'^. 
 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 \ 
 
 Presented by Mr. Samuel Agnew of Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 A g 11 CIV Coll. on Baptism, No. 
 
 
 v. 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2011 with funding from 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/pdobaptismexamin01boot 
 
This Tablet 
 
 'was erected ty die Chirrck ia ol-atefiil Remeniba'anc*' 
 of th.eia" teloved and venerable rastoi" 
 ABRAJHAAl BOOTH. 
 wSijo with. unremitted Fidelitv discharg'edliiB AfinisteiiaLLaboure 
 in this Flace. Thirty -seTeiiYeai's. 
 ■. nifenandas a Chxietiaii.lLe-was Mdlilv ^wid deservedly esteemed 
 as g Mini ster.lie was solertui and devout- 
 His addresses "were perspiciioiis.eneroVtic. and impressive, 
 th» vwere directed to l3ie imderstandiu^' tlie com'iene^.and tbe Heart 
 ProfoTind luiOTvledo'esonud Wisdom luid imalieeted Fiety 
 ■^vere atritiny'lT es**m]>lified 
 iu the conduct of this eicelleut Man, 
 Til liini. the Foorliave lost aliuman** an<l ^Vuerons Beue&ctor 
 Tlie afflicted and the Distrefsed a"wiee and sympathetic Counsellor 
 and this Clmx'cli , 
 a disinteivsted aflectionate andfaithfiilFastor , 
 noi Toll Jub ^Nani*- or liis "Writing's be foi\t'otten . 
 g^\liil Ev-mbelit UTinith (.haUbt* rereivd.Geiiins atuniredormte^iitvRespecttiii 
 Bt depai ted flu ■•life on the ^'7*Janiiflrv 1806 
 m thp72'''V.-urafhisAof ■ 
 
 J 
 
 Riepi-esiemiiailion of a M 'O'N V M EN T in ilie Mepirimo 
 Little FKiKt?roT Stkjkkt . .LO]?TBON. 
 
[ 
 
 
T^ffir/am 
 
 J // 
 
P^DOBAPTISM EXAMINED; 
 
 REPLIES 
 
 itrgumeiit^ Binta ^hiution^ 
 
 DR. WILLIAMS AND MR. PETER EDWARDS. 
 
 BY ABRAHAM BOOTH. 
 
 IN THREE VOLUMES. 
 
 VOL. I. 
 
 PRINTED FOR EBENEZER PALMER, 
 
 18, PATERNOSTER-ROW, LONDON, 
 MDCCCXXIX, 
 
T. Bensley, Printer, 9, Cnmo-court, Fleet-street. 
 
ADVERTISEMENT 
 
 THIRD EDITION. 
 
 The Treatise of the late Reverend Abraham Booth, 
 entitled " Paedobaptism Examined," &c. having become 
 very scarce, and being regarded by us, as a standard 
 work on that subject, we feel great pleasure in seeing 
 this new and complete Edition presented to the 
 Public. 
 
 While we are aware that the character of the 
 learned, pious, and venerated Author, and the admitted 
 sterling and intrinsic worth of these publications, render 
 any recommendation from us quite superfluous, we 
 must acknowledge our obligations to John Satchell, 
 Esq. for the compilation of a complete Index to the 
 whole, and also for the great attention that gentleman 
 has paid to the Work, while passing through the press ; 
 
ADVERTISEMENT, 
 
 and to Mr. Ebenezer Palmer, the publisher, who 
 has spared no expense in rendering this Edition worthy 
 the patronage of the public. 
 
 (Signed) JOHN RIPPON, D. D. London. 
 
 ISAIAH BIRT, Hackney. 
 
 WILLIAM STEADMAN, D. D. President of the Baptist 
 Academy, Bradford, Yorkshire. 
 
 WILLIAM NEWMAN, D.D. London. 
 
 JOSEPH KINGHORN, Norwich. 
 
 JOSEPH IVIMEY, London. 
 
 THOMAS GRIFFIN, London. 
 
 GEORGE PRITCHARD, London. 
 
 F. A. cox, LL.D. Hackney. 
 
 ISAAC MANN, A.M. London. 
 
 MICAH THOMAS, President of the Baptist Academy, 
 Abergavenny. 
 
 T. C. EDMONDS, A. M. Cambridge. 
 
 THOMAS MORGAN, Birmingham. 
 
 RICHARD PENGILLY, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. 
 
 W. H. MURCH, Theological Tutor of the Baptist Academy, 
 Stepney. 
 
 JOHN DYER, Secretary to the Baptist Missionary Society. 
 
 SAMUEL SAUNDERS, Liverpool. 
 
