of the will and command of God, and of that obedience we owe toGod, both as creatures, and as new crea- tures. They are neceflary upon the fcore of obligation we lie under to him, and in point of gratitude for the numerous mercies we receive from him, and that by-them both we and others may glorify him our Father which is in heaven. They are neceflary to adorn the doiflrine of God our Saviour, to recommend religion to others, to tcftify the truth of our faith, and give evidence of the reality of internal holinefs. They are neceflary for the good of cur neighbours, and for the flopping of the mouths of our enemies. Thefe things I have more largely obferved and aflertcd in my letter to this man ; all which he conceals from his readers, and mod vilely fuggcfts to them, that I have vented the fame notion, and am of the fame opinion whh Simon Magus, Carpocrates, and their followers ; who held that falvation was through faith and love, but that other good works were not neceflary ; but were to be looked upon by men as indif- ferent in their own nature, being neither good nor evil ; nothing being natu- rally » Ephefiansii. lo. UNTO SALVATION, CONSIDERED, &c. 185 rally evil, and fo might or might not be done : Things I never thought of, and of whichi have the utmofl. abhorrence and deteflation. With what face or con- fcience could he infinuate any thing of this kind, when I have fo fully exprefled myfelf upon the ncccfTity of doing good works ? But what will not a man fay, intoxicated with pafTion? True indeed, I cannot fay that good works are necef- fary to falvation, that is, to obtain it; which is the only fenfe in which they can be faid with any propriety to be necelTary to it, or in which fuch a propo- fition can be underftood -, and which I charge as a Popifh and Socinian tenet, and hope I fliall ever oppofe, as long as I have a tongue to fpeak, or a pen to write with, and am capable of ufing either. Salvation may be confidered, either in the contrivance of it from eternity, in the mind and counfel of God; and the defignation of perfons to it; or in the impetration of it in time by Chrift; or in the application of it in effedlual vocation by the Spirit of God; or in the entire confummate enjoyment of it in heaven. In every of thefe views of it, good works are not neceflary to it : Not to the contrivance of it, and defignation of perfons to it. God, when in his infinite wifdom he drew the fcheme of falvation in Chrift, fixed upon him to be the author of it, and appointed men unto it by him, was not moved hereunto by any works of his creatures, or by any forefight of them; they were then no moving caufes with God, no conditions of falvation fixed by him, nor were as the antecedent to the confequent; no, not in the prefcience or fore-knowledge of God : As they could not go before, fo they were not fore- viewed by God, as any caufc, condition, motive, or reafon of his chufing one to falvation, and not another; For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpofe of God according to elec- tion might Jl and, not of works, but of him that caUetb°. Good works are the con- fequents and fruits of cledtion to falvation, not antecedent to it. Nor arc they neceffary to the impetration or obtaining of it in time by Chrift : Thefe did not move Chrift to engage in this work, they were no ways aftifting to him in it ; they did not help it forward, or in the leaft contribute to the performance of it, which was done ericirely and complcatly without them. Nor was it effcdcd by him on condition of mens performing good works, nor were they necefTary to it, as the antecedent to the confequent ; they did notan- tecedc or go before it, no, not in the divine mind or confideration, and in the view of Chrift ; for men were then confidered, not as having done good works, but as evil and wicked; ior while we were yet fmners, Chrijl died for hs, and ob- tained eternal redemption, by his blood ; and when we were enemies, we were re- conciled to God by the death of his Son '. Good works do not go before, but fol- low after redeeming grace : Chrift gave himfelf for his people, that ke might re- VoL. II. B B deem. • Rom. k. M. ' Rom. v. 8, 10. lU THE NECESSITY OF GOOD "WORKS >4ieem them /rem all iniquity, and purify unto bimfelf a peculiar piopk, zealous of £ood ivorks ''. Nor are they nccefiary to the application of falvation by the Spirit of God in cffcdual calling, neither as caufes or conditions, or as the antecedent to the confequenr ; they can be no moving caufes to it, nor do they come into confi- deratiSn in the divine mind, as the reafon or condition of it; they are not the rule and meafure of God's proceedure in this affair; he favcs and calls with an holy calling, not according to our works, hut according to bis own purpofe and grace % Bcfides, before regeneration, before effefbual vocation, before a principle of grace is wrought in the foiil, before the new-creation-work is formed, wbich is the initial part of falvation, or that branch of it which God's clefl are firft adlually made partakers of in their own perfons, there are properly fpeaking no good works done by them, or can be done by them ; and therefore cannot pofTibly be ante- cedent to falvation viewed in this light, but muft be confcquent to it : IVe are bis workmanfhip, created in Cbrijl Jefus unto good works '. Nor, laftly, are they neceffary to the confummate enjoyment of falvation in heaven, no, not as the an- tecedent to the confequent ; that is, as an antecedent caufe to a coiifequcnt effeft, which is the eafy, common, and natural fenfe of the phrafe ; for who can hear of an antecedent to a confequent, unlefs by way of illation, but muft at once conceive of that confequent as an effect depending upon the antecedent as a caufe ? Wherefore if good works are antecedent to glorification as a con- fequent, then glorification muft be, and will be confidered as an effefl; depend- ing upon good works as its caufe. And as it will be difKcult to fix any other fenfe upon the phrafe, and perfons are and will be naturally led fo to conceive of it, this, and this alone, is a fuf- ficient reafon why it ought to be rejefted and difufed. This man himfelf will not fay that good works are neceffary as antecedent caufes, or as antecedent conditions of falvation or glorification : Let him then tell us in what fenfe they are neceffary, as the antecedent to the confequent. His performance is An addrefs to young jludents in divinity, and he takes upon him to be a tutor and director of them in their ftudies ; but leaves them in the dark, and does not offer to inform them in what fenfe good works are neceffary, as the antecedent to the confequent. Will he fay they are neceffary as antecedent means of fal- vation ? This is all one as to fay they are neceffary as antecedent caufes, for every mean is a caufe of that of which it is a mean. Will he affert that they are neceffary, as an antecedent mcetnefs or fitncfs for heaven ? This muft be denied. How can our poor, impure and impcrfeft works, our righteoufneffes, which arc z% filthy rags, make us meet and fit for the heavenly glory ? No, it is « TituJ ii. 14. « 2 Tim. i. 9; • Ephes. u. 10. UNTO SALVATION, CONSIDERED, &c. iS; h not works of righteoufnefs done by us, but the Spirit's work of grace within us, which will be performed until the day of Chrift, which is the faints meet- nefs for eternal happinefs. Will he fay that good works are fuch neceflary an- tecedents to falvation, though he does not choofe to fay or cannot fav what, as that falvationn cannot pofTibly be enjoyed where they do not go before ? I have, in my letter to him, given inftances to the contrary ; proving that falvation is, where good works do not go before ; as in the cafe of eledt infants, and of perfons called by grace in their laft hours, when juft ready to launch into eternity. . ■ ■ " If this doflrine is true, that good works are fo abfolutely neceflfary to falva- tion, that there can be no poffibility of any, where they do not go before •, what an horrible fcene muft this open to parents of children, who lofe by death many,- or moft or all of them in their infancy ? fince, upon 'this principle, they muft for ever defpair of their eternal happinefs. One fliould think that fuch a man as this I am concerned with, would have cook care to put in a favin" claufe in favour of infants, efpecialiy when fuggeftcd to him ; who fuppofes that all the infants of believers are inrerefted in the covenant of grace, and confequently muft be faved, at Icaft thofe who die in their infancy ; and if faved, they muft be faved without good works, which they neither do, nor are capable of doing. Marefms ', I obferve, when treating of the nccefiity of doing good works, for fuch ends and ufcs as have been already mentioned, and which nobody denies, adds ; " But this neccfilty is to be rcftrained to adult believers, who are ablt to " perform outward good works ; for the Infants of believers are faved ivithout them ♦' (even as they were finners without any properly perfonal adt of their own) " though not without an inclination to them, by the grace and fpirit of rege- " neration." Moreover, upon this principle, what hope can furviving rela- tions entertain of their adult deceafed friends -, who though they havea ppeared to have had full convictions of their loft and mifcrable ftate by nature, clear views of the exceeding finfulnefs of fin, an abhorrence of it, and repentance for it ; to have feen the infufficiency of any works of the creature to juftify before God, and render acceptable to him ; the nccefTity of falvation alone by Chrift -, and to exprefs fome degree of faith in him, and hope of the heavenly inheritance i yet becaufc they have not lived a regular life in time of health, have not gone through a courfe of good works, have not lived foberly, rigbtecufly and godly in this prefcnt world, muft be therefore cverlaftingly baniflied from the realms of B B 2 light ? I Hxc vero oecelljta] reftringeoda ed ad fidelei adultos, qui bona opera externa praeflare polTunt ; infaotec enim fidelium abfque illis fervantur (ut fine fuo ullo aflu proprie pe fonali erant peccatores) & n noo abfque inclinatiooe ad ilia per gratiam ic fpiritum regeDcrationis, Maref, CQlIeg.Theolog. loc. 12. S. 12. p< 315. i88 THE NECESSITY OF GOOD WORKS light ? What comfort can a man of this principle be a means of adminiftering ? or what comfortable words can he fpeak to a poor creature become truly fenfi- ble of fin, and his loft eftate, of his needofChrift, and falvation by him, on a deathbed? Can he, though he is fatisfied he has a true and thorough fenfe of things, encourage him to believe in Chrift, and hope in him for everlafting life and falvation? No, he cannot; he muft beobliged to tell him that it is too late to think or talk of ihefe things, there is no hope for him ; for fince he has lived a vicious life, hell muft be his portion ; for where good works, a religious life and converfation, do not go before, there can be no confequent happinefs. Whereas, on the other hand, according to our principle, parents may hope for the falvation of their infants that die in infancy ; there is at leaft a poffibility of it, whereas there is none in the other fcheme; furviving relatives may rejoice, in hope of their deceafed friends being gone to glory, who they have reafon to believe have been called by grace, though at the laft hour-, miniftersand others are capable of fpeaking words of peace and confolation todiftrefTed minds, whofe hearts are pricked and and become contrite on their dying beds : All which is a full confutation of what this writer afTcrts % that ."it is abfolutely impofTible " that it" (this tenet, that good works are not neceffary to falvation) " fhould. " do good to any perfon whatfoever." I readily own, that good works are ne- ceffary to be performed by all that are walking in the way to heaven, and expedl to be faved by Chrift, and glorified with him, who are either capable, or have an opportunity of performing them ; but then they are not neceffary as caufes, conditions, or means of procuring glory and happinefs for them ■, nor are they neceffary as the antecedent to the confequent, to pave their way to heaven, to prepare and make them meet for it •, or to put them into the poffeffion of it : they do not go before in any fuch fenfe, or for any fuch ufe ; they follow after : Blejjed are the dead which die in the Lord, from henceforth ; yea, faith the Spirit^ that they may refi from their labours, and their works do follow them '. It is faid % that it cannot poffibly be for the advantage of a faint or a finner, to be told that good works are in no fenfe neceffary to falvation, not as the an- tecedent to the confequent ; and that it may do a great deal of harm and mif- chief to the one and the other. I have already ftiewn it may be for the advan- tage, ufc, peace, and comfort of poor fenfible finners on their death-beds, and of furviving faints : Nor do I fee what harm or mifchief it can do to faints, live- ly or declining ones, or to profane finners; not to lively judicious chriftians, who are taught and encouraged by this doftrine to continue zealous of good works, and diligently to perform them, for many valuable, neceffary ufes, though « Addtefj, tec. p. 7. » Rev. xiv» 13. » Addrefs, &c. p. 6. UNTO SALVATION, CONSIDERED, &c. 189 though not in order to falvation. What, will no motive induce a lively chrif- tian to do good works, but what is taken and urged from the neceffity of them unto falvation ? Or can he be a judicious one, that ads from fuch a principle ? Cannot a declining chriftian be induced to do h\s firjl ivorks, unlcfs he is told they are abfolutely neceflary to his falvation ? Cannot it be thought that argu- ments, taken from the command and will of God, from the gbry of God, the. honour of Chrift, religion and truth, a man's own and his neighbour's good, de- monftrating the necefTity of doing good works, may be made ufe of as means to quicken his diligence, to caft off his fpiritual floth and carnal fecurity, with- out infifting upon the necefTity of them to falvation ? Nor can it tend to harden Cnners in fin, or put them upon running into greater tranfgreffjons, or induce them' to harbour fuch a conceit, that they may get to heaven, let them live as they pleafc ; when they are told, that though good works cannot lave them, their evil works may damn them, or be the caufe of damnation to them. As for the texts of fcripture produced by this writer, they are all of them impertinently alledged, and none of them at all to the purpofe. Some of them do not relate to good works, but to internal holinefs, the fanftification of the Spirit, as 2 Tbefs. ii. 13, 14. Heb. xii. 14. which is thai grace God chufes his people to, in order to their enjoyment of glory ; and without which, and that as perfedt, for fo it will be made by the Spirit of God, they cannot fee or enjoy theLord; and therefore it becomes them, by conftant application at the throne of grace, to follow after a daily increafe of it, and by their lives and converfa- tions to evidence the truth and reality of it. Others only exprefs the neceffity ef doing good works to teftify the truth of faith, or contain motives in them to the performance of them; taken partly from the grace of God beftowed upon the faints here, and from the confideration of that happinefs and glory they fhall enjoy hereafter, as the fruits of grace, and not as the fruits and confequents of their works; zsjamesu. i 7, &c. zPeterm. 10 — \^.Jude 20, 21. iJobn\\\.\—^. And it is eafy to obfcrve, that the whole current of fcripture, and efpecially the Epiltles, run this way, to exclude works entirely from having any hand or con- cern in the juftification and falvation of men. The pafTage out oiCkmerit, I fup- pofe, is chiefly produced to grace his margin with a large citation in Greek; fines it only fets forth the duty of thofe to perform good works, who would be found among the number of fuch who wait for God, and defire to partake ofhispro- mifed gifts : for certain it is, that Clement did not think that good works were ncceflTary tojuftification or glorification; feeing he exprefsly excludes them from either, when he fays '', " All are glorified and magnified, not by themfelves, or _J (« 190 THE NECESSITY OF GOOD WORKS *' or by their works or righteous aftions which they have done, but by his own will: So we alfo, being called by his will in Chrift Jefus, are juftifiedv not " by ourfelves, nor by our wifdom, or underftanding, or piety, or works, which " we have done in holinefs of heart -, but by that faith, by which the Almighty *' God hath juftified all from the beginning, to whom be glory for ever and " ever. Amen." We are next entertained with the rife and original of this tenet, that " good «' works are not necefTary to falvation." And it feems, according to our learned author % that Simon Magus was the firft broacher of it : And we are expofed as his difciples and followers -, and fome pains are taken to tell an idle, filthy ftory, of Simon's picking up a whore in a baudy-houfe at Tyre, and committing forni- cation with her ; no doubt with a view to infinuate to his readers, that our principles being alike, our practice mufl: be fo too ; or, at lead, that our prin- ciples have the fame tendency. But if it fhould appear that Simon's tenets and ours are not the fame, what will become of this little (how of reading, and the mean artifice made ufe of to expofe us to fcorn and contempt ? As for Simon's faying that falvation is by grace, and not by works, this was a doftrine he had from the apoftlcs themfelves ; which he turned into wantonnefs, and abufcd to vile purpofes ; and is in itfelf never the worfe, nor is it to be thought the worfe of, for his ill ufe of it : And as for the inference made from this doftrine, that therefore good works are not neceflary ; this is none of ours, we difclaim it; there is no agreement between Simon's tenet and ours, about good works -, he urged they were not necefTary to be done, we plead for the neccffity of doing them, for the ends before mentioned, and which need not be repeated. Simon, Carpocrates, and their followers, who are reprefented as being in the famefenti- ments, held that every thing, befides faith and love, were things indifferent, neither good nor bad in their own nature, and fo might be done or omitted. But can this man, with any face or confcience, fay that thele are our fenti- ments ? We affirm that good works are in themfelves good, cannot be dif- penfed with, but ought to be performed by all men -, the tenet of thefe men was, that good works were not necefTary at all in any fcnfe, not necefTary to be done. Where is the listeners, the agreement ? Give me leave, on this occafion, to inquire into the rife and original, and to point out the authors, abetters, and maintainers of the contrary tenet, that good works are necejfary to falvation. The falfe apoftles in Judea, and other judaizing Kxlttpya-carrot «>>>"» J'a th Sl^1)flaT®• ovts' k) ififi; «» Jia SiXiiftaT^ avrs it Xj/rn Iijith kXiiSif- Ti{, H Ji ia,v\ut in^Ujii^x, nil itx TiJt vfiijlig^ at^ia;, i) vvtiriuf, v iv^iCnx;! >i ifys" •" >u»7«{- ■^iK^7n, u tftiii^a. n; TU< aik»a; Tur at^tut. A^>!>. CkcDcnC. ROd). >d Corinta. Cpifl I. p. "Jl. Ed. Ojcon. * Addrefs, &c. p. ii. UNTO SALVATION, CONSIDERED, &c, 191 judaizing profeflbrs, were the firft broachers of this notion ; who taught the brethren, not only that circumcifion, but that obedience to the law ol Mofes, the moral as well as ceremonial law, was necelTary tofalvation: kcyi£Jsxv. 1^5, wliich gave the true apoftlcs and primitive churches a great deal of trouble. To confute which, the apoftle Paul efpecially greatly laboured in all his writ- ings, and particularly in his Epiftles to the Romans and Galatians. The Papifts, the followers of the man of fin, have always been the abetters and maintainers of this principle ; and fo has Socinus, and his wretched adherents. The firft among the reformed divines that vented it, was George Major, cotemporary and familiar w'nh Luther and Melan^bcn : He has been reprefenred by fome, from whom one fhould not have cxpeded to have had fuch a charadter of him on this account, z% fatelles Romani Pontificis, a perfon employed by the Pope of Rome ; a tool of the Popifh party, to create divifions and difturbances among the Reformed. The Papifts finding they could not maintain with fuccefs their notion, ihzi good works were meritorious of fahationy inftead of the phrafe, meri- torious of falvation, fubftituted tlie other phrafe, necejfary to falvation, as being a fofter one, in order to gain upon incautious minds •, when one and the fame thing were defigned by both : And this man was thought to be the inftrument they made ufe of for this purpofe. But however this be ; certain it is, that the broaching of this doflrine by him gave great offence, and occafioned much difturbance. The writer of his Life intimates, that the confequences of it gave Major himfelf fome concern*-, and that he declared, in fo many words, that ♦' whereas he faw that fame were offended, for the future he would no more " make ufe of that propofition." Among the chief of his oppofers was Nico- laus Amfdorfius, who in great heat and zeal aflerted, in contradiftion to Major*& notion, that "good works were hurtful and dangerous to falvation ;" a pofition not to be defended} unlefs when good works arc put in the room of Chrift, and are trufted to for falvation : But it is not doing of them, that is, or can be hurtful to falvation, but depending on them when done. This contro- verfy raifed great troubles in the churches, and gave MelanSibon a good deal of uneafinefs -, who at firft was enfnared into the ufe of the phrafe, though he after- wards rejeded it, as improper and dangerous. Amfdorfius did not deny that good works were to be done, but could not be prevailed upon to own that they were neceffary. MelanElbon at length allowed that '* good works were not ncceflary *' to falvation •" nor did he dare to affert it : " For thefe reafons, fays he, wc •' teach that good works, or new obedience, are neceffary ; yet this muft not *« by any means be tacked to it, \)c\z\. good works art neceffary to obtain falvation «' and eternal life." In his anfwer to the paft^rs ofSaxony, he has thefe words : " Never- * Quinimo diferte teRztos e/l, fe propofiiioae ilia, qua rideret allquo) oHeodi, dcincrps bob ■furum. Mclchlor. Adam. Vita Georg. Major, p. 470. ^-,1 i92 THE NECESSITY OF GOOD WORKS " Neverthelefs, let us not ufe this phrafe, good works are necejjary to falvation^ And, in another place, "Verily I fay, that I do not make ufe of this phrafe, <' good ivorks are necejfary to falvation; but I affirm, that thefe propofitions are " true, and properly and without fophiftry thus to be declared ; new obedience " is necejfary, or good works are necejfary; becaufe obedience is due toGod, ac- " cording to that faying, Debtors we are ^." Now thefe were the fentiments, . and which are exadtly ours, of the great MelanHhon, that peaceable man, who never was charged with running into extremes in controverfy, his greateft faulr, .and which has been complained of by fome of his friends, who have had a great regard to him and his memory, was, that he was for compofing differences, . almoft at any rate, fometimes, as was thought, to the injury of truth, and with .the hazard of lofing it. ■ I could eafily produce a large Jiumber of learned and holy men, who have affertcd the fame thing : I ftiall content myfeif with tranfcribing tzvelve argu- ments, fhewing that good works are not neccfTary to falvation, drawn up by thatJearned and judicious divine Abraham Caloviits ; who has dcferved much of all men of learning and true chriftianity, for his learned animadverfions on Grotius's Annotations on feveral paffages in the Pfahns and Prophets, relating to ;the MefTiah -, and for his laborious confutation of Socinus and his followers, and Jiis excellent defence of the orthodox faith againft them. They are as follow. The queftion put is, " IVbether good works are necejfary to falvation ? " The ■Socinians, fays he % affirm this; but this opinion is defervedly reje(fled, 1. Becaufe no fuch thing is ever to be found in the fcriptures, namely, that good works are necejfary to falvation. But if this was fo principal a part of evan- gelic truth, as the adverfaries plead, it fhould, upon the foot of the Socinian iiypothefis, be contained in exprefs words in the fcriptures; fince they afferr, that all things necelTary to be known for falvation, are contained cxprefsly in the fcriptures. 2. The * Propter has caufas docemus, ncce/Taria efTe bona opera, feu novam obedientiam, nequiquam lamen afTuendum eft, bona opera ad falutem & vitam a:cernam confequendam nece/Taria efle. In refponfo ad Paflores Saxonicos : Taraen hac phrafi non utamur, bona opera funt necefTaria ad fa- lutem. Alibi. Plane dico, me non uti hac phraG, bona opera funt neceffaria ad falutem ; fed has popofitiones affirmo veras effe, & proprie & fine fophidica Cc dici : nova obedicntia eft neceffaria, vel bona opera funt necefiaria, quia Deo debetur obedientia, juxta didum, debitorei fumus. Meianflhon ipud Hoornbcck. Surom. Ccmtrov. ]. g. de Lutheranis, p. 523, 524.. \ *■ Utrum bona opera DeccHaria funt ad f^utem ? AfGrmant hoc Socioiani: at fententia ilia 1 me ito reprobatur, i I. Qua nufpiam tale quid in fcripturis habetur, bona fc. opera ad falutem neceffaria e/fe. Si Butem ha;c tarn pfaicipua effet evangtlica: veritatis pars, nt contendont adverfarii, expreflis verbis 1 tarn in fcripturis in contineri oporteret, vi hypothcfews Sociniani, qua omnia fcitu necedaria ad faluem expre/Te in fcripturis contineri aflerint, &c. Calov. Socioifmus Profligatus, Sed. 7. Art. 8. de bonis Operibu;, Controv. 1. p. 787, 788, ice. UNTO 'SALVATION, CONSIDERED, &c. 193 " 2. The apoftle treating of the caufes of our falvation, removes good works, and entirely excludes them; and teaches, that he only has bleflednefs, to whom God imputeth righteoufncfs without works, Rom. iv, 6. Compare Efhes. ii. S. 7'itus iii. 5. If therefore good works are entirely excluded from the caufes of ialvation, how will the fame be neceOary to falvation ? 3. That which is not neceflary to our juftification, that is not neceflary to Ialvation; becaufe there are no other caufes of falvation than of juftification : But good works are not neceflary to juftification. Ergo, 4. If we are faved by grace, then good works arc not neceflary to falvation; for the antitheGs remains firm. If of grace, then not of works, otherwife gr^e is tot grace, Rom. xi.-6. But the former is true, Rom. vi. 2j. Ephes. ii. 8, 9. therefore the latter alfo. 5. If by the obedience of one Chrift we all obtain juftification of life and Ialvation, then wc are not faved by our own proper obedience : But the former is true, Rom. v. 17—19. therefore alfo the latter. 6. "What is afcribed to faich alone, as it is contradiftinguiftied from worlcs, that is not to be attributed to works : But eternal falvation is afcribed to faith alone, Jokn iii. 16. Mark xvi. 16. Rom. i. 17. and iv. 6. Gal. iii. 11. Epbes.W.^, Titus iii. 5. Heb. x. 38. Ergo, 7. What is neceflary to falvation, that, as much as it is neceflary, is pre- fcnbed and required in the evangelic doftrinc, Rom. i. 16. and iii. 27. But good works, as neceflary to falvation, are not prefcribcd in the gofpel, which is not convcrfant about works, but only about faith in Chrift, John iii. t6. and vi. 40. Rom. I. 17. and iv. 6. feeing the law is the dottrinc of works, the gof- pel the dodrine of faitii, Rom. iii, 27. GaL iii. 12, 8. Add to this, that this afl!ertion concerning the neccflity of good works to falvation, has been already rejefted as falfe, in the falfe apoftles, yi£is xv. 5. where an oppofition is formed to the fcntiment of the apoftles, that wc are faved by the grace of Jefus Chrift, and that we arc faved by the keeping of the law, or works, and that the keeping of the law is neceflary to falvation, 9. If good works were neccfl^ary to falvation, we ftiould have whereof to glory; but theiioly Spirit takes away all glorying from us, and for this very rcafon excludes good works from hence, Ephes. ii. 8, 9. Rom. iii, 27. and iv. I, 2. , 10. If our cledion to falvation is of grace, and not of works, as the apoftle teaches, Ephes. 1.4 — 6. 2 Tim. i. 9. good works cannot be aflerted to be nccef- fary to falvation -, for as we are chofen from eternity, fo we are faved in time. ; Vol. II. Cc 11. By 194 THE NECESSITY -OF GOOD "WORKS 11. By whatfocver doftrine t\\e certainty of our falvation is weakened or deftroycd, that ought to be rejedled : But fuch is -this do<5trine -of the Socinians. Ergo, 12. Wherever the fcripturc produces reafons for which ^ood works arc ne- ceflary, it mentions quite others, than that they are necefTary to falvation; namely, that we ougirt diligently to perform good works, becaiife of God, becaufe of Chrid, becaufe of the .holy Spirit, becaufe of the holy angels, becaufe of our neighbour, becaufe of ourfelves, yea, even becaufe of the devil." TKus this excellent writer, confuting the Socinian error, that jfWwori^^ tfrf necefary to falvation, flrongiy defends the contrary ; which ourTheologafter calls z filthy dream, horrible hlafpkemy, &c. This, it fcems, is one of the paradoxes which lead to doftrinal Antino.mianifm. But why a paradox? A paradox, in the antient ufe of the word, fignified a moft certain truth, -at lead, embraced as fuch by men of wifdom and learning, though contrary to the opinion of the vul- gar; which being unufual, (truck them with furprife; whence fuch verities were (bmetimes called wotAl*, and fometimes admirabilia ''. This ufe of the word, I fuppofe, will-not be allowed to be applicable to this tenet. A paradox, in the modern ufe of the word, or in common acceptation, defigns a propofition that carries in it either a real or feeming felf-contradidion. Now the propofition, good works are not necejfary to falvation, is plain and cafy to be underftood ; and is cither true or falfe, but no paradox. We need not go far for inftances of para- doxes, this writer can furni(h us with enow : As when he fays % " Salvation «' is all of free grace, and good works, the fruits of holincfs, ^ part of falva- «' tion, are abfolutely neceflfary to fow/i/^/i; (alvation." The -vrord complete, in this propofition, is fo placed, as that it may be thought to be either a verb of the infinitive mood ; and then the fenfe is, falvation is all of grace, and yet good works are abfolutely nccelTary to complete it ; or as an adjedlive to the word falva- tion ; and then the fenfe is, falvation is all of grace, and good works are abfo- lutely neceflary to falvation complete without them : Take it cither way, the felf- contradiftion is manifeft enough. As alfo, when giving the charafter of a de- •cafcd minifter of the.gofpel, whofe afhcs he mi^ht have fpared; he fays ', " he *' was * Ego aatem ilia ipfa, qui vix in gymnafiij & in otio Stoici probant, ludens conjeci in com- .AQDCU locos ; qaae qaia funt admirabilia, contraque opinionem omnium, ab ipfii etiam ^a^jjola •ppe'.lantur. Tentare volui poflentne proferri in lucem, id eft, in forum ; !c ita dici, ot probaren- t«r, an alia quacdam eflet erudita, alia popularis oratio ; eoque fcripfi libeirtiuf. quod mihi ifta w«(^J.|«, Tjox appdhtntur, maxime vidtKur effa Socratica, longeqoe verilTijna. Ciceron. Paradox. .p. 2140. « In an Advertifemcnt at the end of Mr Wallin'j Funeral Sermon. ' Addrefi, &c. 'p. 14. UNTO SALVATION, CONSIDERED, &c. 2^5 " was a perfon of real piety, but difcoveredyo much pride and wrath in his wric- " ings and conduft, (By the way, how could a man fo wretchedly guilty of " thcfe things, write this without (hame and blufliing?) that it n hard to ao " count for it ; except we allow, that he had a tinElure of entbufiafm." The firftof thefe inftances is a r^a/ felf-contradiflion, and the other, at lead, z feem- ing one ; and both paradoxes. Again ; why fhould this propofition, good works Are not necejfary to fahation, be reprefented as leadir>g to doArinal Antino- mianifm ? This man ought to have informed his ftudents what doftrinal Anti- nomianifm is. Since he has not, I will. Doftrinal Antinomianifm, properly fpeaking, is a denying, or fetting afide the law ofGod, as a rule of life, aftion, or converfation. Now what tendency has the above propofition to fuch a notion ? Or how does it appear, that the very quinteffence of doftrinal Antinomianifm is couched in it, as is fuggefted ^? Though we fay, that good works are not necef- fary to falvation ; do we fay, that they are not neceflary to any thing clfe ? Do we fay, that they are not neceflary to be done? Do we fay, that the^ are not neceflary to be done in obedience to the law of God ? Da we fay, that the com- mands of the law arc not to be regarded by men ? That they are things indiffe- rent, that may be done, or not done ? No -, we fay none of thefe things, but all the reverfe. Do we then make void iht IsWy through this doftrine ? Ged forbid: 2'ea, we ejlablifh the law*', as it is in the hands ofChrift ourLawgiver; to which we dcfire to yield a chearful obedience ; to fticw our fubjeflion to him as King of faints, and to teftify our gratitude for the many blefllngs of every kind wc receive from him. It is not worth my while to take notice of -the flirt ' at the everlafting love of the divine perfons being on all accounts the fame, yejlerday, to day, and for ever ; which he knows, in his own confcience, only regards that love as in the breaft of the divine perfons, and not rhe manifeftations of it -, which are more or lefs to different perfons, and fo, to the fame perfons at different times. c Addrtfi, &c. p. 5, * Rom. iil. 31. ' Addrcfi, ficc. p. 35. c c 2 THE 19^ THE ANCIENT MODE OF THE ANCIENT MODE OF BAPTIZING, B Y IMMERSION, PLUNGING, or DIPPING into WATER ; MAINTAINED and VINDICATED; Againil the Cavils and Exceptions of the Author of a late Pamphlet, intitled, 'The manner of Baptizing with Water cleared up from the Word of God and right Reafon^ &c. ToOETHtR WITH lOUE Remarks upon the Author's Reasons for the Pradice of a FREE or mixt Communion in Churches. C ft A P. I. SomeRetnarh upon tbel'itk of the Book, and the Author s method of writing. THE controverfy about Baprifm, both with refpcd to its mode of admi- niftration, and proper fubjcfts, has been of late fo diligently fearched into, and thoroughly difcufled, that it may well fccm ncedlefs to trouble the world with any further writings upon that fubjeft, it being in a great meafure only ac- tum agcre^ to do the fame thing over again, which has been well done already ; but thofe of a different perfuafion from us, being continually thrufting their crambe millies coUa upon us, and repeating the fame things over and over again, though they have been fulBcicntly anfwcred already, makes it ncceffary for us, in the defence BAPTIZING BY IMMERSION, &c. 19'/ defence of truth, and for the honour of Chrift in his ordinance, to reply. A late anonymous author has thought fit to let the world know what a talent he has in that part of the controverfy, which concerns the mode of adminiftering this or- dinance, by publilhing a traft, whofe title page runs thus, The Manner of bap- tizing with IVater, cleared up from the Word of God, and right Reafon, in a plain freeDebate upon that fubjeSi, between Mr].'?. andMrB.W. June 6'\ 1726. Pul>- lifhtdfor infiruSlion in rigbteoufnefs. How he has acquitted himfelf in the manage- ment thereof, and what improvements and difcoveries he has made beyond others, is our prefent bufinefs to confider. It feems our author has not thought fit to fay any thing concerning the fubjefts of baptifm, but has confined himfelf to the mode of adminiftration of it ; whether it was becaufe he did not care to engage in that part of the controverfy, or whether he thought that it has been fufficiently handled already, and this not fo, is what I do not pretend to determine ; there- fore feeing he has not thought proper to take notice of it, I (hall not think my- felf concerned to fay any thing about it. From the title page we are given to cxpeft, that the manner of baptizing with water fhall be cleared up to us ; for it feems we were all in the dark before about it, or at lead, there were fuch mifts and fogs beclouding our apprehenfions concerning this ordinance, that there was no feeing clearly into it, until the publication of this treatife, by which the author fancies thefe are dinipated, and the affair fet in a clear light; but I hope to make it appear, before I have done, that inftead of giving more light, he has darkened counfel by words without knowledge. The title alfo promifes that this Ihall be cleared up from the word ofGody and right reafon. By the word ofGod^ I fuppofe he means the written word of God, the fcriptures of truth, which indeed are the only rule of our faith and praflice ; and firom whence, under the conduft of the blcfled Spirit, all our light in faith and worfhip fprings ; but what he means by right reafon, needs explaining, and is not fo cafy to determine. If he means a juft and ftrong way of reafoning, one might juftly cxpeft to find fomewhat of it in this his performance -, but the cafe being otherwife, I fhall not, at prefent, farther inquire what clfe he defigned by it ; but only obfervc to him, that we ought to believe and aft in matters of faith and worfliip, upon the fole credit and authority of the great God, as he has revealed his mind and will in the fa- crcd writings. The method which our author has taken, in order to fet this matter in a clear light, is dialogue- wife, or in the form of a conference between two pcrfons, or to ufc his own words, in a plain free debate. What moved him to take this me- thod does not indeed much concern me to know, but yet I cannot forbear think- ing, one reafon might be, that he might have the opportunity of making his antagonift fpcak what he himfelf pleafcd i for it would have betrayed his wcak- ncfs 1-98 ■ THE ANCIENT M O D ET 03^ .' T neft yet more, to havt produced fuch argumcBts and objetUons wbicb he pis not, in his own way, aWe to folve : chough at the fame tinie k is an inftaoceof hij difingenuity, not fairly to propofe ihofc arguments which arc made ufc of, nor give them their full weight and force, which he ought to have done in bandlmg & controvcrfy honeftly and faithfully ; as well as making his friend fpcak fach weak and ridiculous things as never were, at leaft publicly, made ufe of in thij controvcrfy. Had be had a mirtd to have made a trial of ht« fkill and bis talents and abilities this way, why did not he take out the arguments of fomc fuch wri- ters as Tombs, Danvers, Keacb, Stenrut, or Gale, and fairly propofc' them iti their own words, and give an anfwer to them? But this would not have anfwercd his dcfion, -which Teems to be, cxpofing to ridicule and contempt tbc ordinance ftfBaptifm, by plunging or dipping •, and would, moreover, have been a talk too difficult and laborious for him. Perhaps be alfo thought, this method bcft :to conceal himfelf from being known to be the author of it ; but if it is truth he is in fcarch of, and bearing a teftimony to, why fhould he be afliamcd of it ? •why did not he put his name to his book ? This is fuch a poor, mean, and coward- ■ ly way of v»riting, as manifeftly betrays either Qiame or fear to appear publicly In the caufe he has efpoufed ; if he thinks he is fighting tie Lord's battles, why does not he appear like a man, in the open field, and not lie fcouting behind the hedges? But perhaps this is to keep off a full blow that he is afraid might be given to him. But to go on, this debate or conference is reprcfented, as ma- naged by two pcrfons, under the fidtitious names of Mr J. P. a plunger in waterj and Mr J9. ^. a bapti2cr with water; for it fecms, according to our author, ihat plunging rt water, and baptizing with water, are diredly oppofite to each otheti but onkfs he can tell us, how a perfon can be baptized or dipped into wa- ter, without being baptized w7i ir, they will not appear fo oppofite as he ima- gines, bOt of this m6re hereafter. ' • ' '-■ ' ^ ■. V' ■ : ll is fcarcc worth my while to take any notice of the time when thiscont fcrcncc was held, unlcfs it be juft to remark, that it would have been as wc)I fot (he credit of the author, the good and peace of the churches of Chrift, anHeadds, ♦'Suppofing the tranflation very right, I worfder, fays he, where •'dipping, overwhelming, or plunging, can be fccn therein !" What a prodi- gious deal of ftrong reafoning is here ? And I as much wonder too,. }y here wafh- ing with water, cither by pouring or fprinkJing, can be feen therein. He goes on, "you fay, he went out of the water, therefore he had been in it; but if " you had faid, he had been dipped, overwhelmed, or plunged, 1 Ihouid have " denied the confequence." Itfeems, however, that he is willing to grantj that Chrift's going into the water, and being there, is a neceflary inference and con- ■fequence, juftly deduced from his coming up out of the water; though he is unwilling to allow plunging to be fo, for othcrwife 1 doubt not, but that he would iiave denied the one as well as ihc other; and I hope he will be willing to grant, that Chrift went down into the water, in order to be baptized, and that he came up out of it as a baptized perfon ; therefore he is defircd to ob- serve, that we do not infer plunging merely from Chrift's going down into the iwater, nor from his coming up out of it, but from his going down into it in order to be baptized, and from his coming up out of it as a baptized perfon ; for that a perfon may go into water, and come again out of it, and not be plung- ed into it, we know as well as he ; but that a perfon fliould go into water, and - be baptized in it, as Chrift was^ without being dipped or plunged mto it, is what we deny; and if thofe circumftanccs of John's adminiftering this ordinance in BAPTIZING BY IMMERSION, &c. 201 in the river "Jordan^ and Chrift, when baptized, coming up -out of the water, arc not demonftrative proofs of plunging, yet they are at leaftftrong prefump- tivcones, and fuch as I challenge him to produce the like, in favour of this ordinance being adminiftered to Chrift, by wafhing with water, either by pour- ing or fprinkling. If plunging is not a necejfary inference from what is revealed concerning Chrift's baptifm, 1 am fure fprinkling or pouring of water can never be ; and I will leave it to any impartial man of judgmeni^ to ufe his own phrafe, whether there is not a greater probability, to put it upon no other foot, ofChrift'3 being baptized by immerfion, when he went into the nszx Jordan to be baptized, and accordingly was baptized there by "Jobn^ than there is of his being baptized in that river only by an afFufion or fprinkling of water upon him : So chat he has but little reafon, with that air of alTurance, and in that dogmatical way, to fay, " that John baptized in Jtrdan is true, but be never dipped nor plunged any ** in bis life" as he does in p. 10. And here I cannot forbear mentioning a pafiage of thofe excellent divines, 7^'^" ■^*6''^'^"'' '^drew Rivet, /Intbony fV^- Ittus, and Anthony Thyfius, who at the fame time that they are endeavouring to have the mode of baptifm, either by plunging or fprinkling, accounted an indif- ferent thing, acknowledge this inftance of Chrift's baptifm to bean example of plunging. Their words arc thefe % " W.hcthcr baptifm is to be adminiftered " by a fingle or a trine immerfion, was always judged a thing indifferent in the " chriftian church; as alfo whether plunging or fprinkling is to be ufed, feeing *' noexprefs command is extant concerning it -, and examples of fprinkling as ** wrll as <>f plunging may be found in fcripture ; for as in Matt. i,L Chrift went ** into the water, and came out of it, zaaMo the Ethiopian, Ads viii. So, vmny * thoufands are faid to be baptized in one day, in the xi^tyoi J erufalem, Afts ii, " Likcwife many in private houfcs, /i£ls xvi. and xviii. 1 Cor. i. x6. where fuch « a going into water was fcarccly poffible :" Which, by the way, is a miftake iti thofe great men, for none of the texts alJcdgcd, though they prove a baptifm of whole hocfholds, yet they do not prove that it was adminiftered in their houfes -, for moft of them plainly (hew, that this was performed before the apoftles en- trance into them-, and if it had been done there, it would be no proof or evidence that it was done by fprinkling, feeing proper accommodations to baptize by imtTMrrfion might be had, even in a houfe;" Though there is no reafon, as I have Vol. II. D D hinted, * An vero una, ah trini ffitrfione fit ^apbnndum, tndiStretn fempcr judieatam f«1t in e«edelja chrifliaaa^ qucmadmodum ctiam an immerfionc an vcto lidrperlioae uOendnm, cu«n iliius cxprefiiim inandataro nullamvKcti ai '. c H A P. nr. . J'be fecond argument in favour of baptifm by immerfion, taken from the ^lace John cbofe to baptize in, and the reafon of that choice, John iii. 23. •with the weak replies, and foolijh Jhifts and evafons which Mr B. W. makes thereunto, conjidered. A/fR B. fV. next introduceshis friend Mr P. in p. 1 1, 12. arguing for immer- fion, from thofe words in John iii. 26. And 'Johnalfo was baptizing in Enorty near to Salim, becaufe there was much water there, aifcer this manner -, namely, " John was baptizing in Enon, becaufe there was much water there ; therefore " all that were baptized were overwhelmed with water. They^were dipped, ** they were plunged, becaufe there was much water there." But this argu- ment is not very fairly reprefented ; for w.e do not argue merely from there being much water there, that they were dipped or plunged, but from their be- ing baptized in a place of much water, and which was chofe for that very reafon. We know that there may be much water where no perfon is dipped or plunged into it ; but that any perfon fhould be baptized in a place of much water, with- out being dipped or plunged into ir,. is whax we deny. Moreover the reafon- ablenefs of concluding that baptifm, in thofe times, was performed by immer- fion, we think may be fairly argued from John's choofing of, and baptizing in a place where there waS' much water, and we believe it will appear fo to every thinking and unprejudiced perfon i but let us confidcr what Mr B. fV, has to reply. And, ijl. To (hew his learning and fkill in chorography, he inquires what£«o« was, whether it was a river or no, and feems to call in queftion its being fo, and therefore tells us, p. 1 3. That fuch a river cannot be found in the bejl accounts we have of the land ' Idyll. I, M»Ti S17.1? TrXara iu(f, rayxf n-j2< vxnu giJajrlai. 2o6 THE ANCIENT MODE OF iand o/Ifrael : and adds, and it is very probable, that Enon was either a village, or air an cf land, where there were abundance offprings and little rivulets of water. "Whether£«c» is the name of a river, or of a city, town or village, or of a tra<5t of land abounding with water, does not much affeft our controverfy, if it is but granted that there was much water there, for which reafon John made choice of it to baptize in-, and I hope it will be granted, that there was a fufficicncy of ■water to baptize by immerfion, efpecially feeingMr B.IV. tells iis in p. 17. that for plunging of people there need not be much water. The Arabic verfion divides the word into two, and calls liAin-Nun, which may be rendered, the fountain of Nun; as does alfo the 5yr/<7f, Ain-Ton, ^h.\z\\ Junius renders the fountain of the Dove : And as forSalim, near to which was Enon, and which is the beft direiftion for the finding where it was -, this was cither Shalem, a city of Shechem, mention- ed in GfK. xxxiii. 18. as fome think, though this is not very likely, feeing that was in Samaria, with the inhabitants of which John had nothing to do •, or elfe it is the fame with Shalim, in i Sam. ix 4. as Junius and others think, though it feems rather to be that place v^h'ich Arias Montanus'' QzWsSalim juxta torrcntem, Salim by the brook, which he places in the tribe oi JJfachar, not far from the lake of Genefaret ; and may be called fo, perhaps, either bccaufe it was near this Enon, where there was much water, or elfe becaufe it was not far from the place where the two rivers J abac &nd Jordan mei; as Calvin, from the geographers, obfervcs upon this place. But fuppofing that our prefent beft accounts of the land of Jjrael, make no mention of any fuch river as £«;;« -, nor can it be determined by them what it was, or where it was -, yet I hope it will be acknowledged, that the account of it in the facred text is juft, and that whether it be a river, vil- lage, or traft of land, yet there was fWKCi?' water there; for which rea.l'on John made choice of it as a proper place to baptize in, which is fufficient for our pur- pofc. But, 2dly, From inquiring into the place itfelf, he proceeds to give us the notation of the word, or the reafon of its name ; for he fays, the learned tell us, that the wcrd does fignlfy a place of fprings : And the learned " alfo tell us, that it figni- fies an eye, as well as a fpring or fountain; and z.\fo foothfaying, and clouds, or a beclouding; fo that there is not much to be learned from that. And here I can- not forbear mentioning the obfervation of yfrf//«j, upon this place; though I fuppofe that Mr B.IV. will think that he might as well have let it alone, who, after he had faid that it was a town neary(jr- _ ' " 1 , ' ' ' ' ' - ' n ■ ' ' " . , ' - , .■:,')" KaGi ya-^ ly^fToyio xvXtiSofLun irolaf-Loio, .:.•..■ •) . - , . • •. ■ •■ . - - . I , Which may be rendered in Englifli thus : "And the d\v\ne John himfelf alfa V was baptising in water, the ftraying people, who were obedient to God, at " or in a place of deep waters, near to Salem, becaufe there abundance of wa- ♦| ter, fufBcient for them altogether, flowed in the ever-running ftreams of thc- ^. winding. river, whofe pafTage over is very broad." But fuppofing that much water in one great channel is not intended, though I muft confers I can fee no fcafpn.wh^it fhould not, and that many waters, ftreams, or fivufcts arc here - Vol. II. ■ E E ' • meant; 4IO - ' T H t A N C I £'N Y "M'D t) ST lOF- .^ H Weant; yet, -who does not know that many of thefe together, cirt not 6n\y fill large and capacious pools, fufficient enough for ini^merfion, but alfo -frequently form and feed very great rivers ? fo that I do not fee that this will much help his caufe, or affe(ft our argument. - ( But Mr B. fV. fays, p. 14. " But what and if the .holy Ghoft intends to give •' usrhe reafon why the place was called Enon, becaufe there were many waters, ** fprings or rivulets there? what will become of your argument then, and how ♦* win you help yourfelf ?" Where he infim.iates, as if the defign of .the holy Ghoft in thefe words, becaufe there ivas much "water there, is not to inform us 3si the conve^nJcncy of this place for baptizing, or that it was the reafon why John made choice of it, but to explain the meaning of the word £« I do • , • not BAPTIZING B Y ,1 M M E R S Ijq N, &c. in, not doubt, from fbme few hints I have oblerved in this conference, he^as a ya-- lue and refpeft, apd whom } perfuade myfelf he will jiUow tp be ^n imparljfil m(iu of judgment y and to whofe judgment he will always pay a def-h:;;i ^thiy. Our ingenious author, by a new tyrn and mighty ftretch of thoyghr, has found our. another reafon, befudes that of conveniency, for baptizing, which^' made7oi?« fix upon, find determined him in the choice of this place, tl>ftre being much water thefc, ^nd th^t is, sh^t ihf vaji multitudes which flocked to, and at- tended upon his miniftry, mjgh.t bf refrr/hed^ as 4lfo ihei;- horfes, or their camels,. cw whatfopver ^e qi%y fijppofe .mpny<^ tbcm did ride upon •, by which» I foppofe, : he means ut 9brerye, .(Jiat he fcem? t9 /peak this. with fomc caution or guardupon himfcU", as he does alfp in p. 17. where he fays, fpeaking ot the people which flpfked io'Jobns miniftry, " a great number of them, doubc- " Jcfs, mufl; jravcl oi^ny 0)ilesi and we muft fiippofe, many on foot, and many " otherwife:">and thisj Q^nnot but attribute to a felf confcioufnefs in him, that he deferv?d to be numbered among thofe animals, or at lead, to his being aware that this *vpyld be turned upon him, for iiis fooiifh and ridiculous glofles on- the facrcd writings. . What fecms the rppft to ftrengthen him in his folly, and upon which he lays much ftrefs. Is the vaft multitudes of people which followed ' Jfhn^ and attended ppop his miniftry ; and the unwife part John would have adcd, if he had not chofe places vvhere refrefliment might be had for themfclves'. ajid their cattle: But furcly the man forgexs hipifelf, or at ieaft, d£»f6 iVJtgiyc. himfclf time to confidcr, that Jchn y/as now upon the declining hand, wid l«d not thofe vjft nymbcrs and multitudes followirjg him as formerly he bafi ; the- crowd was now afterChrift, and notjobn; and though he had fofpe y'hich came to him, and were baptized, yet they were but few in comparifon pf what he bad formerly, or what now followed Chrift -, as he might cafily have obferye^, t>y, reading this phird chapter of John; and therefore there was no nc^d fpr him to be lo lolicitous for aCQommodatiuns for the people spd their catxl^, 4s inhere -by pur author intimared j and to mal<;e hjs fcpk gppear ;he morcphufibJe, lie. • tells us, that *^hy Join's baptizing, we are to undcrftand Ji^^v's preaching, ♦' adminiftcrin^ in his ofBqe, a/id fuLfiUing his courfe;" for which ^ cites, £ E 2 M''^^- « Fuifle aoMin duo haec cppida JEiidd k Salitn, con procul a fonflucote JoKi!ani» k JaVoc trf- ■_ dunt geograpbi, quibus viciniam faciunt Scythopolim. Cceterum ex his verbis colligcre licet, bap- tirmum fttifle celebratum a Joanne & Chrido totius corporis fubmerfione. Calvin in joh. iii. 23. 212 THE ANCIENT MODE OF ' - Matt. xxi. 25.' J^s X. 47. I: is readily granted, that fometimes by John's bap- t?fni, we are to underftand his whole ininiftry, and' particularly the doflrine of baptifm, preached by him, as diftinft from the adminiftration of the ordinance -, but that by his baptizing here is meant his preaching, muft be denied ; for that it intends his -adminiftraiion of the ordinance of water-baptifm, not only his adl of baptizing, but the people's fubmilTion to it •, for the text fays, they came and were baptized, manifcftly prove it; to fay nothing of the place where it was per- fohnedj being a place of much water, the thing now in debate. He alfo infi- nuates, that great part of the land of Judea was Tandy and barren ; but not fo biircti as his arguments are. *' You may underftand, fays he, what fort of a ♦••country, for. water, a great part of that land was, from the great contentions *i, between Ifaac\ fervants, and others, about digging, finding, and enjoying "wells of water 1" 'but thefe contentions did not arife fo much from the fear- city of water, as from the envy ofihcPbiliJiineson the one hand, and from Ifaac's fqrvants, iliffly infifting upon their right and property, on the other: Forthoush pcrfons may have never fuch plenty of things, ytt they are not willino- to be' defrauded of what is their juft right. He goes on : " Glad at heart they were when they found plenty of water, for ".their own refrefliment, and the refrcfhment of their cattk." One would be aJmofttempted to think that the man was defcribing the fandy defcrts of Arabia, rather than the fcnile land of Ccfs. Moreover, it feems, that there need not be much water for the plunging of pcrfons, and therefore John need not have chofe this place upon that account; but I hope, fo much is needful, as will cover the pcrfons all over. And there is one thing therefore that we need not be afraid of being prcfled with by our author, as we are by fome, and that is, the fcar- ciiy of water in fome parts. But what he fays of the praftice of our friends in London, is entirely falfe, which is, that they plunge in little boles or tubs ; for I cannot fee, but he muft mean them, and not thofe in other places ; becaufe he. adds, rather than the Thames, that is juft by. Now thcrd are but two places, in and about London, that I know of, which are made ufe of for the adminif- traiion of this ordinance, the one is in the midft of a public meeting-houfe, and the other in an open place, where there are convcniencies for a large num- ber of fpeftators ; and it is very rare that this ordinance is adminiftcred by us in BAPTIZING BY INTMERSrON, &c. zjj irn a private ma tine r, is fome other performances commonly are, in a lying-in ■chamber ; and that only in the prefence of a midwife, a nurfc, and two or three goflipping women.' . ' 'As for the inftance of a Certain plunger in the country, performing the ordi- nance in an borfe-pond, in the middle of a town, I fhall fufpend my thoughts about' rt, and neither condemn nor commend his pradlice, unlefs I had a better account of it, with its circumftances, than Mr 'B. W.hzs given -, though I can fee no great damage in it, as he has related it, provided the water was not dirty and filthy : But I fuppofe he defigns it as a banter upon us, and a diverfion for his reader r- much good may do him with it, and let him make the. bed of it he ean. ■ ';■ ■ 'chap: iv^. '*■-■- ^he thir J argument injijledon, in favour of plunging or dipping, as the right mode of baptizing, taken from the practice of the apojlles, and particu- larly from the injldnce of the Eunuch's baptifm in A6ls viii. 38, 39. ijoith the ca-jils and exceptions of Mr B.'W. againjl ity confidered.. THE next' argument which our author,, p. iS. produces, as infiftcd on by us, for the proof of baptifm by immerfion, .and which he excepts againft, is taken from the pradlicc of the apoftles, and particularly.the inlhnce of Philip's baptizing the Eunuch, recorded in /f<5Zj viii. 38, 3^ thus; And be commanded the chariot taJlanAJlill; and th^y werii down both into the water, both Philip and the Eunuch, end he baptized him. And when they ivere come up eut of the water, &c. Here I muft again obferve, as I have already, in a parallel cafe, that we do not from this inftance infer plunging, merely from Philip and the Eunuch's going xlown into, and coming up out of the water; for we know, as well as he, that perfons may go hundreds of times into water, as he fays, without any defign of plunging, or of being plunged ; but we argue from both of them going down into the water ; the one in order to adm'miftcr the ordinance of water-baptifm, and the other to fubmit unto it; and from their coming up out of it, as having 'performed it; from whence we think we have fufficient reafon to conclude, that this was performed by immerfion, or a plugging of the whole body under water; for to what purpofe fhould they both go down into the water, if the ordinance was to be performed .any other way ? or what need would there have been of it? But if plunging cannot be inferred from hence, I am fure it is impoffiblc that pouring or fprinkling Giould. But let us fee whatMr5. ^. will infer from this inftance, and has to except againft our argument from hence. And, . 'A 3214 THE A N C I E N T : M D D E .OP. / •' ' -^fiy FromPbilip and theEuHucFs both ^oing do5v.n int^ the wafer, and comip'r Tjp oat of it, in a profane and jrrcligipus manhfr, hp itjf?rg, that i)either pf them were drowned there. ^Does this become a tninifter of the gofpel, to treat the fa- crcd writings, and the accounts they give of a folemn ordinance qf Ci>rift, after this manner ? Whatever profane loofe he may give himfclf in his attempts to be Vitty on the mode of baptizing by-inunerfion, which he fi^ppofes to b? iinfcrip- 'tural, yet, at leaft, he ought to fet bounds to himfelf, and not be lo free in play- ing Vith, and fe«B«eriBg the yery words of xhe holy Ghoft. But, 'idfy. If that isrejeftcd, why then he infers from hence, that they were both -f lunged over had and cars in the ^atcr. This, I fuppofc, js defigoed to fhevy the abfurdity of our way of reafoning, as he imagines : But does not the man confider, that the one went down as an adminijlrator, the other as 3.fubje£J of bap- tifm; the one /o'^i2/'//2/, xhtoihex .tc be peptized? But fuppofe the ordinance was adminidercd by pouring or fprinkling water, might it not be as jullly infer- red, ihatbecaufe ^hey both went down into the water, one to perform, and the •other to' have it performed, and came up again out of it, when it was done, there- '|ore ihcy' both :bad water poured upon them, or were fprinkled with it ? And then, ^dfyi When heisalked why he could not have concluded, that oni; was plunged and the ofber not: he replies, -"Why truly, fays he, becaufe I thought it out *« of the way of all fcnfc, reafon and revelation fo to infer." I hope he will not \^y that it is out of the way aiallfenfe, reafon, and revelation to infer, that the pne went downip order to adminifter the ordinance of baptifm, and the other to have it ^dm.ini.ftered to him -, but I fuppofe he means that it is out of the way of all fenfe, reafon arid revelation, to infer plunging from hence : But how then icame the.judicious Ca/i'/w to be fomuch out of the way, to conclude from hence that plunging was the antient mode of baptizing, as he does, when he fays, " here " we fee what was the rite of baptizing with the ancients ; for they plunged the " whol^ body Into water''?" How came this great man to be guilty of making fuch a vain conje^ure as our author fays it is ? efpecially when he affirms there i$ -not in facred hiftory, the \c2.^Jhadow of a foundation for it. But to proceed, ' ^thly. In order to elude the force of our argument, from their going down into the water, he obferves, that whofoever goes to any water, efpecially out of a chariot, mull go down to it. But he is defired to obferve, that it is not faid, t"hat they both went down to the water, but they both went into it. As for the text in Pfalm cvii. 23. which fpeaks of perfons going down to the fea in fhips^ 1 hope our author does not think that they went by land in (hips to the fca-fide : If he would know what is meant by this, let him read ver. 26, where the dif- trefs * Hie peffpicirauj. quifnam apud veteres baptizandi ritus fuerh : totum enim corpw in aqustn aiergebant. Calvin in Afl. viii. 38. BAPTIZING BY. IMMERSION, &c. aig tfefs t^at icafaring min arc .often in, is thus elegantly and beautifully defcribed, they mcunt up to the bea'ven^ they go down again to 4bt depths, their foul is melted hecaufe ef trouble ; and what this means, ihofe who have ufed the feas know full wdl, when their fliips have been tofled up as it were to the heavens, and then again plUnged into the depths of the fea, where they have been immeffed in, and covered Over with the waves thereof for a while, and on a fudden, have (^rang out from thence. . It is then they fee the wondrous works of the Lord, in his itmarkablc appearance for them, and providential prefervation of them. *• -Sf^by M^ '^'^5 ^s» ^^^ " ^^'^ ^^ l^c" in the Eunuch's place, he ftiould not •* 4jave chofen to have water poured upon him in the chariot, but for fevcral ^ reafons fbould have been entirely for going down to the water.". He does hot tell us what thcfe reafons are, that we might have confidefcd them ; but with his ufual air 6f Confidence affirms, that "there was no ftrippintr, nor ♦» plunging, nOr puttifig on change of raiment in the (iafc ;" and all the rcafon he has to alTign for it, is, becaufe " Philip was direftly c-aught away by the " -Spirit of the Lord, and the Eunuch immediately went on his way rejoicint^:" But I hope he will aHow that Philip was come up out of the Water firft, bcfbrc be was caught away, and that the Eunuch was got into his chariot, before he •rent on his way j and to fuppofe fo much time as was neceflTary to change their raiment, is no way contMry to the account in the lacred text, and he would alfo do well to confidcr, that ihofe words direSily, artd immediately , are not to be found there. But, 6/i/y, He argues, that if thofe Who Were baptized by the apoftles were plunged or overwhelmed, " thert what prodigious labour muft the apoftles go " through, when three thoufand were baptized in one day, yea perhaps in lefs ** than half of i.t 1 " To which I anfwcr ; There docs not feem to be any ne- cefllty of concluding from ji^iu. 41. that they were all baptized in one day, but if they were, when ive confider that there were twelve apoftles, and fcventy difciples, wha were employed iii the miniftry of the word, Luke x. i, and fo no doubt in baptizing, it will n6t appear fo prodigioufly fatiguing as our author Intimates; for a fingle pcrfon, without having the ftrength either of //rrfw/w, or SamfoKy and without much fatiguing himfelf, may baptize, in this way, a con- ■fidcrablc rmmber in a very little time. But then here is another difficulty be- hind, and that is, " What great trouble muft they be at in ftripping, and fhift- " ing, and changing apparel ! and what abundance of plunging garments they " muft have ready ! " To which I reply, no more trouble than a fingle perfoa has for himfelf, and no more plunging garments to be provided than every one to provide for themfelves, which is no more trouble than wKcn five or ten per- foos only arc baptized : and when "wc confid r how much bathing was in ufe among -J 21^ . .THE ANCIENT MODE iQF • among the Jws, it will not fecm-foilrange, -where, and how they ifhould be fo cafily provided with plunging garments, ^ur objeftor goes on, and adds, ^' In what a poor condition was Pd«/, when he was plunged, having been fo ill, *' and fo long without eating or drinking ! and after that, how unfit mud P««/ " himfclf be under -his wounds and bruifes, and in the dead of the night, to go *' into fome.dcfp .water, and take up the jailor and plunge him P'. H^c I cannot but remarkfthe wretched blunder that our author makes, oc at leaft the inad- vertency, to fay no worfe of it, that he js guilty of, in talking as if the baptifnr of Paul and the jailor was in one and the fame night. But if he objefts this is not his meaning, why did he write in fuch a blundering manner, and many times with want of fenfe, as when. he .talks oi Paul's taking up the jailor^ and many fuch like paflages which are to be found in this his performance. But to ijroceed, that Paul was three days before his baptifm without eating or drinking, is true, but that he was fo very ///as our author reprefcnts, does not appear fo oianifcft; however, it is plain, that be was not fo ill, but he was able to an/ir •and be baptizedy which he need not have done, had it been performed by pour- in^ or fprinkling water upon him. As to Paul's, unfitncfs, under his wounds ^nd bruifes, to.plunge thejailor, 1 need only afk, how he and Silas were capable of praying and fioging the praifes of God, and that fo loud as the other prifoners iieard them? and after that .preached .the gofpel to the jailor and his family, ■which. muft beamuch. more laborious work, and more fpending and fatiguing to them, than baptizing of them was ; but that fame God who enabled them to •perform the one, • carried.them through the other. Again, he fays, " how improperly did Peter fpeak in Cornelius^ houfc, when " he talked oi Jorbidding. water ! whereas he fliould have faid, can any man ior- ." bid thefe men from goirig to the river to be plunged V to which I anfwcr, ,if there is any impropriety in this text, it is not to be charged upon the words or fenfeof the holy. Ghoft, but upon our tranflation; fort/JSaf. *' water," ought not .to be put in conftruflion with lutKvfai, "forbid," but with ^cfr}iSmrou, "to be bap- " tized v" and fo the whole be rendered thus, "Can any man forbid, that thcfe " fhould be baptized with water, which have received the holy Ghoft as well " as we?" and then the fenfe is this; has any man any thing to objeft why thcfe •who have received the holy Ghoft, even as we, fhould not be admitted to the ordinance of water- baptifm? for feeing they have received the greater privilege, why -fiiould they be deprived of the IcfTer ? And this reading and fenfe of the Avords are confirmed by the learned Erafmus, in his notes upon the text, which larc thefe, " the Greeks, fays he ', read after this manner, (um uJ^f . ^c. and the " fenfe ' Grjcci legunt in hone modum ^nrt eJuf. &c. et appartt hunc eflefenfum : nom qnis vetarepoteft,. .qoo minus aqua bap'Jzeniur ii, qui rpuitum faDdlum acceperunt, ficut & nos ? vtluti plus fit fpTitus quam BAPTIZING BY IMMERSION, &c. 217 fenfe appears to be this : Can any man forbid that thefe flioiild be baptized in water, who have received the holy Ghoft as well as we ? for as the fpirit is preferable to water, and feeing they have him, it will be no great matter *' if this be added alfo : Moreover the accufative t« t/Jbf, " water;" either de- " pends upon the prepofitipn ^^-n, which maybe underftood, or elfe adheres to " the verb ^aTT/^FcK, "to be baptized;" jufl in the fame form in which we " fay, p«TT/(^o/za/ ^dT'lia-fM, " to be baptized with a baptifm." As to what Mr 5. fV. fays, concerning the ufe of plunging garments in bap- tifm, that therefore the water comes to the body only a filtering, or as it can work, its way through, which, fays he, at bed is only equivalent to fprinkling. I need only reply, it is fufficient in baptifm that the whole body be plunged into and covered under water ; nor does it much concern us, to obferve and know, how it works its way through to the body. I hope he will acknowledge, that a corps may be faid to be truly buried, when covered with earth, though it is wrapt up in a fhroud, or in its funeral clothes, and put up clofe in a coffin, fo that the earth with which it is covered, does not as yet touch it ; even fo a per- fon may be truly faid to be baptized, when in the name of the threeDivine Pcr- fons, he is plunged into, and covered over with water, even though the water may not be fuppofed to have had time enough to have worked its way through to his body ; and when it has done fo, how that is equivalent to fprinkling, no man can devife. But enough of this, I proceed to the next argument. CHAP. V. The fourth argument taken from Romans v'l. 4. ColofHans ii. 12. ivlth J the fenfe given of thofe fcriptures, by Mr B. W. cojfidcrcd. /^UR next argument for baptifm by immerfion, which Mr 5. ^Z^'. has thought ^-'^ fit to produce in p. 24. and except againft, is taken fromi?ow. vi.4. Cc/.ii.i2. where this ordinance is took notice of by the apoftle, as a burial, and as repre- fcnting the burial and refurreflion of Chrift ; which argument may be formed thus, and not in the loofc rambling way, in which he has reprefcnted it, and which, no doubt, he thought would beft anfwer his purpofe ; namely, " If the " end and defign of baptifm are to reprefent the burial and refurrcclion ofChrift, " then it ought to be performed by plunging into, and overwhelming with " water; but the end and defign of baptifm, are to reprefent the burial and re- VoL. II. F F " furreftion quam aqua, cumque ille contingerit, nihil efTe magni fi hoc accefTerit : Ca:tcrum to viu^ ac^ufativus aut pendet a pracpofitione fubaudita xaxa, aut adharret verbo ^axlit&iiiai, ea forma qua dicimus, pawTi^oncii ^xvlia^x. Erafmuj in Aft. x, 47. 2i8 THE ANCIENT MODE OF " furreftion ofChrift, therefore it ought to be performed by plunging into, and « overwhelming with water; the reafon is, becaufe no other mode of baptizing " either by pouring or fprinkling a little water on the face, can anfwer this end." But let us attend to what Mr B. IV. has to except. And, 1. He feems to deny this to be the end and dcfign of the inftitution of this ordinance, when he afks, " But did Chrift ever inftitutc baptifm for any fuch " end ? As for the Lord's Supper, he hath faid, Do this in remembrance of me j " and it is plain from the word, that in the Lord's Supper we Jhew forth his " death till he come : but where has he faid, be plunged or baptized, to repre- " fent my burial or refurreftion ? " To which I anfwer, that though we have not the end of this inftitution declared, in fo many exprefs words, yet we think it may be fairly concluded from thofc texts now mentioned, and muft continue to be of the fame mind, for ought Mr B. tV. has advanced againft it : Nor are we alone in our fentiments : For that Chrift's burial and rcfur-reflion are reprefentcd by baptifm, has been acknowledged by many, both ancient and modern divines, whofc words I forbear to tranfcribe, partly becaufe they have, been many of them produced by others already, and partly becaufe I would not fill my book with citations, and therefore fhall only direft the reader to the reference in the margent ''. Though Mr B. IV. is of opinion, that to infer this from thofc words, buried with him in baptifm, is very abfurd and inconclu- five ; and that " we may as well be hanged up againft a tree, to reprefenc " Chrift crucified, becaufe it is faid, that we are crucified with Chrift." But can any mortal fee this to be a parallel cafe ? to fay nothing how (hocking this exprefTion muft be to every ferious mind, and not to be borne with ; no more than the wretched jargon which follows it, when he fays, " and to make a fair " end of you, be furc to fee you dead under the earth or under the water ; " which, I doubt not, to every impartial intelligent reader, will appear to have as little of argument as it has of fenfe in it. Befides, who does not fee that all this, whatever he can mean by it, may be levelled as rtiuch againft the or- dinance of the Lord's-Supper, as that of Baptifm. Moreover, there are other texts, befides thefe mentioned, which dcmonftrate the rcprefentation of Chrift's refurrc6lion, which fuppofes his burial to be the end of baptifm-, as for inftance, 1 Peter iii. 21. where baptifm is faid 10 fave us, by the refurreSlion ofjefus Chrift, But how does it do that, but by reprefcnting the refurreftion of Chrift unto us, and thereby leading our faith to it, to behold our juftification and difcharge, by a rifcn Saviour? To which I might alfo add, 1 Cor. xv. 29. where the apoftle » C3tPg07 Nazianzen. BafiJ, Chryfollome, Ambrofe, Daille, Fowler, Cave, Towerron, cited by Mr Stennett, in hii anfwer to Ruflen, p. 144, 145, 147, 156, 157. Sec alfo D: Goodwin** Chrift fet fwih. Seft. 3. Ch. 7. BAPTIZING BY IMMERSION, &c. 219 apoftle evincing the truth of the refurreftion of the dead, thus argues, elfe what /hall they do, which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rife not ? that is, " Who are baptized into the faith of the refurredlion of Chrift, which is ve- " prefented thereby, and which is the confirmation of our refurredlion -, " the thing that is there debated ; and which, if not true, the apoftle argues that their baptifm, as well as their faith, and his preaching, was in vain. Befides, if our author removes this end of baptifm, he ought to have fubftituted an- other, and have told us what was the end and defign of it, which he has not done ; for all the ordinances of the gofpel are, no doubt, dcfigned for the comfort and edification of believers, and the confirmation of their faith in the perfon of Chrift ; and feeing there appears nothing more manifcftly to be the end of it, than what has been mentioned, we fhall think fit to abide by it. But, idly. Our author alks, " What there is in your plunging that reprefents " Chrift's burial and refurredlion;" and to (hew that there is no agreement, he runs the parallel between them, and obferves, that Chrift was carried to his grave, where, being dead, he was buried, and lay there three days, and three nights, and that in the earth, where a grat ftofie was rolled at the mouth of the fcpukhrc, and when he arofe, it was ly his own power, and thereby declared to be the Son of God : But as for us, \i/c go ourfelves into the water, are plunged alive, and that not three minutes, in water; and that our plunger dares not leave us, nor roll a Jione upon us •, and it is he that puts us in that pulls us out, and we are declared to he what we are : What would the man have us be declared to be, what we are not ? and then in a taunting manner fays, " and this is the repre- *' fcntation and the mighty refcmblancc." Thefe are fome of our author's mafterly ftrokcs, and when the candor of the reader has fupplied the want of fcnfe in his cxprefTion, and charitably conjedtured at his meaning, I need only reply, that the things inftanccd in are only circumftantial, and not eftcntial to a burial, and therefore unneceflary to be reprefcnted in baptifm •, nay, it would have been abfurd to have had them : It is enough that the things themfelves arc, namely, the burial and refurreftion of Chrift, which are fufficiently repre- ftnted by an immcrfion into water, and an emcrfion out of rtl But who docs not fee that a Quaker, or any other perfon that denies the ordinance of the Lord's-Supper, may argue after the fame manner, and fay, you lliy that this ordinance reprefents a crucified Chrift, and ftiews forth his drath and lufFerings, but pray how docs it appear ? you take a loaf of bread, and break it in pieces, and a bottle of wine, and pour it out-, but Chrift, when be was crucified, was hanged on a tree, his head was crowned with thorns, his hftrtds and feet were pierced with nails, and his fide with a fpear •, but here are ho thorns, nails, or fpear made ufe of by you, his real body was treated after f K 2 this . I 220 THE ANCIENT MODE OF this manner, but yours. \s on\)' 2i loaf of bread ; he poured out his blood, you only wine; " and this is the rcprefentation, and the mighty refemblance." And I think all this may be faid with as much juftnefs as the other. But, 3. Mr B. /•F. has got another way of getting off the argument taken from thcfe texts, \n Rom. vi. 3, 4. Col. ii. 12. and that is, by aflerting that the bap- tifm of Chrift's futFerings, and not wacer-baptifm, is intended in them. It would be endlcfs, and perhaps our author will fay needlefs, to oppofe to him the feve- ral expofitors and interpreters, who undcrftand, by baptifm, the ordinance of water-baptifm, in thofe texts-, as well as a large number of them who think the- allufion is made to the ancient practice of baptizing by immerfion ; as Grotius; Vorfiius, Paraus, Pifcator, Diodate, zx\di l\\t AJfembly of Divines on Romans v\, j^.. and Zanchy and Davenant on Col. ii. 12. I fuppofe that Mr B. IV. will reply, that thcfe are but men, and their judgment fallible ; I hope he does not think that he is more than a man, or that his judgment is infallible; and it will fcarcely be accounted modcfty in him, to fet himfclf upon a level with them : Though I confcfs that his fcnfc of the words is not difagreeblc to the analogy of faith, yet I wonder that he Oiould be fo poficive as to fay that this is the only meaning of them, as he does in p. j i. As to what he fays with rcfpecl to thole texts, one of them being produced as an argument to promote holinels in belie- vers, and the other to ftrengthcn their faith in the doftrine of juftifica^ion ; I can- not fee, but to undcrftand them of water-baptifm, fuits very well with the fcope- thereof, however it is ridiculed by our author: For why may not our baptifm,- wherein we profefs our faith in a buried Chrift, and that wc are dead by him to the law, the world, and particularly to fin, be urged and made ufeof by the fpirit ofGod, as an argument why we fhould not live any longer therein. And are there no force, power and cogency in this argument .'* Again, in baptifm we profefs our faith in the refurreftion of Chrift, which is rcprefented hereby, and that we are rifen with him, and therefore are under the higheft obligations to walk in newnefs of life, as the apoftle himfelf argues. Moreover, what can have a greater tendency to ftrengthen our faith in the dodtrine of juftification,- ihan this ordinance has ? by which it is led to fee where our Lord lay, and how our fins were left in the grave by him ; and he, as our glorious reprefentative, rifing again for our jujlification, by whom we are acquitted and difcharged from all fin and condemnation ; and is fuch a way of arguing from hence, to promote holincfs, and ftrengthen us in the doflrine of juftification, to be wondered at,, what is meant by it ? But to proceed, j^tbly, Suppofingthat the baptifm ofChrift's fufferings is intended here, and that we are buried with him therein, as our head and reprefentative, it muft be allowed, thatChrift's fufferings are called fo, in allufioh to water-baptifm; and if .. J BAPTIZING BY IMMERSION, &c. 221 if we are faid to be buried with him in them, it mud be in allufion to a perfon's being buried in water in that ordinance, which cannot be by pourino- or fprink- ling of water upon him, but by an immerfion into it. So that our argument for plunging, from hence, is like to lofe nothing by this fenfe of the words. That Chrift's fufFerings are called a baptifm, in Matt. xx. 22. Luke xii. 50. as alfo that by a Synechdoche, they are called the blood of his crofs, is granted ; but then the fhedding of his blood was not the whole of Chrift's fufFerino-s, but a part only, and this is called the blood of fprinkling, not with regard to its being called a baptifm ; but becaufe it is fprinkled upon a believer's confcience, and being fo, fpeal'LS peace and pardon there ; but when i;he greatnefs and multitude of Chrift's fufFerings are fet forth, they are rcprefcnted, not by a fprinklincr of water, but by mighty floods of water, which overflowed him, fo that he feemed, as it were, to be plunged into them, and overwhelmed v/ith them -, as he fays, in Pfalm \%\x 2. I am come into deep waters, where the foods overRow me; where the Scptuagint ufc the word KAnToi^i^a, as they do alfo in verfe 15. which Mr B. W. in page 45. grants is very proper to exprefs plunging by; and therefore no wonder then that his fufFerings are compared to a baptifm, and fiich an one as is adminiftered by immerfion : So that the argument from hence, notwithftanding all thofe cavils and exceptions, ftands firm and un- fhakcn. As to the argument taken from the univerfality of Chrift's fufFerings in every part, of his body, which he makes his antagonift plead in page 32. he acknowledges it was never made ufe of by the greateft men of our perfua- fion, why then does he produce it ? If every thing that has been dropt by weak chriftians, in private converfation on the fubjeft of infant-baptifm, was pub- liftied to the world, how filly and ridiculous would it appear ? CHAP. VI. 'The fifth and lajl argument taken from the fgnif cation of the word P*'2J7'C"> •which always fgnif es to dip or plunge, with Mr B. WV. exceptions to it, confdered.. THE fifth and laft argument ufed by us, for immerfion in baptifm, taken from the conftant fignification of the word fixrji^v, baptizo, to dip or plunge, Mr B.py. has thought fit to produce in p. 33. and except againft^, which we hope, notwithftanding, to make good, however we may be rcpre- fcnted by our author, as uncapable of reaJing our mother tongue. And, I. Mr 5. ^F. denies that y«ir7«, hapto, and ^i-ZJi^u, baptizo, fignify one and the fanie thing ; but the reafon he gives, is not a luflicient one, and that is, becaufe 222 THE ANCIENT MODE OF becaufe the holy Ghoft never makes ufe of the former, when this ordinance is cxprefled, but the latter; for the holy Ghoft may make ufe of what words he pleafes, without deftroying the fenfe of others ; and by the way, then it may be obferved, that c?^rv(a, rantizo, and p*T73^», baptize, do not fignify one and the fame thing; becaufe the holy Ghoft never makes ufe of the former, when the ordinance is exprelTcd, but the latter. Befides, all the Lexicographers that I hav€ been able to confult, tell me, that p«T7a and ^a.'/Ji^a do fignify one and the fame thing ; for they render both by the very fame words, and they are both promifcuoufly ufed by Greek authors : And indeed, why fhould not ^avji^a, baptizo, the derivative, fignify the fame as its primitive ? what, is its fignifica- tion leflened by the addition of a fyllable to it? Dr Gak^ has given inftances enough of derivatives in {<», which fignify the fame with their primitives. And indeed, fome have taken the word, under confideration, to be what gramma- rians call a frequentative, which fignifies more than the derivative does. But, 2. It feems our author will fcarccly allow ^tIo, bapto, to fignify dip ox plungCy and therefore puts it upon us to prove, that^K^^, when he put his hand in the difh, thruft it all over in the fauce, Matt. xxvi. 23. where the word t{jiCAT-\.a.<^ embapfas, is ufed ; but he fhould have obferved, that it was not his hand, but the fop in his hand, by a metonymy of the fubjeft, as PZ/f^/or obferves, which he dipt into the fauce, as he might have learned, by comparing the text with JobnxW'x. 26. And in p. 45. he fays, "yea, with refpedl unto ^a.-/}iu itfelf, it " is very evident that the Greeks did not diredly mean plunging thereby; for " when the Septuagint tell us in Ban. iv, 33. that Nebuchadnezzar^ body was " wet with the d«w of heaven, they make ufe of the very word ;" and I would alfo add, very juftly, itcxaftly anfwered to the Chaldee word yna^' here ufed, which word always fignifies to tinge or dip, as dyers dip their cloilies in their vatts, and fo is exprefTive of what a conAmon Nebucbadnezzar'% body was in, he being as wet with the dew of heaven, as if he had been dipt or plunged all over in water. But enougli of this ; let us confider, ,3. How we are like to come off with the word ^drrji^o, baptize ; and here our author in p. 41. tells us, ore rotunda, and with confidence enough, in fo many words, that " it never docs fignify plunging; waQiing with water by pouring " or fprinkling, is the only meaning of it." The man has got a good affiirance, but yet by his writing, he does not feem to have fuch a ftock of learning ; how- ever what he wants in one, he makes up in the other. It is ftrange that all our Lexicographers, fo many learned critics, and good divines, fhould be fo much miftaken, as to render the word to dip or plunge, and allow this to be the proper fignification of it. I have myfelf confulted feveral Lexicons, as thofe of Suidas, Scapuloy ' Reflexions on Mr Wall's Hiflory of Infant-baptifm, p- 217. BAPTIZING BY IMMERSION, &c. 213 Scapula, Hadrian, Junius, Pafor, as alfo another made by Bitdaus, Tufanus, Gefner, Junius, Conjlantine, Hartung, Hopper, zndXylander, who aJl unanimoufly render the word by merge, immergo, to plunge or dip into : And though they afterwards add alfo, al^luo, leve, to wajh, yet it is plain they mean fuch a wafli- ing, as is by dipping •, and we are very willing to grant it, for we know that there can be no dipping without wafhing : BiJt had they meant a wafhing by pouring or fprinkling, they would have rendered it by per/undo, or afperga, to pour upon, or fprinkle ; but this they never do. And, to thcfe I might add a Urge number of learned critics, and good divines, who grant, that the word in its firft and primary fenfe, fignifies 10 dip or plunge only-, and to -waJh only in a fecondary, remote, and cont'equential one; z% Cafaubon, Camerarius, Gro- iias'", Calvin", siting", /iljled\ IVendthn'*, and others. But what need I heap up authors, to prove that which no man of any tolerable learning will deny : But what will not ignorance, attended with a conf;dcrable fliarc of confidence, carry a man through ? I might oppofe to him, the ule of the word in many Greek authors, but this has been done better already than I am capable of doing it, to which I refer him ', and fhall content myfelf, with juft mentioning that paf- fcge of Plutarch ', ^xirji^-^f mu/Jiv tn i*\a(raat, which 1 think the author I have reference to, has took no notice of; and let hi.n try how his fenfe of pouring or fprinkling will agree with it. I am fure it will found very harfli, to render the words pour ov fprinkle thyfelfinto the fea, but will read very well to be rendered thus, plunge tkyfelf into the fea : But I fuppofe he will take this to be a breach of the firft article agreed upon in this conference; but why the Greek authors fhould not be allowed as evidences, in the fenfe of aGreck word, I cannot fee: I am fure this is not very confiltent with right reafon, which the thing in debate was to be cleared up from, as well as from the word of God. But let us confider the ufe of the word with the Septuagint, which I fuppofe he will not except againft, becaufe he has himfelf brought it into the controverfy. And there are but two places, which I have as yet met with, where the word is ufed by them, and the firft is in -2 Kings v. 14. where it is faid of Naam an the Syrian, that i>« vent down, ^ iCortm^it'T*, and baptized or dipped himfelf feven times in Jordan : I prefume our author will not fay, that this is to be underftood of a wafhing, by pouring or fprinkling ; efpecially, feeing it anfwers to the Hebrew word ^:jD, which always fignifies to dip or plunge, and is the word, which is fo often ren- dered by ^TTfti, kapto, and which, by the way, proves thefe two to be of the fame ■ All three on Matthew iii. 6. n Inflitut. I. ^, r, 15. f. 19^ • Loc comman. p. 198. & Explic. Catech. p. 311. p Ltxic. Theolog. p. zji, 222. < Chrifl. Theolog. 1. I. c. 22. ' Dr Ga'e'j RefleQiom on Mr Wall's Hiftor)- cf lafaot-baptiOni ktterj. • D« Superdiuone. 224 THE ANCIENT MODE OF fame Cgntfication, feeing they are promifcuoufly ufed by them,' to exprefs one and the fame word. The other place is in Jfai. xxi. 4. where what we read, fearfuhefs affrighted vie, they render* *ce/«« /^i ^*tt/{«, iniquity bath plunged me ; for to tranflacc the words, iniquity hath wajhed, or poured, or fprinkled me, would be intoler- able; but both the language and the fenfe are fmooth and cafy, by rendering them, iniquity hath plunged me ; that is, into the depths of mifery and diftrcfs ; fo tbatl am overwhelmed with horror and terror : And hereby alfo the fenfeof the Hebrew word j-iiO, here ufed, is very beautifully exprelTcd. But let us now confider, ^tbly. What exceptions Mr B. fK makes againft this univerfal fenfe of the word, and there are three places in the NewTeftament which he oppofes to it. The firft is in Mark vii. 4. j^nd when they come from the market, except they jwafh, they eat not, and many other things there be, which they have received to bold, as the wafhing of cups and pots, brazen veffels, and of tables. Whereupon Mr B. W. obferves, that the words of the holy Ghoft are, except they firft baptize themfclves -, and many other fuch things they have, as the baptizing of tables. Excellent obfervations indeed ! But how does this prove that the word fignifies only a wafhing, by pouring or fprinkling ? I believe it will ap- pear, that this is meant of the wafhing of the whole body by dipping, which mi"ht be done, without their going into a pond or a river before they came home-, for they had, no doubt, proper conveniencies for immerfion, when they came home, feeing bathing was in many cafes required of the people, as well as of the priefls-, and to underfland it of fuch a wafhing, feems better to ex- prefs their fuperftitious folicitudc to cleanfe themfclves from all impurity they might contrail by converfing with others in the market ; it fcems to be diftinft from wafhing of hands in the former verfe, where a different word is ufed. But fuppofing that wafhing of hands was intended here, does not every body know, that the ufual manner of doing that, is not by pouring or fprinkling water upon them, but by putting them into it. And he>e I cannot but take notice of the obfervation of Bexa ' upon this text ; " ^Afv\iSm, fays he, in this " place, is more than y^iitir-nif ; for the former feems to refpecl the whole " body, the latter only the hands, nor does ^a/xv\^f fignify to wafli, but only " by confequence, for it properly denotes to immcrfe for the fake of dipping." As for the waQiing or baptizing of cups, pots, &c. it is well known that the cleanfing of veffels, which were polluted by the falling of any dead creature that * PIui autem ell iSairn^dSai, hoc in loco, quam ^i{»nr1«», qaod illud videatur de corpore nni- verfo, iftud de manibus duntaxat intelligendum. Neque to ^aTTi{«» fignificat lavare, nifi a con- fequenti, nam proprje declarac tingecdi caufa immergcre. Beza in Marc. 7. 4. •BAPTIZING BY IMMERSION, &:c. 225 that was unclean into them, was by putting into the water, and not by pouruig or fprinkling water upon them. The exprefs command in Z,m/. xi. 32, is, that ;■/ muji be put into the watery or as the Septuagint render it 0ci^iir%',aj, it muft he dipt into water. Moreover, their fuperftitious waOiing of vefTcls, which our Lord feems here to mean, and juftly reprehends, of which we read many things in their Mifnah", or oral law, their book of traditions, was performed this way, where they make ufe of the word ^ntO to exprefs it by, which always fig- nifies to dip or plunge. But what need I ufe many words to prove this, when every old woman could have informed him of the ufual manner of wathing their vcflc-ls, which is not by pouring or fprinkling water upon -them, but by put- ting them into it : And if he afks, did the Jewifh women wafh their tables fo ? There appears no reafon to conclude the contrary ; and if he fliould fay, how and where could they do it ? I anfwer, in or near their own houfes, where they had convenicncies for bathing themfelves, and wafhing their garments, at proper times, without carrying them to a river. The next place inftanced in by him, \s Heb.'w. io. where the ceremonial law is faid to ftand only in meats and drinks, and divers wajhings ; it is in the Greek text, in divers baptifms ; and, fays our author, "it is evident from the " word of God, that thofe waOiings generally ftood in pouring or fprinklin<' of " water ;" but that is a miftake of his, for they neither flood in them gene- rally, norparticularly •, for thofe ceremonial ablutions were always performed by bathing or dipping in water, and are called «/)«f.f/a, divers, or different, not becaufe they were performed different ways, as ibme by fprinkling, others bv pouring, and others by plunging, but becaufe of the different perfons and things, the fubjedts thereof; as the priefls, Levites, Ifraelites, vefTcIs, gar- ments, &c. And here it may not be amifs to obfervc what Maimonides " who was one of the moft learned of the Jewifh writers, fays concernino- this matter " Wherever, fays he, the wafhing of the flefh or garments is mentioned in the " law, it means nothing elfe than the wafhing of the whole body-, for if a man " wafhes himfcif all over, excepting the very tip of his little finder, he is ftill «« in his uncicannefs." Nay, he fays it is necefTary that every hair of his head fhould be wafhed ; and therefore the apoftlc might well call thcfe wafhings- boftifms. The third and lafl inflance produced by him, is i Cor.x. i, 2. where the apoflle fays, that all our fathers were under the cloud, and alt paffed throu-h the Vol. II. Go " j/, .^ " Trafl. Mikvaoth. c. 10. f. I, 5, 6. * Ubiconqoe in lege meinoratur ablatio carnis aut veflium, nihil aliod vult, quam a'jiutionem lotius corporis, nam fiquis fe totum abluat, eicepto ipfiffimo apice minimi dipiti ille adhuc in i.-n- intindiue fua, Maimon. in Mikvaoth. c. 1,4. in Lighifoot Hor. Kebr. in Matt. p. 47. 226 THE ANCIENT M O D E O F fea \ and were all baptized unto Mofes in the cloudy and in the fea ; wliicli when nur author has mentioned, he very brifkly afks, " Pray how were our fathers bap- " tized there ?" to which, I hope, we fhall be capable of returning an anfvver, without appearing to be {o bitterly, gravelled with this place, as he is pleafrd to ■ make his friend fay we arc. As for the manner in which he repreftnts foine of our friends accounting for it ; namely, that when the people oi Ifrael pafTed through theRed fea, they had the waters flood up, both on their right hand, and on their left, and a cloud over them ; fo that there was a very great refemblance of a perfon's being baptized, or plunged under water. This, I fay, is not fo much to be defpifed, nor does it dcferve fo much ridicule and contempt, as he has pleafed to caft upon it ; and I believe will appear to any unprejudiced per- fon, a much better way of accounting for ir, than he is capable of giving, con- fiftent with his way of adminiftering the ordinance : Though I cannot but think that the Ifraelites were jfr/? baptized in the cloud, and then in the fea, according to the order ofthe apoftle's words ; and agreeable to the ftory in Exodus xiv. where we read, that the cloud went from before their face, and flood behind them, and was between the two camps, to keep off the Egyptians from the Ifraelites. I am therefore of opinion, with the learned Gataker'', thgt the cloud when it pafTcd over them, let down a plentiful rain upon them, whereby they were in luch a condition, as if they had been all over dipt in water ; fo that they were not on- ly covered by it, but baptized in it : Therefore our author very improperly di- redls us to Pfalm Ixxvii. i 7. the clouds poured out water, as the better way of re- folving the cafe; for the^ apoftle does not fay, that they were baptized in the clouds, but in the cloud which went before them, but now pafllng over them, in order to ftand behind them, they were, as it were, immcrfed in it. But fup- pofing that the text in Pfalm Ixxvii. may be adireftion in this cafe, and fcrve to explain what the apoftle means by baptizing, ic will no ways agree either with our author's fcnfe of the word, nor his way of adminiftering the ordinance : For were the Ifraelites baptized under the clouds, by their pouring or fprinklinga fmall quantity of water upon their faces ? the Hebrew word Dnr here ufed, fig- nifies an overflow, or an inundation of water : And Ainfworlh reads n Jlr earned down or gufbed with a tempefl \ fo that they were as pcrfons overwhelmed, and plunged over head and ears in water ; and therefore the apoftle might well call it a being baptized. But now let us confidcr alfo, how they might be faid to be baptized in the fea; and there arc feveral things, in which the Ifraelites paflage through the Red fea, refcmbled our baptifm. As for inflance, their following oi Mofcs into it, which may be meant by their being baptized into him, was an acknowledgment of their regard » In Adverfar, Mifcellan. p 30. BAPTIZING BY IMMERSION, &c. 227 regard unto him, as their Guide and Governor-, as our baptifm is a following of Chrill as our Prophet, who has taught and led us the way -, as well as a pr j- feflion of our faith in him, as our Surety and Saviour, and a fubjeftion to hin, as our King and Governor : Theirs was at their firft entrance upon their iourney to Canaan, as ours is, when, in a way of profefTion, we publicly begin our chriftian race : They, when they came out of it, could fing and rejoice, in the view of all their enemies being dedroyed -, as the believer alfo can in this ordi- nance, in the view of all his fins being drowned in the fca of Chrift's blood, witncfs the inftances of the Eunuch and Jailor. But in nothing is there a greater refemblance between them, than in their defcending into it, and coming up out of it; which is very much expreffive of the mode of baptifm by immer- fion. And this I choofe to deliver in the words of the judicious Gataker^. " The defcent, (that is, of the Ifraelites) fays he, into the inmofl and loweft " parts of the lea, and their afcent out of it again upon dry land, hath a very " great agreement with the rite of chriRian baptifm, as it was adminiftered in *' the primitive times ; feeing in baptizing they went down into the water, and " came up again out of the fame ; of which defcent and afcent exprefs mention " is made in the dipping of the EthiopianEunuch, y^i,7j viii. 38,39. Moreover, " as in the chriftian rite, when they were immbrfed, they were overwhelmed " in water, and as it were buried ; and in fome meafure, feemed to be buried *' together with Chrift. And again, when they emerfcd, they feemed to rife, " even as out of a grave, and to be rifen with Chrift, Roni.vi.^., 5. a.ndCol.u.12. " So likewife, the waters of the fca (landing up higher than the heads of thofc *' that pafTcd through it, they might feem to be overwhelmed ; and in fome *' rcfpedts, to be buried therein, and to cmerfe and rife out again, when they " came out fafe on the other fide of the fliore." And having now confidered all thofe exceptions, which our author has made againft this fenfe of the word, which is contended for, I hope it will appear, that he has little reafon to make that vain triumph lie does, in p 38. where, he afks, " Where now is your baptize, that fignifies nothing elfe but plunging and " overwhelming ?" As for his comparing the paffage of the Ifraelites through c c 2 the 1 Magnam habet convenientiam ille in marls intima infimaque defcenfus, ex eodem afcenfui tJenuo in aNdam, cum baptifmi chridiani ritu, prout is primis tcmporibus adminiftrabatur. Si- quidem inter baptizandum in aquas dcfcendebant, & ex eifdem denuo afcendebanl : Cujus iLaraZautui i^ And if he means that it may be inferred from hence, that they ought to be ad- mitted, whilft here, to church-fellowftiip, who denies it ? But I hope it mull be in a way agreeable to gofpel order; and he ought to have firft proved, that admifTion to church-fellowfhip without water baptifm, is according to gofpel order. Jefus Chrift, no doubt, receives many unbaptized perfons into heaven ; and fo he does no doubt, Rich who never partook of the Lord's fupper-, nay, who never were in church-fellowfhip : But are thefe things to be laid afide by us upon that account ? We are not to take our meafures of adling in Chrift's church here below, from what he himfelf does in heaven, but from thofe rules ■which he has left us on earth to go by. Havinor thus confidered our author's reafons, for the free and mixt commu- nion of faints, without making water baptifm a bar to it; I fhall take the liberty to fubjoin fonie reafons againft it, which 1 defire chiefly might be regarded and confidered by thofe who are of the fame perfuafion with us, wnh refpeft to the ordinance of water-baptifm. They are as follow : 1. Becaufe fuch a praflice is contrary to Chrift's commifTion, in Matt, xxviii^ 19. where Chrift's orders are to baptize thofe that are taught. It is not only without a precept of Chrift, which in matters of worftiip we fhould be careful that we do not aft without, (for he has no where commanded to receive unbap- tized perfons into churches) but it is alfo contrary to one which requires all be- lievers to be baptized; and this muft be cither before they are church members or BAPTIZING BY IMMERSION, &c. 255 or after they are fo, or never. The two latter, I dire fay, will not be afTcrted, and therefore the former is true. 2. It is contrary to the order and praftice of the primitive churches ; it is not only without a precept, but without a. precedent : The admifiion of the firft converts after Chrift's death, refurreftion, and afcenfion, into church fcl- lowfhip, was after this manner. Firll, they glad'y received the word, then -jccre baptized, and after that, added to the church, Aifts ii. 41. So the apoftle Paul firft believed, then was baptized, and after that adhyed to join himfclf to the difciples, ASIs ix. 18, 26. Who therefore that has any regard to a command of Chrift, and an apoftolical pradlice, would break in upon fuch a beautiful order as this ? I challenge any perfon, to give one fingle inftance of any one that was ever received into thofe primitive churches without being firft bap- tized. 3. It has a tendency to lay afide the ordinance entirely. For upon the fame foot that perfons, who plead their baptifm in their infancy, which to us is none at all, may be received, thofe wlio never make pretenfions to any, yea, utterly deny watcr-baptifm, may alfo Moreover, if once it is accounted an indif- ferent thing, that may, or may no: be done-, that it is unnecefTary and unefTcn- tial to church-communion, to which perfons may be admitted without it, they will lie under a temptation wholly to omit it, rather than incur the trouble, fhame, and reproach that attend it. 4. It has a tendency to lay afide the ordinance of the Lord's-Supper, and in- deed all others. For, fuppofe a perfon fhould come and propofe for commu- nion, to any of thole churches who are upon this foundation, and give a fatis- faflory account of his faith and experience to them, fo that they arc willing to receive him ; but after all, he tells them he is differently minded from them, with refpecl: to the ordinance of the Lord's-Supper : I am willing to walk with you, lays he, in all other ordinances but that; and, as to that, I am very willing to meet when you do, and with you ; to remember Chrift's dying love : I hope I (hall be enabled to feed by faith, upon his flcfh and blood as well as you ; but I think to cat the bread, and drink the wine, are but outward cere- monies, and altoge.her ncedlcfs. I fiiould be glad to know, whether any of thcfc churches would rcjeift this man ? I am lure, according to their own principles,' they cannot. Therefore has not this a tendency to lay afide the ordinance of the Lord's Supper ? For if it is warrantable for one man, it is fur ten or twenty, and {o on ad infinitum. All that I can meet with, as yet, that is objected to this, is, that the Lord's-Supper is a church-ordinance, and cannot be difpcnfed with in fuch a cafe-, but baptifm is not, and therefore may. But baptifm is an ordinance of Chrift, and therefore cannot be difpenfed H H 2 with 236 THE ANCIENT MODE OF with no more than the other : By a church-ordinance, they either mean an or- dinance of the church's appointing •, or elle one that is performed by pcrfons when in a church ftate. The former, I prefumc, they do not mean, bccaufe the Lord's-Supper is not in that fenfe a church-ordinance: And if they mean in the latter fenfe, that baptifm is not a church-ordinance, then certainly it ouirht to be performed btrfore tht-y are in a church ftate -, which is the thing pleaded for. When they talk of baptifm's not being cflential to falvation, who . fays it is ? but will this tolerate the abufe, neglefl, or omifTion of it ? Is any thing relating to divine worfh'p clTential to falvation ? but what, muft it all be laid afide becaufe it is not ? is not this an idle way of talking ? 5. It is a rcje(fling the patlern which Chrift has given us, and a trampling upon his legiflative power; is this doing all things according to his dircftion, when we ftep over the firft thing, after believing, that is enjoined us? Is not this makincr too free with his legiflative power, to alter his rules at pleafurc ? and what elfe is it, but an attempt to joftle Chrift out of his throne ? It is no other than an imputation of weaknefs to him, as if he did not know what was beft for his churches toobfcrve-, and of carelcfsnefs, as if he was unconcerned whe- ther they regarded his will or no. Let fuch remember the cafe of Nadab and ylbihu. In matters of worlhip, God takes notice of thofe things that fcem but fmall^ and will contend with his people upon that account. A power to difpenfe withChrift's ordinances, was never given to any men, or fet a^ men or churches upon earth. An ordinance of Chrift does not depend upon fo precarious a foun- dation, as perfons having, or not having light into it : If they have not, they muft make ufe of proper means, and wait till God gives them it. 6. We are commanded to withdraw from every brother that walks difordah ; not only from pcrfons of an immoral converfation, but alfo from thofc who are corrupt in doftrine, or in the adminiftration of ordinances; if this is not a dilbr- derly walking, to live in the abufe, or negleifl and omifTion of a gofpcl ordinance, I know not what is : We are not to fufFer fin upon a brother, but reprove hmi for it ; bear our tcftimony againft it, left we be partakers of his guilt ; and if we are to withdraw from iuch difordcrly pcrfons, then we ought not to receive them. 7. This praftice makes our fcparation from thcEftablifhed church, look more like a piece of obftinacy, than a cafe of confcience : What, fliall we boggle at reading theCommon-prayer-book, wearing the furplice, kneeling at theLord's fuppcr, tff. and can at once drop an ordinance of Chrift? if this is not ftraining at gnats, and fwallowing of camels, I muft confefs myfelf miftaken. To all this I might have added alfo, that it is contrary to the conftant and univcrfal praftice of the churches of Chrift, in all ages of the world. To receive an BAPTIZING BY IMMERSION, &c. 237 an nnbaptized perfon into communion, was never once attempted among all t'le corruptions of the church oi Rome : This principle of receiving only baptized pcrfons into communion, was maintained by the authors of the glorious Refor- mation from Popery, and thofe who fucceeded them. As for the prefent praftice of our Prejbyterians and Independents, they proceed not upon the fame foot as om Semi-Makers do. They judge our baptifm to be valid, and their own too; and therefore promifcuoufly receive perfons -, but, according to their own prin- ciples, will not receive one that is unbaptized. And could we look upon their baptifm valid too, what we call mixed communion would wholly ceafe, and confequently the controvcrfy about it be entirely at an end ; therefore the Pref- iyterians and Independents do not maintain a free and mixt communion in the fame fenfe, and upon the fame foundation, as fome of our perfuafion do, which ihofe perfons would do well to confider. It may be thought neccffary by fome, that before I conclude, I fhould make an apology for taking notice of fuch a trifling pamphlet as this is, which l! have been confidering. Had it not been for the importunity of fome of my friends, as well as the vain ovations, and filly triumphs^ which thofe of a dif- ferent perfuafion from us arc ready to make upon every thing that comes out this way, however weak it be, I fhould never have given myfelf the trouble of writing, nor others of reading hereof. If it fhould be afked, why I have been fo large in confidering feveral things herein, to which a fhorter reply would, have been fufRcient ? I anfwer. It is not bccaufe I thought the author deferved it, but having obfcrved that the arguments and exceptions which he has licked! up from others, have been, and flill are, received by perfons of far fuperior judgment and learning to himfclf, and who are better verfed in this controvcrfy than he appears to be ; it is upon that account, as well as to do juftice to the truth I have been defending, I have taken this method. But if any fhould think me blame-worthy, in taking notice of fome things herein, which do not carry in them the appearance of an argument, I perfuade myfelf they will eafily forgive me, when they confider how ready fome captious pcrfons would have been to fay, I had pafTed over fome of his material objccflions. However^ , without much concerning myfelf what any one fnall fay of this performance, I. commit it to the blefllng of God, and the confideration of every impartial; reader. A DEFENCE 238 ADEFENCEOFTHE A D E F E N C E Of a BOOK, intitled, THE ANCIENT MODE OF BAPTIZING B Y IMMERSION, PLUNGING, or DIPPING in WATER, &c. AGAINST Mr Matthias Maurice's Reply, called, Plunging into Water no Scriptural Mode of Baptizing, ^c. CHAP. I. Some Remarks on Mr M'i entrance to his Work TLIAVING lately attempted to vindicate the ancient mode of baptizing, bj immerfion, plunging, or dipping into water, againft the exceptions of an anonymous pamphlet, intitled, The manner of baptizing with water, cleared up from the word of God and right reafon, i^c. The author, who appears to be Mr Matthias Maurice of Rowell in Northamptonfhire, has thought fie to reply. He feems angry at the treatment he has met with -, but if he thought that his name would have commanded greater refpect, why did not he put it to his book? ANCIENT MODE OF BAPTIZING, 239 book ? and why did he refufc to give fatisfaftion to his friends when inquired of about the author of it ? Would he be treated as a gentleman, a fcholar, or a chriftian ? he ought to have wrote as fuch. Who is the aggreflbr ? who gave the firft provocation ? If I have any where exceeded the bounds of chriftianicy, or humanity, I would readily acknowledge it upon the firft conviftion •, but who indeed " can touch pitch, without being defiled with it ?" Three or four pages are filled up with a whining, infinuating harangue, upon the nature of controverfies, and the difagrecable temper and fpirit with which they are fre- quently managed ; deGgning hereby to wipe himfelf clean, whilft he is carting reproach upon others. I would not be an advocate for burlefk and banter in religious controverfies -, but if he would have them banifhed from thence, why does he make ufe of them, even in this his performance, which begins with fuch loud exclainations againft them. As for inftance, how does he pun upon prefumptive proofs, p. 13. and in p. 27. fpeaking of our baptizing in holes or tijlerns, as he is plcafed to call them, " Thus, fays he, you have forfook the " fcriptural way of baptizing with water, and have hewn out unto yourfelves " cifterns," referring to Jer. ii. 13. befides the frequent fneers with which his book abounds. Now if burlefk and banter, in general, ought to be laid afide, much more punning and bantering with the words of fcripture, which are facred and awful. Is this the man that diredls otliers to "write in the fear of God, " having the awful Judge, and the approaching judgment in view ; " and yet takes fuch a liberty as this .'' He fays, p. 7. " I fliall not entertain the reader " with any remarks upon his performance, as it is ludicrous, virulent and de- *■' faming : " Which, itfclf is a manifeft defamation, as the reader cannot but obferve -, it being afierted without attempting to give one fingle inftance wherein it appears to be fo. With what face can he call it ludicrous-, when he himfelf, in the debate, has been fo wretchedly guilty that way ^ when he talks, p. 9. of" Chrift's being under water ftill : and In p. 10. oi John's thrufting the people " into thorns and briars, when he baptized in the wildernefs -, " as alfo his concluding from Philip and the Eunuch's coming up out of the water, p. 19, " that neither of them was drowned there ;" with other fuch like rambling fluff, which he might have been afhamed to publifli to the world. Moreover, what defamation has he been guilt)' of, in reprefenting it, as the judgment of " fome of us " to baptize naked r" p. 22. And in the words of 2.fervant of Chriji, as he calls him, p. 44. tells the world that we " baptize perfons in thin *' and tranfparcnt garments j" which, in other cafes, would be accounted down right lying. Nay even in this his laft performance, p. 44. he has the afTur- ance to infinuate, as if wc ourfclves thought plunging to be immodcft, becaufe we put lead at the bottom of our plunging garments ; why could not he as well have. 240 ADEFENCEOFTHE have argued from our making ufe of clothes themfelves ? it is (Irange that i carefolnefs to prevent every thing that looks like immodefty, fhould be im- proved as an evidence of it : None but a man that is ill-natured and virulent, would ever be guilty of fuch an infinuation. What his friends, aiRozvell, may think of his performances, I cannot tell; but I can affure him, that thofe of his perfuafion at London think very meanly of them; and, as the mofteffedual way to fecure the honour of their caufe, which is endangered by fuch kind of writing as his, fay, " he is a weak man that has " engaged in the controverfy ;" though, perhaps, fome of his admirers may think that he is one of the mighty men oi Ifrael, who, like inoihtr Samfont hzs fmote us hip and thigh; but if I (hould fay, that it is with much fuch an in- ftrumcnt as he once ufcd, I know that I fliould be very gravely and feverely reprimanded for it, my grace and good manners called in queftion, and perhaps be pelted into the bargain, with an old mufty proverb or fentence, either in Greek or Latin ; but I will forbear, and proceed to the confideration of his work, as he calls it. His firft attack, p. 8. is upon a fmall fentence of Latin, made ufe of to exprefs the naufeous and fulfom repetition, of threadbare arguments in this controver- fy, to which he has thought fit, to give no lefs than three feveral anfwers. I. He fays theLatin is falfc, becaufe of an erratum oi coHumiox co5la\ which had I obferved before the laft half fheet had been worked off, (hould have been infertcd among the errata; whereby he would have been prevented making this learned remark ; though had it not fallen under my notice, before he pointed it to me, he (hould have fiad the honour of this great difcovery. He does well in- deed to cxcufe his making fuch low obfervations, as being beneath the valt de- fjgns he has in view. I might as well take notice of his Greek proverb, p. 25. •where ojrjnf, is put for eifnit, 3"<^ charge it with being falfc Greek, though I fhould rather chufe to afcribe it to the fault of the printer, than the inadvertancy of the writer. However, he does well to let his readers know that he can write Greek.; which they could not have come at the knowledge of, by his former performance. But why does not he give a verfion of hisLatin andGreek fcraps, -cfpecially feeing he writes for the benefit of the Lord's people, the Godly, and .■poor men and u-omcn, that cannot look into Diflionaries, and confult Lexicons; befides, all the wit therein will be loft to them, as well as others be left unac- quainted with his happy genius for, and (kill in tranflating. 2. He fays, " the application of this fentence is falfe :" But how does it appear ? why, becaufe at Rowell he and his people are very moderate in the affair of bap- tifm, they feldom difcourfe of it ; when every body knows, that has read my book, that the paragraph referred to, regards not the private converfation of perfons ANCIENT MODEOF BAPTIZING. 241 perfons on that Tubjeft, but the. repeated writings which have been publifhed to the world on his fide the queflion. If the.different fentiments of his people, aboutBaptifm, " make no mannerof difference inaffeftion, church-relation," &c. as he fays p. 9. why does he give them any difturbance ? what could provoke him to write after the manner he has done? He knows very well, however mif- taken they may be about this ordinance, in his apprehenfions, yet that they arcconfcientious in what they do; why (hould he then fnecr at them, as he does for their praftice of plunging, and fix upon them the heavy charges of fuper- ftition and will-worfhip? Is not this man a wife fhepherd, that will give diftur- bance to his flock, when the (heep are ftill and quiet ? 3. He would have his reader believe, that in ufing this fcntence, I would in- finuate, that the notions wherein they differ from us about Baptifm are poifon- ous, when I intend no fuch thing -, nor does the proverb, as exprefTed by me, lead to any fuch thought, but is ufed for a naufeous repetition of.things, with which his performance, we arc confidering, very plentifully abounds. We do not look upon miftakes about the grace of God, the perfon of Chrift, and the perfon and operations of the Spirit, to be of a leficr nature than thole aboutBap- tifm, as he reproachfully infinuates -, for we do with a becoming zeal and cou- rage, oppofe fuch erroneous doflrines in thofe who are of the fame mind with us, refpedting baptifm, as much as we do in thofe who differ from us therein. Paoe 10. He feems to be angry with me for calling him an anonymous author ; what (hould I have called him, fince he did not put his name to his book ? he afks, "Who was the penman of the epiftleto the HehewsF" Very much to the purpofe indeed ! and then brings in a fcrap of Greek out of Synejius, with whom, however he may agree in the choice of an obfcurc life, yet will not in the affair •f Baptifm; ior Synefius was baptized upon profefFion of his faith, and after that made bifhop of P/^/mu/V. " Hundreds of precious trafts, he fays, have " been publifhed without the names of their authors ;" among which, I hope, he does not think his muft have a place, it having no authority from the fcrip- ture, whatever clfe it may pretend to ; as I hope hereafter to make appear. CHAP. II. ' I'he proofs for immerfion, taken from the circum/lances which attended the Baptifm of John, Chriji, and his Apojlles, maintained : and Mr M 's demonjlrative proofs, for pouring or fprinkling, confidercd. THE ordinance of water-baptifm, is not only frequently inculcated in the NewTcftament, as an ordinance that ought to be regarded; but alfo many ioftances of perfons who have fubmitted to it, arc therein recorded, and thofe Vol. II. I I attended 442 .. ' A DEPENCE OF THE • • Attended with fuch circumftances, as manifeftly fhow, to unprejudiced minds, in wiiat manner it was performed. 1. The baptifm ofChrift adminiftercd hy John deferves to be mentioned, and confidercd firft : This was performed in the nver Jordan, Matt. iii. 6, 13. and the circumftance of iiis coming up out of the waJer, as foon as it was done, record- ed ver. 16. is a full dcinonftration that he was in it 5 now that he fliould go into the river Jor,i/e grave, by his fufferings on the crofs, into that death he there fubmit- " ted to i" in which, how oddly things bang together, every judicious reader will obfcrvee. As to Col. ii. 12. though we are faid to be buried with him in bap- tijm, yet it is added, therein alfo you are rifen with him ; but how we can be faid to be rifen with him in the baptifm of his fufferings, will, I believe, not-bc very eafy to account for. It is better therefore to underfiand thofe texts, in the more generally received fenfe both of ancient and modern divines, wiio unani- VoL. II. K K moufly • Rom. vi. 3. ' Matt. ixvi. 28. • A ">s ii. 33. 250 A D E F E N C E O F T H E mouny interpret them of water- baptifm ; in which the death, burial, and refur- rcdion ofChrift are very evidently reprefcnted, when performed by immerfion. idly. He fays, i Pet. iii. 2 i. is not meant of water- baptifm, but of the blood of Chrift fprinkled upon the confcience. That the blood ofChrift, as fprinkled upon a believtr's confcience, is ever called a Baptifm, I never yet met with ; and, I will venture to fay, can never be proved. Befides, the baptifm xhzx.Peter fpeaks of was a figure, a.TvTjv.y, " an antitype" of Nonh's ark, and of the deli- verance of him and his family by water; which was a kind of refurreftion from the dead, and did well prefigure our falvation by the refurreftion of Chrift, repre- fented to us in the ordinance of water- baptifm. 2dly, The fenfe of i Cor. xv. 29. given by me, is alfo objefted againft by Mr M. p. 32. and another fubftitutedin its room. Let the readers of the contro- verfy between us judge which is moft agreeable. The text is difficult, and has employed the thoughts and pens of the moft able and learned men in all ages : Both the fenfes have their defenders. I fhall only refer the reader to the learned notes of S\r Norton KnatchbuH, on r Peter iii. 21. where both thofe texts are confidered by him; and where he has fufficiently proved, from fcripture, fathers, fclioolmen, and modern interpreters, that the ordinance of baptifm -is a true figure, and jufl reprefcntaiion of the rcfurreftion ofChrift, and of ours by him, CHAP. V. A confulcration of the Jignifcation of the Greek loord ^t-rli^a, and parti- cularly the ife of it in Mark vii.4. Luke xi. 38. Heb. ix. 10. T^HAT the proper, primary, common, and natural fenfe of the Greek word Ptf-rl/^a, is to dip Qx plunge, has been acknowledged by the greateft mafters of that language ; and it is a rule which {hould be carefully attended to, that the firft, natural, and common fenfe of a word ought to be ufed in the inter- pretation of fcripture, unlefs fome very good reafon can be given why it fhouid be ufed in a remote, improper, and confequential one. Now though the na- ture, end, and circumftances of the ordinance of Baptifm, manifeftly fhew that immerfion is the right mode of adminiftering it, and do abundantly confirm the fenfe of the Greek word, diredling us to the proper and primary ufc thereof; yet fome have endeavoured to confine it to a more low and remote fenfe, but none have attempted to do it with more pofitivenefs and confidence than our author. But what method docs he take to efFed it, and how does he fucceed therein ? Why ANCIENT MODE OF BAPTIZING. 251 Why, 17?, he will exclude all the teftimonies of the ufe of the word among Greek authors uninfpired, efpecialiy Heathens ; which is unreafonable : If cur tranflators had confined themfclves to this rule, they would have made but poor work m their verfion of fome pare of the Bible, where a word is but once ufcd, or at leaft but very rarely in that fenfe in which it is to be taken. Now if a controverfy concerning the ufe of a Greek word in fcriprure arifes, which cannot be determined by it, though I do not fay this is the cafe in hand, what methods mud be taken ? Will it not be very proper to confulc Greek authors, either Chrillian or Heatlicn, and produce their teftimonies, efpecialiy the latter ? who cannot be fufpccfled of perverting the ufe of a word, having never been concerned in our religious controverfies. But it feems, if we will make ufe of them, we muil be laid under an obligation to prove that " they were delivered under the immediate infpiration of the holy Ghoft:" was ever fuch an unrealonablc demand made in this world before .'' Or was the in- fpiration of the holy Spirit ever thought necedary to fix and determine the Icnfe of a word ? But I am willing to lay afide thofe tcltiinonics in this con- troverfy. And, 2J!y, Be confined, as he would have me, to the ufe of the word in the New Tellament -, but then 1 nniR-, it leems, be confined to tne uic ot it, as applied to tlie ordinance of baptifm, which is alfo unreafonable : He fays tlie word, wiicnevcr applied to the ordinance, fignifies /'c.vr/w^ or y/;r/V/^/;>^ only ; which is a Hiamcful begging of the queftion -, and if I fhoulJ fay it only fjgnifics dipving or plunging, whenever applied to it, how mult the controverly be decided ? Muft we not refer the decifion of it to other texts of fcripture ? It is true, the circumftanccs, which attend the adminiftration of the ordinance are futlicient to determine the true fenfe of the word, and 1 am willing to put it upon that ilfue ; but I know he will not (land to it : Befides, why has he him- fclf brought other texts of fcripture into the controverfy, where the ordinance ot baptilm is not concerned.'' z.s Mark vii. 4. Hcb. ix. 10. 1 Ccr.x.z as alio the Septuagint verfion in Daniel iv. 33. why may not others take the fame liberty.^ And what miferable replies has he made to my inftances out of the latter.^ that in 2 Kings v. 14. he fays, difcovers that they, that is, the Septuagint, undcrdood no more by it than, khu. No more thin khu\ Is not that enough ? Is not A»» a word that includes in it all kinds of wadiing, efpecialiy bathing of the w hole body ; and is always uli^d by the Septuagint to exprcfs the Jewifh bathings, which were always performed by immerfion ; and that Naaman undcrftood the prophet of fuch a kind of wafhing, is manifeft from his ufe of it-, hz dipped himfelf in Jordan, ^^tw t« fufot Ea/cb/s, according to ibe -uscrd of Elifoa. K K 2 As 252 ADEFENCEOFTHE As for the other in Ifai. xxi. 4. he fays, " it is no wonder they made ufe of *•• the word, for they knew very well that fin procures ftiowers of divine dif- " pleafure to be poured upon a perfon, people, and nation." I defire the next time he pretends to baptize an infant, that he would />c«ryZ'(7a;frj of water upon it, if he thinks proper, according to this fenfe of the word ^A-rli^a, which he allows of. But however, though thofc teftimonies mufl: be laid afide, yet, j^/y, I hope Lexicons may be made ufe of to direft us in the fenfe of the word, if it is only as it is ufed in the New Teftament. Yes, that will be allowed of-, for Mr M. himfelf confults Lexicons, though he does well to let us know fo ; for one would have thought, by his pofitivenefs, that he had never looked into one in all his life. "Well, but what do the Lexicons fay ? How do they render the word fitt-jrli^a ? Why by mergo, immergo, to dip or plunge into; and this they give, as the firfl, and primary fenfe of the word; but do they make ufe of no other words to exprels it by ? Yes, they alfo ufe alluo^ lavo, to wafi; and they mean fuch a wafhing as is by dipping, but MrM. p. 38. afks, where do they tell us fo ? I anfwer in their Lexicons. Let Scapula be confuUed, who thus renders the word jia.'xji^o, mergofeu immergc : Ut qute tingen- di aiil ahluendi gratia aq^ua immergimus. But, ^hly. Let us now conlider thofe texts where the word is ufed in the New Teftament; I am willing to be confined to thofe which MrM. himfelf has fixed upon, and we will begin, F/r/?, With Mark vii. 4. and when they come from the market, except they ivafh or baptize {themfelves) they eat not •, which may be underftood either, 1. Of the things they bought in the market, which they did not eat until they were wafhcd : Thus the Syriac verfion reads the words -, and what they buy in the market, unlefs it be wajhed, they eat not : The fame way read all the oriental vcrfions, the /irabic, Ethiopic, indPerJic. Now this muft be underftood of thofe things that may be, and are proper to be wa(hed, as herbs, tff. . And nobody will queftion, but that the manner of the wafhing thcfc wasby putting them into ■water. Bur, 2. If the words defign the wafhing of perfons, they mufl: be underftood, ei- ther of the wafhing of their whole bodies, or elfe of fome part only^ as their hands or feet: It feems moft: likely, that the wafhing of the whole body is in- tended, as Grotius", Vatablus, Drufius\ and others think ; becaufe wafhing of hands is mentioned in the preceding verfe. Befidcs, to underfliand it thus, bet- ter exprefTes the outward, affefted fanftity of the more fuperftitious part of the people. All the Jews wafhed their hands and feet before eating-, but thofe who pretended to a greater degree of holinefs, wafhed their whole bodies, ef- pecially » Inloc. \ De tribus Sefl. Jud. lib. 2. c. 15. ANCIENT MODE OF BAPTIZING. 253 pecially when they came from a market; and of this total ablution of the body \sLuke xi. 38. to be underftood. And here I cannot forbear mentioning a paflage of the ^jczt Scaliger^ to this purpofe. "The more fuperftitious part of thejews, " fays he, not only wafhed their feet, but their whole body. Hence they w>fre " ca.\\<:dHemerobaptiJls, who every day wafhed their bodies before they fat down " to food ; wherefore, thePharifee, which had invited Jefus to dine with him, " wondered that he fat down to meat before he had wafhed his vshole body, " Luke xi. But thofe that were more free from fuperftition, were contented " with wafliing of their feet, inflead of that univerfal immerfion. Witnefs the " Lord himfclf, who being entertained at dinner by another Pharifee, objefted " to him, when he was fat down to meat, that he had given him no water for ♦' his feet, Luke vii," 3. If, by this wafliing, we underftand only the wafhing of their hands when they came from market; then it will be proper to inquire in what manner this was performed : And it muft be obferved, that whatever was the manner which they ufcd, it was not ufcd as a national cuftom, or as it was accordino- to the word of God ; but what was moft agreeable to the traditions of the elders, as is manifcft from the text itfelf. Now this tradition is delivered in their Mifna in thcfe words ; "They waflied their hands before they eat common food, by an " elevation of them; but before they eat the tithes, the offering, and the holy " flcfli, they wafhed by immerfion '." It is reported in the fame tradl, that Jo- hanan Ben Gud-Gada, who, they fay, was one of the moft religious in the priefl- hood, "always eat his common food after the manner of purification for eatino- " of the holy flefh ;" that is, he always ufed immerfion before eating; and it is highly reafonable to fuppofe, that the Pharifees, cfpecially the more fuper- ftitious part, who pretended to a greater ftriftnefs in religion than others, ufed ! the fame method. It defervcs alfo to be remarked, that this tradition, which fome of the Jews have been fo tenacious of, that they would rather die that* break it, is by them faid to be founded on Lev. xv. i i. and hath not rinfed his hands in water ; where the Hebrew word rjto'i' is ufcd, which fignifies a wafhing ' by immerfion : and io Buxtorf renders it. Moreover, in the abovefaid Mryw^j " i we ! I ^ Judzi vero fuperftitiofiores non pedes tantum, fed i corpus totum intlngebant. Hinc nftijjfaT- ' • Tiro" didli, qui quotidie, ante difcubiiuro, corpus intingebant. Quare Pharifius ille, qui (efum ad CG:nam invitaverat, mirabatur eum, antequam totum corpus abluifset, difcubuifTe : oti u v^uTot •Cawlii&ii crjj Tw ixfira. Luc. xi. Puriores vero a fuperftitionc, pro univerfali il!a @aim^N, contenti crant ir»JoFi7r1f«, hoc eft, pedilavio. Teftis dominus ipfe, qui alii Pharifio, a quo cccna cxceptus fuerat, objicit, fibi difcubituro aquam ad pedes datam non fuiHe. Luc. vii, vou^ in -rai «-»Ja! pa «« tiuKa^. Scaliger de Eraend. Temp. lib. vi. p. 571. ' Trad. Chagigah, c. J. J, 5. " Traft. Yadaim. c. i. J. 1—3. &c. ii. S- 3. 254 A DEFENCE OF THE we are told many things concerning this tradition, as the quantity and quality of the water they ufed, the veflels they wafhed in, as well as how far this walliing reached, which was p-)3 UN by which they meant, either the back of tke hand or the zvrijl, or clfe the elbow, as Thecphyla^I obf;rves on Mark vii. 3. who in this is foliowed by Capellus ". Now fome one of theie, the word Tvjyym, intends, which we tranflate oft. As to their manner of wafhing, ic was cither by taking water in one hand and pouring it upon the other, and then lifting it up % tiiat the water might run down to the aforefaid parts, that fo it might not return and defile them -, or elfe it was performed by an immerfion of them into water; which latter was accounted the moft effectual way, and ufed by the more fuperfticioiis part of the Jews. Now thole who contend the mort for a wafhing of hands, and not the whole body, as Pocock ' and Lightfcot, yet frankly acknowledge that it mult be underftood of wafhing of them by immerfion., Ligbtfoct's words are thefe, "The Jews ufed, fays he, an' n'7^:DJ " a wafhing of hands '';" that is, by " lifting them up in the manner before defcribed; and on' J-i'?'ni2 an imincrfion " of the hands ; and the word vt-iatTxit ufed by ourEvangelift, feems to anlwer " to the former, and /54Tl-(a)«r7B/, to the latter." So that from the whole, fup- pofe wafliingof hands is here intended-, yet the fenfe of thcGreek word, ^atti^u contended for, is neverthelei's cftcftually fccured :' Nor need we be much con- cerned at 2 Kings iii. 1 1. being thrown in our way by Mr M. p. 4 i. For, 1. The text does not fay that Elifha poured water upon the hands oi Elijah, to wafh his hands withal : and if he aflvS what^did he then do it for-, fuppofc I fhould anfwer, I cannot tell, how will he help himfelf? it lies upon him to prove that he did it for that end, which he will not find very ealy to do. 2. Some of the Jewith writers ' think, that wafiiing of hands, is not intended, but fome very great miracle, which followed upon Elifha'% pouring water on Elijah's, hands, and is therefore mentioned as a thing known, and what would ferve to recommpd him to the kings oijudab, Ij'rael, znd Edom. But taken in the other fenfe, the recommendation would be but very inconfidcrable ; be- fides, they were now in a very great (trait for water, ver. 9. and they might cxpeft, from his former performance, fome miracle would.be now wrought by him for their relief, as was ver. 17, 20. But, 3. Suppofe " Spicileg. in Mar vii. 3. 0 Buxtorf. Synag.Jud. c. 8.^- Lex. Talm. p. 1335. Pocock ror. mifc. p. 37;, 376, 393. Scaliger. Elenchus TriKxris. Serrar. c. 7. ' Pocock. not. mifc. p. 597, 39?. 1 Adhibuetunt Judael a*T nV^i lotionem manuum, & DH' J~\b^2'i2 immerfioncm manoum & videtur vocabulum ti-^uAxi, apudEfangeiillam noflram, priori rcfpondcre, & pam^utTai pofte- ilori. Lightfoot. Hor. Heb. in Mar. vii. 4. ' V.d. R. David Kitr.chi & R. Sol. Jarchi in loc. ANCIENT MODE OF BAPTIZING. 255 3. Suppofe wafhing of hands is intended, and that this phrafe is expretTive of EliJJja's being Elijah's, miniftering fervant, and that it was his iifual method to wadi his matter's hands by pouring water upon them-, it makes nothing aginft the fenfe of the word in Mark vii. 4. fince that regards the fuperftitious walhing of hands, as has been obferved, which was performed by an immer- fion of [hem, and is there juftly reprehended by our Lord. Secondly, The other text produced by Mr M. in p. 41. is Heb. ix. 10. where the apoftic fpeaks of divers -jonfoings or baptiftns, which I have aderted to be performed always by bathing or dipping, and never by pouring or fprinkling. And I ftili abide by my aflertion, the inftances produced by him being infuf- ficient to difprove it 1. He mentions //f3. ix. 19. where the aportle fpeaks of M^/fj's fprinkling the book and people with blood ; but does he fay that they were wafhed there- with ? or was ever this inftance of fprinkling reckoned among the ceremonial ablutions ? When only a few drops of blood or water are fprinkled upon per- fons or things, can they be faid, in any jufl: propriety of fpeech, to be wafhed therewith ? 2. He inftances in Exodus x, \nDan. iv. 33. In fine, from the whole, we may well conclude that Baptilm ought to be performed by immerfion, plunging, or dipping in water, according to the pracftice of John, Chrift, and his apofties, the nature and end of the ordinance, and the true and native fignification of the word ; which mode of baptizing has been ufed in all ages of the world, and 1 doubt not but will be, notwith- ftanding all oppofition made againft it. As ANCIENT MODE OF BAPTIZING. 257 As to the endangering of health by immerfion, 1 referred the reader to Sir JohnFloyer'sHiJlory of Cold-bathing. h\x M. infinuates thati have mirreprefenred him. I only intimate to the reader, that Sir John gives a relation of feveral cures performed by cold-bathing : And I could cafily fill up feveral pages with a catalogue of difeafes for which he fays it is ufcful, toj^ether with inftanccs of cures performed by it. He afks, "Why I do not infor.m my reader ni how " many cafes Sir J. F. and Dr B. thought cold-bathing inconvenient and dan- " gerous r" I could, indeed, foon acquaint the reader, ihzx. S'wJ cbn FIcyer thought it not proper to be ufed when perfons were hot and fweating, nor after exceflive eating or drinking -, as alfo, that they fhould not flay in it too long, until they were chilled -, and that if any danger came by it, it was ufually in fuch cafes : But this will do his caufe no fervicc, nor afFefb ours. I could alfo have told my reader, that he thinks cold-bathing to be ufcful in Confumptions, Catarrhs, Is^c. the cafes which Mr M. inftances in ; who cites Dr Cbeyne'z EJfay on Health, p. 108. where the Do(ftor fays, " that Cold-bathing fhould never be " ufed under a fit of a chronical diftcmper, with a quick pulfe, or with a head- " ach, or by thofe that have weak lungs" But why does he not acquaint his reader that the Doftor in the very fame paragraph, fays, " that cold-bathing " is of great advantage to health — It promotes perfpiration, enlarges the circu- " lation, and prevents the danger of catching cold." So that every body will eafily fee, as all experience teflifics, that there is no force in the argument, taken from the endangering of health by immerfion. By this time the reader will be capable of judging whether MrGill is fairly anfu-ercd or no, as Mr M. has ex- prcfl^ed in his title-page ; though it would have been as well to have left it for another to have made the remark, and fo took the advice of the wife man. Let another praife thee, and not thine own mouth; a fir anger, and not thine own lips ' : But before I conclude, I fhall take liberty to afk Mr.V/. four or five queftions. I. Why docs he not tell the world who that fervant of Chrifl: is, whofe words he ufcs ; he fays, I am miftaken in faying that they are the words of Ruffen ; but I fiill aver, that they are ufed by him -, but whether RiiJ/'en took them from his fervant of Chrifl, or his fervant of Chrift -from Ruffcn, I cannot tell •, for that two men, without the knowledge of one another's words, fhould fall into ihc fame odd, and aukward way of fpcaking, and commit the very fame blun- ders, is not reafonable to fuppofc ; but however, let hiin be who he will, Mr Stennetl's reply to Ruffen, which I have tranfcribed, fully dctcds the fin and folly of thofe indecent exprefilons. As to what Mry^/. fays, p. 44. '< that " he is very willing that both Siennett and Rufjhi fliould lie dormant;" I be- VoL. II. L L jieve • Proverbs xxvii. 2. 258 A D E F E N C E O F T H E lieve it, for as the latter will never be of any fervice to his caufe, fo the former would give a confiderable blow to it, was his book more diligently perufed. 2. What does he mean by the word of the Lord, he fo often mentions, when fpeaking of the fenfe of the Greek word ? Does he mean the original text of the New Teftament ? That ufes a word in the account it gives of this ordi- nance, which, as has been made appear, always fignifies to dip or plunge. Or, by the word of the Lordy does he mean our trandation ; which ufes the word baptize, thereby leiving the fenfe of the Greek word undetermined, had not the circumdances, attendina the accounts we have of the adminidration ot this or- dinance, fufficiently explained it; as will clearly appear to every one who con- fiders them: Had this rendered it dip, as fome other verfions have done, none, one would think, would have been at a lofs about the right mode of adminif- terino- this ordinance ; though in Holland, where they ufe no other word but dipping to exprefs baptifm by, yet they neverthelefs ufe fprinkling-, nay, as I am informed, the minifter when he only fprinkles or pours water upon the face of the infant, fays, " I dip thee in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the " holy Ghoft." Such a force have prejudice and cuftom on the minds of men, that it puts them on doing what is contrary to the plain and manifeft fenfe of words. 3. Why has he dropt his newfound name o^ Plungers, which he feemed to be fo fond of in his former performance, and thought fo exceeding proper for us, and revived the old name oi Anabaptijls ? which we cannot be, ncicher ac- cording to his principles, nor our own-, not according to ours, becaufe we deny pouring or fprinkling to be baptifm i not according to his, becaufe he denies dipping or plunging to be baptifm. 4. Why are Dr Owen's arguments for Infants-baptifm publifhed at the end of his book ? How impertinent is this ? When the controverfy between us, is not about the fubjedts, but the mode of baptifm : Perhaps his bookfeller did this, feeing Mr M. fays nothing of them himfelf, nor recommends them to others; but if he thinks fit to fhew his talent in this part of the controverfy, he may cxpeft attendance thereto, if what he iTiall offer deferves it. 5. Why has he not defended his wife reafons for mixt communion, and. made fome learned flriftures upon thofc arguments of mine, which he has been pleafcd to call/rzV(7/o«j, without making any further reply to them ? He has very much difappointed many of his friends, who promifed both me and themfelves an anfwer, to that part of my book efpecially ; but perhaps a more elaborate performance may be expefted from him, upon that fubjecT, or fome other learned hand. However, at prefent, I fhall take my leave of him ; but aot vi'vihProv. xxvi^4- which he has been afkamed to tranfcribe at length, left his ANCIENT MODE OF BAPTIZING. 259 his readers fliould compare the beginning and end of his book together -, whereby they would difcover, how much he defcrves the charafter of aGentleman, aSciio- lar, or a Chriftian -, as alfo, how well this fuits the whining infinuations, with which he begins his performance. I (hall add no more, but conclude with the words of Joh^ Teach me, and I will bold my longue \ and caufe me to underjland wherein I have erred. How forcible are right words ? But what doth your arguing reprove ? THE DIVINE RIGHT OF I NFANT - BAPTISM, EXAMINED AND DISPROVED; Being an ANSWER to a Pamphlet, intitled. A brief lllujlration and Confirmation oj the Div'me Right of Infant- Baptifm. Printed at BOSTON in NEW - ENGLAND, 1746. CHAP. I. T'he hitrodiiBion, obferving the Author^ T!itle, method and occafion of writing the Pamphlet under confideration. ATANY being converted under the miniftry of the word in New-England, and enlightened into the ordinance of believers baptifm, whereby the churches of theBaptift perfuafion ^zBoJlon and in that country have been much increafed, has alarmed the pjedobaptifl: minifters of that colony ; who have ap- plied to omMr Dickenfon, a country minifter, who, as my correfpondent informs me, has wrote with fome fuccefs againfl the Arminians, to write m favour of infant fprinkling ; which application he thought fit to attend unto, and accord- ingly wrote a pamphleton that fubjed; which has been printed in fevera! places, L L 2 and 26o THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, and feveral thoufands liave been publifhed, and great pains have been taken to fpread them about, in order to hinder thegrowth of the Baptifl. intercit. This per- formance has been tranfmitted to me, with a requeft to take fome notice of it by way of reply, which I have undertook to do. The running-title of the pamphlet, is The Divine Right of Infant -Bap! i fin; but if it is of divine right, it is of God-, and if it is ofGod, if it is accordm-- to his mind, and is inllituted and appointed by him, it muft be notified fomcw h?re or other in his word ; wherefore the fcriptiires mufl: be fearchcd into, to fee whether it is fo, or no : and upon the moft diligent fearch that can be made, it will be found that there is not the lead mencion of it in them ; that there is no precept enjoining it, or direcfting to the obfervation of it; nor any inftance, example, or precedent encouraging fuch a praflice ; nor any thing there faid or done, that gives any reafon to believe it is the will of God that fuch a rite fhould be obferved ; wherefore it will appear to be entirely an human invention, and as fuch to be rejeclcd. The title-page of this work promifcs an lllujlration and Confirmation of the faid divine right; but if there is no fuch thing, as it is certain there is nor, the author muft have a very difficult tafk to illuftrate and confirm it; how far he has fuccecded in this undertaking, will be the fubjccl of our following inquiry. The writer of the pamphlet under confideration has chofe to put his thoughts together on this fubjeft, in the form of a dialogue between a minifler and one of hh parijlioncrs^ or neighbours. Every man, that engages in a controverfy, may write in what form and method he will ; but a by-ftander will be ready to con- clude, that fuch a way of writing is chofe, that he may have the opportunity of making his antagonift fpeak what he pleafes ; and indeed he would have atted a very Unwife part, had he put arguments and objeftions into his mouth, which he thought he could not give any tolerable anfwer to ; but, inafmuch as he al- lows the perfon tiie conference is held with, to be not only a man of piety and in- genuity, but of confiderahle reading, he ought to have reprcfented him throughout as anfwering to fuch a charadler ; whereas, whatever /);>/)i is fhewn in this de- bate, there is very little ingenuity difcovered; fince, for the moft part, he is in- troduced as admitting the weak reafonings of the minifter, at once, without any further controverfy ; or if he is allowed to attempt a defence of the caufe and principles he was going over to, he is made to do it in a very mean and triflino- manner; and, generally fpeaking, what he offers is only to lead on to the next thing that prefents itfelf in this difpute: Had he been a man of confiderable read- ing, or had he read Mr Stennett, and fome others of the Antipxdobaptift au- thors, as is faid he had, which had occafioned his doubt about his baptifm, he would have known what anfwers and objeftions to have made to the minifter's rea- fonings. EXAMINED AND DISPROVED. 261 fonings, and what arguments to have ufed in favour of aduk-baptifm, and againft infant-fprinkling. What I complain of is, that he has not made his friend to aft in charafler, or to anfwer the account he is pleafed to give of him : However he has a double end in all this management-, on the one hand, by reprefenting his antagonift as aman of ingenuity and confiderablereading, he would bethought to have done a very great exploit in convincing and filencing fuch a man, and reducing him to the acknowledgment of the truth; and, on the other hand, by making him talk fo weakly, and fo eafily yielding to his arguments, he has acted . a wife parr, and taken care not to fuffer him to fay fuch things, as he was not able to anfwer ; and which, as before obferved, fcems to be the view of writing in this dialogue-way. C H A P. ir. . Of the Confequences of renouncing Infant' Bapt fin. . THE miniftcr, in order to frighten his parifhioner out of his principle of adult-baptifm, he was inclined to, fuggefts terrible confequences that would follow upon it; as his renouncing his baptifm in his infancy; vacating the covenant between God and him, he was brought into thereby ; renouncing all other ordinances of the gofpel, as the miniftry of the Word, and the facra- ment of the Lord's-Supper ; that upon this principle, Chrifl, for many ages, muft have forfaken his church, and not made good his promife of his prefence in this ordinance ; and that there could be no fuch thing as baptifm in the world now, neither among Psedobaptifts, nor Antipasdobaptifts. i_/?, The firfl dreadful confequence following upon a man's efpoufing the principle of believers baptifm, is a renunciation of his baptifm ; not of the ordinance of baptifm, that he cannot be faid to rejeift and renounce; for when he embraces the principle of adult-baptifm, and adls up to it, he receives the true baptifm, which the word of God warrants and diredls unto, as will be fcen hereafter : But it fcems it is a renunciation of his baptifm in his infancy j and what of that ? it fhould be proved firfl:, that that is baptifm, and that it is good and valid, before it can be charged as an evil to renounce it ; it is right to renounce that which has no warrant or foundation in the word of God : But what aggravates this fuppofcd evil is, that in it a pcrfon in his early infancy is dedicated to God the Father, Son, and holyGhoft; it may beaflced, by whom is the perfon in his infancy dedicated to God, when baptifm is faid to be admi- niftered to him ? Not by himfelf, for he is ignorant of the whole tranfaftion ; it muft be either by the minifter, or his parents : The parents indeed defire the 262 THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, the child may be baptized, and the minifter ufes fuch a form of words, / bap- tize thee in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the holy Ghofi ; but what dedication is here made by the one, or by the other ? However, feeing there is no warrant from the word of God, either for fuch baptifm, or dedication; a renunciation of it need not give any uneafinefs to any perfon fo baptized and dedicated. idly. To embrace adult-baptifm, and to renounce infant-baptifm, is to va- cate the covenant into which a perfon is brought by his baptifm, page 4. by which covenant the writer of the dialogue means the covenant of grace, as appears from all his after-reafonings from thence to the right of infants to baptifm. I. He fuppofes that unbaptized perfons are, as to their external and vifible relation, ftrangers to the covenants of promife ; are not in covenant with God ; not fo much as vifible chriftians ; but in a ftate of heathenifm ; without hope of falvation, but from the uncovenanted mercies of God, p. 4, 5, 6. The covenant of grace was made from everlafting ; and all interefted in it were in covenant with God, as early, and fo previous to their baptifm, as to their fecret relation God-wards ; but this may be thought to be fufficiently guarded ao-ainft by the reftriftion and limitation, " as to external and vifible relation : " But I afk, are not all truly penitent perfons, all true believers in Chrift, though not as yet baptized, in covenant with God, even as to their external and vifible relation to him, which faith makes manifeft ? Were not the three thoufand in covenant with God vifibly, when they were pricked to the heart, and repented of their fins, and gladly received the word of the gofpel, promifing the remif- fion of them, though not as yet baptized ? Was not the Eunuch in covenant with God ? or was he in a ftate of heathenifm, when he made that confefilon of his faith, / believe that Jefus Chrifi is the Son of God, previous to his going down into the water, and being baptized .'' Were the believers in Samaria, or thofe at Corinth, in an uncovenanted ftate, before the one were baptized by Philip, or the other by the apoftle /' Afli viii. 12. « Afts xvi. 14, ij, 32 — J4, 40. * A£h xviii. 8. • Afls X. 48. and xix. 1 — 7. ' Anfwer to RufTen, p. 14:, 143. « Anfwer to Walker, p. 157, &c. * Barnabx EpiA. C. 9. p. 235, 236. Ed, Vofl". I Hermx Pallor. 1. 1. vif. 3. f. 7. & K jl f, 16. "EXAMINED -AND -DISPROVED. ■ -169 Willing to be baptized in the name of the Lord; and both as going down into the water, and coming op out of it. Clemens Romanus wrote an cpiftle to the Corin- .tiianj, ftii! extant; but there is not a fyllable in it about infant-baptifm. Ignatius wrote epiftles to fcveral churches, as well as to particular perfons; but makes no mention of the pradtice of infant-baptifm in any of them : what he fays of bap- 'tifm, favours aduk-baptifm ; fince he fpeaks of it as attended with faith, love •and patience : "Let your ^baptifm, fays he'', remain as armour; faith as an .«' helmet, love as a fpear, and patience as whole armour." Polycarp wrote an epiftle to the Philippians, which is yet in being; but there is not one word in it about infant-baptifm. So that it is fo far from being true, that there is un- doubted evidence from the ancient fathers, that this praftice univerfally and con- ■ftantly obtained in the truly primitive church, that there is no evidence at all that it did obtain, in any refpeft, in the firfl century, or apoftolic age ; and 'which is the only period in which the truly primitive church of Chrift can be •faid to fubfift;. There is indeed a work called The conjiitutions of the apojlks, and fomeiimes the conjiitutions of Clemens, becaufe he is faid to be the compiler of them ; and another book oi Ecclejiaftical Hierarchy, afcribed to Dionyfius the ■ Areopagite, out of which, paflages have been cited in favour of infant-baptifm ; but thefe are manifeftly of later date than they pretend to, and were never writ- ten by the perfons whofc names they bear, and are condemned as fpurious by learned men, and are given up as fuch by Dr Wall,, in.hisHiJiory of Infant-Bap- ' tifr,r\ 2. The chriftian writers of the fecond century, which are extant, iLVcJuJlin Martyr, Athenagoras, Theopbilus of Antioch, Tatian, Minutius Felix, Irenaus, and Clemens of Alexandria ; and of all thefc writers, there is not one that fays any thing of infant-baptifm ; there is but one pretended to, and that \s [ren^us, and but a fingle pafTage out of him ; and that depends upon a fingle word, the fignification of which is doubtful at befl ; and bcfides the pafTage is only a tran- flation oi Irenaus, and not exprefled in his own original words; and the chap-- ter, from whence it is taken, is by fome learned men judged to be fpurious; fince it advances a notion inconfiftent with that ancient writer, and notorioudy contrary to the books of the evangelifts, making Chrift to live to be fifty years old, yea, to live to a fenior age : The pafTage, produced in favour of infant- baptifm, is this; fpeaking of Chrift, he fays", "Sanftifying every age, by »' that likenefs it had to him ; for he came to favc all by himfelf ; all, I fay,. " qui per eum renafcuntur inDeum, *' who by him are born ag^in unto God;" in- *' fants, and.little ones, and children, and young men, and old men; therefore " he. ^ Ignatii Eplft. ad Polycarp. p. 14. Ed. VofT. ' Part I. c. aj. " Irenzus adv. Hxicf. 1. 2. c. 39. p. 191. "* 2 70 THE DIVINE illGHT GF INFANT-^APTJSM, -^' he went through every age, and became an infant, to infants fandifying in- ♦' fants; and to little ones a little one, fanftifying thofe of that age; and like- " wife became an example of piety, righteoufnefs, and fubjedtion :" Now, the queftion is about the word renafcuntur, whether it is to be rendered horn a^ain, .which is the literal fenfe of the word, or baptized; the true fenfe oilrenaus feems A.Q be this, that Chrift came to fave all that are regenerated by his grace and .Spirit ; and none but they, according to his own words, John iii. 3, 5. and .that ,by aftuming human nature, and paffin^ through the feveral ftages of life, he has fanftified it, and fet an example to men of every age. And this now is all the evidence,- -the undoubted evidence of ijifant-baptifm, from the fathers of the firft two centuries-, it would be eafy to produce pafTages out of the above writers, in favour of believersbaptifm ; 1 fliall only cite one out of the firft of them; the account, that J ujiin Martyr gave to the emperor /intoninus Pius of ■the chriftians of his day -, though it has been cited by Mr Stemett and Mr Rees, I fhall choofe to tranfcribe it •, becaufe, as Dr f^all fays", it is the moft antient account of the way of baptizing next the fcripture, " And now, fays JuJ}in°y •" we will declare after what manner, when we were renewed by Chrift, we de- '.' voted ourfelves unto God ; left, omitting this, we fhould feem to adt a bad -" part in this declaration. As many, as are perfuaded, and believe the things, ," taught and faid by us, to be true, and promife to live according to them, " arc inftrufted to pray, and to afk, fafting, the forgivenefs of their paft fins " of God, we praying and fafting together with them. After that, they are " brought by us where water is, and they are regenerated in the fame way " of regeneration, as we have been regenerated j for they are then waflicd in " water, in the name of the Father and Lord God of all, and of our Saviour " Jefus Chrift, and of the holy Spirit." There is a work, which bears the ]name of Jujlin, called Anfwers to the orthodox, concerning fome necejfary quejiions; to which we are fometimes referred for a proof of infant-baptifm ; but the book, is fpurious, and none of Jujlins, as many learned men have obferved ; and as Dr I'Vall allows ; and is thought not to have been written before the fifth cen- jury. So ftands the evidence for infant-baptifm, from the ancient fathers of xhe firft two centuries. 3. As to the third century, it will be allowed, that it was fpoken of in it ; though as foon as it was mentioned, it was oppofed ; and the very firft man that roentions it, fpeaks againft it ; namely, Terlullian. The truth of the matter is, that infant-baptifm was moved for in the third century ■, got footing and eftab- Jiftiment in the fourth and fifth ; and fo prevailed until the time of the reforma- tion : Though, throughout thcfe feveral centuries, there were teftimonies bore to " Hiftory of Infant-Baptifm, part I. c. 2. • Or TJJTOF it atiBrixaji-ir lavTv;, &C. Juftin. Apolog. II. p. 93, 94. Ed. Parif. ,! -1EXA~M1NED ANt)'I)ISlP'ROVEt>. 271 to adult-baptifm ; and at fcvci'al times, 'teftain perfons rofe op, and oppofed infant- baptifm ; which brings me, ' • . "'III. To confidcr what our author affirms, that it cannot be pretended that this praftice was called in queftion, or made matter of debate in the church, until the madmen oi Munfier kt themfelves againft it, p. 7. Let us examine dhis matter, and, . • '- ■ I. It fliould be obferved, that the difturbances in Gijrwflwy, which our Psedo- ba'ptift wrhers fo often refer to in this controverfy about baptifm, and fo fre- quently reproach us with, were firft begun in the v?ars of nhe boors, by fuch as were I'aedobaptlfts, and them only ; firft by the Papifts, fome few years be- fore the reformation -, and after that, both by Lutherans and Papifts, on ac- count of civil liberties -, among whom, in procefs of time, fome few of the people called Anabaptifts mingled themfelves-, a people that fcarce in any thing agree with us, neither in their civil, nor religious principles; nor even in bap- tifm itfclf ; for if we can depend on thofe that wrote the hiftory of them, and • againft them ; they were for repeating aduk-baptifm, not performed among them; yea, that which was adminiftercd among themfelves, when they re- moved their communion to another fociety ; nay, even in the fame community, when an excommunicated perfon was received again i"; befides, if what is re- ported of them is true, as it may be, their baptifm was performed by fprink- ling, which we cannot allow to be true baptifm ; it is faid, that when a com- munity of them was fatisfied with the perfon's faith and converfation, who prp- pofed for baptifm, the paftor took water into his hand, and fprinkled it on the head of him that was to be baptized, ufing thefe word?, 1 baptize thee in the name of the Father, of the Sou, and of the holy Ghofi '' .- And even the difturb- ances in Munfier, a famous city in IVeJlphalia, were firft begun by Bernard Rot- man, a Psedobaptift minifter of the Lutheran perfuafion, afTifted by other mi- nifters of the reformation, in oppofition to the Papifts in the year 1532; and it was not till the year 1533, that John Matthias of Harlem, and John Bocoldus oi Ley den came to this place'; who, with Knipperdolling and others, are, I fup- pofe, the madmen of Munfier this writer means ; and he may call them mad- men, if he pleafes ; I fliall not contend with him about it ; they were mad notions which they held, and mad aftions they performed ; and both dif- avowed by the people who are now called Anabaptifts ; though it is not rea- fonable to fuppofe, that thefe were the only men concerned in that affair, or that the number of their followers ftiould increafe to fuch a degree in fo fmall a time, ' Cloppenburg. Gangnna, p. 366. Spanhem. Diatribe Hill. Sefl. 27. « BudneuB apud Mcfhov. Hid. Anabapt. 1. 4. p. 96. » Sleidan.Camment.l.io. p. 267, 269. Spanhem. DiatribeHidor. deOrigineAnabaptift.Sefl.iS. 272 THE. DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, time, as to make fuch a revolution in fo large a city : However, certain it is, that it was not their principle about baptifm, that led them into fuch extrava- gant notions and adlions : But what I take notice of all this for, is chiefly to ob- ferve the date of the confuGons and diftradtions, in which thefe madmen were concerned; which were from the year 1533 to 1536: And our next inquiry therefore is, whether there was any debate about the praftice of infant-baptifm before this time. And, . . . 2. It will appear, that it was frequently debated, before thefe men fet them- fclvesagainft.it, or afled. the mad part .they did : In the years 1532 and 1528, there were public difputations at Berne in Switzerlandy between the minifters of the church there and fomc Anabaptift teachers'; in the years 1529, 1527 and 1525, dffo/awpfli/w had various difputes with people of this name &t Bajil in the fame country ' ; in the year 1525, there was a difpute at Zurich in the fame country about Pasdobaptifm, between Zwinglius, oneof thefirfb reformers, and Y)v Balthafar Hubmeierus"., who afterwards was burnt, and his wife drowned at Vienna, in the year 1528; oi ^hom Mejhovius ^ , though a Papift, gives this character; that he was from his childhood brought up in learning; and for his finoular erudition was honoured with a degree in divinity; was a very eloquent man, and read in the fcriptures, and fathers' of the church. Hoornbeck ' calls him a famous and eloquent preacher, and fays he was the firll of the reformed preachers at IVMJhuts There were fcveral difputations with others in the fame year at this place ; upon which an edift was made by the fenate at Zurich, for- bidding rebaptization, under the penalty of being fined a filver mark, and of being imprifoned, and even drowned, according to the nature of the offence. And in the year 1526, or 1527, iccon^xng 10 Hoornbeck, Felix Mans, or Mentz, was drowned it Zurich ; this man, Mejhovius iiys'', whom he calls Felix Mant- fcher, was of a noble family ; and both he, and Conrad Grebel, whom he calls Cunrad Grebbe, who are faid to give the firfl: rife to Anabaptifm at Zurich, were very learned men, and well fkillcd in the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew lan- guages. And the fame writer affirms, that Anabaptifm was fet on foot at ///'/- tenberg, in the year 1522, hy Nicholas Pelargus, ox Stork, who had companions with him of very great learning, as Carolojladius, Philip MelanHhon, and others; this, he fays, was done, whilft Luther was lurking as an exile in the caflle of JVartpurg in Thuringia; and that when he returned from thence to PVitlenberg, he baniflied Carolojladius, Pelargus, More, Didjmus, and others % and only re- ceived • Spanhem ibid Scft. i ». Melhov. Anabaptift. Hiflor. 1. 3. c. i6, 18. t Spanhem. Sefl. 13. Mefhovius, ibid. c. 1. " Spanhem. Seft. 1 1. Methov. 1. 2. c. 4. " Ibid c. 15. ' Summa Controverf. 1. 5. p. 356. y Mefhov. 1. 2. c. 1. * Mediovius, 1. I. c. 2, 3. EXAMINED AND DISPROVED. 273 ceivcd MeIan5!bon again. This carries the oppofition to Pasdobaptifm within five years of the reformation, begun by Luther ; and certain it is, there were many and great debates about infant-baptifm at the firft of the reformation, years before the affair of Munjler : And evident it is, that fome of the firft re- formers were inclined to have attempted a reformation in this ordinance, though they, for reafons beft known to themfelves, dropped it*, and even Zuinglius himfelf, who was a bitter perfecutor of the people called Anabaptifts afterwards, was once of the fame mind himfelf, and againft Pcedobaptifm. But, 3. It will appear, that this was a matter of debate, and was oppofed before the time of the reformation. There was a fet of people in Bohemia, near a hundred years before that, who appear to be of the fame perfuafion with the people, called Anabaptifts ; for in a letter, wmcen by Cojlelecius out of Bohemia to Era/mus, d^ied O^oi>er 10, 1519*, among other things faid of them, which agree with the faid people, this is one ; »' fuch as come over to their fed, mult " every one be baptized anew in meer water-," the writer of the letter calls them Pyghards ; fo named, he fays, from a certain refugee, that came thither ninety-feven years before the date of the letter. Pope Innocent the third, under whom was the Lateran council, A. D. 1215, has, in the decretals, a letter, in anfwer to a letter from the bifliop oi Aries in Provence, which had reprefented to him ", that " fome Heretics there had taught, that it was to no purpofe to " baptize children, fincc they could have no forgivenefs of fins thereby, as •' having no faith, charity, &c" So that it is a clear point, that there were fome that fet themfelves againft infant-baptifm in the thirteenth century, three hundred years before the reformation; yea, in the twelfth century there were fome that oppofed Pa^dobaptifm. M.T Fox, the martyrologift, relates from the hiftory of Robert Guijburne % that two men, Gerhardus and Dulcinus, in the reiori oi Henry the fecond, about the year of our Lord 1158; who, he fuppofes, had received fome light of knowledge of the Waldenfes, brought thirty with them imo England; who, by the king and the prelates, were all burnt in the forehead, and fo driven out of the realm ; and after were (lain by the Pope. Rapia ^ calls them German Heretics, and places their com\ng\nio England 2l\. the year 1166: But William of Nezvhury ' calls them Publicans, and only mentions Gerhardus, as at the head of them; and whom he allows to be fomewhat learned, but all the reft very illiterate, and fays they came fromGafcoigne; and being con- vened before a council, held at Oxford for that purpofe, and interrogated con- VoL. II. N N cerning " Inter Colomej. Collect, apud WalPs Hiflory of Infant- Baptifra, part II. p. 200. ' Opera Innocent, tertii, torn. II. p. 776. apud Wall, ibid. p. 178. ' Afls and Monoments, vol. I. p. »6j. "^ Hiftory of England, vol. I. p. 233. * NeubrigenCj de Rebus Anglicanij, 1. 2. c. 13. p. 15J. 274 THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, cerning articles of faith, faid perverfe things concerning the divine facraments, de- teftino- holy baptifm, the eucharift and marriage : And his annotator, out of a ma- Jiufcript of RaduiphPicardus, the monk, fhews, that the Heretics, called Publi- cans, affirm, that we muft not pray for the dead ; that the fufFrages of the faints were not to be afked ; that they believe not purgatory -, with many other things ; and particularly, ajferunt ijli parvulos non baptifandos donee ad inteUigi- bilem perveniant atatem; " they aflert that infants are not to be baptized, till " they come to the age of underftanding'." In the year 1147, Si Bernard wrote a letter to the earl of SiGyles, complaining of his harbouring Henry, an Heretic ; and among other things he is charged with by him, are thefe -, " the " infants of chriftians are hindered from the life of Chrift, the grace of bap- *' tifm being denied them -, nor are they fuffered to come to their falvation, " though our Saviour compaffionately. cries out in their behalf. Suffer little " children to come unto me, &c." and, about the fame time, writing upon the Canticles, in his 6^'" and 66'^ fermons, he takes notice of a fort of people, he caWs Jpojlolici ; and who, perhaps, were the followers of //.fMry ; who, fays he, laugh at us for baptizing infants '' -, and among the tenets which he afcribcs to them, and attempts to confute, this is the firft, " Infants are not to be bap- ♦' tized : " In oppofition to which, he affirms, that infants are to be baptized in the faith of the chwch ; and endeavours, by inftances, to fhow, that the faith of one is profitable to others ^ -, which he attempts from Matt. ix. 2. and XV. 28. 1 Tim. ii. 15. In the year J 146, Peter Bruis, andHenry his follower, fet themfelves againfl infant-baptifm. PetrusCluniacenfis, or Peter the Ahhot of Clugny, wrote againfl; them-, and among other errors he imputes to them, are thefe: "That infants " are not baptized, or faved by the faith of another, but ought to be baptized " and faved by their own faith ; or, that baptifm without their own faith does " not fave ; and that thofe, that are baptized in infancy, when grown up, *' fhould be baptized again ; nor are they then rebaptized, but rather rightly " baptized •■ :" And that thefe men did deny infant-baptifm, and pleaded for adult-baptifm, MrStennett^ ha.s proved {romCaffander znd Prateolus, both Pas- dobaptifts: And Dr Pf^all'^ allows thefe two men to beAntipidobaptifts ; and Jays, they were " the firft Antipcedobaptift preachers that ever fet up a church, " or fociety of men, holding that opinion againft infant-baptifm, and rebap- " tizing fuch as had been baptized in infancy ;" and who alfo obfervcs ', that the « Not. in ibid. p. 720—723. * Wall, ibid. p. 175, 176. E Hili. F.ccl. Magdeburg. Cent.XII. c. 5." p. 358, 339. " Ibid. p. 332. ' Anfwer to Ru/Ten, p. 83, 84. " Hiflory of Infant-Baptifm, part II. p. 184. ' iLiid. p. 179. EXAMINED AND DISPROVED. - 275 the Z^/CT-^aw council, under Innocent the IP, 1139, did condemn i*^/^r 5r«/j, and Arnold oi Brefcia, who feems to have been a follower of 5rKiV, for rejefting infant-baptifm : Moreover, in the year 1140, or a little before it, 'EvervinuSy of the diocefe of Cologn, wrote a letter to St Bernard; in which he gives him an account of fome heretics, lately difcovered in that country ; of whom he fays, " they condemn the facraments, except baptifm only ; and this only in' " thofe who are come to age ; who, they fay, are baptized by Chrift himfelf, " whoever be the minifter of the facraments -, they do not believe infant-bap- " tifm ; alledging that place of the gofpel, he that believeth, and is baptized, " /hali be favedK" Thefe feem alfo to be the difciples of Peter Bruis, who be- gan to preach about the year 1126 ; fo that it is out of all doubt, that this was a matter of debate, four hundred years before the madmen ofMunJler fee them- felves againft it : And a hundred years before thcfe, there were two men, Bruno, bifhop of yfngiers, and Berengarius, arc4ideacon of the fame church, who began to fpread their particular notions about the year 1035; which chiefly refpefted the facraments of Baptifm and the Lord's-Supper. What they faid about the former, may be learned from the letter fent by Deodwinus, bifhop of Lie^e, to Henry I. King of France ; in which are the following words °'^. " There is a re- *' port come out of France, and which goes through all Germany, that thefc " two {Bruno and Berengarius) do maintain, that ^he Lord's body (theHoft) is " not the body, but a fhadow and figure of the Lord's body ; and that they do »' difannul lawful marriages -, and, as far as in them lies, overthrow the bap- " tifm of infants :" And from Guimundus, bifhop of Av erf a, who v/rote acrainfl Berengarius^ who fays, " that he did not teach rightly concerning the baptifm " of infants, and concerning marriage "." M.x Stennett" relates from Dr y^//a-, a pafTage concerning one Gundulphus and his followers, \n Italy, divers of whom, Gerard, bifhop of Cambray and Arras, interrogated upon feveral heads in the year 1025. And, among other things, that bifhop mentions the followincr rcafon, which they gave againfl infant-baptifm ; " bccaufe to an infant, that *• neither wills, nor runs, that knows nothing of faith, is ignorant of its own " falvation and welfare ; in whom there can be no defire of regeneration, or " confcfTion ; the will, faith and confcfTion of another feem not in the leaft to " appertain." 'D:lVall, indeed, reprefents thefe men, the difciples of Gundul- phus, as Quakers and Manichees in the point of baptifm •, holding that watcr- baptifm is of no ufe to any : But it muft be affirmed, whatever their principles were, that their argument againfl infant-baptifm was very flrong. So then we have teflimonies, that Fsedobaptifm was oppofcd five hundred years before the N N 2 affair ' Wall, ibid. p. 172. m Apud Wall, ibid. p. 159. " Hill. Ecd, Magdeburg, Cent. XI. c. 5. p. 116. • Anfwer to Ruflen, p. 84, 8j. 276 THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, zPfn\r of Munjler. And if the Pelagians, Donatifts, and Luciferians, fo called from Lucifer Calaritanus, a very orthodox man, and a great oppofer of the Arians, were againft infant-baptifm, as feveralPsdobaptift writers affirm; this carries the oppofition to it ftill higher ; and indeed it may feem ftrancre, that fince it had not its eftablifhment till the times o{ Aujiin, that there fhoiild be none to fet themfclves againft it : And if there were none, how comes it to pafs that fuch a canon fhould be made in the Milevitan council, under pope Inno- cent the firft, according toCarranza° ; and in the year 402, as fay the Magde- burgenfian centuriators ' -, or be it in the council at Carthage, in the year 418, as fays Dr IFalh, which runs thus, " Alfo, it is our plcafure, that whoever " denies that new-born infants are to be baptized ; or fays, they are indeed to " be baptized for tlie remifTion of fins ; and yet they derive no original fm " from Adam to be expiated by the wadiing of regeneration ; (from whence it " follows, that the form of baptifin for the forgivcnefs of fins in them, cannot " be underftood to be true, but falfe) let him be anathema :" But if there were none, that oppofcd tlie baptifm of new-born infants, why Ihould the firft part of this canon be made, and an anathema annexed to it ? To fay, that it refpedcd a notion of a fingle perfon in Cyprian^ time, 150 years before this, that infants were not to be baptized, until eight days old ; and that it feems there were fome people ftill of this opinion, wants proof. But however certain it is, that Teriullian', in the beginning of the third century, oppofcd the baptifm of in- fants, and difluaded from it, who is the firft writer that makes mention of it : So it appears, that as foon as ever it was fet an foot, it became matter of debate^ and fooner than this, it could not be : And this was thirteen hundred years before t!ie madmen of Munjier appeared in the world. But, IV. Let us next confider the pracftice of the ancient Waldenfes, with refpefl to adult-baptifm, which this author affirms to be a chimerical imagination, and groundlcfs figment. It fhould be obferved, that the people called Waldenfes, or the Vaudois, inhabiting the valleys of Piedmont, have gone under different names, taken from their principal leaders and teachers ; and fo this of the Waldenfes, from Peter H^aldo, one of their barbs, or paftors-, though fome think, this name is only a corruption of Vallenfes, the inhabitants of the valleys: And certain it is, there was a people there before the times of IValdo, and even from the apoftlcs time, that held the pure evangelic truths, and bore a teftimony 10 them in all agcs,Jand throughout the dark times of popery, as many ' learned men " Sumtna Concil. p. 122, 123. i' Cent. V. c. 9. p. 468. < Hinory, &c. Part II. p. 275. 276. ' De Bapufmo, c. 18. ' Dr Allijt') Remarks on the ancient churches of Piedmont, p. 188, 207, 210, 286. Morland's .Hi'.lory of the evangelical Churches of the vjlleys of PieJaont, book I. C.3. p. 8, i:fc. EtBezx Iconcs apud ibid. In rcduflion to thchiftor/, p. 7. EXAMINED AND DISPROVED. 277 men have obfervcd ; and the fenfe of thefe people concerning baptifm may be bcft underftood, 1. By what their ancient barbs or paftors taught concerning it. Peter Bruis, and Henry his fucceflbr, were both, as Morland affirms', their ancient barbs and paftors ; and from them thefe people were called Petrobruffians and Hen- ricians ; and we have feen already, that thefe two men were Antipasdobaptifts, denied infant-baptifm, and pleaded for adult-baptifm. Arnoldus of Brixi'a, or Brefcia, was another of their barbs, and is the firft mentioned by Morbfid, from whom thefe people were "called A rnoldifts. Of this man Dr y////.v fays ", that befides being charged with fome ill opinions, it was faid of him, that he was not found in his fentiments concerning the facraments of the altar and the baptifm of infants ; and D'cWall allows *, that theLateran council, under Inno- cent the fecond, in 1139, did condemn Peter Bruis, and Arnold oi Brefcia, who fc ems to have been a follower oi Bruis, for rejedling infant-baptifm. LoUardo was another of their barbs, who, as Morland {zys, was in great reputation with them, for having conveyed the knowledge of their dodrine \nio Englatid, where h sdilcij-les were known by the name of Lollards; who were charged with hold- ing, that the facrament of baptifm ufcd in the church by water, is but a light matter, and of fmall effeft ; that chrirtian people be fufficiently baptized in the blood ofChrift, and need no water; and that infants be fufficiently baptized, if their parents be baptized before them " : All which feem to arife from their denying of infant-baptifm, and the efficacy of it to take away fin. 2. By their ancient confcfTions of faith, and other writings which have been pubiifhed. In one of thefe, bearing d.ue A. D. 1120, the 12'" and 13"' articles run thus '' : " We do believe that the facraments are figns of the holy " thing, or vifible forms of the invifible grace; accounting it good that the *' faithful fometimes ufe the faid figns, or vifible forms, if it may be done. " However we believe and hold, that the abovefaid faithful may be faved with- " out receiving the figns aforefaid, in cafe they have no place, nor any means " to ufe them. We acknowledge no other facrament but baptifin and the " Lord's-Supper." And in another ancient confefTion, without a date, the 7"" article is * : " We believe that in the facrament of baptifm, water is the vifible *' and external fign, which rcprefents unto us that wliich (by the invifible vir- «' tue of God operating) is within us; namely, the renovation of the Spirit, " and the mortification of our members in Jefus Chrift ; by which alfo zee are *' received into the bo!y congregation of the people of God, there protefling and de- " daring • Ilidory, book I. ch. 8. p. 184. " Remarks, i-c. p. i7t, 172. • Hifl. of Infant-Baptifm, part II. p. 179. » fox's Afls andMonuments, vol. I p.868,. J' Morlaod'* Hiftory, b'c. bookl. cb. 4. p. 34. *_ Ibid. p. 58. 278 THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, " clarin-^ openly our faith and amendment of life." In a traft *, written in the language of the ancienc inhabitants of the valleys, in the year 1 100, called The hohli Ledon^ are thefe words -, fpeaking of the apoftles, it is obfervcd of them, " tiiev ipoke without fear of the doftrine of Chrift ; they preached to Jews and " Greeks, workino- many miracles, and thofe that believed they baptized in the " name of Jefus Chrift." And in a treatife concerning Antichrift, which con- tains many fernions of the barbs, coUeiSted in the year 1120, and fo fpeaks the fcnfe of their ancient paftors before this time, ftands the following paflage " : " The third work of aniichrifl: confifts in this, that he attributes the regenera- " tion of the holy Spirit, unto the dead outward work (or faith) baptizing chil- " dren in that faith, and teac'hing, that thereby baptifm and regeneration mufl: " be had, and therein he confers and beftows orders and other facraments, and " groundeth therein all his chriftianity, which is againft the holy Spirit." There are indeed two confefTions of theirs, which are faid to fpeak of infant- baptifm -, but thefe are of a late date, both of them in the fifteenth century -, and the earlieft is not a confefTion of the fFaldenfes or Vaiidois in the valleys of Piedmont, but of the Bohemians, faid to be prefented to Ladiflaus king oi Bohemia^ A. D. 1508, and afterwards amplified and explained, and prefented to Ferdi- nand k\ns, of Bohemia, A.D. 1535-, and it fhould be obferved, that thofe people fay, that they were falfly called IValdenfes " ; whereas it is certain there were a people in Bohemia that came out of the valleys, and fprung from the old Wal- denjes, and were truly fo, who denied infant-baptifm, as that fort of them called Pygbards, or Picards ; who, near a hundred years before the reformation, as we have feen by the letter lent to Erafmus out of Bohemia, rcbaptized perfons that joined in communion with them; and Scultetus^^ in his annals on the year 1328, fays, that the united brethren in Bohemia, and other godly perfons of that time, were rcbaptized ; not that they patronized the errors of the Anabaptifts, (mcanincr fuch that they were charged with which had no relation to baptifm) but bccaufe they could not fee how they could otherwife feparate themfelves from an unclean world. The other confeffion is indeed made by the minifters and heads of the churches in the valleys, affembled in Angrogne, September 12,' 1532 '. Now it fliould be known, that this was made after that " Peterj^itxffon " and George Morell were fent into Germany in the year 1530, as Morldna ' fays, " to treat with the chief minifters of Germany, namely, Oecolampadius, Bucer, •' and others, touching the reformation of their churches ; but Peter Maffon " was taken prifoner at Dijen." However, as" Fox fays ', " Morell efcaped, " and » Morland's Hiftory, &c. ch. 6. p. 99, III. * Ibid. ch. 7. p. 142, 14S. ' Moiland's Hiftory, ch.4. p. 43. * Apud Hoornbeck. Summa Controvcrf. I. 5. p. 387. • Morland, ibid.cb.4. p.39. ' Ibid. ch. 8. p. 185. « A4h & Monuments, vol. II. p. 1 86. EXAMINED AND DISPROVED. -279 « and returned alone to Merindol, with the books 'and letters he broucrht with «' hitn from the churches of Germa^ty ; and declared to his brethren all the " points of his commifTioni and opened unto them how many and great errors " they were in -, into the which their old minifters, whom they called Barbs, »' that is to fay Uncles, had brought them, leading them from the right way of " true religion." After which, this confefTion was drawn up, fio-ned, and fwore to: From hence we learn, where they might get this notion, which was row become matter of great debate in Switzerland &nd Germany ; and yet, after all this, I am inclined to think, that the words of the article in the faid con- fefTion, are to be fo underftood, as not to relate to infant-baptifm : They are thefe " ; " We have but two facramental figns left us by Jefus Chrift •, the one " IS Baptifm ; the other i^ths Eucbariji, which we receive, to fhew that our " perfeverance in the faith, is fuch, as we promifed, when we were baptized, " being little children." This phrafe, i>eing Utile children, as I think, means,, their being little children in knowledge and experience, when they were bap- tized ; fincc they fpeak of their receiving the Eucharift, to fhew their perfe- verance in the faith, they then had promifed to perfcvere in : Befides, if this is to be underftood of them, as infants in a literal fenfe ; .what promife were they capable of making, wlien fuch ? Should it be faid, that " they promifed by " their fureties ;" it fhould be obferved, that the If^alden/es [did not admit of godfathers and godmothers in baptifm •, this is one of the abufes their ancient £ari>s complained of in baptifm, as adminiftered by the Papifts '. Befides, in a brief confeflion of faith, publifhed by the reformed churches of P/fiw;«/, fo- late as A. D. 1655, they have thefe words in favour of adult-baptifm '' ; "that ■" God does not only inftrudl and teach us by his word, but has alfo ordained " certain facraments to be joined with it, as a means to unite us ii/ito Cbrijl, and to make us partakers of bis benefits. And there are only two of them belonging " in common to all the members of the church under the New Teftament; to wir, " Baptifm and the Lord's-Suppper ; that God has ordained the facrament of " baptifm to be a teftimony of our adoption, and of our being cleanfed from " our fins by the blood of Jefus Chrift, and renewed in holinefs of life:" Nor is there one word in it of infant-baptifm. Upon the whole, it- will be eafily ken, what little reafon the writer of the dialogue under confideration had to fay, that the ancient f^a'denfes, being in the. conftant praftice of adult-baptifm, is a chimerical imagination, and a. groundlefs fiflion ; fince there is nothing appears to the contrary, but that they were in the praflice of it until the fixteenth century, for what is urged againft it,. * Morland, ibid. c. 4, p. 41. « Morland, ibid. c. 7. p. 173. '' Ibid. c. 4. p. 61, 67. 28o THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, it, is fince that time: And even at that time, there were fome, that continued in the pradice of it ; for Ludovicus Vives, who wrote in the faid century, hav- ing obferved, that "formerly no perfon was brought to the holy baptiftery, " till he was of adult age, and when he both underftood what that myftical " water meant, and defired to be wafhed in it, yea, defired it more than once," adds the following words ; " I hear, in fome cities of Italy, the old cuftom is " ftill in a great meafure preferred '." Now, what people fhould he mean by fome cities of //VED. t8< in diftinftion from the covenant df works ; which is the fenfe in which it k commonly ondcrftood, and m which this writer feems to undcrftand this cove- nant with ylbrabam; for of it, he fays, p- 13. " k was the covenant of grace, ** that covenant by which alone wc can have any grounded hope of falvation :' But that it was tbt covenant of grace, or a pure covenant of grace, muft be licnied : For, I. It is never called the covenant of grace, »or by any name which fhews it to be fo ; it is called the tovtnant 9/ (ir . '. ■ i. If ii was made with all the natural feed of Abraham, as fuch, it muft be with his more immediate offspring-, and fo muft be equally made with a mock- ing and perfecuting IJhmael, -born after the flefh, the fon of the bond-woman, as with IfaaCy bom after the Spirit, -and the fon of the free-woman ; and yet we find, that Ifhmael was excluded from having a Ihare in fpiritual bleffings, only tem- poral, ones were promifed him ; and, in diftindlion and oppofition to him, the covenant was eftablifhcd with 7/ijjf '. Again, if this was the cafe, it rauft be equally made with a profane Efau, as with plain-hearted ^flfo^ -, and yet it is faid, Jacob have I loved, and Efau have I hated*-. ■ 2. If it was made with all Abraham.^ feed according to the flefh,- it muft be made with all his remote pofterity, and ftand good to them in their moft cor- rupt cftate ; it muft be made with them who believed not, and whofc carcafcs fell in the wildernefs, and entered not into reft; it muft be made with the ten tribes, that revolted from the pure fervicc of God, and yvho worfhipped the calves it Dan znd Bethel i it muft be made with the people of the Jews in T/'^/c/fi's time, when they were a fmful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a feed of evil-doers, children thativere corrupters; whofe rulers are called the rulers of Sodom, zhi the people the people of Gomorrah ', it muft be made with the Scribes and Pharifees, and that wicked, adulterous, aTnd hypocritical generation of men in the lime of our Lord, who were his implacable enemies, and were concerned in, his death -, who killed him, perfecuted his apoftles, pleafed not God, and were contrary to all men. What man, that ferioufly confiders thefe thing<;, can think thkt tlie covenant of grace belonged to t|iefe men, at leaft to all ; and efpecially when he -o^jfcrvcs, what the apoftle fays, they are not all Ifrael, which 'are of Ifrael; neither becaufe they are the feed of Abraham, are they all children " ? Yea, ' ' ■ 3. If it was made with all that are the feed of Abraham according to the flefti,. then it muft be made with Ifhmaelites and Edomites, as well as with Ifraelites -, with his pofterity by Keturah, as iwll as by Sarah ; with the Midianites aad Arabians -, with the Turks, as well as with The Jews, fince they defcended*d claim their dcfcent from Abraham, as well as thefe. ' But, " 4. To fhut up this argument ; this covenant made vj'ith Abraham, be it a covenant of grace, feeing it could be no more, at moft, than a revelation, ma- nifeftation, copy, or tranfcript of it, call it which you will ; ic can never be thought to comprehend more in it than the original contradl, than the eternal 002 covenant I Gco.xvii. 19, ao, Ji. ' Mai. i. i, :. ' Ifai. i. 4, 6, to. ^ Rom.Lx. 6, 7, fUy . THE DIVINE RI^HT OF IKFANT^APTISM, ■ ■cerffnant between the Father atid €he Son. ' Kow the 6nly-perfons intereded ir> the everlaftkig covenant of grace, arc the ^btff^^ if God iu*d fr bt redeemed by his ' ^ blood i for whom pfovifion is made ift xhe fame covenant for the £anaifkation . .(".of their nature, for the juftifkation of tbeir peribns, for the pardon of their 'fins, for th^ir perfevftrance in grace, and for their eternal glory and happincfs : So that all that are in that covenant are chofcn to gntcc here, and glory here- after, and fhall certainly enjoy both : they are all fccurcd in the hands of Chrift, and are redeemed from fla, law, hdl, and death, by his precious Hood ; and fhall be faved in him wish an everlafting falvation ; they have all of them the laws of God put Into their minds, and written on their hearts ; they have new hearts and new fpirits given them, and the ftony heart taken away from them-, they have the righteoufrvefs of Chrift imputed to. them; they have their fins forgiven them for his fake, and which will be remembered no more ; ihey have the fear of God put into their hearts, and fhall never finally and totally depart from him ; bur, being called and juftified, (hall be glorified ". Now if this covenant was made with all /ihaham''% natural feed, and compre- hends all of them, then they muft be all cbofen of Ced ; whereas there was only a remnant anxing them, according to the eUSion of grace "• : they muft be all given to Chrift, and fecured in his hands ; whereas there were fome of them, that were not of his fhcep, given him by hisFather, and fodjd not believe in him' ; they muft be all redeemed by his blood; whereas he laid down his life for his fhcep, his friends, his church, which all of Abraham's feed could never be faid to be : In a word, they muft be all regenerated and famSlified, juftified and par- doned ; muft all havt the grace of God, and pverfevere in it to the end, and be all eternally faved ; and the fame muft be faid of all the natural feed of believ- ing Gentiles, if they alfo are all of them in the covenant of grace. But what man, in his C^nfes, will afiirm thefe things ? And, upon fuch a principle, how will the doftrines of pcrfonal eleftion, particular redemption, regeneration by effica- cious grace, not by blood or the will of man, and the faints final perfcverance, be cftablifhed ? This Gentleman, whofe pamphlet is before me, is faid to have written with f6me fucccfs againft the Arminians ; but fure I am, that no man can write with fuccefs againft them, and without contradiftion to himfelf, that has imbibed fach a notion of the covenant of grace, as this I am militating againft. zdly. The other part of the qucftion is, whether the covenant made with Abraham, fo far as it was a covenant of grace, was made with all the natural fbcd » Jer. xxxi. 33, J4. and xxxii, 40. Ezek. xxxri. 15 — 27. Rom. viiL 30. • fiioin. xi. J. 'JohDX.»6.' EXAMINED AND DISPROVED. 285 feed of believing Gentiles ? which alfo muft be anfwered in the negative : For, 1. It will be allowed, that this covenant refpefls Abraham' i fpiritual feed among the Gentiles } even all tfue believers, all fuch that walk in the fteps of his faith -, for he is the Father of all them that believe, whether circumcifed or wncircumcifed, Jews or Gentiles "i ; but not the natural feed of believinc^ Gen- tiles. They, indeed, that ar« of iht fmh oi Jhrabam^ are his children in a fpiritual fenfc, and they are blefled with him with fpiritual blefllngs, and are fuch, as Chrift has redeemed by his blood ; and they believe in him, and the blefling oi Abraham comes upon them : But then this fpiritual feed oi Abraham is the fame with the fpiritual feed of Chrift, with whom the covenant was made from everlafting, and to them only does it belong -, and to none can fpiritual bleffings belong, but 10 a fpiritual feed, not a natural one. Let it be proved, if it can, that all the natural feed of believing Gentiles, are the fpiritual feed of Abraham, and then they will be admitted to have a claim to this covenant. But, though it appears, that believing Gentiles arc in this covenant, what daufc is there in it, that refpefts their natural feed, as fuch ? Let it be fhown, if it can i by what right and authority, can any believing Gentile pretend to put his natural feed into Abraham's covenant .? The covenant made with him, as to the temporal part of it, belonged to hirn^ and his natural feed 5 and with tcfpctft to its fpiritual part, only to his fpiritual feed, whether Jews or Gentiles ; and not to the natural feed of either of them, as fuch. 2. The covenant made mih Abraham^ and his fpiritual feed, takes in many of the feed of unbelicvingGentileSi who being called by grace, and openly believ- ing Chrift, are Abraham's fpiritual feed, with whom the covenant was made : That there are many among the Gentiles born of unbelieving parents, who be- come true bclievei's in Chri^, afld io appear to be in t-he covenant of grace, muft be allovWd • fince many ar* received as fuch intb the communion of the P^do- baptifts, as well as others V and, on the- other hand, there are many born of be- lieving Gentiles, who do not believe in Chrrfti, arc no« pafto'kers of his grace. Oft whom the fpifitual blefllngs of Abraham do not come; and fo not in his cove- nant. Wherefore, by what authority do men put in the infant feed of believing Gentiles, as fuch, into the cote'nant, and reftfainix to them, and leave out the feed of unbelievingGcntiles; wh«l1, On the contrary, God oftentimes tak-es the ofiejj and leaves the other ? ~ 3. That all the natural fe«d of believing Gentiles cannot be included in the covenant of grace, is mariifcft, from the reafon above given, againft all the na- tural feed of Abraham being in it ; flicwing,. that all that arc in it arc the eleft of- 1 Rora. iv. II, 12, 16. 