 BENJAMIN GODWIN, Classical Tutor of the Baptist 
 Academy, Bradford, Yorkshire. 
 
 EDWARD STEANE, Camberwcll. 
 
 THOMAS PRICE, London. 
 
 JAMES EDWARDS, Shipley. 
 
 London, 
 November 26, 1828. 
 
PiEDOBAPTISM EXAMINED, 
 
 PRINCIPLES, CONCESSIONS, 
 
 REASONINGS 
 
 MOST LEARNED P^DOBAPTISTS. 
 
 BY ABRAHAM BOOTH. 
 
 " As certain also of your own poets have said." — Paul. 
 
 " This testimony of theirs, to me, is worth a thousand others; seeing it comes 
 from such as, in my opinion, are evidently interested to speak quite other- 
 wise." — Daille'. 
 
 " How happy it is to have to do with people that will talk pro and con ! By 
 this means you furnish me with all I wanted ; which was, to make you confute 
 yourselves." — Pascal. 
 
 VOL. I. 
 
/ 
 
PREFACE 
 
 
 ^•^ CI 
 
 Li-asoi'O 
 
 SEHlS^ 
 
 Having observed, for a course of years, that many of 
 the most learned and eminent Paedobaptists, when 
 theological subjects are under discussion, frequently 
 argue on such principles, admit of such facts, interpret 
 various texts of scripture in such a manner, and make 
 such concessions, as are greatly in favour of the Baptists; 
 I extracted a number of passages from their publica- 
 tions, and made many references to others, which I 
 thought might be fairly pleaded against infant sprink- 
 ling.* On reviewing these quotations and memoranda, 
 I concluded, merely for my own private use, to employ 
 some leisure hours in transcribing and arranging them, 
 under different heads of the Psedobaptist controversy. 
 
 When I had made a considerable progress in the 
 work of transcription and arrangement, Mr. Henry's 
 Treatise on Baptism fell into my hands. f Prepossessed 
 
 * N. B. As the terms infant sprinkling, wherever they occur in 
 this Treatise, are used merely by way of distinction, and not of 
 contempt ; so the expressions, VieAo-baptism, and infant baptism, 
 are used in compliance with general custom j not because the author 
 thinks an infant is baptized, on whom water has been solemnly 
 poured or sprinkled. 
 
 f The Monthly Reviewers, after pronouncing this " the most 
 popular defence of infant baptism and of the mode of sprink- 
 ling that hath appeared," very justly add^ "Some reflections, how- 
 ever, which he casts on their [the Baptists] mode of baptism (which, 
 perhaps, the editor might as well have omitted,) — are scarcely con- 
 sistent vjith that candour and liberality which might have been ex- 
 pected from the author, and which, had he been now livings he 
 would probably have discovered.'' Monthly Review, for April 1784, 
 p. 313. My reader may see in what an illiberal manner Mr. Henry 
 has reflected on the baptismal immersion, and some animadver- 
 sions upon it. Vol. I. Chap. IV. Reflect. VII. p. 231, this edition. 
 
 b 2 
 
Vlll PREFACE. 
 
 Oi a high regard for the character of that worthy au- 
 thor, I perused the treatise with care. Not convinced, 
 however, by any thing contained in it, that the sprink- 
 hng of infants is an appointment of Christ; and being 
 fully persuaded that Mr. Henry had employed his learn- 
 ing and zeal in defence of an unscriptural ceremony; I 
 determined to prosecute the subject with greater appli- 
 cation, and to publish the result of my enquiries and 
 thoughts concerning it. Such was the occasion of this 
 publication. 
 
 The method of arguing here adopted, is far from 
 being either novel or unfair: it has been used, by the 
 spirit of infallibility against Pagans;* by Christians 
 againsts the Jews;f by the Reformed against Roman 
 Catholics; and by Protestant Dissenters against our 
 English Conformists.:}: It is, in a particular manner, 
 employed and pursued by the author of Popery con- 
 futed by Papists; a book, indeed, which I had not seen, 
 till the far greater part of these pages was composed. 
 The following words of that anonymous writer may be 
 justly applied, mutatis mutandis, to the present subject. 
 " I will call the church of Rome for a witness to our 
 cause; and if she do not plainly confess the antiquity of 
 our tenets, and the novelty of her own ; if she herself do 
 not proclaim the universality of our faith; if she do not 
 
 * Acts xvii. 28 J Titus i. 12. 
 
 f So Witsius, for instance, in his Jiidaeus Christianizans/p, 276 — 
 402} and Hoornbeekius, Contra J lulfeos, 1. ii.c.i.j l.iv. c.ii. 
 