286 THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, of God, the redeemed of Chrilt, are cffeftually called by grace, perrevere to the end, and are eternally faved; all which cannot be faid of all the natural feed of believincT Gentiles: And if all the natural feed oi Abraham are not in this covenant made with him, as it was a covenant of grace, it can hardly be thought that all the natural ked of believing Gentiles fhould. 4. Seeing it is fo clear a cafe, that fome of the feed of unbelieving Gentiles are in this covenant, and fome of the feed of believing Gentiles are not in it, and that it cannot be known who are, until they believe inChrift, and fo appear to hiAbrabam's fpiritual feed; it mull be right to put off their claim to any pri- | vileoe fuppofed to arife from covenant intereft, until it appear that they have ! one. 5. After all, covenant interefl: gives no right to ^ny ordinance, without a pofitive order and dircdion from God. So, for inftance, with refpeft to cir- cumcifion ; on the -one hand, there were fome perfons living at the time that I ordinance was inftituted, -who undoubtedly had an intereft in the covenant of grace, as Sbem, Arphaxad, Lot, and others, on whom that was not injoined, and who had no right to ufe it ; and, on the other hand, there have been many that were not in the covenant of grace, who were obliged to it : And fo with rcfpcct to baptifm, it is not covenant interefl: that gives a right to it; if it could be proved, as it cannot, that all the infant feed of believers, as fuch, are in the covenant of grace, it would give them no right to baptifm, without a pofitive command for it •, the reafon is, bccaufe a perfon may be in covenant, and as yet not have the prerequifite to an ordinance, even faith in Chrift, and a pro- feffion of it; which are ncceflary to baptifm and thcLord'sSupper. This leads me on. Thirdly, To another inquiry, whether circumcifion was a fealof the covenant ■of grace to Abraham's natural feed ; the writer, whofe performance I am con- fjdcring, affirms, that it was by God's exprefs command to be fealcd to infants; and that circumcifion is the feal of it, p. 10, 16. But this muft be denied: circumcifion was no feal of the covenant of grace ; for, I. If it was, the covenant of grace, before that took place, muft be without a feal; the covenant fubfifted fromevcrlafting, and the revelation of it was quick- ly made after the fall of Adam ; and there were manifeftations of it to particu- lar perfons, as Noah, and others, before this to Abraham, and no circumcifien injoined: Wherefore, {torn Adam to Abraham, according to this notion, the covenant muft be without a feal; nay, there were fome perfons living at the time it was inftituted, who were in the covenant, yet this was not injoined them ; as it would, if this had been defigned as a feal of it. 2. Circumcifion .T TE X cA; TVT1.NET) AND DISTPROVED. 287 * '2, Circumcifion,in the inftitution of ir, is called a fic^n, but not a feal • it is faid to be j-\Mi Q(h, i Token, or Sign'; but not Qn-in Cbothem, zSeal; ic was a fign or mark in the flefh, v/hich ^i>rabam's natural feed were to bear un- ■til the prom.ifes made in this covenant were accomplifhed ; it was a typical fion of the pollution of human nature, propagated by natural generation, and of cleanfing from it by the blood of Chrift, and of the inward circumcifion of the heart ; but did not feal or confirm any fpiritual bleffing of the covenant to thofe on whom this mark or fign was fet ; it is never called a feal throucrhout the whole Old Teftament; and fo far is therefrom being any exprcfs command, that the covenant of grace fliould be fealed to infants by it, that there is not the leaft hint of it given. • 5- It is indeed in theNewTeftament called a feal of tberighteoufnefs of faith'; but it is not faid to be a feal of the covenant of grace, nor a feal to infants : it was not a feal to Abraham's natural feed j it was only fo to himfelf The plain meaning of the apoftic is, that circumcifion was a feal to Abraham, and afibred him of, or confirmed his faith in this, that he fliould be the father of many nations, in a fpiritual fcnfe; and that the righteoufiiefs of faith which he had, when he was an uncircumcifcd perfon, fliould alfo come upon, and be imputed unto the uncircumcifcd Gentiles : and accordingly, this mark and fign conti- nued until the gofpel, declaring juftification by the righteoufnefs ofChrift, was preached, or ordered to be preached to the Gentiles -, and could it be thought that circumcifion was a feal to others bcfides him, it could at mod be only a fcal to them that had both faith and righteoufnefs, and not to them that had- neither- 4. If it was a feal of the covenant of grace to Abraham's natural feed, it muft be cither to fome or all ; if only to forne, it fliould be pointed out who they are; and if to all, then it muft be fealed, that is, confirmed, and an intercfl: in it af- fured of, to a mocWxuolfhmael; to a profane £/}z«-, toKorah, Dathan, andAbiram,. and their accomplices, whom the. earth fwallowed up alive ; to Achitophd, .that hanged himfelf; to Judas, that betrayed our Lord ; and to all the Jews con- cerned in his crucifixion and death; fincc there is reafon to believe they were-all . circumcifed. But, 5. The covenant made vi'\th Abraham, fo faras it was a covenant of grace, wai »ot made, as we have feen, with i\\ Abraham's natural feed ; and therefore cir- cumcifion could not be a feal of it to them. I pafs on, Fourthly, To another inquiry, whether baptifm fucceeded circumcifion, and fo became a feal of the covenant of grace to believers, and their natural feed ?. This muft be anfwered in the negative ; for,^ I. Th&rc ' Gen. xvii. ii. ^ Rom. iv. ti» 288 THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, : I. There is no agreement between thcra, in the fubjefts eo whom tbey arc adminiftcred; circumcilion was adminiftercd to Jews only, or fuch as becanrw profelytcs -, baptifm both to Jews and Gentiles, without any diftindtion, that believe in Chrift -, circumcifion was adminiftered to infants, baptifm only to adult perfons ; circumcifion belonged only to the males, baptifm to male and female : Seeing then the fubjefts of the one and the othcf are fo different, tkc one cannot be thought to fuccced the other. -2.. The ufc of the one and the other h not the fame-, the ufc of circumcifion was to diftinguifli the natural feed of Abraham from others, tmtil Chrift was come in the fiefli ; the ufe of baptifm is to be a diftinguiftiing badge of the fpiritual feed of Chrift, fuch as have believed in him, and put him on -, the ufe of circumcifion was to fignify the corruption of human nature, the neceflity of regeneration, of the circumcifion without hands, and of clcanfing by the blood of Chrift -, the ufe of baptifm is to anfwer a good confcience towards God, to rcprefcnt the fuffcrings, burial, and rcfurrcdiion oi Chrift, and prtrequires repentance and faith. 3. The manner of adminiftering the one and the other is very different; the one is by blood, the other by water ; the one by an incifion made in one part of the body, the other by an immerfion of the whole body in water j the one was done in a private houfe, and by a private hand ; the other, for the moft part, publicly, in open places, in rivers, and before multitudes of people, and by a perfon in public office, a public minifter of the word. Now, ordinances fo much differing in their fubjefls, ufe, and manner of adminiftration, the one can never be thought to come in the room and place of the other. But, 4. What puts it out of all doubt, that baptifm can never be faid to fuctxcd circumcifion is, that baptifm was in force and ufe before circumcifion was abo- liftied, and its practice difcontinued, or ought to be difcontinued. Circum- cifion was not abolifhed till the death of Chrift, when, with other ceremonies of the law, it was made null and void ; but, unto that time, it was the duty of Jewiftj parents to circamcife their infants ; whereas fome years before this, John came preaching thedoftrine of baptifm, and adminiftered it to multitudes; our Lord himfelf was baptized, three or four years, according to the common compuution, before his death ; now that which is in force before another is out of date, can never, with any propriety, be faid to fuccced or come in the room of that other. 5. It has been proved already, that circumcifion was no fcal of the covenant cf grace to Abrabam'i natural feed ; and therefore, could it be proved, as it caanot, that baptifm fucceeds, it, it would not follow that baptifm is a feal of the covenant of grace ; there arc many perfons who have been baptized, and ■ yet '"£XAMlN£D AND DISPROVED. 169 ytC not in the covenant of grace, and to whom it was nevet fealed, as Simon Magus, and others ; and, on the other hand, a perfon may be in the covenant of grace, and it may t>c fealed to him, and he may be comfortably affured of his intereft in it, though, as yer, not baptized in water. The author of the dialogue before. me fays, p. 16 that it is allowed on all hands, that baptifm is a token or feal of the covenant of grace •, but it is a popular clamour, a vul- gar miflake, that either that or the Lord's-Supper are feals of the covenant of grace. The blood of Chrill: is the feal, and the only feal of it, by which its pro- mifcs and biefTings are ratified and confirmed •, and the holy Spirit is the only earned pledge, feal, and fealer of the faints, until the day of redemption '. And fo all that fine piece of wit of our author, about the red and white feal, is fpoil- ed and'lofl, *p. 17. Upon the whole, we may fee what fufficient fcripturc inftitution for infant- baptifm is to be found in the covenant made with Abraham; fmce the fpiritual part of that covenant did not concern his natural feed, as fuch, but his fpiritual feed, and fo not infants, but adult perfons, whether among Jews or Gentiles, that walked in the ftcps of his faith ; and feeing there is not one word of bap- tifm in it, and much lefs of infant-baptifm -, nor was circumcifion a feal of ir, nor does baptifm fucceed that, or is i feal of the covenant of grace : Hence alfo, it will appear, what litile reafon there is for that clamorous out- cry, fo often made, and is by our author, of lefTening and abridging the privi- leges of infants under the gofpel difpenfation, and of depriving chcm of what they formerly had v or for an harangue upon the valuable blefTlng, and great and glorious privilege they had, of having the covenant of grace fealed unto them by circumcifion ; or for that demand, how, why, and when, children were cut off from this privilege? or for fuch a reprefentacion, this being the cafe, that the gofpel is a lefs glorious difpenfation, with refpefl: to infants, than the former was, p. 19, 20, 22, 30. Seeing the covenant of grace was never fealed to infants by circumcifion -, nor was that bloody and painful rite accounted a rich and glorious privilege ; far from it ; efpecially as it bound them over to keep the whole law, it was a yoke of bondage, an infupportable one : and it is a rich mercy, and glorious privilege of the gofpel, that the Jews and their cliildren are delivered from it j and that Geatilcs and their children are not obliged to it : And as for the demand, how, why, and when, children were cut off from it, it is eafily anfwered, that this was done by the death of Chrift,. and at the time of it, when all ceremonies were abolifhcd ; and that for this rea- fon, becaufe of the weaknefs, unprofitablcnefs, and burdcnfomenef? of that, and them: And as for the gofpel-difpenfation, that is the more glorious, for infants being left out of its church-ftatc; that is to fay, for its being not national Vol. II. P p and ♦ Heb. xiii. 20. compared with Dan. ix. :;. Ephrr. i. 11. 14. and iv 30. 290 THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, and carnal, as before, but congregational and fpiritual ; for its confiding, not of infants without underftanding, but of rational and fpiritual men, of believers in Chrift, and profeflbrs of his name; and thefc not in afinglc and fmall coun- try, as Judta, but in all parts of the world, as it has been, at one time or an- other, and it will be in the latter day : And as for infants themfelves, their cafe is as good, and their privileges as many and better, than under the legal dif- penfation ; their falvation is not at all afFc<5led by the abrogation of circumcifion,. or through want of baptifm to fucceed it. As the former did not feal the co-. venant to them, and could not fave them, fo neither could the latter, were it adminiftered to them : To which may be added, that being born of chriftian parents, and having a chriftian education, and the advantage of hearing the. gofpel, as they grow up, and this not in one country, but many, muft exceed, all the privileges the Jewifh children had under the former difpcnfation. CHAP. V. A confideration of the federal texts of fcripture produced in favour- of Infant -Baptifm. '"pHE n inifter in the dialogue before me, being prefTed by his neighbour to ^ declare what were the numerous texts of fcripture he referred to, as prov- ing the continuance of childrens privileges under the gofpel- difpenfation, mean- ing particularly baptifm, mentions the following. 17?, The pafTage in A£is ii. 39. For the promife is unto you, and to your chil- dren, and to all that are afar off, even as many as ibe Lord our God Jhall call. This fcripture is often made ufc of by our author, and feems to be his dernier refort on all occafions, and the fheet-anchor of the caufe he is pleading for. The promife fpoken of, he fays, undoubtedly, was' the covenant made with Abraham ; and was urged as a reafon with the Jews, why they and their chil- dren ought to be baptized •, and as a reafon with the Gentiles, why they and their children, when called into a church-ftate, fhould be alfo baptized, p. 1 1, 12. He makes ufe of it, to prove that this promife gives a claim to baptifm, and that an intereft in it gives a right unto it, p. 15, 16, 18, 29, 30. I. It is eafy to obferve the contradidlions, that fuch are guilty of, that plead for infant-baptifm, from the covenant or promife made w'lih Abraham, as this writer ii. One while, he tells us, that perfons are by baptifm brought into the covenant of grace-, and what a dreadful thing it is to renounce baptifm in infancy; whereby the covenant is vacated, and the relation to the glorious God dif- owned. 1 EXAMINED ANI> DISPROVED. 291 owned, they were brought into by baptifm, p. 4. And yet here we are told, that intercft in this promife gives a right and claim to baptifm ; but how can it give a previous right and claim to baptifm, when it is by baptifm, according to this writer, that perfons are brought into this covenant ? v.. The promife here oWerved, be it what it will, is not taken notice of, as what gives a claim and right to baptifm, but as an encouraging motive to per- dbns pricked in the heart, and in diftrefs, both to repent, and be baptized for the remiffion of fins, and as giving them hope of receiving the holy Ghofl:, •fince fucha promife was made; wherefore repentance and baptifm were urged, jn order to the enjoyment of the promife ; and, confequently, can be under- llood of no other than adult perfons, who were capable of repentance, and of a voluntary fubjeftion to the ordinance of baptifm. 3. Thcfhildren, here fpoken of, do not dcfign infants, but the pofterity of •the Jews, and fuch, who might be called children, though grown up : And ■nothing is more common in fcripture % than the ufe of the phrafe in this fenfe; and, unlefs it be fo underftood in many places, ftrange interpretations muft be given of them : wherefore the argument, from hence, for Psedobaptifm, is given up by fome learned men, as Dr Hammond, and others, as inconclufive-, but fome men, wherever they meet with the vford cbUdren, it immediately runs in their heads, that infants muft be meant. 4. The promife, be it what it will, is reftrained to as many as the Lord our Codjhail call, whether they be Jews or Gentiles, as well as to repenting and baptizing perfons ; and therefore can furnifli out no argument for infant-bap- tifm, but muft be underftood of adjjlt perfons, capable of being called wich an holy calling, of profefTing repentance, and of defiring baptifm upon it; and of doing this, that their faith might be led to the blood of Chrift, for the re- miffion of fin. 5. It fcems clear from the context, that not the covenant made vi\x.\\ Abra- ham, but cither the promife of the Meffiah, and -falvacion by him, the great promife made in the Old Teftament to the Jews, and their pofterity ; or the particular promife of remiffion of fins, a branch of the new covenant made with the houfe of Ifrael, and mentioned in the preceding verfe, and which was calcu- lated for comfort, and pertinently taken notice of; or of the pouring out of the holy Ghoft, which is laft mentioned : And indeed all may be included in this promife, and ufed as a means to comfort them under their diftrefs, and as an argument to encourage them to do the things they arc prefTed to in the foregoing verfe. • p p 2 . ^^b^ '*-See Exod. i. 8, 12. «nd Hi. 23. and xii. 26, 27, 28, 35, 40, 50. ind x\f. 8, 10, 22, 29. Jcr. I. 4. and a multitude of other places. 292 THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, zdfy, To the former is added another fcripture in Matthew x\x. 14. Suffer little children, and forbid them not to ceme utile me, for of fucb is the kingdom of heaven. Upon which, it is afkcd, how, and which way, fliould we bring our little children to Chrift, but in the way of his ordinances ? If they belong to the kingdom of heaven, they muft have a right to the privileges of that king- dom, p. 20. To which I anfwer, 1. Thefe little children do not appear to be new-born babes-, the words ufed by the evangelifts do not always fignify fuch, but are fomecimes ufed of fiich as arc capable of going alone, yea, of receiving inflrudtions, of underftanding the fcriptures, and of one of twelve years of age". Nor is it probable that chil- dren juft born, or within the month, Oiould be had abroad. Moreover, thefe were fuch as Chrift called unto him % and were capable of coming to him of themfelves, as thefe words fuppofe ; nor does their being brought unto him, or his taking them in his arms, contradi(ft this ; fince the fame things are faid of fuch as could walk of themfelves •*. 2. It is not known whofe children thefe were, whether the children of thofc that brought them, or of others-, and whether their parents were believers in Chrift, or not, or whether their parents were baptized or unbaptized ; and if ihcy were unbelievers and unbaptized perfons, the Predobaptills themiclves will not allow that their children ought to be baptized. 3. Ceruin it is, that they were not brought toChrifb, to be baptized by hi.m -, for the ends for which they were brought are mentioned ; Mattheiv fays, they brought them unto him, that hef].ouldpul ins hands on thenu, and pray ; that is, ifjx them, and blcfs them -, as was ufual with the Jews to do ' : and it was com- mon with them to bring their children to venerable perfons, men of note for re- ligion and piety, to have their blefTmg and their prayers -, and fuch an one the perfons that brought thefe children might take Chrift to be, though they might ROt know him'to be the MefTiah. Mark and Luke fay, they were brought to him, that be u-cu!d touch them*; as he fometimes ufed to do, when he healed perfons of difcaies ; and probably fome of thefe children, . if not all of them, were diftaied, and were brought to be cured ; otherwife it is not eafy to con- ceive what they fliould i>e touched by him for; however, they were not brought to be baptized : If the perfons that brought them had their baptifm in view, they would not have brought them to Chrift, but to his difciplcs ; feeing not he but they baptized the perfons fit for it -, they might have fcen the difciples admi- nifler that ordinance, but not Chrift; and from hence it is certain, that they were not baptized by Chrift, fince he never baptized any. 4. This ' Matt, xvili. t. 2Tini.iii, 1;. Marie v. 39, 4?. « Luke xviii. 16. T Mate. xii. 22. and xvii. i6. Mark ix. 36. f See Gen. xlix. 14 — 16. » Maik X. 13. Luke xviii. 15, ; EXAMINED AND DISPROVED. 293 . 4. This pafiage concludes againft Pjedobaptifm, and not for it; for it feems, by this, that it had never been the praftice of the Jews, nor oijchn the Baptift, •nor of Chrift and his difciples, to baptize infants ; for had this been then in ufe, the apoftles would fcarcely have rebuked and forbid ihofe that brought theie children, fince they might have concluded they brought them to be baptized -, but knowing of no fuch ufage, that ever obtained in that nation, neither amono- thofe that did or did not believe in Chrift, they forbad them; and Chrift's entire Cknce about the baptifm of infants at this time, when he had fuch an opporcu- xiity of fpeaking of it to his difciples, had it been his will, has no favourable af- pefl on fuch a pradlice. 5. This writer's reafoning upon the pafTage, is befide the purpofe for which he produces it ; if he brings it to prove any thing refpefting baptifm, it muft be to prove that infants were brought to Chrifl, in order to be baptized by him, and not to him In the way of his ordinance, or in the way of baptifm : the rea- fon our Lord gives why they fhould be fuffered to come to him, for of fuch is the kingdom of heaven, is to be underftood of fuch as were comparable to little children, for modeQy, mccknefs, and humility, and for freedom from rancour malice, ambition, and pride ^ And fo the ^yr/ar verfion is, who are as tkefe \ and xh^Per/ic verficn, which is rather a paraphrafe, fhewing the fenfe, "who have been humble as thefe liLtU children ; and fuch are the proper fubjefts of a gofpcl church-ftate, fomctimes called the kingdom of heaven, and fhall inherit eternal happinefs. If the words are to be literally underftood of infant?, and of their belonging to the kingdom of heaven, interpreted of the kingdom of grace, or of the gofpel church-ftate, according to this author's reafoning, they will prove too much, and more than he cares for; naniely, that belonging to that king- dom, they have a right to the privileges of ir, even to all of them, to the Lord's flipper, as well as to baptifm; but the kingdom of glory fcems to be dcfigncd : And we are not unwilling to admit the literal fenfe, for the eternal f^lvation and happinefs of infants dying in infancy, is not denied by us; and, according to this fenfe, our Lord's reafoning is ftrong, that feeing he thought fie to fave tiie fouls of infants, and introduce them into the kingdom of heaven, why fliould they be forbid being brought to him, to be touched by him, and healed of their bodily difeafes ? The argument is from the greater to the lefTcr; butfur- nifhes out nothing in favour of Psdobaptifm. ^dly. The next text mentioned is Matt, xviii. 6. Bafxhofo pall offend one of ibeje little ones which believe in me, it were better for him, that a millfione were hanged about his neck, and that be were drowned in the depth of the fca. Upon which it is obferved, that the little one referred to was in an infant ftate, as ap- pears * See Matt, xviii. 2. 2 04 THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, j-iears from verfe 2^ and Mark ix. 36. and that little children are reputed, by i Chrift, believers in him : And fo here is a full anticipation of the common • objedlion againft the baptifm of infants, and a juftification of their claim to the feal of the rightcoufnefs of faith-, as well as a ftrong declaration of the awful danger of offending thefe little ones, by denying them the coveaant privileges, to which they have a righteous claim, p. 20, 21, 23, 27. But, 1. Though the little child, in verfe 2'*, which our Lord fet in the midft of his difciples, and took an occafion from thence to rebuke and inftruft them', was in an infant-ftate, yet thofe our Lord here fpeaks of, were not little ones in acye ; for how capable foever they may be of having the principle or habit of faith implanted in them, they cannot be capable of cxercifing it, or of aft- ing faith, which the phrafe ufed exprefTes -, for if they are not capable of exer- cifing reafon, though they have the principle of it in them, they cannot be capable of exercifing faith ; nor indeed of being offended in the fenfe the word is here ufcd, and to fuch -a degree, that the offenders of them had better have died a violent death, than to be guilty offuch offence. Bur, 2. The difciples of Chrift are meant, his apoflles, who were contending among themfcflves who fhould be greateft in the kingdom of heaven ; which ambition our Lord rebukes, by placing a little child in the midft of them, ver. I, 2. faying to them. Except ye be convertedy and become as little children, ye Jhall not enter into the kingdom of heaven ; adding, that whoever humbled him- fclf as the child before him, fhould be the greateft in it; and that fuch who received fuch humble difciples of his, received him ; but thofe that offended them, would incur his refentment, and the greateft danger exprelTed in the words under confidcration, ver. 3—6. And thefe were fuch, not only who by faith looked to Chrift, and received him as their Saviour, and made a profefTion of him •, but preached the doftrine of faith ; who, having believed, therefore /poke ; and who may be faid to be offended, when their perfons were defpifed, their miniftry rcjedted, and they reproached and perfecuted ; and, when it would go ill with them that fliould treat them in this manner. Thefe were fuch, who were little ones, in their own eftcem, and in the efteem of others. 3. Admitting that infants in age could be meant, and thefe to have the prin- ciple and habit of faith in them, yet this would not juftify their claim to bap- tifm, which this writer means, by the feal of the rightcoufnefs of faith ; though not baptifm, but circumcifion is defigned by that phrafe -, fince afliual faith, yea, a profcfTion of it, is a neceffary pre-rcquifitc to baptifm ; Jf thou believcfi -with all thine heart, thou mayeji '. 4. This ' Afls viii. 37. EXAMINED AND DISPROVED. 295 4.. This -writer feems confcious to himfelf, that faith in Chrift is neceflary to baptifm, and is that which juftifies a claim unto if, fince he feems glad to lay hold on this text, and the fenfe he puts upon it, in order to anticipate the ob- jedlion to infant-baptifm taken from faith in Chrift, being a pre-rcquifue to n-, which he knows not how otherwife to get rid of, than to fuppofe that infants have. faith, and that this is a proof of it. But, ; 5. Suppofing this, either all infants have faith, or only fome : If all ; how comes it to pafs, that there are fo many, when grown up, that are manifeftly defticute of it: Can the grace be loft ? Is it not an abiding one ? Is not He, who is the. Author, the Finifhcr of it ? If .only, fome have it, how. can it be known, who have it, and. who not ? Wherefore, to baptize upon this fuppofed faith, is to proceed on a very precarious foundation : It feems, therefore, much more eligible, to defer their baptifm, .till it appears, that they do truly and ac- tually believe in Chrift. ^hJy, Xhe next paflage of fcripture, produced in favour. of infant-baptifm, is. I Cor. vii. 14. For the unbelieving hujhand is fan£lified by the wife, and the un- believing wife is fanliified by the hufband, elfe were your children unclean; but new - are they holy. Upon which, ouc autJior thusreafons ; '« If either of the parents '.' be a believer, the children are reputed holy i .that is, they have a covenant " holincfs,-and Jiave, .therefore, a claim to covenapt-privileges-, — they are holy, *' by virtue of their covenant.-relaiion to God, .and muft, therefore, have a " right to have that covenant fealed to them in baptifm, p. 21." But, 1. It oughr to be told, what thefe covenant-privileges arc, that children have a claim unto, by virtue of their covenant-relation, this writer fo often fpeaks of. If baptifm is one of them, as it feems to be his intention, that muft be denied, to be a covenant-privilege, or a. privilege of the covenant of- grace -, for then alL the covenant ones in all ages, ought to have enjoyed it ; whereas they have not : And we have feen already, that covenant intereft gives no right to any pofiti-^'e' inftitutjon, or ordinance, without a divine direftion ; and that baptifm is na . fcal of the covenant; 2. It ftiould be told, what this covenant is, whether it is a real or imaginary thing; it feems to be the latter, by our author's way of exprcffing himfelf. Ho fays, children are reputed holy ; that is, have a covenant- holincfs : So that cove- rant-holinefs is a reputed holinefs ; but fuch a. holinefs can-never qualify per^ - fons for a New Tcftament ordinance ; nor has the covenant of grace any fuch . holinefs belonging to it-, that provides, by way of promife, for real holinefs, fignified, by putting and writing the laws of God in the heart, by giving new- hearts and new fpirits, and taking away the ftony heart, and by cleanfing fronr all impurity -, this is real, inward holinefs, and fhews itfclf in an outward holy , converfation : . 296 THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, converfation : Where this appears, fuch have an undoubted right to the ordi- nance of baptifm, fincc they muft have received the holy fpirit, as a fpirit of fanftification '. 3. A holinefs, appertaining to the covenant of grace, can never be meant, (Ince it is fuch a holinefs, as unbelievers, yea, as heathens are faid to have ; h is fuch a holinefs, as unbelieving hufbands, and unbelieving -wives are faid to have, by virtue and in confequence of their relation to believing wives and believing hufbands -, and vyhich they have prior to the holinefs of their children ; and on which their childrens holinefs depends, Now, furcly, unbelievers and heathens, will not be allowed to be in covenant, of to bepoflcflcd of a covenant holinefs, by virtue of their yoke-fellows •, arrd yet, theirs, and their childrens holinefs, muft be of the fame kind and nature. Wherefore, 4. If children, by virtue of this holinefs, have a claim to covenant-privileges, and to have the covenant fealed to them by baptifm 1 then, much more, their unbelieving parents, becaufe they arc fanftificd before them, by tlieir believ- ing yoke-fellows, and they are as near to them, as their children ; and if the ho- linefs of the one gives a right to baptifm, why not the holinefs of the other ? And yet, our Pasdobaptifts do not pretend to baptize the unbelieving hufband or wife, thougli fanflified, whofe holinefs is the more near ; but the children, that become holy through the fandtification of both, whofe holinefs is the more remote. For, it fhould be obferved, that the holinefs, fpoken of in the text, be it what it will, is derived, or denominated, from both parents, believing and unbelieving; yea, the holinefs of the children depends upon the fanftifi- cation of the unbelieving parent; for if the unbeliever is not fanftifted, the chil- dren are unclean, and not holy. Befides, the words are not necefTarily to be underftood of infants, or young children, but of the pofterity of fuch perfons, whether of 40, or 50 years of age, or of what age foever ; and muft be unclean in the fcnfe of the word, here ufcd, if their unbelieving parent is not fandtificd by, or to the believing one. But, 5. Thefe words are to be underftood of a matrimonial holinefs ; not merely of the holinefs of marrbge, as it is an inftitution of God, but of the very aft of marriage, which, in the language of the Jews, is frequently expreffed, by being fanuHfitd. Innumerable inftances might be given of this ; I have produced one in my cxpofition of this place, in which the word, np Kadr.Jh, " to fandify," is ufcd no lefs than ten times, to efpcufe. And, for the fake of thofe who have it not, I ftiall tranfcribe the paftage: And it 4s, as follows'; "a man '^*7pD Mc- " kaddrjh, " fandifies," or efpoufes a wife by himfclf, or by his meffenger; a " woman, K;"»pn"3 Mithkaddefn, " is fandificd," or efpoufed by hcrfelf, or by " her * Afti X 47. ' Mifn. Kiddufhin, c. 2. §. i. ■" EXAMINED AND DISPROVED. 29; " her m-fTrnger -, a man, tnpID Mekaddejh, " landifies," or efpoiirt-s his dan jI.- " ter, when (he is a young woman, by himlelf, or by his meff,nger: If any one " fays to a woman, ' z. EXAMINED AND DISPROVED. 299 ueceflary thereunto. Men are not made difciples by baptizing them, as this writer fuggefls, but they mud be firft difciples, and tlien baptized. Sojerom'' long ago underflood the comminion, who has thefe words upon it -, " firft, they *' teach all nations, then dip thofe that are taught in water : For, it cannot " be, that the body (hould receive the facramcnt of baptifm, unlefs the foul has " before received the truth of faith." To the fame purpofe, Jtbanaftus hy%'\ " wherefore the Saviour docs not fimply command to baptize, but firft fay?, " teach; and then baptize thus, in ihe name of the Father, and of the Son, and " of theholyGhoJl; that faith might come of teaching, and baptifm be pcrfcfred." 5. Such a difciple, as this writer fuppofes to be conftituted by baptifm, namely, a learner ofChrift, cannot agree with an infant. What can a new-born babe learn ofChrift.? What can it be taught of him, or receive by way of teach- ing, at the time of its baptifm, or by being baptized .' If learners and difciples are fynonymous terms, as this author fays, they cannot be difciples before they are learners; and they cannot be learners ofChrift, unlefs they have learned fomething of him : And, according to this notion, they ought to learn fome- thing of him, before they are baptized in his name. But what can an infant Jearn ofChrift ? 6. The text xnAHsw. 10. is not to be underftood of infants, but of adult perfons ; even converted Gentiles, who believed in Chrift, and were his difci- ples-, and upon whom, the falle teachers would have impofcd the yoke of the ceremonial law -, and, particularly, circumcifion : Which, becaufe it bound over to the whole law, the apoftle reprefents as an infupportable one; and calls this jmpofition of it on the believing Gentiles, a tempting of God : And as for any other pafTages that enjoin the education of children, or fpeak of it, they are never from thence called the difciples of Chrift, nor any where elfe. btbly. This writer afierts, that " it is plain that the apoftles thus underftood «' ourSaviour's meaning, and accordingly baptized Z.;Y//d and her houfliold, and " thcGaoler and all his"; and the houftiold oi Stephanas'" P. 21. But, I. Seeing the underftanding of our Saviour's meaning in the commidion, depends upon thofe inftances of baptifm, and fo the warrant for the baptizing of infants, the Pxdobaptifts ought to be fure that there were infants in thefe families, and that they were baptized, or otherwife they muft baptize them, at nioft, upon a very precarious foundation ; for if the commiffion of itfelf is not clear for it, and thofe inftances in which the apoftles afted according to the fommiffion, are not fufficient to vouch it, it muft ftand upon a very bad bot- q_Q_2 torn, * Primum docent omnesGentes, deinde doaas intingunt Aqua, Uc. Hieron. io Matt, xxviii. ig. Athanaf. contr. Arianos. Orat. III. p. 209. * Aftixvi. 15, 33. ' 1 Cor. i. 16. 300 THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, tom, having neither precept nor precedent for it ; and they muft know, that there are families that have no infants in them, and how can they be fure there were any in thcle ? And, 2. It lies upon them to prove there were infants in thefe families, and that thcfc infants were baptized, or the allegation of thofe inflances is to no pur- pofe; how they can fatisfy themfeives without ic, they belt know ; they ought not to put it upon us to prove a negative, to prove that there were nOnc, this is unfair ; and one would think, fhould not fit very eafy upon their minds, to reft their practice on fo poor a fhift, -and fo unrcafonable a demand. But, 3. We are able to make it appear, that there are many things in the account of the baptifm of thefe families, which are inconfiftent with infants, and which make it at Icaft probable, that there were none in them; and certain, that thofe that were baptized were adult perfons, and believers in Chrift:. As for Lydia, it is not certain in what ftate of life fhc was, whether fingie or married, whether maid, widow, or wife; whether fhe had any children, or ever had any; or if (he had, and them living, whether they were infants or adult ; and if infants, it does not fcem probable that fhe fliould bring them along with her from her native place Thyatira to Philippic where fhe feems to have been upon bufinefs, and fo had hired a houfe during her ftay there ; wherefore, her houfhold feems to have confifted of menial fervants fhe brought along with her, to afTift her in her bufincfs ; and certain it is, that thofe that the apoftles found there, when they entered into it, after they came out of prifon, were fuch as are called bre- thren, and were capable of being comforted by them ". And as for the Jailer's houfhold, they were fuch as were capable of having the word of God fpoken to them, and of rejoicing at it, and in the convcrfation of the apoflles, at what was faid and done by them ; and are even exprefly faid to believe in God, as the Jailer did, and together with him; and as for the houfhold oi Stephanas, that is, by fomc, thought to be the fame with the Jailer's; but, if not, it is cer- tain it confifted of adult perfons, believers in Chrift, and very ufcful in the public fervice of religion; for they were the firft-fruits of y^fi^a/t:, and addided themfeives to the miniftry of the faints". All which, in each of the inftances, can never be faid of infants. But, 7/i;/y, This writer adds one text more, which, he fays, mufl be allowed to be decifive in the prefent cafe, and that is Romans xi. 17 — 25. from whence he thinks it is moft evident, that fince the believing Gentiles are grafted into all the privileges and fpiritual blefTings of the Jewifh church, they cannot be cut off from that great blefTing and privilege of having the covenant fealcd to their infant feed, p. 21. To which I reply, , I. It ■ Aftj xvi. 15, 40. » 1 Cor. zTi. 15. EXAMINED AND DISPROVED. 301 1. It will readily be allowed, that believing Gentiles fliared in all the fpiritual bkflings and privileges of the Jewifh church, or of believers under the former difpenfation ; the fame blefTings of imputed righteoufnefs and pardon of fin came upon the uncircumcifion, as wdl as upon the circumcifion, who walk in the fteps of the faith of Abraham °y for fuch that are Chriji's, true believers in him, they are Abraham's feed, his fpiritual feed, and heirs, according to the pro- mifcy of all fpiritual blelfings and privileges "". Bur, 2. The covenant of grace was never fealed to Abraham'' s, natural feed; ^he covenant of grace itfelf did not belong to them, as fuch; nor was circumcifion a fcal of it to them ; nor is baptifm a fcal of the covenant of grace to any; and therefore it is a great impropriety and impertinence to talk of cutting off from, that which was never had, and never was. 3. Though believing Gentiles fhare in the fpiritual ble/Trngs and privileges which th" Jewidi church, or Jewifh believers enjoyed, they never v\'ere orafted into that church; that church-ftate, with all the peculiar ordinances of it, was utterly abolifhed by Chrift, fignified by the Jhakir.g of the heavens and the earth, and removing of thofe things that are fhaken, that thofe which cannot be fhaken t>iay remain'^. The Jewifh church is not the olive-tree, of whofe root and fa:- refs the G-ntilcs partake ; they are not grafted into the old Jewifh flock ; the ax has been laid to the root of that tree ; and it is entirely cut down, and no cngraftment is made upon it. But, 4. The olive-tree, of whofe root and fatnefs believing Gentiles partake, is the gofpel church- rtate, out of which the Jews that rejeded Chrifl were left, and arc the broken branches ; and thofe that believed in Chrift were taken in, and laid the firlt foundation of it ; thefe are the firft-fruits, and the root, which being holy, are a pledge of the future converfion and holinefs of that people ; they of them that received the firft-fruits of the Spirit, were firft incorporated into a gofpel church-flate ; and then the Gentiles which believed were received among them, and were engrafted into them ; and this engrafture or coalition was firft at ^fl/;of/&, where and when, and hereafter, the Gentiles partook of the root and fatnefs of the olive-tree ; enjoyed the fame privileges, communi- cated in the fame ordinances, and were fatisfied with the goodnefs and fatnefs of the houfe of God ; and of this engrafture, and of this only, does this text fpeak ; fo that it is fo far from being decifive in the prcfent cafe, that there is not one word, one fyllable about baptifm in it, and ftill lefs can any thing, in iavour of infant-baptifm, be inferred from it. I fhall conclude this chapter, and with it the affair of the divine right of infant- baptifm, which, whether iUuftrated and confirmed in the Dialogue, muft be left to . • Rom. iv. 6 — 1 1. f Gal. iii. :9. « Heb. xli. 26, 27. -302 THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, to the judicious reader, by oblcrving, that the minifter in it being required to ■give exprefs New Teftament proof for infant-baptifm, which he was confcious to himfelf he could notdo, inanfwer to it, requires exprefs New Teftament proof, 'that iromen fhould partake of the Lcrd's iupper, and offers to prove infant-bap- ■tifm by the fame arguments that this fhould be proved. But, X. We do not go about to prove womens right to partake of the Lord's Sup- per, by fuch arguments as this writer forms for usj as, by their covenant-intercft, by their claim to have the covenant fealed to them, and by their being a part of all nations-, and though we look upon their being believers and difciplcs of Chrift, proper qualifications for their admiffion to the Lord's fupper, when thefe can be made to appear to belong to infants, we fhall readily admit them to baptifm. But, 2. We prove their right to the ordinance of the Lord's Supper, by their right to the ordinance of baptifm ; for they that have a right to one Ordinance, have to the other; that women believing in Chrift have a right to baptifm, is clear, from /^^s viii. i z. They were baptized, both men and women, and therefore fhould •partake of the Lord's Supper. Let it be proved, that infants ought to be bap- lized, and it will be allowed and infifted upon, that they partake of the Lord's Supper. ' 3. We prove it by their being church members ; Mary the mother of Jefu?, with other women, were of the number of the difciplcs that formed the firft gofpel church at Jerufalem; Sapphira, the wife oi Ananias, was, with her hufband, of the multitude that believed, and were together^ and bad all things com- tHon; after whofe awful death, believers were the more added to the Lord, that is, to the church, both men and women '. There were women in the church at Co- rinth; concerning whom the apoftle gives rules rcfpefting their condufl '. Now all thofe ihat are members of gofpel churches, ought to eat the bread and drink the cup, in remembrance of Chrift'. Women are members of gofpel churches; and therefore ought to eat and drink in like manner. 4. We prove this by example : Mary, the mother of our Lord, and other women, being of the number of the difciplcs, which conftituted the gofpel Church ftate at Jerufalem, as they continued with one accord in prayer and fup- plication, fo likewife in breaking of bread °. 5. We prove this by a divine direftion, exhortation, and command. Let a man examine himfelf, and fo let him eat". The word ufed is rtcSjaT©-, a word of the common gender, and fignifies both men and women; in which fenfe it muft be often underftood, as in i Timothy ii. 5. for is Chrift a mediator only between ' Afls i. 14, 15. and iv. 32. and v. 9, 14. • i Cor. xi. 5, 6, 13. and xiv. 34, 35. « I Cor. zi. 26. ■ Afts i. 14, 15. ind ii. i, 44, 46. " i Cor. xi. zg. E"XAM1NED and disproved. 30s between God and men, and not women ? Under the gofpcl difpenfation, in a gofpel church ftate, there is neither male nor female ; ihey are all one inChriJl, and enjoy the fame privileges and ordinances \ Let the fame proof, or as good, be given for infant-baptifm, and we have done-, let it be proved that infants have a right to any other gofpel ordinance as fuch •, that they are or ought to be members of gofpel churches-, that there is either precept or precedent for the baptizing of them, and we (hall readily admit them. CHAP. VI. Concernifig the Mode of admlniftering the Ordinance of Baptifm^ 'whether by i mm erf on or by fpr inkling. T^HE author of the dialogue under confideration affirms, that there is not one fingle Lexicographer, or critic upon theGreek language, he has ever feen, but what agrees, that though the word baptizo fometimes fignifies to dip, yet it alfo naturally fignifies to wafi 5 and that wadiing, in any mode whatfoever, is the native fignification of the word baptifmos, p. 3 i. that the words baptize and baptifm, as ufed in the New Teftament, do not, from their fignification, make dipping or plunging the necefTary mode of adminiftering the ordinance, p. 33. and. that one fingle inftance of that mode of adminiftering the ordinance, is not to. be found in all the New Teftament, p. 34. nor is it probable it fhould be the mode, p. 38. and that the modcof adminiftering it by fprinkling is a more lively, emblem of what is fignified and reprefented by it, than dipping or plunging can be fuppofed, and therefore the moft proper one, p. 39. Firji, As to the lexicographers, and critics oa theGreek language, they agree that the word ^4an^ca, fignifies, in its firft and primary fenfe, •' to dip or plunge " ' and only in a fccondary and confequential fenfe, to wajh, but never io pour or fprinkle; there being no proper wafhing, but what is by clipping ; and for this we appeal to all the writers of this kind, and even to thofc this author mentions. Scapula, the firft of them, renders ^xtIi^u, by tnergo, feu immergo, ut qua tin- geudi, ant, ahluendi gratia aqtoe intnurgimus, " to dip or plunge into, as what " for the fake of dying or wafhing we dip into water -," item mergo, fubmergo, ohruo aqua, "alfo to plunge, plunge under, overwhelm in water;" item abluo, lavo, "alfo to wafti off, wafti;" and 0*Tj7({, by immergo, " to plunge into ;" :ind ^it-rlifffi©-, hy immerjie, letie, bap- tijmus, " inimerfjon, walking, baptifm." As for other critics on the Greek language, who afTcrr, that the proper fig- nification of the word baptize, is to dip, or plunge ; they arc fo numerous, that it would be tedious to reckon them up : I (kail only mention a few of them, and their words. Calvin ' fays, " Ipfum baptizandi verbum merger e fignijic at, i^ *' mergendi ritum veteri ecclef.iC ebfervatum fuijfe conjlat ;" the word baptize, fig- " n'lfics to plunge; and, it is plain, that the rite of plunging was obferved in " the ancient church." Beza, who niufl: be allowed to be a learned critic in the Greek language, fays, on Markvu-i^.. '■'■ Neque vero to ^t.ifn\tiv, ftgnificat " lavare nifi a confequenti, nam propric declarat tingendi caufa immergere ; " nei- " ther does the word baptize, fignify to wajh, unlefs confcquentially ; for it " properly fignifies, to plunge into, for the fake of tinging, or dying;" and on Matt. iii. 1 1. he fays, '■'■ fignificat autem t« ^fj]i?^Hr, tingere quum m^^ to P^^tthk, " dicatur, (J quum tingenda mergantur ; " the word baptize, fignifies to dtp *' (as Dyers in the vatt) Iceing it comes from bapto, to dip, and feeing things, «' that are to be dyed, are dipped." Cafaubon, another great critic on the Greek language, has thefe words on Matt. iii. 6. " Hie enim fuit baptizandi ritus " ut in aquas immergerentury quod vel ipfo vox ^*wli^Hr, declarat fatis — unde intel- ligimt'.: • Inftitut. L. IV. C. 1; ^. 19. ■ EXAMINED AND DISPROVED. 305 " ligimus Ttoti ejje ah re, quod jam pridem non nulli difputarant de toto cor pore immer- " gendo in ceremonia baptifmi; vocem enim ^n-rji^nr, urgehant ;" for this was the " rite of baptizing, that perfons fliould be plunged into water, which the word *' baptizo, fufficiently declares — Hence, we underftand, that it was not fo- " reign from the matter, which fome fome time ago difputed, concerning " plunging the whole body in the ceremony of baptifm -, for they urged the " fignification of the word baptizo." And, that this is the proper fignification of the word, he obferves, in his notes on /i3s i. 5. and ii. 4. To which, I fhall only add one more critic, and that is Grotius; who, on Mat tkew iii. 6. thus writes ; " Merfatione autem non perfujione agi folitum bunc ritiim indicat ^ vocis " proprietas, i^ loca ad eum ritum dek5ia, John iii. 23. Adls viii. 38. ^ alltifiones " multa apoftolorum quts ad afperfionem referri non pojfunt, Rom. vi. 3. Col. ii. 12. " that this rite ufed to be performed by plunging, and no: by pouring, both the " propriety of the word, and the places cholen for this rite, (hew, John iii. 23. " AHs viii. 38. and the many allufions of the apofcies, which cannot be referred *' io/prinkling, Rom.vi.3,4. Col.ii. 12." I might have here fubjoined, fome inftances of the ufe of the word in Greek authors, by which it appea-rs to have the fenfe of dipping and plunging, and not of pouring, or fprinkling.; but this has been largely done hyDr Gale, and others. I (hall, therefore, proceed, Secondly, To confider the ufe of the words, baptize and baptifm, in the New Teflament; which our author fays, do not, from their fignification, make dip- ping or plunging, the nece(rary mode of adminiftering the ordinance of bap- tifm : And the places enumerated by him, in which they are ufed, are as follow. I. The defcent of the holy Ghoft on the apodles, and on Cornelius, and his company, is called baptizing, Afts i. 5. and xi. 16. where he obferves, ic cannot be pretended that there was the lead: allufion to, or refcmblance of dipping, or plunging, in this ufe of the word. But the learned Cafaubon, a very great cri- tic in the Greek tongue, before-mentioned and referred to, does pretend, that there is fuch an allufion and refcmblance, his words on /JHs i. 5. are thefe, " etji " non improbo, &c. although I do not difapprove of the word baptized, being " retained here, that the antithefis may be full j yet, I am of opinion, that " regard is had, in this place, to its proper fignification; for fitrTj^ar, is ta *' immerfe, fo as to tinge or dip : And, in this fenfe, the apoftles arc truly faid " to be baptized ; for the houfe, in which this was done, was filled with the " holy Ghoft : So that the apoftles feemed to be plunged into it, as into Ibr.e " pool." And the extraordinary defcent of the fpirit in thole inftances, is nni(.h more ftrongly expreffcd by a word, which fignifies plur.giug, than if it had been cxprcflcd by a word, that fignifies bare perfufion, and ftill lefs by fprinkling. Vot. II. R R 2. " ChrilVs ';3o5 THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, ' 2. <' Chrift's crucifixion is called a baptifm, Markx.^S. but, being buffeted, *' fpit upon, and lifted up upon the crofs, fays our author, bear no refemblance, i*' nor can have any allufion to dipping, or plunging. But, it is eafy to ob- ••' ferve, that the fufferings of our Lord, which are compared to a baptifm, in *' the place referred to, and in Luke xii. 50. becaufe of the greatnefs and abun- " dance of them, are, fomctimes, cxprefled by deep waters, and floods of wa- *' tcrs ; and he is reprefcntcd as plunged into them, and covered and over- *' whelmed with them;" For fo he fays himfclf •, The waters are come into my foul; I fink in deep mire, where is no ftanding ; I am come into deep waters, where the floods overflow me, Pfalm Ixix. i, 2. And, therefore, a word fjgnifying /»;- tnerfion, and a covering of the whole body in water, is a very apt one to exprefs the multitude of Chrift's fufferings, and the overwhelming nature of them ; and muft, more fitly, exprefs the fame, than a word, which only fignifies pour- ing, or fprinkling a few drops of water. 3. The text in Mark vii. 4. is next mentioned •, which fpeaks of the Jews, when come from the market, not eating, except they wafh {baptizoontai) ; and oi the wafhing^baptifmous) of cups and pots, brazen veffels, and of tables, or beds, as the word fignifies. And this, our author thinks, is an unexceptionable in- ftance of thefe words fignifying wafliing, without dipping, or plunging •, fince it can hardly be fuppofed, that they dipped themfelves under water, every time they came from market, or, that they dipped their beds, every time they fat, or lay upon them. But, in anfwer to this, it fhould be obferved, that our Lord is here fpeaking of the fuperftition of the Pharifecs, who, when they came from marker, or any court of judicature, if they touched any common perfons, or their clothes, reckoned themfelves unclean ; and, according to the tradi- tions of the elders, were to immcrfe themfelves in water, and did : So that a fnoft proper word is here made ufe of, to exprefs their fuperftition. And, as for cups, pots and brazen veffels, what other way of wafhing them is there, than by dipping, or putting them into water? And, in this way, unclean veffels were to be wafhed, according to the law. Lev. xi. 32. as well as all that were reckoned fo by the traditions of the elders; and even beds, pillows and bolfters, when they were unclean in a ceremonial fenfe, and not, as this author puts it, every time they lay, or fat upon them, were to be wafhed by immerfion, or dipping them in water; as I have proved from the Jews oral law, which our Lord has refpedl to, in my Expofition of this place ; to which, I refer the reader. Wherefore, the words are here ufed in their primary fenfe, as figni- fying dipping; and, if they did not fo fignify, they would no: truly reprefent the fuperftition, they are dcfigned to do. 4. The EXAMINED AND DISPROVED. 307 4. The next pafTage produced,' is i Cor. x. i, 2. which fpeaks of the Jewifh fathers, ht\ng baptized unto Mofes in the cloud, and in the fea. Upon which; this writer obferves, that he thinks, he need not ferioudy undertake to convince his friend, he is debating with ; " that the fathers were not dipped in the cloud, " but that the rain from the cloud bore a much greater refemblance to fprink- " ling, or affufion, than to dipping." But let us a little examine this matter, and fee wherein the agreement iay, between baptifm and the Ifraelites pafiage under the cloud, and through the fea. "Which may be confidered, either to- gether, or feparately : If together, the agreement between it and baptifm, lay in this J the Ifraelites, when they paffed through the Red fea, had the waters on each fide of them, which flood up, as a wall, higher than they, and the cloud over them ; fo that they were, as perfons immerfcd in, and covered with wa- ter; and, in this view, it is eafy to fee, that the refemblance is much greater to immerfion, than to fprinkling, or affufion : or this may be confidered feparately, as baptized in the cloud, and as baptized in the fea ; in the cloud, when, as Gataker ', a Pasdobaptift writer, thinks, it paflcd from before the face of the Ifraelites, and flood behind them, and was between the two camps, to keep off the Egyptians ; and which, when it pafl"ed over them, let down a plentiful rain upon them, whereby they were in fuch a condition, as if they had been dipped all over in water; or, when under the cloud they were all over covered with it, as a perfon, when baptized by immerfion, is all over covered with water ; and they might be faid to be baptized in the fea, when, as they pafTed through it, the waters flanding up above their heads, they feemed, as if they were immerfed. The refemblance to plunging, therefore, confidered in either way, muft be nearer, than to pouring, or fprinkling a fmall quantity of water. To which may be added, that the defcent of the Ifraelites into the fea, when they feemed as though they were buried in the waters of it; and their afcent out of it again on the fhore, have a very great agreement with baptifm, as adminiftered by immerfion ; in which, the petfon baptized, goes down into the water, is buried with Chrift therein ; and comes up out of it, as out of a grave, or as the children of Ifrael out of the Red fea. 5. The lall text mentioned, where the word baptifm is ufed, is Heb. ix. 10. where our author obferves, " the apoftle, fpeaking of the ceremonial difpenfa- " tion, tells us, that kjlood only in meats, and drinks, and divers ivajhings (bap- •' tifmous) and carnal ordinances ; and the principal of thefe wafhings, he cx- " emplifies to us, ver. 13. to be the blood of bulls and goais, and the afhes of an " heifer, fprinkling the unclean : Here, therefore, the word cannot, with any " appearance of modefty, be explained in favour of immerfion." To which, I R R 2 reply, * Adverfar. Mifcellan. p, 30. r . 3o8 THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, reply, that the aflies of an heifer, fprinkling the unclean, were fo far from be- ing the principal part of the Jewiih wafhings or baptifms, that it was no part at all; nor is this mentioned by the apoftle, as any exemplification of them, who underftood thefc things better. Sprinkling the afhes of the heifer, and the wafhing, or bathing of the perfon in water, which was by immerfion, are fpoken of, as diftinft and feparate things, in the ceremony referred to. Numb. xix. 19. and indeed, waOiing by fprinkling, is not reconcileable to good fenfe, to the propriety of language, and to the univerfal cuftom of nations. However, cer- tain it is, that the priefts, Levites, Ifraelites, veflels, garments, &c. which were enjoined wafhing by the ceremonial law, and which wafhings, or baptifms, are here referred to, were done, by putting them into water, and not by pouring, or fprinkling water upon them. It is a rule with the Jews ', that, " wherc- " focver, in the law, wafhing of the flefh, or of the clothes is mentioned, it " means nothing elfe, than j):tr\ ^D n'p^nQ Tebiletb Col hagopb, the dipping of ♦' the zvhok body in a laver — for if any man dips himfclf all over, except the tip " of his little finger, he is ftiil in his uncleannefs." From the whole, it ap- pears, that the words, baptize and baptifm, in all the places mentioned, do, from their fignification, make dipping, or plunging, the necelTary mode of ad- miniflering the ordinance of baptifm. I now go on. Thirdly, To vindicate thofe texts of fcripture, which afford inflances of the mode of adminiflering baptifm by immerfion, from the exceptions of this wri- ter, who confidently affirms, " that none of thofe texts will necefTarily prove " that any one perfon was baptized by dipping, by ^^y^K Baptift, ourblcfTed " Saviour, or his apoftles." P. 34. And, 1. The firfl text brought into the debate, and excepted to, is Matthew iii. 6. ylnd were baptized by him in Jordan, confejfing their fins. But we do not argue on this place, from thofe perfons being baptized, to their being dipped, as this writer makes his neighbour to do, but from their being baptized in the river "Jordan •, for why (hould John chufe the river Jordan to baptize in, and baptize in that river, if he did not adminiflcr the ordinance by immerfion ? Dr Ham- mond, a Paedobaptift, thought that thefe words afford an argument for dipping in baptifm, though our author will not allow it: His paraphrafe of them is; " And he received them by baptifm, or immerfion in the water oi Jordan, pro- " mifing them pardon upon the fincerity of their converfion and amendment, ♦' or reformation of their lives." And in \\\% nott on Matthew ni. i. having refpeft to this place, fays, '■'■John ^vcizKxng repentance to the Jews in the de- ♦' fert, received all that came unto him as new profelytcs, forfaking their old *[ relations, that is, their fins, and in token of their refolved change, put them ^' into « MaimoD. Hilchot. Mikvaot. c. iT 5. 2. EXAMINED AND DISPROVED. 309 *' into the water ^ dipped them all over, and fo took them out again; and upon the " fincerity of their change, promiled them the reminion of their fins, and told *» them of the Meffiah which was fuddenly to appear among them, and warned *' them to believe on him." The inftances of wafhing in the pool of 5//o(j;k, in Solomon's ten lavers, or the hands in a bafon, mentioned by our author, are very impertinent j and befides, fuch wafhing is not performed without dippincr. Who ever wafhes his hands without dipping them in the water he wafhes in ? 2. Another text mentioned, is John iii. 23. John was baptizing in Enon near toSalim, becaufc there was much water there. Upon which this writer obferves, that " the words in the ovx^xniX zr& many waters; which implies many fprings " or brooks of water; waters fuited to the necefTity and conveniency of the •' vaft multitudes that reforted to John, as a fupply of drink for themfelves, " and for the horfes and camels which they rode upon, as well as for their •' baptifm. Here is no appearance of dipping in the cafe. — Yiidjohn baptized *' all thefe multitudes by dipping, he muft have flood almoft continually in " water, up to his wade, and could not have furvived the employment but " by miracle." To which I reply, (i.) Admitting that the words in the original, many waters, imply many fprings or brooks, this fhews there was a confluence of water there ; and every body knows, that many fprings and brooks being together, could eafily fill large pools, fufficient for intmerfion •, and even form and feed great rivers, which is often the cafe -, and befides, the ufe this author finds for thefe fprings and brooks, requires a confiderablc quantity of water, namely, for the vaft multi- tudes of men, and for their horfes and camels -, and furcly, therefore, there muft be a fufficient quantity to cover a man's body in. (2.) The words wsM* wAt*, many waters, fignify a large quantity, great abundance, both in the literal and metaphorical fenfe of the phrafe, as it is ufed by the evangelift John elfewhere, fee Rev. i. 15. and xvii. i, 15. and by the Septuagint interpreters, it is ufed even for the waters of the fea, Pfalm lxxvii.19. and cvii. 23, and anfwers to D''2") CO, Mayim Rabbim, in Cam. viii. 7. many waters cannot quench love; which furely muft refer not to a fmall, but a large quantity of water ; and which phrafe there, the Septuagint render by much zi-a- ter, as we do the phrafe here. (3.) Thefe words are given as a reafon, not for the conveniency of drink for men and their cattle, but for the baptizing of men, and the conveniency of that ; that the men that came to John\ baptifm came on horfes and camels, we know not -, however, the text afTigns no reafon for the choice of the place upon the account of convenience for them, but for baptifm only ; and therefore, we fhould gio THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, fhould not overlook the reafon in the text, that is certain, and receive one, which, at moft, is very precarious and uncertain ; befides, John had not, at this time, fuch vaft multitudes that followed him •, thofe followed Chrift, and not him : he was decreafing : Chrift made and baptized more difciples than he. See ver. 26, 30. and chap. iv. i. (4.) Suppofing that vaft multitudes ftill followed him, and were baptized by him, this affords no argument againft dipping in baptifm ; and efpccially fincc this was performed in a place where there was much water. Nor was the baptizing of fuch great multitudes by immerfion fo great an undertaking, as that he could not furvive it without a miracle ; admit the work to be hard and laborious, yet as bis day ivas, his Jlrengthwas; according to the divine promife. We have had inftances in our own nation, in our climate, of perfons that have baptized great multitudes in rivers, and even in the winter time, and that for many days fuccefTively, if credit is to be given to our own writers. Mr Fox the martyrologift, relates", {rom Fabian, thaty/«/?/«, archbifhop of C4«/^r^ary, baptized ten thoufand in one day, in the river Swale ; and obferves upon ic, that whereas he then baptized in rivers, it followeth, there were then no ufe of fonts. And the fame, Ranulpb, the monk oiCheJler affirms, in his hiftory % and fays, it was on a day in the middle of winter ; and, according to Fox, it was on aChriJimas-dny. And our Widorhn Bede fays'', thz.t Paulinus, for fix and thirty days fucceffively, did nothing elfe, than inftruft the people, which from all parts flocked unto him, and baptized them that were inftrufled in the river G/^«; and who alfo baptized in one day vaft numbers in the river Treni, King Edwin being prefent. (5.) Though, this writer fays, here is no appearance of dipping, in the cafe referred to in the text, yet there are feveral Psdobaptifts, who are of another opinion, and think there was. Calvin, on the text, thus writes ; " from thefc " words, we may gather, that baptifm was performed by John and Chrift, by " a plunging of the whole body under water." Pifcator, on the place, has ihefe words; " this is mentioned, to fignify the rite of baptifm ■w\\\c\\Jchn ufed; " namely, plunging the whole body of the man, ftanding in the river -, hence, »' Chrift, being baptized oijohn \njcrdan, is faid to come up out of the water, " Matt. iii. 16. The fame mode PM;/) obferved, A^s viii. 38." Aretius, on the paflage, writes in the following manner; " but, why did John ftay here ? " He gives a reafon, becaufe there was much water here ; wherefore penitent per- " fons might be commodioufly baptized ; and, it feems to intimate, that a " large » Afls and Monuments, vol. I. p. 154; » Pol^chronicon, lib. V.c. 10. T Ecdes. Hid. 1. II. c. 1 ^.. p. 77, & c. 16. p. 79, EXAMINED AND DISPROVED. 311 " large quantity of water was nccclTary in baptizing, that they might, perhaps, " immerie the whole body." To which, I fhall only add the words of Grotius, on the claufe, much water : " Underftand, fays he, not many rivulets, but, fim- " ply, a plenty of water-, fuch, namely, in which a man's body could eafily " be immerfed : In which manner baptifm was then performed." 3. Another text, produced in favour of dipping in baptifm, \sMat(. iii. 16. Aid Jefus, when be was baptized, went up ftraigbtway out of the water. To which is objeded, that " there is no more in the original, than that our Sa- " viour wetit up ftraigbtway erfons ? " Which fhews, that it required a place of fome quantity of water, fufficient for baptizing by immerfion-, otherwife it would no: have been in the power of any man 10 hinder them having a little water, to be fprinkled or poured on the face. And what follows confirms ic ; And he commanded them to be baptized in the na^ne of EXAMINED AN D -DISPROVED. 315 of the Lord; befides, the words of the text may be rendered, Can any man forbid that thefe fhouldbe baptized with water? See Erafmus on the place. Where- fore, what this writer fays, that the apoftle did not fpeak of forbidding the wa- ter to run in the river, or to remain in any other receptacle or refervoir of water, and therefore muft fpeak of bringing water for their baptifm, is very imper- tinent and ridiculous. 4. He obferves, that " the Gaoler and his houlhold were baptized in the " dead of the night, in the fame hour of his converfion by the earthquake ; «' and therefore, there was no probability (nor indeed pofTibility) of their going " to any depth of water for that purpofe, yiils xvi. 33." But where is the im- pofTjbility, or improbability of it? Grotius thinks it probable, that there was a pool in the prifon, where he wafhed the ftripes of the apoflles, and here the ordinance might be adminiftered -, but, if not, it is not unreafonable to fuppofe, that they went out of the prifon, to the river near the city, where the oratory, or place of prayer was, ver. 13. and there adminiftered the ordinance, and then returned to the prifon again, before morning, unobferved by any : compare ver. 30. and 34. together. And now let it be confidered, whether thefe inftances, as our author fays, are fufficicnt to convince an vinprejudiced perfon, that the ordinance was not adminiftered by dipping, in the apoftolic times. 5. He concludes, that feeing fprinkling was the greatefl: purification among the Jews, and the blood of Chrift, and the influences of the holy Spirit, are fre- quently reprefented by fprinkling, but never by dipping; therefore, it mu.^ be the mofl proper mode of adminiftration. Bur, 1. It muft be denied, that fprinkling was the greateft purification among the Jews ; their principal purifications, and which were moft frequently ufed in cafes of ceremonial uncleannefs, were performed by immerfion, and therefore they are called wa/hings, or baptifms, in Heb. ix. 10. and even the purification by the afhes of the red heifer, which this writer inftances in, was not performed with- out bathing the perfon all over in water, Numb. xix. 19. and which was the clof- ing and finifliing part of it. 2. Itisnotfaft, that the blood of Chrifl, and the influences of the Spirit, are never reprefented by dipping. The bloody fufferings of Chrifl:, and the large abundance of his blood-flied, are called a baptifm, or dipping, Z,tt^^ xii. 50. And his blood is reprefented, as a fountain opened to wafli in, for fin, and for uncleannefs, Zech. xiii. i. And the donation of the Spirit, on the day of Pen- tecojly is alfo called a baptifm, or dipping, JSIs I 5. Bur, it is not on thofc allufive expreffions, that wc lay the ftrefs of the mode of the adminifliering this s s 2 ordinance, 3i6 THE DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT-BAPTISM, kc. ordinance, though they are only fuch, this author attempts to mention, in fa- vour of fprinkling. Wherefore, upon the whole, let the reader judge, which is the moft proper and fignificative rite, ufed in the adminiftration of the ordinance of baptifm ; whether immerfion, which is the proper and primary fenfe of the word baptifm, and is confirmed to be the rite ufed, by the places in which baptifm was admi- nidered ; and by I'everal fcriptural inftances and examples of it, as well as by allufive expreffions ; and which fitly reprefcnts the death, burial and rcfurreftion of Chrifl: ; or, fprinkling, which the word baptifm never fignifies ; and is noc confirmed by any of the faid ways j nor does it reprefent any thing for which baptifm is adminiftered. Let it be, therefore, ferioufly confidered, what a daring thing it is to introduce into this ordinance fubjefls which Chrift never appointed, and a mode of adminiftering it never ufed by him or his apoftles. In matters of worfhip, God is a jealous God, The cafe of Nadab and Abibu ought to be remembered by us, who offered ftran^e fire, the Lord commanded not. In things relating to religious worlhip, as this ordinance of bapti4m is apart of divine worfliip, we ought to have a direflion from God, either a precept, or a precedent : And we ought to keep to the rule, both as to matter and manner, and not dare to innovate in cither, left it fliould be faid to us, who hath required this at your bands ? and become chargeable with will-wor(hip, and m\\\ teaching for docirines, the commandments of men. 'V 1 i E THE ARGUMENT FROM APOSTOLIC TRADITION, IN FAVOUR OF INFANT-BAPTISM, With OTHERS, advanced in a Jate Pamphlet, called, 'The Baptifm of Infants a reafonabk Service ^ ice. confidered ; AND ALSO An Answer to a Welch Clergyman's Twenty Arguments for Infant-Baptifm. To which are add«d, The Dissenters Reasons for feparating from the Church o^ Engl and 1 Occafioned by the faid Writer. IT is with reluflance Icnter again into the controverfy about baptifm; not from any confcioufnefs either of the badnefs or weaknefs of the caufe I am engaged in; but partly on account of other work upon my hands, which I chofc not to be interrupted in; and partly becaufe I think there hasbeen enough written already, to bring this controverfy to an ifTue ; and it is not our fault that it has not been clofcd long ago ; for there has been fcarce any thing wrote by us thefejf//)! years part, but in our own defence; our Psedobaptift brethren being continually the aggrefTors, and firft movers of the controverfy; they feem as if they were not fatisfied with what has been done on their fide, and therefore are always attempting cither to put the controverfy upon- a new foot, or to throw the old arguments into a new form ; and even fay the fame things over and over again, to make their minds, and the minds of their people cafy, if. pofHble. If perfons are content to fearch the fcriptures, and form their judg- ment of this matter by them,, there has been enough pufahflied on both fides. the. I "3 J 8 -XHE -ARGUMENT FROM APOSTOLiC, JTRADIXION, :. the queflion to determine themfelves by, and we are willing things (hould reft here: but this is our cafe; if we reply to what is written againft us, then we are litigious perfons, and lovers of controverfy ; though we only rife up in our own vindication, for which furely we are not to be blamed -, and if we make no reply, then what is written is unanfwerable by us, and we are triumpht:d over. No lefs than half a dozen pamphlets have been publilhed upon this fubjeft, within a very little tinTe-, without any provocation from us, that I know of. Some of them indeed are like mudirooms, that rife up and die almoft as foon as they live-, it has been tiie Irtck of the pamphlet before me, to live a little longer » and wliich is cried op as an unanfwerable one, for no other reafon, that I can fee, but becaufe it has not )ct been anfwered in form; otherwife the arguments advanced in it, have been anfwered before it was in being; for there is nothing new throughout the whole of it. Is there any one argument in it, but whac has been brought into the controverfy before ^ not one. Is the date of infant-bap- tifm, as it appears from the writings of the ancients, from antiquity, for which this performance is moftly boafted of, carried one year, one month, one day, one hour, or moment higher, than it was before? not one. Is there any one paffage of the ancients cited, which has not been produced and been under con- fideration before.'' not one. What then has this Gentleman been doing? juft nothing at all. However an anfvver would have been made to him before this time, had not fome things in providence prevented. My late worthy friend, the Reverend Mr Samue! fFUfon, intended to have drawn up one, as he fignified tome; for which reafon, I did not give myfelf the trouble to read this pamphlet: His view was firft to publifh his Manual, and then to take this under confidera- tion ; but he dying before the publication of the former, prevented his defign ; nor did he, as I could ever find, leave any'materials behind him relating to this affjir. Some time after Mr Killingivorth publifhed an anfwer to Dr Fojier on the fubjeft of communion, and added fome remarks upon this pamphlet; when I O'dered my BookfcUer to get me that, and the ftridlures on it ; upon reading of which, I found that Mr Killingworth expe(5ted a formal anfwer to it was prepar- ing, and would be publifhed by a Gentleman he reprefents as the occafion of its being written ; which for fome time I have been waiting for : but hearing nothing of it, and the boafts of the party increafing, becaufe of no anfwer, de- termined me to take it under examination in the manner I have done; but whether after all I am not loo forward, I cannot tell ; but if any thing is pre- paring or prepared by another hand, I hope what I have written will not hinder the publication of it. Infant-baptifm is fometimes put upon one footing, and fometimes on another; as on the covenant of grace ; on circumcifion -, on the baptifm of Jewifh profe- lytes ; ~ IN FA'TOUR OF I N F A N T . E A P T I S M. 319 Jytes ; otTfcripture confequences •, and by our author ic is refted on apoJloHc tra- dition. This he fays is an argument of great -weight ' ; and that it is principally for the fake of this, that his performance appears in the world'-, for which reafon, 1 fhall chicfiy attend unto it. Whatever weight this argument may be thought to have in the prefent controverfy, it has none in others; not in the controverfy with the Papifts, nor with the church of England about rites and ceremonies, thisGentlcman himfelf being judge; whol underftand is the author of The dij/enting Gentleman's anfwer to Mr WhiteV Three Letters. In his contro- verfy with him, Chrift is t\\t only lawgiver and head of the church, and no man upon earth, or body of men, have authority to make laws, or prefcribe things in religion, or to fet afide, alter or new-make any terms fixed by him ; and apoftolical authority, or what is direfted to by the apoftles, as fallible and unaf- fifted men, is no authority at all, nor obligatory as a law on men, they having no dominion over their faith and praflice ; and the fcriptures are the only, cotn- mcn, fufficient z.nA -perfect rule: but in the controverfy about infant-baptifm, apoftolic tradition is of great weight; if the diipute is about fponfors and the crofs in baptifm, then fathers and councils ftand for nothing; and the tefti- monies of the anticnts for thefe things, though clear and indubitable, and about the fcnfe of which there is noconteft, and are of as early antiquity as any thing can be produced for infant:baptifm, are not allowed fufficient; but if it is about infant-baptifm itfelf, then fathers and councils arc called in, and their teflimo- nies produced, infifled upon, and retained, though they have not one fyllable of baptifm in them ; and have fenfes affixed to ihcm, ftr-aincd and forced, con- trived to ferve an hy'pothefis, and what the good old fathers never dreamed of; is this fair dealing ? can this be faid to bcfmcerity, integrity and honffly ? no furcly. This Gentleman fhould know that we, who are called Anabaptifts, are Proteftants, and the Bible is our religion ; and that we rejedl all pretended apoflolic tradi- tion, and every thing that goes under that name, not found in the Bible, as the rule of our faith and praftice. The title of the pamphlet before me is. The baptifm of Infants a reafonahle fervice, founded upon Scripture, and undoubted Jpofiolic Tradition; but if it is founded upon fcripture, then not upon tradition ; and if upon tradition, then • not on fcripture; if it is a fcriptural bufinefs, then not a traditional one; and if a traditional one, then not a fcriptural one : if it can be proved by fcripture, that is enough, it has then no need of tradition ; but if it cannot be proved by that, a cart-load of traditions will not fupport it. — This put me in mind of wliat I have heard, of a countryman offering to give tlie Judge a dozen rc.ifons why his neighbour could not appear in court; in ihe frfi place, my Lord, fays he, be * Reafonable Service, p. 30. * Preface, p 5. 310 THE ARGUMENT FROM APOSTOLIC TRADITION, he is dead ; that is enough, quoth the Judge, I fhall fpare you the trouble of giving me the reft : fo prove but infanc-baptifm by fcripture, and there will be no need of the weighty arguments from tradition. However, by putting the cafe as it is, we learn that this author by apojlolic tradition, means unwritten apoflolic tradition, fince he diftinguifhes it from the fcripture ; and not apoftolic tradition delivered in the fcriptures, which is the fenfe in which fometimes tradition is ufed, both in the word of God % and in ancient writers ''. So wc are not at a lofs about the fenfe of it -, it is unzvritten, uninfpired apoftolic tra- dition-, tradition not /«, but c«/ of the fcriptures ; not delivered by the apoftles in the facred writings, but by word of mouth to their fuccefTors, or to the churches. It is pretty much that infant-baptifm fhould be called an undoubted apoftolic tradition, fince it has hetn doubted o( by fome learned Psdobaptifts themfelves; nay, fome have affirmed that it is not obferved by them as an apoftolic tradi- tion, particularly CurcelUus % and who gives a very good reafon for it : his words are thefe ; " Psedobaptifm was unknown in the two firft ages after Chrift; »' in the third and fourth it was approved by a few ; at length, in the fifth and " following a^es it began to obtain in divers places ; and therefore this rite is " indeed obferved by us as an ancient cujlcm, but not as an apoftolic tradition" Biftiop Taylor' calls it a pretended apoftolical tradition-, and fays, that the tra- dition cannot be proved to be apoftolical, we have very good evidence from antiquity. Since then the Psedobaptifts difagree about this point among them- felves, as well as it is called in queftion and contefted by others ; one would think, this writer fhould not be fo confident as to call it an undoubted apoftolic tradition. fiefides, apoftolic tradition, at moft and beft, is a very precarious and uncer- tain thing, and not to beius; who with the former, he him- fclf owns, he ufed much freedom, and added much, and took fuch a liberty in both of adding, taking away, and changing, that, zs Erafmvs hys'", whoever reads thefe pieces, it is uncertain whether he rtidsOrigen or Ruffinus; andFoJius obfcrves % that the former of thefe was interpolated hy Ruffinus, and thinks there- fore, that tl-.e pafi"age cited was of the greater authority againft the Pelagians, be- caufe Ruffinus was inclined to them. The Homilies on Luke, out of which is the other pafiage, were tranflated by Jerom, of whom Bu Pin fays*', that "his " verfions are not more exact than Rnffinus's." Now both thefe lived at the lat- ter end of the fourth century, and it looks very probable, that thefe very paflliges, are additions, or interpolations of thefe men, fince the language agrees with thofe times, and no other; for no cotemporary of Origen's, nor any writer before him or after him, until the times ofRuff.nus, Jerom znAAuJlin, fpeak of infant-bap- tifm as an ufage of the church, or an apoftolical tradition ; in fiiorr, as bifhop y^j/or obferves % " a tradition apoftolical, if it be not configned with a fuller " teftimony than of one perfon {Origen,) whom all after-ages have condemned " of many errors, will obtain fo little reputation an^ongfl: thofe, who know that " things have upon greater authority pretended to derive from the apoftles, and " yet falfly ; that it will be a great argument, that he is credulous, and weak, •' that (hall be determined by fo weak a probation, in a matter of fo great con- . " cernment." Cyprian. "• In Rivet, critici facri, 1. 2. c. 12. p. 202-. * Hift. Pelag. par. i. I. 2. p. t^j, 1 Hift. Ecdes. vol. I. p. ijz. * Libcfty of Prophefjinj;, p. 3:0. 326 THE ARGUMENT FROM APOSTOLIC TRADITION, Cyprian, with Ms council of fixty-fixbifh^ps, are brought as witnefTes of infant- baptifm, a little afcer the middle of the third century. We allo-w that as infant- baptifm was moved for inTertullian's time, fo it obtained in the y:^ma« churches inCyprian's time; but then by Ftdus the country bifhop, applying to the council to have a doubt rcfalved, whether it was lawful to baptize infants until they were eight days old; it appears to.be a novel practice; and that as yet it was unde- termined, by council or cuftom, when they were to be baptized, whether as foon as born, or on the eighth day, or whether it was to be left to every one's liberty : and it fliould alfo be obfcrved, that in this age, infant communion was praftifed as well as infant- baptifm ; and very likely both began together, as it is but rea- ibnable, that if the one be admitted, the other (hould. But of this more hereafter. The Clementine Conjlitutions, as they are called, are next produced, as cnjoinincr infant-baptifm ; but why does this Gentleman call them the Clementine Conjlitu- tions, unlefs he is of opinion, and which he fuggelts by this title of them, that Clemens Romanus was the compiler of them from the mouths of the apoftles ? and if fo, he might have placed the pafTage out of them with greater advantage, at the head of his teflimonies; but he muft know, that thcfc writings are con- demned as fpurious, by almoft all learned men, excepting ^\'; Wkijlon ; and were not heard of till the times oi Epipbanius, in the latter end of the fourtli century, if fo foon : and it fhould be obferved, tliat thcfe fame Confiitutions, which dirc(5l to the baptizing of infants, injoin the ufc of godfathers in baptifm; the form of renouncing the devil and all his works; the confecration of the water; trine immerfion; the ufe of oil, and baptizing fafiing;; crofnng with the fign of the crofs in the forehead; keeping the day of Chrift's nativity, Epiphany, the ^adragefiKia or hent ; the feaft of the pafsover, and the feftivals of the apoflles ; fafting on the fourth and fixth days of the week ; praying for faints departed ; Cuging for the dead, and honouring their relicks ; with many other things foreign enough from the Gmplicity of the apoftolic dodrine and pradice. A teftimony from fuch a work, can be of very little credit to the caufe of infant-baptifm. And now vre are come to a very remarkable and dccifive tcQiniony, as it is called, from the writings of Aufiin and Pelagius ; the fum of which is, that there being a controverfy between thefe two pcrfons about original fin, the latter, who denied it, was prefled by the former, with an argument taken from the baptifm of infants for the j-cmifTion of fins; with which Pelagius feemed exceedingly cmbarafTed, when it greatly concerned him to deny it if he could ; and had it been an innovation, fo acute, learned, and fagacious a man as he was, would hare difcovered it ; but on the contrary, when he was charged wTth a denial of it as the confequencc of his opinion, he warmly difclaims it, and complains of a flander; and adds, that he never heard that even any impious heretic denied IN FAVOUR OF IN F A N T - B A P T I S M. 327 itj or rcfufed it to infants j and the fame fays jiujlin, that it never was denied by any man, catholic or heretic, and was the conftant ufagc of the chorch ; for all which vouchers are produced. To which may be replied, 1. However errbarafTed Pelagius might be with the argument, it did not lead to a controverfy about the fubjeft, but the end of baptifm, and aJDOut the lat- ter, and not the former was the difpute; nor was he under fo great a tempta- tion, and much kfs neccffity, nor did it fo greatly concern him to deny the baptifm of infants, en account of his tenet; fmce he was able upon his prin- ciples to point out other ends of their baptifm, than that of femifTion of fin \ and particularly, their receiving and enjoying the kingdom of heaven •, »nd as a late writer ' Obferves, this propoficion " baptifm ought to be ddminifttred to *' children^ as will as to the adult ; was not inconfiftent with, nor repugnant to " his doctrine -, for though he denied original fin, he allowed baptifm to be " adminiftered even to children, .but only for their fanftification." 2. It fhould be known and obferved, that we have no writings 0^ Pelagius extant, at leaft under his name, only fomt pafTages quoted by his adverfaries, by which we can judge what were his fcniimenrs about infant- baptifm •, and it is well known that a man's words often are mifquoted, or mifunderftood, or mifreprcfcnted by an adverfary ; I will not fay that this is the cafe of Pelagius -, I would hope better things of his adverfaries, particularly Aujlin, and that he has been ufcd fairly •, I am willing to allow his authorities, thou<^h it would have been a greater fatisfaiftion to have had thcfe things from himfclf, and not at fccond hand. Nor, 3. Would I detraft from the charader of Pelagius, or call in queflion his acute- fiefs, fagacity, and learning; yet two doftors of the age in which he lived, are divided about him in this relpcft, Aujliu and Jerom; the former fpeaks of him as a very confiderable man, and of great penetration ; but the latter, as if he had no genius, and but very little knowledge ' ; it mud be owned, that yiujlin was the moft candid man, and Jcrctn a four one, who fcldom fpoke well of thofe he oppofed, though he was a man of the greateft learning, and fo the beft judcre of it : but however acute, learned, and fagacious Pelagius was, yet falling in with the ftream of the times, and not feeing himfclf concerned about the fubjeft, i)ut the end of baptifm, might give himfelf no trouble to inquire into the rife of it ; bat take it for granted, as ///(/?/« did ; who perhaps was as acute, learned and fagacious as he, that it had been the conftant ufage of the church, and an apoftolic tradition ; as he had many other things, in which he was miftaken, as will foon appear. 4. Though • Bower's Hiftorj' of Popes, vol. I. J*. 339. * Bower ibid. p. 329, c. 330. 32 S THE ARGUiMENT FROM APOSTOLIC TRADITION, 4, Though Pelagius complained that he was defamed, and flandered by fomc who charged him with denying infant-baptifm •, yet this, Jujlin obferves, was only a fhift of his, in order to invert the ftate of the queftion, that he might more eafily anfwcr to what was objefted to him, and preferve his own opinion. And certain it is, according to y^Ky?/;;% that the Pelagians did deny baptifm to fome infants, even to the infants of believers, and that for this reafon, becaufe they were holy; what others made a reafon for it, they make a reafon againftit. 5. Pelagius fays no fuch thing, that he never heard, no not even any impious he- retic, who denied baptifm to infants. His words indeed are ^ vunquam fe vel im- pium aliquem hareticuvi audijp, qui hoc, quod propofuir, de parvulis diceret; " that " he never heard, no not any impious heretic, that would fay concerning-infants, " what he had propofed or mentioned:" the fcnfe depends upon the meaning of the phrafe, quod propofuit, " what he had propofed or mentioned," of whom, and what that is to be underftood ; whether of Aujliv, and the ftate of the cafe us propofed and fet down by him ; fo our author feems to underftand it, fince by way of explanation, he adds, viz. "that unbaptized infants are not liable to " the condemnation of the firft man -, and that they are not to be cieanfed by *' the regeneration of baptifm :" but this gentleman has not put it asyf«(/?.'); has ftated it, which is thus ; " it is objeflcd to them (the Pelagians) that they v/ill " not own that unbaptized infants are liable to the condemnation of the firft " man ; id in eos tranfijje originale peccatum regeneratione purgandum, and that •' original fin has pafTcd upon them to be cieanfed by regeneration:" and accord- ing to this fenfe the meaning cannot be, that he never heard that any heretic denied baptifm to infants ; but either that he never heard that any one iTiould fay, that unbaptized infants are not liable to the condemnation of the firft man, and that original fin had not pafled upon them to be cieanfed by regeneration; but then this is to bring the wicked heretics as witneftes againft himl'elf, and to make himfelf worfe than they : or the meaning is, that he never heard that any of them fiiould fay, that unbaptized infants are liable to the condemnation of the firft man, and that original fin has paftcd upon them to be cieanfed by re- generation, which is moft likely : but then this makes rather againft, than for the thing for which i: is brought; fince it makes the heretic as never faying that infants ftood in need of being cieanfed by baptifm : or elfe, quod propofuil^ " v^hat he had propofed or mentioned," refers to Pelagius, and to the ftate of the queftion as he had put it ; reprefenting that he was charged with promifing the kingdom of heaven to fome, without the redemption of Chrift -, and of this he might fay, he never heard the moft impious heretic to fay ; and this feems to be the Icnfe by what he fubjoins ; " for who is fo ignorant of what is read in • De peccator. merit. & reraifs. I. zTc. 2j. ^ lo Aug. de peccator. original!, I. 2. C. 18. /.IN FAVOUR OP INFANT - BAPTISM. 329 •** in the gofpel, not only as to attempt to affirm it, but even lightly mention " it, or even imagine it ? Moreover, who fo impious that would exclude in- *' fants from the kingdom of heaven, dum eos baptizari & in Cbrijio renafci pu- " tat? whilll he thinks, or is of opinion that they are baptized and regene- *' rated in Chrift ? " for fo it i^ in my edition 'of ^ujlin; pulai, and not vetut,, as Dr /F<3//quotes it •, and after him this Gentleman : and Pelagius further adds, " who fo impious as to forbid to an infant, of whatfoever age, the common re- " demption of mankind ? " but this, Aujlin (zys, like the reft is ambiguous ;. ■what redemption he means, whether from bad to good, or from good to better : now take the words which way you will, they cannot be made to fay, that he had never heard that any heretic denied baptifm to infants, but that they denied the kingdom of heaven to them ; and indeed every one muft allow, whoever is of that opinion, that infants are by baptifm really regenerated in Chrift j whicli was the prevailing notion of thofe times, and the light in which it is put ; that they muft belong to the kingdom of heaven, and fliarc in the common redemp- tion by Chrift. 6. yiujlin himfclf does not fay, that he had never heard or read of any catho- lic, heretic, or fchifmatic, that denied infant-baptifm •, he could never fay any fuch thing ; he muft know, that Tertullian had oppoicd it ; and he himfelf was at the council of Carthage, and there prefided, and was at the makincr of that canon which runs thus ; " alfo it is our pleafure, that whoever denies that " new-born infants are to be baptized — let him be anathema : " but to what purpofe was this canon made, if he and his brethren knew of none that denied infant-baptifm ? To fay that this rcl'pedls fome people, who were ftill of the fame opinion with F;W«J, an African biftiop, that lived 150 years before this rime, that infants were not to be baptized until they were eight days old, is an idle notion o( Dr fVall' : can any man in his fenfes think, that a council, con- fifting of all the bidiops in /ifricay fhould agree to anatbematizi their own bre- thren, who were in the fame opinion and pradice of infant-baptifm with thera- felves 1 only they thought it ftiould not be adminiftered to them as foon as born, but at eight days old ? Credat "Judaus Apella, believe it who will -, he is capable of believing any thing, that can believe this. Auji'm himfelf makes mention of fome that argued againft it, after this manner^ ; " men are ufcd to afk this quef- '* tion, fays he, of what profit is the facramcnt of chriftian baptifm to infants, " feeing when they have received it, for the moft part they dje before they know " any thing of it ?" and as before obferved, he brings in the Pelagians *■ faying, , • 1 ... . . J .'• Ed. Antwerp, by Plantine, 1576. ' Hifl. of Infant bapiifm. part I. ch. 19 J. J7. t De libero Arbitrio, 1. 5. c. 23. * Dc Pcccator. n crji. I. 2. c. zj. Vol. II. • ' U u ihat 3-^0 THE ARGUMENT FROM APOSTOLIC TRADITION, that the infants of believers aught not to be baptized: and fo Jerom\ who was a cotemporary of his, fpeaks of fomechriftians, qui dare noluo'int baptifma, *' wha " rtfufed to give baptifm to their children ;" fo that though infant-baptifm greatly obtaijifd in thofe times, yet it was not fo general as this author repre- 4^nts it. ylujlin therefore could not fay what he is made to fay : but what then does he fay, that he never remembered to have read in any catholic, heretic, or -fchifmatic writer? why, " that infants were not to be baptized, that they might " receive the remiflion of fins, but that they might be fandlified in Chrift :" it is of this the words are fpoken, which our author has quoted, but are not to be -found in the place he refers to; having through inadvertence miftakenDr^^i//, from whom I perceive he has taken this, and other things. This, and not in- fant-baptifm itfclf, was what was tranfiently talked of at Cm-tb.ige, and cur- forily heard by ylujlin fome little time ago, when he was there : this was the novelty he was ftartled at, but did not think it feafonable to enter into a debate about it then, and fo forgot it: for fu rely it will not be faid, that it was the- denial of infant-baptifm that was defended with fo much warmth againft the church, as he fays this was; and was committed to memory in writing; and the brethren were obliged to a(k their advice about it ; and they were obliged to difpute and write againft ; for this would prove the very reverfe of what this gentleman produces it for. Now, though ylujiin could not fay that he never remembered to have heard or read of any catholic, fchifmatic, or heretic, that denied infant-baptifm ; yet he might fay he never remembered to have heard or read of any that owned and praflifed infant-baptifm, but who allowed it to be for the remiffion of fm ; which is widely different from the former : it is one thing whatyf«/?/» fays, and another, what may be thought to be the confequence of his fo faying; and in the fame fenfe are we to underftand him, when he fays ", " and this the church has always had, has always held," "What ? why, that infants are difcafed ihro\ig\\ Adam ; and ftand in need of a phyfician ; and are brought to the church to be healed. It was the doftrine of original fin, and the baptifm of infants for the remiffion of it, he fpeaks of in thefe paflTages; it is true indeed, he took infant-baptifm to bean ancient andcorfftant ufage of the church and an apoftolic tradition ' ; which perhaps he had taken up from the Latin tranflations of Origin by Jerom zodRu^nus before-mentioned; fince no other ec- dcnaftical writer fpeaks of it as fuch, before thofe times : but in this he was de- ceived and miftaken, as he was in other things which he took for apoftolic tra- ditions ; which ought to be equally received as this, by thofe who are influenced by his authority; and indeed every horjeft man that receives infant-baptifm upon the • Ep. ad Lztam, t. I. fol. 19. M. ■■ De verblj Apoftoll, ferm 10. C. 2. . f De Gcneli, 1. 10. c. 22. De bapcifmo. cootr. Donat, ]. 4. c, 23, 24. -IN FAVOUR OF IN FAN T - BAPT I SM. r -331 -the foot of tradition, ought to receive every thing elfc upon the fame foot, of • which there is equally as/«//, -and as early evidence of apoftolic tradition, as of - this : let it then be obferved, . . I. That the fame Aujiin that aflerts infant-baptlfm to be an apofiolic tradi- tion, affirms infant-communion to be fo likewife, as Bi(hop Taylor'^ obferves ; and thus Aujlin fays", " if they pay any regard to the apoftolic authority, or .-*' rather to the Lord and Matter of the apoftles, who fays, that they have no • " life in themfelves, unkfs they eat the flejh of the fon of man^ ani drink his blood, *' -which they cannot do unlels baptized; will fometimesown that onbaptized »« infat^ts have not life ;" — and a little after, " no man that remembers that he *' is achriftian, and of the catholic faith, denies or doubts that infants, not hav- , " ing the grace of regeneration in Chrift, and without eating his flefh, and drink- *' ing his blood, have no life in them -, but are hereby liable to everlafting pu- " nifhment;" by which he means the two facramentsof baptifm, and the Lord's , fupper; the neceffjty of both which to eternal life he founded upon a miftaken itnicoijobn iii. 5. and vi. 53. as appears from what he clfewhere fays" -, where having mentioned the firft of thofe paflages, he cites the latter, and adds -, " let *' us hear the Lord, I fay, not indeed fpeaking this of the facrament of the holy »' laver, but of the facrament of the holy table ; whither none rightly come, *' Unlefs baptized. Except ye eat my flefh, and drink my blocd, ye fhall have no *' life in you ; what do we feek for further ? what can be faid in anfwer to this, , *' unlefs one would fet himfclf obftinately againft clear and invincible truth? " will' any one dare to fay this, that this pafTage does not belong to infants ; and *' that they can havelife inthemfelves, without partakingof his bodyand blood?" And of the necefTity of this, as well as of baptifm to eternal life, he fays'" the African chriftians took to be an ancient and apoftolic tradition. Innocent the firft, his cotemporary, was alfo of the fame mind; and the giving of the eucharift to infants generally obtained ; and it continued fix hundred ■ years after, until tranfubftantiation took place; and is continued to this day in the Greek church : and if we look back to the times before Aufiin, we fliall find that it was not only the ojpinion of Cyprian, but was pradlifed in his time; he ; tells '' a flory which he himfelf was a witnefs of; how that " a little child being ^ " left in. a fright by its parents with a nurfe, fhe carried the child to the magif- '" ti-ates, who had it to an idol's facrifice; where becaufe the child could not \" eat flefh, they gave it bread foaked in wine : Tome time after, the mother ,»' had her child again ; which not being able to relate to her whath'ad p:incd, u u 2 . . it t m Liberty of Prophtfy ing, p. 119. " Ep. ro6. "Bonifacio, contr. Ptiag. • De Pcccator. merit. & remifs. 1. i.e. 20. f Ibid.c. '■2^. * Cyprian delapns, p. 244. 332 THE ARGUMENT FROM APOSTOLIC TRADITION, *' it was brought by its parent to the place where Cyprian and the church were " celebrating the Lord's- fupper; and where it fhrieked, and was dreadfully " diftrefTcd ; and when the cup was offered it in its turn by the deacon, it (hut " its lips againft it ; who forced the wine down its throat-, upon which it fob- «« bed, and threw it up again." Now here is a plain inftancc of infant-com- munion in the third century, and we defy any one to give a more early inftance, or an inftance fo early, of infant-baptifm : it is highly probable that infant- baptifm was now praftifed -, and that this very child was baptized, or otherwife it would not have been admitted to the Lord's-fupper •, and it is reafonabic to fuppofe, they both began together ; yet no inftance can be given of infant- baptifm, fo early as of infant-communion ; wherefore whoever thinks himfelf obliged to receive the one upon fuch evidence and authority, ought to receive the other ; the one has as good a chim to apoftolic authority and tradition, as. the other has. 2. The fign of the crofs in baptifm was ufed by the ancients, and pleaded for as an apoftolic tradition. Ba/tly who lived in the fourth century obferves ', that fome things they had from fcripture -, and others from apoftolic tradition,, of which he gives inftanccs ; and, fays he, " becaufe this is the firft and moft " common, I will mention it in the firft place ; as that we Ji^r. with tkejign of ♦' the crofs thofe who place their hope in Chrift; and then afks who taught this " in fcripture ? " Chryfojlom, who lived in the fame age, manifeftiy refers to it, when he fays ", " how can you think it fitting for the miniftcr to make the '■'■ fign onits (the chWdh) forehead, where you have befmeared it with the dirt ?" which CynV' calls the royal feal upon the "forehead. Cyprian in the middle of the third century relates the cuftom of his times •■ ; «' what is now alfo in ufe among us is, that thofe who are baptized, are offered " to the governors of the church •, and through our prayers and impofition of " hands, they obtain the holy Spirit, zndixc m%At com^\czx.fignaculo Dominico, " with the feal of the Lord : " and in another place " he fays, " they only can " cfcape, who arc regenerated and figned mih the fign of Chri_ft." AndTertul- ♦' Ijan, in the beginning of the fame century, fpeaking of baptifm fays % " the *' flcfti is wafhed, that the foul may be unfpotted •, the flefh is anointed, that " the foul may be confecratcd ; caro ^gnatur^, " the flefti is figned," that the " fool alfo may be fortified." Now this ufe of the crofs in baptifm, was as rarly as any inftance of infant-baptifm that can be produced ; higher than Ter- tullian's. » Bafil. de Spiritu Saoft. c. 27. • Homil, I 2. in \ Ep. ad Corinth. • Citechef 12. i. 4. • Ep. 7}. ad Jubsjanum. p. iS.).. * Ad.Demetriin.. prope fioem. ' Dc rcfurreflione camU. c. 8. IN FAVOUR OF INFANT - BAPTISM. 333 ■ iuUian'% time it cannot be carried : what partiality tlien is it, 1 know to whom I fpeak, to admit the one upon the foot of traditioa^-and rejed the other ? The fame Tertullian ^ alfo fpcaks of fponfores, fponfors, or godfathers, in baptifm 1 which this writer himfelf has mentioned, and thus renders ; " what occafion is " there — except in cafes of nccefTuy, that the fponfors or godfathers be brought " into danger ;" not to take notice of the C/^«i?»/J«^ CfKy?y/tt//o«j, as our author . calls them, which enjoin the ufe of them -, and which appear to be as early as infant-baptifm itfelf ; and indeed it is but reafonable that if infants are baptized, there fliould be fponfors or fureties for them. 3. The form of "renouncing the devil and all his works," ufed in baptifm, is alfo by 5fl/// ^ reprefented as an apoftolic tradition ; for having mentioned feveral rites in baptifm, received upon the fame foot, he adds •, " and the reft ^ " of what is done in baptifm, as to renounce liie devil and his angels, from what " fcripture have we it? is it not from this private and fecret tradition?" Origen . before the middle of the third century relates the ufage of his times",; ♦' let every " oneof the faithful remembcrwhen he firft came to the waters of baptifm; when " he received the firft feals of faith, and came to the fountain of falvation ; what " words there he then ufed ; and what he denounced to the devil, nonje ufurum " pompis ejus, " that he would not ufe his pomps, nor his works, nor any of his " fervice, nor obey his pleafures :" and Tertullian*' before him ^ "when we " enter into the water, we profcfs the faith of Chrift, in the words of his law ; " we proteft with our mouth that we renounce the devily and his pomp, and bis " angels " and in another place % in proof of unwritten tradition, and that it ought to be allowed of in fome cafes, he fays ; "to begin with baptifm ;. when *'.we come to the water, we do there, and fometimes in the congregation under " the hand of the paftor, proteft that we renounce the devil, and his pomp, and " angels ; and then we are thrice immerfed ; anfwering fomething more than ■ " the Lord has enjoined in the gofpel :" now this is as early as any thing can be produced in favour of infant-baptifm. 4. Exorcifms and exfufflations are reprefented by /lujiin \ as rites in baptifm, prijcce traditionis, "of ancient tradition,." as ufed by the church every where, throughout the whole world. He frequently preffes the Pelagians with the ar- gument taken from thence, and fuggefts, that they were pinched with it, and knew not how to anfwer it ; he obfcrvcs, that things the moft impious and ab- furd, were the confequences of their principles, and among the reft thefc ' : " that " they (infants) are baptized into a Saviour, butnotfavedi redeemed byadeli- " vcrer 1 DeBaptifmo.*. i8. » Ut ftipra. • Homll. i«. in Numeros, fol. 114. D.. * Dc fpeflaculis, c. 4. * De corooa, e. 3. * De peccato originali, l,i. c 40. de nupt. & concup. L i. c. JO.it I..2. c. 18.. «- Contr. J)JiaD.l. 3. C 5. g>^ "TSSE 'AUGUMEITT -TROM jILPOSTOLlC TRADITION, " verer, "faut not delivered j wafhed in the laver of regeneration, but not -wafhtd *' from any thing ; exorcifed and exfufflated, but not freed from the power of *' -darknefs :*' and elfewhere he fays '^, that " norwithftandingtheir craftinefs, '" they know not what anfwer to make to this, ibat infants are exorcifed and ex- " fuffiated; for this, without doubt, is done in mere fhow, if the dcvij has no ■" power over them ; but if he has power over them, and therefore are notf;^- *' orcifed and exfufflated in mere fliow, by what has the prince of finners power '■*' over them, but by fin ?" And Gregory Nazia'nzen before him, as he exhorts ^0 confefTion of fin in baptifm, fo to cxorcifm ; " do not refufe, fays he S the *' medicine of cxorcifm — for that is the trial of fincerity, with refpedt to that grace (baptifm)." And fays Optatus of Alikvis ', " every man t!ut is born, though born of chriftian parents, cannot be without the fpirit of the world, which muft be excluded and feparated from him, before the falutary laver; "*' this cxorcifm effedts, by which the -unclean fpirit is driven away, and is caufcd " to flee to defert places." Cyprian^ in the third century, fpeaking of the effi- cacy of baptifm to deftroy the power of Satan, relates what was done in his days '; " that by the exorcift the devil was buffeted, diftrefTcd, and tortured, with an "" human voice, and by a divine power." AndCornelius bifhop of Rome, a co- ttmporary of his, makes mention '' of the fame officers' in the church ; and this ■ is alfo as early as the practice of infant-baptifm. 5. Trine immerfion is affirmed to be an apoflolic tradition, nothing is more "frequently afferted by the ancients than this. Bafil\ among his inftances of ' apoftolic tradition, mentions this ; -" now a man is thrice imnierfed, from whence ♦' is it derived ?" his meaning is, is it -from fcripture or apoftolic tradition ? not the former, but the latter. Andyfrow", in a dialogue of his, makes one of the parties fay after this manner, ^hich clearly appears to be his own fenfe^ " and ** many other things which by tradition are obferved in the churches, have ob- -" tained the. authority of a written law^ as to dip the head thrice in the laver," ■i^c. And (o Teriullian in the third century as above, in fupport of tradition, ■ mentions " this as a common prafticc-, ^' we are thrice immerfed^" and elfewhere fpcaking" of the commifTion ofChrifl:, he fays, " he commanded them to dip ■•' into thtFather, and theSon, and the holyGhoft; not into one, for not once, *-»' "but thHce arc we dipped, at each name, into each perfon ;" and he is the "ifirft man that makesmention of infant-baptifm, who relates this as the then ufage 'of the church : and Sozomen* the hiftorianobfcrvcs, that it was faid, that "£«- "-*' nomius^zs\h.t firft that dared toaflert, that the divine baptifm fliould be " performed ■* Ep.io;. Booifacic, pTOpe finem. "i Oral. 40. p. 6,7. * Ad». Parmenian. 1. 4. p. 92. ' Ep 76. id Magnum. ^ Apud Eufeb. Ecd. Hift. 1. 6. c. 43. ' Ut fupra. ■" Adv. Luciferianoj, fol. 47.-H.t01n, 2. . ■ Dc corona, €.-3. ' ' Hift. Eccles. 1. 6. c. 26. - S • Adv. Praxeara c. 26. IN FAVOUR OF I N F A N T - BA P T I S M. 335 " performed by one immcrfion; and lb corrupted the apoftolic tradition, which *' till now had been every whertobfervcd." 6. The confecration of the waterof baptifni is an ancient rite, and which "Bajil ' derives from apoftolic tradition ; " we confecrate, fays he, the water of baptifm, *' and the anointing oil, as well as the perfon that receives baptifm, from what " .Icripture ? is it not from private and fecret tradition ?" by which he means apodolic tradition, as he in the fame place calls it; which was done, not only by the prayer of the adminiflrator over the water, but by figning it with the fign of the crofs -, which rite was in ufe in the times of Aujlin % who fays, " baptifm "is figned with the fign ofChrift, that is, the water where we are dipped-," and Amhrcfey who lived in the fame age, relates, that exorcifm was alfo ufed in con- fecration : he dcfcribes the manner of it thus '' ; " why did Chrift defcend firft, "and afterwards the Spirit, feeing the form and ufe of baptifm require, that *' firft the font be confecrated, and then the perfon that is to be baptized, goes- " down ? for where the prieft firft enters, he makes an exorcifm, next an invo- cation on the creature of the water, and afterwards prays that the font may be- " fandtificd, and the aernal Trinity be prefent." Cyprian, in the middle of the third century, makes mention of this ceremony of confecrating the baptifmal water ; he fays ', " the water muft firft be cleanfed and /ij;?^?/;??^ by the prieft, " that it may, by his baptizing in it, wafti away the fins of the man thatis bap- ♦^ tized." And Tertullian before him, though he makes no difference between the waterof a pool, river or fountain^. fTj^^r or Jordan, yet fuppofes there is a. fandification of it through prayer-, "all waters, he fays ', from their ancient " original prerogative, (referring to Genefts i. 2.) obtain the facrament of fanc- ". tjfication, Beo invocato, God being called upon -," for imm.ediately theSpirit *« comes down from heaven, and rcfts upon the waters, fanflifying them of- " himfclf; and fo being fanftified, they drink in together the fanftifying virtue.'*' This alfo is as high as the date of infant- baptifm can be carried.. . 7. Ajiointing with oil at baptifm, is a rite that claims apoftolic tradition. Bafil' mentions it as an inftance of it, and afks -, "the anointiug oil, what paf- . "■ fage in fcripture teaches this ?" Aujlin " fpeaks of it as the common cuftom of th« church in his time-, having quoted that paflagc \nAcls x. 38. <■* how God " anointed him {Jcfus) with ibt holy Choji ; adds, not truly with vifible oil, but •♦with the gift of grace, which is fignified by the vifible ointment, quo baptiza- " tos ungit ecckfia, " with which the church anoints thofe that arc baptized :" fe- veral parts of the body were wont to be anointed. Ambrofe'' makes mention of- • Ut fupra. * De tempore fcrmo, 119. c. 8, * De facrameDtis, J. 1. c. 5. » Ep. 70. ad Januarium. • De baptifmo, c. 4. « Ut fupra. »■ Detrinjtate, l.ij. ciS, » Dc £»craiaciitis, ). 3. c. i» 336 THE ARGUMENT FROM APOSTOLIC TRADITION, of the ointment on the head in baptifm, and gives a rcafon for it. Cyril^ fays, the oil was exorcifed, and the forehead, ear, nofe and breaft, were anointed w-ith it, and obfervcs the myftical figniScation of each of thefe ; the neceffity of this anointing is urged hy Cyprian ^ in the third century ; " he that is baptiz- " -cd muft needs be anointed, that by receiving the chryfm, thatis, the anointing, •' he may be the anointed of God, and have the grace of Chrift. And Tertul- lian, in the beginning of the fame century, fays % as before obferved, " the flefh ♦' -is anointed, that the foul may be confecratcd ;" and in another place*, " when *' we come out of the laver, we are anointed with the blefled ointment, accord- *' ing to the ancient difcipline, in which they ufed to be anointed with oil out ■•" of the horn, for the priefthood ;" this was the cuftom ufed in the times of the man that firft fpoke of infant-baptifm. 5. The giving^ mixture of milk and honey to a perfonjuft baptized, is a rite that was ufed in the churches anciently through tradition -, Jerom " makes men- tion of it, as obferved upon this footing, and as an indance, among other things which obtained authority in that way : " as to dip the head thrice in the laver, ■" and when they came out from thence, to lajle of a mixture of milk end boney, to " fignify the new birth •" and elfewherc he fays ', it was a cuftom obferved in the wcftern churches to that day, to give w/wf and milk to them that were rege- nerated in Chrift. This was in ufe in TertuUian's time ; for, fpcaking of the adminiftration of baptifm, he fays'", "we come to the water — then we are thrice dipped — then being taken out from thence, we tafte a mixture of milk and honey; and [his, as well as anointing with oil, he obferves, was ufed by heretics them- fclves, for fo he fays o^Marcion ' \ " he does not rcjeft the water of the creator, ".with which he wafhes his difciples i ror the oil with which he anoints his •" own ; nor the mixture of milk and honey,, by which he points them out as new-' "born babes;" yea, tvcn Barnabas, a companion of the apoftlcP^K/, is thought to refer to this praflice, in an epiflle of his ftill extant ^ j not to take notice of the white garment, and the ufe of the ring and kifs in baptifm, mCyprian and TertuUian's time*. . Now thefe fcveral rites and ufeges in baptifm, claim their rife from apojlolic tradition, and have equal evidence of it as infant-baptifm has ; they are of as early dace, have the fame vouchers, and more •, the ttflimonies of them are clear and full -, they univerfally obtained, and were practifed by the churches throughout the whole world ; ^nd even by Jieretics and fchifmatics •, and this is » Citechef. myflagog 2. 5- 3- & J. S- 3- '' Ep. 70. ad Janoariam, p 175. • De refurrefiione carnis, c. 8. » De baptifmo, c 7. ^ Adv. Lucifcrianoi, fol. 47. * Commeot. in Efaidin. c. ;;. i.fol. 94. E. ' De corona, c. j. « Adv Marcion, 1. 3 c. 14. ' C. 5. prope finem. « Tertullian de pudic'tia, c. 9. Cvprian. Ep. 59. ad Fidom, vjd. Aug. contr. 2. Epift. Pelag. 1. 4. c. 8. IN FAVOUR OF IN F AN T - BAP T I SM. 337 is to be faid of them, that they never were eppofed by any within the time referred to, whTch cannot be faid of infant- baptifm \ for the very firfl: man that men- tions it, difluades from it : and are thefe facts which could not but be publicly and perfeflly Icnown, and for which the ancient writers and fathers may be ap- pealed to, not as reafoners and interpreters, but as hiftorians and witnefles to public ftanding fafts ; and all the r^afoning this gentleman makes ufe of, con- cerning the apoftles forming the churches on one uniform plan of baptifm, the rearnifs of infant-baptifm to their times, from the teftimony of the anticnts, the difficulty of an innovation, and the eaGnefs of its dctcflion, may be applied to ;ill and each of thefe rites. Wherefore whoever receives infant-baptifm upon the foot of apoftolie tradi- tion, and upon fuch proof and evidence as is given of it, as above, if he is an honcft man ; I fay again, if he is an honeft man, he ought to give into the prac- tice of all thofe rites and ufages. We do not think ogrfclves indeed obliged to regard thefe things ; we know that a variety of fuperftitious, ridiculous, and foolifli rites, were brought into the church in thefe times ; we are not of opinion, as is fuggefted, that even the authority of the apoftles a hundred years after their death, was fufficient to keep an innovation from entering the church, nor even whilft they were living •, we are well alTured, there never was fuch a fett of im- pure wretches under the chriftian name, fo unfound in principle, and fo bad m pradice, as wtre in the apoftles days, and in the ages fuccecding, called tl.e purejl ages of chriftianity. We take the Bible to be the only authentic, pcrfedl and fufficient rule of faith and praiftice : we allow of no other head and law- giver but one, that is, Chrift j we deny that any men, or fet of men, have any power to make laws in his houfe, or to decree rites and ceremonies to be ob- Icrved by his people, no not apoftles ihemfclves, uninfpired : and this gentle- man, out of this (ontraverfy-, is of the fame mind with us, who aflerts the above things we doi and affirms, without the Icaft hefitation, that what is "ordained ^' by the apoftles, without any precept from the Lord, or any particular direc- V tion of the holy Spirit, is not at all obligatory as d law upon the confciences " of chriftians i— even the appjlles h»d no dominien over ihe failh and pra£Iice of ^' chriftians, but what w^s given them by the fpecial prcfcnce, and Spirit of *' Chxift, the only Lawgiver, Lord, and Sovereign of the church : they were «* to teach *n(y the things which he (hould command them •, and whatever they V cnjoifKd under the influence of that Spirit, was to be confidered and obeyed " as the ifljunilions of Chrift \ but if they enjoined any thing in the church, " without the peculiar influence and direftion of this Spirit, chat is, as merely •* fallible and unaffifted men, in that cafe, their injunftions had no authority " over confcience ; and every man's own reafon had authority to examine and Vol. II. X X " difcufs r" (C 338 THE ARGUMENT FROM APOSTOLIC TRADITION, *' difcufs their injunflions, as they approved themfelves to his private judg- *' ment, to obferve them or not : Qiould we grant thee what you afk — fays he *' to his antagonill — chat the church in the prefent age, has the lame authority " and power, as the church in theapollolic age, confidtred, as not being under any immediate and extraordinary guidance of the holy Ghoft - what will you *' gain by it ? This fame authority and power is you fee, Sir, really no power *' nor authority at all \" The.controverfy between us and our brethren on this head, is the fame as be* tween Papifts and Protcftants about tradition, and between the church of Eng- land and DifTenters, about the church's power to decree rites and ceremonies j namel<, whether Chrift is the fole head and lawgiver in his church ; or whether any fet of men have a power to fet afide, alter, and change any laws of his, or prcfcribe new ones ? if the latter, then wp own it is all over with us, and we ought to fubmir, and not carry on the difpute any further : but fince we both profefs to maite the Bible our religion, and that only the rule of our faith -and . pradlicc ; let us unite upon this common principle, and rejcdl every tradition . of men, and all rites and ceremonies which Chrift hath not enjoined us ; let us join in pulling down this prop of Pcpery, and remove th\s fcatidal oi the Protcf- tant churches, I mean infant-baptifm-, for fure I am, fo long as it is attempted to fupport it upon the foot of apoftolic tradition, no man can write with fuccefs - againft the Papifts, or fuch, who hold that the church has a power to decree rites , and ceremonies. However, if infant baptifm is a tradition of the apoftles, then this point muft be gained, that it is not a fcriptural bufinefs; for if it is of tradition, then not of fcripture ; who ever appeals to tradition, when a docflrine or pradice can be proved by fcripture? appealing to tradition, and putting it upon that foot, is giving it up as a point of fcriptu-re : I might therefore be excufed from confider- ing what this writer has advanced from fcripture in favour of infant-baptifm, and the rather, fince there is nothing produced but what has been brought into the controverfy again and again, and has been anfwered over and over: but perhaps this gentleman and his friends will be difpleafed, if I take no notice of his argu- ments from thence; I fhall therefore juft make fomefcw remarks on them. Buc before I proceed, I muft congratulate my readers upon the blefled times we arc fallen into ! what an enlightened age ! what an age of good fenfe do we live in !' what prodigious improvement in knowledge is made! behold! tradition proved hy fcripture! apojlolic tradition proved hy Abraham' i covenant! undoubted apoJloUc tradition proved from writings in being hundreds of years before any of the apoflles were |» The diflecting Gcntleraan'i Second Letter, tec p. 29, 30." t: IN FAVOUR OF I N FAN T - BAPT I S M. 5^9 were born ! all extraordinary and of the marvellous kind ! but let us attend to the proof of thefe things. The/r/Z argument is taken from its being an incontejiahk faH, that the infants of believers were received with their parents into covenant with God, in the former difpcnfations or ages of thethurch; which is a great privilege, a pri- vilege ftill fubfifting, .and never revoked ; wherefore the infants of believers, having ftill a right to the fame privilege, in confequence have a right to bap- tifm, which is now the only appointed token of God's covenant, and the only rite of admilTion into it'. To which I reply, that it is not an inconteftabie fadl, but 2.faa centefled, that the infants of believers were with their parents taken into covenant with God, in the former difpenfations and ages of the church ; by which muft be meant, the ages preceding ihcAbrahamic covenant; fince that is made, to furnifh out a y^fw/J and di(lin(ft argument from thisi and fo the fcriptures produced are quite impertinent, Gen. \\\\. 7, 10 12. Deut. xxix. 10 — 12. Ezek. xvi. 20, 21. feeing they refer to the Abrahamic and Mofaic difpenfations, of which hereafter. l"he firft covenant made with man, was the covenant of works, with Adam before the fall, which indeed included all his pofterity, but had t\o peculiar regard to the infants of believers; he (land- ing as a federal head to all his feed, which no man fince has ever done : and in him they all finned, were condemned, and died. This covenant, I prefume, this Gentleman can have no view unto : after the fall oi Adam, the covenant of grace was revealed, and the way of life and falvation by the MelTiah ; but then this revelation was only made to Adam and Eve perfonally, as interefted in thel'e things, and not to their natural feed and pofterity as fuch, as being inrerefted in the fame covenant of grace with them ; for then all mankind mufl be taken into the covenant of grace; and if that gives a right to baptifm, they have all an equal right to unto ir; and fo there is nothing /)ff«//(jr to the infants of believers; and of whom, there is not the leaft fyllable mentioned throughout the whole acre or difpenfation of the church, reaching from Adam to Noah ; a length of time almoft equal to what has run out from the birth of Chrift, to the prefent age. The next covenant we read of, is the covenant made with Noah after the flood, which was not made with him, and his immediate ofl^spring C!:lj/; nor were they taken into covenant with him as the infants of a believer ; nor had they any fa- crament or rite given them as a token oi Jehovah being their God, and they his children, and as ftanding in a peculiar relation to him ; will any one dare to fay this of //aw, one of the immediate {onsofNoah? The covenant was made with Noah and all mankind, to the end of the world, and even with every living creature, and all the beads of the earth, promifing them fecurity from an uni- X X 2 verfal * Bapcifm of Infants a reafonable Serrice, 5.-C. p. 14, ij. 340 THE ARGUMENT FROM APOSTOLIC TRADITION, verfal deluge, as long as the world (lands; and had nothing in k peculiar to the infants of believers : and thefe are all the covenants the fcripture inakes men- tion of, till that tnid^ with AbrahatHy of which irt the next argument. This being the cafe, there is no room nor reafon to talk of the greatnefs of this privilege, and of the continuance of it, and of aflcing when it was repealed, Cnce it does not appear to have been a fadt; nor during thefe ages and difpen- fations of the church, was there ever zny facrament, ri/e, or ceremony, appointed for the admiflion of perfons adult, or infants, into covenant with God ; nor was there ever any fuch rite in any age of the world, nor is there now : the covenant with Adam, cither of works or grace, had no ceremony Of this kind -, there was a token, and ftill is, of iVwi^'s covenant, the rainbow, but not a token or rite of admiflion of pcrfons into it, but a token of the continuance and perpetuity of it in all generations: nor was circumcifion a rite of admiflion oi Abraham's feed into his covenant, as vviil quickly appear ; nor is baptifm now an initiatory rite, by which pcrfons are admitted into the covenant. Let this Gentleman, if he can, point out to us where it is fo dcfcribed; perfons ought co appear to be in the co- venant of grace, and partakers of the blefTmgs of it, the Spirit of God, faiih in Chrift, and repentance towards God, before thiy are admitted to baptifm. This Gentleman will find more work to fupport his firft argument, than perhaps he was aware of; thepremifes being bad, the conclufionmuft be wrong. I proceed- to, The feccfid argument, taken from xheAbrabamic covenant, which ftands thus : The covenant God made w^nU Abraham and his feed, Geiuftsxv\\. into which his infants were taken together with himfelf, by the rit4 of circunuifion, '\% t\\t very fame we are now under, the fame wi:h that '\x\Gal. iii. 16, 17. ftill in force, and not to be difannulled, in which we believing Gentiles are included. Remans iv. 9 — 16, 17. and fo being Abraham\ feed, have a right to all the grants and pri- vileges of it, and fo to the admiflion of our infants to it, by the fign and token of it, which is changed from circumcifion to baptifm '. But, i. though y^^a- kam^s feed were taken into covenant with him, which defigns his adult pofterity in all generations, on whom it was enjoined to circumcife their infants, it does iiot follow that his infants were ; but fo it is, that wherever the words/^^i, chil- dren, &c. are ufcd, it immediately runs in the heads of fome men, that infants nuift be meant, though they are not neceflarily included ; but be it fo, that Ahrahanis infants were admitted with him, (thoUgh at the time of making this covenant, he had no infant with him, Ifhmael was then thirteen years of age) yet not as the infants of a believer; there were believers and their infants then living, who were left out of the covenant ; and ihofe that were taken in in fuc- ccfllve '' Baptifm of I;ifant) a reafonable Ser\'ice, &c. p. 16^19 IN FAVOUR OF INFANT - BAPTISM. 341 celTive generations, were not the infants of believers only, but of unbelievers ^Co; even all the natural feed of the Jews, whether believers or unbelievers 2. Thofe that were admined into this covenant, were not admitted ^ /2»f r/Vf of circumcifimf, Ahrabam'i female feed were taken into covenant with him, as well as his male feed, but not by any vifibk rite or ceremony ; nor were his male feed admitted by any fuch rite, no not by circumcifion-, for they were not to be circumcifed until the eighth day ; to have circumcifcd them fooner would have been criminal ; and that they were in covenant from their birth, this gentleman, I prefume, will not deny. —3. The covenant of circumcifion, as it is called J£is vii. 8. cannot be the fame covenant we are now under, fincc that is abolifhed, Cal. V. 1 — 3. and it is a ruw covenant, or a new adminiftration of the covenant of grace, that we are now under \ the old covenant under the MofaU difpenfa- tion is waxen old, and vaniflied away, Heb. viii^ 8, 13. nor is the covenant with Abraham, Ccn.x\\'u the fame with that mentioned in G<2/. iii. 17. which is ftill in force, and not to be difannulled ; the diftance of time between them does not agree, but falls ftiort of the apoftle's date, four and twenty years j for from the making of this covenant to the birth of T/Jar, was one year, C«r. xvii. 1. and xxi. 5. from thence to the b\x\h of Jacob, fixty years. Gen. xxv. 26. from thence to his going down to Egypt, one hundred «Bd thirty years. Gen. xlvii. 9. w-herc the Ifraelitcs continued two hundred and fifteen 'j and quickly after they came out of Egypt, Was the law given, which was but four hundred and fix years after this covenant. The^eafon this gentleman gives, why they mud: be the fame, will not hold good, namely, "this is the only covenant in which " God ever made and coxjirrmd promifes to Abraham, and to bis feed " fince God wade a covenant with Abraham before this, and confirmed it to his feed, and that by various rites, and ufeges, and wonderful appearances, Gen.iiv. 8—18.. which covenant, and the confirmation of it, the apoftlc manifeftly refers to in Gal. iii. 17. and with which his date cxadly agrees, as the years are computed by Parous " thus ; from the confirmation of the covenant, and taking Hagar to wife, to the birth of Jfaac, fifteen years ; from thence to the birth difazob,. fixty. Gen. xxv. 26. from thence to his going down to Egypt, one hundred and thirty. Gen. xlvii. 9. from thence to his death, feventcen, Gttu xlvii. 18.- from thence to the death of Jofeph, fifty three, Gen. 1. 26. from thence to the birth of Mofes., feventy-five; from thence to the going out of Ifrad from Egypt., and the giving of t4ie law, eighty years; in all four hundred and thirty years — 4. It is allowed, that the covenant made mih Abraham, -G^n, xvii. is of a fnixtd kind, confifting partly of temporal, and partly of fpiritual blefilngs ; and that there is a twofold fczd of Abraham., to which they frverally belong-,, the temporal blcffings, to his natural feed the Jews, and the fpiritual blefTings,, tO' ' See Pool's Acnotatioo on Gal. iii. 17. " lo ibid. 342 THE ARGUMENT -FROM APOSTOLIC TRADITION, to his fpiritual feed, even all true believers that walk innhe fteps of his faith, Jews or Gentiles, Rom iv. -i i, 12, 16. believing Gentiles ^tz jAbrabani's fpiritual feed, but then they 'have a'tight only to the'fpiritual blelBngs of the covenant, not tort//the grants and privileges of it-, for inftance, not to the land of Canaan:, and as for their natural feed, thefc have no right, as fuch, to any of the bleffings of this covenant, 'temporal or fpiritual : for cither they are the natural, or the fpiritual {ctA- oi Abrab knew nothing of: men, who were utter ftrangers to the baptifm of Gentile pro- fclytes, to the Jewifli religion, and of their infants; and to any baptifm, but the ■ ceremonial ablutions, before the times of 7ei'« the Baptift : — men, who were .• not-; » Aeafonible fervice, &c. p. i9-:-J2. .. 344 THE ARGUMENT FROM APOSTOLIC TRADITION, not tenacious of their ancient rites after the Spirit was poured down upon them Jit Pentecoft, but knew they were now abolifhcd, and at an end : men, thouoh they had feen Httle children brought to Chrift to have his hands laid on them, yet had never feen an infant baptized in their days :— men, who thoucrh they knew that infants were finners, and under a fentence of condemnation, and need- ed remiflion of fin and juftification, and that baptifm was a means of leading the faith of adult perfons to Chrift for them ; yet knew that it was not by bap- tifm, but by the blood of Chrift, that thefe things are obtained : — men, that knew that Chrift came to fct up a new church-ftatei not national as before, but con- gregational; not confifting of carnal men, and of infants without underftanding; but of fpiritual and rational men, believers inChrift; and therefore could not be led to conclude that infants were comprehended in the commifTion : nor is Chrift's filence with refpeft to infants to be conftrued into a ftrong and moft manifeft prefumption in their favour, which would be prefumption indeed ; or his not excepting them, a permifTion or order to admit them : perfons capable of mak- ing fuch conftrudions, are capable of doing and faying any thing. I haftcn to The/ourlh argument, drawn from the evident and clear confequences of other pafTages of fcripture ' ; as, 1. From Romans xi. 17. and if feme of the branches' be broken cffy &c. here let it be noted, that the olive-tree is not the Abrabamic covenant or church, into which the Gentiles were grafted ; for they never were grafted into the Jewifh church, that, with all its peculiar ordinances, being abolifhed by Chrift ; figni- fied by the fliaking of the heaven and the earth, and the removing of things fhaken ', but the golpel church-ftate, out of which the unbelieving Jews were left, and into which the believing Gentiles were engrafted, but not in the ftead of the unbelieving Jews : and by the root zndfatnefs of the olive-tree, are meant, not the religious privileges and grants belonging tothe Jewifti covenantor church, which theGentiles had nothing to do with, and are abaliftied; but the privileges and ordinances of the gofpel-church, which they with the believing Jews joint- ly partook of, being incorporated together in the fame church-ftate; and which, as it is the meaning of Romans xi. 1 7. fb of Epbeftans iii. 6. in all which tliere is not the leaft fyllabie of baptifm ; and much Icfs of infant baptifm ; or of the faith of a parent grafting his children with himfelf, into the church or covenant- relation to God, which is a mere chimera, that has no foundation chher in rea- fon or fcripture. 2. FromAffjr^x. ij,. Suffer Ul tie children tocome untome^ S)ic. zn^JohniW. §. Ex- <£pt any one is born ofwater^ &c. from thcfe two paflTages put together, it is f*id, the right * Reafonable fervict, &c. p. 23-^28, • Heb. xii. 26, 27. , • IN FAVOUR OF IN FAN T - BAPTISM. 345 right of infants to baptifm may be clearly inferred; for in one they are declared" a<5lually to have a place in God's kingdom or church, and yet into it, the other as exprefsly fays, none can be admitted without being baptized. But fuppofing the former of thefe texts is to be underftood of infants, not in a metaphorical fenfe, orof fuch as are compared to infants for humility, tfc. which fenfe fome verfions lead unto, and in which way fome Pjedobaptifts interpret the words, particularly Calvin, but literally ; then by the kingdom 0/ God, is not meant the vifible church on earth, or a gofpel church-ftate, which is not national, but con- gregational; confi fling of perfons gathered out of the world by the grace of God, and that make a public profeflion of the name of Ch rift, which infants are incapable of, and fo are not taken into it : befides, this fenfe would prove too much, and what this writer would not chufe to give into, viz. that infants, having a place in this kingdom or church, muft have a right to all the privileges of it -, to the Lord's fupper, as well as to baptifm -, and ought to be treated in all refpefts as other members of it. Wherefore it (hould be interpreted of the kingdom of glory, into which we doubt not that fuch as thefe in the text arc admitted; and then the ftrength of our Lord's argument lies here; that fincc he came to fave fuch infants as thefe, as well as adult perfons, and bring them to heaven, they Ihould not be hindered from being brought to him to be touched by him, and healed of their bodily difeafes : and fo the other text is to be underftood of the kingdom of God, or heaven, in the fame fenfe ; but not of watcr-baptifm as neccfTary to it, or that without which there is no entrance into it ; which miftaken, fhocking and ftupid fenfe of them, led Aujitn, and the African churches, into a confirmed belief and praflice of infant-baptifm ; and this fenfe being imbibed, will juftify him in all his monftrous, abfurd and impious tenets, as this writer calls them, about the ceremony of baptifmal water, and the abfolute neceftity of it unto falvation: whereas the plain meaning of the words is, that except a man be born again of the grace of the Spirit of God, com- parable to water, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God, or be a partaker of the heavenly glory ; or without the regenerating grace of the Spirit of God, which inTitus in. 5. is called the wafhing of regeneration, and reneiving of the bolyGhofl, there can be no meetnefs for, no reception into, the kingdom of heaven ; and therefore makes nothing for the baptizing of infants. 3. A diftindlion between the children of believers and of unbelievers, is at- tempted from I Cor. vii. 14. as if the one were in a vifible covenant-relation to God, and the other not; whereas the text fpeaks not of two forts of children, but of one and the fame, under fuppofed different circumftances ; and is to be underftood not of any federal, but matrimonial holinefs, as I have (hewn Vol. II. y y clfewhere. 34^ THE ARGUMENT 3FR0M APOSTOLIC TRADITION, Sec. elfewhere ', to which I refer the reader. As for the^eries with which the argu- ment is concluded, they are nothing to the purpofe, vnlefs it could be made out, that it is the will of God that infants fliould be baptized, and that the bap- tifm of them would give them the remitTion of fins, and juftify their perfons ^ neither of which are true: and of the fame kind is the barangue'm the iniroduiiicn to this treatife : and after all a poor, flender provifion is made for the felvation of infants, according to this author's own fcheme, which only concerns tht infants, efhelievers, and leaves all others to the uncovenanted mercies of God, as he calls them -, feeing the former are but a very fmall part of the thoufands of infants. that every day languifh under grievous dillempers, are tortured, convulfed, and in piteous agonies give up the ghoft. Nor have I any thing to do with what this writer fays, concerning the moral purpofes and ufeof infant-baptifm in reli- gion-, fince the thing itfelf is without any foundation in the word of God; upon the whole, the baptifm of infants is fo far from being a reafonable fervice, that it is imojl unreafonabk' one ; fince there is neither precept nor precedent for it in. the facred writings j and it is neither to be proved by fcripture nor tradition. • The difine right of Infant. baptifin difprovtd, &c. p. 73 — 78. A N A N A N S W E R T O A WELCH CLERGYMAN'S TWENTY ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR OF INFANT-BAPTISM, WITH Some Strictures on what the faid Author has advanced concerning the Mode of B A P T I S M. A Book, fome time ago being publifhed in xheJVekb language, intiiled, " A "^ " Guide to a faving Knowledge of the Principles and Duties of Religion, " wz. Queftions and Scriptural Anfwers, relating to the Doflrine contained in " the Church Catechifm," 6?f . Some extradts out of it refpedting the ordinance of baptifm, its fubjedl:, and mode, being communicated to me, with a requeft from our friends in fVales to make fome Reply unto, and alfo to draw up fome Rea/ons for diflenting from the church of England, both which 1 have undercook, and (hall attempt in the following manner. ■ I fhall take but little notice of what this author fays, part 5. p. 40. concerning fponfors in baptifm, but refer the reader to what is faid of them in the Reafons for diflenting, hereunto annexed. This writer himfclf owns, that the prafticc of having fureties is not particularly mentioned in fcripturc; only he would have it, that it has in general obtained in the churches from the primitive times, and was enafted by the pozvers which Cod has appointed, and whofe ordinances are to he Submitted to, when they are not contrary to thofc of God"-, and mufl be al- lowed to be of great fervice, //the fureties fulfilled their engagements. The anfwertoall which is, thacfince it is not mentioned in fcripturc, it deferves no regard ; at leaft, this can never recommend it to fuch, who make the Bible the V y 2 rule ' '*- . _. • 1 Pet. ii. 13. Rom. xlJi. i, 2. Tit. iii. i, 2. 348 AN ANSWER TO THE TWENTY ARGUMENTS rule of their faith and prato when deftitute of truth ; one while the covenant of grace is faid to be made with believers, and their feed, as in the next argument, and fo their infants being in it, have a right to baptifm; at another time it is baptifm that puts them into the covenant -, and if they are not baptized they are left without intereft in it, and, to the great grief of their parents, under a dreadful fentence of eternal condemnation. But, 4. as the falvation of an infant dying in its infancy is one oitbeftcret things which belong unto the Lord, a judicious chriftian parent will leave it with him •, and find more relief from his diftrefs, by hopino- in the grace and mercy of God through Chrift, and in the virtue and efficacy of his blood and righteoufnefs, which may be applied unto it without baptifm, than he can in baptifm ; which he may obferve, may be adminiftered to a perfon,. and yet be damned. For, 5. baptifra is no feal of the covenantof grace, nor does it give any perfon an intereft in it, or feal it to them ; a perfon may be baptized, and yet have no intereft in the covenant, zi Simon Magus and others, and to whom it was never fealed -, and on the other hand, a perfon may be in the covenant of grace, and it maybe fca,]ed to him, and he aflTured of his intereft in it, and not yet be baptized : the blood of Chrift is the feal of the covenant,, and the Spirit of Chrift is the fealer of the faint's intereft in it. And, after all, 6 if bap- tifm has fuch virtue in it, as to give an intereft in the covenant of grace, to be a Cgn and promife of mercy, and of our intereft in Chrift, and furnifli out hope of falvation, and fecure from wrath and condemnation, why ftiouldnot.com- paffion be fticwn to the children of unbelievers, who are in the fame ftate and condition by nature? for, I obferve all along, that in this and the following arguments,. * See Rom. v. 12, 18. Zsso AN ANSWER TO- THE TWENTY TARGl^MENTS arguments, baptifm is wholly-reftrained to the children of bdievcrs ; uporr the •whole, the argAjment from the flate of infants to their baptifm is impertinent and fruitlefs; fince there is no fuch efficacy in baptiim, to deliver them from iff. The fecotid argument is : " The children of believers (hould be admitted to *' baptifm, fince as the covenant cjf works, and the feal of it belonged toAdavi " and his children, fo the covenant of grace, .and the feal thereof belongs, " through Chrift, to believers and their children ;" to which it may be replied, 1. That it is indeed true, that the covenant of works belonged to Adam and his -pofterity, he being a federal head unto them; but then it does not appear, that that covenant had any feal belonging to it, fince it needed none, nor was it pro- per it fhould have any, feeing it was not to continue. And if the tree of life is intended, as I fuppofe it is, whatever that might be.a fign of, it was no feal of any thing, nor did it belong w Adam's children, who wer€ never fufFcred to par- take of it. 2. There is a great difparity heiween./1dam and believers, and the relation they ftand in to their refpedive offspring: Adam ftood as a common head and reprefcntative to all his pofterity ; not fo believers to theirs : they are no common heads unto them, or reprefentatives of them ; wherefore though the covenant of works belonged to Adam and his pofterity, it does not follow, that the covenant of grace belongs to believers and their children, they not ftanding in the fame relation he did. There never were but two covenant-heads, Adam and Christ, and between them, and them only, the parallel will run, and in this form; that as the covenant of works belonged to Adam and his feed, fo the covenant of grace belongs toChrift and his feed. 3. As it does not appear there was any feal belonging to the covenant of works, fo we have feen already, that baptifm is not the feal of the covenant of grace ; wherefore this argument in favour of infant-baptifm is weak and frivolous ; the reafon this author adds to firengthen the above argument, is very lamely and improperly expreflTed, and impertinently urged-, ■^'for we arc not to imagine, that there is more efficacy " in the covenant of works, to bring condemnation on the children of the unbe- " lieving, through the fall of Adam ; than there it virtue in the covenant of •" grace, through the mediation of the fon of God, x.\\t iecondi Adam, to bring *' falvation to the feed of thofe that believe *." For the covenant of works being broken by the fall oi Adam, brought condemnation, not on the children of the unbelieving only, but of believers alfo, even on all his pofterity, to whom he ftood a federal head ; and fo ^he covenant of grace, of which Chrift the fccond Adam is the mediator, brings falvation, not to the feed of thofe that believe, many of whom never believe, and to whom falvation is never brought, nor they to * See iiie htroJuShn to iheBaf/i/m ofhfanH a rta/onahliScrvicf, &C. to which this il an anfwer. ^ Rom. V. 15, 18. . IN FAVOUR -OF wIJs^PAI^T.- BAPTISM. ^51 to that; but toallChrift's fpiritual feed arid offspring, to "whom he ft ands a fede- ral head •, which is the fenfe of the paffages of fcripiure referred to, and ferves no ways to ftrengthen the caufe of infant-baptifm. • -The /i'/W argument runs thus. " The feed of believers are to be baptized " into the fame covenant with themfelves •, feeing infants, while infants, as na- *' tural parts of their parents, are included in the fame threatening^, which are "denounced againft wicked parents, and in the fame promifes as are made to " godly parents, being branches of one root '." Here let it be obferved, i . that it is pleaded that infants Ihould be baptized into the fame covenant with their pArents, meaning no doubt the covenant of grace ; that is, fhould by baptifm be brought into the covenant as it is expreffed in Argument 7"', or elfe I know ntkt what is meant by being baptized into the fame covenant ; and yet in the preceding argument it is urged, that the covenant of grace bclono-s to the infants of believers, that is, they are in it, and therefore are to be baptized: an inftance this of the glaring contradicStion before obferved. 2. Thrcatenin^s indeed are made to wicked parents and their children, partly to fhew the heinoufnefs of their fins, and to deter them from them ; and partly to cxprefsGod's hatred of fin, and his punitive juftice; and alfo to point out original fin and the corrup- tioa of nature in infants, and what they mud cxpeft when grown up if they fol- low the examples of their parents, and commit the fame or like fins ; but what iy ill this to Infant-baptifm ; Why, 3. In like manner promifes are made to godly parents and their children, and feveral paffages are referred to in proof of it -, fomc of thcfc are of a temporal nature, and are defigned to ftir up and encourao^e good men to the difcharge of their duty, and have no manner of regard to any Ipiritual or religious privilege •, and fuch as are of a fpiritual nature, which rc- fpefl converfion, fandification, (s'c. when thefe take place on the feed of belie- vers, ihen, -and not till then, do they appear to have any right to Gofpel-ordi- nances, fuch as baptifm and the Lord's fupper ; wherefore the arounient from promifes to fuch .privileges, before the things promifcd are beftowcd, is of no force. ■ ■ The fourth agunment is much of the fame kind with the foregoing, namely, " There are many examples recorded in fcripture wherein the infants of ungod- " .ly men are involved with their parents in heavy judgments ; therefore as the " judgment and curfe which belong to the wicked, belong alfo to their feed, *', fo the privileges of the faints belong alfo to their offspring, unlefs they rejcfl " the God of their fathers. The juftice and wrath of God, is not more cxtenfivc ."to •Rom.xi. 16. Deut. iv. 37, 40. andxtTiii. I— 4. and«x. 6, 19. Pfal. cii. 28. Prov. xi. ei. indxx.7. Jer. xxxii. 38, 39. Exod. xx. 5. and xixiv. 7. Dfut. xxviii. 15, 18, 45, ^6^ PiaJ. xxi. 10. and cxix. 9, 10. Ui\. xiy. vo, 21. Jer. txii »8. and xxxvi ji. 352 AN ANSWER TO THE TWENTY ARGUMENTS " to deflroy the offspring of the wicked, than his grace and mercy is to fave " thofe of the faithful j therefore baptifm, the fign of th€ promifes of God's " mercy, is not to be denied to fuch infants ^" The anfwer given to the for- mer may fuffice for this : to which may be added, i. That the inflifting judg- ments on the children of fome wicked men, is an inftance of the fovereign jufticc of God ; and his beftowing privileges on the children of fome good men, is an inftance of his fovereign grace, who puniflies whom he will, and has mercy on whom he will : for, 2. God does not always proceed in this method ; he fome- times beftows the bleffings of his grace on the children of the wicked, and inflidls deferved punifhment on the children of good men ; the feed of the wicked do not always inherit their curfes, nor the feed of the godly their bleffings ; where- fore fuch difpenfations of God can be no rule of condufl to us; and particularly with refpeft to baptifm. And, 3. Whatfoever privileges belong to the feed of believers, we are very defirous they fhould enjoy ; nor would we deprive them of any, let it be (hewn that baptifm belongs to them as fuch, and we will by no means deny it to them. But, 4. Whereas it is faid that the privileges of faints belong to their offspring, adding this exceptive claufe, " unlefs they rejeft " the God of their fathers ;" it feems moft proper, prudent and advifeable, particularly in the cafe before us, to wait and fee whether they will receive or rejefb, follow or depart from the God of their fathers. Tht fifth argument is formed thus: "The children of believers are to be bap- " tized now, as thofe of the Jews were circumcifed formerly •, for circumcifion " was then the feal of the covenant, as baptifm is now, which Chrift has appoint- " ed in lieu thereof. Abraham and his fon IJhmael, and all that were born in " his houfe, were circumcifed the fame day ; and God commanded all Ifrael to " bring their children into the covenant with them, to give them the feal of it, " and circumcife them^." To all which I reply, i. that circumcifion was no feal of the covenant of grace ; if it was, the covenant of grace from Adam to Abraham was without a feal. It is called ijign in Genefis xvii. the paffagc re- ferred to, but not a feal : it is indeed in Romans iv. 11. faid to be a feal of the righteoufnefs of the faith, not to infants, not to /Abraham's natural feed, only to himfelf-, affuring him, that he fhould be the father of many nations, in a fpiri- tual fenfe, and that the righteoufnefs of faith he had, fhould come upon the Gen- tiles : wherefore this mark or fign continued until the gofpel, in which the righ- teoufnefs of Cad is revealed from faith to faith, was preached unto the Gentiles, ■ and received by them ; to which may be added, that there were many living who were interefted in the covenant of grace, when circumcifion was appointed, and yet it was not ordered to them ; as it would have been, had it been a feal of 'Namb.xiv.33. 2 Kings V. 17 Jothua vji. 24i 25. Jer. xxii. 18. I G:n. xvii. DeuC. xxix. 10 — iz. Col. ii. >i, 12. -IN FAVOUR OF INFANT - BAPTISM. ,35} tif that covenant; and on the other hand, it was enjoined fuch who had no intereft in the covenant of grace, and to whom it could not be a feal of it, as IJhmael, E/au, ^nd others. And, 2. it has been £hewn already, that baptifm is no fcal of the faid covenant. Nor, 3. is it appointed by Chrift in lieu of circumcifion, nor does it fucceed it -, there is no agreement between them in their fubjedts, ufe, and manner of adminiftration ; and what moft clearly fhews that baptifm -did not come in the room of circumcifion^ is, that it was in force and ufe before xircumcifion was abolifhed ; which was not till the death of Chrift; whereas, .years before that, multitudes were baptized, and our Lord himfelf ; and there- fore it being in force before the other was out of date, cannot with any propriety be faid to fucceed it. This writer, p. 28. has advanced feveral things to prove that baptifm came in the room of circumcifion. . tjl. He argues from thcLord's fupper being inftead of the pafchal Iamb, that -therefore baptifm muft be in the room of circumcifion, which is ceafed ; orelie there muft be a deficiency. But it docs not appear that the Lord's fupper is in the room of the paflTover -, it followed that indeed, in the inftitution and cele- bration of it by Chrift, but it was not inftituted by him to anfwer the like pur- pofes as the paflbver-, nor are the fame perfons admitted to the one as the other • and bcfides, was the Lord's fupper in the room of the pafibver, it docs not fol- low from thence that baptifm w;k/? be in the room of circumcifion : but then it is faid there will be a deficiency •, a deficiency of what ? all thofc ceremonial rites, the paffover and circumcifion, with fpany others, pointed at Chrift and have had their fulfilment in him-, he is come, and is the body and fubftance of them ; and therefore there can be no deficiency, fince he is in the room of -chem, and is the fulfilling end of them : nor can any other but he, with any propriety, be faid to come in the room of them. And there can be no defi- ciency of grace, fince he is full of it, nor of ordinances, for he has appointed -as many as he thought fit. idl); This author urges, that it is proper there ftiould be two facraments under the gofpel, as there were two under the law, one for. adult perfons, the other for their children, as were the pafchal lamb and circumcifion. But if every thing that was typical of Chrift, as thofc two were, were facraments, it •might as well be faid there were two and twenty facraments under the law, as two; and, according to this way of reaibning, there fliould be as many under the gofpel. Moreover, of thefe two, one was not for adult perfons only, and •the other for their children ; for they were, each of them, both for adult per- :fons and children too ; they that partook of the one had a right to the other; all that were circumcifcd might cat of the paffover, and none but they ; and if Vol. II. Z z this 354 AN ANSWER TO THE TWENTY ARGUMENTS this is a rule and direftion to us now, if infants have a right to baptifm, they ought to be admitted to the Lord's fiipper. ^dly, Baprifm, he fays, is appointed for a. like end as circumcifion ; namely, for the admifTion of perfons into the church, which is not true ; circumcifion was appointed for another end, and not for that: the Jewifh church was nation- al, and as foon as an infant was born, it was a member of it, even before cir- cumcifion J and therefore it could not be admitted by it-, nor is baptifm for any fuch end, nor are perfons admitted into a vifible church of Chrift by it; they may be baptized, and yet not members of a church : what church was the eu- nuch admitted into, or did he become a member of, by his baptifm ? 4/^/)', This writer affirms, that "the holy Spirit calls baptifm circumcifion, *' that is, ihe circumcifion made without hands, having the fame fpiritual defign ; " and is termed the cbrijiian circumcifion, or that of Chrift ; it anfwering to *' circumcifion, and being ordained by Chrifl: in the room of it." To fay that baptifm is ordained by Chrift in the room of circumcifion, is begging the quef- tion, nor is there any thing in it that anfwers to circumcifion, nor is it called the circumcifion of Chrift, in Col. ii. 11. which I fuppofc is the place referred to; for not that, but internal circumcifion, the circumcifion of the heart is meant, which Chrift by his Spirit is the author of, and therefore called his ; and the fame is the circumcifion made without handsy in oppofition to circumcifion ;'» theflejh; it being by the powerful and efficacious grace of God, without the affiftance of men ; nor can baptifm with any fhew of reafon, w appearance of truth, befo called, fince that is made with the hands of men; and therefore can never be the circumcifion there meant. Sthly, He infers that baptifm is appointed in the room of circumcifion, from their fignifying like things, as original corruption, regeneration, or the circum- cifion of the heart ^; being feals of the covenant of grace '; initiating ordinances, and alike laying men under an obligation to put off the body of fm, and walk in newnefs of life'' ; and alfo being marks of diftinftion between church-mem- bers and others '. But baptifm and circumcifion do not fignify the like things ; baptifm fignifies the fufferings, death, burial, and refurredlion of Chrift, which circumcifion did not ; nor does baptifm fignify original corruption, which it takes not away ; nor regeneration, which it does not give, but pre-requircs it; nor is baptifm meant in the pafTage referred to, Titus iii. 5. nor are either of them feals of the covenant of grace, as has been fhewn already ; nor initiating ordinances, or what enter perfons into a church-ftate: Jewifti infants were church- members, before they were circumcifcd ; and perfons may be baptized, and yet not * Deut. XXX. 6. Tit. iii. j. ' Rom. iv, 11. •■ Roni. vi. 4, 6. * Ezek. xvi. 21. Matt, xvi. i6. IN FAVOUR. OF IN FAN T - BAPTISM. 355 OQt be enembers of churches ; and whatever obligations the one and the other may lay men under to live in newnefs of life, this can be no proof of the one coming in the room of the other. Circumcifwn was indeed a mark of diftiniftion between the natural feed oi Abraham and others j and baptifm is a diftinguifhing badge, to be wore by thofe that believe in Chrift, and put him on, and are his fpiritual feed; but neither of them diftinguifh church-members from others j the paf- iages referred to are impertinent. But I proceed to cbnfider Thzfixih argument in favour of infant-baptifm, taken from " the famcnefs of the covenant oi grace made with Jews and Gentiles, of which circumcifion was the feal i from the feal and difpenfation of which, the Jews and their children arc cut off, and the Gentiles and their feed are engrafted in V In anfwer to which, let it be obferved, i. That the covenant of grace is indeed the fame in one age, and under one difpenfation, as another; or as made with one fort of people as another, whether Jews or Gentiles ; the fame blefiings of ic that came upon Abraham, come upon all believers, Jews or Gentiles ; and the one are faved by the grace of our Lord Jefus Chrift, as the other ; but then, 2. The cove- nant of grace was not made vj\i\\ Abraham and his natural feed, or with all the Jews as fuch; nor is it made with Gentiles and their natural feed as fuch.; but with Chrift and his fpiritual feed, and with them only, be they of what nation, or live they in what age they will. 3. Circumcifion was no feal of the covenant of grace, nor does Romans iv. 11. prove ir, as has been fhewn already ; and therefore nothing can be inferred from hence with refpeft to baptifm. 4. The root or ftock from whence the unbelieving Jews were cut off, and into which the believing Gentiles are engrafted, is not the covenant of grace, from which thofe who arc interefted in it can never be cut off; but the gofpel church-ftate, from which the unbelieving Jews were rejedted and left out, and the believing Gentiles took in, who partook of all the privileges of it ": though no mention is made throughout the whole of the paffage of the children of cither; only of fome being broken off through unbelief, and others ftandincy by faith ; and therefore can be of no fcrvice in the caufe of infant-baptifm. The fevenib argument is taken from " the extent of the covenant of grace being the fame under the New Teftan^cnt, as before the coming of Chrifl, who canie not to curtail the covenant, and render worfe the condition of infants ; if they were in the covenant before, they are io now; no fpiritual privilege given to children or others can be made void "." To which may be replied, I. That the extent of the covenant, as to the conditution of it, and perfons irucrefted in it, is always the fame, having neither more nor fewer ; but with z z 2 refpeft " GaJ. iii. 14. A£bzv. ii. Rom. iv. 1 1 . aod xi. 1 5, 17. • Rom. xi. 17 — zj. " Rom. zt. 19. Jer. xxx. 20. 356 AN ANSWER TO THE TWENTY ARGUMENTS refpeft to the application of it, it extends to more perfons at one time than at another ; and is more extenfive under the gofpel-difpenfation than before •, it being applied to Gentiles as well as Jews : and with refped to the blefTino-s and privileges of it, they are always the fame, arc never curtailed or made void, or taken away from thofe to whom they belong; which are all Chrift's fpiritual feed, and none elfe, be they Jews or Gentiles. But, 2. It fhould be proved that the infant-feed of believers, or their natural feed as fuch, were ever in the covenant of grace ; or that any fpiritual privileges were given to them as fuch -, or it is impertinent to talk of curtailing the covenant, or taking away the pri- vileges of the feed of believers. 3. If even their covenant-intereft could be proved, which it cannot, that gives no right to any ordinance, or to a pofuive inftitution, without a divine direction ; there were many who were interefted in the covenant of grace, when circumcifion was appointed, who yet had no- thing to do wiih that ordinance. 4. Baptifm not being allowed to infants, does not make their condition worfe than it was under the former difpenfation-, ior as then circumcifion could not fave them, fo neither would baptifm, were it adminiftered to them -, nor was circumcifion really a privilege, but the re- verfe ; and therefore the abrogation of it, without fubftituting any thing in its room, does not make the condition of infants the worfe; and certain it is, that the condition of the infants of believing Gentiles, even though baptifm is de- nied them, is much better than that of the infants of Gentiles before the com- ing of Chrift; yea, even of the infants of Jews themfelves ; fince they are born of chriftian parents, and fo have a chriftian education, and the opportuniry and advantage of hearing the gofpel preached, as they grow up, with greater clcarnefs, and in every place ■■ where they are. The lext in Romans x\.2g. regards not external privileges, but internal grace ; that in Jeremiah xxx. 20. refpedls not infants, but the pofterity of the Jews; adult perfons in the latter day. The eighth argument is taken from the everlaftingnefs of the covenant of grace, and runs thus ; " The example oi Abraham and the Ifraelites in circum- "• cifing their children according to the command of God, fhould oblige us " to baptize our children ; becaufe circumcifion was then a feal of the ever- '• lafling covenant, a covenant that was to lad for ever, and not ceafe as the " legal ceremonies ; which God hath confirmed with an oath ; and therefore " can have fufFcred no alteration for the worfe in any thing with refpedt to ♦' infants ■" " The anfwer to which is, i. That the covenant of grace is ever- lafting, will never ceafe, nor admit of any alteration, is certain ; but the covenant of circumcifion, which is called an everlafting covenant, Gene/is xvu.y. was ' This a]fo is ar anAver to what the author of Tf>e bafiifm oflnftnts a rea/onahU Servhi fuggelb in p. 7, 1:, 16. "< Gen. vii. 17. Heb. vi. 13, 18. Mic. rii. 18, 20. Gal.iii. 8. IN FAVOUR OF INFANT - BAPT ISM. 357 was only to continue during the Mofaic difpenfation, or unto the times of the Mefliah ; and is fo called for the fame reafon, and juft in the fame fenfe as the covenant of the priefthood with Phinebas is called, the covenant of an everlajling friejlbood'. Though the covenant of grace is everlafting, and whatever is in that covenant, or ever was, will never be altered -, yet it fhould be proved there is any thing in it with refpcd to infants, and particularly which lays any foundation for, or gives them any claim and right to baptifm. 3. Though cir- cumcifion was a fign and token of the covenant made with Abraham, and his na- tural feed, it never was any feal of the covenant of grace. And, 4. The example of Abraham and others, in circumcifing their children according to the com- mand of God, lays no obligation upon us to baptize ours, unlefs we had a com- rMand for their baptifm, as they had for their circumcifion. The ninth argument is formed thus-, "Baptifm is to be adminiftered to the *' feed of believers, becaufe it is certainly very dangerous and blameworthy, *' to neglefl and defpife a valuable privilege appointed by God from the begin- "■ ning, to the offspring of his people." But it muft be denied, and fhould be proved, that baptifm is a privilege appointed by God from the beginning, to the offspring of his people ; let it be fhcwn,. if it can, when and where it was appointed by him. This argument is illuflrated and enforced by various obfer- vations ; as that " that foul was to be cut off that negleded circumcifion -, and " no juft cxcufe can be given for negleding infant-baptifm, which is ordained " to be the feal of the covenant infiead of circumcifion:" but we have feen already, that baptifm does not come in the room of circumcifion, nor is it a feal of the covenant of grace ; and there is good reafon to be given for the negleft of infant-baptifm, becaufe it never was ordained and appointed of God. More- over it is faid, " that the feed of believers were formerly, under the Old Tefla- " ment, in the covenant together with their parents ; and no one is able to fliew " that they have been cafl; out under the New, or that their condition is worfe,. " and their fpiritual privileges lefs, under the gofpcl, than under the law:" but that believers with their natural feed as fuch, were together in the covenant of grace under the Old Tcftament, fhould not be barely affirmed, but proved,, before we are put upon to fhew that they are cafl out under the New ; though, this writer himfelf, before in the Jixth argument, talks of the Jews and their children being cut off from the feal and difpenfation of the covenant ; which can never be true of the covenant of grace ; nor do we think that the condition of infants is worfe, or their privileges lefs now, than they were before, though, baptifm is denied them, as has been obfervcd already. It is further urged, that-. *' it is not to be imagined, without prefumption, that Chrift ever intended to " CUti ' Numb. ixv. i3( 358 AN ANSWER TO THE TWENTY ARGUMENTS ' " cm them off from an ordinance, which God had given them a right untoj" nor do we imagine any fuch thing; nor can it be proved that God ever gave the ordinance of baptifm to them. As for what this writer further ebferves, that had Chrift took, away circumcifion, without ordaining baptifm in the room of it, for the children of believers ; the Jews would have cried out againft it as an excommunication of their children ; and would have been a greater objcftion againft him than any other -, and would now be a hindrance of their €onverfion ; and who, if they were converted, would have baptifm or circumcifion to be a feal of the covenant with them and their children, it deferves noanfwer; fince the clamours, outcries, and objeftions of the Jews, and their praftice on their legal principles, would be no rule of direftion to us, were they made and gave into, fince they would be without reafon and truth ; for though Chrift came net to deftroy the moral law, but to fulfil it ' ; yet he came to put an end to the cere- monial law, of which circumcifion is a part, and did put an end to it ' : the text ]n Jeremiah XXX. 20. refpcfts the reftoration of the Jews in the Fatter day, but not their old ecclefiaftical polity, which fhall not be eftabliftied again, but their civil liberties and privileges. The fe7itb argument ftands thus; " Children are to be baptized under the " covenant of grace, bccaufe all the covenants which God ever made with men " were made not only with them, but alfo with their children;" and inftances are given in Adam, Noah., Abraham., Ifaac and Jacob, Levi, Pbinehas, and David. The covenant of works was indeed made with y^^^jw and his feed, in which covenant he was a federal head to his offspring ; but the covenant of grace was not made with him and his feed, he was no federal head in that ; nor is that made with all mankind, as it muft, if it had been made with Adam and his feed : this is an inftancc againft the argument, and fticws that a// the covenants that ever God made with men, were not made with them and their feed ; for certainly the covenant of grace was made with Adam, and made known to him ' ; and yet not with his feed with him ; nor can any inftance be given of the cove- nant of grace being made with any man, and his natural feed. There was a covenant made with Noah and his pofterity, fccuring them from a future de- luge, but not a covenant of grace fecuring them from cverlafting deftruftton ; for then it muft have been made with all mankind, fince all are the pofterity of Ncab ; and where then is the diftindion of the feed of believers and of un- believers i* Bcfides //• Gen. xvii. 19 — 21. * Rom.ix. lo — 13. n IN FAVOUR OF IN F A N T - B APT IS M. 359 and all were not IfraeliWa were of Ifrael, or oi Jacob, ver. 6. The covenant of the priefthood was indeed made with Levi and Phinebas, and their pofteritv ; and though it is called an tverlajlitig one, it is now made void -, nor is there any other in its room with the minifters oF the word and their pofterity \ and yet no outcry is made of the children of gofpel-miniftcrs being in a worfe con- dition, and their privileges lefs than thofe of the priefts and Levites : and as for David, the fad eftatc of his family, and the wicked behaviour of mofl: of his children, fliew, that the covenant of grace was not made with him and his natural offspring ; and whatever covenants thofe were that were made with thefe perfons, they furnilh out no argument proving the covenant of grace to be made with believers and their carnal feed, and ftill lefs any argument in favour of infant-baptifm ". The eleventh argument is -, " The feed of believers ought to be baptized " under the covenant of grace, otherwife they would be reckoned pagans, " and the offspring of infidels and idolaters, to whom there is neither a promife " nor any fign of hope ; whereas the fcripture makes a difference, calling them '" holy on account of their relation to the holy covenant, when either their " father or mother believe ', difcipks'^; reckoning them among them that be- " lieve, becaufe of their relation to the houfhoid of faith * ; flyling them the '■'■ feed of the bkjjed, and their offspring with them"; accounting rhsm for a " *' generation to the Lord", as David fays; who, ver. 10. obferves, that God " was his God from his mother's belly; and alfo calling them the children of " God^ ; therefore they ought to be dedicated to him by that ordinance which " he has appointe.d for that purpofe." To all which may be replied, i. Thac the children of believers arc by nature children of wrath even as others-, and are no better than others ; and were they baptized, they would not be at all the better chriftians for it. Though, 2. It will be allowed that there is a difference between the offspring of believers, and thofe of infidels, pagans and idolaters; and the former have abundantly the advantage of the latter, as they have a chrif- tian education ; and confequently as they are brought up under the means of grace, there is hope of them ; and it may be expefted that the promife of God to fuch who ufe the means will be accomplifhed. But, 3. the charaflers men- tioned either do not belong to children, or not for the reafon given ; and thofe that do, do not furnifh out an argument for their baptifm. Children are faid lohi holy, born in lawful wedlock'; not on account of their relation to the holy covenant, but on account of the holinefs of a believing parent, which furely » Let this airo be obferved, together with the anfwer to the firll argument of the aothor o(Tbt bap- lifraof Ihfanli a rtafonabUStrvici, &c. p. 14. 1 1 Cor. vii. 14. * Afli xv. 10. » Matt, xviii. 6. ' Ifai. Ixv. 23. « Pfal. xxii. 30. * Ezelt. xvi. 20, 2J1, « -I Cor. vii. 14. -360 ■ AN ANSWER TO THE TWENTY ARGUiMENTS furciy cannot be a federal holinefs, but a matrimonial one j the marriage of a believer with an unbeliever being valid, or otherwife their children muft be un- ckaB or illegitimate, and not holy or legitimate. The difciples in ji^is xv. 10. ■ are not young children, but adult perfons, the converted Gentiles, on whom the falfe teachers would have put the yoke of the ceremonial law, and particu- larly circumcifion. The little ones reckoned among thofe that believe inChrift, Matt, xviii. 6. were not infants in age, but the apoRles of our Lord, who were litde in their own account, and in the account of others, whom to offend was criminal, highly provoking to Chrift, and of dangerous confequence. The text, Ifai. Ixv. 23. fpcaks of the fpiritual feed of the church, and not the carnal feed of believers ''-, and thefe are the fame who are accounted to the Lord for a generation; even a fpiritual feed that fhall ferve him, Pfat. xxii. 30. and the words in ver. 10. are the words, not of David, but of Chrift. And the fons and daugh- ters born to God, and whom he calls his children, Ezekiel xvl. 20, 21.' were fo, not by grace or by covenant, but by creation. And from the whole there Is not the leaft reafon why the children of believers fhould be dedicated to God by baptifm, which is an ordinance that never was appointed by him for any fucli purpofc. The tzvelftb argument is ; " The feed of believers are to be baptized, becaufc ♦« church-relation belongs to them, as citizenlTiip belongs to the children of ■*' freemen; and it is by baptifm that they are firft admitted into the vifiblc "' church; and there is neither covenant nor promifc of falvation out of the " church; for [he church of Chrift is his kingdom on earth, and Chrift fays ■*' this belongs to children ^" In anfwer to which, i. There is a manifeft con- iradidion in the argument. Church-relation belongs to infants, that is, they ar^ related to the church, and members of it, and therefore fhould be bapcized ; and yet they are firft admitted imo the church by baptifm; what a contradidion this ! in it, and out of it, related, and not related to it, at one and the fame lime. 2. Church-memberfhip does not pafs from father to fon, nor is it by birth, as citizenfhip, or the freedom of cities ; the one is a civil, the other an ccclefiaftical affair ; the one is of nature, the other of grace ; natural birth gives a right to the one, but the fpiritual birth or regeneration only iniitles to the other. 3. Church-memberfhip gives no right to baptifm, but rather baptifm .to church-memberfhip, or however is a qualification rcquifuc 10 it; perfons ouoht to he baptized before they are church-members; and if they are church- .jncmbeis, and not regenerate perfons and believers in Chrift, for fuch maybe in a church, they have no right to baptifm. 4. To talk of there bejng no cove- nant or promife of falvation out of the church, fmells rank of popery. The covenant ♦ Vicfeibid, p. 24. » Mark x 13, 14. . IN FAVOUR -OF iNFANT - BAPT I SM. 361 covenant and propife of falvation are not made with and to perfons as members of churches, or as in a vifible church-ftate, but with and to the eled of God in Chrift, and with perfons only confidercd in him -, who have an intereft in the covenant and promife of falvation, though they may not be in a vifible church- Hate-, and doubtlefs many are faved who never were members of a vifible church. 5. The kingdom of God, in Afiir;^ X. 13, 14. be it the church of Chrift on earth, or eternal glory in heaven, only belongs to fuch perfons who arc like to little children for their meeknefs and humility, ,and freedom from malice and rancor, as ver. 15. fhows. 6. Could infants in age, or the feed of believers as fuch be here meant, and the kingdom of God be underftood of Chrift's vifible church, and they as 'beionging to it, it would prove more than this writer chufes ; namely, that they have a right to all church-privileges, and particularly and efpecially to the Lord's fupper. The thirteenth argument is -, " Children are the lambs of Chrift's flock and ♦' fheep; and the lambs ought not to be kept out ofChrift's fold, nor hindered " from the wafliing that is in his blood; he particularly promifes to be their " fhepherd ; and his Spirit has declared, that little children fliould be brought " to him under the gofpel, in the arms, and on the (boulders of their parents \" On which may be obfcrved, i. That there is indeed mention made of the lambs of Chrift \nlfai. xl. 11. John xxi. 15. which he gathers in his arms, and ordered Peter to feed ; yet not infants in age are intended in cither place, but adult perfons, weak believers, who, in comparifon of others, becaufc ot their Ih-iall degree of knowledge and ftrength, are called lambs-, and are to be gently and tenderly dealt with -, and fuch as thefe are not kept out ofChrift's fold, but are received into it, though weak in the faith, but net to doubtful difputaiions; and are fed with knowledge and underftanding, which infants in age are not capable of, 2. The infant-feed of believers are no where called the flicep of Chrift, nor has he promifed to be the fhepherd of them -, let the pafTages be direfted to, if it can be, where this is faid. 3. Thofe who are truly the iambs and fheep of Chrift, arc not hindered from the walhing of his blood -, though that is not to be done, nor is it done by baptifm -, perfons may be walhed with water, as Simon Magus, and yet not waftied in the blood of Chrift : Canticles vi. 6. does not intend wafhing in cither fenfe -, but cither the regenerating graceof the fpi- rit, or the purity of converfation, and refpeds not infants at all. 4. Nor is it declared by theSpirit of God, that parents fliould bring their children toChrift in their arms, and on their (boulders -, the pafTage in Ifai. xlix. 22. brought in fupport of it, fpeaks of the fpiritual feed of the church, and not of the carnal feed of believers; and of their being brought, not in the arms and on the (lioul- VoL. II. 3 A ders ^ Ifai. xl. 1 1, and zlix. 22. Cant. vi. 6. John xxi. 1 j. 362 AN ANSWER TO THE TWENTY ARGUMENTS ders of their natural parents, but of the Gentiles ; and not toChrift, but to the church, through the miniftry of the word in the latter day, in which the Gen- tiles would be very afTifting. The fourteenih argument runs thus : " The feed of the faithful ought to be ' baptized, becaufe they were partakers of all the former baptifms mentioned ' in fcripture, as the children of Noah in the ark '' ; the Ifraelites at the Red fea, ' and in the cloud ''. Several children were baptized with the baptifm of the .» Spirit, for feveral were filled with the holy Ghofl: from their mother's womb-, ' all the children of Betb!ehem under two years old, with the baptifm of mar- ' tyrdom ' -, and many children with John's baptifm, fince he baptized the ' whole country." Bur, 1. It unhappily falls out, for the caufe of infant- baptifm, ihzi Noah's children in the ark were all adult and married perfons "". 2. That [here were children among the Ifraelites when they were baptized in the cloud, and in the fea, is not denied ; but then it fliould be obferved, thai they did all eat the fame fpirituat meat, and did all drink the fame fpiritual drink ; and therefore, if this does not give a fufficient claim to infants to partake of the Lord's fopper, neither will the other prove their right to baptifm : moreover, if any arguments can be formed from this and the former inftance, for the ad- miniftration of baptifm under the New Tcftament, they will clearly fhew, that it ought to be adminiftered by immerfion; for, as in the former, when the foun- tains of the great deep were broke up under them, and the windows of heaven were opened over them, they were as perfons immerfed in water; fo when the waters of the Red fea flood up on each fide, and the cloud was over the Ifraelites, they were, as it were overwhelmed in water. 3. Though this writer fays, that fcveral children were filled with the holy Ghoft from their mother's womb, yet we read but of one that was fo, John theBaptift, a very extraordinary perfon, and extraordinarily qualified for extraordinary work, an inftance not to be men- tioned inordinary cafes; befides, it is a rule in logic, a particular: ad univer- falem ncn valet confequentia, " from a particular to an univerfal, the confequence " is not conclufive." Moreover, in what fenfe John was filled with the holy Ghoft fo early, is not cafy to fay ; and be it what it will, the fame cannot be proved of the feed of believers in general ; and could it, it would give no right to baptifm, without a pofitive inftitution; it gave no right lojohn himfelf. 4. That the infants at Bethlehem were murdered, will be granted, but that they fuffered martyrdom for Chrift, will not eafily be proved; fince they knew no- thincr of the matter, and were not confcious on what account their lives were taken away. 5. That many or any children were baptized vf'wh John's baptifm we ' I Pet. ili JO. * I Cor. x. I, 2. Exod. xii. 37. ' Matt. iL ■ Gen. vii. 7. IN FAVOUR OF INFAN T - BAPTISM. 353. we deny, and call upon this writer to prove ic, and even to give us one fingle inftance of it j what he fuggefts is no evidence of it, as that the whole country in general were baptized by him, who could not be all childlefs; but I hope he does not think, that every individual perfon in the country oijudea was baptized hyjchn; it is certain, that there were many even adult perfons that were refufcd by him, and fuchas were baptized by him, were {\ich as confejjed (heir Jins, which infants could not do": and as to the probability of the difplcafure of Jtrwilh pa- rents, fuggefted if their children had not been baptized hy John, fince they were ufed, and under a command of God, to bring their children to the covenant and ordinances of God •, it dcfcrves no regard, fince whatever probability there, was of their difpleafure, though I fee none, there could be no juft ground for it; fince in the inftances given, they had the command of God for what they did, for this they had none. The fifteenth argument is : " It is contrary to the apoftlc's praflice, to leave " any unbaptized in chriftian families ; for they baptized wiiole families when " the heads of them believed; as the families of Lyi/rt, the Jailor, and Sie- *' phanas ; and it is evident, that the words, family and houlhold, in fcripture, " mean chiefly children, fons, daughters, and little ones '." To which I re- ply, that whatever thefe words fignify in fome places of fcripture, though in the paflages mentioned they do not chiefly intend new-born infants, but grow* perfons ; it fliould be proved, that there were infants in families and houfliolds that were baptized, and that thefe were baptized together with the head of the family ; for it is certain, there are many families and houfholds that have no little children in them ; and as for thofc that are inftanced in, it is not pro- bable that there were any in them ; and it is manifeft, that fuch as were bap- tized, were adult perfons and believers in Chrift. It is not evident in what ftation of life Lydia was, whether married or unmarried, and whether (he had young children or not ; and if fhe had, it is not likely they fhould be with her, when at a diftance from her native place, and upon bufinefs ; it is moft pro- bable, that ihofe that were with her, called her houfhold, were her fervants, xhat alTifted her in her bufinefs ; and it is certain, that when the apoftles entered her houfe, thofe that were there, and who doubtlcfs are the fame that were baptized, were called brethren, and fuch as were capable of being comforted'^; and the Jailor's houlhold were fuch as had the word of God fpoken to them, and received it with joy, took pleafure in the company and converfation of the apofllcs, and believed in God together with him, and fo were adult perfons, 3 A 2 believers. • Matt. ii). J — 7. • Gen. xvii. Deut. xxix. lo, 13. Joel ii. 16. * Compare Ezod. i, i, 7. w'th Gen. xlvi. ;. and xlv. 18, 19. compare i Sam. xxvi!. j. with chap. XXX. 6. 1 Tim. iii. 8, Gen. xxx. 30. Numb. iii. 15. ^ Aflsxvi. ij, 4c. 364 AN ANSWER TO THE TWENTY ARGUMENTS believers, and very proper fubjefts of baptifm '. Stephanas is by feme thought to be the fame with the Jailor -, but if he was another perfon, it is plain his houfhold confifted of adult perfons, men called by grace, and who were made ufe of in public work ; they were tke firji-fruits of Acbaia, and addided them- felves to the miniftry of the faints '. The Jxteenth argument is : " None that truly fear God, can ferioudy and with *' certainty fay, that there were not many infants among the three thoufand " baptized by the apofties at once •, for the Jews were not content with any " ordinances without having their children with them. The apoftle diredts " thofe who were at age to repent, but he commands every one of them to be " baptized, and objedls nothing againft their children-, becaufe, as he fays, " the promifc was unto them and their children alfo •, and this is a plain com- •' mand for infant-baptifm to all that will judge impartially." But, i. A man that carefully reads the account of the baptifm of the three thoufand, having the fear of God before his eyes, may with the greateft ferioufncfs and ftrongeft affurance affirm, not only that there were not many infants, but that there were not one infant among the three thoufand baptized by the apofties ; for they were all of them fuch as were pricked io the heart, and cried -out. Men and bre- thren what fhall we do ? they gladly received the word of the gofpel, joined to the c'lurch, znAcontuuicd ftedfajlly in the apofties doofrine, in fellowjhip, and in breaking oj bread and prayer ; all which cannot be faid of infants. 2. What this author luggefts, agreeable to wliat he clfewhere fays, that the Jews were not pleafed with any ordinance unlefs they had their children with them, is without foun- dation ; what difcontent did they ever fliew at a part of their children being left out of the ordinance of circumcifion, and no other appointed for them in lieu of it ? And had they been difcontented, what argument can be formed Irom it ? 3. The diftindion between thofe that were of age, whom the apoftle directed to repent, and the every one of tberA whom he commanded to be bap- tized, has no ground nor reafon for it, yea is quite ftupid and fcnfelcfs ; and even, according to this writer himfelf, is a diftinftion without any difference, fince the every one to be baptized are fuppofed by him to have children, and fo to be at age; fince he adds, "and objedts nothing againft their children." And a clear cafe it is, that the felf-fame perfons that were exhorted to be bap- tized, were exhorted to rf/>f«/, and that as previous to their baptifm; and there- lore jv.uft be adui: perfons, for infants are not capable of repentance, and of •living eviJ-.-ncc ot it. 4. 1 hofe words, the promife is unto you and to your children, are fo far fro.r. being a plain command for infant- baptifm, that there is not a v/ord of baptifm in tiiem, and much Icfs of infant-baptifm ; nor do they regard, infants, but the pofterity of the Jews, who are often called children, though grown ' Afls xvi. 32 — 34. • I Cor. xi. 1 5. Let this be obferved, in anf*er to what the au- thor of I'he baptiim oJ Infjr.ts a reafonable Service, isfc, hai advanced in p. 43. l' IN JAVOUR OF INFANT - BAPTISM. 365 grown up, to whom the promife of the Meffiah, and remiffion of fins by him, and the pouring out of the holy Ghoft, was made ; and are fpoken for the en- couragement of adult pcrfons only, to repent and be baptized ; and belong only to fuch as are called by grace, and to all fuch, whether Jews orGentiies. The feventeenth argument is-, " The feed of believers fhould be baptized, be- " caufc the privileges and bleffings which are fignified and fealed in baptifm are " neccflary to their falvation, and there is no falvation without them -, namely, " an intereft in the covenant of grace, the remifTion of original fin, union with " Chrift, fandlification of the holy Spirit, and regeneration, without which " none can be faved '." The anfwer to which is, i.That the things indeed mentioned are necefiary to falvation, and there can be none without them -, but then baptifm is not ncceflary to the cnjoyrhentof thefe things, nor to falvation ; a pcrfon may have an intereft in thefe blefiings, and be faved, though not bap- tized j thefe are things neceflary to baptifm, but baptifm is not ncccffary to them ; and indeed a perfon ought to have an intereft in thefe, and appear to have one, before he is baptized. Wherefore, 2. Thefe things are not fignified in baptifm, and much lefs fealed by it ; other things, fuch as the fufl^erings, death, and the refurreftion of Chrift, are fignified in it ; thefe, as regeneration, tff- are prerequifites unto baptifm, and are not communicated by it, or fealed up to perfons in it, who may be baptized, and yet have no fliare and lot in this matter, witnefs the cafe of Simon Magus. The eighteenth argument is : " The children of the faithful ought to be bap- " tized, becaufe this lays them under ftrong obligation to fhun the works ofSa- " tan-, and many have received much benefit from hence in their youth. Com- *' fortable fymptoms, or figns of a work of grace, have appeared very early in »* fevcral, though perhaps bad company has afterwards corrupted them. Befides *' infant-baptifm keeps up a general profefTion of faith and religion, and makes " the word and means of grace of more virtue and efficacy, than if men had " utterly renounced chriftianity, and declared themfclvcs infidels; and further, " it lays a powerful obligation on their parents and others, to teach them their " duty, which is a main end of all the ordinances God has inftituted "." But, I. Is there nothing befides baptifm, that can lay perfons under ftrong obliga- tion to ftiun the works of the Devil ? certainly there are many things : if fo, then it is not abfolutely necefiary on this account ; befides, thougli the baptifm of adult perfons does lay them under obligation to walk in newnefs of life ", yet the baptifm of infants can lay them under no fuch obligation as infants, and while they are fuch, becaufe they are not confcious of it, nor can it take any fuch effedt upon them. 2. What that much benefit or advantage is, that "many have » John iii. 5. » Pfalm l;txviii. 5, 6. * Rom. vi. 4. 366 AN ANSWER TO THE TWENTY ARGUMENTS have received from infant-baptifm, I am at a lofs to know, and even what is intended by this writer, unlcfs it be what follows, that figns of a work of grace have appeared very early in feveral, which may be, and yet not to be afcribed to baptifm ; baptifm has no fuch virtue and influence, as to produce a work of grace in che foul, or any figns of it; bcfides, a work of grace has appeared very early in feveral, and has been carried on in them, who have never been baptized at all. 3. Infant-baptifm keeps up no public or ge- neral profeflion of faith or religion, fince there is no profeffion of faith and re- ligion made in it by the perfon baptized ; nor is it of any avail to make the word and means of grace powerful and efficacious, which only become fo by the Spi- rit and grace ofGod ; and a wide difi^crence there is between the difufe of infant- baptifm, and renouncing chriftianity, and profcffing infidelity j thefe things are not neceflarily connc(5led together, nor do they go together; perfons may deny and difufe infant-baptifm, as it is well known many do, and yet not re- nounce the chriftian faith, and declare themfelves infidels. 4. Parents and others, without infant-baptifm, are under ftrong obligations to teach children their duty to God and men, and therefore it is not neccfTary on that account. The nineteenlb argument is ; " The feed of believers are to be baptized, " though they have not adual faith, fince Chrift fpeaks not of thefe butot " adult perfons, Mark xvi. 16. And certain it is they have as much fitnefs " for baptilhi as for juflification and eternal life, without which they muft all " pcrifh ; the Spirit of God knows how to work this fitnefs in them, as well " as in grown perfons : Jeremiah, John the Bapitft, and feveral others, were ♦' fanftificd from their mother's womb '." To which may be returned for an- fwer, I. That if the text in Mcrk xvi. 16. fpeaks not of infants, but of adult perfons only, as it certainly does, I hope it will be allowed to be an inftruftion and dircflion for the baptifm of adult believers, and to be a fufficient warrant for our pradice. 2. If the infants of believers have no more fitnefs for bap- tifm than they have forjuftification and eternal life, they have none at all, fince they are by nature children of wrath, even as others; and therefore can have none, but what is given them by theSpirit and grace ofGod. 3. We difpute not the power of the Spirit ofGod, or what he is able to do by the operations of his grace upon the fouls of infants; we deny not but that he can and may work a work of grace upon their hearts, and clothe them with the righteoufnefs of Chrifl, and fo give them both a right and meetnefs for eternal life; but then this (hould appear previous to baptifm; adlual faith itfelf is not fufficient for baptifm, with- out a profelTion of it ; the man that has it ought to declare it to the fatisfaftion of the adminiflrator, ere he admits Jiim to the ordinance''. 4. Of the feveral childrtn ' John iii. 8, g. Eccles. xi.5. Lukei. ij, 44. Jtr. i. 5. Ifai. xlir 3. Pfal. viii. 2. ■'''viii. 36, 37. IN FAVOUR OF IN FA N T - B AP T I S M. 367 children faid to be fanftiied from their mother's womb, no proof is given but of one, John theBaptift, who was filled with the holy Ghoft from thence, which has been confidered in the anfwer to the fourteenth argument ; as for Jeremiah^ it is only faid of him thathewas/^«if7//ff^, that is, fetaparr, defigned and ordained, in the purpofe and counfel of God to be a prophet, before he was born -, and is no proof of internal fandification fo early. Ifaiah xliv. 3. fpeaks of the Spirit of God being poured down, not upon the carnal feed of believers, but upon the fpiritual feed of the church ; and Pfalm viii. 2. is a prophecy, not of new-born infants, but of children grown up, cry'moHofanna in the temple ' : no argument from a particular inftance or two, were there more than there are, is of avail for the fanftification of infants in genera! j it (hould be proved, that all the infant- feed of believers are fanftified by the Spirit of God j for if fiameonly, and noc ail, how fliall it be known who they are ? let it firft appear that they are faniti- fied, and then it will be time enough to baptize them. The twentieth argument is ; " The children of believers arc to be baptized, *' becaufe their right to the covenant and church of God is ellablifhed from •' the firft, much clearer than feveral other neceflary ordinances ; there is no " exprefs command nor example of womcns receiving the Lord's fuppcr ; no »' particular command in the New Teftament for family-worfhip, and for the " obfervation of the firft day of the week as a fabbath ; and yet none dare call " them in queftion •,. and there is no objeftion againft infant-baptifm, but the " like might formerly have been made againft circumcifion ; and may now " be objedted againft many other ordinances and commands of God." To which 1 reply, i. That with refpeft to womens receiving the Lord's fupper, ic is certain, that not only they were admitted to baptifm ', and became members of churches ^ but there is an exprefs command for their receiving the Lord's fupper in i Cor. xi. 29. where a word is ufed of the common gender, and includes both men and women ; who are both one in Chrift, and in a gofpel church- ftate, and have a right to the fame ordinances'. 