 J A remarkable instance of this kind, is mentioned by Mr, Peirce, 
 who having informed us, that Kp. Hoadly and Mr. Ollyfe wrote 
 against Dr. Calamy, in defence of their own Conformity, adds; "It 
 happened, as is very usual with our adversaries, that these two de- 
 fended conformity upon different princij)les. Dr. Calamy, there- 
 fore, in liis answer, set their arguments one against another, and so 
 handsomely defended our cause — that the Dissenters looked upon 
 themselves obliged, not only to the doctor for his defejice, but to 
 his antagonists, who gave him the occasion of writing." V'indicat. 
 of Dissent, part i. p. 282. 
 
PREFACE. IX 
 
 confess that we are both in the more certain and safe 
 way in the Protestant church, I will neither refuse the 
 name" * — of an Anabaptist, nor any part of that cen- 
 sure which is due to such a character. 
 
 Though I do not approve of every sentiment con- 
 tained in the following quotations produced on behalf 
 of the Baptists, yet, as the generality of those P^edo- 
 baptists, from whose writings the extracts were made, 
 must be considered as persons of learning and eminence 
 in the several communions to which they belonged; 
 and as no small number of them were famous pro- 
 fessors in Protestant universities, their declarations, 
 in the argumentum ad hominem, cannot but have the 
 utmost weight. Nor can their testimonies, concerning 
 the signification of Greek terms, or the practice of the 
 church in former ages, be hastily rejected, without in- 
 curring the imputation of gross ignorance, of enormous 
 pride, or of shameful precipitancy. Considering the 
 quotations adduced, and the characters of those writers 
 from whom they were taken, it is presumed, that the 
 leading ideas of another paragraph, in Popery confuted 
 by Papists, may be here applied. " If these witnesses 
 had been ignorant and unlearned men, or excommu- 
 nicate persons in their own church -— there might be 
 some plea why their testimonies should not be admitted. 
 But when the points in question are articles of their 
 own creed; when they are witnessed by popes, by coun- 
 cils, by cardinals, by bishops, by learned doctors and 
 schoolmen in their own church, on our behalf, and 
 against their own tenets; I see no cause why I should 
 not demand judgment in defence of our church, and 
 trial of our cause. It is the law of God and man, ' I 
 will judge thee out of thine own mouth.' "f Thus also 
 Mr. Claude, when confuting the Roman Catholics; "I 
 will make their authors that are not suspected by them 
 
 * Popery confuted by Papists, sect. viii. p. 43, 
 f Ut supra, sect.x, p. 152. 
 
X PREFACE. 
 
 to speak, whose passages 1 will faithfully translate, which 
 they may see in the originals if they will take the 
 pains." * To which I may add the following words of 
 another Pasdobaptist, which are considered by him as a 
 kind of axiom. " The confessions of enemies, and cir- 
 cumstances favourable to any body of men, collected 
 from the writings of their adversaries, are deserving of 
 particular regard." f Testimonium Adversarii contra se 
 Validissimnm. 
 
 The reader will find, that our auxiliaries in this dis- 
 pute are both numerous and respectable; for while a 
 multitude of Paidobaptists reluctantly concede this, that, 
 and the other, in support of immersion upon a pro- 
 fession of faith, those M'ho may be justly esteemed 
 impartial judges of the evidence produced on both sides 
 of this debate, very cheerfully award the cause to us. 
 Yes, those disinterested Friends, the people called 
 Quakers, without so much as one exception occurring 
 to observation, pour in their attestations on our behalf, 
 and treat infant sprinkling as a merely human inven- 
 tion. 
 
 Though I am not conscious of having misrepre- 
 sented the meaning of any Paedobaptist, whose testi- 
 mony is produced, yet, as the quotations are very 
 numerous, and as many of them are translated from the 
 Latin, it is possible that mistakes may be discovered, 
 by those readers who accurately compare my quotations 
 with the writers from whom they were taken. Such 
 mistakes, it is hoped, however, will be found compara- 
 tively few, and of trifling importance. I am persuaded, 
 
 * Defence of Reformation, part ii. p. 127. 
 
 f Dr. Priestley's Letters to Dr. Horsley, p. 137. " What," says 
 the learned Chamier, " can be a more convincing proof, than that 
 which arises from the confession of an adversary ? " Panstrat. torn. iv. 
 1. viii. c. ix. § 4. Conformably to which, Mr. Travis, when speaking 
 of a particular fact, says : It " is proved by the best testimony pos- 
 sible, the acknowledgment of an adversary." Letters to Mr. Gib- 
 bon, lett. iii. edit. 2nd. 
 