2. As to family-worfhip, that is not peculiar to the New Teftament difpenfation, as baptifm is; it was com- mon to the faints in all ages, and therefore needed no exprefs command for ic under the New; though what clfe but an exprefs command for it is Ephe/ians vi. 4 ? for can children be brought up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, without family-worftiip ? 3. As to the obfervation of the firft day, though there is no exprefs command for it, there are precedents of it ; there are inftanccs of keeping it '' : now, let like inftances and examples of infanr- * See Matt. xxi. 15, 1 6. » Afli viii. 12. * Afls i. 14, 15. and iv 37. and V. 9, 14. 1 Cor. xi. ;, 6, 13. and xiv.34, 35. « Gal. iii. a8. ' John ax. 19,06.. Afls XX. 7. 1 Cor. xvi. 1,2. 3^8 AN ANSWER TO THE TWENTY ARGUMENTS infant- baptifm be produced if they can: though no exprefs command can be pointed at, yet if any precedent or example of any one infant bcincr bap- tized by John, orChrift, or his apoftles, can be given, we fhould think ourfelves obliged to follow it. 4. That the fame objeftions m|ght be made againft cir- cumcifion formerly, as now againft infant-baptifm, is moft notorioufly falfe ; it is objected, and that upon a good foundation, that there is neither precept nor precedent for infant-baptifm in all the word of God •, the fame could never be objefted againft circumcifion, fince there was fuch an exprefs command of it to Abraham, Genefis xvii. and fo many inftances of it are in the facred writino-s • let the fame be fhewn for infant-baptifm, and we have done. 5. What the other ordinances and commands of God are, to which the fame objedions may be made as to infant-baptifm, is not faid, and therefore no reply can be made. I have nothing more to do, than to take fome little notice of what this wri- ter fays, concerning the mode of adminiftering the ordinance of baptifm, p. 33, We are no more fond of contentions and ftrifcs about words, than this author, and thofe of the fame way of thinking with himfelf can be; but fu rely, modeftly to inquire into, and attempt to fix the true manner of adminiftering an ordi- nance of Chrift, according to the fcriptures, and the inftances of it; according ' to the fignification of the words ufcd to exprefs it, andagreeable to the end and defign of it ; ran never be looked upon as a piece of impertinence, or be tra- duced as cavil and wrangling. And, 17?, Since this writer obferves, that he does not find that either the facred fcripture or the church of £«^/ij«i, have exprefsly determined, whether bap- tifm is to be performed by plunging or fprinkling, but have left the one and the other indifferently to our choice; 1 hope he will not be difpleafed, that we choofc the former, as moft agreeable to the facred writings, and the examples of baptifm in them ; as thofe of our Lord and others \n Jordan' ; and in y£«c;;, VihcTcJohn was baptizing, becaufe there was much water''; and of the Eunuch^; and as beft reprefenting the death, burial, and refurreftion of Chrift ""i as well as beft fuits with the primary fenfe of the Greek word, /Jxtt/^«, which ficrnifies to plunge or dip. And, 2dly, Since, according to this writer, one mode is not more eftential to the ordinance than another, but a reverential receiving of the fign ; it may be afl-ced, what of this nature, namely, a reverential receiving of the fign, the application of the water to the body, fignifying the fpiritual application of Chrift and his grfts • Mntt. iii. 6, r6. fjohniii. 23. « Afls vjii. 36— 38. '' Rom. vi. 4. Col. ii. 12. IN FAVOUR OF INFANT - BAPTISM. ^6^ gifts to the foul, can be obferved in an infant when fprinkled, which is -not confcious of what is done to it ? 2dfyf Whereas, he fays, " it is not improbable but the apoftles baptized by fprinkling, fince feveral were baptized in their houfcs, J^s ix. 17, 18. and xvi. 33. and others, in former times, fick in their beds:" it may be replied, that it is noc probable that the apoftle Paul was baptized by fprinkling '; fince had he, he would have had no occafion to have arofe in order to be baptized, as he is faid to do, yi^s ix. 18. It is mod probable, that when he arofe off of his bed or chair, he went to a bath in Judas's houfe ; or out of the houfe, to a certain place fit for the adminiftration of the ordinance by immerfion ; and fince there was a pool in the prifon, 3.s Grolius thinks, where the Jailor wafhed the apoftles ftripes, it is moft probable, that here he and his houlhold were baptized •, or (ince they were brought out of the prifon, and after baptifm brought into the Jailor's houfe, ver, 33, 34. it is moft likely they went out to the river near the city where prayer was wont to be made, and there had the ordinance adminiftered to them, ver. 13. As for the baptifm of fick perfons in their beds, this was not in the times of the apoftles, but in after-times, when corruptions had got into the church -, and fo deferves no regard. 4/i/)', In favour of fprinkling, or pouring water in baptifm, he urges that " it is a fign of the pouring or fprinkling of the hoIyGhoft, and of the blood of Chrift ^ :" but it fhould be obferved, that baptifm is not a fign or fignificative of the fprinkling of clean water, or the grace of the Spirit in regeneration, or of the blood of Chrift on the confcience of a finner, all which ought to pre- cede baptifm ; but of the death, and burial, and relurre(5tion of Chrift •, whicli cannot be reprefcnted in any other way than by covering a perfon in water, or an immerfion of him. . Stbly, " Water in baptifm, he fays, is but a fign and feal ; a little of it is " fufficient to fignify the gifts which Chrift has purchafcd, as « fmall quantity of " bread and wine does in the other facramenr, and as a fmall feal is as much *' fecurity as a larger one." But as baptifm is no fign of the things before- mentioned, fo it is no feal, as we have feen, of the covenant of grace ; where- fore thefe fimilitudes are impertinent to illuftrate this matter : .and though a fmall quantity of bread and wine is fufficient in the other facrament, to fignify our partaking of the benefits of the death of Chrift by faith \ yet a fmall quan- tity of water is not fufficient to fignify his fufferings and death, with his burial and refurreftion, thcmfelves. And though we do not exped benefit from the quantity of the water, yet that bcft cxprefl"es the end and defign of the ordinance. ~ Vol. II. 3B 6/% • Afl« ix. 17, 18. ^ £«!'. xxxvi. :;. Heb. xii. 94. 370 AN ANSWER TO THE TWENTT. ARGUMENTS, &c. Bfbiy and lajify, H« obferves, thar " fprinkling of water on the face, a part of the body, is a fign fufficient for the whole •, fmcc the nature of the foul ap- pears more in it, and often in -ftrripture fignifies the whole man." But be it fo that it does ; fprinkling water on the face is not a fufficient fign for the whole ; for this ordinance reprefents a burial, and fprinkling a little water is not fufficient for that} the ordinance fo performed cannot be called a burial, or a perfon faid to be buried in it ; carting a little earth upon the face of a corps, can never be fufficient for its burial, or be accounted one. I have now gone through the confideration of the feveral arguments of this author, with refped both to the fubjefls and mode of baptifm-, fhould he upon reading this anfwer, and after he has confidcred the advice of the wife man, Prov. xxvi. 4, 5. which he propofcs to do, think fit to reply, perhaps, upon the like confideration, a rejoinder may be made to what hefhall hereafter offer. T K r. THE DISSENTERS REASONS For feparating from the CHURCH OF ENGLAND, OCCASION %D B Y A Le T T £ R wrote by a Welch Clergyman on the Duty of Catechiftng Children. Intended chiefly for the ufc of DifTcnters of the Baplijl Denomination in U^ales. "\A/HEREAS DifTcnters from the church of England ire frequently charged with ichifm, and their ieparation is reprefented as unrcafonable, and they are accounted an obftinate and contentious people ; it may be proper to give fome reafons why they depart from the Eftablifhed church ; by which it will appear that their feparation does not arife from a fpirit of Angularity and contention, but is really a matter of confcicnce with them ; and that they have that to fay for themfelves, which will fufficiently juftify them, and remove the calumnies that are caft upon them ; and our reafons arc as follow. I. We diflike the church of England becaufe of its Ccnjiitution, which is human •, and not divine : it is called The church of England as by law EJlabliJhed ; not by the law of God, but by the law of man : it is faid to be the beft con- ftituted church in the world, but we like it never the better for its being con- ftituted by men: a church of Chrifl: ought to be conftituted as thofe we. read of in the A5ii of the Afojiles, and not eftablifhed by AHs of Parliament ; as the articles, worlhip, and difcipline of the church of England be ; a parliamtntary church we do not undcrftand j Chrift's kingdom or church '\s>not of this fuorld-y it is not eftablifhed on worldly maxims, nor fupported by worldly power and policy. / 3 B 2 II. Wc i ■ .37»„_. T.HE DISSENTERS REASONS FOR SEPARATING II. We are not fatisfied that the church of England is a true church of Chrift ; bccaufe of ihe form and order of it ; whicli is national, whereas it ought to be I congregational, as the firft chriftian churches were ; we read of the church at Jerufalem, and of the churches in Judea befides, fo that there were feveral churches in one nation -, and alfo of the churches oi Macedonia', and likewife of Calatta, and of the feven churches of /^yant oi difcipUne in the church of England, if another reafon of our dilTcnt from it. In a regular and well-ordered church of Chrift, care is taken that none be admitted into it but fuch as are judged truly gracious perfons, and of whom teftimony is given of their becoming converfations -, and when they are in U,. they arc watched over, that thtirwalk is according to the laws and rules of Chrift's houfe i fuch as fin, are rebuked either privately or pub- licly, as the nature of the offence is ; ^iforderly, perfons are ccnfurcd and with- drawn from; profane men are put out of communion, and heretics, after the tirft and fccond admonition, are.rejedcd : but no fuch difcipline as this is main- tained m the church of England. She herfclf acknowledges a want of godly dif- cipline, and wifhes for a reftoration of it ; which is dcKie every Lent fcafon, and yet no ftep taken for the bringing of it in ; what difcipline there is, is not exer- cifed by a miniftcr of a parifti, and his own congregation, (hough the offender is of them, but^in the Bifhop's Court indeed, yet by laymen; the admonition js by a fct of men called Apparitors, and the fentence of excommunication and the whole procefs leading to it by Lawyers, and not Minifters of the word. ; IX. The Rites ind Ceremonies ufed in the church of England, are another rea- son of our feparation from it. Some of them arc manifellly of pagan original ; (pme favour of Judaifm, and are no other than abolifhed Jewifh rites' revived ; apd.moft, if not all of them, are retained by tte papifts ; and have been, and ftill are, abufed to idolatry and fuperftition. Bowing to the eaft, was an ido- latrous praftice-gf the heathens, and is condemned in fcripture as an abomina- ble thing V Bowing to the altar, is a relic of popery, ufed by way of adoration cf -the elements, and in favour and for tlie fupport of trarifubftantiation, and the .- -Vol. ;II. 7 , . ' 3 ^ . . ^ ' ^"^^l . ' •• I Cor. xir. 34, 35. i Tim.ii. 1 1, 12. »• Ezek. viii. 15, 16. 1 378 THE DISSENTERS REASONS FOR SEP ARMING real prefence ; and therefore by no means to be u fed by thofe that difbtlievc that doflrinc, and muft be an hardening of fuch that have faith in it. Bowingi when the name of Jesus is mentioned. Is a piece of fuperftition and will-wor- fliip, and has no countenance from Phil. ii. lo. The words (hould be rendered <«, and no: at the name of Jefus ; nor is it in the namejefus, but;« the name of Jefus, and fo dcfigns fome other name, and not Jefus ; and a name given him after his rcfurreftion, and not before, as the name of Jefus was at his birth; and befides fome are obliged to bow in it, who have no knees in a literal fenfe to bow with, and therefore bowing of the knee cannot be meant in any fuch fenfe. And as for fuch ceremonies which in their own nature are neither good nor bad, but indifferent, they ought to be left as fuch,. and not rmpofcd as ne- ceflary; the impofuion of things indifferent in. divine fervice as neceffary, as if without which it coutd not be rightly performed, is a fufficicnt rcafon why they ought not to be fubmirted to: fuch and fuch particular garments worn by perfons in (acred office, confidercd as indifferent things, may be ufed or not ufcd ; but if the ufeof thefc is infifted on, as being holy and neceffary, and without which divine worfhip cannot rightly be performed, then they ought to be rejeft- cd as abominable. Nor can we like the furplice ever the better for being brouoht in by po^c Adrian, A. D. 796. The crofs in baptifm, and kneeling at the Lord's-fupper, have been taken notice of before. X. The book of Common Prayer, fet forth as a rule and dircftory ot divine- worfhip and fervice, we have many things to objedl to. J. Inafmuch as it prefcribes certain ftinted fi:t forms of prayer, and ties men up to the ufe of them : we do not find that the apoftks of Chrift and the firfl: churches ufed any fuch forms, nor chriftians for many ages; and of whatever ufe it can bethought to be unto perfons of weak capjacities, furely fuch that have fpiritual gifts, or the gift of preaching the gofpel, can ftand in no need of it, and who muft have the gift of prayer; and to be bound to fuch prc- compofcd forms, as it agrees not with the promifc of the Spirit of grace and fupplication, fo not with the different cafes, circumftanccs, and frames that chriftians are fometimes in ; wherefore no: to take notice of the defcctivenefs of thefc prayers, and of the incoherence and obfcurity of fome of the petitions in them v the frequent tautologies and repetitions, efpecially in the Litany, fo contrary to Chrift'i precept in Matt. vi. 7. are fufficient to give us a diftafte of them. 2. Though we are not againft reading the fcriptures in private and in public, yet wc cannot approve of the manner the Liturgy direfts unto ; namely, the reading it by piece-meals, by bits and fcraps, fo mangled and curtailed as the Gofpels and Epiftles are : wc fee not why aiiy part of fcripturc fliould be omit- ted ; FROM THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 379 ted ; and the order of ihcfe being an invention of a Pops of Rome^ and the fixing them to mattins and even-fongs fmelling fo rank of popery, no ways ferve to recommend them to us : not to take notice of the great impropriety of calling pafTages oui of I/aiah, Jeretniab, Joel, Malachi, and the A5is of the apoftles, by the name of Epiftles : but efpecially it gives us much uneafinels to fee IcflTons taken out of i\\c Apocrypha, and appointed to be read as if of eqoal authority with the facred fcriptures ; nay not only out of the books of Bariuh, Wifdom, 2indi Ecclefiajiicus, but out of the hiftories of Tii^//, Judith, Sufanna, - Bel and the dragon, and fuch leflbns out of them as contain the moft idle and fabulous ftories. 3. The book of Common Prayer, enjoins the reading of the book of Pfalms in the corrupt tranflation of the Vulgate Latin, ufed by the papifts -, in which there are great omilTions and fubtradtions in fome places -, as every where, the titles of the Pfalms are left out, and in all places thefe words Higgaion and Selab, and the laft verfe of Pfalm Ixxii. and in others, there are manifcft additions, as in Pfalm ii. 12. and iv. 8. and xiii. 6. and xxii. i, 31. and xxxix. 12. and cxxxii. 4. and cxxxvi. 27. and cxlvii. 8. and three whole vcrfcs in Pfalr,ix\v. whereas nothing Ihould be taken from, nor added to the word of God -, fome fentences are abfurd and void of fenfe, as PfalmWm. 8. and Ixviii. 30, 31. and in others the fenfe is perverted, or a contrary one given, as in Pfalm xvii. 4. and xviii. 26. and XXX. 13. and cv. 28. and cvi. 30. and cvii. 40 and cxxv. 3. This tranfla- tion of the Pfalms (lands in the Englifh Liturgy, and is ufed and read in the churches in England. » 4. It direfts to the obfcrvation of feveral falls and fcftivals, which are no where enjoined in the word of God, and for which it provides collefts, gofpels and epiftles to be read : the fafts are, ^adragefma or Lent, in imitation of Chrift's forty days faft in the wildernefs, Ember wcclis. Rogation days, and all the Fridays in the year; in which men are commanded to abftain from meats, whichGod has created to be received with thankfgiving. The feftivals, befides, the principal ones, Cbrijlmas, Eafler and IVhitfuntide, are the feveral faints days throughout the year j which are all ofpopidi invention, and are cither movea- ble or fixed, as the popidi fcftivals be ; and being the relics of popery makes us ftill more uncafy and diffatisfied with them. 5. Befides the corruptions before obferved in the ordinances of Baptifm and the Lord's fuppcr, in the order for the Vification of the Sick ftands a form of Abfolution, which runs thus; "And by his (Chrift's) authority committed to " me, labfolvc thee from all thy fins, in the name of the Father, and of the 3 c 2 . " Son, §8o tHE DISSENTERS REASONS FOR SEPARATING " Son, 'and of the holy GTiofl -,'* which is a mere popifh device •, Chrift having ' left no fuch power to his church, nor committed any fuch authority to any fet of men in it; all that the minifters of Chrift have power or authority to do, Is only minifterially to declare and pronounce, that fuch who believe inChrift fhall receive the rcmidion of fins, and that their fins are forgiven them ; and that fuch who believe not fhall be damned. 6. It appoints fome things merely civil, as ecclefiaftical and appertaining to the miniftry, and to be performed by ecclefiaftical perfons and minifters, and provides offices for them : as, 1. Matrimony ; which fcems to favour the popifh notion of making a facra- ment of it; whereas it is a mere civil ctDntradl between a man and a woman, and in which a minifter has nothing to do ; nor do we ever'read of any prieft or Levite, that was ever concerned in the folemnization of it between other perfons, under the Old Teflament, or of any apoftle or minilter of the word, under the New ; not to fay any thing of the form of it, or of the ceremonies attending it. " ' 2. The Burial of the Dead ; which is a mere civil aftion, and belongs not to a gofpel-minifter, but to the relations of the deceafed or other neighbours, fViends or acquaintance ' : nor is there any necelTity for a place to be confe- crated for fuch a purpofe. Abraham and Sarah were buried in a cave, Deborah Tnder an oak, Jcjhua in a field, Samuel in his houfe, and Chrilt in a garden ''. jfor do the fcriptures ever make mention of any fcrvice being read, or of any 'ine worfhip being performed at the interment of the dead ; and was any thing of this kind ncceflary, yet we mufl: be obliged to objedt unto, nor could we comply with, the fervice ufed by the church of England on this occafion ; we cannot in confcience call every man and woman, our dear brother, or our dear Jifier^ as fome who have lived vicious lives, and have not appeared to have had true repentance towards God or faith in Chrift, have been called ; or •' cdm- " mit their bodies to the ground in fure and certain hope of the refurreflion to " eternal life v" lince we know there will be a refurrcdion to damnation as well as to eternal life ; nor can we give thanks to God on account of many, "that «' it has pleafed him to deliver them out of the miferies of this finful world ;" nor join in the following petition, which feems to favour the popifh notion of praying for the dead ; " bcfeeching — that we, with, all thofe that are departed in the true faith of thy holy name, ma.y'have our pcrfeft confummation and blift, both in body and foul," ^c, tl. Wc • Matt. viii. 21, 22. Aft viii. r. * Gtn. xxiii. 9^ and xxxv. 8. Jp(h, xxiv, 30. 1 Sam. ixv. i. John xir.41. 1 FROM THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. s^t XI. We cannot commune with the church oi England, becaufc it is of a perfecuting fpidt; and we cannot thlnlv fuih a chyrch is a true church of Chrift: that the Puritans were perfecuted by it mQ^tcn Elizabeth's time, and the Dif- fentcrs in. the reign of King Charles the fecond, is not to be denied ; and though this fpirit does not now prevail, this is owing to the mild and gentle govern- ment of our gracious foverfeign King George, the head of this Church, for which we have reafon to be thankful -, and yet it is not even now quite clear of pcrfecution, witnefs. the Teft and Corporation-a6ts, by which many free-born Englifhmen are deprived of their native rights, becaufe they cannot conform tc^ the church of Epgland; IxOdes', thfe reproaches and revilings; which are daily caft upon us, from the pulpit and the prefs, as well as in converfation, fhew the fame : and to remove all fuch calumnies and reproaches, has been the in- ducement to draw up the above Reafons for our dilTent •, and which have beea chiefly occafioncd by a late Letter, on the duty of Catechizing Children, in which the author, is not content highly to commend the church of £«_g^/(7wi, as the pureft church under heaven, but refledts greatly on DilTenters, and particularly on luch whom he calls rebaptizers ; and repeats the old ftale ftory of iht German- Anabaptijls, and their errors, madneflefs and diftradtions ; and mod malicioufly infinuaccs, that the people who now go by this name are tinflured with erro- neous principles ; fur he fays, they fpread their errors in adjacent countries,, which are not fully extinguifhed to this day : whereas they are a people that fcarce agree with us in anything; neither in their civil nor in their religious principles, nor even in baptifm itfelf; for they were for the repetition of aduit-baptilm in fome cafes, which we are not : and ufed fprinkling in baptifm, which we do not : the difference between them and us is much greater than between the papifls and the church of England; and yet this letter- writer would think ic very hard and unkind in us, fhould we rake up all the murders and maflacres com.mitted by Pjedobaptifts, and that upon principle, believing tha! in fo doing they did God good fcrvice ; I mean the Papirts, who are all P^dobaptifts ; and yet this might be done with as much truth and ingenuity, as the former ftory is told : and bcfides, the diflurbanccs in Germany were begun by Psdobaptifts ; firft by the Papifts before the reformation, and then by Lutherans after it, whom Lutber- endeavoured to difTuade from fuch prac- tices ; and even the difturbances in Munjler were begun by Psedobaptift miniftcrs, with whom fome called Anabaptifts joined, and on whom the whole fcandal is laid. But what is all this to us, who as much difavow their principles alid praftices, as any people under the heavens? nor does our different way of thinking about baptifm any ways tend to the fame. AN-TL -582 A N T I P iE D O B A P T I 3 M ; O R, JNriPMDOBAPXISM^, XD R, INFANT-BAPTfSM AN INNOVATION 3J E I N G A R E p L Y to a late Pamphlet, intitled, P^ d o b a p t i s m ; or, A Defence of Infant-Baptifm, in point of jintifuity, &c. A Pamphlet being publifhcd fome time ago by a namclefe author, intitled, "^^ ne baptifm of Infants a reafonablc Service, &c. I wrote an anfwer to it, chiefly relating to .the antiquity of infant-baptifm, called. The argument from ^pofiolic tradilion, in favour of Infant-hapifm, (cc. conjidered; and of late another anonymous writer has ftartcd up in defence of the antiquity of it, from the exceptions made by me to it -, for it £eems it is not the fame authdr, but an- other who has engaged in this controveriy.i but be he who he will, it does not greatly concern me lo know ; though methinks, if they judge they are em- barked in a good caufe, they ihould not be afhamed of it, or of their names, and of Jetting the world know who they are, and what fhare they have in the defence of it : butjuft as they pleafe, it gives me no uneafinefs ; they arc wel- come to take what method they judge mod agreeable, provided truth and righ- teoufncfs are attended to. In my anfwer, I obferve that apoftolic tradition at moft and beft is a very uncertain and precarious thing, not to be depended upon ; of which I give an inftance fo early as the fecond century, which yet even then could not be fettled ; and that it is doubtful whether there is any fuch thing as apoftolic tradition, not delivered in the facred writings ; and demand of -the Gentleman, whofe performance was before me, to give me one finglc inftance or it; and if infant- baptifm is of this kind, to name the apoftJc or apoftlcs by whom it was deli- vered, and to whom, when, and where i to all which no anfwer is.f^tWncd i only JNFAN T - BAPTISM AN I N N OV A T lO N. 383 enly I obferve a deep filence as to undoubted apojlolic tradition, fo much boafted of before. The ftate of the controverfy between us and the P;edobaptifts, with refpefl to the antiquity of infant-baptifm, lies here-, and thequeftion is, whether there is any evidence of its being praiflifed before the third century -, or before the times of Tertullian. We allow, it began in the third century, and was then prac- tifed in the African churches, where we apprehend it was firft moved ; but deny there was any mention. or praftice of it before that age ; and affirm thar Terlullian is thefirft perfon known that fpokeof it, and who fpeaks againft it: I have therefore required of any of our learned Paedobaptifts to produce a fingle paflage out of any authentic writer before Terlullian, in which infam-baptifm is cxprcfsly mentioned, or clearly hinted at, or plainly fuppofcd, or manifeftly referred to : if this is not done, the controverfy muft remain juft in the fame ftate where it was, and infant-baptifm carried not a moment higher that it was before;, and whatever elfe is done below this date, is all to no purpofe.. How far this Gentleman, who has engaged in this controverfy, has fuccceded,. is our next bufinefs to inquire. The only chriftian writers of the firft century, any of whofe writings arc extant, zrc Barnabas, Clemens Romanus, Hermas, Pelycar-p, and Ignatius; no- tiling out oi Barnabas, Polycarp, znA Ignatius, in favour of infant-baptifm, is pretcndfd to.. " The moft ancient writer that we have (fays this Gentlemanj " in the words of Mr Bingham) is Clemens Romanus, who lived in the time of " the aportles •, and he, though he doth not diredlly mention infant-baptifm, " yet fays a thing that by confequence proves it ; for he makes infants liable " to original fin,, which is in effeft to fay that they have need of baptifm to " purge it away,. &c." The palTage or parages in Clemens, in which he fays this thing, are not produced ; 1 fuppofe they are the fame that are quoted by Dr fValJ, in neither of which docs he fay any fuch thing; it is true, in the firft of them he makes mention of a paflage in Job xiv. 4. according to the Greek vcrfion, no man is free fnm pollution, no not though bis life is but of one day; which might be brought indeed to prove original fin, but is not brought hy Clemens for any fuch purpofe, but as a felf-accufation of Job;, fhcwing, that though he had the charader of a good man, yet he was not. free from fin : and the other only fpeaks of men coming into the world as out of a grave and darknefs, meaning out of their mother's womb ; and fcems not to refer to any moral death and ■ darknefs men are under, or to the finful ftate of men as they come into the world : but be it fo, that in thefe pafl"agcs Clemens does fpeak of original fin, what is this to infant-baptifm, or the nccefilty of it ? is there no other way to purge away original fin, but baptifm? nay, is there any fuch virtue in baptifm as to purge: S-S4 - . AN T I P ^ D O B A P T I S M; OR, .. purge it away? .there is not; it is the blood ofChrift, and that only, that purges away fin, whether original or aftual. Should it be faid that this was the fenfe of the ancients in feme after-ages, who did afcribe fuch a virtue to baptifm, and did affirm it was neceflary to be adminiftered, and did adminifter it to infants for that purpofe, what is this to Clemens ? what, becaufe fome perfons in fome after-aoes gave into this fnipid notion, that baptifm took away original fin, and was neceflary to infants, and ought to be given them for that reafon, does it follow i\\ztCkmens was of that mind? or is there the lealt hint of it in his letter ? What though he held the dodlrine of original fin, does it follow therefore that ■he was for infanc-baptifm ? how many Antipjedobaptifts are there who profefs the fame dodlrine ? will any man from hence conclude that they are for and in the praftice of infant-bapcifm ? It follows in the words of the fame writer ; *' Hermes fajlor {Hermas I fuppofe it fhould be) lived about the fame time with "*' Clemens; and hath feveral paflages to fiiew the general necefllty of ^a/fr, ♦' that is, baptifm, to fave men :" the paflages referred to are thofe Dr fVall has produced. Hermas had a vifion of a tower built on water; inquiring the reafon of ir, he is told, it was " becaufe your life is, and will be faved by water:" and in another place, " before any one receives the name of the Son of God, " he is liable to death ; but when he receives that feal, he is delivered from *• death, and is afllgned to life ; and that feal is water." Now by ivater Hermas is fuppofed to mean baptifm-, but furcly he could not mean real material water, or the proper ordinance of water-baptifm, Hnce he fpeaksof the patriarchs com- ing up through this water, and bring fcaled with this feal after they ivere dead, and fo entering into the kingdom of God : but how difembodied fpirits could be baptized in real water, is not eafy to conceive; it muft furely dcfign fome- thing myftical ; and what it is, I mufl: leave to thofe who better undcrftand ihcfe vifionary things : but be it fo, that baptifm in water is meant, falvation by Jt may be underftood in the fame fenfe as the apoflle Peter afcnbcs falvation to it, when he fays, that baptifm javes by the refurre^ion of Cbrift from the dead; that is, by direcling the baptized perfon to Chfift for falvation, who was deli- vered for his offences, and rofe again for his juflification ; of which refurredlion ■baptifm by inimcrfion is a lively emblem; 2nd Hermas is only fpeaking of adult perfons, and not of infants, or of their baptifm, or of the neccfTity of it to their falvation : in another place indeed he fpcaks of fome that were as infants with- out malice, and fo more honourable than others ; and, adds he, all infants, are honoured with the Lord, and accounted of firfl: of all ; that is, all fuch infants as before dcfcribcd: but be it that infants in age are meant, they may be valued and lovrd by the Lord ; he may fhew mercy to them, chufe, redeem, regene- rate, and fave them, and yet not order them to be baptized ; nor has he ordered it: INFANT - BAPTISM AN INNOVATION. 385 jt : however //^rwflj has not a word about the baptifm of them, and therefore thefe paflages are impertinently referred to. Now thefe are all the pafTages of the writers of the firfl: century brought into this controverfy ; in which there is fo far from being any exprefs mention of infant-baptifm, that it is not in the leaft hinted at, nor referred unto-, nor is any thing of this kind pretended to, till we come to the middle of the next age; and yet our author upon the above pafTages concludes after this manner : ♦' thus — we have traced up the praHice of infant baptifm to the time of the " apoftlesj" when thofe writers give not the leaft hint of infant-baptifm, or have any reference to it, or the praftice of it. It is amazing what 2i face fome men have ! proceed we now to The fecond century. The book of Recognitions, this writer feems to be at a lofs whereto place it, whether after or before 7/(/7/« -, however, M.r Bingkum tells him, " it is an antient writing of the fame age with Jujlin Martyr, mcn- " tioned by Origen in his Philocalia, and by fome afcribcd to Bardefanes Sjriu, *' who lived about the middle of the fecond century." It is indeed mentioned by Origen, though not under that name, and is by him afcribcd toClemcns, as it has been commonly done •, and if fo, might have been placed among the tef- timonics of ihtfirjl century, but this Gentleman's author fays it is afcribed by fome 10 Bardefanes Syrus: it is true, there is inferted in it a fragment out of a dia- logue of his concerning fate, againft yf^jif^j an aftrologer-, but then it fliould rather be concluded from hence, as Fabricius oblerves % that the author of the Recognitions, is a later writer than Bardefanes : but be it fo that it is him, who is ih\s Bardefanes F an arch-heretic, one that firftfell into theValentinian herefy •, and though he feemed afterwards to change his mind, he was not wholly free, zsEufeiius fays ", from his old herefy, and he became the author of a new fe6t, called after his name Bardelanifls ; who held that the devil was not a creature of God -, that Chrift did not aflume human flcfh ; and that the body rifes not '. The hook of Recognitions, afcribed to him, is urged by the Papifts, as Mv James obfcrves % to prove the power of cxorcifts, free-will, faith alone infufficienr, the chryfm in baptifm, and Pir/fr's fuccefllon ; though the better fort of writers among them arc afliamed of it. Sixtus Senenfis Cays', that "moll things in " it are uncertain, many fabulous, and fome contrary to doflrines generally " received." And Baronius ' has thefe words concerning it : " Away with fuch *' monflrous lies and mad dotages, which are brought out of the faid filthy Vol. II. 3D " ditch • BibHothec. Grace. 1. 5. c. I. f. 12. p. 36. * Eccl. Hid. 1. 4. c. 30. ' hiigius de Herefurchis, feft. 2.C. 6. p.133. Vid. Epipban. Hiref. 56. Auguft. de Hstref. C. 35. ' Corruption of the Fathers, part i. p. 6. « Apud Rivet. Critic. Sacr. 1. i.e. 7. p. 130. f Ibid. 386 ANTIP^DOBAPTISMj OR, " d'nch of the Recogni (ions, which go under the name o{ Clemens:" but all this is no matter, if infant-baptifm can be proved out it ; but how ? " This " author fpeaks of the neccJTity of baptifm in the fame ftile as Jujlin Martyr *' did — was undeniably an afTertor of the general neceffity of baptifm to I'alva- *' tion :" wherever this wretched tenet, this falfe notion of the abfolute necefTuy of baptifm tofalvation is met with, the Prtdobaptifls prefently fmell out infant- baptifm, one fal (hood following upon another-, and true it is, that one error leads on to another ; and this falfe doftrine paved the way for infant-baptifm j but then the myftery of iniquity worked by degrees-, as foon as it was broached infant-baptifm did not immediately commence: it does not follow, becaufe that heretic alTcrted this notion, that therefore he was for or in the practice of infant- baptifm -, befides this book, be the author of it who will, is not made mention of before the third century, if fo foon ; for the work referred to by Origen has another title, and was in another form ; he calls it the circuits of Peter, an apo- cryphal, fabulous and romantic writing ; and though the pafilage he quotes is in the Recognitions, which makes fome learned men conclude it to be the fame with that i yet fo it might be, and not be the fame with it. But I pafs on to a more authentic and approved writer of the fccond century : 'fujlin Martyr, who lived about the year 150 ; and the firft pafTage produced from him is this * : " We bring them (namely, the new converts) to fome " place where there is water, and they are regenerated by the fame way of " regeneration by which we were regenerated ; for they are wafhed with water *' in the name of God the Father and Lord of all things, and of our Saviour " Jefus Chrift, and of the holy Spirit." In this paflage, it is owned, " Jufiin «' is defcribing the manner of adult baptifm only 5 having no occafion to de- " fcend to any farther particulars ; nor is it alledged, it is faid, as a proof of " infant-baptifm dircdly ; but only to fhew, that this ancient writer ufed the " word regeneration fo as to connote baptifm — yet his words cannot be thought •' to exclude the baptifm of infants in thefe days :" but if infant-baptifm had been praftifed in thofe days, it is not confident with that fincerity and impar- tiality which fuflin fets out with, when he propofed to give the Roman Em- peror an account of chriftian baptifm, not to make any mention of that ; for he introduces it thus : " We will declare after what manner, when we were «» renewed by Chrift, we devoted ourfelvcs unto God, left omitting this we •' fhould feem to adl a bad part (prevaricate or deal unfairly) in this declara- ■«* tion-," whereas it was not dealing fairly with the Emperor, and not giving him a full and fair account of the adminiftration of the ordinance of baptifm to all its proper fubjefls, if infants had ufed to be baptized ; which he could cafily « Apolog. :. p. 93, 94. INFANT - BAPTISM AN INNOVATION. 387 eafily have introduced the mention of, and one would think could not have omitted it : befides, as Dr Gale "■ obferves, he had an occafion to fpeak of it, and to defcend to this particular, had it been ufed ; fince the chriftians were charged with ufing their infants barbaroully ; which he might, have removed, had this been the cafe, by obfcrving the great regard they had to them in de- voting them to God in baptifm, and thereby initiating them into their religion, and providing for the falvation of their fouls : but Jujiin is fo far from faying any thing of this kind, that he leaves the Emperor and every body elfe to conclude that infants were not the fubjefts of baptifm in this early age •, for as the above writer obferves, immediately follow fuch words as diredlly oppofe infant-baptifm -, they are thefe : " And we have been taught by the apoftles " this reafon for this thing -, becaufe we being ignorant of our firfl: birth, were " generated by necefTity, i^c. that we fhould not continue children of that " necelTity and ignorance, but of will (or choice) and knowledge-, and fhould " obtain forgivenfs of the fins in which we have lived, by water : " fo that in order to obtain thefe things by water or baptifm, which JuJlin fpeaks of, there mud be free choice and knowledge, which infants are not capable of: but it feems the main thing this paflage is brought to prove, is, that the words rege- nerated and regeneration are ufed for baptized and baptifm \ and this agreeing with the words of Chrift in John\\\. 5. fhews that this conftruftion of them then obtained, that baptifm is necefTary to falvation. Now, it fhould be obfcrved, that the perfons JuJlin fpeaks of are not reprefented by him as regenerated by baptifm, becaufe they are fpoken of before as converted perfons and believers ; and it is as clear and plain that their baptifm is diflinguifhed from their regene- ration, and is not the fame thing ; for JuJlin ufes the former as an argument of the latter •, which if the fame, his fenfe muft be, they were baptized becaufe they were baptized; whereas his fenfe, confident with himfelf, and the pradice of the primitive churches, is; that thefe perfons, when brought to the water, having made a profcfilon of their regeneration, were owned and declared rege- nerated perfons; as was manifefl from their being admitted to the ordinance of water-baptifm; and from hence it appears, that, then no fuch conftrudion of John iii. 5. obtained, that baptifm is necefTary to falvation: and this now feems to be the pa/Tage referred to, in which JuJlin is faid to fpeak of the necefTity of baptifm, in a ftilc the author of t\\t Recog7iitions zgxtt(\ with him in; but without any reafon. The next pafTagc out of JuJlin is in his dialogue with Trypho the Jew ; where he fays that " concerning the influence and effed of Jdam's fin upon mankind, " which the ancient writers reprcfent as the ground and reafon of infant- 2 D 2 " baptil'm— " ' Refledionj, &c. p. 45>. 388 ANTIP^DOBAPTISM;OR, " baptifin— " The words, as cited by Dr fVall, to whom our author refers us, are thefe : Jufiin, fpeaking of the binh, baptifm, and crucifixion of Chrift, fays*, '« he did this for mankind, which hy Adam was fallen under death, and *' under the guile of the ferpent ; befide the particular caufe which each man " had of finning." Now, allowing that this is fpoken of original fin, as ic feems to be, what is this to infant-baptifm ? I have already expofed the folly of arguing from perfons holding the one, to the praflice of the other. It is added by our author, " in the fame book, he (Jujlin) fpeaks of baptifm being " to chriftians in the room of circumcifion, and fo points out the analof^y be- " tween thofe two initiatory rites." The paflage referred to is this ' : " We •" alio who by him have had accefs to God, have not received this carnal cir- " cumcifion, but the fpiritual circumcifion, which Enoch, and thofe like him, " have obferved •, and we have received it by baptifm by the mercy of God, " bccaufe we were finners ; and it is enjoined to all perfons to receive it the fame " way." Now let be obferved, that this fpiritual circumcifion, whatever Jujlin means by it, can never defign baptifm ; fince the patriarch Enoch, and others like him, obferved it: and fince chriftians are faid to receive it ^j baptifm, and therefore muft be different from baptifm itfelf : nor does Jujlin fay any thing of the analogy between baptifm and circumcifion. Or of the one being in the room of the other; but oppofcs the fpiritual circumcifion to carnal circumcifion ; and fpeaks not one word of infants, only of the duty of adult perfons, as he fup- pofcs it to te. The laft paflage, and on which this Gentleman intends to dwell awhile, is this '' ; "Several perfons {hys Jujlin) among us of both fexts, of " fixty and feventy years of age, e/ •« ira.ti'av jjUrtSKT^t- ansae to Xj/ss), " who were ♦' difcipled to Chrift in their childhood, tfr." which I have obferved (hould be rendered, " who from their childhood were inftruifted in Chrift ;" and which I have confirmed by feveral paffages in Jujlin, in which he ufes the word in the fenfe of inftruftion ; and from whom can we better learn his meaning than from himfclf .'' all which this author takes no notice of; but puts me off with a pafl"age out of Plutarch, where Aiitiphon the fon of Sophilus, according to his verfion, is faid to be difcipled or profelyted to h\s futher : I leave him to enjoy his own fenfe ; for I do. not underftand it ; and fhould have thought that ^M^^tv3a( A TO mlfiy might have been rendered more intelligibly, as well as more truly, " inftrufted by his father;" fince, as it follows, his father was an orator. He thinks he has catched me. off of my guard, and that I fuppofe the word difciple includes baptifm ; becaufe in my commentary on Aiis xix. 3. I fay, ♦* the apoftle takes it for granted that they were baptized, fince they were not *' only believers, but difciples; " but had he read on, or tranfcribcd what fol- lows, » Dialog, cum Trjpho p, 3J6. Ed. Pirii. ' lb. p. 261. * lb. Apo\og. p. 62. INFANT - BAPTISM AN INNOVATION. 389 lows, my fenfe would clearly appear ; " fuch as not only believed with the " heart, but had made a profeffion of their faich, and were followers of Chrift:" nor is the fenle of the word difcipky as including the idea of baptifm, confirmed by A5lsx\w. 21. where it is faid, when they had preached the go/pel to that city, iy HA^nvvafTif-, '^ and taught many, or made them dilciples-," which may be interpreted without tautology, and yet not include the idea of baptifm j fince the firft word, preached, exprelTes the bare external miniftry of the word ; and the latter, taught, or made difciples, the influence and effefl of it upon the minds of men ; the former may be where the latter is not ; and both, where baptifm is not as yet adminiftercd. The reafon why f« •xatiutj muft be ren- dered in, and not from their childhood, bccaufe the baptifm of any perfons bcincr not a continued, hut one fingle tranlient adt, to fpeak of their being baptized from their childhood would be improper, is merry indeed ; when Jujlin is not fpcaking of the baptifm of any perfon at all j but of their being trained up in the knowledge of Chrift, and the chriftian religion from their childhood, in which they had-perfevercd to the years mentioned. Upon the whole, in all thefe paffagcs oi Jujlin quoted, there is no exprefs mention of infant-baptifm, nor any hint given of it, nor any reference unto it. Proceed we now to the next writer in this century, brought into this controverfy : Iren^us ; who lived towards the clofe of it, and wrote about the year 180; the only paflage in him, and which has been the fubjcd of debate a hundred years paft, is this-, fpeaking of Chrift, he fays ', " he came to fave all, all I " fay, qui per eum renafcuntur inDeum, " who by him are l>orn again unto God -," " infants, and little ones, and children, and young men, and old men." Now not to infift upon the works of Irenxus we have being moftly a tranflation, and a very poor one, complained of by learned men •, nor upon this chapter wherein this pafTage is, being reckoned fpurious by others; which weaken the force of this teftimony, and will have their weight with confidering perfons ; I fhall only take notice of the fenfe of the phrafe, born again unto God; and the injury done to the charadlcr of 7rf«.£'W, to make it fignify baptifm, or any thing clfe bui the grace of regeneration. Our author begins his defence of this paflage in fa- vour of infant-baptifm, with a remark of the learned Feuardentius, as he calls him ; " that by the name of regeneration, according to the phrafe ofChrift and ♦' his apoftles, he {Iren^us) underftands baptifm, clearly confirming the apoC- «* tolical tradition concerning the baptifm of infants." As for the learning of this monk, I cannot difcern it, unlefs his lies and impudence againft the refor- mers, which run through his notes, are to be fo called. Whether our author is a junior or fenior man, I know not ; by his writing he feems to be the former, but ' Adv. Hxref. 1. 2.c. 39. 390 ANTIP^DOBAPTISM; O R, - but the advice of Rivet, who was without doubt a man of learning, K good ; " only, fays he", I would have the younger, that fhall light on the works of " Irenicus advifed, to beware of thofc editions, which that moft impudent monk " Feuardentius, a man of large affurance, and uncommon boldnefs, and of no " faith nor faithfulnefs, has in many things foully corrupted and defiled with " impious and lying annotations ;" and a falfe glofs this of his is, which is quot- ed; forChrift and his apoftles nowhere call baptifm by the mmt oi xht new birth. I have obferved, that as yet, that is, in Iren^us'% time, it had not obtained among the ancients, to ufe the words regenerated or regeneration for baptized or baptifm ; nor is this author able to prove it. The paflage in Jujlin before-men- tioned falls fhort of it, as has been fliewn -, and the paffages in Tertullian and Clemens oi Alexandria, concerning being born in water, and begotten of the womb of water, are too late -, and befide, the one is to be interpreted of the grace of God compared to water ; this is clearly Tertnllian's fenfc ; for he adds ", " nor " are we otherwife fafe or faved, than by remaining in water •," which furely can never be underftood literally of the water of baptifm : and as for Clemens', he is fpeaking not of regeneration, but of the natural generation of man, as he comes out of his mother's womb, naked, and free from fin, as he fuppofes ; and as fuch, converted perfons ought to be. To have recourfe to heathens to afcertain the name of chriftian baptifm, is monftrous ; though this, it is faid, there is no need of, " finceyh;^rfl/ chriftian " writers, who lived with or before Iren^us, fpeak the fame language, as will " be fcen hereafter :" and yet none are produced hm Barnabas and Juflin; the latter of which has been confidered already, and found not to the purpofe; and his rcafoning upon the former is beyond my comprehenfion; for whatever may be faid for the giving of milk and honey to perfons juft baptized, being a fym- bol of their being born again, it can be no proof of the words regeneration and regenerated he'ing ufed for baptifm and baptized; when thcfe words neither the one nor the other are mentioned by Barnabas ; fo that I have no reafon to re- trafl what I have faid on that point. And now we are returned to Iren^us him- fclf ; and two paffages from him are produced in proof of the fenfc of the word contended for-, and one is where he thus fpeaks % " and again giving the power " of regeneration unto God to his difciples, he faid unto them. Go and teach all nations, baptizing ihem, &c." By which power or commifTion is meant, not the "> Juniores qui in opera Irenii incident monitos volo, ut caveant ab illis editionlbus qiias impu- den iiTimus il!e monachus Fcuardentius, homo projefli audaciae, & nu!lius fidei, fxde in multis corrupic Sc annotationibus impi:r& mendacibus confpurcavit, Rivet. Critic. Sacr, l.z.c.6. p. i SS, i S9. " Nos pifciculi in aqua nafciir.ur. Nee aliter quam in aqua permanendo falvi fumu', Ter- tullian. de baptifmo, c i. • jiuo.Tiat 1. 4. p. 538. Ed. Parii. f Adv. H.-cref. 1. 3. c. (9. INFANT - BAPTISM AN INNOVATION. 391 the commiffion of baptizing, but more plainly the commifTion of teaching the dodlrine of regeneration by the Spirit of God, and the necefTity of that to fal- vation, and in order to baptifm ; and which was the firfl: and principal part of the apoftles commifTion, as the order of the words (hew ; and it is mod reafonable to think, that he fhould fo call the commifTion, not from its more remote and lefs principal part, but from the firfl: and more principal one. The other paf- fage is where Iren^us mentions "^ by name " the baptifm oi regeneration to God :" but this rather proves the contrary, that baptifm and regeneration are two dif- ferent things, and not the fame -, jufl: as the fcriptural phrafe, the baptifm of re- pentance, and which feems to have led the ancients to fuch a way of fpeakinp, means fomething different from repentance, and no: the fame : baptifm is fo called, becaufe repentance is a prerequifite to it, in the fubjedls of it; and for the fame reafon it is called the baptifm of regeneration, becaufe regeneration is abfolutely necelTary in order to it : to all which I only add, that Irentcus no: only ufcs the word regeneration in a different fenfe from baptifm clfewhere ', but mofl clearly ufcs it in another fenfe in this very pafTage -, fince he fays, Chrill came to fave all who by him are born again unto God ; who are regenerated by Chrifl^, and not by baptifm j and which is explained both before and after by h\s fanHifying a\\ forts of perfons, infants, little ones, young men, and old men ; which cannot be underftood of his baptizing them, for he baptized none; and therefore they cannot be faid to be regenerated by him in that fenfe : and I fay again, to underftand Irenaus as fpeaking of baptifm, is to make him fpealc what is abfolutely falfe ; thatChrilt came to fave all and only fuch who are bap- tized unto God. It feems Le Clerc is of the fame fentiment with me, an author I am a ftranger to; whom this-wriier Jets pafs without any reafoning againft him, only with this chaftizement; "he (hould have underftood (being an ecciefiaflical " biflorian) the fcntiments and language of the primitive fathers better ;" but what their language and fentiments were, we have feen already ; and let them be what they will, Irensus muft exprefs a downright .falfehood, if he is to be underftood in the fenfe contended for : on the one hand, it cannot be true that Chrift came to fave all that are baptized ; no doubt but Judas was baptized, as well as the other apoftles, and yet it will not be faid Chrift came to fave him ; Simon Magus was certainly baptized, and yet was/« the gait of bitternefs, and bond of iniquity, and by all the accounts of him continued fo till death ; there were many members of the church a.t Corinth, who doubtkfs were baptized, and yet were unworthy receivers of the Lord's fupper, and eat and drank damnation to themfelves, for which reafon there were many weak, fickly, and afleep ■; and it is to be feared, without any breach of charity, that this has been the cafe of thoufands 1 Ibid. 1. I. c. 18. ' Vid. 1. 4. c. S9- and I. 5. c. 15. • i Cor. xL 29, 30. •392 ANTIP^DOBAPTISMiOR, thoufands befides : and on the other hand, it cannot be with truth foggefted, that Chrift came to fave only fuch as are baptized •, he came to die for the tranfgref- fions that were under the Firft Teftament, or to fave perfons under that difpen- fation, who never received Chriftian baptifm j he faid to one and to another, unbaptized perfons, thy fins are forgiven thee ^ \ and no doubt there are many faved, and whom Chrift came to fave, who never were baptized in water; and the Psedobaptifts themfelves will ftand a bad chance for falvation, if this was true-, for they will find it a hard tafk to prove that any one of them, only fprinkled in infancy, was ever truly baptized-, and yet as uncharitable as we are faid to be, we have fo much charity to believe that every good man among them, though unbaptized, fhall be faved. And now fince the words of Iren^us taken in this fenfe contain a manifeft faldiood, and they are capable of another fenfe, agreeable to truth, without ftraining them -, as that Chrift came to fave all that are regenerated by himfelf, by his fpirit and grace, we ought in a judg- ment of charity to believe that this latter fenfe is his, and not the former ; and the rather, fince his words in their proper and literal fenfe have this meaning ; and fince they are expreffcd with fo much caution ; left it fhould be thought it was his meaning that Chrift came to fave all ja^x\, good and bad, he defcribes the perfons he came to fave, not by their baptifm, which is a precarious and uncertain evidence of falvation, but by their regeneration, which is a fure proof of it -, and fince this fenfe of his words is agreeable to his ufe of the phrafe elfc- where, and to the context likewife, and is fuited to all forts of perfons of every age here mentioned -, and indeed to depart from this clear literal fenfe of his words, which eftablifiies a well-known truth, and fix a figurative, improper one upon them, which makes him to fay a notorious untruth, to ferve an hypothefis, is auel ufage of the good old father, and is contrary to all the rules of honour, juf- tice, truth, znd charily. To put ourLord's words in Mark xvl i6. upon a level with the falfe fenfe of Iren^us, is mean and ftupid -, they need no qualify- ing fenfe -, the meaning is plain and eafy -, that every baptized believer fhall be faved, and leave no room to fuggeft that unbaptized believers (hall not -, but that every unbeliever, be he who he will, baptized or unbaptized, fiiall be damned. And now what a wretched caufe muft the caufc of infant-baptifm be, that requires fuch managing as this to maintain it ? what a wretched caufe is it, that at its firft fetting out, according to the account of the advocates of it -, for DrPf^all fays °, " this is the firft cxprefs mention that we have met with of infants " baptized?" I fay again, what a wretched caufe muft this be, that is connected with lies and fallhood at its firft appearance, as pleaded for-, is cftabliflied upon downright injuftice to a good man's charaftcr, and fupported by real injury to it? ' Mitt. ix. 5. Luke vii. 4?. • Hiftory of Infant-baptifm, parti, c. 3. 5- 6. INFANT - BAPTISM AN INNOVATION. 393 it ? and yet no:withftanding all this, our author has the front to fay, " fo much *' then for the teftimony, the plain, unexcepdetiable te^imony, of Irenaus, for V the praftice csf infant-baptifm." And now we ara come to the clofe of the fecond century ; but before wc pafs to the next, we muft flop a little, and confider a paflagc our author, after 'DrJVall, has produced out oi Clemens oi Alexandria, who lived at the latter end of this century, about the year 190 \ and it is this : fpeaking of rings worn on the fingers, and the feals upon them, advifes againft every thing idolatrous and lafcivious, and to what is innocent and ufeful •, " let our feals, fays he *, be a •' dove, or a fifh, or a fhip running with the wind, or a tnufical harp — or a *' mariner's anchor and if any one is a filherman, Atstcak (UfAnmAi j^ re^r •' if vJhrQ- traif7ntij.iren Tt<^ MdrSai©- TUTU wgj> T1K vrgyaifiiriui ru ^aili^o^ira, & Paulo port to ita ru i/Jal©- Auly? — i^xafiX'"'* tavT*' rn 5n*Tn1t — x'»J"'f*''*" ^*"" *fXi ■& •"lyi- Origen. Comment, in Joinnem, p. 124. 1 INFANT - BAPTISM AN INNOVATION. 399 that ordinance. Let this Gentleman, if he can, produce any thing out of thofe •writings of On|^«», in favour of infant- baptifm ; the paflage Dr /^ his very birth contrafted the contagion of the death anciently threatened ; **- who comes, for this rcafon, nx>re cafily to receive forgivenefs of fins, becaufe •>- they are not his own, but others fins that are forgiven him. This therefore, »» dear brother, was our opinion in the affcmbly, that it is not for us to hinder " any man from baptifm and the grace of God, who is merciful and kind and *' affeftionate to all ; which rule, as it holds for all, fo we think it more efpe- " cially to be obferved in reference to infants, and perfons newly born ; to ** whom our help, and the. divine mercy, is rather to be granted ; becaufe by ♦' their INFANT - BAPTISM AN INNOVATION. '^tfi " their weeping and wailing, at their firft entrance into the worid^ they do in- ** timate nothing fo much as that they implore compalTion ''." Every one that compares what Cyprian and his collegues fay for infant-bap- tifm, and what Tertullian fays againft it, as before related, will eafily fee a dif- ference between them, between rfr/«Wa« the Antipsedobaptift, and C>/irfrt;? the Pjedobaptiftj how manly and nervous the one! how mean and weak the other! no doubt, as is known, being raifed about iufant-baptlfm at this time, or any objection made to it, does not prove it then to be an ancient cuftom ; fince the fame obfervation, which may be made, would prove infant-communion to be equally the fame. Now as we allow that henceforward infantrbaptifm was prac- tifed in the African churches, and prevailed in The fourth century, here the concroverfy might flop : and indeed all that we contend for in this century, is only that there were fome^perfons that did call it in qutllion and oppofe it ; and if this will not be allowed, we are not very anxious about it, and (hall not think it worth while to conteft it.— This writer would have it obferved, that I have given up the greatejl lights of the church in this century as vouchers for infant baptifm, and particularly St Jerom, Ruff.nus, and Augujlin ; they are welcome to them ; they have need of them to enlighten them in this dark affair : we do not envy their havini^"- them, efpecially that perfidious interpolater Ruffinus; nor that arch -heretic Pelagius, whom this Gentleman takes much pains to retain, as ignorant as he either was, or would be, or is thought to be; as that he never heard that any one whatever denied baptifm to infants, and promifed the kingdom of heaven without the redemption of Chrift, or refufed that unto them. This lanorance of his was either affected or pretended, in order to clear himfelf from the charoe of thofe things againft him ; as men generally do run into high ftrains and ex- travagant cxprelTions, when they are at fuch work -, or it was real ignorance, and who can help that ? It does not follow that therefore none had, becaufe he had never heard of it •, one would think his meaning rather was, that he had never heard of any that denied the kingdom of heaven and the common re- demption to infants, who think they ought to be baptized, dum putat, while he is of opinion, that in baptifm they are regenerated in Chrift ; but about this I fhall not contend ; truth does not depend upon his hearing and knowledcre, judgment and obfervation. I think it is not infiftcd upon that Aujlin ftiould fay, he never heard or read of any catholic, heretic, or fchifmatic, that denied infant-baptifm ; however, it feems he could fay it if he did not, and that not- withftanding the reafons I alledged ; as. Vol. II. 3 F i- /^Ji'» * Cyprian, ad Fidum. Ep. 59. p. 317. 402 'ANTIP^DOBAPTISM; OR, I. Auftin muft know that TtrtuUian had oppofed it. Here our author quit- bles about the terms oppofing and denying, and diftinguiflies between them ; and obferves, that whatever Tertullian faid againjl it, he did not properly deny it. He may fay the fame of me, or any other writer againft infant-baptifm, that though we fpeak againft it, contradidt and oppofe it, and ufe arguments againft it, yet we do not deny it. Dr tVall indeed thinks neither /lujlin nor Pelagius had feen Tertullian'& book of baptifm, or they could not have faid what he thinks they did. a. Auftin prefided at the council of Carthage, when a canon was made that anathematized thofe who denied baptifm to new-born infants'; and therefore muft know there were fome that denied it. This Gentleman fays, it is demon- ftrably certain, that thix canon was not made againft perfons that denied infant- baptifm, becaufe it was made againft Pelagius and Celejliiis. It is true, the lat- ter part of the caron was made againft them \. but the former part rcfpeflcd a notion or tenet of fome other perfons, who dehied baptifm to new-born infants. Dr^j//faw this, and fays, this canon mentions the baptifm of infants, con- demning two errors about it -, the one rcfpefting the baptifm of new-born in- fants ; the other the doftrine of original fin, and the baptifm of infants for for- givcnefs of fins, denied by the Pelagians -, but the former he fuppofes was the opinion of Fidus, embraced by fome perfons now, which he had vented a hun- dred and fifty years before, that infants fhould not be baptized till they were- eight days old; whereas F/W«j is reprefentcd as having been alone in his opinion; and if he retained if, which is doubtful, it does not appear he had any followers; nor is there any evidence of there being any of his fentiment in this age '; an J were there, it is unreafonable to imagine, that a council of all the bifliops in Africa fhould agree to anathematize them, becaufe they thought proper to defer the baptizing of infants a few days longer than they did ; and befides, infants only eight days old may be properly called newly-born infants ; and therefore fuch could not be faid to deny baptifm to them ; and it would have been a mar- vellous thing, had they been anathematized for it : though this writer fays, " wonder who will; a council, confifting of all the bifhops of Africa, did in " fa6t agree to anathematize their own brethren, who were in the fame opinion " and praftice of infant-baptifm with themfelves." It is true, they did ana- thematize the Pelagians, who were in the fame opinion and practice of infant- baptifm with themfelves in general ; though I qucftion whether they reckoned them their own brethren ; but then not on account of any difference about the time of baptifm, a few days odds between them, the thing to be wondered at; but their denial of original fin, and the baptifm of infants to be on account of that : - 1 Hiftorj' of Infant- baptifm, p. I. ch. 4. 5- J3« INFANT - BAPTISM AN INNOVATION. -403 that : and now fince the Pelagians are diftinft from thofe in the canon that de- nied baptifm to new-born infants; and it is unreafonable to fuppofe any who were of the fentiments oi Fidus are intended; it remains, that there mufl be feme perfons different both from the one and the other, who denied baptifm to babes, and are. by this canon anathematized for ir, which Atijtin muft know. 3. It is obferved by me, that yfw/?/« himfelf makes mention of forhe that ar- gued againft it, from the unprofitablenefs of it to infants ; fince for the mod part they die before they have any knowledge of it. Thefe men our author does not know what to make of; fometimes it is queftionable whether they were chriftians, and fuggefts that they were men of atheiftical principles ; and then again they are fuppofed to be chriftians, and even might be Psdobaptifts, not- withftanding this their manner of arguing. I am content he fhould reckon them what he pleafes ; but one would think they could not be any good friends to infant-baptifm, that queftioned the profitablenefs of baptifm to infants, and brought fo ftrong an objecSlion to it. • . 4. It is further obferved by me, that according io/lujlin the Pelagians denied baptifm to the infants of believers, becaufe they were holy. This is reprefented by this Gentleman as a miftake of mine, underftanding what was fpoken bypo- tbetically, to be abfolutely fpoken. I have looked over the palTage again, and am not convinced upon a fecond reading of it, nor by what this writer has ad- vanced, ofamiftake: the words are abfolutely exprelTed and reafoned upon ; " but, fays the apoftle, your children would be unclean, but noiv they are holy ; " therefore, fay they (the Pelagians) the children of believers ought not now to " be baptized." The obfervation our author makes, though he does not infift upon it, is very impertinent ; that not infants but children are mentioned, and fo may include the adult children of believers, and confequently make as much againft adult-baptifm as infant-baptifm ; fince children in the text, on which the argument is grounded, are always by themfelves underftood of infants. Auf- tin wonders that the Pelagians fhould talk after this manner, that holinefs is derived from parents, and reafons upon it, when they deny that fin is originally derived from Adam: it is true, indeed, he prefTcs them with an argument this Gentleman calls ad hominem, taken from their fhutting up the kingdom of God. to unbaptized infants; for though they believed that unbaptized infants would not perilh, but have cverlafting life, yet not enter the kingdom of God; abfurd- . ly diftinguifhing between the kingdom of God, and eternal life. What ihey were able to anfwer, or did anfwcr to this, it is not cafy to fay ; " it is a difadvantage, " as our author fays, that we have none of their writings entire, only fcraps ■ " and quotations from them :" Perhaps as they had a fingular notion, that the ' infants of believers ought not to be baptized, though the infants of others fhould; 3 F 2 they J 404 A N T I P iE D O B A P T I S M i OR, they would, in anfwer to the above argument, fay, that the infants of believers unbaptized cnicr the kingdom, though the unbaptized infants of others do not. I only guefs this might be their anfwer, confiftent with their principles : however, if I am miftaken in this matter, as I think I am not, it is in company with men of learning I am not afhamed to be among. The learned JDfl;7^z^j fays", " the •' Pelagians deny that baptifm is to be adminiftered to the children of believers" having plainly in view this paflage of ^u/lin's; and the very learned Forbejius" brings in this as an objeftion to hisfenfe of i Corinthians vii. 14. " the Pelagians " abufed this faying of the apoftle, that they might fay, that the infants of *' believers ought not to be baptized, as we read in yiugujiin °." 5. The words quoted by me out of Jerom^ I own, are fpoken by way of fuppo- fition ; but then they fuppofe a cafe that had been, was, and might be again ; and it Ihould be obferved, that the fuppofition Jerom makes, is not a negleSi of the bap- tifm of infants, as this Gentleman fuggefts, but z denial of it to them, a refufing to give it to them; which is expreffive of a rejeftion of it, and of an oppofition to it. So that from all thefc inftances put together, we cannot but conclude that there were fome perfons that did oppofc and rejeft infant-baptifm in thofe times, and think it may be allowed, which is all we contend for-, however, as I have faid before, we are not very anxious about it. Mx Marjhall^, a favourite writer of our author's, fays, fome in thofe times queftioned it (infant-baptifm) as Auguftin grants in his fermons de verbis Afojiol. but does not refer us to the par- ticular place } it fce(r)S to be \\\% fourteenth fermon on that fubjefl, intitied. Concerning the baptifm of infants, againfi the Pelagians-, whert Auflin tells us how he was led to the fubjeft; and though he had no doubt about it, yet " fome men raifed difputes, which were now become frequent, and endea- " voured to fubvert the minds of many ■• :" by whom he feems to mean per- fons diftinft from the Pelagians, fince he rcprefcnts them as having no doubt about it : and this is further confirmed by a paffage out of the fame difcourfe ; " that iafants are to be baptized, let no one doubt (which is an addrefs to others, " and implies, that either they did doubt of infant-baptifm, or were in danger " of it) fince they doubt not, who in fome refpedt contradift it j" which our author has placed as a motto in his title-page. Auflin, we allow, in this age, frequently fpeaks of infant-baptifm as an ancient ufage of the church, and as an apoftolical tradition ; but what proof does he give n Baptifmani parvulis fidelium negant dandam Pelagiani. Danxu) de facramcnds ad calcem AuguH. de Hzrcf, " Abatebantur hoc Apoftoli didlo, nt dicerent infanres fidelium baptizari minirae dcberi, ut legimus apud Aug. de ptccator. merit, ic remifl". 1. z. c. 35. Forbef. Inftiuft. Hiftor. Theiolog. 1 10 c. 10 f. 5. " L. 2, de Peccator. merit. & remiiT. c. 2j. » Sermon on baptizing of Infantt, p. 5. « Sed difput^tionrs qaorundam, qua: modo ere. bicfccrc, ic multorum anitnos evettere moliuntur, Aug. dc veib ApOdol. Serm. 14^ INFANT . BAPTISM AN INNOVATION. 405 give of it? what teftimonies does he produce? does he produce any higher reftimony than Cyprian ? not one j who, ic is owned, fpeaks of infant-baptifm, but not as an apoftolical tradition; Cyprianx>{ts no fuch language: thofe phrafcs, '' which were underftood and believed /r<>/» the beginning, and what the church '.' always though:, ot anciently held," z^t Aujiin's words, and nox. Cyprian's; and only cxprefs what Aujlin inferred and concluded from him : and befides, his leftimony is appealed, to, not fo much for infant-baptifm, the thing itfelf, as for the reafon of it, original fin, which gave rife unto it in Cyprian's time : and it is for the proof of this, and not infant-baptifm, that yiujlin himfelf refers to xh(i Tnanifejl faith of an apojile ; namely, to fbew that not the flefh only, bur the foul would be loft, and be brought into condemnation through the offence oi Adam, if not quickened by the grace of Chrift, for which he refers to Rumans y. 18. and yet our author infinuates, that by this he did not confider the baptifm of infants for original fin as a novel thing in Cyprians time, but refers it to the authority of an apoftle: and by the way, fince Cyprian, the only witncis produced by Auflin, fpeaks not of infant-baptifm as ati ancient ufage of the church, or an apoftolic tradition, there is no agreement between his lan- guage and that of Origen, he is made to fpcak in his Latin tranflations, as this author elfewherc fuggcfts ;. and it confirms the proof of his having been dealt unfairly with, fince Cyprian, coming after him, ufes no fuch language, nor does AuJUn himfelf ever refer unto liim. I have obfcrved that there are many other things, which by Auflin, and other ancient writers, are called apoftolic traditions ; fuch as infant-communion, the fign of the crofs in baptifm, the form of renouncing the devil-and all his works, exorciim, trine immerfion, the confecration of the water, anointing with oil in baptifm, and giving a mixture of milk and honey to the-baptized pcrfons : and therefore if mfant-baptifm is received on this foot, thcfe ought likewife; fince there is as early and clear proof of them from antiquity, as of that : and my further view in mentioning thefc, was to obferve, not only how early, but how ea/ily thefe corruptions got into the church, as infant-baptifm did. This writer has thought fit to take notice only of one of ihefe particulars, namely, infant-communion ; and the evidence of this, he fays, is not fo full and fo early as that of infant-baptifm. Now, let it be obferved, that there is no proof of infant-baptifm being praftifed before Cyprian's time; nor does Aujiin refer to any higher teflimony than his for the praftice of it for original fin i and in his time infant-communion was in afc beyond all contradidion : there is an inftance of it given by himfelf, which I have referred to; and that is more than is or can be given of infant-baptifm, which, can only be deduced by confequences from that inftance, and from Cyprianznd his collcgues rcafon- 4o6 A "N T I P i?: T) O B A P T 1 S M J OR, ing about the necefTity of the adminiftration of it to new-born children. He fuggefts that Aujlin exprefles himfelf differently, when he is fpeaking of the one and of the other as anapoftolic tradition; but -if he does, it 'is in higher drains of infant-communion ; for -thus begin the paflages, "-if they pay any reo-ard " to the apojiolic authority^ or rather to the Lord and Majier of tbt apcjlles, &c. *' and no man that remembers -that he^istj cbrijliart, and of the catholic faith^ " denies or doubts that infants, without eating his flefli, and drinking his blood, " have no Jife in them, i^c." The Punici Chrijliani, which jiufiin fpeaks of, are not to be retrained, as they are by our author, to the chriftians oT Carthage, but take in other ^r/Va« -chriftians, particularly at Hippo, where yiujiin was bifhop, and where they fpoke the Punic language, and in many other places: and furely if yf«/?/« is a good witnefs for an apoftolical tradition, who lived at the latter end of the /i7Kr;;6 century ; he muft know what was the fenfe of the African chriftians in his time, among whom he lived, and upon what they ground- ed their practice of infant-communion; which he fays was upon an ancient and apoftolic tradition. The other rites and ufages, he fays, 1 make mention of, are fpoken of hyBa- ftl as unwritten traditions; and infant-baptifm is not mentioned among them, and lb was confidered as (landing upon a better evidence and teftimony : now, not to obfcrve that I produce earlier authorities xhznBaftl, for thefe apoftolical tra- •ditions fo called, even as early as Tertullian, the firft man that fpoke of infant- baptifm ; neither are infant-communion, fponfors at baptifm, exorcifm in it, ■ and giving milk and honey at that lime, mentioned by fi<2/;/ among them; does it therefore follow that .they ftand upon a better foot than the reft ? befides, fince Apoftolic. tradition is diftinguiftied from Scripture, by the author of iTi^if baptifm ■ of infants a reafonable Service, with whom 1 had to do; -it can be confidered in the controverfy between us, no other than as an unzvritten tradition. This writer further obferves, that it does not appear that thefe unwritten traditions were ever put to the teft, and ftood the trial, particularly in the Pelagian controverfy, as infant-baptifm : it is manifeft that the exorcifms and exfufflations ufed in bap- tifm, and theargument.from ihern, as much pinched, puzzled, and confounded the Pelagians, as ever infant-baptifm did : and it is notorious, that figning with the fign of the crofs has ftood the teft in all ages, from the beginning of it, and is continued to this day ; and prevails not only among the Papifts, but among Proteftant churches. XJpon the whole then, it is clear there is no exprefs mention . of infant-baptifm in the two firfl centuries, no nor any plain bint of it, new any manifefl reference to.it; and that there is no evidence of its being praftifed till the third century ; and that it is owned, it prevailed in the fourth: and fo refts ahe ftate of the controverfy. A REPLY A- REPLY TO A D E F E N C E OF. T. H E. DIVINE RIGHT of INF ANT - B A PTI SM;, By PETEK CLARK, A,M. Minifter at Sal^m, IN A L.E T T E R to a F R I E N D at Boston in New-EnglantL To which axe added,. Some STRICTURES on a late TREATISE, called, yi Fair and Rational Vindication of the Right of Infants to the Ordinance of Baptifm.- . Written by DAVID B O.ST WICK, y^. M Late Minifter of the Preftyterian Church in the City of New-Tori, The P R E F A C R IT is necefiary. that the reader fhould be acquainted with the reafon of the republication of the following treatife. In the year 1746, a pamphlet was - printed ^iBoJlon \nNcw England^ called, " A brief lUuftration and Confir- *<■ mation.of the Divine Right of Infant-Baptifm," written by Mr Dickinfon; , which being induftrioufly fpread about in great numbers, to hinder the growth, of thcBaptift-Intercft in thofe parts, it was fent over to me by fome of our friends there, rcquefting an anfwcr to it; which I undertook, and publifhed in the year 1749, intitled, " The Divine Right of Infant-Baptifm examined and dif- *«■ proved." Upon vih'ich Peter Clark, A.M. Minifter ziSalem \n New- England, wasi . 40 8 THE P "R E F A C E. was employed to write againft it, and which he did -, and what he wrote was printed and publifhed zi Bojlon in 1752, called, "A Defence of the Divine *' Right of Infant-Baptifm." This being fent over to me, I wrote aReply, in a letter to a friend at Bojicn, in the year 1753, as the -date of my letter fhews, giving leave to make ufe of it, ^s might be thought fit; and which was printed and publifhed at ■Bejlon in 1754, together with a Sermon of mine on Baptifm, presLchcd at Barbican, 1750. The controverfy lying beyond the feas, I chofe it fhould continue there, and therefore never reprinted and republilhed my Reply beTCy though it has been folicited; but of late Mr Clark's Defence has been fent over here, and publifhed, and advcrtifed to be fold -, which is the only reafon •of my reprinting and repiibUfliing the following Reply ; to which I have added fome ftriflures on a treatife oiMxBoftz:;ick's on the fame fubjeft, imported from America, with the above Defence, and here reprinted. The Pfedobaptifts are ever reftlds and uneafy, endeavouring to maintain and fupport, if pofTible, their unfcriptural praftice of Infant-Baptifm ; though it is no other than a pillar •of Popery ; that by which antichrift has fpread his baneful influence over many nations; is the bafis of national churches, and worldly cftablithments ; that •which unites the church and the world, and keeps them together; nor can there be a full feparation of the one from the other, nor a thorough reforma- tion in religion, until it is wholly removed : and though it has fo long and laroely obtained, jnd ftill does obtain ; I believe with a firm and unfhaken faith, that the time is haftening on, when Infant-Baptrfm will be no more prac- •tifed in the world; when churches will be formed on the fame plan they were in the times of the apoftles; when gofpel-doftrine and difcipJine will be reftored to their primitive Juftre and purity ; when the ordinances of baptifm and the Lord's fupper will be adminiftcred as they were firfl: delivered, clear of all pre- ■'fcnt corruption and fupcrftition; all which will be accomplifhed, when tbeLord Jball be king over allJhe earth, ^nd there Jhall he une Lord, and his name me. A REPLY R E P L Y, &c. In a LETTER to a Friend. SIR, I Acknowledge the receipt of your Letter on the il* of lad March, and with it Mr Clark's Defence of the Divine Right of hfant-Baptifm, &c. which I Jiave fince curforily read over-, for I thought it a too great wafte of time- to give it a y?f(jwj reading. Nor will my engagement in a work of greater im- portance permit me to write a fet and laboured anfwer to it -, nor am I willin-g to beftow fo much time and pains as areneceffary to cleanfe that Augean ftable, and remove all the dirt and rubbifh this writer has colleded together. The remarks I made in reading, I here fend you. At firft fetting out, 1 foon found I muft expedt to be dealt rudely and roughly with, and accordingly prepared myfelf for it j and I aflure you. Sir, I was not difappointed. The firji chapter of my book, which the above Gentleman has undertook to anfwer, is fhprt, and only an introdu5lion, obferving the author's .title, method, and occafion of writing the pamphlet before me. In MrC/ar-t's Reply to which I obferve ; i. That he is difpleafed at calling the ordinance of baptifm as truly and properly adminiftered, Believer's-baptifm, and the pretended adminiftration of it, to infants, Infant- fprinkling -, whereas this is calling things by their pro- per names: it is with great propriety, we call baptifm as adminiftered to belie- vers, the proper fubjefts of it, Believer's-baptifm j and with the fame propriety we call that which is adminiftered to infants, Infant-fprinkling-, from the nature of the adion performed, and the perfons on whom it is performed. Does this Gentleman think, we fhall be fo complaifarit to fuit our language and way of fpeaking to his miftaken notion and praftice ? though indeed we too often do, through the common ufe of phrafes which obtain. 2. He is unwilling to allow of any increafe of the Baptift intereft in New England, cither at Boflon or in the country; whereas I am credibly informed, and you, Sir, I believe, can atteft Vol. II. 3 G the 4IO A REPLY TO A DEFENCE OF THE the truth of it, that there have been confidcrable additions to theBaptift intereft az Bojion ; and that many hundreds in the country have been baptized within a few years. 3. He fays, it is an egregious miftalce, that the miniflers of New- England applied to Mr Dickinfon (the author of the pamphlet I wrote againft) to write in favour of Infant-fprinkling -, and he is certain that not one of the miniftcrs in Bojlon made application to him, (which was never affirmed,) and is perfuaded it was not at the motion of any minifters in New-England, that he wrote his Dialogue, but of his own mere motion ; and yet he is obliged to corredl himfelf by a marginal note, and acknowledge that it was wrote through minifterial influence. 4. This writer very early gives a fpecimen of his talent at rcafoning -, from the rejedion of Infant- baptifm, as an human invention, he argues totlie rejeftion of baptifm itfelf, as fuch; that if Infant-baptifm is intircly an human invention, and a rite not to be obferved, then baptifm itfelf is an hu- man invention, and not to be oblcrved : this is an argument drawn up y^fKwiww arlem, like a mafter of arts ; and to pretend to anfwer fo ftrong an argument, and fee afide fuch a mafterly way of rcafoning, would be weaknefs indeed ! 5. It being obferved. of the Dialogue-writer, " that he took care, not to put fuch ♦' arguments and objedftions into the mouth of his antagonift as he was not able " to anfwer •," this Gentleman rifes up, and bluflers at a great rate, and defies the moft zealous, learned, and fubtil of the Antipsdobaptifts to produce any other arguments and objecflions againft Infant-baptifni, for matter or fubftance, different from, or of greater weight, than thofe produced in the Dialogue ; but afterwards lowers his topfail, and fays, that the defign of the author of that pam- phlet was to reprefent in a few plain words, the moft material objeflions againft Infant-baptifm, with the proper anfwers to them-, and at laft owns, that a great deal more has been faid by the Antipasdobaptifts. The fecond chapter, you know. Sir, treats of " the confequences of em- " bracing Believer's- baptifm ; fuch as, renouncing Infant-baptifm, vacating " the covenant, and renouncing all other ordinances of the gofpel;" that Chrift muft have forfaken his church for many ages, and not made good the promife of his prefcnce, and that there now can be no baptifm in the world. in M: Clark's Reply to what I have faid on thofe heads, I obferve the follow- ing things. The /ry? confcquence is the renunciation of Infant-baptifm ; which confe- quence, to put him out of all doubt and pain, about my owning or not own- ing it, I readily allow, follows upon a perfon's being fprinkled in infancy, embracing adult-baptifm by immerfion; in which he is to bejuftified, the one being an invention of man's, the other according to the word of God j nor is there DIVINE RIGHT OF I N FANT - BAPTISM. 411 there any thing this Gentleman has faid, that proves fuch a renunciation to be an evi]. 1. He is very wrong in fuppofing it muft be my intention, that the age of a perfon, or the time of receiving baptifm, are eflential to the ordinance. The Antipsdobaptifts do not confine this ordinance to any age, but admit old or ycung to it, if proper fubjedls ; let a man be as old as Metbufelah, if he has not faith in Chrift, or cannot give a fatisfaftory account of it, he will not be admit- ted to this ordinance by reafon of his age ; on the other hand, if a little child is called by grace, and converted, and gives a reafon of the hope that is in it, of which there have been inftances; fuch will not be refufed this ordinance of bap- tifm. The eflentials to the right adminiftration of baptifm, amongfl: other things, are, that it -be performed by immerfion, without which it cannot be baptifm ; and that it be adminiftered upon a profeffion of faith ; neither of which are to be found in Infant-fprinkling. 2. It is in vain and to no purpofe in this writer to urge, that infants are capa- ble of baptifm ; fo are bells, and have been baptized by the Papills. But u is faid, infants are capable of being cleanfed by the blood of Chrilt •, of being re- generated ; of being entered into covenant, and of having the fcal of it adminif- tered to them. And what of all this? are they capable of underflanding the nature, defign, and ufe of the ordinance, when adminiftercd to them ? are they capable of profefTing faith in Chrift, which is a pre requifuc to this ordinance ? are they capable of anfwering a good confcicnce towards God in it ? are they capable of fubmitting to it in obedience to the will of Chrift, from a love to film, and with a view to his glory .'' they are not. But, 3. It feems, in baptifm, infants are dedicated untoGod ; wherefore to renounce Infant- baptifm, is for a man to renounce his folemn dedication to God7race ot God in that adt. By the bond of the covenant, is not meant faith and repentance on man's part ; which fome ftupidly call the terms and condi- tions of the covenant, when they are parts and bicfTings of it ; but the ever- lafting love of God, which is the fourcc and fecuricy of it, and which lays men under oblio-ation to ferve their covenanc-God ; and to be brought into it, is to be brought into a comfortable view of intcrcft in it, and to an open participation of DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT - BAPTI S M. 415 of the blcdings of it j which is all according to, and confident with the eternal conftitution of it. 5. The covenant of grace can never be vacated, fince it is evcrhfling, ordered in all things and fur e : this is owned by our author in refpeft of its divine confti- tution, and of the immutability of the divine promife, to all under the fpiritual difpenfation of it; but there are others who are only in it by a vifible and bap- lifmal dedication ; and thefe may make void the covenant between God and them ; and this it fcems is the cafe of the greateft part of infants in covenant. Now let me retort this Gentleman's argument upon himfelf, which he makes ufe of againft the covenant being from everlafling. " Thofe, whom God ad- " mits into the covenant of grace, have an intereft in the benefits of that cove- *' nant, pardon of fin, the gift of the Spirit, reconciliation, adoption, (^c. for " it is a fort of contradiftion to fay, that any man is admitted into the covenant, " and yet debarred from an intereft in all the privileges of it." Now, either infants are admitted into the covenant of grace, or they are not-, if they are, then they have an intereft in the benefits of it, pardon of fin, and the other bleffings, and fo fhall all certainly be faved wich an everlafting falvation, and not apoftatize, as it feems the greateft part of them do; for to fay they are in the external, but not in the fpiritual part of the covenant, is to make a poor bufinefs of their covenant-intereft indeed. The inftance of Simon Magus, which he thinks I have forgot, will not make for him, nor againft me; it is a clear proof, that a man is not brought into covenant by baptifm -, fince though bap- ufm was adminiftered to this perfon in the pure, primitive way, by an apoftolic man, yet he was in the gall of hitternefs and bond of iniquity. 2dly, The other three confequences following upon the renouncing oflnfant- baptilm, as renouncing all other ordinances, the promife of Chrift's prefcnce not made good, and no baptifm now in the world, are in fome fort given up, and are allowed not to be clear, at leaft not alike clear ; and are only adverted to in a general way, and fome expreftions of mine catched at, and remarked upon, and thefe miftaken or perverted. I. I obferve, this author repeats his former miftake, that we make age efTcn- tial to baptifm, which is but circumftantial ; and then ufes an argument from the leflTcr to the greater, as he thinks, that if a defedt in fuch a circumftance nullifies the ordinance, then much more the want of proper adminiftrators : but it is not age that we objedl to, but a want of underftand:ng, and faith, and an incapacity to make a profedlon of ir, as well as the mode of adminiftrarion ; things of greater importance in this ordinance ; at leaft they are fo with us. However, it is kind in this Gentleman to diredl us how we may avoid this inconvenience his argument has thrown us into, by exercifing a little more moderation. 4i5 A REPLY TO A DEFENCE OF THE moderation and charity for Infant-baptifm •, and upon this foot he feems to be willing to compound the matter with us. 2. As to the prefence of Chrift with his church and minifters, it is fufficient to make that good, that he grants it where his Church is, and wherefoever he has a people, be they more, or fewer, and wherefoever his ordinances are ad- miniftered according to his diredion ; but he has no where promifed, that he will have a continued fuccefTion of vifible congregated churches. Certain in- deed it is, that he will have a number of chofen ones in all ages -, that his in- vifible church, built on Chrift the rock, fhall not fail ; and he will have a feed to fcrve him, or fome particular perfons, whom he will referve to himfelf from a general corruption; but that thefe fliall be gathered always into -a vifible cTofpel church-ftate, is no where promifed ; and for many hundreds of years it will be hard to find any one fuch church, unlefs the people in the valleys of Piedmont are allowed to be fuch. 3. This writer is not willing to admit fuch a fuppofition, that any of the laws and inftitutions of Chrift have failed, ceafcd, or been annulled in any one ac^c, and much more for feveral ages together; but, befides the ordinance of baptifm, which through the change of mode and fubjefts, together with the impure mixtures of fait, oil, and fpittle, and other fuperftitious rites, which became quite another thing than what was inftituted by Chrift, and pradifed by his apoftles ; the ordinance of the Lord's-fuppeh was fo fadly perverted and corrupted, as to be a mere mafs indeed of blafphemy and idolatry ; in the com- munion of which the gracious prefence of Chrift cannot be thought, to be en- joyed: and yet this continued fome hundreds of years; only now and then lome fingle perfons rofe up, and bore a teftimony againft it, who for a while had their followers. 4. He fecms to triumph from Dr fVall's account of things, that there never was nor is, to this day, any national church in the world but Psdobaptifts, cither among the Greeks, or Roman Catholics, or the Reformed ; anJ that Antip^dobaptifm never obtained to be the cftablifiied religion of any country in the world. We do not envy his boaft ; we know that national churches are good for nothing, as not being agreeable to the rule of the divine word ; on; fmall church or congregation, gathered out of the world by the grace of God, according to gofpel-order, and whofe principles and praflices are agreeable to the word'^of God, is to be preferred before all the national churches in the world. 5. According to this Gentleman's own account of the Englifh Antip.xdobap- tifts, there could be none to adminifter the ordinance to them in their way; fince ihofe that came from Holland, it feems, gained no profelytes, but were foon DTVINE'RIGHT OF INFANT - BAPUISM. 417 foon cxtind, being cruelly perfccuted and deftroycd ; fo thar it was neccflary they ftiould fend abroad for an adminiftrator, or make ufe of an unbaptizec} one : but which way foever they took, they are able to juftify their baptifm on as good a foundation as the Reformers are able to juftify theirs received from the Papifts, with all the fooleries, corruptions, and fuperftitious rites •attending" it. :.. 5 . ....,.., o My third chapter, yoa will remember, Sir, is concerning The Jntiq^uity of Infant'baptifm, and the praifUcc of the Wiildcnfes. . , I. The enquiry is, whether Infant- baptifm conftantly and univerfally obtain- ed in the truly primitive church, which truly pure and primitive church muft be the church in the times of Cbrift and his apoftlcs j Gnce towards the clofe of ihofc times, and in the two following Ages, there arofe fuch a fee of impure men, both for principle and pradice, under the chriftian name, as never were knowa in the world : now by an indu(ftion of particular inftances of churches in this period of time, it does not appear, that Infant-baptifm at all obtained. In Mr Clark's reply to which, I obferve, i. That he fays, the evidence of Infant-bap- tifm is not pretended to lie in the hiftory of faft, or in any exprcfs mention of it in the New Teftament. That the penman of the AHs of the Apojlles did not dcfccnd tofo minute a particular, as the baptizing of infants, — and that the bap- tifm of the adult was of the greateft account to be recorded. 2. Yet he thinks there arc pretty plain intimations of it in moft of the charaflcrs inftanced in, and particularly in the church zijerufakm \ which he endeavours to make good by a criticifm on AEls\\. 41, And it ispleafant to obferve, how he toils and la- bours to find out an antecedent to a relative not exprefled in the text ; for the words, /p them, are not in the original ; it is only and the fame day there were add- ed about three tboufand fouls \ or, the fame day there was an addition of about three thouiand fouls; and all this pains is taken to fupport a whimfical notion, that this addition was made, not to the church, but to the new converts ; and by a wild fancy he imagines, that infants are included among the three thou- find foub that were added : his argument from ver. ^^. and the other inftances tncniioQcd, as well as fomc other paflages aUedged, fuch as Luke xviii. 16. Ads XV, JO. I Cor. vii. 14. as they come over in the debate again, are referred to their proper places. But, 3. It muft not be forgotten, what is faid, that this may be a reafon why Infant-baptifm is fo fparingly mentioned, (not mentioned at all) bccaufc the cuilom of the Jews to baptize the children of profclytcs to their re- ligion with their parents, was well known ; and there can be little doubt, that the apoftles proceeded by the fame rule in admitting the infants of chriftian prolclytcs into the chriftian covcnaat by baptifm. This is building Infant-bap- . . Vou II. 3 H tifm 4i8 A REPLY TO A DEFENCE OF THE: tifm on a bog indeed ; Gnce this Jewifh cuftom is not pretended to be of divine inftitution ; and fo a poor argument in the Defence of the Divine Right of Infant - baptifm; and at moft and beft, is only a tradition of the elders, which body of traditions was inveighed againft by Chrift and his apoftles ; and befides, this particular jtradition does not appear to have obtained fo early among the Jews ihemfely^s, as the times of the apoftles, and therefore could be no rule for therri to proceed by ; and about which the firft reporters of it difagree, the one affirming there was fuch a cuftom, and the other denying it ; and had it then obtained, it is incredible the apoftles fliould make this the rule of their proce- dure in adminiftering an ordinance of Chrift : and after all, was this the cafe, this would be a reafon for, and not againft the exprefs mention of Infant-bap- lifm by the divine hiftorian ; fince it is neceffary that in agreement with this Jewifh cuftom, fome inftance or inftances of chriftian profelytes being baptized with their children fliould be recorded, as an example for chriftians in fucceed- ino- ages to go by. Bur, 4. A fuppofuion is made of fome Pasdobaptifts fcnt into an heathen country to preach, and giving an account of their fuccefs, de- clarino- that fome families were baptized, fuch a man and all his, fuch another and his houftiold •, upon which a queftion is aflced, who could raife a doubt whe- ther any infants were baptized in thofe fevcral families ? To which I anfwcr, there is no doubt to be made of it, that Psedobaptifts would baptize infants ; and if the apoftles were Paedobaptifts, which is the thing to be proved, they no doubt baptized infants too; but if ho other account was given of the baptiz- ing of houftiolds, than what the apoftles give of them, Infant-baptifm would ftill remain a doubt. For who can believe, that the brethren in Lydia's houfe whom the apoftles comforted, and of whom her houftiold confifted, or that the Jailor's houftiold, that believed and rejoiced with him, or the houftiold oi Ste- phanas, who addiftcd themfelves to the miniftry of the faints, were infants? however it feems, as there is no evidence of faft for Infant-baptifm in the New Tcftament, it is referred to the tcftimony of the ancient fathers ; and to them then we muft go. II. The teftimony of the fathers of the three firft centuries is chiefly to be attended to •, and whereas none in the firft century are produced in favour of Infant-baptifm, we muft proceed to the fecond. In it, I obfcrve, there is but one writer, that it is pretended fpeaks of Infant-baptifm, and that is 7««v/illix has abundantly proved. The cafe, as he makes it appear, was this ; that there were Manichees in the places where the Valdcnfes and Albigenfes lived, but not that joined them ; their enemies took the advantage of this, and called them by the fame name, and afcribed the fame opinions to them, efpecially if they could find any thing in them fimilar to them : thus for inftance, becaufe they denied Infant-baptifm, therefore they were againft all Water-baptifm, and lo Manichees -, for as Dryillix * obferves, " in thofe barbarous and cruel ages, a ♦' fmall conformity of opinions with the Manichees, was a fufRcient ground to " accufe them of Manicheifm, who oppofed any dodrine received by the I ♦' church of Rome : Thus would they have'taken the Anabaptifts for downright ' " Manichees, fays he, becaufe they condemned the baptifm of infants:" and Mr Clark cannot objcd to this obfervation, fince he himfelf argues from the denial of Infant-baptifm, to the denial of baptifm itfelf ; and has reprefented me as a Manichee, or a Qiiakcr, for no other rcafon, but for the denial of Infant-baptifm > and if his book live? to the next age, and is of any authoHty, and can find people foolifh enough to believe it, I muft be fct down for a Manichee or a Quaker. Indeed I muft confefs, I ofice thought, giving too much credit to Dr IVallt that there were different feds among the Waldenfes, and fome of them Manichees, and of other erroneous principles, which I now retrad. $; It is not true what this writer from Dr fP'all affirms ; " This is certain, ♦' that no one author, that calls the people he writes of Waldenfes, does im- 312- " pu-.e Remarks on the aocient churcli ofPiednaont, c. i v p. 1 ji- 42S A -REPLY TO A DEFENCE OF THE • " pute to them the denial of Infanc-baptifm -, " for Claudius Coujfard, writing againft them, under this name, gives an extraft of their errors out of Raynirius, and this is one of them ; " They fay, then firft a man is baptized, when he is " received into their feft -, fome of them hold that baptifm is of no advantage " to infants, becaufe they cannot yet aftually believe ; " and concludes this extraft thus, " from whence you may fee, courteous reader, that this feft of " the Waldcnfes, and the chief, yea almoft all hcrefies now in vogue, are not " of late invention, ISC'" and were this true, yet it is a mere evafion, and a foolifh one; fince the names of Henricians, Arnoldids, Cathari, Apoftolici, fc, under which they are rcprefented, asoppofers of Infant-baptifm, are the names of the Waldcnfes, as Ferrin >' obferves, a writer whom our author fays he has read. 4. It is a mod clear cafe, , that the ancient barbs or pallors of the Waldenfiaa churches, fo called, were oppofers of Infant-baptifm. S'\t Samuel Aloreland, as I have obfcrved, reckons Peter Bruis and Henry among their ancient paftors -, fo docs Perrin likewifc, though he is miftaken in making them to follow I'Faldo j. and thcfe are allowed to be Antipjedobaptifts by fcveralPxdobaptifts themfelvcs. yirnoldus, another of their paftors, according to the above writer, from whence they were called Arnoldifts, was out of all doubt a denier of Infant-baptifm,, for which he was condemned by a council, as Dr fFall owns. Lollardo was another of their paftors, according to the fame authors, and from whole name» Perrin fays, the Waldcnfes were called Lollards ; and fo Kilianus fays % a Lol- lard is alio called a Waldenfian heretic. Thefe were not the followers of fFickliff, as our author wrongly afterts ; for they were, as Dr Allix'' obferves, more an- cient than the Wicklifites; and though this name was afterwards given to the latter, Lollardo was here in England, and had his followers before IVickliff's time v and lb he had in Flanders and Germany ; and of the Lollards there, Tri- ihemius^ fays, they derided the facrament of baptifm; which cannot be under- ftood of their deriding baptifm in general, but of their deriding Infant-baptifm ; which was common among the Papifts to fay ; and the fame is the fenfe of the Lollards in England, who are charged with making light of the facrament of baptifm. Now fince thefe were the fentiments of the ancient paftors of the Waldcnfes, it is rcafonable to believe the people themfelves were of the fame mind with them ; nor are there any confeftions of their faith, which make any mention of Infant-baptifm ; nor any proofs of its being praflifcd by them until the fixteenth century, produced by our author, or any other. 5. The r Hirtory of the Waldenfei, p. 8, 9. -' '■ . • Apud A'llix's Remarks on the ancient churches of the Albigenfes, c. z;. p. 202. » Ibid. p. 201. ^ Apud Ailix, ibid. p. aoj. 1 DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT - BAPTISM. 429 : ■ 5. The Albigenfes, as Perrin ' fays, differ nothing at all from the Waldenfes, in their belief; but are only fo called of the country oi Albi; where they dwelt, and had their firft beginning •, and who received the belief of the "Waldenfes by means of Peter Bruis, Henry and jirnold; who, as it clearly appears, were all Antipasdobaptifts; and DxAllix " obferves, that the Albigenfes have been called Petrobrufians ; owned to be a fed of the Waldenfes, that denied Infant-bap- cifm : and that the Albigenfes denied it, at lead fome of them, yea the greateft part of them, is acknowledged by fome Pjedobaptifts themfelves. Chajjanion in his hiftory of thefe people fays ' ; " fome writers have affirmed, that the " Albigeois approved not of the baptifm of infants. — I cannot deny that the " Albigeois for i\\t greateft fart were of that opinion .The truth is, they did *:' not rejedl this facrament, or fay it was ufelcfs, (as fome, he before obferves, " aflerted they did) but only counted it unneceflary to infants, bccaufe they are " not of age to believe, or capable of giving evidence of their faith." Which is another proof of the ancient Waldenfes being againft Infant-bapcifm, thefe being the fame with them. Upon the whole, if I have been too modefV, in fay- ing that the ancient Waldenfes praftifed Infant-baptifm, wants proof, I fhall now ufe a little more boldnefs and confidence, and affirm, that the ancient Vallenfes, or as corruptly called Waldenfes, were oppofers of Infant-baptifm •, and that no proof can- be given of the praftice of it among them till the fixteenth century ; and that the author of the dialogue had no reafon to fay, that their being in the pradice of adult baptifm, and denying Infant-baptifm, was a mere chimsera and a groundlcfs figment. M.y fourth chapter, you know. Sir, refpefts the argument for Infant-baptifm, taken from the covenant made with Abraham, and from circumcifion. Here our author runs out into a large difcuffion of the covenant of grace, in his way -, in which he fpends about fourfcore pages, which I take to be the heads of fome old fcrmons, he is fond of, and has taken this opportunity of publifhino them to the world, without any propriety or pertinence. For, i. not to difpute the point with him, whether there are two diftinft covenants of redemption and grace, or whether they are one and the fame, which is foreign to the argument;' be it that they are two diftindt ones, the fpiritual feed promifed toChrift, or the people given him in the one, are the fame that are taken into the other ; they are of equal extent ; there are no more in the one, tlian there are concerned in the other ; and this writer himfclf allows, " that the falvation of the fpiritual *' feed o/"Chrift is promifed in both covenants." Now let it be proved, if it can, * Hiftory of the Albigenfej, 1. I. c. I. p. I, 2. * Ut fopr«, c. 14. p. lii. • Apud Stennett, p. 81, 8a 430 A REPLY TO A DEFENCE OF THE can, that there arc any in the covenant of grace but xhcfpiritual feed of Cbrifl \ and that the natural feed of believers, and their infants as fuch, are the fpiritual feed : and if they are, then they were given to Chrift, who undertook to fave them, and whofe falvation was promifed to him, and to whom in time the communications of grace according to the covenant are made; then they muft be all of them regenerated, renewed, and fandified, juftified, pardoned, adopted, perfcvere in grace, and be eternally faved ; all which will not, cannot be faid .of all the infants of believers ; and confequently cannot be thought to be in the covenant of grace. 2. As to what he fays concerning the conditionality of the covenant, it is all anfwered in one word -, let him name what he will, as the condition of this covenant, which God has not abfolutely promifed, or Chrift has not engaged to perform, or to fee performed in his people, or by them. Are the Condi- tions, faith and repentance ? Thefc arc both included in the nev> heart, and fpirit, and heart ef ficfh, God has abfolutely promifed in the covenant, Ezekiel xxxvi. 26. Is new, fpiritual, and evangelical obedience, the condition ? This is abfolutely promifed as the former, ver. 27. Or is it aflual confent ? Thy people fhall be willing, Pfal. ex. 3. And after all, if it is a conditional covenant, how do infants get into it ? Or is it a conditional covenant to the adult, and uncon- ditional to them ? If faith and repentance are the conditions of it, and thefc muft be, as this author fays, " the finner's own voluntary chofen adls, before ♦♦ he can have any aftual faving intereft in the privileges of the covenant;" it follows, that they cannot be in it, or have intereft in the privileges of it, till they repent and believe, and do thefe as their own voluntary chofen afb ; and if " man's confent and agreement bring him into covenant with God," as this writer fays ; it (hould be confidered, whether infants are capable of this con- fent, or no ; and if they are not, according to this man, they ftand a poor chance for being in the covenant. 3. Whereas the covenant of grace, as to the eflence of it, has been always the fame, as is allowed, under the various forms and adminiftrations of it, both under the Old and New Tcftanicnt ; fo the fubjcds of it have been, and are the fame, the fpiritual feed of Chrift, and none elfe ; and not the carnal feed of men as fuch : and if the conditions of it are the fame, faith and obedience, as our author obfcrvcs, then infants muft ftand excluded from ic, fince they can neither believe nor obey. 4. That the covenant of grace was made with /ibrabam, or a revelation and application of it to him ; that the gofpel was revealed to hiin, and he was jufti- fied in the fame way believers arc now; and that he had ipiritual promifes made to him, and fpiritual blefTings beftowed upon him j and that gofpeUbelievers., be DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT - BAPT I S M. 431 be they Jews or Gentiles, who are the fpiritual feed of Abraham, are heirs of the fame covenant-bleffings and promifes, are never denied ■,— this man is fight- ing with his own fhadow. What is denied and fhould be proved, is, that the covenant of grace is made with Abraham'^ carnal feed, the Jews, and with the carnal feed of gofpcl- believers among the Gentiles; and that fpiritual promifes are made to them; and that they are heirs of fpiritual blefTmgs, as fuch : and let it be further ob- fcrved, that the covenant in Genefu xvii. is not the covenant referred to in Galatians iii. 17. faid to be confirmed of God in Chriji, and which could not be dif- annuUed by the law 420 years after ; fince the date does not agree, it falls fliort twenty-four years ; and therefore mud refer, not to the covenant of circum- cifion, but to fonrje other covenant, and time of making it. 5. It is falfe, that children have been always taken with their parents inro the covenant of grace, under every difpenfation. The children of y^iaw were not taken into the covenant of grace with him, which was made known to him immediately after che fall ; for then all the world muft be in the covenant of grace. The covenant made with Noah and his fons, was not the covenant of grace; fince it was made with the beafts of the field as well as with them ; vmkfs it will be faid, that they alfo are in the covenant of grace. Nor were all Abraham's natural feed taken into the covenant of grace with him. Jfhmael was by name excluded, and the covenant cftablifhed withT/a^jf ; and yet Ifhmael was in the covenant of circumcifion ; which by the way proves, that, that and the covenaQt of grace aic two different things : nor were all Abraham's natural feed in the line of Ijaac taken into the covenant of grace, not Efau ; nor all in the line of Jacob and Ifrael \ for as the apoftle fays, they are not all Ifrael which 4ire of Ifrael-^ neither becaufe they are the feed of Abraham, are they all children ; hitt in Ifaac fhall thy feed be called ; that is, they which are the children of the fleflj, thefe are not the children of Gad, but the children of the fromife are counted for the feed'. - The covenant at Hcreb was indeed a national covenant, and took in all, children and grown pcrJbns ; and which was no other than a civil contradl, and not a covenant of grace, between God and the people of //ra^/; he as King, and they as fubjefts ; he promifing to be their protedor and defender, and they to be his faithful fubjedts, and obey his laws ; which covenant has been long ago abolifhed, when God wrote a Loammi upon them : nor is there any proof of infants under the New Teftament being taken into covenant with their pa- rents. Not Ma//, xix. 14. iC^r. vii. 14. which make no mention of any cove- nant at all, as will be confidered hereafter; nor Heb. viii. 8. fince the houfe of Ifrael, that new covenant is faid to be made with, are i\\i fpiritual Ifrael, whe- ther « Rom. ix. 6 — 8. 432 A REPLY TO A DEFENCE OF THE" ther Jews or Gentiles, even the whole houlhold of faith, and none but them ; nor are their infants fpoken of, nor can they be included ; for have they all of them the laws of God written on their hearts ? Do they all know the Lord ? or have they all their fins forgiven them ? which is the cafe with all thofe with whom this covenant is made, or to whom it is applied. Nor are there any predi6rions of this kind in the Old Teftament. Deut.xxx. 6. P/almxxn.^o. Ifaiab\x.2]. fpeak only of a fucceffion of converted perfons, either in the gofpcl-church among the Gentiles, or in the fame among the Jews, when that people fhall be converted in the latter day. 6. The diftindion of an inward and outward covenant, is inUtopian bufinefs, mere jargon and nonfenfe ; it has no foundation in fcripture, reafon, nor com- mon fenfe. And here I cannot but obferve what Mr Baxter, a zealous Psdo- baptift, fays on this fubjeft ^ " Mr 5/aA:(?'s common phrafe is, that they are " in the outward covenant, and what that is, I cannot tell; in what fenfe is that " (God's covenant-aft) called outward ? It cannot be, as ifGod did as the dif- " fembling creature. Ore tenus, with the mouth only, covenant with them, and *' not with the heart, as they ileal with him. I know therefore no pofTiblc fenfe *' but this, that it is called outward from the blefTings promifed, which arc out- " ward ; here therefore, I fhould have thought it reafonable for Mr Blake to «' have told us what thei'e outward bleflings are, that this covenant promifeth ; " and that he would have proved out of the fcriptures thatGod hath fuch a co- " venant diftinft from the covenant of grace. I defire therefore that thofe words " of fcripture may be produced, where any fuch covenant is contained." And letMvClark tell us what he means by the OK/w^jr^ covenant, or the outward pare of it, in which infants are-, if any thing can be collefted from him, as his mean- inot to the natural feed of either of them az fuch" He fays, " it is not requifitc to a perfon's vifible title and claim to the external privileges •* of the covenant, that he fhould be truly regenerate, or a fincere believer; " and yet he clfewherc fays, " that to fepenc and believe muft be the finner's " own voluntary chofcn acfls, before he can have any aftual faving intereft in " the privileges of the covenant :" let him reconcile thcfe together. He has not proved, nor is he able to prove, that the natural feed of believing Gentiles, as fuch, are the fpiritual feed oi Abraham ; fince only they that are Chrift's, or believers iti him, or who walk in the fteps of the faith ol Abraham, are his fpiritual fced ; which cannot be faid of all the natural feed of believing Gen- files, or of any of them as fuch. That claufe in Abrabani's covenant, A father of DIVINE RIGHT OF I NFANT - BAPTISM. 435 ef many nations have I made thee^y is to be underftood only of the faithfal, or of believers in all nations -, and not of all nations that bear the chriftian name, as comprehending all in them, grown perfons and infants, good and bad menv and only to fuch who are of the faith oi Abraham ' if J, even to them 'that were afar off, their brethren the Jews in diftanc countries, that fliould hear the gofpel, repent and believe, and be baptized ; or fhould live in ages to come in the latter day, and ftiould look on him whom they have pierced^ and mourn ; and fo has nothing to do with the covenant with Abraham DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT - BAPTIS M. 441 Ahrabam and his natural feed, and much lefs with the Gentiles and theirs : and be it To, that the Gentiles are meant by thofe afar off, which may be admitted, fincc it is fometimes a defcriptive character of them ; yet no mention is made of their children •, and had they been mentioned, the limiting claufe, even as many as the Lord our GodJJoall call, plainly points at, and defcribes the pcrfons in- tended ; not among the Gentiles only, but the Jews alfo, as agreeable to com- mon fenfe and the rules of grammar -, and is to be undcrftood only of the Jews that are called by grace, and of their children, that are effeftually called, and of the Gentiles called with an holy calling, as the perfons to whom the pro- mifc belongs; and which appears evident by their repentance and baptifm, which this is an encouraging motive to; and therefore can be underftoDd only of adult perfons, and not of infants ; and of whofe baptifm- not a fylhble is men- tioned, nor can it be inferred from this pafTige,: or eftablifhtd by it. II. The next pafiage of fcripture produced in favour of Infant-baprifm, and to as little purpofe, is Matthew xix. rj. it rs owned by our author, tha: tlitrfe children were not brought to Chrift to be baptized by him ; and that they were not baptized by him ; thefe things', he fays, they do not affirm. For what then is the pafTage produced ^ why, to fhew, that infants become profelytesto Chrift by baptifm ; and is not this to be baptized ? what a contradidion is this .'' And afterwards another felf-contradiftion follows : he imagines thefe infants had been baptized already, and yet were commanded to become profclvtfs by baptifm, and fo Anabaptifts ; but how does it appear that it was the will of Chrill they (hould become profelytes to him this way .' from the etymology Oi"' the Greek word, which fignifies /.'e, and for that reafon ", without favouring flrong of popery, or favouring the notion of marriage being a facramenr, as this writer infinuates ; who has got a ftrange nofe, and a ftrangcr judgment : whe- ther he is a finglc or a married man, I know not; he appears to have a bad opinion O;' marriage. That infants born in lawful wedlock cannot be called holy, being Jcgitiinatc, without favouring of popery. As he is not able to fct afide the fcnfe of the word fanSfifieJ given by me, as fignifying efpoufed ; he re- quires of me to prove that the v/ord holy means legUim.its ; for which I refer him to Ezra ix. 2. where thofe born of parents, both Jewifh, are called an holy feed; -that if, a lawful one; in oppofuion to, and in diitinftion from a fpurious and illegitimate ifTue, born of parents, the one Jewidi and the other Heathen : and this is the fame with the godly feed, in Mai. ii. 15. which Calvin interprets legi- timate, in diftinflion from thofe that are born in polygamy : nor will any oiher fcnfe fuit with the cafe propofcd to the apoftle; nor with his anfwer and manner of reafoning about it ; who fays not one word of a covenant whereby an unbelieving yoke-fellow is fandified to a believing one, or of the federal holi- nefs of the children of both; but argues, that if their marriage, being unequal, was not valid, which was their fcruple, their children mufl be unclean, as baftards wcic accounted" ; whereas it being good, their children were legitimate, and !•) might beeafy, and continue together as they ought, ■ The pafTdge out of theTalmud, which he has at fecond-hand from Dr Ltghtfco:, f'-.-r.gns by Holinefs, Judaifm, and not Chriftianity, and is quite impertinent to I'.j purpofe ; nor can it be thought to be alluded to, fince the holinefs the Jews fpeak " Hcb. iiii.4. ° Dcut. xxiii. 2. DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT - BAPTISM. -445 ^cak of, refpefts the parents, as both profclytes to Judaifm ; whereas the ■ 3poftle's cafe fuppofes one an Heaihcn, and the other a Chriftian : and he | ciight have obferved by a tradition quoted by the Do(flor, in the fatne place, . j th:lt fuch a marriage the apofl:)e was confiJering, 1s condemned by the Jews as ] no marriage, and the iflue of it as illegitimate -, which afTcrts, i\\2.i a fon begotten \ of a Heathen woman is not a fon, hi^s lawful fon ; juft the reverfc of what the apoftle fuggefted : and after all, our author himfclf .feems to make this holinefs no other than a civil holinefs, and which fecures a civil relation, by which «' the unbelieving yoke-fellow is fanflified, fo far as concerns the believing " party ; that is, for lawful cohabitation, conjugal fociety, and the propaga- y- tion of a holy covenant-feed ; " for all which purpofcs, lawful marriages niay be allowed to fandtify, \i on\y \n?iczA oi a holy covenant -feed, a legitimate feed is put. So that upon the whole, this pafTage does not furni/h out the lead fliew of argument for Infant-baptifm. Come we to V. The next pafTage produced in favour of Infant-baptifm, which are the words of the commiffion in Matthew xwiii. 19, 20. one would think there (hould be no difficulty in iinderftanding thefc words -, and that the plain and cafy fenle of them is, that fuch as are taught by the miniftry of the word, Ihould be baptized, and they only, and if there was any doubt about this, yec it might be removed by comparing the fame commifTion with this, as differently cxprefTcd in Mark xvj. 15, \6. from whence it clearly appears, that to teach all nations, is to preach the gofpel.io every creature; and that the perfons among all nations, that may be faid to be taught, or made difciples by teaching, are be- lievers, and being fo, are to be baptized -, be that believetb and is baptized, fiall be faved. It is obferved by this writer, that the afts of difcipling and baptizing are of equal extent: it is agreed to, provided it be allowed, as it ought,, that the word, teach, or make difciples, defcribes and limits the perfons to be bap- tized ; for fuch only of all nations are to be baptized, who are made dif- ciples by teaching •, not all the individuals of all nations ; no, not even where the gofpel comes, and is preached ; for many hear it, and more might, who are not taught by it -, and even when the feventh trumpet fhall found, and all nations fhall ferve the Lord, this will not be true of every individual of all nations, only of fuch, who arc qualified for, and capable of ferving the Lord ; and fo of adult perfons only, and not of infants at all : and was this the cafe, that all nations in the commiffion arc under no limitation and reflridion, then not only the children of Pagans, Turks, and Jev/s, but even all adult perfons, the moft vile and profligate, fhould be baptized ; wherefore the phrafe, all nations to be baptized, mufl: be reftrained and limited to thofe who are made difciples out of all nations -, who are the antecedent to the relative, them that are to be baptized, and not all nations j and though there is a frequent change 44^ A REPLY TO A DEFENCE OF THE change of gender in the Greek language, which is owned ; yet as Pifcator, a learned Pzedobaptift, on the text obferves, "the fyntax {of them) is referred to *' the fenfe, and not to the word, fincc nations went before ;" and the fame obfcrvation he makes on the pafTage our author has produced as parallel, Romans ii. 14, but in order to bring infants to this reftriflive and qualifying charaftcr for bapiifm, it is faid, they arc made difciples with their parents, when they become fo, as parts of themfclves : and why may they not be faid to be bap- tized with them, when they are baptized, as parts of themfelves, and fo have no need of baptifm ? No doubt, if Chrift had continued the ufe of circumci- fion under the New-Tcftament, and had bid his apoftles to go and difcipU the Jiations, ctrcumcijing tbem, they would have needed no dircftion as to infants, as is fuggeftcd ; and that for this plain rcafon, becaufe there had been a previous cxprcfs command for the circumcifion of them.-, but there is no fuch command to baptize infants previous to the commiflion, and therefore could not be un- derftood in like manner. But it fccms the known cuftom of the Jews to bap- tize the children of profclytes with them, was a plain and fufficient direftion as to the fubjcfts of baptifm, and is the reafon why no exprefs mention is made of them in the commiffion : But it does not appear there was any fuch cuftom among the Jews, when the commifTion was given -, had it been fo early, as is pre- tended, even in the times oi Jacob, it is ftrange there fhould be no hint of it in the Old Tcftament : nor in the apocryphal writings j nor in the writings of the New Tcftament •, nor in Jofephus % nor in Pbilo the Jew ; nor in the Jewilh Mjfnab; only in ihe Talmud; which was not compofed till five hundred years after Chrift ; and this cuftom is at firft reported by a fingle Rabbi, and at the fame time denied by another of equal credit and authority: and admitting that this was a cuftom that then obtained, fince it was not of divine inftitution, but of human invention, had our Lord thought fit (which is not reafonable toftip- pofe) to take it into his New Tcftament ordinance of baptifm ; yet it would have been neceftary to have made cxprcfs mention of it, as his will that it ftiould be cbfervcd, in order to remove the fcruple that might arife from its being a mere Jewifti cuftom and tradition. But to proceed : though this writer may be able to find in the fchools within his knowledge, fuch ignorant difciples and learners, that have learned nothing at all -, Christ has none fuch in his fchool : Chrift fays, none can be a difciple of his, but who has learned to deny bimfelf, take up his crofs, and follow bim", and forfake all for him •, and this man fays, they may be called difciples, that have learned nothing, and be inrolled among the difciples of Chrift, who are uncapable of outward teaching : but who arc we to believe, Chrift, or this ipan ? Luke liv. 26, 27, 33. DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT - BAPTI SM. 447 i man ? He fuggefts, that it would be impradicable to put the commifTion in j execution, if none but true difcipies and believers are to be baptized, fince the j heart cannot be infpcded, and man may be deceived 5 and obferves, that the 1 apoftles baptized immediately upon profefllon, and waited not for the fruits of it, and fome of which are not true difcipies, but hypocrites: this is what he often harps upon 5 and to which I anfwer, the apoftles had no doubt a greater fpirit of difcerning, and fo could obferve the figns of true faith and difciplefhip in men, without long waiting; but they never baptized any whom they did not judge to be true difcipies and believers, and who profefled themfelves to be fuch : and though they were in fome few inftances miftaken ; this micrht be fuffered, that minifters and churches might not be difcouraged, when fuch inftances fhould appear in following times; and this is fatisfadion enou^^h in this point, when men keep as clofe as they can to the divine rule, and make the beft judgment of perfons they are able ; and when, in a judgment of charity, they are thought to be true difcipies ofChrift, baptize them; in which they do their duty, though it may fall out otherwife; and in which they are to be juftified by the word of God ; which they could not, were they to adminifter the ordinance to fuch who have no appearance of the grace of God, and the truth of it in them. The text in AHs xv. 10. is far from provincr infants dif- cipies ; they are not defigncd in that place, nor included in the charadler; for though no doubt the Judaizing preachers were for having the Gentiles, and their infants too, circumcifed ; yet it was not circumcifion, the thing itfelf, tliat is meant by the intolerable yoke, attempted to be put upon the necks of the difcipies ; for that was what the Jewifh fathers and their children were able to bear, and had borne in ages paft; but it was the doctrine of the neccfTity of that, and other ritqs of Afo/fj, tofalvation; and which could no: be impofeJ upon infants, but upon adult perfons only. Next we proceed to VI. The pafTages concerning the baptifm of whole houfholds, as an expla- nation of the commifilon, and of the apoftles underftanding it : Now fince Infant-baptifm, as we have feen, cannot be eftabliflied by Abraham'^ covenant, nor by circumcifion, nor by any command of Chrift, nor by his commiffion, nor by any inftances of infants baptized in the times oi John the Baptift, or of Chrift ; if any inftances of infants baptized by the apoftles are propofed, they (hould be clear and plain : Since there is no cxprefs precept, which might juftly be demanded ; if any precedent is produced, it ought to be quite unexception- able; if it is expeded, fuch a practice Ihould be given into by thinking people. Three families or houfholds we read of, that were baptized, and thtf.- are the precedents propofed ; yet no proof is made of any one infant in thcfe families, or of the baptifm of any in them ; which ftiould be done, if the'former could be 443 A REPLY TO A DEFENCE OF THE be proved : but inftead of this, the advocates for this praflice are drove to this poor and mifcrable fhifc, to put us on proving the negative, that there were no infants in them. Our author thinks it utterly incredible, that in three fuch fa- milies there (hould be no infants, when, in fo large a country as Egypt, there was not a family without a child ■■ ; and is fo weak as to believe, or however hopes to find readers weak enough to believe, that all the firft-born of theE-^yp- tians that were flain were infants-, whereas there might be many of them twenty, thirty, or forty years of age ; fo that there might be hundreds and thoufands of families in Egypt that had not an infant in them, and yet not an houfe in which there was not a dead perfon. But let us attend to thefc particular families : as for Lydia and her houfhoIJ, fo far as a negative in fuch a cafe as this is capable of being proved ; this is cer- tain, that no mention is made of any infants in her family ; it is certain, that there were brethren in her houfe, who were capable of being comforted by the apoflles, and were-, for it is exprefsly faid, that they enter id into the houfe of Lydia, and comforted the brethren; which is a proof of what, he fays, cannot be proved, that they faw the brethren at her houfe ; and nothing appears to the contrary, but that they were of her houfliold ; and if there were any other befides them, that were baptized by the apoftles, it lies upon thofe that will affirm it, to prove it; without which, this inftance cannot be in favour of Infant- baptifm. As for the Jailor's family, it is owned by our author, that there were fome adult perfons in it, who believed, and were baptized at the fame time with the Jailor; but he afks, how does this argue that there were no others baptized in it, who were in the infantile (late ? It lies upon him to prove it, if there were : The word of God was fpokcn to all that were in his houfe, and all his houfe believed in God, and rejoiced in the converfation of the apoftles, who muft be all oi them adult perfons; and>if hecan find perfons in his houfe, befides thofe a// that were irt it, I willfet him down for a cunning man. Who thofe expofitors are, that ren- der the words, believing in God, he rejoiced all his houfe over, I know not, any more than I undcrfland the nonfenfe of it. Erafmtis and Vatablus join the phrafe withall his houfe, with believing, as we do, and Priceeus makes it parallel with /iHs xviii. 8. but however, this writer has found a text to prove, that the chil- dren of believers are in their infancy accounted believers, and numbered with them, it is in AcJs ii. 44. if he can .find any wife-acres that will give credit to him. A% \.o [.V.c\\o\i{i\o\. ix. 10. which are fuppofed to have the fignification of wafhing ; fince thefe do not at all miliutc againft the fenfe of dipping, feeing dipping is wafhing; and to as vain a purpofe are thofe 3 M 2 fcriptures 452 A REPLY TO A DEFENCE OF THE fcriptures referred to, Epbes. v. 26. Tit. iii. 5. i Cor. v\. 1 1. 2 Peter i. g. A^j xxii. 16. which call baptifm a wajhirtg of water, and the wafhing of regeneration, .&c, evcnfuppoling they arc to be undirrftood of baptifm -, which, at lead in ieveral of them, is doubtful -, fince nobody denies, that a perfon baptized, may be faid to be wafhed, he being dipped in water. 4. It is affirmed that we do not read of one inftance of any perfon who re- paired to a river, or conflux of water, purely on the defign of being baptized therein. But certain it is, that John repaired to fuch places for the convenient adminiitration of that ordinance ; and many repaired to him at ihofe places, purely on a defign of being baptized by him in them ; and particularly it is faid of Chrifl:, then comet h Jefus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of bim" ; and I hope it will be allowed, that he repaired to Jordan, on a pure defign of being baptized in it ; and though it was in a wildernefs where John was, yet fuch an one in which were many villages, full of inhabitants, as our author might have learned from Dr Lightfoot "^ ; where John might have had the convenience of veflxls for bringing water, had the ordinance been performed by him in any other way, than by immerfion. 5. The ufe of the words, baptize and baptifm, in fcripture, comes next under confideration •, and, (i.) the word is ufed in AEls i. 5. of the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit to the apoflles on the day of Pentecoft, which is called' a being baptized with the holy Ghofl ; and the houfe in which the apoftles were, being filed with it, had in it a refemblance to baptifm by immerfion ; and hence the ufe of the phrafe. The main objedlion our author makes to this, is, that the difciples were in the houfe before it was filled with the holy Ghoft ; whereas it fliould have been firft filled, and then they enter into it, to carry any refemblance in it to immerfion: but it matters not, whether the houfe was filled before or after they entered, inafmuch as it was filled when they were in, whereby they were encompalTed and covered with it ; which is fufficient to fupport the a!lu- fion to baptifm, performed by immerfion -, or covering the perfon in water : it is reprcfcnted as diflbnant from common fenfe, to fay, 2'e fhall be plunged with the holy Gbofl? and is it not as diflbnant from common fenfe to fay, Ye fhall be poured with the holy Gbofl ? (2.) The fuScrings of Chrift arc called a baptifm ^ j. and a very apt word is ufed to cxprefs t\\t abundance of them', as that fignifics an imnierfion into water; and though the lefier fufferings of men, and God's judgments on them, may be cxpreflcd by the pouring out of his wrath, and the vials of it on them ; yet fince the holy Ghofl: has thought fit not to make ufe of fuch a phrafe, but a very peculiar word to cxprefs the greater fufferings of Chrifl:, this the more confirms the « Malt. iii. 13. » Vol. II. p. 1 13, 297. ' Mark x. 38. Luke xii. 50. J DIVINE RIGHT OF INFA'NT - BAPTISM. 453 the fcnfe of the word contended for. The phrafein Pfalm xxii. 14. I am poured cut like water, doth not exprefs the fuffcrings of Chrift, but the effeft of them, the faintnefs of his fplrits under them. The pafTages in Pfalm Ixix. i, 2. which reprefent him as overwhelmed with his fufFerings, as in water, do moft clearly illuftrate the ufe of the word baptifm in reference to t'lem, and ftrongly fupport theallufion to it, as performed by immerfion, which this writer has not been able to fet afide. (3.) Mention is made inA£jr^ vii.4. of the Jews wafhing, or baptizing them- fclvcs, when they came from market, before they eat; and of the wafhing, or baptizing of their cups, pots, brazen veflcls, tables or beds; all which was done by immerfion. This writer fays, I am contradided by the beft mafters of the Jewifh learning, when I fay, that the Jews upon touching common people, or their clothes, at market, or in any court of judicature, were obliged by the tra- dition of the elders to immerfe themfelves in water, and did. To which I reply, that Vatablus and Druftus, who were great mafters of Jewifh learning, affirm, that according to tlie tradition of the elders, the Jews wafhed or immerfed the whole body before they eat, when they came from market; to whom may be added the learned Crotius, who interprets the words the fame way; and which feems mofl rcafonabic, fince wafhing before eating, ver. 4. is diflinguifhed from the wafhing of hands, ver. 3. But not to refl it here; Maimonides'^, that great maflcr of Jewifh learning, afTures us, that " if the Pharifees touched but the " garments of the common people, they were defiled, all one as if they had " touched a profluvious perfon, and needed immerfion," and were obliged to it : and though Dr Lightfoot, who was a great man in this kind of learning, yet not always to be depended upon, is of opinion, that the plunging of the whole body is not here underftood ; yet he thinks, that plunging or immerfioa of the hands in water, is meant, done by the Jews, being ignorant and uncer- tain what uncleannefs they came near unto in the market ; and obferves, the Jews ufed the wafliing of the hands, and the plunging of the hands; and that the word wajh in the Evangelift, feems to anfwer to the former, and baptize to the latter ; znd Pococke^ himkM, whom this writer refers to, confefTcs the fame,, and fays, that the Hebrew word "jn'J) to which ^ATm^iSmi anfwers in Greek, fig- nifies a further degree of purification, than b'O:^ or ^(mrjtir, (the words ufed for wafhing of hands) though not fo as neceflarily to imply an immerfion of the whole body ; Cnce the greatefl and moft notorious uncleannefs of the hands reached but to the wriH:, and was cleanfed by immerfing or dipping up to it ; and though he thinks the Greek word ufed in the text does not only and necef- larily fignify immerfion, which yet he grants, fpeciaily agrees to it, as he thinks appears, ■ In Mifnah Chagigah, c. 2. 5. 7. » Not. Mifcell. 390, 397. ■454 A REPLY T O A DEF EN C E ' O F THE" appears from Luke xi. 38. To this may be oppofed what the great Scaliger * fays-, " the more fupcrftitious part of the Jews, not only dipped the feet but the whole " body, hence they were called Hemerobaptifts, who every day h>cfore they " fat down to food, dipped the body -, wherefore the Pharifee, who had invited " Jefus to dine with him, wondered he. fat down to meat before he had wafhed •' his whole body, Luke xi." and after all, be it which it will, whether the immerfion of the whole body, or only of the hands and feet, that is meant in thefe. paflages ; fince the wafhing of .either was by immerfion, as owned, it is fufficient to fupport the primary fenfe of the word contended for : and fo all other things, after mentioned, according to the tradition of the elders, of which only the text fpeaks, and not of the law of God, were wafhed by immerfion ; particularly brazen veflels -, .-concerning which the tradition is % " fuch as they " ufe for hot things, as cauldrons and kettles, they heat them with hot water, " and fco4.ir them, and dip them, and they are fit to be ufed." '.This writer fays, I am ftrangely befides my Text, when I add, that " even " beds, pillows, and bolfters, when they were unclean in a ceremonial fenfe, " were to be wafhed by immerfion, or dipping them into water;" but I am able to produce chapter and verfe for what I affirm, from the traditions of the Jews, which are the only things fpokcn of in the text, and upon which the proof depends : for beds, their canons run thus ; "abed that is wholly de- " filed, if a man J;/)j it part by part, it is pure ^" Again, " if he J//>j the bed •' in it, (a pool of water) though its feet are plunged into the thick clay, (at •" the bottom of the pool) it is clean '." As for pillows and bolflers, thus they fay, " a pillow or a bolder of fkin, when a man lifts up the mouth of them " out of the water, the water which is in them will be drawn ; what fhall we *' do? he muflJip them, and lift them up by their fringes ^" Thus, accord- ing to the traditions of the elders, our Lord is fpeaking of, thefe feveral things mentioned were wafhed by immerfion ; which abundantly confirms the primary frnfe of the word ufed. (4.) The pafTage of the Ifraelitcs through the Red-fea, and under a cloud, is reprcfented as a baptifm, iCcr.x. i, 2. and very aptly, as performed by im- merfion -, fince the waters ftood up on both fides of them, and a cloud covered them ; which very fitly reprefented perfons immcrfed and covered with water in baptifm : but what our author thinks will fpoil this fine fancy, and fome others, as he calls them, is, that one obfcrvation of Ms/^j often repeated ; that /be children of Ifrael went en dry ground through the midjl of the fea. To which I reply, that we arc not under any neceflity of owning that the cloud under which * De Emend, temp. I. 6. p. ^71. "• Maimon. Miacolot Afurot, c. «7. 1. 3. * Jb. Celim, c. 16. S. 14. « Mifoah Mikvaot, c. 7. S. 7. ' lb. S. 6. DIVINE RIGHT OF INFANT - BAPTI S M. 455 which the Ifraelites were, let down any rain : it is indeed the fentiment of a Paidobaptift, I have referred to, and therefore am not affcfled with this obfer- vation ; befides, it (hould be confidered, that this equally, at leaft, fpoils the fine fancy of the rain from the cloud bearing a much greater refemblance to fpr'mkling or affufion, as is aflerted by- the writer of the dialogue j and our author fays, there was a true and proper ablution with water from the cloud, in which the Ifraelites were baptized, -and concludes that they received baptifm by fprinkling or afFufion -, how then could they walk on dry ground ? (5.) The laft text mentioned is Heb. ix. 10. which fpeaks o{ diverfe wajh'mgs or baptifms of the Jews, or different dippings, as-it may be rendered without any. impropriety, as our author aflerts -, though not to be underftood of different forts of dipping, as he fooliflily objefts to us ; nor of different forts of wafhing, fome by fprinkling, fome by affufion, others by bathing or dipping, as he would have it j but the Jewifh wafhings or baptifms are fo called, becaufe of the dif- ferent perfons, or things wafhed or dipped, as Grolius on the place fays ; there was one waftiing of the Priefts, another of the Levitts, and another of the If- . raelites, when they had contracted any impurity -, and which was done by im- mcrfio*; nor do any of the inftances this writer has produced difprovc it. Not Exod. xx'ix. 4.,Jhcu Jhalt wajl:) them with water; but whether by immerfion or affufion he knows not. The Jews interpret it of immerfion j theTargum ofjo- nathan is, "thou fhalf<^»/) them in forty meafurcs of living water:" nor Exod. . XXX. 19. which mentions the wafhing of the prieft's hands and feet at .the brazen laver of the tabernacle ; the manner of which our author defcribes from Dr Ligbtfoot, out of ihc Rabbins i but had he tranfcribed the whole, it would have appeared, that not only wafhing the hands and feet, but bathing of their whole body, were ncccflary to the performance of their fcrvice; for it follows, "and none **■ might enter into the court to do the fcrvice there, till he hath bathed ; yea, " though he were clean, he mull bathe his body incold water before he enter." And to this agrees a canon of theirs ^j " no man enters into the court for fervice, *' though clean, ir\\ he has dipped himfelf; the high-priefl dips himfelffive *' times on the day of atonement." And the Prielts and Levites, before they, performed any part of the daily fervice, dipped thcmfelyes : nor 2 Chron. iv. 6. which fays, the molten fca in Solomon's tern pie was for the priejls to wajh in j , where they wafhed not only their hands and their feet, but their whole bodies, . as Dr Ligbtfoot fays "; and for the bathing of which, they went down into the • vefTel itfelf; and to which agrees l\\c J erufalem Talmud \ which fays, "the " molten fea was a dipping-place for the pricfls :" Nor Numb. viii. 6, 7. which, , had the pafTage been wholly tranfcribed, it would appear, that not only the wa- ter i « Mifoah. Yoma, c. 3.^8. 3. * Vol. I. p. 2047^ ' Yoma, fol. 41,.!.. 456 A REPLY TO A DEFENCE OF THE ter of purifying was fprinkled on theLevites, but their bodies were bathed-, for it follows: "and let them (have all their fiefh, and wafh their clothes, and fo «' make themfelves clean -," that is, by bathing their whole bodies, which, as theTargum on the place fays, was done in forty meafures of water. Sprinkling the zvater vf -purification was a ceremony preparatory to the bathing, but was itfelf no part of it-, and the fame is to be obferved of the purification by the ajhes ■of an heifer, on the third and feventh days, Numb. xix. 19. which was only pre- paratory to the great purification by bathing the body, and wafhing the clothes on the feventh day, which was the clofing and finifhing part of the fervice ; for that it was the unclean perfon, and not the prieft, that was to wafh his -clothes, and bathe himfelf in water, ver. 19. is clear; fince it is a diftinft law, or ftatute, from that in ver. 21. which enjoins the prieft to wafh his clothes, but not to bathe himfelf in water-, and indeed, the contrary fenfc is not only abfurd, and inter- rupts and confounds the fenfe of the words-, but, as Dr Gale alfo obferves, it cannot be reafonably imagined that the prieft, by barely purifying the unclean, fhould need fo much greater a wafhing and purification than the unclean him- -Iclf-, this fprinkling of the afhes of the heifer, therefore, was not part of the Jewifh wafliings, or baptifms, or any exemplification of them -, fo that from the whole, I fee no reafon to depart from my conclufion, that " the words bap- "' tize and baptifm, in all the places mentioned, do from their fignification make " dipping or plunging the necelTary mode of adminiftcnng the ordinance of bap- «' tifm." • ' ■ I proceed now, 6. To vindicate thofc pafTages of fcripture, which nccefTarily prove the mode of baptifm by immerfion. And, l"he firft pafTage, is \nMatthew\\\. 6. and were baptized of him injordan, con- fejfwg their ftns. We argue from hence, not merely from thefc pcrfons being baptized, to their being ". The third inftance, is the baptifm of Cornelius and his houfhold ■". The fenfe of the words given, " can any man forbid the ufe of his river, or bath, " or what conveniency he might have, for baptizing-," is objected to, as not being the apoftlc's words, but a ftrained fenfe of them : the fame objtrdlion may be made to this writer's fenfe, that the phrafe imports the forbidding water to be brought ; fince no fuch thing is exprefled, or hinted at : the principal "thing, no doubt, defigned by the apoftle, is, that no one could, or at lead ou whence it can be ■ concluded. The baptifm encouraged to by it is only of adult perfons convinced of fin, and who repented of it. The paflTage in A^s iii. 25. brought for the fupport of the author's fenfe of his text, is foreign to his purpofe ; fince it re- fers not to the. covenant of circumcifion made fi\\.\\ Abraham, Gen. xvii. but to • the promife of the JVIefilah of Abraham's feed, and of the bieffing of all nations in him, Gen. xxii. 18. and which was fulfilled in the mifTion and incarnation of Chrift, and in the miniftration of his gofpel to Jews and Gentiles; which fame promife of Chrift, of life and falvation by him, is meant in A^s xiii. 26, 32, 33. . and which is .alfo a proof, that the children to whom it belongs, are to be • underftood 1 • -The Oflavo Edit, is referred to nil along. 454 SOME STRICTURES ON Mr B OSTWl C K*s undcrftood, not of infant-children, but of the adult pofterity of the Jews ; fincc the apoftlc fays, Gcd bath fulfilled the fame to us their children; for furcly the apoftle Paul muft not be reckoned an infant-child. Secondly, The ground on which the right of infants to baptifm is founded by this author is a falfe one; which is the covenant made with Abraham, that, which gave his infant-children a right to circumcifion, and is faid to be the covenant of grace, the fame under which believers now are. This he looks .upon to be the grand turning point, on which the ifTue of the controverfy very much depends ; that it is the main ground on which the right of infants to bap- tifm is aficned ; and he freely confefles, that if this covenant is not the cove- nant of grace, the main ground of infants right to baptifm is taken away, and confcquently, that the principal arguments in fupport of the doftrine are over- turned, .p. I 8, 19. Now that this ground and foundation is a falfe and fandy one, and will not bear the weight of this Juperftrufture laid upon it, will ap- pear by obferving, 1. That the covenant of grace gives no rightto any pofitive inftitution, either circumcifion or baptifm : not to circumcifion; -the covenant of grace was in being, was made, manifefted, and applied to many, from Adam to Abraham, •both before and after the flood, who had no right to circumcifion, nor know- iedgc of it; the covenant of grace did not give xo Abraham himfelf a right to circumcifion ; he was openly interefted in it, it was made, manifefted, and applied unto him, many years before circumcifion was enjoined him; and when it was, it was not the covenant of grace, but the cxprefs command of God, ■that gave him and his male feed a right to circumcifion ; I fay his male feed, for his female feed, though no doubt many of them were interefted in the .cavenant of grace, yet their covenant-intercft gave them no right unto it : as there were alfo many, at the fame time that circumcifion was enjoined Abraham and his natural feed, who were interefted in the covenant of grace, and yet had no right to circumcifion ; as Shem, Arphaxad, Lot, and others : and on the other hand, it may eafily beobferved, that there were many who had a right to .circumcifion, and on whom it was praftifed, who, without any breach of cha- rity, it may be concluded, had no intereft in the covenant of grace ; not to mention particular perfons, as Ifhmael, Efau, &c. many of the idolaters and •rebels among the Ifraclites in the wildernefs, of thofe that bowed the knee to Baal in the times of Ahab, and of the worftiippers of feroboam's calves ; thofe that are called the rulers of Sodom and Gomorrah in the times of Ifaiah, and that worfhipped the queen and hoft of heaven in the times of Jeremiah ; and (thofe whofe charadtcrs are given in the prophecy oi Malachi, as then living; with J FAIR AND RATIONAL VINDICATION, &c. 465 with the Scribes and Pharifees, who committed the unpardonable fin in the times of Chrift; thefe cannot be thought to be in the covenant of grace. In (hort, all were not I/rael that were of Jfrael, and circumcifed : it is there- fore clear to a demonRration, that intereft in the covenant of grace did not give right to circumcifion, but the fpecial, particular, and exprefs command of God: nor does it give right to baptifm -, it gave the Old Teftament-faints no right unto ir, who were four thoufand years without it, and yet in the cove- nant of grace ; and fince baptifm is enjoined as an ordinance of the New Tefta- ment, a perfon may be in the covenant of grace, and yet not known to be fo ' by himfclf or others ; and while he is in fuch a ftate, and in fuch circumftances, he cannot be thought to have any right to baptifm. It is a command of God, that thofe that repent and believe, be baptized; the covenant of grace provides faith and repentance for thofe interefted in it, and beftows them on them ; whereby they are qualified for baptifm according to the divine command. But it is not the covenant of grace, nor thefe qualifications, that give the right to baptifm -, but the command of God to perfons fo qualified, to profefs the fame, and be baptized : for men may have faith and repentance, yet if they do not make a profefDon of them, they have no right to baptifm, nor a minifter any authority to adminiftcr i: to them. No doubt but the apoftle Peier was fatis- fied that the three thoufand pricked in their hearts were truly penitents ; yet infixed on the profeffion of their repentance, as antecedent to baptifm ; and Philip., I make no queftion, was fatisfied of the Eunuch's being a believer in Chrift by the converfation he had with him; yet required a confeffion of his faith in him, in order to his baptifm ; for with the mouth confejfion is to be made unto falvatien. Nor even according to our author's fcntiment does the cove- nant of grace give a right to baptifm ; fince, according to him, perfons are not in covenant before they are baptized; for he exprefsly fays, p. 12, 30. that by baptifm they enter into the covenant, and are taken into the covenant by bap- tifm ; and therefore baptifm rather gives them a right to the covenant, than the covenant a right to baptifm, according to this Gentleman : fo far is it from being true what he elfewere fays, p. 32. that the covenant of grace ^;kst Abra- ham and his children a right to circumcifion under the law; and that this it is that gives parents and children a right to baptifm under the gofpel. 2. The covenant of circumcifion, or the covenant which gave Abraham's infant-children a right to circunicifion, is not the covenant of ^racc; for the covenant of circumcifion muft be mod certainly, in the nature of it, a covenant of works, and not of grace. It will be freely allowed, that the covenant of grace was at certain times made, and made manifcft, and applied to Abrahamy and iie interefted in it; and that God was the God of him, and of his fpiritual Vol. II. 3 O feed; 1 466 SOME STRICTURES ON MrBOSTWICK's feed ; and that the fpiritual feed of y^iraham, both among Jews and Gentiles, are incerefted in the fame covenant -, bur not his carnal feed, nor theirs as fuch : and ihnt^irabam was juftified by faith, as believers now are-, and that the fame gofpel was preached to him as now j and that at the fame time the covenant of circumcifion was given unto him, there was an exhibition of the covenant of grace unto him : the account of both is mixed together-, but then the covenant of circumcifion, which was a covenant of peculiarity, and belonged only to him and his natural male feed, was quite a diftinft thing from the covenant of grace, fincc it included fome that were not in the covenant of grace, and excluded others that were in it : nor is that the covenant that was confirmed of God in Chrift 430 years before the law was -, fince the covenant of circumcifiorw falls 24 years fhort of that date, and therefore it refers not to that, but to.an exhibition of the covenant of grace \o Abraham, about the time of his call out of CbalJea -, befides. the covenant of circumcifion is abolifhcd, but the covenant of grace continues, and ever will-, fee my reply, p. 35, 36. Now as this covenant, which gave Abrabam'% infant-children a right to circumcifwn, is not the covenant of grace, the main ground on which the right of infants to baptifm is affcrccd, is taken, away, and fo no foundation left for it; and confcqucntly the principal arguments in fupport of the doflrine are overturned, as this Gentleman freely confclTcs ; and as every one fhould,. who is in the fame way of thinking and reafoning. If the covenant of circumcifion is not the covenant of grace, hereofri^ht thecon- troverfy fhould be clofed, fince this is the turning point on which the ifiue of it very much depends ; for if this be falfe, all that follows as argued from it,, muft be fo too •, for. Thirdly^ If the covenant of circumcifion is not the covenant of grace, then circumcifion is not the feal of the covenant of grace it is faid to be, p. 22. If it was,, the covenant of grace muft be without fuch a feal near two thoufand years, before the covenant of circumcifion was given-, and why not then always without one i" befides, it muft be with a feal and without a feal at one and fame time,, which is abfurd ; for there were fome interefted in the covenant of grace as before obferved, on whom circumcifion was not enjoined, and fo without this feal, when it was cn]o\ncd on Abraham and his natural feed, and there were fuch afterwards -, and circumcifwn alfo muft have been the feal of itfelf, which is another abfurdity. Circumcifion was a token and fign, or mark in the fiefh, y)h\ch Abraham's natural pofterity were to bear until the coming of theMelTiah; but is never called a feal throughout the whole Old Teftament ; and much lefs is it any where faid to be a feal of the covenant of grace : and indeed what blefs- ing of grace could it feal, aflure of, and confirm, to any of Abraham's natural feed ^ Romans iv. li. FAIR AND RATIONAL VINDICATION, &c. 467 feed as fuch, or any other man's natural feed ? It is indeed in the New Tefta- ment called a feat of the rigbtcoufnefs of the faith which Abraham had, being yet vncircumcifed ", but then it was no fealofihar, nor of any thing elfe to others, but to Abraham on]f ; namely, that that righteoufncfs which he had by faith before he was circumcifed, would come upon, or be imputed to the uncircum- cifed Gentiles ; and accordingly this mark continued in the flefh of his pofterity, until the gofpcl, publi(hing juftification by the righteoufnefs of faith, was or- dered to be preached to the Gentiles '. Wherefore, . Fourthly, Seeing circumcifion was no feal of the covenant of grace, baptifm, •which it is pretended was inftituted in the room of it, can be no feal of k nei- ther, and lo not to be adminiftered as fuch to the children of profefled believers, as is faid, p. 25. The text In Colojians ii. 1 1. falls fhort of proving that bap- tifm is inftituted in the room of circumcifion •, fince the apoftle is fpeaking, not of circumcifion in the flcfli, but in the Spirit ; and by which he means not the outward ordinance of baptifm, that is dil\inguifhed from it ^ but an inward work of grace upon the heart; fpiritual circumcifion, caWcd the circum:i/ton of Chrill: ; which to undcrlland as the fame, is not to make an unreafonabic tauto- logy; it makes none at all, and much Icfs ncnfenfe, as this writer fugoeds j but beautifully completes the defcripcion the apoflje gives of'fpiritual circumcifion ; firft, by the manner of its performance, without hands; then by the matter and fubftance of it, the putting off the body of the fins of tbefefh; and laftly, by the author of it, Chrift, who by his fpirit produces it. The argument from analogy \% weak and infufficient; though fome little agree- ment between circumcifion and baptifm maybe imagined, and feem to be in the figiiification of them, yet the difference between them is notorious ; they differ in their fubjcfts, ufcs, manner of adminiflration, and the adminiflrators of them-, nor is it true, what is fuggeflcd, that they are both facraments of ad- milTion into the church ; nor are they badges of relation to God orChrilV, nor ligns and fcals of the covenant of grace. Nor need we be under any concern about any ordinance corr.ing in the room of circumcifion, and anfwering to thac Jcwifh rite. Nor is there any necefTity of any, no more than of a pope in the room of an high priefl:, or of any feflivals to anfwer to thofe of the pafrover, pentecoll, and fcaft of tabernacles-, nor does the Lord's fupper anfwer to the pafTuver, and come in the room of it ; it is Chrift that anfwers to it, and is the pafTover facrificed for us : but what makes it quite clear and plain, that baptifm docs not fucceed circumcifion, or come in the room of it, is, that it was in force and ufe before circumcifion was abolifhed, which was not until the death of 302 Chrift; * Rom. iv. II, and the Reply, p. 43. * See the divine Right of Ipfant-baptifin examined, &c. p 56, ic. ' Ver i:. 468 SOME STRICTURES ON Mr BOSTWICK's Chrift, whereas "John adminiftered baptifm, and Chrift himfelf was baptized^ and many o;hers, fome years before that time -, and therefore baptifm cannot be faid, with any propriety, to fucceed circumcifion, when it was in force before the other was out of date : befides, if it did, it is no feal of the covenant of grace, nor to be adminiftered to infants for fuch an ufe-, for what fpiritual bleffing, what bleffing of grace in the covenant, does baptil'm feal, or can feal, aflure of, 4nd fecure unto the carnal feed of believers ? Let it be natncd if it can % Fifthly^ It is not indifputably evident, as this Gentleman fays, p. 29. but indifputably falfe, that the apoftles acknowledged and allowed the covenant- relation and interefl: of children, under the gofpel, as well as under the law-,. by which I take it for granted he means, their relation and interefl in the cove- nant of grace : that relation and interefl, the natural feed of Abraham, as fuch, had not under the law ; nor have the natural feed of believers, as fuch, the fame under the gofpel. This is not to be proved from his text, as has been fhewn already : nor from Romans xi. 16, 17. where by the root and branches, ire not meant Abraham and his pofterity, or natural feed -, nor by the olive- tree the Jewirti church 1 but the gofpel church-ftate in its firft foundation, out of which were left the Jews that believed not in Chrifl, meant by the branches broken off; and which church was conflituted of thofe that believed in him ; and thefe were the root d^nd firjl-fruits, which being holy, are the pledge and carneft of the future converfion and holinefs of that people the apoflle is fpeak- ing of in the context; and into which church-ftate the Gentiles that believed were received, and are the branches grafted in, which partook of the root and fatnefs of the olive-tree ; that is, of the goodnefs and fatnefs of the houfe of God, the ordinances and privileges of it : and in this paflage not a word is laid of the covenant-relation, and interefl of children under the gofpel ; not a fyllable about baptifm, much lefs of Infant-baptifm j nor can any thing in favour' of it be inferred from it'; nor can any thing of this kind be proved from I Corinthians vii. 14. real internal holinefs is rejefled by our author, as the fcnfe of this and the preceding pafTage ; but he pleads for a federal holi- Hcfs ; but what that is, as diftindl from real holinefs, let it be faid if it can : the only holinefs which the covenant of grace promifes and provides for, and which only is proper federal holinefs, is real holinefs of heart and life * : no other than matrimonial holinefs, or lawful marriage, can be meant in the Co- rinthian text ; it is fuch a holinefs with which the unbelieving parent is fanfti- fied, hufband or wife ; and if it is a federal holinefs, the unbeliever ought to be allowed to be in covenant ; and if this gives a right to baptifm, ought to be baptized, « See Reply, p. 44—47. ' Sec the Reply, p, 64, 65. « See Jer. xxxi, 33. Ezek. xxxvi. 26, 27. FAIR AND RATIONAL VINDICATION, &c. 4% baptized, as well as their carnal ifllie ; and have as good a right to it, furely, fis they who have their holinefs from them, and which even depends upon the fanflification of the unbelieving parent. lam able to prove, from innumer- able inftances in Jewifh writings, that ihtv/ords faniiify znd fanSifiid, are ufed for efpoufe and efpoufedy and the apoftle, being a Jew, adopts the fame lan- guage ; and let men wriggle and wrangle as long as they can, no other fcnfe can be put upon the. words, than of a legitimate marriage and offspring; no- thing elfc will fuit with the cafe propofed to the apoftle, and with his anfwer and reafoning about it ; and which fcnfe has been allowed by many learned Esdobaptifts ; and I cannot forbear tranfcribing, what Lhave clfewhere done,, ihe honeft confelTion oi Mufculus : "Formerly, fays he, I have abufed this " place againft the Anabaptifts, thinking the meaning was, that the children " were holy for the parents faith, which,, though true, the prefcnt place makes *'- nothing for the purpofe '." Sixthly, From what has been obferved, it is not proved, as our author aflerts, p. 32. that the apoftles looked on the children of believing parents as having an incercft in the covenant of grace ; and falfe is it, to the laft degree of falfhood,. what he infers from thence, that " then we have undeniable evidence that " they did in fad baptize the children of all profcfTing believers; and that they •* underftood their commiffion as authorizing them fo todo,Mlicit .cprom.and is in Matthew xix. 14. but Chrift'* permilTion of children tQ eomty or to he hroHght unto him, there fpoken of, was not for baptifm, .pr to be baptized by hinx, but for him to pray for them, and touch them, in order to cure them of difeafes ". Another implicit, if not .ex- prefs command, to baptize infants, is va Matthew xxviii. ,19. This has been confidered, and difproved already j. fee p. 99. The fourth and lafl implicit command, the author mentions, js., the e^chortatioii in his text, A5ls ii. 38, 39. jn which, as has been fhewn,;Hh.ejQ is /lot the .^eaft hint of Infant-bapiifm, nor (any thing froin-whence.it can fee, condvdcd. This author obfcrves, that fincc virtual and implicit commands are looked on as fufficicnt to determine our conduft in other things, then why noc in this ? foch as keeping the firft-day-fabbath, attendance on public worfhip, and the admifllon of -women to the Lord's-fupper. To which I reply, he has not proved any virtual and implicit command to baptize infants; and as to the cafes xncndoned, -bcfides implications, there are plain inftances in fcrlpturc of the praftice of them; and let like inftances of Infant- baptifm be produced, and we (hall think ourfelvcs obliged to praftife it. As to what this author fays ofan exprcfs, irrcpealablc command to children, to receive the fcal of the cove- rant, and the iconftant pradlicc of the church to adminifter the feal of it to thcmi :if by liic covenant is meant the covenant of grace, it never had any fuch fcal asiBfuggcftrd,which has been proved; nor has it any but the blood of Chrift, x:9\\c^ she blood /)f the everlafting cvvenant. 2. Another objeftion to Infant-baptifm is; there is no exprefs inftance in all the hiftory of the New-Tcftamcnt of an Infant-child being baptized, and there- fore is without any fcripture-example. To which is replied, by obfcrving that whole houfholds were baptized ; as there were, and which have been already confidered; and thefe were baptized, not upon the converfion of the parent, or head of the family, but upon their own faith ; and fo were not infants, but adult perfons ; though this author thinks that fuch accounts would eafily be undcrftood to include children, had the fame been faid of circumcifion. They mighxfo, when. circumcifion was in force and ufe ; for this very good rcafon, bcciufe there was a previous exprefs command extant to circumcife children, when there is none to 'baptize infants. He further obfcrves, that from there being no exprefs mention of Infant-baptifm in theNew Tcftament, it fhou'd not be concluded there was none, any more than that the churches of Jntioch, Ico- VoL. II. 3 P niutn, "rM«t.aix. 13. Mark x, 13. of the fenfe of this text fee the Reply, p. 50 — 52. 474 SOME STRICTURES ON Mr BOSTWICK's niuM, of the Romans, Galatians, Thcflalonians and Coloffians, were not bap- tized, becaufe there is no exprefs account of it in the hiftory of the New-Tcfta- tnent : but of feveral of thofe churches there is mention made of thebapiifm of the members of them, of the Romans, Galatians and Coloffians, Rom. vi. 3,4. Gal. iii 27. Col. ii. 12. but what this author might imagine would prefs us hard, is to give a fcripture-example of our own prefent praflice. Our prefent prac- tice, agreeable to fcripture-examples, ; is Tiot at all concerned with the parents of thofe baptized by us, whether believers or unbelievers, chriftians or not chrif. tians, Jews or Heathens, this comes not into confidcraiion -, it is only concerned with the perfons thcmfelves to be baptized, ^ what they are. Itfcems, ifwe give a fcripture-example of our praftice, it muft bcof a perfon born and brought up of chriftian or baptized parents, that was baptized in adult years ; but our prefent practice is not limited to fuch perfons. We baptize many whofc parents we have no reafon to believe arc chriftians, or arc baptized perfons j and be it that we baptize adult perfons, who arc born and brought up of chriftian or bap. tized parents, a fcripture-example of fuch a perfon might indeed be required of us with fome plaufible pretext, if the hiftory of the AUs of the /^ojiles, which this writer fays continued above thirty years, had given an account of the yearly or of frequent additions of members to the churches mentioned in it, during that fpace of time; whereas that hiftory only gives an account of the firft planting of thofe churches, and of the baptifm of thofe of which they firft confifted j wherefore to give inftances of thofe that were born of them, and brought up by them as baptized in adult years, cannot be reafonably required of us : But, on the other hand, if Infant-children were admitted to baptifm in thofe times, upon the faith and baptifm of their parents, and their becoming chriftians ; it is ftrange ! ex- ceeding ftrange ! that among the many thoufands that were baptized in Jeru- falet?!, Samaria, Corinth, and other places, that there fliould be no one inftance of any of them bringing their children with them to be baptized, and claiming the privilege of baptifm for them upon their own faith, or of their doing this in any ftiort time after-, this is a cafe that required no length of time-, and yet not a finglc inftance can be produced. 3. A third objeftion is, that " infants can receive no benefit from baptifm, " becaufe of their incapacity ; and therefore are not to be baptized." To which our author anfwers; that they are capable of being entered into covenant with God, of the feal of the covenant, of being deanfed by the blood of Chrift, and of being regenerated by his Spirit : And be it foi what of all this ! as I have obferved in the Reply, p. 4, Are they capable of underftanding the nature, dcfign, and ufe of the ordinance of baptifm .' Are they capable of profcffing FAIR JVND RATIONAL VINDICATION, ^c. 475 j)rofefring faith in Chrift, which is a prcrcquifnc to it, and of excrcifing it in it ?- ^Arc .they capable of anfwering a good confcicncc to God in it ? Arc they capable of fubmitting to it in obedience to the will of Chrift, from love to him, and with a view to his glory ? They are not: what benefit then can they receive, by baptifm ? and to what purppfe is it to be adminiftered to them ? ,If infant? receive any advantage,, benefit, or blefling by baptifm, which our infants h^ve not without, it, let it be named, if it can j if none, why ad- minift.ered ?, why all this zeal and jcqntcntion about it ? a mere noife about no- thing/,; ;.', ...;;:,. :j.. ;_ , 4. A fourth and moft common objedion, it is faid, is, that " faith and re- ".pentance, or.^ profcQion of them at leaft, arc mentioned in the New Tefta- .",ment.asthq neceflary prcrcquiCtes of baptifm, of which children are incap- ". able, and ^erefore of the ordinance itfclf." To this it is anfwered -, that children are capable of the habit and principle of faith : which is not denied, nor is it in the objeftion 1 and it is granted by our author, that a profcfTion of /aith is a prcrequifite lo baptifm in adult perfons, who embrace chriftianity •, but when they have embraced it, and profeflcd their faith, in the apoftles times, not only themfclves, but their houfholds, and all that were theirs, wefc bap- tized. It is very true," thofe profeffing their faith alfo, as did the houlhold of the Jailor, of whom jt is faid, that he was believing in God with all his houfe : His family believed as well as he, which could not have been known, had they hot profefTed it. The inftance of a profeffing ftranger embracing the Jewifli religion, in order to his circumcifion, which, when done, it was always admi- niftered to his family and children, makes nothing to the purpofe j fince it is no rule of procedure to us, with refpefl: to a gofpel-ordinancc. ' "Ninthly, The performance under confideration is concluded with obfcrving many abfurdities, and much confufion, with which the denial of Infant-baptifm, B3 a divine inftitution, is attended. As, 1. It is faying the covenant qiade with Abraham is riot an everlafting one; that believers under the gofpel are not Abrabam'i feed, and heirs of his promife; that the ingrafted Gentiles do not partake of the fame privileges in the church, from which the Jews were broken pfF; and that the privileges of the gofpcl- difpenfation are lefs than thofe of the law : all which are faid to be flat contra- diftions to fcripturc. To all which I reply, that the covenant of grace made with, and made known to Abraham, is an .everlafting covcnanr, and is fure to all the feed ; that is, the fpiritual feed; and is not at all affircted by Infanc- baptifm, that having no concern in it. The covenant of circumcifion, though called an everlafting covcnanr. Gen. xvii. 7. was only to continue ijnto the times of the Meffiah ; and is fo called, juft in the fame fcnfc, and for the fame reafon, 302 the 476 S0ME^s¥Ri<:¥yRES-c5R'Mi^6sTwix:k'5 the covenant oFpriefthoo^ w'nh PblMOs'his'ihi: fifiie'fcfrtrhW,'i^<<*3.'Jocv. 13'. be- lievers under the gofpel are Jfbrabctm'Biph\tii3\ fefetl,'and' heirs of the fame promifc ■of fpiritual things j tat thbfe "fpiritual things', khd-i'h6 promife of t'hem, do not "belong to their riatural feed asfdch ; "^lic believing 'Gentiles, ingrafted into the •gofpel chvrrch-1Vate, '■^irta'ke bf dtl the 'p'ri^leges of it, triafn vvhich the yrib'eliev- •jntr Tews are -tjicloded, bCTne:'for their iitibelief jfeft Out '(5f that'ftafe. The privileges of tbe goTpcl-'BiFpcnfarion are not ier?,"yea fdl- greate'r ihari fhofe of the law ; to believers, who -are freed frmrf "the bcrrdenfome rites' afid Ceremo- nies of the law, have larger meafurcs of grace, a clearer miniftration of the gofpel, and more fpiritual ordinances; -nor •are they Icfs to their infants, who are eafcd from the painful rite of circurhcifion," have the advantage of i chrif- lian education, and of hearing the gofpcT as ilHcy grow up, in a "dearer hianner than under the law-, whith' are greater privileges than the JewYfh thildren had under the former difpenfation ; nor are all, nor any of thefc affcfled, or to be contradifted, by the "denial of Infant-baptifm. 2. It is obfervcd, that to deny the validity of Infaht-ba'ptifm, Ts faying that " there was no true baptifm in the "church for eleven or, twelve "hundred years *' aftet Chrift; and that the generality df the prefent p'rcffcnbrs of cbriftlanuy *' are now a company of unbaprizcd heathens," -p. 52. fo p. 10. To which I reply, that the true baptifm contrntied in the Church in the firft.two centuries; and though Infant-baptifm was introduced in the 'third, and prevailed in the fourth, yet in both thefc centuries there >^ere thofe that oppofed it, and abode by the true baptifm. Befides, 'in the vallies of Piedmont, as many learned men have obftrved, there were witneffcs from thfe times of the apoftles, who bore their teftimony againft roraiptions in doflrine' and praflice, and arrtong whom Infant-baptifm did not obtain until the fixteerith century v fo that the true bap- tifm continued in the church till that time, and it has ever fince ; fee the Repfy-y p. 31, 32. As for the generality of the prefent profelfors of chriflianity,. it lies upon them to take care of their charaftcr, and remove from it what may be thought difagrecable ; and clear themfelves of it, by fubmitting to the true baptifm according to the order of the gofpel. As to the falvation of perfons in or out of the vifibic church, which is the greater number, this author fpcaks of, I know notliing of; falvation is not by baptifm in any way, but by Chrift alone. 3. It is faid, if Infant-baptifm is a divine inflitution, warranted by the word of God, then they that are baptized in their adult age necefiarily renounce a divine jnftitution, and an ordinance ofjcfus Chrift, and vacate the former covenant Ijctween God and them. 1/ it he; but it is not a divine inftitution, nor an ordinance . J^AIR A.WI5 RATIO:jIAL TIND I CATION, &c. 477 briJiiraiCJC of Jcfus Chrift, as appetrs from all that "has been faid about it in th« forcgOHig p»g«st wJierefore it is right to renounce and rcjed it, as an biioun- invention : and as for any covenant i>ctween God and them vacated thereby, it will not, it need not give the renounccrs of it any concern-, being *»hatthey know nothing of, and the whole a chimerical bufineis. Nay, it is farther obfervcd, that renouncing Infant-baptifm, and raajcing it a nullity, is -prafticaily faying there are no baptized perfons, no regular tninifters, nor ordi- :iiainces, in all profcfling churches but their own, and as clfcwhere, p. 41. no ^ofpel-church in the world } and that the adminiftrations of the minifters of ■other churches are a nullity, and the promifc of Chrift to be with his minifters in the adminiftration of this ordinance to the end of the world, muft have fail- ed for hundreds of years, in which Tnfiint-baptifm was praftifed. But be it fo : 'to whom is all this owing ? to whofe account muft it be put ? to thofe who are the corrupters -of the word and ordinances. Is it fuggefted by all this, that " God *♦ in his providence would never fuffer things to go fuch lengths ?" Let it be obferved, that he has given us in his word reafon to expedl great corruptions in doftrineand woifhip; and that though he will always have a feed to ferve him, roore or fewer, in all ages, yet he has no where promifed that thefe (hall be al- ways in a regular gofpel-church-ftate ; and though he has promifed his prefencc in his ordinances to the end of the world, it is only with thofe minifters and peo- ple among whom the ordinances are adminiftered according to his word ; and there was for fome hundreds of years, in the darknefs of popery, fuch a corrup- tion in the ordinances of baptifm, and the Lord's fupper, in the adminiftration of which theprefenceofGod cannot be thought to be-, nor were there any regu- lar minifters, nor regular ordinances, nor a regular gofpel-church, but what were to be found in the vMcs of Piedmont; and with whom the prefcnceof God may be fuppofed to be ; who bore a-teftimony.againft all corruptions, and among the reft, againftlnfant- baptifm ^ This writer further urges, that " if Infant-baptifm is a nullity, there can be *» now no regular baptifm in the world, nor ever will be to the end of it ; and «' fo the ordinance muft be loft, fince adult baptifm cannot be traced to the apof- «' ties times, and as now adminiftered, is derived from thofe that were baptized " in infancy ; wherefore if Infant-baptifm is invalid, that muft befotoo; fo " in p. 42." To which it may be anfwered, that the firft Englifti Antipsedo- baptifts, when determined upon a reformation in this ordinance, inaconful- 'tation of theirs about it,' had this difficulty flatted about a proper adminiftrator to begin the work, when it was propofed to fend fome to foreign churches, the fucceffors- *- See Reply, p. ii, ii. 478 SOME STRICTURES ON Mn BOSXWlCICs, fcc. fucceflbrs of the anticnt Waldenfes in France zndGermarty ;-and iccordingljr did fend fome, who being baptized, returned and baptized others : though othen were of opinion this too much favoured of the popifli notion of an uninterrupted fuccefHon, and a right through that to adminifter ordinances ; and therefore judged, that in an extraordinary cafe, as this was, to begin a reformation from a general corruption, where a baptized adminiftrator could not be had, it might be begun by one unbaptized, otherwife qualified to preach the word and ordi,- nances V which praflice they were able to juftify upon the fame principles the <)iher reformers juftified theirs ; who without any regard to an uninterrupted .fucceffion, fet up new churches, ordained paflors, snd adminiftered ordinances. Nor is it eflcntial to the ordinance of baptifm, that it be performed by one re- gularly baptized, though in ordinary cafes itfhould; or otherwife it could. never have been introduced into the world } the firft adminiftrator of itmuft be an lunbaptized perfon, as John the Baptift was. All which is a fufficient anfwcr to what this writer has advanced on this fubjedl '. , . :.'. H Sec the Divine Right of Infant-baptifm cxaminfd, &c. p. i] — 15. 8v« Edit. ne 'The Scriptures the only Guide in Matters of Religion. Being a SERMON Preached at the Baptism of feveral Perfons in Barbican, Novemher 2, 1750. Jeremiah VI. 16. Thus faith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways and fee, and ajk for the old paths, "where is the good way, and walk therein ; and ye fhall find refi for your fouls IN this chapter the deftruflion of Jerufalem by the Babylonians is threatened and foretold, and the caufes of it affigncd ; in general, the great aboundings of fin and wickednefs among the people ; and in particular, their negleft and contempt of the word of God ; the fin of covetoufnefs, which prevailed amonty all forts ; the unfaithfulnefs of the prophets to the people, and the peoples impenitence and hardnefs of heart ; their want of fhame, their difregard to all inftruftions and warnings from the Lord, by the mouth of his prophets, and their obfl:inate refufal of them -, which laft is cxprefled in the claufe following the words read •, and which, though an aggravation of it, fhew the tender regard of the Lord to his people, and may be confidered as an inftrudlion to fuch who had their doubts and difficulties in religious matters ; who were halt- ing between two opinions, and like men in bivio, who ftand in a place where two or more ways meet, and know not which path to take ; and in this light I fhall confider them ; and in them may be obferved, I. A direftion to fuch perfons what to do ; to Jland in the ways, and fee, and aJk for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein. II. The encouragement to take this direflioni and ye Jball find rejl for your fouls. r. The 48o THE SCRIPTURES THE ONLY GUIDE ■; 1. THe direEtion gi ven to fiand In or on tht vmys^ "Sec to 4o as 4»cn 4o wliefl they are come to a place where two or more ways meet, make a ftand, and view the roads, and fee which they fliould take-, they look about them, and confi- der well what coude they (hoold fteer ; they look up to the way-marks, or way-pofts, and read the infcriptions on them, which tell them whither fuch a road leads, and fo judge for themfelves which way they ihould go. Now in relicrlous matters, the way-maiks or way-pofts to guide and dired men in the way, are the fcriptures, the "oracles of God, and they orily. Not education-principles. It is right in parents to do as Abraham did, to teac"h Ttrdr chiidren to iarp Tie -amy of Tb{±,wd^. Tiic tlireftion of rhe wife man is an exceeding good one ; Train up a child in the way he Jhould go, and when he is old, he will not 'di^aff from -it " ; tiiat is, cafily and ordinarily : and it becomes chriftians under the gofpel-difpenfation to bring up their children in the narturt and adtnonilicm ef the Lord" \ and a great mercy and blefling it is 'to Nhave a refigious education j but then, as wrong principles may be infufed as well as right ones, into perfons in their tender years, it becomes them, when come to years of maturity and difcretion, to examine then^, whether they are according to the word of God, and fo judge for themfelves, whether they are to be abode by or rejected. I know it is a grievous thing with fome perfons to forfake the religion they have been brought up in ; but upon this foot, a man that is born and brought up a Turk or a Jew, a Pagan or a Papift, muft ever continue fo. Sad would have been the cafe of the apoftle Paul, if he had continued in the principles of his education ; and what a (hocking figure did he make whilft he abode by them ? thinking, according to them, he ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jefus *. Nor are the cuftoms of men a rule of judgment, or a direSion which way men fliould take in matters of religion ; for the cufloms of the people are for the moft part vain' ; and fuch as are not lawful for us, being chriftians, to receive or ohferve' ; and concerning which we ihoukl fay. We have no fuch cuflom, nei- ther the churches of God^. Cuftom is a tyrant, and ought to be rebelled againft, and its yoke thrown off. Nor are the traditions of men to be regarded -, the Pharifees were very tena- cious of the traditions of the elders, by which they tranfgrefTed the command- nicnts of God, and made his word of no effeft •, and the apoftle Paul, in his ftate of unregeneracy, was zealous of the fame ; but neither of them are to be imitated by us : it is right to obferve the cxhorution which the apoftle gives, when • Gen. xviii. ig. * Pxov. xxii. 6. * Ephes. vi. 4. '/ Aflj xnii. 3. 4. and xxvi. 9. « Jer. ix. 3. ' A£U xvi. 21. t I Cor. xi. 16. -IN MATTERS O P R E L I G I D N. . 4S1 ■wlien a chriftian * j beware left any matt fpoil you through fhilofopby avdvain deceit, after the traditions of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Cbrijl. Take care you arc not impofed upon, under the notion and pretence of an apof- iolical traction ; unwritten traditions arc not the rule, only the word of God is the rule of our faith and prafticc. Nor do the decrees of popes and councils demand our attention and regard ; -it matters iK)t what fuch a pope has determined, or what canons fuch a council under iiis influence has made; what have we to do with the man of fin, that etsalts^himfelf abave all that is called God; v/ho Jits in the temple of Cod, fhewing himfelf as if be -was God? wc know what will be his fate, and that of his fol- lowers '. Nor are the examples of men, no not of the bed of men, in all things to be copied after by us ; we n)Ould indeed be followers of all good men as fuch, of ihofe who through faith and patience inherit the promifes ; and cfpecially of fuch, ^ho are or have been fpiritual guides and governors in the church ; who have made the fcriptures their ftudy, and have laboured in the word and dodlrine-, \heir faith we fhould follow, confidering the end of their converfation ; how that iflues, and when it terminates in Chrift, his perfon, truths and ordinances, the fame to-day, yefierday and for ever ^ : but then we are to follow them no further than they follow Chrift ; the apoftle P^«/ defired no more than this of his Co- rinthians with refpeft to himfelf; and no more can be demanded of us; it fhould be no. bias on our minds, that fuch and fuch a man of fo much grace and excel- lent gifts thought and pradlifed fo and fo. We are to call no raaTi father or maf- ter on earth ; we have but one father in heaven, and one mafter, which isChrift, whofe dodrincs, rules, and ordinances wc fhould receive and obfcrve. We arc rot to be influenced by men of learning and wealth ; though thefe fliould be on Pfal. ii. 7. • John i. 1, 14.. c to him, and fay. Rabbi, he that teas with thee ieyondjerdan^ to whom thou bearejl witnefs, behold the fame baftizetb, and ail men come to him '. Thefe alfo could not be infants that came to him and were baptized; and bcGdes, who they were that were baptized by him, or by his orders, we are afterwards told, and their charadters are given ; Jefus made and baptized more difciples than John ' : firft he made them difciples, and then baptized them, or ordered them to be baptized, and a difciple of Chrift is one that has learnt him, and the way of falvation by him ; who is taught to^deny finful, civil and righteous Mf forChrift; and fuch were the perfons baptized in the times of Chrift, who muft be adult ones ; and with 1 Matt, iii, 5 — g. ' johoiil. 26. *• Joho i». 1, IN MATTERS OF RELIGION. 489 with this his praftice agrees the commifTion he gave in Matthew xxviii. 1 9. where he orders teaching before baptizing; and fuch teaching as iflues in believing, with which compare Mark xvi. 16. True indeed, he fays', fuffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not ; but they were admitted to come to him, not to be baptized by him, of which there is not one fyllable, nor the lead inti- mation, but CO* lay his hands on them and pray, or be touched by him, very probably to heal them of difeafes that might attend them. However, it feems reafonable to conclude, that the apoftles knew nothing of any fuch pradlice a^ Infanc-baptifm, enjoined, pradlifed, or countenanced by Chrifl:, or they would never have forbid the bringing of infants to him v and our Lord faying nothin-T of it when. fuch. a fair opportunity offered, looks very darkly upon it. Once more; look over the accounts of the adminiftration of Baptifm by die apoftles of Chrift, and obferve who' they were that were baptized by them. "VVc read indeed of houfholds baptized by tlurm ; but inafmuch as there are many families that have no infants in them, notTiing can be concluded from hence in favour of Infant- baptifm ; it fhould be firft proved that there were infants in thefe houQiolds, before any fuch confcquence can be drawn from them : and bcfidcs, it will appear upon a review of them, that not infants but adult perfons in the feveral inftanccs are intended. Lydia's houQiold confided of brethren, whom the apodlcs comforted; who could not be infants, but adult perfons ; we have no account of any other, no other are named ; if any other can, let them be named. The Jailor's houfhold were fuch, to whom the word of God was fpoken, who believed in God, and rejoiced with him. Stephanas^ houfhold, which is the only other that is mentioned, is thought by fome to be the fame with the Jailor's; but, if not, it is certain that it confided of adult perfons, fuch who addicted themfclves to the minidry of the faints". It will be cafy to obferve, that the Brd perfons that were baptized after our Lord's rcfurredtion and afcenQon, were fuch as were pricked to the heart, repented of their fins, and gladly received the gofpcl ; fuch were the three thoufand who were baptized, and added to the church in one day. The Samaritans, hearing Philip preach the things concerning the kingdom of God, were baptized, both men and women. The indance of the Eunuch is notorious; this man was a Jewidi profelyte, a ferious and devout man, was reading in the prophecy of Ifaiah when Philip joined his chariot ; who, after convcrfation with him, de- fired baptifm of him, to whc^n Philip replied, that if he believed with all his heart he might be baptized ; intimating, that if he did not, notwithdanding his profcfTion of religion, and external ferioufnefs and devotion, he had no right to that ordinance ; and upon profeffing his faith in Chrid he was baptized, . Vol. II. 3 R Cornelius ' Matt. xix. 14. ■ Afls xvi. 15, 32-7-34. 40' • Cor. i. 16. and xvi. ij. 49° THE SCRIPTURES THE ONLY GUIDE Cornelius and his family, and iliofe in his houfe, to whom Peter preached, and on whom the holy Ghofc fell, were ordered by hin-> to be baptized, havincr received the holy Ghoft,- and for that realbn. And the Corinthians, hearincr the apoftle Paul, and believing in Chrift he preached, were baptized " : from all which inftances it appears, that not infants but adult perfons were the only ones baptized by the apoftles of Chrift. Now, though we might juftly de- mand a precept or command of Chrifl to be Ihewn, exprefsly enjoining the baptifm of infants, before we can go into fuch a praflice, fince it is ufed as a part of religious worfhip; for which we ought to iiave a thus faith the Lord: yet if but one fingle precedent could be given us, one inftance produced ; or if it could be proved that anyone infant was ever baptized by John the Baptift, by Chrift, or by his orders, or by his apoftles, wc ftiould think ourfelves ob- liged to follow fuch an example ; let this be Ihewn us, and we have done; we will ftiur up the controverfy, and fay no more. Strange ! that in the fpace of fixty or fevcnty years, for fuch a courfe of time ran out from the firft adminiflra- tion of baptifm to the clofe of the canon of the fcripcure, that in all the accounts of baptifm in it, not a fingle inftance of Infant-baptifm can be given ! upon the whole, we muft be allowed to fay, and if not, we muft and will take the liberty to fay, that Infant-baptifm is an unfcriptural pradice; and that there is lieipher precept nor precedent for it in all the word of God. 2. If the doubt is concerning the Mode of Baptifm, wiiether it is to be per- formed by immerfion of the whole body, or by fprinkling or pouring a little water on the face ; take the fame courfe as before, ajk for the old paths; inquire how this ordinance was anciently adminiftered in the times oijohn, Chrift, and his apoftles. I Ihall not api>eal unto, nor fend you to inquire the fignificacion ■t>f the Greek word ; though all men of learning and fenfe have acknowledged, that the primary meaning of the word is to dip or plunge; but this ordinance was appointed not for men of learning only, but for men and women alio of the tneancft capacities, and of the moft plain and"fimple underftandings: wherefore let all inquiring perfons confult The fcriptural inftances of Baptifm ; read over the accounts of baptifm as ad- miniftered hy John, and you will find that he baptized \nJordan: afk ycrurfelves why a n'vfr was chofe, when a bafon of water would have done, had it been per- formed by fprinkling or pouring; try if you can bring yourfclves to believe that John was not in the x'wct Jordan, only on the banks of it, from whence he took water, and poured or fprinkled it ; and if you can ferioufty and in good earneft conclude (with a grave divine) that if he was in the river, he had in his hand a fcoop, or fome fuch inftrumcnt, and with it threw the water over the people as ■» AfU ii. J7, 41, 42. and viii. 12, jf, 38. ini x. 47. aid xviiL ». IN MATTERS O F R E L I G I O N. ,49; as they flood on the banks of the river on both fides of him, and To baptized them in fboals. Look over the baptifm of Chrift by John, and fee if you can perfuade yourfelves that Chrift went ancle deep, or a little more, into the river Jordan, and John Uood upon a bank and poured a little water on his head, as flicnieurs painter and engraver have defcribed them; or whether the moft eafy end natural fepfe of the whole is not this, that they both went into the river^'f^r- . dan, ^ndjohn baptized ourLord by immerfion; which when done, he ftraight- way came yp out of the water, which fuppofes him to have been in it; and then ihc Spirit defccnded on him as a dove, and a voice was heard from his Father, faying, This is my beloved Son*. Carefully read over thofe words of the evaji- gelift '', atidjobn alfo was baptizing in^non near toSaliin., becaufe there was much water there; and try if you can make much water to fignify little; or many watej'Sy as the words may be literally rendered, only a little rill, or fome fmaJl rivulets of water, not fufficient to cover a man's body ; though the phrafe is ufed even of the waters of the great fea ' ; and perfuade yourfelves, if you c«n, that the reafon of the choice of this place, becaufe of much water in it, was npt for bap- tifm, as fays the text, but for the convenience of men, their camels and afles on which they came to hear John ; of which it fays not pne word. To which add the inftance of the eunuch's baptifm, in which we are told ', that both Phi- lip and the eunuch went down into the water ; and that when baptifm was admir niftered, they came up out of the water : now try whether you can really believ^ that tliis great man, who left his chariot, went down with Pkilip int^ the water ancle or knee deep, only to have a little water fprinkled and poured upon him and then came out of it, when in this way the ordinance might as well have been adminiftered in his chariot; or whether it is not moft reafonablc to believe, from the bare narrative, from the very letter of the text, that their going dpwn into the water was in order that the ordinance might be adminiftered by immerfion^ and that when Philip had baptized the Eunuch this way, they both came up out of the water : as for that poor weak criticifm, .that ihis is to be underftood of going to and from the water-fide j it may be a/ked what -they Ihould go thither for, what reafon was there. for it, if done by fprinkling? BeCdcs^ it is entirely deftroyed by the obfervation the hiftorian niakes before this, that they came un to a certain water ^i to the water-fide; and therefore when they went down, it muft be into the water itfelf ; it could not with any propriety be Jlaid, that when they were come tp the water-fide, after that they went to the watcr-Iide. JBut 10 proceed, 3 R 2 Confider » Matt, iii. ^, 16, 17. y JoJ»n iii. 23. « Se^H-jn.P&l. lixyji.^p. ^pd cvi|. 13. • Aas viii. 38, J9. * Vfi^ 36. 