PREFACE. Xr 
 
 therefore, that the judicious and candid will impute them 
 to inadvertency, or ignorance, rather than to a disinge- 
 nuous intention. 
 
 A learned foreigner has justly observed, that while 
 all Christians deservedly acknowledge the Bible as a 
 divine revelation, it has fallen out, that every one desires 
 to find in that sacred volume whatever in his own ima- 
 gination seems divine ; and that men are so wonder- 
 fully happy in this respect, as hardly ever to complain 
 of being disappointed, or of having lost their labour, in 
 searching the sacred records for what they wanted ; but 
 all, in the language of self-gratulation, repeat the old 
 evpYjKoc of Archimedes, / have found it ! I have found 
 it!* — "It is but too frequently," says Mr. Placette, 
 " that we see truth clashing with our temporal interests, 
 with the secret bias of our hearts, with our most violent 
 passions, and with other things which we make the 
 ordinary measures of our conduct. Whenever this 
 happens, we ought to despise these vain interests, to 
 stifle these inclinations, to repress these criminal mo- 
 tions, and in all our proceedings to stick close to the 
 unalterable rule of truth. But we cannot bring our- 
 selves to such a resolution : on the quite contrary, ^e 
 endeavour to ply and bend this rule ; and instead of 
 conforming ourselves to it, would have it conform to 
 ourselves. Not being able to change it, because it is 
 really constant and perpetual, our next attempt is to 
 change our own judgment about it. We try to persuade 
 ourselves out of its directions ; and, with much pains 
 and labour, we come at length to succeed in our design. 
 No man can, indeed, be ignorant of that mighty sway 
 which the heart bears over the understanding. Accord- 
 ing to the order of nature, and the intention of its divine 
 Author, it is the understanding that ought to guide the 
 heart, and to be set up as its faithful lamp and light; 
 but in common experience we see the reverse of this. 
 
 * Werenfelsii Opuscula^ p. 376^ ^zr. 
 
XU PREFACE. 
 
 The heart draws aside the understanding that way to 
 which itself inclines; and if it fail to do this imme- 
 diately, and by absolute command, it carries its point by 
 time and stratagem. — It hinders the intellective power 
 from attending to such, reasons as are disagreeable to 
 itself, and keeps it perpetually busied about the opposite 
 arguments. — It makes us look on the former with a 
 secret desire, that they may prove false ; and on the 
 latter, with a most unjust wish that we may find them 
 true : and then, no wonder if it be successful in its arts, 
 and if it effectually lead us into error." * 
 
 Very important is that declaration of our Lord ; " If 
 any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, 
 whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself:" 
 with which the following direction of Bp. Taylor agrees: 
 " If a man enquires after truth earnestly, as after things 
 of great concernment ; if he prays to God to assist, and 
 uses those means which are in his hand, and are his best 
 for the finding it ; if he be indifferent to any proposition, 
 and loves it not for any consideration, but because he 
 thinks it true ; if he will quit any interest rather than 
 lose a truth ; if he dares own what he hath found and 
 believed ; and if he loves it so much the more, by how 
 much he believes it more conducing to piety and the 
 honour of God ; he hath done what a good and wise 
 man should do : he needs not regard what any man 
 threatens, nor fear God's anger when a man of another 
 sect threatens him with damnation. For he that heartily 
 endeavours to please God, and searches what his will is, 
 that he may obey it, certainly loves God ; and nodiing 
 that loves God can perish." f — Such is the rule of our 
 duty in this respect ; but as we are far from being insen- 
 sible of our liability to be influenced by prejudices and 
 corrupt affections in our enquiries after the mind of God 
 
 * Christian Casuist, b. ii. chap, xxiii. 
 
 f Ductor Dubitant. p. 755, See Mr. Locke's Conduct of the 
 Understanding, sect, xi. 
 
PREFACE. Xlll 
 
 respecting the ordinance of baptism, it is no small satis- 
 faction to lind, that our most learned and eminent op- 
 posers have said so much in favour of immersion, upon 
 a profession of faith, as the appointment of Jesus Christ. 
 For, as Dr. Owen observes, " Truth and good company 
 will give a modest man confidence."*' 
 