492 THE SCRIPTURES THE ONLY GUIDE Confider the figurative or metaphorical Baptifms memioned in fcripturr. Baptifm is faid'to be a like figure to Noah's ark, in which eight fouls were faved by water; there is a iikenefs, an agreement between the one and the other; now fee if you can make out any Iikenefs between the ark upon the waters and baptifm, as performed by fprinkling ; whereas it foon appears as performed by immerfion, in which perfons are covered in water, as Noah and his family in the ark were, when the fountains of the great deep were broke up under them, and the windows of heaven were opened above them : think with yourfelves, whether fprinkling or immerfion bell agrees with this, that baptifm fhould be called the antitype to it ; to which may be added, that Noah and his family, when fhut up in the ark, were, as ic were, buried there ; and bap- tifm by immerfion is a reprcfcntation of a burial. The pafTage of the Ifraelites through the Red fea is called a being baptized in the eland and in the fea ^ ; but why (hould it be fo called ? what is there in that account that looks like fprinkling? There is that rcfembles immerfion; for when the -.vaters of the fea ftood up on both fides of them, as a wall, and a cloud covered them, they were as people immerfed in water ; and befides, their going down into the fea» and pafiing through it, and coming up out of it on the other fide ; if it may not be litterally called an immerfion, it was very much like an immerfion into ■water, and an emerfion out of it ; and both that and baptifm reprcfent a burial and rcfurreftion. The fufFerings of our Lord, are called a baptifm; you would do well to confider whether only fprinkling a few drops of water on the face, or an immerfion into it, befl: rcprefents the abundance and greatnefs of our Lord's forrows and fufferings, for which reafon they are called a baptifm ; and the rather, fince they are fignified by the waters coming into his foul, and by his coming into deep waters, where the floods overflowed him'. Once more, the extraordinary donation of the holy Ghoft on the day of Pentecoft is called a baptifm, or a being baptized with the holy Gbojl, and with fire; which was done when the houfe in which the apoftles were, was filled with a mighty wind, and cloven tongues, as of fire, fat upon them ' : it deferves your confideration, whether this wonderful affair, and this large abundance of the Spirit, is not better cxprefled by baptifm, as adminiftcred in a large quantity of water, than ■with a httle. To add no more ; Confider the nature, ufe, and end of Baptifm ; it is a burial; and the ufe and end of it are, to reprcfent the burial and refurredtion of our Lord Jefus Chrift i hence the phrafc of being buried -with him in baptifm ' : fee if you can make any thing like a burial when this ordinance is adminiftered by fprinkling; can • I Pet. iii. JO, 21. * 1 Cor. x. i, 2. • Luke xii. 50. Pfalm Ixix. 1, 2- ' Matt. iij. 1 1. Afls i. 5. aod ii. i> 2, 3. ( Rom. vi. 4. Colofs. ii. 12. -.TN MATTERS O F : R E LI G lO K . 493 can you pcrfuade yourfelves, that a corps is properly buried, when only a little duft is fprinkled on its face ? on the other hand, you will eafily perceive a Jively rcprefentation of a burial, when the ordinance is performed by immer-- fion ; a perfon is then covered with water, and when he comes out of it, it clearly reprefents our Lord's refurreftion, and the believer's rifing again to rewnefs of life. Upon the whole, having afked for the good eld paths, and found them, walk herein, abide by this ancient praftice of baptifm by immer- fion ; a pradtice which continued for the fpace of thirteen hundred years, at leaft, without any exception, unlefs a few bed-ridden people in the times of Cyprian *■, who received baptifm on their fick and death-beds, fancying there was no atonement for fins after baptifm, and therefore deferred it till fuch. time. But after all, let me ac^vife you in the words of our text to inquire where is the good way, or the better way; for though the ordinance of baptifm, and every other, is a good way, there is a better way. This is a way of duty, but not of life and falvation ; it is a command of Chrift, to be obeyed by all be- lievers in him, but not to be trufted in and depended on; it is eflrntial to church-communion, but not to falvation ; it is indeed no indifferent thing whether it is performed or no; this ought not to be faid or thought of any ordinance of Chrifl: ; or whether in this or the other manner, or adminiftered to this or the other fubjeft. It ought to be done as Chrift has directed it Ihould ; but when it is beft done, it is no faving ordinance: this I the rather mention, to remove from us a wicked and a foolilh imputation, that we make an idol of this ordinance, and place oor confidence and dependence on it, and put it in the room of the Saviour. I call it wicked, becaufe falfe; and foolifli, becaufe contrary to an avowed and well-known principle on which we proceed, namely, that faith in Chrift alone for falvation is a prerequifite to baptifm : can any man in his fenfcs think that we depend on this ordinance for falvation, when we require that a perfon Ihould believe in Chrift, and profefs that he believes in Chrift alone for falvation, before he is baptized; or otherwife we judge he is not a fit fubjed ? but on the other hand, thofe that infinuate fuch a notion as this, would do well to confider, if their own condufl does not be- fpeak fomething of this kind ; or otherwife what means the ftir and buftle that is made, when a child is ill, and not yet fprinkled .? what means fuch language as this, " run, fetch the minifter to baptize the child, the child's a " dying ? " Does it no: look as if this was thought to be a faving bufinefs, or as if a chikl could not be faved unlefs it is fprinkled ; and which, when done, they are quite c^fy and fatisfied about its ftatc ? But to leave this, and as the » ClUiici. 4?4 THE SCRlt>TURES THfi DKLY GUIDE •the apollle fays, yit Jhew I unto you a more excellent ivny\ which is Jefus Cbftjl, .the way, the truth, and the life. Chrift is the way of falvation, -which thegofpel, and the minifters of ir, point ■out to men i and he is the only way of falvation, there is falvation in him, and an no othtr -, this is what the whole Bible centers in -, this is the fum and fub- flance of it-, this is the faithful faying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Chrifl came into the vcorld to fave the chief of finners. He is the way of acccfs to the "Father, nor can any come td God but by him ; he is the mediator between <5od and man, and through him there is accefs with confidence by the faith of him. He is the way of acceptance with God : we have nothing to render us ac- ceptable unto God ; we are black in ourfelves with original and aftual fin, and .arc only comely inGhrift; our acceptance is in the beloved. God is well pleafed with him, and with all that arc confidered in him-, their perfons and their facri- ■fices are acceptable to God through him. He is the way of conveyance of all grace, and the blefTings of it to us. All was given originally to him, and to lis m him ; and from him, and through him wc -receive it, even out of his ful- nefs, grace for grace; allfpiritual blefllngs are with him, and come to us from him -, all grace pafTes through his hands -, the firft we have, and all the after- fupplies of it -, yea, the gift of God, eternal life, is through Jefus Chrifl our Lord. And he is the way to heaven and eternal happinefs ; he has entered into it with his own blood aVready, and has opened a way by it for his people, into the ho- lieft of all ; he is gone beforehand as their forerunner, and has taken poirefTion of heaven for them-, he is now preparing a place for them there, and will conie again and take them to himlelf, and introduce them into his kingdom and glory. And he is a plain, pleafant, and fafe way; plain to him that underftands, and has a fpiritual knowledge of him, even though but of a very mean capacity ; for this is a way in which men, Jhough fools, fh all not err; and it is a very delight- ful one ; what more delightful than to live by faith on Chrift, or to walk by faith in him, as he hath been received. And a very fafe one, it mud needs be; none ever pcrifhed that believed in Chrift ; he is the living way, all in this way live, none in this way die; though it is a ftrait gate and narrow way, yet it furely and fafcly leads to eternal life; and though it is fometimes called a new way, yet not becaufe newly contrived, for it is as ancient in this refpefl as the coun- fcl and covenant of peace; nor newly revealed, for it was made known to Adam immediately after the fall ; nor newly made ufe of, for all the Old Teftament faints were direfted in this way, and walked in it, and were faved by the grace ;of our Lord Jefus Chrift, the Lamb llain from the foundation of the world, as avelUswcj but becaufe it is more clearly manifefted now, and more largely and ' 4. Cor. x\u }u 1 IN MATTERS OF RELIOropT. 495 «nd frequently walked in : otherwife it is the good old path to beafkedfof; there never was any other way of falvation, or ever wHl be. I go on, II. To Gonfider the encouragement given to take the direction, and make the inquiry as above-, and in this I fliall be very brief j it lies in this claufe, and ye Jballfijid reji for your fouls. There is a reft for fouls to be enjoyed in ordinances, when men are arrived to fatisfadion about them, and fubmit unto them in a becoming manner} when- a man has carefully and confcientioufly fearched the fcriptures, and is come to a point about an ordinance, his mind is eafy, which before was diftradled and confufed ; and he is the more eafy in that he has aftcd the faithful part to him- felf and truth ; and I cannot fee how perfons can have reft in their minds, who have not ftood in the ways and looked about them, fearched the fcriptures,. and inquired for the good old paths ; and in confequence of an honeft inquiry,, walk therein ; to fuch, wifdom's ways are ways if pleafantnefs, and her paths paths af peace; there is great peace enjoyed x» them, though not /rc»/« them ; a be- liever comes to an ordinance, being upon inquiry fatisfied about it, as for in- ftance, the ordinance of baptifm ; he, J fay, comes to it with delight, pafTcs through it with pleafure, and goes away from it as the eunuch did, rejoicing. There is reft for fouls to be enjoyed in dodlrines, which a man does cnjoy» when upon a diligent fearch after truth, he finds it, and is at a point about it;, a man that is toHed to and fro with every wind of doftrine, is like a wave of the fea, always reftlefs and uneafy ; a double-minded man, that halts between two opinions, and fometimes inclines to one, and fometimes to the other, is unflable in all his ways, and has no true reft in his mind ; a man that is carried about with divers and ftrange doftrines, is like a meteor in the air, fometimes here, and fometimes there ; a good thing it is to have the heart eftablifticd in and with the dodrines of grace ; and the way to this is 10 fearch the fcriptures, to fee whether thefe things be fo or no; which when ferioufly and faithfully done, the iffue is peace of confcience, reft in the mind. But above all, true reft for the foul is to be had in Chrift, and fuch who afk for the good and better way find it in him, nor is it to be found in any other j- Chrift is that to believers, as Noah's ark was to the dove, which could find no reft for the fole of its feet, till it returned thither : there is reft in Chrift, and no where clfe, and he invites weary fouls to come to him for it ; his words are '', Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you refl -, take my yoke upon you, and learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, andyefhall find r(fi unto your fouls \ which laft claufe is the fame with this in our text, and our * Matt. xi. 28, 29. ^9^ THE SCRIPTURES THE'ONLY GUIDE, &c; ;Lord fecms to have had refpeftunto it, and to have took his language from it- -and what -peace and reft do weary foiuls find inChrift, when their faith is led to his perfoD, fiilnefs, blood, facrifice and righteoufnefs ? and fuch who are made partakers of fpiritual reft here, fhall enjoy an eternal one hereafter, for ftill there remains a rejl to the people of God '. To conclude ; let us blefs God for the fcriptures, that we have fuch a way- . -mark to direft us, and point out unto us the way in which we ftiould go -, let us make ufe of them -, let us fearch the fcriptures daily and diligently, and the Tather, fince they tcftify of Chrift, of his perfon, offices, of his doftrines and ordinances. Thdc ztc the wore fure word of prophecy, to which we do well to take heed, as to a light Jhining in a dark place \ thefe are a larap iinto our feet, and a light unto our paths, both with refpeft to the way of falvation, .and to the ■way of our duty. Thefe guide us to the old paths, and fhew us where is tlie good way in which we (hould walk -, and when we are tempted to turn to the rifht hand, or the left, it is beft to hearken to the voice of the word behind us, faying,' This is the way, walk in it ". The Bible has the beft claim to anti- quity of any book in the world ; and the gofpel, and the truths of it, have the greateft marks and evidences of it upon them. Error is old, 'but truth is more ancient than that ; the gofpel is the everlajling gofpel; it wa5 even ordained be- fore the world unto our glory " ; and the ordinances of it, as adminiftered in the times of Chrift and his apoftles, ftiould be received and fubmitted to, as there delivered -, and we ftiould walk in them as weliave Chrift and his apoftles for an example : but above all things, our concern fhould be to walk in Him, the way •, there is no way better, nor any fo good as he •, feek reft for your fouls in him, and no where elfe -, not in the law, and the works of it, there is none there -, not in the world, and the things of it, ibis is not your reft, it is polluted"; but feek it in Chrift, where you will find it here, and more fully enjoy it with him hereafter. ' Heb. iv. 9. ■» John V. 39. zPet. i. 19. Pfil. cxix. 10;. Ifai. xxx. 21. •* &, that is, of John; and he elfewhere ' fpeaks cf his baptifm as a part of righteoufnefs to be fulfilled, and was fulfilled by him. Now John's baptifm and Chrift's were, as to the fubftance of them, the fame ; John's baptifm was allowed of and approved of by Chrift, as appears from his fubiniftion to it-, and the ordinance was confirmed by the order he gave to his apoftles to adminifter it : one of John s difciples faid to his mafter, Rahhi, be that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou beareft witnefs, behold, the fame baptizeth, and all men come to him '-, though, as is faid afterwards, J ejus himfelf baptized not, but his difciples ^ \ that is, they baptized by his orders; and which were renewed after his refurredion from the dead, faying, Go ye there-' jore, and teach all nations, baptizing them, &c". and which orders were obeyed by his apoftles, as many inftances in the A£li of the Apofiks (hew ; and that it was water-baptifm they adminiftered, according to Chrift's inftruftions and di- reiftions. In matters of worfliip there ought to be a command for what is done; as this ordinance of baptifm is a folemn aft of worftiip, being performed in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghojl. God is a jealous God, and cfpecially with refped to the worftiip of him ; nor fliould any thing be intro- duced into it but what he has commanded ; and careful ftiould we be hereof, left he ftiould fay unto us, who hath required this at your hands'"? it is not enough that fuch and fuch things are not forbidden; for on this footing a thou- fand fooleries may be brought into the worftiip of God, which will be refcnted by him. When Nadab zndjbihu offered ftrange fire to the Lord, which he com- manded not, fire came down from heaven and deftroyed them : we fliould have a precept • John i. 6, 33. f Matt. xxi. 25, a6. ' Luke vii. 30. ' M.tt, iii. 15. • John iii. j6. ' Johnir. 2. " Malt, xxviii. 19. • Ifai. i. 12. TO BE OBSERVED. 501 a precept for what we do, and that not from men, but from God -, left we in- cur the charge of worjhipping God in vain, teaching for doElrines the command- ' ments of men ', and involve ourfelves in the guilt of fuperftiticn, and will- worfhip. Wherefore, the baptifm of infants muft be wrong ; fince there is no com- mand of God and Chrift for it ; if there was any, it might be expcdted in the New Tcftament, and in that only -, it is abfurd to fend us to the Old Tefta- ment for a command to obferve a New Teftament-ordinance -, it is a grofs ab- furdity to fend us fo far back as to the xvii'" chapter of Genefis ^ for a warrant for the ordinance of baptifm ; we might as well be fent to the firft chapter of that book -, for there is no more relating to that ordinance in the one than in the other. Was there a like precept for the baptifm of infants under the New Tcftament, as there was for the circumcifion of infants under the Old Tefta- ment, there could be no objeftion to it; but it is an abfurdity of. abfurdities to affirm, that baptifm comes in the room of circumcifion -, fince baptifm was in force and ufe long before circumcifion was abolilhed •,. circumcifion was not aboliftied until the death of Chrift, when that, with other ceremonies, had an end in him ; but baptifm was adminiftered many years before to multitudes, by John, by the order of Ch rift, and by his apoftles ; now where is the good fenfc of faying, and with what propriety can it be faid, that one thing fucceeds another, as baptifm circumcifion, when the one, faid to fucceed, was in ufe and force long before the other ceafed, it is pretended it fucceedcd ? If there is any precept for Infant-baptifm, it muft be in the New Teftament ; there only it can be expedled, but there it cannot be found ; not in Matthew xix. 14. Suffer little children, and forbid them not to come unto me, for of fuch is the kingdom of heaven ; which is no precept, but a permifTion, or grant, that little children might come, or be brought unto him -, but for what ? not for haptifm •, but for that for which they were brought, and which is mentioned by the evangclift in the preceding vcrfe, that be fhould put bis bands on them, and « Matt. XV. g. y That we are ever referred to this cKap.er, for a proof of rofant-baptifm, it denied, and pro- nounced a wilful mifreprefcnutioD, by the above mentioned writer, in his fecond letter in the news- paper. This man muft have read very little in the controverfy, to be ignorant of this. The very laft writer that wrote in the controverfy, chat I know of, calls the covenant made with Ahraham'x^ that chapter, '• the grand turning point, on uhich the iflue of the controverfy very muth depends; *' and that if ,firaAa/7i'» covenant, which included his infant-children, and gave them a tight to •' circumcifon, was not the covenant of grace; then he freely confefTes, \\izix.\\e main grcunj, on. " v/Wich they zSTcTt the right 'fin/anti to iafti/m, is taken away; and, confequenily, the principal " arguments in fupport of the doftrine, are overturned." Boftwick'a Fair and Ratioaal Vindi- cation of the Right of Infant! to the Ordinance of Baptifm, &c. p. 19. 502 BAPTISM A DIVINE COMMANDMENT and pray, or give them his blefTing -, as it fecms it was ofual in tbofe times, and with thofe people, as formerly, to bring their children to perfons venerable for religion and piety, to be bleffed by them in this way ; and fuch an one they mighc take Jefus to be, though they might not know he was the McfTiah. Two other evangelifts fay, they were brought unto him that be Jhould touch ■fhem; as he fomctimes touched difeafed pcrfoas when he healed them; and thefe children might be difeafed, and brought to him to be cured of their dif- £afes ; however, not to be baptized by Chrift, for he baptized none; they would rather have brought them to the difciplcs, had it been for fuch a pur- pofe ; and had it been the praftice of the apoftles to baptize infants, they would not have refufed them ; and our Lord's intire Glence about Infant-baptifin at this time, when there was fo.fair an opportunity to fpeak of it, and enjoin it, had it been his will, has no favourable afpedl on that praftice. The reafon given by Chrift for the pcrmiffion of infants to come to him, for of fucb is the kingdom of heaven, is figurative and metaphorical ; and not to be underflood of the infants themfelvcs, but of fuch as they ; of fuch who are comparable to th.em for their humble deportment, and harmlefs lives ; or to ufe our Lord's ■words elfcwhere, fuch who are cmverted, and become as little children. Matt. xviii. 2 ''. Nor is a command for Infant-baptifm contained in the commifTion to bap- tize, Matthew wv'nx. 19. Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghcjl. It is argued, that " fince all nations are to be baptized, and infants are a part of them, then, " accordino- to the command of Chrift, they are to be baptized." But ic .(hould be obferved, that the commidion is indeed to teach all nations, but not to y The above letter-wxiter, in the news-paper, obfcrves, "that the iingJom of bia-ven (igniiies " either the kingdom, of church of Chrift here, or the kingdom of glory above. If the former, •«' they are declared, by Chrift himftlf, real fubjeflsof his among men; if the latter, if memberj •' of the invifible church, why not of the vifible f" But, in fafl, they themfelves are not intended, only fuch as they ; fuch who are comparable to them for meeknefa and humility ; for freedom from malice, pride, ind ambiton. But admitting that the words are to beunderftood of infants littcrally, the kingdom of heaven cannot defign the kingdom, or church of Chrift under the gofpel difpenfa- tion, which is rot national, but congregational ; confifting of men gathered out of the world, by the grace ofGod, and who make t public profedion of Chrift, which infants are not capable of, and fo cannot be real (ubjcfls of it ; and if they were, they muft hive an equal right to the Lord's fup- p«r, as to baptifm, of which they arc equally capable. The kingdom of glory then being meant, it is aOced, if members of the invifible church, why not ofihe vilible ? They may be, when it ap- peirs that they are of the invifible church, which only can be manifcft by the grace of God beflowed on ihcm; and it is time enough to talk of their baptifm when that is evident; and when it i» clear they have both a right unto, and meetnefs for the kingdom of heaven. TO BE OBSERVED. 503 to haftize all nations ;' the antecedent to the relative thtm^ is not aU nations } the words mtrt. is •^w, all nations^ arc of the neuter gender •, but m-rtu them, is of the mafculine, and do not agree -, the antecedent is f£«3tT»<, difdplts, which is underflood, and fuppofed, and contained in the word (xa^nvrnt, teach, or make difciples -, and the fenfc is, teach all nations, and baptize them that are taught, or are made difciples by teaching. If the above argument proves any thing, it would prove too much ; and what proves too much, proves nothing : it would prove, that not only the infants of chriftians, but the infants of Turks, Jews, and Pagans, fhould be baptized, fince they are part of all nations ; yea, that every individual perfon in the world fhould be baptized, heathens, as well as chriftians, and even the moft profligate and abandoned of mankind, fince they are part of all nations ^. ^ And as there is no precept for the baptifm of infants, fo no precedent for it in the word of God. Thpugh there was no clear and cxprefs command for it, which yet we think is neceflary, and is required in fuch a cafe ; yet, if there was a precedent of any one infant being baptized, we Ihould think ourfelves obliged to pay a regard unto ic -, but among the many thoufands baptized by John, byChrift, or, however, by his order, and by his apoftles, notonefingle inftance of an infant being baptized can be found. We read, indeed, of boujholds being baptized -, from whence it is argued, that there might be, and it is probable there were, infants in them, who might be baptized ; but it lies upon thofe who are of a different mind, to prove there were any in thofe houfhokls. To put us upon proving a negative, that there were none there, is unfair. However, as far as a negative can be proved, we are capable of it '. There are but three families ufualiy obfcrved, if fo many -, Lydia's, the Jailor's, * But our letter-writer fays, " When the apoftles received their commirtion, they could not under- «■ ftand it otherwife than to baptize the pannti ih^l embraced the faith of Chrift, through their «' preaching, and all their children with them, as wa* the manner of the miniders of God in pre- " ceding ages, by circumcilion ;" but if they {a underflood it, and could not otherways underftand it, it is ftrange they Ihould not praflice according to it, and baptize children with their parents ; of which we have no one inftance. Uy i\\e miniften of GoJ in prKet/'mg agei, I fuppofe, he means the pielli and prophets, under the Old TellameiW-difpenfition ; but thefe were not the operators of circumcifion, which was done by parent! and others : and furely it cannot be faid, it was the ufual manner of miniftcrs to baptize parents, aid their children with them in thofe ages ; and it is pretty unaccountable how they (hould baptize riien; by circumcifion, ai is affirmed -, this is fome- thing unheard of before, and monftroufly ridiculous and abfurd. » The above writer afiiriiu, that my mannner of " proving the negttive, was by bare!]! ejining •' there were no children in any of the families, mentioned in the fcriptures, is baptized." The f^Jfity of which appears by the following defcriptive cbaradlere given of the perfoosin the feveral fa- - niilies, and the reafoniogs upon them. 504 BAPTISM A DIVINE COMMANDMENT Jailor's, and that of Stephanas, if not the fame with the Jailor's, as fome think. As for Lydia's houdiold, or thofe in her houfe, they were brethren ; whom, afterwards, the apoftles went to fee, and whom they comforted ; and fo not infants. As for the Jailor's houlhold, they were fuch as were capable of hear- ing the word preached to them, and of believing it ; for it is faid, he rejoiced, believing in God with all his houfe ^ : and if any man can find any other in his houfe, befides all that were in it, he mufl be reckoned a very fagacious perfon. As for the houfhold oi Stephanas, (if different from the Jailor's) it is faid, that they addicted thetnfehes to the minijiry of the faints ' : and whether this be under- ftood of the miniftry of the word to the faints, or of the miniftration of their fubftance to the poor, they muft be adult perfons, and not infants. Seeing then there is neither precept nor precedent for Infant-baptifm in the word of God, of which I defy the whole world to give one fingle precedent, we cannot but condemn it as unfcriptural, and unwarrantable ''. I proceed, II. To fhcw that the ordinance of water-baptifm, being a divine command, it ought to be kept, and obferved, as direded to in the word of God. Firjt, I fliall fhew, by whom it is to be kept and obferved. i. By fenfible, rcpcntint^ finners. John's baptifm was called the baptifm of repentance' ; be- caufe repentance was previous to it ; and the very firfl: perfons that were bap- tized by him, were fuch who were fenfible of their fins, repented of them, and ingenuoufly confefled them ; for it is faid, they were baptized of him in Jordan, confeffmg their ftns -, and whereas others applied to him for baptifm, of whom he had no good opinion, he required of them, that they would firft bring forth fruits meet for repentance ; and not to think with thcmfelves, we have Abraham to * Afli xvi. 40, 34. * I Cor. i. 16. — xvi. ij. * Inhi5turn, the writer in the news-paper, " defies me to produce one fcripture precept, orpre- •< cedent, for delaying the baf>iifm «/" fAiVir/n of chrillian parents j or for baptizing adult pcrfooi, " born cif fuch parents. On this the controverfy hinges." It is ridiculous to talk of a precept for delaying that which was not in being ; and of a precedent for delaying that which had never been praflifed. If a warrant is required for baptizing adult perfon«, believers, it is ready at hand, Mari xvi. 16. and precedents enough : and we know of no precept to baptize any other, let them be born of whom they may ; and as for precedents of the baptifm of adult perfon;, born of chridian parent}, it cannot be expefled, nor reafonably required of us j fince the ASii of the Apoftles only give an account of the planting of the firft churchea; and of the baptifm of thofe of which they firft confifted; and not of thofe that in a courfe of years were added to them. Wherefore, to demand inftances of perfons, born of chriftian parents, and brought up by them, as baptized in adult age, which would require length of time, is nnreafonable ; and if the controverfy hinges on this, it ought to be at an end, and given up by them. ' Mark i. 4. . T O B E (D B S E K V E D. 505 to our father' ; fince fuch a plea would be of no avail with him ; and the very firft perfons that were baptized after our Lord had given to his apoftles the commiffion to baptize, were penitent ones ; for under the firft fcrmon after this, three thoufand were priciced in their heart, and cried out. Men and bre- thren, what fl} all we do? To whom the apoftle Peter gave this inftruflion and direftion : Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jefus Chrijl s -, and accordingly, on their repentance, they were baptized. 2. This command h to be kept and obferved by believers in Chrift; be. that believetb and is bap- tized, fhall be faved^. Faith goes before baptifm, and is a pre-requifite to it j as the various inftances of baptifm recorded in the fcriptures fliew. Philip went down to Samaria, and preached Chrift there to the inhabitants of it -, and when they believed Philip, preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jefus Chrift, they were baptized both men and women '. The fame miniftcr of the word was bid to join himfelf to the chariot of an Eunuch, returning from ferufalem, where he had been to worfhip, and whom he found reading a pro- phecy in Ifaiah; and faid unto him, Underftandeft thou what thou readeft ? -To which he anfwcred. How can J, except fome man fhould guide me? And bein" taken up into the chariot with him : from that fcripture, Philip preached Jefus to him, his word, and ordinances, as the fequel fhews ; for when they came to a certain water, the Eunuch faiJ, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized ? And Philip faid. If thou believeft with all thine heart, thou ma\eft. Otherwife not, itfeems; for notwithftanding his religion and devotion, withou: faith in Chrift, he had no right to that ordinance ; He anfwered and faid, I be- lieve that Jefus Chrift is the Son of God^ ; upon which profcfTion of his faith, he was baptized. The apoftle Paul preached the gofpel at Corinth with fucccfs ; and it is obferved by the hiftorian, that many of ihe Corinthians hearing, believed, end wer< baptized \ Firft they heard the word, then they believed in Chrift, the fum and fubftance of the word, and upon the profeftion of their faith, were baptized. 3. The ordinance of water-baptifm is to be attended to, and obferved by fuch who are the difciples of Chrift; it is faid ihiijefus made and baptized v:ore difciples than John". Firft made them difciples, and then baptized them ; that is, ordered his apoftles to baptize them ; with which his commifTion to them agrees, Teach all nations, baptizing them; make difciples, and baptize them that are fo made. Now, what is it to be difciples of Chrift ? Such may be faid to be fo, who have learned to know Chrift, and believe in him ; who are taught to deny finful felf, righteous felf, and civil felf, for his fake, and to take up the crofs and follow him, in the exercife of grace and in the difcharge of duty : Vol. II. 3 T and, f Matt. iii. 6—9. e Ad.su. 38. «" Mark xvi, i6. • Aflsviii. 12. Atts viii. 36, 37. ' AGs xviii. 8. * Johniv. 1. 5o6 BAPTISM A DIVINE COMMANDMENT and, 4. Such as have received the Spirit of Gcxi, are proper perfons to obfervc the ordinance of baptifm, and fubmit unto it : Can any man forbid water, that tbefe Jbould not be baptized, v^bo have received the holy Cbojl as well as we"? as a Spirit of illumination and convidtion, as a Spirit of fandtification, faith and confolation, and as a Spirit of adoption. zdly. Next let us conGdcr in what manner the ordinance of baptifm is to be kept and obferved : and, i . It fliould be kept in faith ; for without faith it is impoffible to pleafe God; and wbatfoever is not of faith, is fin, Heb. xi. 6. Rom. xiv. 23. 2. In love, and from a principle of love to Chrift, and which is the end of every commandment, and of this •, If ye love me, fays Chrift, keep my commandments, John xiv. 15 3- It fliould be kept as it was at firft delivered and obferved : the manner in which it is to be performed and fubmitted to, is immerfion, or coverincT the whole body in water; and which agrees with the primary fcnfe of the word Co.t7/^*, which fignifics to dtp or plunge, as all learned men know"; and he mult be a novice in the Greek language, that will take upon him to contradict what has been ingenuoufly owned by fo many men of learning. Had our tranflacors thought fit to have tranflated the word, which they have not in thofc » A£b X 47. e The letter-writer makes me to Cay, " All the world acknowledge ColtIi^ii, Cgnifies to dip or «' olunoe, and never to fprmklc or pour water on any thing,'* which is a fiJfe reprelentation of my words, and of the manner in which they were delivered ; however, this I affirm, that in all ihi Greek Lexicons I ever faw, and I have feen a pretty many, I do not pretend to have feen «ll that have been publilhed i yet in what my fmall library furnilhes me with, the word is always rendered in the firft and primary fenfc by mtrgo, immergo, to aip or f'u/ige inti ; and in a fecondary and con- fequentia! fcnfe, by abluo. lavo, to ivaff?, becaufe what is dipj ed is wadied i and never by perfun- do or afpergo, to four o: /frinilt ; as th« Lexicon publithcd hy Conjl amine, BuJa^ui, &c. thofeof liaj- ian, "Junius, Piantinui, Sc/rpala. Sebrevtlius, and Stotkiui, befides a great number of critics that fuieht b; menciontd; and if thi» writer can produce any oce Lexicographer of any note, that renders the word lo Mur or fprinkle, let him came him. This iterant /irili/er pan the following queftioos, <• Did the Jews plunge their whole bodies in water always before they did eat? Did ihey aip their • < pot!, brazen vefTels and beds?" He does not fufFer me to anfwer the quedions, but anfwers for me, " He knows ihe contrary." But if I may be allowed to anfwer for myfelf, I mufl fay, by the tertiroonics of the le*s themfilves, aod of others, I know ihey did ; that is, when they came from market, having touched the common people, or their clothes, immerfed themfelvcs in water; fo fays Maiiaonides in N/lifo. Chagigah. c. a. fefL 7. " If the Pharifces touched but the garments of •• the common people they were defiled, and needed immerfion, and were obliged to it." And tcaligtr obferves, de Emend. Temp. 1.6. p. 271. "That the more fuperftiiious part of the Jews, "" e»ery day befo'e they (at down to meat, dipped the whole body ; hence the Pharifee's admiration «• at Chriil, Lxii x\. 38." According to the law of Mo/es, Lev xi. }2. unclean veflels were wafhed ■by putting or dipping them into water ; and according to the traditions of the elders, to which oar Lo d rtferi, Mari vii. 4. not only brazen velTels and tables, but even beds, bolllers and pillows un- clean, in a ceremonial fenfe, were waftied by immerfion in water. So the Jews fay in the;rMifnah, or book of traditions, " A bed that is wholly defiled, a man dips it part by pan." Celim, c. z6. Aa. 14. See alfo Mikvaot, c 7. fe^^. 7. TO BE OBSERVED. 507 thofe places where the ordinance of baptifm is made mention of, for reafons cafily to be guelTed at, but have adopted the Greek word baptize in all fuch places ; had they truly trandated it, the eyes of the people would have been opened, and the controverfy at once would have been at an end, with refpeft to this part of it, the mode of baptifm -, however we have proof fufficient that it was performed, and ought to be performed by immerfion, as appears, i. By the places where it was adminiftered, as the river Jordan, where John baptized many, and where our Lord himfelf was baptized; and^noriy near Salim, which he chofc for this reafon, becaufe there was much water there ' j now if the ordi- nance was adminiftered in any other way than by immerfion, wliat need was there to make choice of rivers and places abounding with water to baptize in ? 2. By the inftances of perfons baptized, and the circumftances attending their baptifm, as that of our Lord, of whom it is faid, JFhen he was baptized, he went up jlraightway out of the water "^-y which manifeftly implies that he had been in it, of which there would have been no need, had the ordinance been adniinif- tered to him in any other way than by immerfion ; -as by fprinkling or pourincr a little water on his head, as the painter ridiculoufly defcribcs it. The baptifm of the Eunuch is another inftance proving baptifm by immerfion ; when he and Philip were come to a certain water, and it was agreed to baptize him, ic is faid, they went down both into the water, both Philip and the Eunuch, and be baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip \ The drcumftances oi going down into the water, and coming up out of it, manifeftly fhew in what manner the Eunuch was baptized, namely, by immerfion ; for what reafon can be given why they fhould go into the water, had it been performed in any other way ' ? 3. The end of baptifm, which » Matt. iii. 6, ij. i Matt. iii. i6. ' Aaiviii. 38, jg. • The above letter-writer aflcs, " How often muft I be told, that the particle «; and « are in " hundreds of places in the New TeQament rendered unio mi from ?" be it ly faid to ume to a. certain wafer, to the water-fide ; wherefore when they went down, they went not unto it, if they were there before, bot iato it ; ai it muft be allowed the prepoCtion fometimes, at leall, iignifies ; and circumftances require that it fliould be fo rendered here, let it fignify what it may elfewhere ; and this determines tlie fenfe of the other prepoCtion, that it muft tivd ought to be rendered »«/ tf; for ai they went down into the water, when they came op, it muft be out of it. What he means by the flrange queftion that follows, *• What will he make of Chrift's going i»/9 a m^M/fl/*^" I cannot devife, unlefs he thinks the traof- lition of Lukt vi. 1 a is wrong, or nonfenfe, or both ; but has this wifeacre never heard or read of • cave in • mountain, into which men may go, and properly be Caid to go Imo the mountain ; and fuch aj) one it is highly probable our L01.0 went into, to pray alone; fuch as the caveia mount 3 T a Horcb, 5o8 BAPTISMA DIVINE COMMANDMENT which is to reprefent the burial and refurredlion of Chrift, cannot be anfwercd any other way than by immerfion •, that it is an emblem of the burial and re- furreftion of Chrift, and of the burial and refurreflion of believers in him, is clear from Rom. vi. 4. Colofs. ii. 12. buried with him by baptifm^ and in bapttfm. Now only an immerfion or covering of the whole body in water, and not pour- irig or fprinkling a little water on the face, can be a reprefentation of a burial ; will any man in his fenfes fay, that a corps is buried, when only a little duft or earth is fprinkled or poured on its face ? 4. The figurative baptifms, or the allufions made to baprifm in fcripture, fhew in what manner it was adminiftered; the pafiage of the Ifraelites under the cloud, and through the fea, is calltd a being baptized in the cloud and in the fea ' ; and with great propriety may it be called a baptifm, as that is by immerfion ; for the waters (landing up as a wall on each fide of them, through which, and the cloud over their heads, under which they pafTed, they were like perfons immerfed in water " : likewife the overwhelm- ing fuffcrings of Chrift are fitly called a baptifm, in allufion to baptifm by im- merfion. I have a beptifm to be baptized with, fays he ; and how am JJiraitened until it be accompUlhed" ? and which fuffcrings of Chrift, in prophetic language, agreeable to baptifm by immerfion, are thus defcribed -, lam come into deep waters, where the floods overflow me"^ Once more •, the extraordinary donation "of the Spirit on the day of Pentecoft, is called a being baptized with the holy Ghoft ^ •, the emblem of which was a ruflnng mighty wind, which filled all the houfe where they were fitting'^ \ fo that they were as if immerfed into it, and covered with Horeb, into which £/y.i4 went. But hij tip-top tranflation of all is that of 7»i fhould be rendered in; rV water; and /» the holy Gholl ; and /« fire; and the phrafe of i/^f^/ffg <« Jirt, ii nounufual one, both iojewilhand Greek authori; u I have (hewn in my Kzpofition of the. place, and of Afit ii. 3. * Johnxiv. 21. * Joha xiv. 23, 510 BAPTISM A DIVINE COMMANDMENT, &c. it ? Lukexn. §o. And therefore why fhould we think ic an hardfliip, or be back- ward to comply with his will, in fubmitting to the ordinance of water-bapcifm ? • WhenNaaman was bid by EHJha to dip h\mk\{ in J or dan, and be clean j which he rcfented as too little and trifling a tiling, and thought he might as well have ftayed in his own land, and dipped himfelf in one of the rivers oi ^yria ; one of his fervants took upon him to allay and reprefs the heat of his pafTion and refent- ment, by obferving, that if the prophet had bid him do fome great thing, which was hard and difficult to be performed, he would have gone about it readily ; how much rather then, he argued, fhould he attend to the dircftion of the pro- phet, when he only bid him wajh in Jordan, and be clean * ? There are many that will go into baths, and plunge thcmfclves in them for pleafure or profit, to refrelh their bodies, or cure them of diforders; bu: if plunging in water is dire(?«m^ in cafe it is certified the child is weakly and not able tu bear dipping ; otherwife, by the Rubric, the prieft is ordered to dip the child warily : fprinkling received only a Prefbytcrian fanftion in the times of the civil war, by the Aflcmbly of Divines; where it was carried for fprinkling againft dipping by one vote only, by 25 againft 24, and then cftablifhed by an ordi- nance of parliament 1644^: and that this change has its rife from the autho- rity of the Pope, Dr fFall^ himfelf acknowledges, and that the fprinkling of infants is from popery. " All the nations of chri.ftians, fays he, that do now, " or formerly did, fubmit to the authority of the bifhop of Rome, do ordina- *' rily baptize their infants by pouring or fprinkling; and though the Englilh " received not this cuftom till after the decay of Popery, yet they have fincc ♦' received it from fuch neighbour-nations as had began it in the times of the " pope's power; but all other chriftians in the world, who never owned the *' pope's ufurped power, do, and ever did, dip their infants in their ordinary *' ufe ;" fo that Infant-baptifm, both with refpcft to fubjedt and mode, may with great propriety be called a part and branch of popery. But it is not only a part of popery, and fo ferves to ftrengthen it, as a part does the whole ; but it is 3i pillar of it, what ferves greatly to fupport it; and which furniflics the Papifts with one of the ftrongeft arguments againft the Pro- teftants in favour of their traditions; on which, as we have feen, the eflentials of popery are founded, and of the authority of the church to alter the rites of di- vine » Eflay to reftore Dipping. &c. p. 4*. ' Ibid. p. 58. » Ibid. p. 12, 32. • Hiftorj- of Infaot-baptifm, pan 4. p. 477. . .AND. PILLAR OF -POPERY. ' 515 vine worfliip: they fadly embarrafs Pasdobaptift proteftants with the affair of Infant-baptifm, and urge them either to prove it by fcripture, both with rcfpeft to mode and fubjeds, or allow of unfcriptural traditions and the authority of the church, or give it up; and if they can allow of unwritten traditions, and the cuftom and praftice of the church, as of authority in one point, why not in others ? This way of arguing, as Mr Slennett oblerves "i, is ufed by cardinal Du Perron, in his reply to the anfwer of king James the firft, and by Mr John jirnj-worib, againft Mr Henrj Ainfwortb, in the difpute between them, and by Fijher the Jefuit, againft archbifhop Laud\ a late inftance of this kind, he adds, we have in the controverfy between Monfieur BoJJ'uet, bifliop of Meaux, and a learned anonymous writer, faid to be Monfieur de la Roque, late paftor of the reformed church at Roan in Normandy. The bifhop, in order to defend the withholding the cup in the Lord's fupper from the laity, according to the au- thority of the church, urged that Infant-baptifm, both as to mode and fubjcdt, was unfcriptural, and Iblcly by the authority of tradition and cuftom, with which the pretended reformed complied, and therefore why not in the" other cafe ? which produced this ingenuous confeftion from his antagonift, that to baptize by fprinkling was certainly an abufe derived from the Romifti church, without due examination, as well as many other things, which he and his bre- thren were refolved to correft, and thanked the bifliop for undeceiving them; ' and freely confeflcd, that as to the baptifm of infants, there is nothing formal orexprefs in the gofpel to juftify the neceftity of it; and that the paflages pro- ■duced do at moft only prove that it is permitted, or rather, that it is not for- bidden to baptize them. In the times of ^iwigCharles the fecond, lived Mr Je- remiah Ives, a Baptift minifter, famous for his talent at difputation, of whom the king having heard, fent for him to difpute with a Romifli prieft ; the which he did before the king and many others, in the habit of a clergyman : Mr Ives preffed the prieft clofely, fhcwing that whatever antiquity they pretended to, their dodrine and pradtices could by no n\eans be proved apoftolic ; fince they are not to be found in any writings which remain of the apoftolic age; the prieft after much wrangling, in the end replied, that this argument of Mr Ives was of as much force againft Infant-baptifm, as againft the dodrines and ceremo- nies of the church of Rome : to which Mr Ives anfwered, that he readily grant- ed what he faid to be true ; the prieft upon this broke up the difpute, faying, he had been cheated, and that he would proceed no further; for he came to difpute with a clergyman of the eftabliftied church, and it was now evident, that this was an Anabaptift preacher. This behaviour of the prieft afforded his majefty and all prefent not a little diverfion ' : and as protcftant Psdobap- tift5- ► Anftver lo Ruflen, p. 173, fi:c. « Crofby's Hia. of ihe Baptills, »ol. 4. p. 24.7, 248.. 520 INFANT - 'BAPTISM, A PART •tifts are urged by this argument to admit the unwritten traditions of thePapifts, fo difleniers of thePasdobaptift perfuafion are prefled upon the fame footing by ■thofe of the church of England to comply »vith the ceremonies of that church, retained from the church of Rome, particularly by Dr fVhitby " ; who having pleaded for fomc condefcenfion to be made to diffeniers, in order to reconcile them to the church, adds •, "And on the other hand, fays he, if notwithftand- *' ino- the evidence produced, that baptifm hy immerfion, is fuitable both to the " inftitution of ourLord and his apoftjes ; and was by them ordained to repre- " fcnt our burial with Chrift, and fo our dying unto fin, and our conformity ^' to his refurrcftion by newnefs of life ; as the apoftle doth clearly maintain " the meaning of that rite : I fay, jf notwithftanding this, all our dijfenters " (that is, who arc Pjcdobaptifts, he mult nrean) do agree to Jprinkk the bap- *' tized infant -, why may they not as well fubmic to the fignificant ceremonies *' impofed by our church ? for, fince it is as lawful to add unto Chrift's infti- ♦' tucions a fignificant ceremony, as to diminifli a fignificant ceremony which *' he or his apofties inftituted,,and ufe another in its ftead, which they never " did inftitute ; what rcafon can they have to do the latter, and yet refufe fub- " -mifllon to the former ? and why fiiould not the peace and union of the ■" church be as prevailing with thetn, to perform the one, as is their mercy ■*' to the infant''^ body to ncglc£t the other ?" Thus Infant-baptifm is ufed as the orznd plea for compliance with the ceremonies both of the church oi Rome and of the church of England. I have added, in the preface referred to, where ftands the above claufe, that Infant-baptifm is " that by which Antichrift has fpread his baneful influence *' over many nations •," which is abundantly evident, fince by the f/r//?!?*///^ of children, through baptifm introduced by him, he has made whole countries and nations chriftians, and has chriftened them by tbt na.mc of Chrijiendom -, and thereby has inlargcd his univerfal church, over which he claims an abfolute power and authority, as being Chrift's vicar on earth -, and by the fame means he retains his influence over nations, and keeps them in awe and in obedience to him ; aflerting, that by their baptifm they are brought into the pale of the church, in which there is falvation, and out of which there is none ; if there- fore they renounce their baptifm, received in infancy, or apofliatize from the church, their damnation is inevitable -, and thus by his menaces and anathemas he holds the nations in fubjeftion to him: and when they at any time have cou- rage to oppofe him, and aft in difobediencc to his fupreme authority, he imme- diately lays a whole nation under an intcrdid -, by which are prohibited, the adminiftration of the facraments, ail public prayers, burials, chriftenings, &c. church * ProUinant Reconciler, p. 289, AND PILLAR OF POPERY. 521 church-doors are locked up, the clergy dare not or will not adminifter any of- fices of their fundion to any, but fuch as for large fums of money obtain fpc- cial privileges from i?(7ff7^ for that purpofe': now by means of thefe prohibitions, and particularly of christening or baptizing children, nations are obliged or comply and yield obedience to the bifliop of Rome ; for it appears mod dread- ful to parents, that their children (hould be deprived of baptifm, by which they arc made chriftians, as they are uught to believe, and without which there is no hope of falvation ; and therefore are influenced to give into any thing for the fake of what is thought fo very important. Once more, the baneful in- fluence fpread by Antichrift over the nations by Infant-bapcifm, is that poifon- ous notk)n infufed by him, that facraments, particularly baptifm, confer grace ex opere cperato^ by the work, done-, that it takes away fin, regenerates men, and favcs their fouls ; this is charged upon him, and complained of by the anticnt Wahdenfes in a trad ' of theirs, written in the year 1 120. Where, fpeak- ing of the works of antichrift, they fay, "the third "tiork of antichrift confifts " in this, that he attributes tht; regeneration of the holy Spifit unto the dead, " outward work of baptizing children in that faith, and teaching that thereby " baptifm and regeneration muft be had ; and therein he confers and beftows " orders and other facraments, and groundeih therein all his chriftianity, which " is againft the holy Spirit :" and which popifti notion is argued againft and expofed by Robert Smith the martyr*; on Bonner's faying " if they (infants) die «' before they arc baptized, they be damned ; he afked this queftion ; I pray '• you, my Lord, fhcw me, arc we faved by water or by Chrift ? to which •♦ Boruter replied, by both ; then, faid Smith, the water died for our fins, and ** fo muft ye fay, that the water hath life, and it being our fervant, and created *♦ for us, is our Saviour; this my Lord is a good dod tin e, is it not ?" And this pernicious notion ftill continues, this old leaven yet remains even in fome Proteftant churches, who have retained it from Rome; hence a child when bap- tieed is declared to be regenerate, and thanks are returned to God that it is regenerate} and it is taught, when capable of being catechized, to fay, that in its baptifm it was " made a child of God, a member of Chrift, and an inhe- " ntor of the kingdom of heaven -," which has a tendency to take off all concern in pcrfoni when grown up, about an inward work of grace, in regeneraiion and fandific»tion, as a mcetnefs for heaven, and to encourage a prcfumption in them, rwtwithftanding their apparent want of grace, that they arc members of Chrift, and ftiall never perifh ; are children and heirs of God, and ftiall cer- tainly inherit eternal life. Wherefore Dr Ou/f» rightly obferves'', " that the Vol. IL • 3 X " father • AbftraS of the Hift. of Popery, part i. p. 463. See Fox'i Afts and MoBumenU, vol. i.p. 32^. ' Apud Morlaad's Hirtory of the churches of Piedmont, p. 148. Fox's Afts and Monumemi, vol. 3. p. 400. ' Theologoumena, I. 6. c. 3. p. 477. 522 INFANT - BAPTISM, A PART " father of lies himfelf could not eafily have devifed a dodrine more pernicious, " or what propofts a more prefcnt and eflFeftual poifon to the minds of finners ^' to be drank in by them." II. The fecond article or propofition in the preface is, as aflerted by me, that " Infant-baptifm is the bafis of national churches and worldly eftablifhments ; " that which unites the church and world, and keeps them togther-," than which nothing is more evident : if a church is national, it confifts of all in the nation, men, women, and children -, and children arc originally members of it, cither fo by birth, and as foon as born, being born in the church, in a chriftian land and nation, which is the church ; or rather by baptifm, as it is generally put; fo according to the order of the church of England, at the baptifm of a child, the minifter fays, "We receive this child into the congregation of Chrift's «' flock." And by the AfTcmbly of Divines, "Baptifm is called a facrament " of the New Teftament, whereby the parties baptized are folemnly admitted " into ihevifible^hurch." And to which there is a ftrange contradiftion in the following anfwer, where it is faid, that " Baptifm is not to be adminiftercd to any " that are out of the vifible church ;" but if by baptifm the parties baptized are folemnly admitted into the vifible church, then before baptifm by which they are admitted, they muft be out of it : one or other mud be wrong; cither perfons are not admitted into the vifible church by baptifm, or if they are, then before baptifm they are out of it, and have baptifm adminiflered to them in order to their being admitted into it; and Calvin fays, according to whofc plan of church-government at Geneva, that of the Scotch church is planned, that baptifm is a folemn introdudion to the church of God '. And Mr Baxter ar- oucs, " that if there be neither precept nor example of admitting church- " members in all the New Teftament but by baptifm ; then all that are now " admitted ought to come in by baptifm ; but there is neither precept nor, " example in all the New Teftament of admitting church -members but by " baptifm ; therefore they ought to come in the fame way now." So then in- fants becoming members of a national church by baptifm, they are originally of it ; are the materials of which it confifts ; and it is by the baptifm of infants il is fupplied with members, and is fupported and maintained ; fo that it may be truly faid, that Infant-baptifm is the bafis and foundation of a national church, and is indeed the finews, ftrength, and fupport of it: and infants be- ing admitted members by baptifm, continue fuch when grown up, even though uf tlie mod diffolute lives and converfations, as multitudes of them are ; and many, inftead of being treated as church-members, deferve to be fent to the houfe ' EjiH. Calvin. Ep. ad N. S.. D p. ^41. AND PILLAR OF POPERY. 523 houfe of corrcftion, as fome are; and others are guilty of fuch flagitious crimes that they die an infamous death -, yet even thefe die in the communion of the church ; and thus the church and the world are united and kept together till death doth them part. The Independents would indeed feparate the church and the world, according to their principles; but cannot do it, being fettered and hampered with Infant- church-memberfhip and baptifm, about which they are at a lofs and difagreed on what to place it ; fome place it on infants interefl in the covenant of grace ; and here they fadly contradift themfelves or one another ; at one time they lay it is intercft in the covenant of grace gives infants a right to baptifm; and at another time, that it is by baptifm they are brought and entered into the covenant ; and fometimes it is not in the inward part cf the covenant they arc intcrefted, only in the external part of it, where hypocrites and gracelefs pcr- fons may be ; but what that external part is, no mortal can tell : others not being fatisned that their infant-feed as fuch are all interefted in the covenant of grace, fay, it is not that, but the church-covenant that godly parents enter into, which gives their children with them a right to church- memberfhip and baptifm : children in their minority, it is faid ", covenant with their parent?, and fo become church-members, and this intitles them to baptifm; for accord- ing to the o\f\ Independents oi New England, none but members of a vifiblc church were to be baptized ' ; though Dr Goodwin "is of a different mind : hence only fuch as were children of members of churches, even of fee mem- bers "j as they call them, were admitted, though of godly and approved chrif- tians ; and though they may have been members, yet if excommunicated, tlieir children born in the time of their excommunication might not be baptized"; but thofc children that are admitted members and baptized, though not co.-i- ■firmed members, as they flile them, till they profefs faith and repentance''; yet during their minority, which reaches till they are more than thirteen years of age, according to the example oi IJhmael, and till about fixteen years of age, they are real members to fuch intents and purpofes, as, that if their parenis are difmifTcd to other churches, their children ought to be put into the letters of difmilTion wuh them''; and whilft their minority continues, are under church- watch, and fubjeft to the reprchenfions, admonitions, and cenfures thereof, for 3x2 their * Difpatation concerning church-members and their children at Boftoo. p. ii, 13. Hooker'i Survey of church-difcipiine, part 3. p. 2;, 2;. ' Cotton's Way of the churches in New England, p. 81. Bonon-difpotation, p. 4 Defence of the Nine Propofiiions, p. 115. " GoYernmentofthecharchesof Chiirt, p. 377. " Defence of the Nine Propofi ions, p. f 9, * Cotton's Way, p. 85. Bonon-difputation, p. JJ. Hooker's Survey, part 3. p. 1 8. * Cotton's Hohnefs of church-members, p. 19. Bofton-difputaiicn, p. 3. ' Ibid. p. i j. 524 INFANT - BAPTISM, A l>ART their healing and amendment ', as need fhall require; thongh vith refpeft to public rebuke, admonition, and excommtinication, children in their minority «re not fubjcft to church-difcipline, only to fuch as is by way of fpiritual watch and private rebuke '. The ongim] Jmiependenls, by the covenant feed, who have a right to church-membcrfhip and baptifm, thought only the feed of im- mediate parents in church-covenant are nieant, and not of progenitors '. Mr Cotton fays ", ■" Infants cannot claim right unto baptifm, but in the right of one " of their parents or both ; -where neither of the parents can claim right to the •• Lord's- fupper, there their infants cannot claim right to baptifm," though he afterwards fays", " it may be confidered, whether the children may not be " baptized, where cither the grandfather or grandmother" have made profefTion " of their faith and repentance before the church, and are ftill living to under- ** take for the chriftian education of the child ; or if thefe fail, what hinders ♦• but that if the parents will rcfign their infant to be educated in the houfe of " any godly m.-mbcr of the church," the child may be lawfully baptized in the " right of its houfhold governor." But Mr Hooker, as he afTcrts'', that chil- dren as children have no right to baptifm, fo it belongs not to any prcdecefTors, tither nearer or farther off removed from the next parents to give right of this privilege to their children ; by which predeceflbrs, he fays, he includes and comprehends all bcfides the next parent j grandfather, great grandfather, (jfc. So the minifters and melTcngers of the congregational churches that met at the Sjfir)' declare * i ♦' that not onl/ thofe that do aftually profefs faith in, and ♦' obedience unto Chrift, but alfo the infants of one or both believing parents " are to be baptized, and thofe only." And the commiffioners for the review of the Common Prayer, in the beginning of the reign of king Charles the fecond ; thofe of the Prejbyterian pcrfuafion moved, on the behalf of others, that " there •• being divers learned, pious, and peaceable minifters, who not only judge it *• unlawful to baptize children whofc parents both of them are Atheifts, Infi- •* dels, Heretics, or Unbaptized \ but alfo fuch whofe parents are cxcommuni- •♦ cate perfons, fornicators, or otherwife notorious and fcandalous finners ; we •* defire, fay they, they may not be inforced to baptize the children of fuch, •* until they have made open profeffion of their repentance before baptifm':" but now 1 do not underftand, that the prefent generation of Diffenters of this Arnomination, adhere to the principles and practices of their predecefibrs, at leaft • CarabruJge PUtfofjn of church government, p. i8. • Bofton-difputation, p 14. • Bofton-difputation, p. ig. " Cotton'i Way of th« chorcbei, p. 81. • Ibid. p. 1 1 ;. » Of this fee Epift. Calvin. Ep. Farella, p. 17;. & Salden. Otia, Theolog. Exercitat. 7. feft. ai. . p. J44. T Survey of charchdifciplioe, part 3. p. ij. » Dcclaracicn of the Faith and Order. &e. c. 29. p. 48. • Proceeding} of the CommilTioncr. of both PerfuaHoDi, &c, p. 22. AND PILLAR OF POPERY., ,525 leaft very few of them ; but admit to bapraftifc the other-, fo the people under their miniftrations will be all agreed, and receive the truths of the gofpel in the love of thctn, and fubmit ta ihc precepts and inftitutions of it, without any difference among thcmfchres, ftnd without any variation from the word of God -, and among the reft, the ordinance of baptifm, about which there will be no longer ftrife ; but all will agree that the proper futgefbs of it are believers, and the right mode of it immeffion ; and fo Infant-fprrnkling will be no nwre contended for; faints m this, as tn other things, will fcrve the Lord wich one cenfent, Zeph. iii. 9. Sixthly, Another reafbn why I firmly believe Infant -baptifm will hereafter be no more praftifed, is, becatifc anrichrift will be enth-ely cvnfumedWnh the fpi- rit or breath of Chrift's mtutb, artd with the brighinefs of his coming, 2 Thcfs. ii. 8. that is, with the pure and powerful preaching of his word, at his coming to take to himfelf — his power, and reign fpiritually in the chejrches, in a more glo- rious manner; when all antichriftian doftrines and praftices will be entirely abo- liflicd and ceafc, even the whole body of anrichriftian worfhip ; not a limb of antichrift fliall remain, but all fhall beconfumed. Now as I believe, and it has been (hewn, that Infant-baptifm is a part and pillar of Popery, alimbofanti- chrift, a branch of fuperftition and wUI-worfhip, introduced by the man of fin, when he fhall be deftroyed, this fhall be deftroyed with him and be no more. Seventhly, Though the notion of Infant-baptifm has been embraced and prac- tifed by many good and godly rrrcn in feveral ages -, yet it is part cjf the wood, hay, and flubble, laid by them upon the foundation ; is one of thofe works of theirs, the bright day of the gofpcl fhall declare to be a falfhood ; and which the fire of the word will try, burn up, and confume, though they themfelvc* fhall be faved ; and therefore being ntrerly confumed, fhall no more appear in the world : for, Eighthly, When the angel fhall defccnd from heaven with great power, and the earth be lightened witi his glory, which will be at the fall oi Babylon and ruin of Antichrift, Rev. xviii. i, 2. fuch will be the blaze of light then given, that all antichriflian darknefs fhall be removed, and all works of darknefs will be made manifefl and cafl off, apriong which Infant-baptifm is one ; and then tht earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the fea, Ifai. xi. 9. even of the knowledge of the word, ways, worfhip, truths, and ordinances of God, - AND PILLAR OF POPERY. 529 Xjod, and all ignorance of them vanifh and difappear; and then the ordinance of baptifni will appear in its former luftre and purity, -and be embraced and fubmitted to in it ; and every corruption of it be rejefled, of which Infanc- -bapiifm is one. Ninthly, Whereas the ordinances of the gofpel, baptifmand theLord's-fupper, are to continue until the fecond coming of Chrift, or the end of the world, MaU.xxvin. 19, 20. 1 Cor. xi. 26. and whereas there have been corruptions introduced into them, as they are generally adminiftered, unlefs among fome few ; it is not reafonable to think, that thofe corruptions will be continued to theiecond coming of Chrift, but that they will be removed before, even at his Ipiritual coming, or in his fpiritual reign : and as with refpeft to baptifm par- ticularly, there muft be a miftake on one fide or the other, both with refpefb / the -^y^^rJ of Chrift v that is, not only the doftrines of the gofpel, which will be then purely preached and openly profefttrd, but the ordinances of ir, baptifm and the Lord's-fupper j which have been (particularly baptifm) fadly corrupted in almoft all the periods of the churches hitherto, exceptincr the apoftolic one j but will in this period be reftorcd to their priftine purity and glory -, hence it is promifed to this church, and that it reprefents, that becaul'e \i kept the word oi Chv\{\.\ patience truly and faithfully, it fhould be kept from the hour of temptation that fiiould come on all the earth; and is exhorted to bold faft what ftie had, both the dodlrines and ordinances, as they were delivered by Chrift and his apoftles, and as fhe now held them in the truth and purity of tliem. Thefe are the reafons why I believe with a firm and un- Ihaken faith, that the time is coming, and I hope will not be long, when Infant-baptifm will be no more pradifed in the world. Since, now at this time, wc are greatly and juftly alarmed with the increafc of Popery ; in order to put a ftop to it, let us begin at home, and endeavour to remove all remains of it among ourfelves ; fo ftiall we with the better grace, and it may be hoped, with greater fuccefs, oppofc and hinder the fprcad of it. Vol. II. 3 Y POST- ,520 INFANT -BAPTISM^ A PART P OS T S C R I P T. *. npHE writer who lately appeared in a news-paper, under the name of CaW:'- dus, having been obliged to quit his mountebank-ftage, on which he held forth to the public for a few days -, has-, in his great humility, condefcended to deal out his packets, in a lefs popular way ; under the title of, " The true Scrip- " ture-Do5}rine of the Mode and SubjeSJs of Chrijlian Baptifm, &c. in fix letters." It is quite unreafonable that we fhould be put, by every impertinent fcribbler, to the drudgery ofanfwering, what has been anfwered over and over again in this controverfy. However I fhall make fhort work with this writer, and there- fore I have only put him to, and (hall only give him a little gentle correftion at the cart's tail; to ufe the phrafeof a late learned Profefj'or in one of our univer- fities, with rcfpedl to the difcipline of a certain Bifbop. The Jjrjl and feccnd letters of Candidus, in the news-paper, are anfwered in mart»inal notes on my Sermon upon Baptifm, and pubiiQicd along with it. His third kacr is a mean piece of buffoonery and fcurrility ; it begins with a trite, vulfrar proverb, in lovy" language, fit only for the mouth of an Hofikr or a Car- man 1 and his friends fecm to have fpoiled one or other of thefe, by making him a Parfon. He goes on throughout the whole of the letter, as one that is in great lialle, running after his wits, to feck for them, having loft them, if ever he Iiad any, and it concludes with a poor, pitiful, foolifh burlefk, mixed with, flander and falfhood, on an innocent gentleman ; quite a ftrangcr to him, and could never have ofiended him, but by a confcientious regard to what he believ- ed was his duty. However, by this bafe and inhuman treatment, it appears that his moral character is unimpeachable, or otherwife it would have been nib- bled at. His fourth letter begins with reprefentiog the fermon publifhed, as fo mangled, changed, altered, and added to, that it has fcarce any remains of its original ; in which he muft be condemned by all that heard it : and he has mod unluckily charged one claufe as an addition, which, there cannot be one in ten but will remember it ; it is this, "If any man can find any others in his «' (the jailor's) houfe, bcfides all that were in it, he muft be reckoned a very "■ fagaciouj perfon ;" and he himfclf, in his '^r/? letter, publifhed before the fermon was, has an oblique glance at it; calling me, in a fneering way, "the " fagacious dodtor." "What he fays in the following part of the letter, concern- inc the fubjcfts of baptifm, and what he intended to fay concerning the mode in another letter, which was prevented, I fuppofe are contained in a fet of letters now publifhed-, and which are addreffcd, not to Mr Printer, who caft him off, but to a candid Antip.idobaptifl i and indeed the epithet of candid better agrees with — ] i ,AND PILLAR OF POPERY> 531 with that fort of people than with himfelf, of which he feems confcious, if he has any confcience at all ; for it looks as if he had not, or he could never have fct out with fuch a mod notorious untruth, and impudent falfhood ; affirming that I faid in my fermon, that " the ten commandments, ftiled the moral law, " were not binding onChrift's difciples ;" a greater untruth could not well have been told : tny writings in general teftify the contrary, and particularly two fermons I have publilhed, one called, "The Law ejlablijhed by the Cofpel" and the other, " Tbe Law in the Hand of Chrijl ■" which arc fufficient to juftify me from fuch a wicked calumny, and the paragraph with which my fermon begins, attacked by him, and which I declare, are the words I delivered in the pulpir, that " the ten commandments, are the commands of God, and to be obferved " by chriftians under theprefent difpenfation;" for which I quoted i Cor. ix. 21. this I (ay, muft ftare him in the face, and awaken his guilty confcience, if not feared as with a red-hot iron -, which I fear is his cafe. As for his flincrs at eter- nal juftification, which he has lugged into this controverfy, and his grand con- cluding and common argument againft it, that it is eternal nonfenfc, I defpife -, he has not a head for that controverfy : and I would only put him in mind of what Dr Owen faid to Baxter, who charged him with holding it, " What would " the man have me fay ? I have told him, I am not of that opinion -, would he " have me fwcar to it, that I am not ? but though I am not, I know better and " wifer men than myfclf that do hold it." . Some body in the news-paper, obferving that this man was froward and per- verfc, and fearing he fliould do hurt to religion in general, in order to divc.-t him from it, and guide him another way ; complimented him with bein" a man of wit, and of abilities; and the vain young man fancies he really is one : and being a witty youth, and of abilities, he has been able to produce an inftancc of Infant-baptifm, about 1500 years before chrifliaa bapdfm was inftituced ; though he muft not have the fole credit of it, becaufe it has been obferved be- fore him : the inftacce is of the paflage of the Ifraelites through the fea, ac which time, he fays, their children were baptized, as well as they : come (ben; .fa\$ he, in very polite language, this lis one fcripture-inftance; but if he had bad his wits about him, he might have improved this inftance, and ftrengthened bis argument a little more; -by obferving that there was a mixed multitude, th^t came with the Ifraelites out of Egypt, and with them paflcd through the fea, with ibeir ' I am the Word of God, that is, the Son of God." Menander Yi\s 6^k\^\c ■took, the fame charafters and titles to himfelf his mafter did '. idly, Cirinthtts is the next, who was cotemporary with the apoftle Jehn, of whom that well known ftory is told % that the apoftle being about to go into a bath at Ephefus, and ke'mgCerintbus in it, faid to thofe with him, "Let us flee *' from hence, left the bath fall upon us in which Cerintbus the enemy of truth «' is :" he afferted thatChrift was only a man, denying his deity ', and in courfe his divine and eternal Sonftiip; he denied thatjcfus was born of a virgin, which fcemed to him impofTible ; and that he was the fon of Jofepb and Mary, as other men are* of their parents. Jerom fays ^ at the requeft of the bifhops of Afia, - 'John the apoftle wrote his gofpcl againft Cerintbus and other hereticks, and efpe- cially the tenets of theEbionites, then rifingup, who afterted thatChrift was not htfoxzMary; hence he was obliged plainly to declare his divine generation; and ■ it may be obfcrved, that he is the only facred writer who in his gofpel and epif- tles fpeaks of Chrift as the begotten and only begotten Son ofGod, at leaft fpcaks moftly of him as fuch. "i^dly, Ebion. What his fcntiment was concerning Chrift, may be learned from ■what has been juft obferved, about the apoftle Jobn'i writing his gofpel to refute it ; and may be confirmed by what Eufebius ' fays of him, that he held that Chrift was a mere man, and born as other men are : and though he makes mention of another fort of them, who did not deny that Chrift was born of a virgin, and of the holy Ghoft, neverthelefs did not own that heexifted before, being God the Word and Wifdom. Hence Hilary calls " Pbotinus, Ebion, becaufe of the fame- nefs. • Irenacus adv. hacref. I. i.e. 20. ^ De Hxres. e. i. • Coromem. in Mait. xxix. 5. torn. 9. fol. jj. A. * Tertollian de pracfcript. hz-et. c 46. • Irenius 8dv. harref, 1. 3. c. 3. ' TertuUian ut fupra, c. 48. « Irenacus ib. 1. 1. c 1;. »> Catalog, fcrip. eccle.*. c. 19. Gc Irensus 1. 3. c. 1 1. ' Eccles. Hift. 1. 3. c. 27; vid.. TertulliaBde carne Chrift. c. 18, " De 1* initate L 7. p. 81, 82. .536 A DISSERTATION CONCERNI-NG THE nefs of their principles, and 7' immortal life, who is both of M^ry and of God." In a larger epiftle to the fame ', thought by fome to be interpolated, though it cxpreftcs the fame fenti- ment; "our phyfician is alone the trueGod, the unbegotten and invifiblcLord " of all, the Father and higetter of the only begotten one; wc have alfo a phyfi- " cian, our Lord Jefus Chrift, the only begotten Son before the world, and the ♦' word, and at laft man of the virgi nM(7ry;" and afterwards in the fame ' epiftle ftill more cxprefsly, " the Son of God, who was begotten before the world was, " and conftitutes all things according to the will of the Fattier, he was bore in " the womb by Mary, according to the difpenfation of God, of the feed oi David " by the holy Ghoft." And a little farther \ " be ye all in grace by name, ga- " thered together in one common faith of God the Father, and of Jefus Clirift " his only begotten Son, and the firft-born of every creature ; according to the " flcfli indeed of the family oiDavid: ye being guided by the Comforter." A plain account, as of the divine Sonfhip andHumaniry of Chrift, fo of tlie doc- trine of the Trinity. In another epiftle of his *, he fpfaks of JcfusChrift, " who " was v-ith the Father before the world was, and in the end appeared," that is, in human nature in the end of the world i and exhorts all to " run to one tem- " pie of God, as to one altar, as to one Jefus Chrift, who came forth from " one Father, and being in him and returning to him." And a little lower he adds, " there is one God, who hath manifcfted himfclf by J^fus Chrift his Son, " who is his eternal word." And farther on he fays, " ftudy to be eftabliftied " in thedoflrines of the Lord, and of the apoftlcs, that uhatfoever ye do may " profper, in flelh and fpirit, in faith and love, in the Son, and in the Fatlier, " and in tlie Spirit." A full confelTion of tne Trinity, one of the principal dodlrines he would have them be eftablidied in. All which is more fully ex-r Vol. II. 3 Z prcfred « Ecclcs. hid. 1. 3. c. 36. ' Epift. ad Ephes, p. zi. Ed. V'ofj. ' IbiA p. i 2j. « Ibid. p. 136. " Ibid. p. i 38. ■ Epift. ad M.ignes. p. 33. 34. 37. 538 A DISSERTATION CONCERNING THE prefTed in the larger epiftle' to the fame perfons : fpeaking of Chrift, he fays, " who was begclten by the Father before the world was; God the Word, the only " begotten Son, and who remains to the end of the world, for of his kingdom " there is r.c end." Again, " there is oneGod omnipotent, who hath manifeft- « ed himfclf by Jcfus Chrift his Son, who is his Word j not fpoken, but effen- ♦' tial, not the voice of an articulate fpeech, but pf a divine operation, bcgot- " ten fubftance, who in all things pleafed him that fent him." And farther on, «« but ye have a plerophory in Chrift, who was begotten by the Father before all »' worlds, afterwards made of the virgin A/ary without the converfation of men." And in the larger epiftle'' of his to other perfons, he thus fpeaks of fome here- ticks of his time-, "they profcfs an unknown God, they think Chrift is unbe- " gotten, nor will they own that there is an holy Spirit : fome of them fay the «' Son is a mere man, and that the Father, the Son and the holy Spirit, are the « fame: beware of fuch, left your fouls be enfnared." And in an epiftle to another people' he fays, "there is one unbegotten God the Father, and one " only begotten Son, God the Word and man, and one comforter the Spirit •« of truth." And in aa epiftle' afcribed unto him he has thefe words, "there ." is one God and Father — there is alfo one Son, God the Word — and there is «' one comforter, ihe Spirit-, —not three Fathers, nor three Sons, nor three •' Comforters, but one Father, and one Son, and one Comforter •, therefore- " the Lord, when he fent his apoftles to teach all nations, commanded them " to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghojl ; not " in one of three names, nor into three that are incarnate, but into three of «' equal honour and glory." Lucian, tTiat fcoffing, blafphemous heathen, lived in the times of fTrij/cw, and before, zsSuidas hys, wrote a dialogue " in derifibn- of the chriftian religion, particularly of the doftrine of the Trinity : which, dialogue, though it is a feoff at that do6lrine, is a teftimony of ir, as held by the chriftjans of that age; and among other things, he reprcfcnts them as faying, that Chrift is (be eternal Sen of the Father, I go on, II. To the fccond century, in which the fame hcrefies of Ebion and Cerintbus were held and propagated by Carpocrates, the father of the Gnoflicks % by Valen- tinus and Tbeodotus the currier, whofe difciples were another Tbeodotus a filver- fmith, :in6yifclepiodotus iT\AArtemonz\fo, zzcoTd\t\gioEufebius*. jfi. Carpocrates was of /Alexandria in Egypt, and lived in the beginning of the fecond century : he and his followers held that Chrift was only a man, born of Jofcpb » Page 145. M7, 151. ' Ad TrsllianM, p. i6o. " Ad Philadelph. p. 176. • Ad Phillipans. p. 100. " Eniitled, Pl>J(<>faJrii. . « EuTeb. hia. ecclej. 1. 4. c. 7. * Ibid. 1. J. c. a8. ETERNAL SONSHIP OF CHRIST, &c. 539 jfcfepb and Mary, of two parents, as other men% only he had a foul fuperior to others; which, having a'ftrong memory, could remember, and fo could relate, what he had feen and had knowledge of, when in the circumference (as they cx- prefs it) and in converfation with his unknown and unbegotten Father; and which was endowed with fuch powers, that he efcaped the angels, the makers of the world ; and was fo pure and holy, that he defpifed the Jews, among whom he was brought up ; and afterwards returned to his unknown Father ; his foul only, not his body ^ There feems to be fomething fimilar in this notion of the human foul ofChrift, to what is imbibed by fome in our day. idly, Valentinns. He came to Rome when Hyginus was bilhop of that place, flourifhed under P/w, and lived to the time oiAnicetus ^ He and his followers held, that God the creator fcnt forth his own Son, but that he was animal, and that his body defcended from heaven, and pafTed through the virgin Mary, as water through a pipe ; and therefore, as Tertullian obferves ', Valeniims ufed to fay, that Chrift was born by a virgin, but not of 3. virgin. This is what di- vines call the heretical illapfe ; which yet thofe difavow, who in our day are for the antiquity of the human nature of Chrifl: before the world was ; thour^h how he could be really and aftually man from eternity, and yet take flefh of the virgin in time, is not cafy to reconcile. ^dly, Artemon, o\ Artemas, who lived in the time of T/^f/or bifliop of i?0OT?. He held that Chrift was a mere man* ; and pretended that the apoftjes and all chridians from their times to the times olVicior, held the fame"; than which nothing could be more notorioufly falfe, as the writings aVjuJlin, Iren,eus, &c. fhew : and it is faid that by him, or by his followers, tlie celebrated text in i John V. 7. was erafed and left out in fome copies '. 4/%, Tbeodotus the currier held the fame notion he did, that Chrifl: was a mere man; for which he was excommunicated hyVi5Ior bifhop of Rome: which fhews the falfity of what Artemon faid; for if ViSlor had been of the fame opi- nion, he would never have excommunicated Tbeodotus. Eufibiui fays, this man was the father and broacher of this notion ", before Artemon, that Chrift was a a mere man, and denied him to be God. Yea, that he was not only a mere man, but born of the feed of man ". Though Tertullian fays, that he held 322 that « Irenaeusadv. hires. 1. i.e. J4.Tertull. de prifcript. har:et. c. 48. * Irenius ib. Epiphan. contra kzret. hir. 27. Theodotet. bzret. fol. 1. i. c 7. Aug. de hirct. c.j. t Ireoxui 1. 3 c. 4. * Ibid. I. c. i. Tertull. de prsfcript. c. 49. Epiphan. hxres. 31. • Adv. Valentin, c. 27. U de carne Chrift. c. 20. ^ Eufeb. Eccles. Hift. 1, 5. c. 25. Tbeodoret. hire t. fol.l. 2. c. 5. ' Wittichii Theolog. pacific, c. 17.^25. " Eufeb. eccles. hift. 1. j. c. 28. " Epiphan, Harrea. -54. 540 A DISSERTATION CONCERNING THE that Chrift was only a man, but equally conceived and born of the holy Gholt and the virgin Mary, yet inferior to Melcbizedeck °. The contrary to thefe notions was afTerted and maintained by thofe apofto- lical men, not only Ignatius, who lived in the latter end of the preceding cen tiiry, and the beginning of this, as has been obferved, huthy Poly carp, Jujlin Martyr, Irenxtfs, and others. 1. Polycarp, bifhop o^Snyrna, a difciple and hearer of the z^oMzJohi, ufed to flop his ears when he heard the impious fpeeches of the hereticks of his time. This venerable martyr, who had ferved his mafterChrift eighty fix years, when at the (lake, and the fire jufl about to be kindled upon him, witnefTed a good confefiion of the blefled Trinity in his laft moments, putting up the following prayer; "O Father of thy beloved and blefl'ed Son Jefus Chrift, by whom we *' have received the knowledge of thee-, God of angels and of powers, and every " creature — I praife thee for all things; I blefs thee, I glorify thee, by the " eternal high prieft JefusChrift thy bclovedSon, through whom, to thee wich " him in the holy fpirit, be glory, now and for ever. Amen ^"■ 2. Jujlin, the philofopher and martyr, in his'firft apology "i for the chriftians, has thefe words; " TheFather of all, being unbegoccen, has no name — thcSon " of him, who only is properly called a Son, the Word, begotten and exifting " before the creatures (for at the beginning by him he created and beautified *' all things) is called Chrift." And in his fecond apology he fays ', " We pro- " fefs to be atheifts with refpefk to fuch who are thought to be Gods, but not " to the irueGod andFather of righteoufnefs, iic. him, and hisSon who comes " from him, and has taught us thefe things, and the prophetic Spirit, we adore " and worfliip." Afterwards* he fpeaks of the logos, or word, as ihcfirjl birtb of God : "which, fays he, we fay is begotten without mixture." And again', " We fpeak that which is true, Jefus Chrift alone is properly the Son begotten *' by God, being his Word, and firft-born, and power, and by his will became " man ; thefe things he hath taught us." And in his dialogue with Trypho the Jew", wJio is reprefented as objefting to him, "What thou fayeft, that this *' Chrift cxifted God before the world, and then was born, and became man, " does not only feem to be a paradox to me, but quite foolifti." To which Jujlin replies, " I know this feems. a paradox, cfpecially to thofe of your nation, " — but if I cannot demonftrate, that this is the Chrift of God, and that he " pre-exiftcd God, the Son of the maker of all things, and became man by " a virgin, in this only it would be juft to fay, that I am miftaken, but not to " deny • De prircript. Haer. c. 53. P Eufeb. 1. 4. c. ij. « Page 44. « Pa£c 56. • Ibid, p. 66. » Ibid. p. 68. « Page 267. ETERNAL SONS-RIP OF CHRIST, &c. 541 " deny that this is the Chrift of God, though he may feem to be begotten a man " of men, and by choice made Chrift, as aflerted by fome •, for there are fome " of our religion who profefs him to be Chrift, but affirm that he is begotten a *• man of men ; to whom I do not aflcnt, nor many who are in the fame mind " with me." In which he plainly refers to the hereticks before mentioned, who thought that Chrift was born oi Jofeph and Mary. And in another place, in the fame dialogue, he fays ", " I will prove from fcripture that God firft " begat of bimfelf, before all creatures^ a certain rational power, which is called " by the holy Spirit, the Glory of the Lord, fometimes the Son, fometimesWif- " dom, fometimes the Angel, fometimes God, fometimes the Lord and tlie »» Word." And then, after obfcrving there is fomething fimiiar in the Worcf begetting a Word without any rejedion or diminution, and fire kindling fire Svithout leflening it, and abiding the fame; he proceeds to give his proof from- the words of Solomon, Prov. viii. where ♦' the word of wifdom tcftifies, that he " is the God who is begotten by the Father of all, who is the word and wifdom " and the power and the glory of him that generates." And then obferves, that "this is the birth produced by the Father, which co-exijlej vj'nh the Father " before all creatures, and with whom the Father familiarly converfed, as the " word hy Solomon makes it manifcft, that he the beginning before all creatures " is the birth begotten by Gcd, which by Solomon is called Wifdom.** And in .another place % in the fame dialogue, on mention of the fame words in Proverbs he fays, " Ye muft underftand, ye hearers, if ye do but attend, the Word decFares " that this birth was begotten by the Father before all creatures, and that which is *' begetter, is numerically another from him that begets." What can be more ex- prefs for tlie eternal generation of the Son of God,, and that as a diftinft perfoa from his Father ! 3. Ircnaus, a martyr, and biftiop of Lyons in France, and a difciple of Poly- carp. He wrote five books againft the herefies oi Vaknlinus and the Gnoftics, which are ftill extant; out of which many tcftimonics might be produced con- firming^ the dodlrine of the Trinity, and the deity of Chrift. I (hall only tran- fcribe two or three pafijges relating to the divine Sonfhtp and generation of Chrift. In one place he fays \ " Thou art not increated and man, nor didft " thou always co-exijl with God, as his own word did, but through his eminent " goodne'fs, haft now had a beginning of beings ; thou fenfibly learneft from •' the word the difpofitions of God who made thee; therefore obferve the order " of thy knowledge, and left, as ignorant of good things, thou fliouldeft tran- " fccncL • Ibid. p. 284, 28). » Ibid p. 339. ^ A^v. Hicres. 1. I, e. 43. 542 A DISSERTATION -CONCERNING THE *' fcend God himfelf." And again % " (hould any one fay to us, how is the " Son brought forth by the Father ? we reply to him, This bringing forth orgene- " ration, &c. or by whatfoever name it is called ; no man knows his cxifting " U7ifpeakable gzntrzuon; noi l^akntinus, not Marcion, nor Saturnhius, nor Bafi- " tides, nor angels, nor archangels, nor principalities, nor powers, only the " Father, who hath generated, and the Son that \s generated ; therefore feeing " his generation is ineffable, whoever attempts to declare fuch produdlions •*' and generations (as the above hereticks did) are not in their right minds, pro- " mifing to declare thofe things which cannot be declared." And elfewhere, he fays% "TheSon, the Word and Wifdom, was always prefent with him (God), • ".and alfoihe Spirit, by whom, and in whom, he made all things freely and .•" willingly ; to whom he" fpake, faying, Let us make man, &c." And a little after, " that the Word, that is, the Son, was always with the Father, we have . " abundant proof i" and then mentions Prov. iii. 19. and viii. 22, &:c. 4. Athenagoras, who flouriQied at Athens, in the times oi Antoninus and Com- modus, to which emperors he wrote an apology for the chriftians, in which he has thefe words % " Let not any think it ridiculous in me that I fpeak of God -" as having a Son, for not as the poets fable, who make their Gods nothing " better than men, do we think either of God and the Father, or of the Son -, ■" but the Son of God is the Word of the Father, in idea and efficacy, for of ♦' him and by -him are all things made, feeing the Father and the Son are one; «' fo that the Son is in the Father, and the Father is in the Son, by the union " and power of the Spirit; the mind and word of the Father is the Son of God; " now if any through the fublimity of your underftanding would look further " and enquire what the Son means, I will tell him in a few words, that he is " the frfl birth of the Father ; not as made, for from the beginning, God being " the eternal mind, he had the word in himfelf (the X"?^. or reafon) being eter- " nally rational, (that is, never without his word and wifdom) but as coming " forth, is the idea and energy of all things." For which he produces as a proof frci'. viii. 22. and then proceeds, "Who therefore cannot wonder, to " hear us called atheifts, who fpeak of God theFather, and of God thcSon and " the holy Spirit, (hewing their power in unity and their diftinction in order ?" A little farther", he ftrongly exprefles thedodlrine of theTrinity inUnity; "We " aflert God, and the Son his Word, and the holyGhoft, united indeed accord- " log to power, the Father, the Son, the Spirit, for the Mind, Word and -" Wifdom, is the Son of theFather, and the Spirit an emanation, or influence, ■" as light from fire." 5. TheophiluSy y Ibid. c. 48. » L. 4. c. 37. * Leg^'io P''°Chriftian. p. 10, 11. * Ibid. p. 27. ETERNAL SONSHIP OF CHRIST, &c. 543 5. Thecphilus, h\(hop of Jndoch, fiounfhtd undcrihe evr.peror y^ntoninusVerus : in a treatife of his ' he has thefe words concerning the Word and Son of God, ** God having his Xoyo> i.oiaSirw, internal word within himfelf, begat htm, when " he brought him forth with his wifdom ie/ore all /kings; this word he ufed in ** working thofe things that were made by him, and he made all things by him. ♦' — The prophets were not when the world was made; but the wifdom of God, " which is in him, and the holy word of God, was always prefcnt with him ;" in proof of which he produces Prov. viii. 27. And in another place \ fpeaking of the voice Jdam heard, fays, "Whatelfe is the voice, but the word ofGod, who " is his Son ? not as the poets and writers of fables, who fay, the fons of the gods »'• are born of copulation i but as the truth declares, the internal Word being al- " ways in the heart of God, before any thing was made, him he had as his coun- " fellor, being his mind and prudence, when God would do what he counfelled, *' he begat the Word, and having begotten the Word, the firft-born of every " creature, he always converfed with his Word," for which he quotesjobn i. i — 3.. 6. Clemens of Alexandria^ flourifhed under the emperors 6'«.'fr«j zndCaracalla, towards the latter end of the fecond century, he bears a plain teftimony to the doflrine of the Trinity, concluding one of his treatifes thus% "Let us give " thanks, praifing the only Father and the Son, both teachers, with the holy " Spirit, in which are all things, in whom are all things, and by whooi all are " one, — to whom be glory now and for ever, Amen." He fpeaks' of Chri|t the perfeft word, as born of the perfeft Father; and fays ^ of the Son of Goo, " that he never goes out of his watch-tower, who is not divided nor difiecated, " nor pafTcs from place to place, but is always every where, is contained no " where, all mind, all paternal lighr, all eye; who fees all things, h^ars all " things, knows all things by his power, fcarchcs powers, and to whom the " whole militia of angels and gods (magiftrates) is fubjefl — This is the Son ♦' of God,' the Saviour and Lord whom we fpeak of, and the divine prophecies " fhew." A little after he fpeaks of him as, '■'■ begotten ivithoul beginning, that " is, eternally begotten, and who, before the foundation of the world, was the " the Father's counfellor, that wifdom in whom the almighty God delighted ; for **■ Son is the power ofGod ; who before all things were made, was the moft antient: " word of the Father. — Every operation of the Lord has a reference to the al- " mighty ; and the Son is, as I may fay, a certain energy of the Father." This antient writer frequently attacks and refutes the Carpocratians, Valentinians, andGnoftics, and other heretics of this and the preceding age. I proceed. III. To. « Ad. Autolog. c. 1. J. p. 88. * Ibid. p. loo. » Pxdagog. 1. 3. p. 266. ' Ibid. 1. I. c. 6. p. 91. » Stiomar. 1. 7. p. 70J, 703. 54+ A t)ISSERTATION CONCERNING THE III. To the third century. The herefies which fprung up in this age refpeic- ing the Perfon, Sonfliip, and Deity of Chrift, were thofe oi Beryllus, who revived that oi j^r lemon, and of the Noecians or Sabellians, fometimes called Patripaf- Iians, and of the Samofatenians. !_/?, Beryllus, bifhop of Bojlra in Aretia, who for fome time behaved well in his office, as Jfroaj fays', but at length fell into this notion, that Chrift was not before his incarnation •, or as Eufebius ^ cxprelTes it, that cur Lord and Saviour did not fubfift in his own fubftance before he fojourned among men, and had no deity of his own refiding in him, but his Father's ; but through dif- putations he had with fevcral biftiops, and particularly with Origejt, he was recovered from his error and reftored to the truth. . 2. The Noetians, fo called from Noelus, and afterwards Sabellians, from ^abellius, a difciple of the former ; thofe held that Father, Son and Spirit, are one perfon under thefe difiereat names. The foundation of their herefy was laid by Simon Alagus, as before obferved. They were fometimes called Praxeaiis and Hermogenians, from Praxtus and Hermogenes, the firft authors of ir, who embraced the fame notions in this period, and fometimes PatripafTians, becauf?, in confequence of this principle, they held that the Father might be faid to fufFer as the Son '. 3. The Samofatenians, fo called from Paul of Samofaie, bifhop of Anticch, who revived the herefy of Artemon, that Chrift was a mere man. He held that Airift was no other than a common man -, he refufed to own that he was the Son of God, come from heaven ; he denied that the only begotten Son and Word was God of God : he agreed with the Noetians and Sabellians, that there was but one perfon in the Godhead"; of thefe notions he was convifted, and for them condemned by the fynod at Antioch". The writers of this age are but few, whofe writings have been continued and tranfmitted to us \ but thofe we have, ftrongly oppofed the errors now mentioned -, -the cliief are TertuUian^ Origen, and Cyprian., bcfides in fome frag- uicnis of others. I. Tertullian. He wrote againft Praxeus, who held the fame notion that J^oelus and Sabellius did, in which work he not only expreflcs his firm belief of the Trinity in Unity, faying" •, " neverthelefs the oeconomy is prefervcd, which " difpofcs Unity into Trinity, three, not in ftate (or nature, cffence) but in de- " grce (or perfon) not in fubftance but in form, not in power but in fpecies, of " one fubftance, of one ftate,and of one power, becaufe but oneGod, from whom " thefe ' Cata'03. Script. Ecclcs c. 70. ^ Hift. Ecdes. 1. 6. c. 33. I Epiplun. Hacrej. 42 Aug de hxres, c 36, 41. " Eui'eiJ. Eccles Hiil. 1 7.C. 27, 30 Epiphan Hxre-. 6j. Aug. de Hares, c. 44.. « Eufeb. ib. c. 29. • .Adv. Praxeam. c. 2. ETERNAL SON SHIP OF CHRIST, &c. 545 " thefe degrees, forms and fpecies are deputed, under the name of the Father, " and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit." • And that he means three diftinft perfons, is clear from what he afterwards ' fays : " whatfocver therefore was the " fubftance of the Word, that I call a perfon, and to him I give the name of " SoHi and whilft I acknowledge a Son, I defend a fecond from the Father." The diftindion of the Father and Son from each other, and the eternal genera- tion of the one from the other, are fully exprefled by him : " this rule as ■> pro- " fcflcd by me, is every where held -, by which I teftify, the Father, Son, and " Spirit are infcparable from each other -, - for lo I fay, another is the Father " and another is the Son, and another is the holy Spirit;— not that the Son is " another from the Father, by diverfity, but by diflribution ; not another by " divifion, but by diftindtion : — TLuoiheris he thit generates, and another he that *' IS generated : — a Father mud needs have a Son that he may be a Father, and " the Son aFather that he may be aSon." And again % he explains the words in Prov. viii. 22. [The Lord pojfejfed me) of the generation of the Son; and on the claufe, when be prepared the heavens, I was with him, he remarks, " thereby " making himfclf equal to him, by proceeding from wliom he became the Son *« and firft born, as being begotten before all things ; and the only bcfrottcn, as " being alone begotten of God." On thefe words, Thou art my Son, this day have J begotten thee, he ohhtvcs' to Praxeas, "if you would have me believe " that he is both Father and Son, flicw me fuch a pafTage elfcwhere. The Lord *' /aid unto himfclf, J am my Son, this day have I begotten my I'cU" And in another work ' of his, he has thcle words, fpcaking of the Word, " chis we " learn is brought forth from God, and by being brought forth, generated, and " and therefore called the Son of Cod, and God, from the unity of fubftance ; — *' fo that what comes from God, is God, and the Son of God, and both one :" that is, one God. 2. Origen. Notwithftanding his many errors, he is very cxprefs for the doflrinc of the Trinity, and the dillindion of the Father and Son in it, and of the eter- nal generation of the Son : he obfervcs ° of the Seraphim, in Ifr.i. vi. 3, that by faying, " Holy, holy, holy, they preferve the myltcry of the Trinity -, that it " was not enough for them to cry holy once nor twice, but they take up the " perfed number of the Trinity, that they might manifeft the multitude of " the holinefs of God, which is the repeated community of the trine holinefs, " the holinefs of the Father, the holinefs of the only begotten Son, and of the " holy Spirit." And eUewliere ', allegorizing the fhew-brcad, and the two tenth deals in one cake, he an• In Lfaia.T. iicn;il i.Tol-icc^ A Hca-.i! 4. fol. 103. 3. " In Lev. Hofnil. 13. fol. Bf. I . 546 A DISSERTATION CONCERNING THE fiyi be, '• we do not feparate the Son from the Father, nor the Father from *' the Son, Jcbn xiv. 9. therefore each loaf is of two tenths, and fct in two " poGtions, that is, in two rows, for if there was one pofition, it would be " confufed, and the Word would be mixed of the Father and the Son, but now- " indeed it is but one bread; for there is one will and one fubftance; but there " are two pofitions -, that is, two proprieties of perfons (or proper perfons) for *' we call Jlim the Father who is not the Son ; and him the Son who is not ■ " the Father." Of the generation of the Son of God he thus Ipeaks % " Jefus " Chrift himfelf who is come, was begotten of the Father before every creature " was." And again ', " it is abominable and unlawful to equal God the Father ". jn tht generation of bis only begotten Son, and in his fubftancc, to any one, men " or other kind of animals -, butlhere muft needs be fome exception, and fome- " thing worthy of God, to which there can be no comparifon, not in things " only, but indeed not in thought : nor can it be found by fenfe, nor can the *' human thought apprehend, how the unbegottcn God is the Father of the " only begotten Son: {or generation is eternal, as brightnefs is generated from *' li"ht, for he is not a Son by adoption of the Spirit cxirinfically, but he is a " Sen by nature." .' . . 3. Cyprian. Little is to be met with in his writings on this fubjedl. The following is the molt remarkable and particular "^ ; " the voice of the Father ♦' was heard from heaven, This is my beloved Son, in uhom I am well pleafed, " hear ye him; ,^\hn i\\\i \o\ze. came from thy paternity, .there is none that *' doubts-, there is none who dares to arrogate tiiis word to himfelf; there is " none amono- the heavenly troops who dare call the Lord Jefus his Son. Cer- " tainly to thee only the Trinity is known, the Father only knows the Son, " and the Son knows the Father, neither is he known by any unlefs he reveals " him ; in the fchool of divine teaching, the Father is he that teaches and in- " ftrufls, the Son who reveals and opens the fecrets of God unto us, and the " holy Spirit who fits and furnifhes us ; from the Father we receive power, " from the Son wifdom, and from the holy Spirit innocence. The Father " choofes, the Son loves, the holy Spirit joins and unites; from the Father is " given us eternity, from the Son conformity to him his image, and from the " holy Spirit integrity and liberty ; in the Father we are, in the Son we live, " in the holy Spirit we are moved, and become proficients ; eternal deity and ♦' temporal humanity meet together, and by the tenour of both natures is made " an unity, that it is impofTible that what is joined (hould be feparatcd from «' one another." As for the Expofition of the Creed, which ftands among Cyprian''^ « »,-, Ajx^"» prsem fo!. 1 1 1. 4. y Ibid. 1. !. c. 2. fol. 114. 4. vid. Pamphn. Apolog. pro O igcn; inter opere Ilicroroni. torn. 4. fol. 74. M. it fol. 77. A. » C)pnjr. dc b.iptifmo inter opera ejus, p. 455. ETERNAL SONSHIP OF CHRIST, &c. 547 -CyfriarCi works, and is fometimes attributed to him, it was done by Ruffiniis, and the teftimonies from thence will be produced in the proper place. 4. Gregory oi Neocafarea, fometimes called Tbaumaturgus, the wonder-worker, lived in this century, to whom is afcribed * the following confedion of faith ; " One God, theFather of the living Word, of fubfilling wifdom and power, and *' of the eternal charafter, perfeft begetter of the perfeft One, Fatlier of the only begottenSon: and God theSon, who is through all. The perfed Trinity, which in glory eternity and kingdom, cannot be divided nor alienated. Not there, fore any thing created or fervile is in thcTrinity, nor any thing luperinduced, nor firft and laft -, nor did the Son ever want a Father, nor the Son a Spirit : *' but thcTrinity is always the fame, immutable and invariable." And amon:> his xwclvc articles of faith, with an anathema annexed to them, this is one": " If *' any one fays, another is the Son who was before the world, and another who " was in the laft times, and docs not confcfs, that he who was before the " world, and he who was in the laft times, is the fame, as it is written, let " him be anathema." The interpolation follows-, " how can it be faid, an- " other is the Son of God before the world was, and another in the laft days, *« when the Lord fays, before Abraham was, lam; and becaufe I came for lb *' from the Father, and am come; and again, I go to my- Father ? " 5. Dionyfius, biftiop of Alexandria, was a difciple of Origen : he wrote againft the Sabcllians % but none of his writings arc extant, only fome frag- ments prefcrved in other authors. And whereas Arius made ufe of fome pai- fages of his, and improved them in favour of his own notions, Atbanafius from him ftiews the contrary, as where in one of his volumes he exprefsly fays ^ that " there never was a time in which God was not a Father; and in the following " acknowledges, that Chrift the Word, Wifdom and Power, always was ; that « he is the eternal Son of the eternal Father; for if there is a Father, there " muft be a Son-, and if there was no Son, how could he be theFather of any ? >' but there are both, and always were — The Son alone always co-exiftcd witli " the Father God the Father always was : and the Father being eternal, thq " Son alfo is eternal, and co-exifted with him as brightncfs with light." An4 in anfwcr to another objedtion, made' againft him, that when he mentioned the Father, he faid nothing of the Son, and when he named the Son, faid nothing of the Father -, it is obfcrved, that in another volume of h's, he fays', that " each of thcfe names fpoken of by me, are infeparablc and indivifible from " one another; when I fpeak of the Father, and before I introduce the Son, I 4 A 2 " fignif'y » Expof/Fidei inter Optra ejus, p. I. ed. Paris. * ibid, p 4. « Epift. »d Xydum apud Eufeb. 1. 7. c. 6. & ad Ammonium & Euphraro'. apud Achanafium de Sent DionyC p. 433, 435. ' * Elench. & .^polog. vol. i. apud Athauaf. ib. p 436, 437. * Ibid. vol. ». tpud Aihanaf. ibid. p. 437. £48 A DISSERTATION CONCERNING THE *' Cgnify him in the Father -, when I introduce the Son, though I have nor *' before fpoken of the Father, he is always to be underftood in the Son." 6. The errors of Paulus Samofate were condemned by the fynod zr. Antiock, towards the latter end of this century, by whom a formula or confcfTion of faith was agreed to, in which are thcfe words ^ " We profcfs that our Lord, " Jefos CUr\{\ was l>egoUen of fbe Fcthtr before agesy according to the Spirit, and " in the laft days, born of a virgin, according to the flefli." The word it^osa-nu confiibjiantial, is ufcd in their creed. Towards the clofe of this century, and at the beginning of the next, lived Lailantius, (for he lived under Dioclejian, and to the times of Conjlantinc) who afTerts^ that God, the maker of all things, begat »' a Spirit holy, incorruptible, and irreprehenfible, whom he called the Son."^ He afics \ " how hath he procreated ? The divine works can neither be known " nor declared by any, ncverthclcfs the fcripturcs teach, that the Son of God *♦ is the Word of God." Nothing more is to be obfcrved in this century. I pafs on, IV. I'o the foiirt!) century, in which rofc up the Arians and Photinians, and others. \fl, Tlic Arians, lo called from Arius, a prcfbyter of the church at Alexandria^ in the beginning of this century, who took occafion from fome words dropped in dilputation by Alexander his bifhop, to oppofe him, and ftart the herciy liiat goes under his name; and though the eternal Sonfhip of Chrift was virtually denied by picceding herccicks, who affirmed that Chrift did not cxift bcfoTC Mary; in oppofition to whom the orthodox affirmed, that he was begotten of the Father before all worlds ; yclArius was the firft, who pretended to acknowledge the Trinity, that adlually and in exprefs words fct himfelf to op- pofe the eternal Sonfliip of Chrift by generation ; and argued much in the fame manner as thofe do, who oppofe it now : for being a man who had a good (hare of knowledge of the art of logic, as the hiftorian obferves ', he reafoned thus, *• If the Father begat the Son, he that is begotten, muft have a beginning of *' his exiftence, from whence it is manifeft, that there was a time when the Son *' was not V and therefore it neccftarily follows, that he had his fubfiftcnce " from things that arc not;" or was brought out-of a ftatc of non-exiftence into a ftatc of exiftence. He undcrftood |-(?«frefore limes and ages, perfeft God, the only *' begotten, immutable j and that before he was begotten or created, or decreed *' or t^3.b\\^c6,he was not, for he was not unbegotten-, we are perfecuted becaufc " we fay, the Son bad a beginnings but God is without beginning; for this we are " pcrfecuted, and becaufe we fay, that he is of things that did not exift (that is, ♦' out of nothing-,) fo we fay, that he is not a partofGod, norout of any fubjeft- " matter; and for this wc are pcrfecuted." And in his letter to his biftiop, he thus expreiTes himfelf ••, " We acknowledge one God, the only unbegotten ; *' —that this God begat the only begotten Son before time, by whom he made " the world, and the reft of things ; that he begot him not in appearance, but " in reality ; and that by his will he fubCfted, immutable and unalterable, a " perfect crea'ure, but as one of the creatures, a birth, but as one of the births " — Wc fay, that he was created before times and ages, by the will of God, and - *' received his life and being from the Father; fo that the Father together appoint- " ed glories for him;— The Son without lime was begotten by the Father, and " was created and cftablilhed before the world was ; he was not before he was " begotten, but without time was begotten before all things, and fubfifted alone ♦' from the alone Father ; neither is eternal nor co-eternal, nor co-unbegotten »' with theFathcr, nor had he a being together with theFather." What he held is alfo manifeft from his creed', which he delivered in the following words, *' I believe in one eternal God, and in his Son whom he created before the world, " and as God he made the Son, and all the Son has, he has not (of himfclf,) he " receives from God, and therefore the Son is not equal to, and of the fame " dignity with the Father, but comes (hor; of the glory of God, as a work- " manlhip; and is Icfs than the power of God. 1 believe in the holy Ghoft, ♦» who is made by the Son." The Arians were fomctimes called Aetians, fromAelius, a warm defender of the doftrine of Arius, and who ftumbled at the fame thing tliat Arius did ; for hecould not undcrftand, the hiftorian faysS how that which is begotten could be'co-ctcrnal with him that begets ; but when Arius diffembled and figned that form of doftrine in the Nicenc Synod, Aetius took the opportunity of breaking off from the Arians, and of fetting up a diftinft feft, and himfelf at the head of them. Thefe were after called Eunomians, from£«»0OT/«.s a difciple ofActius; . heisfaid' to add to and to exceed the blafphemy of ^rm; he with great bold- ncfs t Apud Theodoret. Eccl. Hid. 1. i. c. 5. * Apud Epiphan. Hires. 69. < ApudAthsnaf.ioNlc.conct.contr.Ariomdifput. p. 81, 8:. ^ Socrat.Eccl.Hin. 1.2. c.35. ' Theodoret. Eccl. Hift. 1. a. c, 29. n •'550 A DISSERTATION CONCERNING THE nels rene Aeci the hercly of Aeiius, who not only after Arius afTeried that the Soh ■ was created out ot nothing, but that he was unlike to the Father".^' Hence the 'followers of thefe men were called Anomoeans. There was another feft called Nacivitarians, who were a fucker or branch that fprung from the Eunomians, and refined upon them ; thefe held that the Son had his nativity of the Father, the beginning of it from time-, yet being willing to own that he was co-eternal with the Father, thought that he was with him before he was begotten of him, • that is, that he always was, but not always a Son, but that he began to be a Son from the time he was begotten. There is a near approach to the fentimcnts ot thefe in fomc of our days. ...■■.. The Arians were alfo called Macedonians, from Macedonius a violent pcrfecutor of the orthodox, called Homooufians ", who believed that theSon is of the fame iubftancc with the Father -, but this man afterwards becoming bifhop oi Conjlan- titwplcy refufed to call him a creature, whom the holy fcripture calls the Son; and therefore the Arians rejedted him, and he became the author and patron of his own fefSt; he denied the Son was confubftantial with the Father, but taught, that in all things he was like to him that begat him, and in exprefs words called the Spirit a creature", and tlie denial of the deity of the lioly Spirit is the dif- tinguifhincr tenet of his followers. 2i/y, The Photinians rofe up much about the fame time the Arians did, for they arc made men;ion of in the council of Nice, but their opinions differ from the Arians. Thefe were fometimes called Marcellians, from Alarcellitis of Ancyra, \f.\\o'it 6\{c\}p\t Pbotinus was, and from him named Photinians. He was bifhop of Syrmium ; his notions were the fame with Ebion and Paul of Samofate, that Chrifl was a mere man, and was only of Mary ; he would not admit of the ge-. neration and exiftence ofChrift before the world was ^ His followers were much the fame with our modern Socinians, and who are fometimes called by the fame name. According to Thomas Aquinas'^, the Photinians, and fo theCerinthians, Ebionites, and Samofatcnians before them, as they held that Chrift was a mere man, and took his beginning from Mary, fo that he only obtained the honour of deity above others by the merit of his blcfTcd life ; that he was, like other men, the Son of God by the Spirit of adoption, and by grace born of him, and by fome likenefs to God is in fcripture called God, not by nature, but by fomc participjtion of divine goodnefs. Thefe herefics were condemned by the feveral councils and fynods held on account of them, and were refuted by various found and valuable writers who lived Sozorren. Eccl. Hid. I 6. c. z5. » Socrat. Eccl. Hirt. 1. 2. c. j8. » Theodoret. Eccl. Hid. I z c. 6. »" Theodoret. ibid. I. 5. c. 1 1. Socrat. I. 7. c. 32. SozomcQ. I. 4. c. 6. ^ CooCr. Geotiles, 1. 4. c. 4. p. 610, 'ETERNAL SONSJHIP OF CHRIST, &c. 551 lived inthis century : to produce all their tcftimonies would bccndlefs; I fliall only take notice of a few, and particularly fuch as refpcfl theSonfhip ofChrift. ; I. The tenets. of ^r/«j were condemned by the council held at Nice in Byihi- nia^ confining of three hundred and eighteen bifhops, by whom was compofed thefollowing creed or agreement of faith, , as the hiftorian calls it ' : " We be- " lieve in one God thef ather Almighty, the maker of all things, vifiblc and " invifiblev and in one Lordjefus Chrift, the Son of God, the only begotten, " begotten of the Father, that is, out of the fubftance of the Father, God of " God, light of light, true God of true God -, begotten not made, confubflan- " tial (or of the fame eflence) with the Father, by whom all things are made "which are in heaven and in earth -, who for us men, and for our falvation, de- " fcended and became incarnate, and was made man and fufFered, and rofe again " the third day J afcended up into heaven, and will come to judge the quick '"' and the dead. • And we believe in the holy Spirit. As for thofe that fay, " there was a time when the Son of God was not, and before he was begottea " was not, and that he was made of what does not exift (out of nothing), and " fay, he was from another fubRance, or eflence, or created, or turned, or " changed i the holy catholic and apoftolic church anathematizes." 2. Aihanafms \i^% a famous champion for the doftrines of the Trinity, the proper Sonlhip ofChrift, and his eternal generation; to produce all the tefti- monies from him that might be produced in proof of thofe doftrines, would be to tranfcribe a great part of his writings; it may be fufficienc to give his creed; not that which is commonly called the Athanafian creed, which, whe- ther penned by him is a doubt, but that which ftands in his works, and was delivered by him in a perfonal difputation with Arius, and is as follows ; which he calls an epitome of his faith '. " I believe in one God the Father, the al-- " mighty, being always God the Father; and I believe in God the Word, the " only begotten Son of God, that he co-exifted with his own Father; that " he is the equal Son of the Father; and that he is the Son of God; of the fame " dignity; that he is always with his Father by his deity, and that he contains all ♦' things in his eflisnce ; but the Son of God is not contained by any, even as " God his Father : and I believe in the holy Ghoft, that he is of the eflence of " the Father, and that the holy Spirit is co-€ternal with the Father ■and with. the " Son. The Word, 1 fay, was made flefh." After this I would onlyjuft obferve, ihatyithanajius having faid that the Son was without beginning and eternally be- gotten of the Father, farther fays ', that he was begotten ineffably and incon- ceivably ; and clfewhere hefays ", "it is fuperfluous or rather full madnefs to " call ' Socrat. Hifl.l. I.e. 8. • Coatr Arian. difput. inter opera ejus, vol. I. p. By. ' Expofit. fidei, vol. I. p. 3g(. u Contr, Arian. Orac. 3. p. an, 214. 552 A DISSERTATION CONCERNING THE " call in queftion, and in an heretical manner to aHc, how can the Son be «er- ♦' nal ? or, how can he be of the fubftance (or eflcnce) of the Father, and not *' be a part of him ?" And a little farther, *' it is unbecoming to enquire how *' the Word is of God, or how he is the brightnefs of God, or how God begets, " and what is the mode of the generation of God : he mud be a madman that *» will attempt fuch things, fince the thing is ineffable, and proper to the na- " ture of God only, this is only known to himfclf and his Son." 3. JUxavder, bifhop of Alexandria, whom ^r/»j oppofed, and Ihould have been mentioned firft, in an epiftle of his to Alexander., bifhop oi Ccnjiantinople ', acquaints him with the opinion of Arius, that there was a time when the Son of God was nor, and he that was not before, afterwards exifted, and fuch was he made, when he was made as every man is ; and thjt the Son of God is out of things that are not, or out of nothing; he obfcrves to him, that what was his faith and the faith of others, was the faith of the apoftolic church : " We bc- " lieve in one unbegotten Father, — and in one Lord Jefus Chrift, the only " begotten Son of God ; not begotten out of that which is not, but from " the Father •, that exifts, not in a corporal manner by incifion, or defluflions " of divifions, as fcemcd to Sabcllius and Valentinus, but in a manner ineffable " and inexplicable." 4. Epiphcnius wrote a volume againft all herefies, and attempts a confutation of them: and with refpeft to theArian herefy, he thus writes'; " God exifting, «' incomprclienfible, has begat him that is incomprchenfible, before all ages and *' times, and there is no fpace between the Son and the Father, but as foon as *♦ you underftand a Father, you underftand a Son, and as foon as you naine " a Father you fhew a Son ; the Son is underftood by the Father, and the Fa- *' ther is known by theSon ; whence aSon, if he has not aFather? and whence *' a Father, if he has not begat an only begotten Son ? for when is it the Father " cannot be called aFather, or the Son, aSon ? Though fome think of a Father " without a Son, who afterwards comes to a proficiency and begets a Son, and *' fo after the birth is called the Father of that Son : the Father who is perfeft, " and never wants pcrfeftion, making a progrefs or proficiency in the deity." 5. Hilary, bifliop of Poitiers in France, wrote againft the Arians, and fays many things in oppofition to their tenets, concerning the Sonfliip ofChrift, and his eternal generation; among others, he fays'', "the unbegotten begot a Son " of himfclf before all time, not from any fubjacent matter, for all things are by ♦' the Son, nor out of nothing, for the Son is from him himfelf. — He begot the " only begotten in an incomprchenfible and unfpcakable manner, before all " lime " ApudTheodortt. Hid. I. i.e. 4. ■ Contr. Hzref. I. 2. tern, z.h.-eref. 6g. »■ De Triniiate, 1. 3. p. 23, 24. ?id. ibid, dc Unitate filii & patris, p. 65c. ETERNAL SONSHIP OF CHRIST, &c. 553 " time and ages, of that which is unbegotten, and fo of the unbegottcn, pcr- " fcft and eternal Father, is the only begotten, pcrfed and eternal Son." 6. Faufiinus the Y)rc{bytcT, wrotea treatife againft the Arians -, who obfcrvcs, that they fometimes ufe the fame words and phrafcs the orthodox do, but noc in the fame fenfc; they fpeak of God theFather and of God the Son, but when they fpeak of theFather, it is not of one who truly begets, and when they fp;ak of the Son, it is of him as a Son by adoption, not by nature •, and when they fpeak of him as aSon begotten before the world was, they attribute a beginning to him, and that there was a time when he was not; and fo they affert him to be of things not exiftent -, that is, of nothing ^ He afks % " How is he truly a " Father, who, according to them, does not beget (truly) ; and how is Chrift « truly a Son, whom they deny to be generated of him ?" And again *, «' How " is he the only begotten of the Father, fince he cannot be the only begotten, " other Sons exifting by adoption ? but if he is truly the only begotten by the " Father, therefore becaufc he only is truly generated of the Father." And clfcwhere*, "They fay God made himfclf aSon: if he made him out of nothing, " then is he a creature, and not a Son. What is he that you call a Son, whom " you confirm to be a creature, fince you fay he is made out of nothing ? there- •« fore you cannot call him both a Son and a creature-, for a Son is from birth, " a creature from being made." And again % " In this alone the Father differs « from the Son, that the one is a Father, the other a Son ; that is, that the one " begets and the other is begotten •, yet not becaufc he is begotten has he any " thi'^g lefs than what is in God the Father, Het. i. 3." Once more -, " God « alone is properly a true Father, who is a Father without beginning and end, " for he did not fometimc begin : he is a Father, but he was always a Father, « having always a Son begotten of him, as he is always the true God, conti- " nuing without beginning and end." 7. Gregory, bifhop of iVaz/j^zww, gives many teftimonies to the doftrines of the Trinity and of the Sonlhip and generation of Chrift, againft the Arians andEunomians; among which are the following-, "We ought, fays he% to " acknowledge one God the Father, without beginning and unbegotten ; and " one Son, begotten of theFather-, and oneSpirir, having fubfiftence fromGod, « yielding to theFather, becaufc he is unbegotten, and to thcSon, becaufc he " is bcgo°tten ; otherwife of the fame nature, dignity, honour and glory." And elfewhere he fays', "If you aftc me, I will anfwer you again. When was the « Son begotten? When theFather was not begotten. When did theSpirit pro- VOL. II. 4B "ceed? J De Trinitate contr. Arian c. «.p. 36. I'M p. 4?. ' ^''^- P- 77. * Ibid.ci. p.92. • Ibid.c. 3. F- •J4- « Ibid. C.7. p. 157- Ed.Oxon. • Orit. »6.p. 445. ' Or>t. 3 J. p. 563. 554- A DISSERTATION' CONCERNING THE •' cced? When the Son did not proceed, but Was begotten before time, and be- " yond expreflion. — How can it be proved, that they (the Son and Spirit) are " co-eternal with the Father ? From hence, becaiifc they are of him, and not " after him, for what is without beginning Is eternal." And then he goes on to anfwer the feveral objeftions made to the generation of theSon by the Euno- Diians. Again he fays S " Believe the Son of God, the word that was ie/ere " an ages begotten of the Father before time, and in an incorporeal manner; " the fame in the lafl: days made the Son of man for thy fake, coming forth " from the virgin Alary in an unfpeakable manner." And elfewhere he fays •■, " Do you hear of generation? do not curioufly enquire how it is. Do you " hear that the holy Spirit proceeds from the Father? do not be anxioufly fdli- " citous how it is : for if you curioufly fearch into the generation of the Son, j " and the proccfTion of the Spirit, I fhall curioufly enquire into the tempera- ! "• ment of the foul and body, how thou art duft, and yet the image of God? '.' How the mind remains in thee, and begets a word in another mind ?" 8. Bajil, ciWed the ora:, zrchhilhop of Cicfarea Cappadocia, wrote a treatife againft Euncmitu, in which he fays', -"As there is one God the Father, always " remaining tlicFather, and who is forever what he is; fo there is oncSon, born : " by an eternal generation, who is the true Son of God, who always is whac " he is, God the Word and Lord; and one holy Spirit, truly the holy Spirit." Again *=, "Why therefore, O incredulous man, who doft not believe thatGod ' " has an own Son, doft thou enquire how God begets? if truly thou afkeCb " ofGod how and where alio, as in a place and when as in time; which, if ab- " furd to afk fuch things concerning God, it will be more abominable not to ♦' believe." And a little after he fays '', "If God made all out of nothing by " his will, without labour, and that is not incredible to us ; it will certainly be " more credible to all, that it became God to beget an own Son of himfclf, in ♦' the divine nature, without pafTion, of equal honour, and of equal glory, a «' counfellor of the fame feat, a co-operator confubftantial with God the Father; ♦' not of a divers fubftance, nor alien from his fole deity ; for if he is not fo, " neither is he adorable, for it is written thou /halt not worjhip ajlrange God." a. Gregory, bilhop of TVy/i, the brother of fia/;/, wrote againfl£««o»Jz«/, in which we have this paffage '. " He {Eunomius) does fay, that he (theSon) was " truly begotten before the world. Let him fay of whom he was begotten : he " mufi fay of the Father entirely, if he is not afhamed of the truth ; but from " the eternal Father there is no feparating the eternity of the Son ; the word " Father contains a Son." 10. Amhrofey c Or2f. 40. p. 671. ^ Crat. 29. p. ^93. ' Adv. Eunom.I. ?. c. u. ^ IbiJ.c. 14. ' Bafil ibid. m Contr. Eunom. Oiat. i.p .30. ETERNAL SONSHIP OF CHRIST, &c. SS5 10. Amhrofe, bi(hop of Milav, after having faid many things in oppofition to jirius^ Sabelliiis, Pbotinus and Eunomrus, obfcrvcs, that " when you fpeak of " a Father, you alfo dcfign his Son, for no man is a father to himfelf ; and " when you name a fon, you confefs his father, for no man is a fon to himfelf; " therefore neither the fon can be without the father, nor the father without the " fon ; therefore always a father and always a fon." He has alfo thefe words ' : " You afk me, how he can be a fon if he has not a prior father ? I afk of you " alfo, when or how you think the Son is generated ? for to me it is impoflible " to know the fecret of generation; the mind fails, the voice is filent; and not ♦' mine only, but that of the angels ; it is above angels, above powers, above »' cherubim, above feraphim, and above all ujiderftanding ; if the peace of " Chrift is above all underftanding, Pbil. iv. 7. muft not fuch a generation be " above all underftanding ? " And in another place "■, «' God the Father beo-a: " the Word co-(Jernal with himfelf and co-omnipotent, with whom he produced" " the holy Spirit ; hence we believe that the fubftance of the Son and of the " holy Spirit cxifted before any creature, out of all time; that the Father is the " begetter, the Son is begotten, and the holy Spirit the holinefs and the Spi- " rit of the begetter and the begotten." 1 1. Jerom the prcfbyter, and a noted writer in this century, fpeakintr of the Arians fays", " Let them underftand, that they glory in vain of the tcftimony " in which Wifdom fpeaks of being created in the beginning of the ways of " God, and begotten and eftablifhed; for if, according to them, he was created " he could not be begotten or born ; if begotten or born, how could he be' " eftablifhed and created ? " And a little after he fays, " God, the Father of " our Lord Jefus Chrift, is a Father according to fubftance (or effcnce), and " the only begotten is not a Son by adoption, but by nature ; whatfoever we " fay of the Father and the Son, this we know is faid of the holy Spirit." Here the creed of Damafus might be taken notice of, in which he fays, " God " has begot a Son, not.by will nor by necefllty, but by nature;" and in the expla- nation of it, it is faid, " Not becaufe we fay the Son is begotten of the Father " by a divine and ineffable generation, do we afcribe any time to him, for *' neither the Faihcr nor the Son began to be at any time ; nor do we any other " wife confefs an eternal Father, but we alfo confefs a co-eternal Son." Alfo Ruffinus's cxpofuion of the apoftles creed, which ftands among Jerom's works, »« when you hear of a Father, underftand the Father of a Son, the imao-e of " his fubftance ; but how God begat a Son do not difcufs, nor curioufly in- *' trude into the depth of this fecret "." 4 B 2 The J De Fide ad Gratian. c. j. p. 1 19, 1 20. " Iq Epift. ad Ephcj. fol. 96. A. torn. 9. ™ In fymbolum apoftol. c. 1. p. 87. torn. 4. Vid. opera Hierom torn. 4. fol. 42. 1 . 44; z. 55^ A DISSERTATION CONCERNING THE 12. The errors of the Photinians were not only confuted by the feveral above writers, but Pbotinus himfclf was condemned by the fynod at Syrmium, of which place he had been bifliop ; and in the formula of faith a 4^o> « Difputatio Theolog. & Epilog. Difputat. de generatione filU. « Maftrift. Theolog. 1, > c 26. f. 17.?. 257. ■ See hUbcdy of divinity, p. 12I, &c. ETERNAL SONSHIP OF CHRIST, fee. 563 in the Godhead, and yet ftrangely adopts the Socinian notion of Sonfliip by office, and makes the eternal Sonfhip of Chrift to be what he calls his mediato- rial Sonfhip. There is indeed a third perfon of great fame among us, Dr Ifaac Watts, who has exprefled his diflatisfaftion with the doftrine of the eternal gene- ration of theSon ofGod, but then he is not to be reckoned aTrinitarian, being fo manifeftly in the Sabellian fcheme, as appears by his DiJJertations publifhed in 1725. infomuch that the celebrated Fred. Adolphus Lampe, who publifhed his Tbeological Dt/putations . conctrning ihc holy Spirit, two or three years after, fpares not to reckon him among the groflerSabellians: his words arc % *< Nupe- " rius novum fyftema Socinianum deTrinitate Anglice J.Wats edidit, additis " quibufdam diflertationibus cam illuftrantibus, quarnm quinta ex profe/To de .-" fpiricu S.agit. Exillimatquidem fefb. 2. p. 126. catenusfeaSocinOjSchlidtingio, " Crellio cfle diftinguatum, quod virtutem in Deo non accidcntaJem, fed ef- " fcntialem, feu fubftantialem profpiritu S. habeat; hoc tamen ita facit, ut non " cenfeat hanc notionem conftanter ubique obtinere : nam faepius cum crafTiori- " bus Sabellianis fpiritum S. cGc Deum ipfum, p. 130. f. 49. defendit." Upon the whole, fctting afide the faid perfons, the teftimonies for and againfl: the eternal generation and Sonlhip of Chrift ftand thus : For Eternax Generatjon, &c. - Jgnatius,^ Polycarp, Juftin Martyr, Ircna^us, Athenagoras, Theophilus of Jntwch, Clemens o{ Alexandria, Tcr- tullian, Origen, Cyprian, Gregory of Neocafaria, Dionyfius of Alexandria., the three hundred and eighteen Niccne Fathers ; Athanafius, Alexander bifhop of Alexandria, Epiphanius, Hilary, Fauftinus, Gregory of Nazianzum, Bafil, Gregory of Ny£a, Ambrofe, Jerom, Ruffinus, Cyril oi Jerufalem, befides the many hundreds of bifhops and prcfbyters aflcmbled at different times and in different places, as, at Syrmium, Antioth, 'Ariminum, Seleucia, andConJlantinople, and clfewherc; Au- guftine, Chryfoftom, Leo Magnus, Theodoret, Cyril of Alexandria, Pau- AcAiNST It. Simon Magus, Ccrinchus, and Ebion, and their rcfpcftive followers ; Carpo- <:ratcs and the Gnofticks, Valentinus, Theodotus the currier, Artemon, and others their aflbclatesj Beryllus of Bf/ira, Praxcus, Hermogcnes, Noctius and Sabellius, the Samofateniaos, Arians, Aetians, Eunomians and Pho- tinians, the Prifcillianifts and Bono- tians ; Mahomet and his followers ; the Socinians and Rcmonftrants ; and all Antitrinitarians. 4 c 2 ' Lampc dlfp. z. de fpiritu, f. c. j. f. 13 f. u. linus, 564 A DISSERTATION CONCERNING, &c. Jinus, ,Flavianus, Vi(5tor, Maximus Taurienfis, ftx hundred and thirty fa- thers in the council at Cbalcedon; Ful- gcntiuSjGrcgoryTurnafis, Fortunatus, Caffiodorus, Gregorius Magnus, the many bifhops in the feveral councils at Toletum, the Roman fynod of a hundred and twenty -five under Agatho, Damafccne, Beda, Albinus, and the fathers in the council of Franckford^ with many others in later times, and all the found divines and evangelic churches fince the reformation. Now fince it appears that all the found and ortiiodox writers have unanimoufly declared for the eternal generation and Sonfhip of Chrift in all ages, and that thofe only of an unfound mind and judgment, and corrupt in other things as well as this, and many of them men of impure lives and vile principles, have declared againft it, fuch muft be guilty of great temerity and rafhnefs to join in an oppofuion with the one againft the other ; and to oppofe a doftrine the church of God has always held, and efpecially being what the fcriptures abun- dantly bear teftimony unto, and is a matter of fuch moment and importance, being a fundamental doflrine of the chriftian religion, and indeed what diftin- guifhes it from all other religions, from thofe of Pagans, Jews andMaliometans, who all believe in God, and generally in one God, but none of them believe in the Son of God : that is peculiar to the chriftian religion. A DISSER- DISSERTATION CONCERNING The Rise and Progress of POPERY. WHAT is generally meant and underftood by Popery, is well known. As for the name it matters not from whence and from whom it is, nor . when it began to be in ufe, nor in what fcnfe the word papa is ufed in heathen *ind ecclcfiaftical writers. By the latter it was given tochriftian bifhops in com- mon ; as to Cyprian, Atbanafius, uiujlin, Epiphanius, and others ; until the bifhops of i2owf afTumed it as peculiar to themfelves : but it is not the name,- but the thing we arc inquiring after j and as things are before they have a^ name, fo Popery was in being before it bore this name. It did not begin at Reme, nor was it always confined there; nor did it ceafc at the Reformation in. the reformed churches; fome of its unholy relics continued with them, and ftill do, and even in Geneva itfelf. It is commonly believed by Proteftants, that the Pope oi Rome is Antichrift; and the Roman church, its hierarchy,, doftrines and praftices, Ancichriftian ; and by Proteftant writers and- interpre- ters, for the moft part, it is fuppofed that the fame Antichrift is meant in- 2Tbefs.i\.2 — lo. to whom the defcription agrees ; as, the man of fm, the fon- of perdition, who exalts himfelf above all that is called God, or is worfhipped ; fit- ting in the temple of God, fhewing himfelf to be God. Now this fame man of fin, was then in being in the apoftles time, though not arrived to his manhood ; to- deny this, would be juft fuch good fenfe as to deny that an infant cxifts becaufe it is not grown up to man's cftate. Antichrift was not then revealed, but was to- be revealed in his proper time, when that which hindered his being revealed was taken away, even the Roman empire: he was in being, though he lay hid and concealed till an apporcunity offered to (hew himfelf. The myftery of iniquity, which is one of the names of my^\ci\ Babylon, or the Ancichriftian whore of Rome, Rev. xvii. 5. began to work already, when the apoftlc wrote the above. prophecy, and gave the above defcription of Antichrift ; and fo the apoftle John. J 566 A DISSERTATION CONCERNING THE y^bn fsrys, that the fpirit of anticbriji, ■7i\v\z\\ JbvM come, even now already /; it in the world, i John iv. 3. Antichrift was not only in embryo in the times of the apoftJes, but was arrived to fome bignefs, fo as to be aflivc and operative. Now P''prry may be confidered in a twofold rftipeft-, both as an hierarchy, an ufurped juriffiidion, and tyrannical domination over others ; and as a fyflem of antichrif- tian doflrincs and practices : and in both views it will appear, that what h now fo cal.ed, had a very early beginnirg. I. Popery may be confidered as an antichrifbian hierarchy, a tyrannical jurif- diftion over other churches, gradually obtained by ufurpation ; and though fuch an affeftation of pre-eminence tnd dominion was forbidden, and condemned by Chrift, Matt. xx. 26, 27. and chap, xxiii. 8, 11. and by his apoftles, and even by Peter, whom the pope oi Rome claims as his predeceflbr, 2 Cor. i. 24. x Pet. V. 3. yet this Diotrephcfian fpirit, or love of pre-eminence, appeared even in the apoftolic age, 3 Join ix. and though the office of bifhop or overfcer, and of prcfbyter or elder, and of paftor, is one and the fame, and equal, according to the fcripture-accounr, A£fsy.x. 27. and there were but two officers in the church, bifhops and deacons, Phil i. 1. yet we foon hear of the fupcriority of biffiops to preft>yters, and of the fubjcftion of prcfbyters to bifliops, as well as of deacons 10 both, and of the people to them all ; as appears from the epiftles oi Ignatius, in the fecond century; and in the third and following, we read of a great variety of offices, together with others fince added, which make the prefent antichrif- tian hierarchy •, as will be obferved hereafter. The bifhops of Rome very early difcovered a domineering fpiric over other bifhops and churches -, they grafped at power and exercifed it, though they met with rebuffs in it. In the fecond century there was a controverfy about keeping Eaftcr. The Afian churches obferved it on the 14"' day of the new moon, let it fall on what day of the week it might i but the church of Rome, with other churches, obferved it on the Lord's day following. Viilor, then bifhop of Rome, being a fierce and bluflering bifhop, threatened at lealt to excommunicate, if he did not excommunicate, the faid churches, for not obferving Eafler at the fame time that he did. Eufebius fays *, that he attempted to do it ; from which Trentcus" of France, endeavoured to difTuade him, though he was of the fame . mind with him, with rcfpcft to the obfervance of Eafler; but Socrates the hif- torian fays % he did fend them an excommunication ; which was an inflance of tyrannical jurifdidion exercifed over other churches. In the middle of the third century there was a difpute about rebaptizing hereticks who repented and cane over to the church : the African churches and bifhops, a% Cyprian and others, ' » Ecd Hid. 1. 5. c. 24. > Apudibid, ' Socrat. Eccl. Hill. 1. 5. c.tz. J11SE-ANDPROGRE5SOFPOPERY. 5^7 others, were for rcbaptizing them, and did ; but Stephen, bifhop oi Rome, vio- lently oppofed the baptifm of them, and cut off all the churches in /Ifrics for the pra(fbice of it; which is another inftance of the power the bifhop of Rome "thus earljr ufurped over other churches : though indeed it was highly rcfentcd by the caftcrn churches S and difplays his imperious and impofing temper, . as if he wanted to make himfclf a bifhop of bifliops '. In the beginning of the third century, \r\TerttdUan'% time, the bifhop of Rome had the cities of Pontifex Maximus., and of Epifcopus Epifcoporum ^ Julius I. in the fourth century, took, upon him to reprove fomc eaftcrn bifhops fordepofing others, and ordered the reftitution of them ; though they dcfpifed his reproofs, tand even depofed him for firft communing with Atbanafius and others ^ PU- t'tna fays ^ that he reproved them for calling a council at Antiocb, without the leave of the bifhop of Rotm j which he urged, could not be done without his authority, feeing the church of Rome\\zA the pre-eminence over the reft cf the churches: but the fame author fays, they confuted his claini with a fneer. _uldolpbus Lampe, in his Ecclefiaftical Hiftory ', obfervcs, that it is thought that .Mark, Iitting in the Roman chair, A. D. 335. firft arrogated to himfelf the -tide of univerfal bifhop : and indeed, if the letters oi Atbanafius and the Egyp- ,tian bifhops to him '', and his to them, are genuine, they both gave the title to him, and he took it to himfclf; their letter to him runs thus, •' To the reve- ■*' rend Mark, pope of the holy Roman and apofVolic See, and of the univerfal *« church." And his to therri begins thus, " To the venerable brethren Atba- " nafiuj, and all the bifhops in Egypt, Mark, the bifhop of the holy Roman .•' and apoflolic See, and of the univerfal church." And in the former, the iec of Rome is called the tnotber and head of all churches. Though hiftorians generally agree, that the title of univerfal bifhop was given by Pbucas to Boniface III. in the year 606. at the beginning of the fcventh cen- tury, yet an anonymous writer', in an ejfay on fcripture prophecy, p. 104- pub- lilhed in I724. quotes from Sigonius De occid. Imper. p. 106, and 314. two paP iages, (hewing, that Valentinian, the third emperor of the wcfl, in A. D. 445. and Marcion^ emperor of the cafl, in A. D. 450. afilgned fomething like an uni- verfal power to pope Leo I. which was more than a century and a half before the times oi Phocas. The title of univerfal bifhop might not be eftablifhed by authority of the emperor until his time, yet pretenfions were made to it, and it was claimed by the bifhops of Rome before, and in fome inftances given. And though. , * Vid. Cyprian Ep. 75. « Condi. Carthag. inter opera Cyprian, p. 397. ' Tertullian de ptxlicitia, c. i. « Socratc',1. z. c. 15. Sozomen, 1. 3. t 8. it. " ViL Pontific. p. 44. 45- ' L. 2. c. 5. f. 17. * Athanafii opera. » Intheabflrad ofthebiflory of popery, p. 1. margia. 568 A DISSERTATION CONCERNING THE though popt Gregory I. in the fixth century, a little before the time of Phocas, con- demned Jobn of Conjlantinople as antichrift, for taking upon him the title of Oecumenical h'\^op, becaufe it intrenched upoti his own power and authority i yet this hamble pope, who called himfelf fervus fervorum, alTerted, that the apoftolic fee, meaning the fee of Rome, was the head of all the churches -, and vehemently inveighed againft the emperor, for taking it to himfelf '. And it is certain that this pope claimed a jurifdiftion over the churches in Britain, fince he appointed his legate, Augujline the monk, metropolitan over the whole ifland "" i who endeavoured to bring the Britilh bifhops and churches to a conformity to the Roman church, and the rites of it, and to acknowledge the pope's autho- rity. This was before the time of pope Boniface the third, who obtained of the emperor the title of univcrfal bifhop. The primacy of the church oi Rome to other churches, with refpccEt to rank and order, which made way for primacy of power, was very «arly aficrted^ claimed, and allowed. Several fayings of the antient writers much contributed to it : from the grandeur and magnificence of the ciry of /?£>OTf, being the me- tropolis of the empire, an argument was very early ufcd to a fupcrior regard to the church in it. Irenaus ", who lived in the fecond century, obfcrves, that " to this church (the Roman church) every church fhould convene (or join in »' communion -,) that is, thofe every where who arc believers-, propter potentiorer,t " principalitatem; in which always by them who arc, every where is preferved " that tradition which is from the apoftles." And Cyprian", in the middle of the third century, calls it the chair of Peter, and the principal church, from whence the faccrdotal unity arifcs. Jerom % in the fourth century, writing to popt Datnafus, calls him his bkjjednejs, and the chair ol Rome, the chair of Peter: and Optatus"*, in the fame century, fays, the Roman church is the cpifcopal chair, firft conferred on Peter, in which he fat the head of all the aponies, and the chair of P;/fr; and earlier in this century the council of Nice wfis held, the Cxth canon of which gave equal power to the \:>\fhop of Rome, over the bifhops of his province, as the bifhop of yllexandria had by cuflom ; and by the third canon of the council zi Conjlantinople, A. D. 381, 382. the bifliop of Conjlan- tinople had the prerogative of honour after the bifhop of Rome, becaufe Conjlan- tinople was New Rome'; and this was confirmed by Jujlinian the emperor, in the fixth century, who ordained, that the pope of Rome fhould have the firft feat, and after him the avchh\(hop of Conjlantinople. And what ferved to ftrengthen the primacy of the church of Rome, and incrcafc its power, and which the bilhops of ' Vid. Magdeburg. Ecclei Hift. cent. 6. p. 217. " «. Bed. Hift. Ecfeb. • Adv. Hotref. 1. 3. c. 3. " Ep. 55 p. iig. f Opera torn. 2. p. 4^, 45. , 1 De Schifm. Donatift. 1. 2. p. 35, 37. 40. ' Socrat. Ecc'. Hift. 1. 5. c. 8. RISE AND PROGRESS OF POPERY. 569 of it failed not to avail themfclvcs of, was the bringing of caufes in difference I between other bifhops and their churches to them, either to have their advice or ' to be decided by them : and indeed this was done by the order oi' Conjiamim \ himfclf, Who enjoined, that the caufes of contending bifliops fhould be brought j to the bifhop oi Rome and his coUegues, and there decided ' : and this was ad- vifed to by Ibme eminent doftors of the church, particularly Ambrofc, who calls the Roman church the head of the whole Roman world or empire ' ; and advifed Theopbilus, that what was committed to him by the fynod at Capua, fhould be referred by him to the prieft of the Roman church (the ponuff} '. And- it is no wonder ih^tLeo I. in the fifth century, fhould require fuch rcfpeft and obedience to himfclf, who claim.ed the apoftolical and epifcopal dignity of Pf/^r"; and fubjeftion to the fee of iicOTf, as to the blefTed apoftle P^/^r " .- yea, he required oiTheodcftus the criiperor himfelf, that the writings of the bifhop of C(7«/?iJ?7//- vople might be fent to him -, teftifying that he embraced the true dodlrine,. and condemned thofc that difTented from it '. In his epiflle to the bifhop of The][alomca \ he afTcrts his care of all the churches, and the fee oi Home to be the apoflolic fee; and ordered him, that all matters of difference fhould be brought to him to decide, according to the pleafure of God. He ordered the African hereticks who repented, to fend the account of their repentance and faith to him, that it might appear they were catholic'. He alfo afTumed a power of calling general councils' : and termed Peter's feat, or the fee oi Rome, univcrfal '' ; and Peter the Prseful of the fee of Rome, and the primate of all bifhops'. In the beginning of the fifth century, during the fixth council at Carthage, which lafted fix years, the popes Zcz/ww, Boniface I. znd C^leJltKUS I. ftrove with all their might and main to get fome fort of primacy and monarchy over the other bifhops, though they failed in their attempt ''. The care of the church of Chrifl at firfl, with refpcfl: both to things tem- fjoral and fpiritual, lay wholly and entirely in the hands of the apoflies ; but finding the temporal afl^iirs of the church too burdcnfomc to them, they di- refted it to choofe a fort of officers called Deacons, to take care of them, JSIs vi. 1—6. and fo there were two offices, and two only, as before obferved, in the primitive apoflolic churches, Pbil. i. i. but they were foon increafed, by diftinguifliing bifhops and prefbyters, making the latter to be a diflinfl office from and fubfervient to the former: and afterwards offices became numerous; Vol. II. 4D and .' Eufeb. Eccl. Hin. I. lo.c. ;. • Ep. 1. «. Ep. 4. t jbiJ. Ep 9. " Serra. in A^nivers. die Affuirp. p. 9;. • Ep. 89. ad epifcop. Vienn. p. 159. » Ep. 33. p. 118. r Epill. 8^. 'EpS/.c. 3. »Ep9}.c. 17. / »• Spanheim. liagog. ad HiA. cedes, p. 221. * In anniverf. die AlTumpt. Serna. 2. >■ Vid. Aided. Chronolog. p. 360, 408. 570 A DISSERTATION CONCERNING THE and before the bifhop of Rome had the title of univerfal bifliop by authority ; and were the fame which now confticute the hierarchy of the church of Rome, very few excepted ; for even in the third century the following orders are afcribed to Caius bifhop of Rome, as of his appointment, and as degrees to a bifhoprick; firft a door-keeper, then a reader, then an cxorcift, an acolyte, a fubdeacon, a deacon, and a prefbyter, and then a bifhop '' : nor is it improbable that fuch orders and offices obtained as early, fince Cyprian, in the fame century, makes mention of an acolyte often % and of readers ; of Jurelius a reader, and of Saturnus a reader ^ and of Opiatus a fubdeacon, and of cxorcifls ^ : and Cornelius bifhop of Rome, who lived about the fame time Cyprian did, writincr to Fabius bifhop of Antiocb, concerning Novatus, fays, That In the- catholic church were but one bifhop, forty-four prefhyters, feven deacons, and as many fubdeacons, forty -two acolytes, exorcifts and readers, with door- keepers, fifty-two ''. All thefc are mentioned together, excepting acolytes, by Epiphanius in the fourth century '. And Eufebiuj ^ obferves, that in the perfe- cution under Diode/tan, the prifons were filled with bifhops, prefbyters, deacons,, readers and exorcifts : that in the council of Nice there were bifhops, prefbyters, deacons and acolytes. And Jerom', in the fame century, fpeaks of a reader, an acolyte, and a pfalm-finger : and Wkcv/'ift yfrnbrofe"", fpeaking of the quali- fications for different offices, one, he fays, is fit to read diflindlly -, another is more agreeable for finging pfalnis ; another for exorcifing evil fpirics •, and an- other to take the care of the veftry : all which, he fays, the prielt fhould look. after, and what every one is fit for, appoint him to that office. Sozsmen " fpeaks of an archdeacon in the church of Alexandria, whofe office it was to read the holy Bible -, and Optatus calls Cacilianus an archdeacon «• : and in Perfta,. Sozo- tnen fays % Simeon was archbifhop of Seleiuia and Ctefiphon, famous cities in it ; and there were patriarchs appointed over provinces by the fynod at Cpnjlanti- nople, as Socrates relates '' ; and both he ' and Sczomen ' make mention of Peier, an arch-prcfbyter of Alexandria, and of Timothy an archdeacon there, in the fifth century •, fo that long before Popery arrived to its height, there was much the fame popifh hierarchy as now : that of Cardinals fcems to be the only ex- ception, yet there were of the name, though.not of the fame office and dignity. In the fourth century, monkery, celibacy and virginity came much into ^3wooue i the monaflic life was much commended in this, age by B.a^l and his father, * Platinz vit. Pontif. p. 34. • Ep. 47. p. 90. Ep. 55. p- i ^4• * Ep.24. p.50. & Ep 76. p.joi» t Ep.33.p.'i5. b ApudEafeb. Eccl. Hift. I.6.C.43. » Cotnpend. de fide propc finem. * £ccl. Hid. 1.8. c.6. ' Ad Nepotian. fol. 5. D. torn. i. ■ De officiisl. I.e. 44. » Eccl. Hill. 1. 7. c. 19. o Contra Parmen. 1. 1 . p. 1 8^ ' » Eccl. Hift. 1. 2. c. 9. 1 Eccl. Hid. 1. j; c. 8. • * Ibid. 1.6. c. g. ic I. 7. «. 7., * Eccl. Hifi, I. 8. c. la. RISE AND PROGRESS OF POPERY. 571 father, as may be feen in his works. The firft of thefe Monks, Anchorites and Eremitrs, is faid to be ont Paul oi Thebes, z^Jerom relates'; and their difciples, in lefs than half an age, were fo multiplied, that the deferts oi Egypt and Arabia were full of them. Thcfc indeed were men of more ftrift and religious Mves than thofe of later ages, who go by the name of monks. Even before the time of Conjlantine, and in it, there were focieties of virgins, profcdlng perpetual vir- ginity, which he had a great regard unto " ; and fuch Helena found at or near Jerufalemy in whofe company fhe took great pleafure, and miniftered unto them ". Arius is faid to infeft with the poifon of his dodrine feven hundred virgins profefTing virginity '. And Ambroje fays, the virgins came to Milan from va- rious parts, even from the furtheft parts oi Mauritania, to be confecrated and veiled ' : fo early were monafteries and nunneries fct up, at leaft the foundation of fuch inllitutions were fo early laid, and the forms, rules, rites and ceremo- nies of them prcfcribcd, which now make fo great a figure in Popery. II. Popery may be confidered as a fyftem of antichriftian doftrines and prac- tices, feme of the principal of which the apodle Paul has prophetically given notice of in a few words, i Tim. iv. 1 — 3. l^ow the fpirit fpeaketh exprefsly, that in the latter times fame Jhall depart from the faith, giving heed to feducing fpirits, and do£irin£S of devi/s ; fpeaking lies in hypocrify ; having their confcience feared with a hot iron : forbidding to marry, and commanding to abjlain from meats, which (Jod hath created to be received with thankfgiving of them which believe and know the truth. All which are notorious dodtrines and praftices of the Papifts, and are here plainly pointed at ; and which, with others, are a branch of the myftery cf iniquity which began to work in the times of the apoftles, and riiore mani- Jeftly appeared foon after their departure. Very remarkable are the words of Hegefippus, an ancient hiftorian ^ tcftifying, that " till the times of Trajan (A.D. " 100.) the church continued a virgin pure and incorrupt; — but after the fa- *' crcd company of the apoftles ended their lives by various kinds of death,— " then the confpiracy of impious error began to take place, through the deceit " ot fdlfc teachers." P'or this branch of popery, or myflery of iniquity, takes its rife from the herefies of falfe teachers of the firft ages, and from unguarded cxprcfTions and errors of thofe who have been called fathers of the church ; and who, in other points, were counted found and orthodox; and which, by de- grees, grew up to that enormous mafs of antichriftian doiflrincs which are the 4 D 2 peculiars « AdEuflacli de virginitafe fol. 50. K. & !□ vita Paul Eremiix, fol.Si.K. u Eufcb. de vita ConftaDiin. 1. 4. c. 28. * Socrat. Eccl. Hid. 1. i. c. 17. I Epiphao. hajief. 69. r De virginibuj, 1. i. prope fiqera. » ApodEufeb. Eccl. Hift.I 3 c. 32. • 572 A DISSERTATION CONCERNING THE . peculiars of popery : and, to begin with thofe the apoftle foretold in the above . quoted paflage, I. Wordiipping of angels and praying to faints departed ; which are meant by the doEirines of devils, or demons, as Mr Mede thinks, fuch as the heathens reckoned a fort of mediators between God and men ; as the papifts efteem an- gels to be mediators of intcrcefiion, though not of redemption ; and therefore invoke them to intercede for them ; and the papifts are they who are meant in Rev. ix. 20. faid to worjhip devils, and idols of gold and fiher, &c. And this do6lrine of worfhipping daemons or angels, was embraced by a hvf, even in the times of the apoftles ; for the apoftle Paul wirns the Coloflians, that no man beguiled them in a voluntary humility, and worfhipping of angels. Col. ii. 1 8, This was a tenet of Simon Magus, the father of herefies, who held, that the world was made by angels : and this is afcribed to him by Tertullian '. And Theodoret reckons it as the notion oi Carpocrates, Epiphanes, Prodicus, and the Caiani"; and in his expo- fition of C(7/. ii. 18. he fays, that this evil notion continued long in Piirj'^/ij and Pi/Idia : wherefore the fynod which met atLaodicea, the metropolis of Phrygia^ forbad by a law to pray to angels j and he fays, that to his time might be feen among the people of thofe countries, and thofe that bordered upon them, the oratories of Sc Michael In the latter end of the fccond century lived the hereticks Angelici, fo.called becaufe they worfhipped angels, as fays Jfidore". Origen, who lived about the fame time, and in the beginning of the third century, gives a form of prayer to angels : "Come, O angel, receive one in word converted from his former " error, from the dodrine of devils, from iniquity, fpcaking highly j and receiv- ♦' ing him as a good phyfician, cherifli and inftruft him -, he is a little one, he " is born to day, an old man growing young again j and receive, retributing «' to him, the baptifm of the fecond regeneration -y and call to thee other com- «' panions of thy miniftry, that all ye equally may inftrudt in the faith, who " were fometimes deceived '." Auflin in the fourth century, and beginning of the fifth, fcems to favour the fame : quoting Phil. iv. 6. he obferves ', requefts are not to be underftood " as made known to God, who knows them before " they were made, but as made known by us to God through patience v or »» perhaps alfOj they arc made known by angels, who are with God,, that they «' might in fome fort offer them to God ; and confult concerning them, and " that they might know what was to be fulfilled ; he commanding, as they •« ought to know, and bring it to us, cither openly or fecretly -," for which he quotes, T^ohit yi\\. \^. The angel faid to the man. When thou and Sarjih pray efl, 1 offer up your prayer in the fight of the love of God. Praying • Deprzfcrip. Hiref. c. 33. ' Divioar. Decret. Epitome p. 295. « Origines 1. 7. c. 5^ * Homil. i. in Ezckiel fol. ijj. 4. * Efift. >»l- «• 9* RISE AND PROGRESS OF POPERY. 573 Praying to faints was ufcd as early ; fo Origin diredls a prayer to Job, in this manner ; " O blefled Job, living for ever with God, abiding in the prefence of " the king and lord; pray for us miferable ones, that alfo the terrible majefty ♦' of God may proteft us in all tribulations and deliver us from all the opprefTions " of the wicked one, and number us with the juft, and write us with them " who are faved, and make us reft with them in his kingdom, where we may "' perpetually magnify him with the faints ^" And elfewhere*, "I think, fays *' he, that all the fathers who died before us, fight with us, and help us by " their prayers ;" and which he confirms by a Doctor of the church fenior to him. Cyprian, in the third century, hints the fame, when he fays ^ " If any " of us go firft from hence, through the celerity of the divine worthinefs, let *' our love perfevere with God for our brethren and fifters ; and let not our " prayer for the mercy of the father ceafe." So Bafil, in the fourth century, in his homily on the forty martyrs, has thefe words; "Here is help prepared *' for chriftians, namely, the church of martyrs, the army of the triumphants, "^ the chorus of thofe that praife GoJ ? often have ye ufed means, ofcen have " ye laboured to find one praying for you ; there are forty fending forth one *' voice of prayer ; where two or three are met together, &c. but where there are- ♦' forty, who can doubt of the prefence of God ; he who is preffed with any ■ " trouble, let him flee to them ; he that rejoices, let him recur to them ; the *' one to be delivered from evils, the other to continue in profperity." In the fame century there are inftances of Nazianzen praying to Cyprian, and to Bajil dead ', and particularly to the virgin Mary very early was prayer made, and her intcrccfTion implored. Iren^sus^^ in the fecond century, calls the virgin Mary the advocate of the \\xg\nEve, which at beft is an unguarded exprellion. Jtha- nafius, in the fourth century, puts up a prayer to her in this manner', "Hear, *' O daughter of David and Abraham ; incline thine ear to our prayers, and *' do not forget thy people and us, who are of the family and houfc of thy fa- " ther; unto thee we cry, remember us mod holy virgin, who haft remained « a virgin from the birth, and reward us for thofe fpeechcs with great gifts from " the riches of thy grace-gift thou art full of — Hail full of grace, the Lord is " with thee! intercede for us, dame, miftrefs, queen, and mother of God."' And 'Nazianzen makes mention of ontjujlina, a virgin, in the times ofCypriatt, who was delivered from a temptation by applying to the virgin Mary". Epipba- nius ° fpeaks of fome who made aGod of her, and of fome \n Arabia who offered cakes ' Traa. 2. jn Job in fine. » Homil. i6. in Jofuam fol. i63. 2. » Epift. 57.P.134. ' Orat. 18. infinet'Orat.zo. in fine. * Adv. Harej. 1. 5. c. "ig^, » De fanftidiine Dei para prope finem. ■ Orat. 18. in laudem Cyprian. *.Cpatra Hiref. 1. 3. hai. 78, 73. 57A- A DISSERTATION CONCERNING THE cakes to her, and celebrated facred things in her name; and in the fifth century, PetrusGnaphaus., or the fuller, bifhop oiAntiocb, ordered that the mother of God fhould be named in every prayer ". 2. Another tenet, and which is apopifh one, the apoflleP<7KJ foretold would be broached in future time, \% forbidding to marry, \ Tim. iv. 3. fo antichrill:, as defcribed by the prophet D^k/i?/, is faid not to regard the defire of women, Dan. xi. '^'j. This was a tenet of the anticnt hereticks ; this branch of the myftery of ini- quity foon began to operate among them, and was held by them; by thcEbion- ites, who, Si% Epipkanius fays", magnified virginity, and by the Saturnalians, who faid, to marry and beget children was of the devil ' -, and that matrimony was a doflrine of the devil ^ -, and by theScverians, who faid, that a woman is the work offatan'; and by the Marcionites, who condemned marriage as an evil and unchaftc bufinefs ' -, and from thefe fprung the Encretites, at the head of whom was Tatian, who, as thofe before, called marriages, corruptions and fornications ' : and if the canons afcribed to the apoftles arc theirs, perfons hold- ing fuch a tenet were in their days, fince the 51" canon runs thus ; " If any bi- " fhop, prefbyter, or deacon, or whole of the facerdotal lift, abftain from mar- " riage, flefh and wine, not for exercife, but through abomination of them, " forgetting that all things are very good, and that God made man male and fe- *' male; but blafpheming, accufes the workmanfhip of God, either let him be " correded (amended or fct right -,) or be depofed, and caft out of the church ; " and fo if a layman." The notion of celibacy, and in disfavour of marriage, began to obtain early among thofe who were counted orthodox. Dionyftus, bi- fhop of Athens, fuppofed to be the fame as in A£?s xvii. 34. is faid to write an epiftle to the GnofTians, ftill extant ", in which he admonifhes Pjnylus, their bifhop, not to impofe as necefTary the yoke of chaflity or continence upon the brethren-, but to confider the infirmity which is in moft men -, which fuppofcs that luch a yoke was attempted to be laid. Athenagoras, in the fecond century, iecms to /peak too highly of celibacy; "you will find many of us, fays he", *' of both fexe^, who are become old and arc unmarried, in hope of having more *' communion with God." And a little after, he fpeaks feverely againft fecond marriages, condemning them as adultery, and as a tranfgreflion of the law of God. In the third century, not only fecond marriages were fpoken againfl by Tertullian, Origen, and Cyprian, but marriage itfclf was flight ly fpoken of, and continence, » Theodori Laflor. Hid. Etcl. 1. 2. p. 566. • Contr. Hatrcs hxr. 30. • •* Ibid. 1. I. hxr. 23. Jrer.iu! adv. ha;r. I. i.e. it. "i Theodoret. Hxrct. Fab. fab. 4. *■ Epiphan. hxr. 45. vid. Origen. in Rom. 1. 10. fol. 216. i. • 1 ertullian adv. Marcion. 1. 1. c. 29, 30 & de piifcript. hiret. c. 33. t Irenacus 1. 1. c.31. Clement. Stromat. 1. 3. p. 460, 465. Eufeb. Eccl. hitt. 1. 4. c.29. Epiphan. contr. hxref. I i . hxr. 46. • Apud Eufcb. Ecd. hid. 1. 4. C. 23. "» Le^at. pro cbriftiao. p. 37. RISE AND PROGRESS OF POPERY. 575 eontinence, celibacy and virginity, were highly extolled. TertuUian fays% *' he preferred continence and virginity to marriage, though not forbid, but " gave the preference to a fuller holinefs." Origen calls virginity the work of pcrfe(5tion ^; zndCyprian commends chaftity (or the fingle life) as a ftate of an- gelic quality % and " virginity, he fays ", equals itfelf to angels •, yea, if ye " diligently examine it, it exceeds, while it ftrivts with the flefh, it carries off " a vidlory againft nature, which angels have not:" and again'', "though " marriage is good and infticuted by God, yet continence is better, and virgi- " nity more excellent, which neither necedity nor command compel to, but " the choice of perfedion perfuades to it." I have obferved already how the monaftic life, celibacy and virginity, were in great vogue in the fourth century,; in the former part of which, the council of Nice was held, in which it was moved by fomc bithops, that thofe who were married before they were in holy orders, fliould not cohabit with their wives ; upon which Papbnutius^ a confeflbr, rofe up and vehemently oppofed it, as putting an heavy burden upon them; alledg- ing, that all had not fuch ftridl continence, that marriage was honourable, and that to make fuch a rule might be an occafion of fcandal to them and to their wives ; and that it was fufRcient to obferve the antient tradition of the churcli, that thofe who came into holy orders unmarried, fliould not marry afterwards •, but that thofe who were married before, fhould not be feparatcd from their wives; to which the fynod affentcd'^ : but then it fliould be obferved, that it had been an antient tradition that men in holy orders fliould not marry, if not married before they came into them. Jitanq/ius, in the fame century, fays'* many things in praife of virginity and continence, "O virginity, never failing opu- " Icnce : O virginity, a never fading crown. O virginity, the temple of God •' and the dwelling-place of the holy Spirit. O virginity, a precious pearl, to " many Inconfpicuous, and found by a few only. O continence, hated by many, ♦* but known and rcfpefted by thy worthy ones: O continence, which makes »' death and hell to flee, and which is poflefled by immortality ; O continence, «' the joy of the prophets, and the boaft of the apoflles : O continence, the " life of angels, and the crown of faints -, bleflcd is he that retaineth thee." Je- . rem has many things in his writings, too numerous to tranfcribe, in favour of. virginity and celibacy, and to the difcouragement of marriage. And Jujlin'y . though he in fome places fpeaks well of marriage, yet he was of the mind, that, virgins devoted to holinefs have more merit with God than believers who arc married ; oppofing Jovinian, who denied It. It is eafy to obferve, how much.. thefe.. « Adv. Marcion. 1. 5.C. ij. r Ib Romanl. 10. « De finguUr cleric, p. 532. » Debonopudicitiac, p. 419. *" De nativiute Chrifl. p. 448. • Socrat. Ecd. Hid. 1. 1. c. 1 1. Sozomen. ibid. 1. i. c. 2.3. * D« virginiiau in fine. • D« peccat. merii. 1. 3.. c. 7. 576 A DISSERTATION CONCERNING THE thefe notions got ground, and monkery obtained, and was eftablifhed in the fifth and fixth centuries before the man of fin was at his heighth. 3. Another popifh tenet, foretold by the apoftlePjw/ as a part of the apoftafy which would hereafter come on, is abjlaining from meats, i Tim. iv. 3. and ob- ferving fafts, fuch as the ^adrage/ihia or Lent, &c. and which quickly took place: the abovementioned antient hereticks, the Saturnalians, Ebionites, Gnoftics, Marcionites, andEncratites, who wereagainft marriage, were alfo for abftinence from meats; as appears from Iren^us, Clemem Akxandrinus, Tertnllian, Origen, Eufebius, Epiphanius, and Tbeodoret, in the places before referred to. The Gnofticks obferved the fourth and fifth days of the week as fafl; days -, and who knew, ^% Clemens oi Alexandria fays', the enigmatical meaning of them, the one being called the day oi Mercury; and the other the day oi Venus \ and the .Montanifts are faid to be the firft-that inftitutcd laws concerning fafling, and who laid the foundation for many anrichriftian pradtices. §xadr/igefuna, or Lent, ■ and fading on Wednefdays andFridays, very early obtained in the church. The former was differently obferved by the antients. Iren^us, in the fecond century, fays*, there was a difpute about Eafter day, and of the manner of the fall itfelf, ■that is, which was before it; fome thought they mud fad one day, others two, others more, fome forty hours, reckoning a night and day for a day, and this difi^crence was not in this prcfent age, but long before. Socrates relates '', that tthe fad before Eader was differently kept-, they at Rome faded three weeks be- .fore it, excepting the fabbath, (faturday) and theLord's day; and they \nlllyria ^nd in all Greece and in Alexandria, faded fix weeks before it ; and that they ■ called Quadragefima. Others began the fad feven weeks before Eader, and ;faded three weeks only, and but five days in a week, neverthclels tiiey called thisQiiadragefima; but, fays the hidorian, to me it feems wonderful that they .fliould difagree about the number of days, and yet call it by the fame name : and to the fame purpofe Soxomen^ fays, "that Quadragefima, in which the people ■*' fad, fome count it fix weeks, as the Illyrians and the wedern nations, all Ly- " bia znd Egypt, with Palejline; fome feven, as ziCcnJlantinopk, and in all the " provinces round about \inx.oPbsnicia\ fome, out of thefe fix or feven weeks, *♦ fad three weeks by intervals ; others only three weeks together before the " fead ; fome only two, as the Montanids." And Socrates the iiidorian relates '', that " the antients were not only found to differ about the number of days on " which they faded, but about the food alfo they abdained from ; fome abdained *' from animals entirely, others of animals only eat fidi, fome with filhes cat " fowl alfo, becaufe they are of the water, according to Mofcs ; fome abdained " from ' Sttomat. 1 7. p. 744. t Apud Eufcb. Eecl. Hiii. 1. 5. c. 24- * Eccl Hill. 1. 5. c. 22. ' Eccl. hid. 1. 7. c. 19. . "^ Eccl. h"ft. 1. 5. C. jz. RISE AND PROGRESS oV POPERY. 577 «< from fruits of trees, and from eggs; fomc eat- bread only, and others not *' that." And Epipbanius obferves ', that the cuiloms of the church were va- rious, " fome abftained from all flefh, beafts, fowls and filhes, and from eggs " and cheefe; fome from beafts only, but eat fowls and the reft; fome abftained " from fowls and ufcd eggs and fifties; others did not eat eggs; and others fifties " only ; fome abftained from fiflies", but eat cheefe; others did not make ufe of *' cheefe; others, moreover, abftained from bread; and others abftained from the " hard fruits of trees, and from nuts, and from things boiled." Wednefdays and Fridays were kept as faft-days inTertullian's time, by the catholics, whom he calls Pfychici", he being himfelf then a Montanift. ■ And Origen" fpcaks of thofc days, and of Lent, as folemn fafts in his time. The canons, common!/ called the canons of the apojiles, were, according to b\ihop BeveriJge °, collefled before the end of the third century, and in them is one which runs thus, can. 60. " If *' any biftiop, or prcfbyter, or deacon, or reader, or finger, does not faft on " the holy Qiiadragefima of Eafter, nor on the fourth day (of the week), nor on " the preparation (to the fabbath, Saturday, which preparation was on Friday), " except he is hindered through bodily weaknefs, let him be depofed ; if a lay- " man, let him be feparatcd." In the fourth century, Jsrcvi fpeaks of keeping Lent as an apoftolical tradition ; ''We faft oneQiiadragefima, according to the " tradition of the apoftles, in the whole year, at the time agreeable to us,; they " (theMontanifts) make three Quadragefimas in a year, as if threeSaviours fuf- " fered ^" And in another place % he fays, "TheLord himfelf, the true Jonah, ". being fent to preach the gofpel, fafted forty days, and leaving us an inheritance " of fafting, prepared our fouls for the eating of his body under this number." And elfewhere ' he obferves, " fliould any fay, if it is not lawful to obferve days " and months and times and years, we muft be guilty of a like crime in obferv- " ing the fourth day of the week, the preparation, and the Lord's day, and the " faft of Quadragefima, and the feaft of Eafter, and the joy of Pentecoft : " To which he makes anfwer, Aujlin likewifc not only mentions the faft of forty days, but thus reafons for it ' : " The Quadragefima of fafts has indeed au- " thority both in the antient books (the old tcftament,) from the faftings oi Mofes " and£/;^j; and out of the gofpel, becaufe the Lord fafted fo many days; ftiew- «« ing that the gofpel does not diftcnt from the law and the prophets." And a little after, " In what part of the year could the obfervation of the Quadrage- " fima be fixed more fitly, than near and contiguous to the paftion of the Lord ?" Ambrofe, in the fame century, has thcfe words, " It is good at all times to faft^ Vol. II. 4 E " but • Compend de fide prope finem. "" De jejun. c.2.14. " Homil. 1.0. in Levii. foI.8x.4. • In ibid. 1. i.e. 2. f. 7. p Epifl. ad Marcellam.'adv. Montanirt. torn. 2. fol. 44. B. « Comment, in Jonam. fol. 57. M. torn, 6. " Comment, in Gala: 4. fol 79. A. ioin.9, . • Ep. 86.& Ep. iig. c. 15. 578 A DISSERTATION CONCERNING THE *' but it is better to faft withChrift inQuadragefima (or Lent); for this Qiiadra- *' gefima the Lord -has confecrated to us by his own fading." And in another place, " TheLord has fo ordained, that as in his pafllon, and the faft of Quadra- •' ■gefima, we fhould forrow; fo in his refurredlion, and in the feaft ofQuinqua- " gefima, (or Pentecoft,) we fliould rejoice '." 4. Popifh fcflivals were obferved very early, long before the Pope of i?^?;^,? •rrived to the height of his ambition. The feaft ofEafter was' kept in the fecond century, as the controverfy between Anicetus and Polycarp, and between ViHor and the Afiatic churches, ihews ; yea in the fifth century, if PclycraUs" is to be credited, who fays, that " Philip the apoftle who died zxHierapolis^ ^.ndjchn •' zt Epbefus, Polycarp biftiop of Smyrna, Thrafeas of Eumenia, Sagaris, who *' died at Laodicea, Papyrius and Melito, all kept Eafter on the iV*" dayvof the •« month ; and the bifhops of Rome, hcfoTeFiHor, as well as he, kept it on the " Lord's day following ; fo Anicetus, Pius, Hyginus, TeUfpkortis, Xyjlus and " Soter." And fo did Jrenaus in France ; and thus it contmued to be obferved by the order of Ctw/?aK//«i? *. The vigils of the pafsovcr, or Eafter-eve, were very early obferved -, Eufebius " makes mention thereof as in the times of Narcijfus, patriarch of Jerufa'em, in the fecond century; zndTertullian"' fpeaks of the whole night- preceding Eafter-day, as very folemn ; and Aujlin, in the fourth century, mentions Eafter-eve '' as folemn likewife. Pentecoft was obferved as early as Eafter, and is fpoken of along with it by Terlullian ', hyOrigen '', and by Jerom ' ; and Amlrofe fays S " Let us rejoice on this holy day as at Eafter ; on " both days there is the fame and the like folemnity ; at Eafter all the Gentiles »' ufed to be baptized, and at Pemecoll the apoftlcs were baptized," that is, with the holy Ghoft. Chriftmas-day, orChrift's birth-day, was celebrated in the fecond century, on the 8''' of the calends of January-, as appears from the pafchal epiftle of Tbeo- philus'. In the times of Dioclefian, and before the council at Nice, AnthimaSy biftiop of Nicomedia, with fome thoufands, were burnt, by fire being fct to the place where they were aflrmblcd to keep the feaft of Chrift's birth day '. Baf.l, in the fourth century, has a fcrmon upon it, in which he calls ic Tbecphania, the appearance ofGod, and fays, " Let us celebrate the folemnities of a fa'ved worlds " the birth day of mankind." Ambrofe has feveral fcrmons upon it ; and in one of them, ferm. lO. fays, "the vulgar ufed to call the Lord's birth-day the new ♦' fun : and foCbryfoJiom in the fifth century. The « Serm. 31. & ferm. 60 torn. 5. " Apud Eufeb. Ecd. Hift. 1. 5. c. 4. " Socrar. Ecd. Hift 1. 5. c. 22. « Ecd. Hift. 1. 6. c. g. lee c 34. T Ad uxor. 1. 2. Cf 4. * Ep. tg. c. 2. * Coron. mil. c. 3. * Contr. Celf. 1. 8. p. 392. * Commeirt. in Gal. 4. fol. 79. A. * Serm. 60. p. 82. torn. 5. ' Vid. Magdeburg. CeoturiaC. cent. 2. p. 89, gOw f Nicephor. 1. 7. c. 6. apud Seldcn of iKe birth-day of our Saviour, C 4. p. 33. RISE AND PROGRESS OF POPERY. 579 The feaft of the Annunciation of the virgin Af^ry was obferved by the anticnts. Gregory of Neocody, as it is faid by the Word, This is my body." Ckryfoftom., in the fifth century, fcems to ftrengthen the dodrine of tranfubftantiation, when he lays ", " Do you fee the bread ? do you fee the wine ? do they go as the reft of " the food into the privy ? God forbid, that thou ftiouldft fo think ; for as if ♦' wax put to the fire is affimilated to it, nothing of the fubftance remains-, " fo likcwifc here think that the myftcrics areconfumcd in the fubftance of the " body." In the fixth century, Grf^or^l.^ fays, it appears that they called theLord's- fiipper a, viaticum ; and even in the fourth century, it ufed to be given to dying perfons as fuch. Honoraius, prieft of P'erceit, gave it 10 St .-itnbro/e, who as icon as he received it died, carrying with him the good viaticum, as Paulinus in his life relates. And Ambrofe himfclf fays ", that in his time, travellers and failors ul'ed to carry it with them. Yea, even in the third century, it ufed to be fent to thofe who were hindered by ficknefs from partaking of it -, there is even an inftancc of its being fent by a boy, and put into the mouth of a dying man, upon which he expired \ . The firft inftancc of corruption in baptifm, as to the form of it, and alfo as to the mode of it, was made by Mark, the heretick, and his followers •,. who made a mixture of oil and water, and poured it on the head '!. And the next in- ftancc is in Novalus, who received baptifm on a fick bed by pci\furion (as the Clinici alfo did}, if he might be faid to receive it, as Corneliw, the then biftiop of Rome » Cateches. myftagog. i. f. 4. 'In baptifm- Ch:ifti, »oI. 2 p 802. t Catechct orat. c 37 p. 53S. vol. 2. ■ De Euchirillia. " Oe obitu fatyr. fiatfil.. » Eufeb. Ecd. Hift. 1. 6. c. 44. 1 Irena:u5 adv. Hsref. 1. 1, c. iS. ^4 ADISSERTATION CONCERNING, &c. V Rome obferves ^- ; and when he recovered, and got to be made a prefbyter, all -the clergy and many of the people, judged it was not lawful, .that fuch an one, who was baptized in that manner, ftiould be admitted among the clergy -, nor could fuch an one be a prefbyter, according to the lo"" canon of the council oi Neoc^farea. An innovation with refpedt to the fubjefts began to be made in the third century, in the African churches, and prevailed much in thefourth, through the zeal of Aujlin in favour of original Cn, and for the falvation of in- fants, which he thought could not be faved without it. This ufe of chrifm, cxorcifm, figning with the fign of the crofs, and other corruprions early intro- duced, have been obferved in fome former treatifes of mine '. Thus we fee that the principal things of which the popifli hierarchy confifts, and the chief principles and praftices which are now reckoned popifh ones, were held and maintained before the popes of Rome arrived to the full power they had long ±)een aiming at ; and which together make up what we call Popery. THE COROLLARY .FROM all this is. That fince it can be no objeflion to the doflrine of invocation of angels and faints departed, being called a popifh doflrine; nor to the prohibition of marriage, and abftaining from meats, and keeping divers fafts and feftivals, being called parts of popery ; nor to the doflrines of purga- tory andtranfubftantiation being popifh ones, though they werefeverally broached and embraced ages before the pope oi Rome was declared univerfal Bifhop; it . can be no objeflion to Infant-baptism being called a part and branch of pope- ry, though it was introduced into the churches in the /i;/>i and /(7Kr/i> centu- ries, and fo before the Roman antichrifl arrived to his higheft pitch of grandeur; it being a tenet held by thePapifls, as founded upon the tradition of the church ; and being no more agreeable to the word of God, than the other above tenets held by them are. Truth indeed is mofl ancient ; but error follows clofcly at its heels, and is nearly as antient ; fo that high pretenfions to antiquity in mat- ters of faith and worfhip, are no otherwife to be regarded, but as they have the concurrent evidence and tettimony of the facred fcriptures; they only can be trufled to with fafety. * A pud Eufeb. ut fupra, c. 43. • The ai-gument from apollolical tradition, &:c. and Infant-bap:ifm- a part and pillar of Popery. DYING DYING THOUGHTS CONSISTING OF A Few Unfinished HINTS, Written by D r GILL, A little before his Decease. nPHE ufe ourLord makes of the doflrin^ of death, is, Matt. xxiv. 44. There- fore l>e ye alfo ready, for in fuch hour as ye think not, the Son of man comet h : Either to judgment, or by death : and happy they, who,- with the wife virgins, are ready to go in to the marriage-chamber, and partake of the marriage-fupper. Matt. XXV. ID. and it is one great bufinefs of the gofpcl miniflry, under the in- fluence of the Spirit and grace of God, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord, Luke i. 17. that is, the eleft of God, whom he has referved for himfelf^ But the great queftion is, wherein lies this readinefs and preparation for death and eternity ? and this may be confidered. First, Negatively, what it is not. Many and fatal are the miftakes of perfons about it; fome placing it in one thing, and fome in another. (i.) Some think \t \s z well-fpent life -, and that if a man can look back on fuch a life, he is ready for death, come when it may. But let us confider what this well-fpent life is. The life of the apoftle Paul was undoubtedly a life as well- fpent, as, perhaps, any that can be mentioned among men. Before conver- fion, his life was irreproachable-, as to external morality, he lived in all good confcicnce before men ; after converfion, his life was devoted to the fcrvicc of Chrift and his gofpcl ; his gladnefs and ambition were, to fpend and be fpent, wherever he came, for the good of immortal fouls-, he travelled much, endur- ed great hardlhips, and laboured more than tlie refl of the apoftlcs -, which he imputes not to his own goodnefs, induftry and power, but to the grace of God. And when the time of his departure was at hand, as it was when he wrote his Vol. II. 4 F cpiftle 586 DYING THOUGHTS: CONSISTING OF" cpiftle to the Philippians, being then a prifomr ar Roftte; whar did fre feck af-- ter, orjudge to be his readinefs for another world ? not his well-fpent life : no ; he defired tp he found in Christ, not having bis own rigbteoufnefs •,. in which muft be included his well-fpent life, and which indeed was the main of it ; but the rigbteoufnefs which is of God by faith, even the righteoufnefs of Chrift. Tic forgot the things which were behind; his labours, fer vices andfufFerings for Chrift, all his attainments and ufefulnefs ; and -prefjed forward, not in a view of his well-fpent life, but having his eye on the mark, Ghrill and his righteouf- nefs, for the prize of the high calling of God m him, Pbil. iii. 9 — 13, 14. The life of a common believer is a well-fpent life, in comparifon of others ; he lives by faith on Cluift, and gives him the glory of his falvation •, and, from a principle of love to him, walks in all his commandments and ordinances, and is very defirous of living a life of holinefs, and of fpiritual and heavenly-mind- ednefs, and does fo live in fome meafure. Butwhen the believer comes to look back on his pad life of faith and holinefs, what deficiencies and imperfc5iions in his faith ! what unbelief in him, at fuch and. fuch a lime will he obfervc ' what tarnifhes in his life and walk ! and how few the minutes were in which he was fpiritual and hcavtnly-mindcd ! and how frequently and long was fuch a frame interrupted with carnal and fcnfual lufts ! The faint, before his convcrfion, is as other men, being born in fin, and living in it : after converfion, prone to backdiding •, even in all things he offends, and fins in his moft folcmn and religious fervices. He muft therefore betray great ignorance of himfclf, who flatters himfclf, or fufFcrs himfelf to be flattered, with a refleflion on.a well- • fpent life, as his readinefs and preparation for death and another world. (2.) Others imagine, becaufe they ■ have ioK^ »o injury to any man's perfon and property, nay, have done jufiice between man and man, and \\z\e paid_ every man his own, they are ready for death come when it may. Thefc are all very good tilings, and ought to be done •, for it is written, owe no man any thing •, but then they are no other than what fuch a man would chufc to have done to himfelf, and which he ought to do to others 4 ' and are no other than what ho- nour, confcience, and the laws of God and man oblige to ; and where is the merit oi z\\ this ? And what obligation docs this lay upon God ? As Elihu ar- gues, Job XXXV. 7, 8. If thou be righteous, what givejl thou him? or what re- ceiveth he of thine hand? Thy wickednefs may hurt a man, as thou art, by injur- ing his perfon or property ; and thy righteoufnefs may profit the Son of man, by fair trade and paying juft debts -, but what profit is^this toGod ? And, perhaps, after all, fuch a man has never thought about the payment of his debts to God, and how THEY muft be paid, when he owes ten thoufand talents, and has nothing JO pay, nor to make a compoficion with. How can he think of appearing before A FEW UNFINISHED HINTS. 5S7 •before his great creditor, with fuch a charge and load of debts upon him ? may- he not juflly fear, t;hat he^'ill order him to prifon, there to lie, until the utter- moft farthing is paid ? The great concern (houki he, to know whether Chrift is his furety, and has paid his debts for him, cancelled the bond, and blotted out the hand-writing againft him, and fo his account with God ftands clear and fair. This is the beft preparation for death and eternity. (3.) Others think, that by giving alms to the peer, they get a readinefs for death. To do good and to communicate, to do afts of beneficence from a rio-ht principle, are facrifices with which God is well pleafcd -, but thefe may be done only to -be feen of men, and get applaufe from men -, and fuch have their reward in this world, but not in another. A man may give all his goods to the poor, and yet not have charity, or true grace, and fo be unfit to die. And very preoof- xerous and monftroufly abfurd it is, in fome perfons, who ciioofe to five little away in their lifetime, and leave large eftates for charitable ufes after their death, as if what was to be done after death could be a preparation for it : than which nothing can be more ridiculous. (4.) Someplace readinefs for death \n the mercy of God ; imploring that in their laft moments: and yet they cannot be fure tlicy (hall have time even to fay, " Lord have mercy on us." There is mercy with God, and it is a ground of hope •, but then it muft be applied for by fuch who are fenfible of their fins, contels them, forfake them, and turn to the Lord •, fuch find mercy. And be- fides, mercy is only had through Chrift. God, out of Chrift, is a confumino' fire ; a finner Ihould go to God through Chrift for mercy, faying, as the pub- lican did. Cod be merciful, or propitious, tome afmncr; that is, through the pro-'' piiiatory facrifice of his Son, Luke xviii. 13. (5.) Others flatter themfelves that they h2L\tmade their peace tvitb God,' znd {q are prepared for death whenever it comes. And yet thefe perfons, perhaps, never faw the flaming fword of juftice brandiflied againfl. fin, nor the heavens opened, and wrath of God revealed from thence againft all ungodlinefsof men; nor never heard the vollies of curfes from a righteous law, which pronoun(;es every man curfed, that continues not in all things written in it do them ; and were never truly acquainted with what is required to be done in order to make peace, as fatisfying juftice by -fulfilling the law, through obeying its precepts and bearing its penalty, with their own inability to do thefe things : they ima- gine, that their own humiliation, repentance, and imperfect obedience, are to make peace for them. They fliould know, that Cbrijl onlv is the peace-maker -, and their concern Ihould be to know that he has made peace ior them by ihc blood of his crofs, and to lay hold upon him as fuch, Ifai. xxvii. 5. (6.) Others make their readinefs for death to lie in a little negative holinefs, and thank God, as the Pharifce did, that they are not as other men are-, not 4 p 2 gfi'l'y 5^8 DYING THOUGHTS: CONSISTING OF guiliy of fuch grofs and flagitious crimes as feme are •, they have not been guilty di murder, adultery, theft, and fuch like fins as others have. But this is a very flender preparation for death -, publicans and harlots, repenting and believing, go into the kingdom of heaven before fuch. (7.) Others, with greater plaufibilicy, pleafe themfclves with a /ir(7/>^o« «?/ rf- ^gion they have made and held. They havcconftantly attended on hearing the word, have fubmitted to baptifm, fat down at the Lord's table, and obferved every duty of religion. But all this a man may do, and not be ready. " He may have a form of goilinefs, without the power of it. Some who have heard Chrift preach, or his miniflcrs, have eat and drank in his prefence, will be bid to de- part from him, as not known by him. In fliort, (8.) Net any external righteoufnejs whatever makes a man ready for death and eternity. For by it he is not juftified before God, and by it he is not fa- ved. Except he has ^ better righteoufnefs, he will never enter into the king- dom of heaven. And it fliould be our concern, with the apoftle, to he found in Chrifl, and in his rightcoufnefs, and not in our own, which will leave us fliort of heaven and happinefs. Secondly, Pcfitively, what that is, which conftitutes a readinefs and prepara- tion for death ; that which is certain, conltanr, and abiding, let a man's frames and circumftances be what they may ; lies in the following things : (i.) \n regeneration. Without this, a man cannot fee, nor enter into, the kingdom of heaven. It is by the wafhing of regeneration God faves men ; and the life with which a man is then quickened, is conneded with eternal Vife. TKe grace then implanted is a well of living water, fpringing up into a life that never dies. As foon as a man is born again, he is prepared tor death, be his rege- neration fooner or later, and from that moment always continues To. (2.) In fan^if cation, or a work of grace and holinefs, which takes place im- mediately upon regeneration -, and without which no man fiiall fee the Lord ; but where this is begun, it (hall be carried on, and be performed, until tlie day of Chrift -, and fo furnilhes us with a readinefs for that day. This is that oil of grace, which the wife virgins had in the vcfTcls of their hearts, befides lamps of profeQion •, and fo were ready when the bridegroom came. . (3.) The rightcoufnefs of Chrifi imputed, is a conftant readinefs for death and eternity. The church is faid to make herfelf ready -, which was done, by putting on the fine linen clean and white, the rightcoufnefs of Chrift, which made her ready to meet him. Were it poffible for a man to get into heaven, the mar- riaoe-chamber, without the nuptial robe, as it is not -, he would be turned our, as unready and unfit, mih, friend, how camefl thou in hither, net having a wed- ding A FEW UNFINISHEt) HINTS. 5h ding garment ? And he fpeechlefs^ having nothing to ailed ere as a plea for his being there. Now fuch as are found in Chrift, and cloathed with his righceoufnefs, will be found, at death, neither naked nor fpeecblefs, but fhall have a ready and an abundant entrance into Chrift's kingdom and glory. (4.) A being wajl:cd in the blood of Chrift^ and fo clear from* all o\.\\\i and charge of it, and condemnation by it, is a fure and lading readinefs for death. Chrift's blood is a fountain opened to wafh in •, and it has fuch virtue in it, as to cleanfe from allfm whatever, and leaves none behind -, fo that a perfon once •wafhed or purged by it, is clear from it, and when death comes, {hall imme- diately inherit the kingdom of God: which none fhall, but thofe who are wafh- ed, fanftified, and juftified. (5.) Spiritual hwivledge ofChriJi, and true faith in him, have eternal life con- neflcd with them infeparably •, though not always clear, and unbeclouded, and in lively exercifc, yet the principle itfclf always abides, and is never lofl ;. and fuch who know in whom they have believed, are faithfully kept by him, to whom they have committed themfclves, againftthe day of death and judgment. There is another fort of readinefs which is not always tlie fame, and lies in ihcfranie and pofture of the foul, and which a faint is defirous of having when death comes, both for his own comfort and the glory of God-, though he knows that his fafc:y does not lie in it, yet he wifhes to be found in the lively exercife of taith, and hope, and love, and patience, and refignation to the will of God : W be awake, and nut in a flumbering frame ; but watchmg and on his guard againft the enemy, and expedling his Lord's coming; to be frequently medi- tating on death, and making it familiar to himfelf, and fo become free from the fear and dread of it-, and to be in fuch a difpofuion of mind, as to be de- firous of dea h, and willmg to depart -, and rather choofing it, and longing for it •, faying, "uhy are his chariol-vcheelsfo long in coming ? And to be fo fearlefs of death, as to triumph over it, and fay, Dc'^//^, where is thy fling ! Grave, where is thy victory I Or however, he wilhes to be in a waiting pofture when death comes, .waiting for the hope or nghtcoufnels by faith, and looking for his Lord's-com- ing, with his loins girt and his lamp burning; and blejjed indeed are thofe fervanls whom, when their Lord comes, he fJjall find fo doing, Lukexii. 35 — ij, 43. II. There are feveral things which may ferve to reconcile men to death, though it is fo difagreeable to nature ; as, i. The necefTity of death to free them from fm and forrow, without which they will not be free. Whiift they arc in this tabernacle they are burdened with fin, and groan under their burden; nor will they be eafcd till the tabernacle is difTolvcd, or pulled down by death. Whilfl they are in thii land, the Canaanites are in it, their inbred fins and cor- ruptions, 1 'SOo DYING THOUjGHTSj C ONS IS Til-NG. O F juption;:, and thefe arc thorns in their Jides, uuid frlch in .th;u- eyes ; and wiU continue fucli. But, when they have got through death into the better and -' heaver>ly country, there will be no prickingbriar, nor grieving thorn, throuoh- . out the land. 2. Death is no other to faints, than going to their father's and 'Chrift'sfather's houfej where are many manfions provided, and where they fhall tnjoy the kingdom it is' their father's good pleafure to give, and where thej- Aall have his prefence for evcFmore. 3. It is in order to be withGhrift, which is infinitely preferable to being in this world, -and wIltc they fliall be for ever with him and behold his glor)'. 4. Which, though of ieflcr confideration than ■■the former, yet it has fomethingin it to reconcile to death, that that will intro- duce them into the prefence and company of pious relations and friends that are gone before, and died in Ciirifl ; fo Z), ch. xix. 26, 27. the body, though a vile body as laid in thcgrave, -urill h raifed, and J-a/bimed Me tv the glorious hdy of Cirijl. Ic •will be raifed \r\ incorruption : this corruptible Jhall put on incorruptton. It will be raifed \n glory, like Chrift ; it will be raifed in power, and be durable, and always remain in a ftate of immortality. It will be raifed zfpiritual body, and fo more fit for fpiritual fervices than ever, i Cor. xv. 42,.43. fo that the faints will be jio" looferS,. but gainers, by death ; and need not fear it. 5. Be it that death is an enemy, as it is contrary to nature •, it is the laji enemy that fhall be deftroyed v and, when that is conquered, the viiflory will be compleat over every enemy, fin, fatan, the world, death and the grave, i Cor. xv. 26, 55, 57. - Tbcuiks, therefore:, to God, who giixeth us the victory through our Lord JefusCbnJl. ' " N L S. >7? PubliJl:eJ, ■ ■■ -T- S C R 1 P. T URAL CHECK to' S O C I N I A N I S M: O R, The First Chapter of S. JOHN's GOSPEL, With Dr G I L L's COMMENTARY on it. To which is prefixed, by another Hand, A PREFACE, Recommended to the ferious Confideration of the Rev. Dr PRIESTLY. JESUS CHRIST the true GOD and Eternal Life, i John v. 2c! Denying the only LORD GOD and our LORD JESUS CHRIST, Jude 4. 'Printed for GEORGE KEITH, in Gr acec hurch - Street. N- B. This is intended as a Specimen of a New Edition of the Author's COMMENTARY on the whole Bible ; containing a Double Verfion of theSacredText, the firft by itfclf, the other with the fevcral Tranflations and Paraphrafcs of the Original Verfions, and large Explanations Critical, Hiftorical, Doflrinal, and Pradical -, which hath been long dcfircd, and is now ready for Publication, with his laft Corrections and Improvements. Princeton Theological Seminary Libraries 1 1012 01218 5478 HECKMAN BINDERY INC. APR 95 iBoun^.To-PlaK^ N.MANCHESTER L INDIANA 46962 ' J