 In proportion as I have become acquainted with the 
 Popish controversy, and with that between our English 
 Episcopalians and Protestant Dissenters, the more have 
 I been convinced, that there is a remarkable similarity be- 
 tween the arguments used by Roman Catholics in defence 
 of Popery; by our Conformists, in support of their Esta- 
 blishment ; and by Pasdobaptists in general, in favour of 
 infant sprinkling. It gives me, therefore, peculiar plea- 
 sure to find, that the general principles on which I oppose 
 Peedobaptism, are the very same with those upon which 
 the Reformed have always proceeded, in confuting the 
 Papal system, and upon which Protestant Dissenters 
 argue against the constitution, government, and unscrip- 
 tural rites of the English church. By these consider- 
 ations, I am the more confirmed in my disapprobation of 
 infant sprinkling. Agreeable to which are the following 
 words of Dr. Calamy, when speaking of the persecuted 
 Nonconformists, and of their leading principles : " They 
 were the more confirmed in their adherence to these 
 principles,, by finding the most eminent divines of the 
 church forced to make use of the very same in their 
 noble defence of the Reformation against the Roman- 
 ists; and, indeed, it seemed to them remarkable, that 
 those which were reckoned by the clergy the most suc- 
 cessful weapons against the Dissenters, should be the 
 same that are used by the Papists against the Protestant 
 Reformation."'!' 
 
 In the course of my reflections on the language and 
 
 * Vindication against Sherlock, p, 41. 
 
 f Nonconformist's Memorial^ Introduct. p. 53. 
 
XIV PREFACE. 
 
 arguments of some Pa?dobaptists, the reader will meet 
 with a few strokes of pleasantry. It is presumed, how- 
 ever, that he will have no reason to complain of ill 
 temper, or of a want of benevolence to any from whom 
 I conscientiously differ. For though it appears, from 
 several quotations, that the harshest things have been 
 said of the Baptists by some of their opposers;* and 
 though it must be acknowleged the Baptists have some- 
 times retorted in an unbecoming manner; yet, as every 
 one must confess, that " the wrath of man worketh not 
 the righteousness of God," so it may be observed of the 
 cause that is here pleaded, 
 
 Non tali auxilio, nee defensorihus istis. 
 
 Some persons, to avoid the labour of thinking, and 
 to keep their consciences easy in a compliance with 
 prevailing custom, pronounce baptism a controverted 
 point; and then infer, that all disputes about the mode 
 and subjects of the ordinance, are not only stale and un- 
 important, but unworthy the character of any who profess 
 a warm regard for the interests of moral virtue, or for 
 the person, the atonement, and the grace of Jesus Christ. 
 That baptism has been the subject of much controversy 
 must be allowed ; but then I will say, with Bp. Hurd ; 
 " Show me the question in religion, or even in common 
 morals, about which learned men have not disagreed ; 
 nay, show me a single text of scripture, though ever so 
 plain and precise, which the perverseness or ingenuity of 
 interpreters has not drawn into different, and often con- 
 trary meanings. What then shall we conclude? that 
 there is no truth in religion, no certainty in morals, no 
 authority in sacred scripture ? If such conclusions as 
 these be carried to their utmost length, in what else can 
 
 * Dr, Featley acknowledges that, when writing; against the 
 Baptists, " he could hardly dip his pea in any other liquor than the 
 juice of gall.'' In Crossby's Hist, liap. vol. i. Pref. p. 5. See 
 Backus's Church Hist, of New Eng. vol. ii. p. 323, 324. 
 
PREFACE. XV 
 
 they terminate, but absolute universal scepticism ?" * I 
 may add, in the words of Dr. Waterland, " As long as 
 religion [or any particular branch of it,] is held in any 
 value or esteem, and meets with opposers, it must occa- 
 sion warm disputes. Who would wish that it should 
 not ? What remedy is there for it, while men are men, 
 which is not infinitely worse than the disease? A total 
 contempt of religion, [or an universal and absolute indif- 
 ference for any particular article in it,] might end all 
 disputes about it; nothing else will."f 
 
 It must, indeed, be acknowledged, that positive rites, 
 forms of worship, and ecclesiastical order, are not of 
 equal importance with doctrines that immediately respect 
 the object of our worship, as rational creatures ; the 
 ground of our hope, as criminals deserving to perish ; or 
 the source of our blessedness, as intended for an im- 
 mortal existence. Nor is the most punctual perform- 
 ance of a ritual service, detached from faith in Christ 
 and benevolence to man, worthy of being compared with 
 truly devotional principles and virtuous tempers, though 
 attended with much ignorance relating to the positive 
 parts of divine w-orship. But is this a sufficient reason 
 for treating the law of baptism as of little or no im- 
 portance — as if it were obsolete, or as if our great 
 Legislator had no meaning when he enacted it ? That 
 mutilation of the sacred supper, which is practised in 
 the Romish communion, has been sharply opposed and 
 loudly condemned by all denominations of Protestants : 
 and is it not lawful, is it not matter of duty, to oppose 
 and condemn such an outrage on divine authority and 
 primitive example ? Are we not required to contend 
 earnestly, but with virtuous dispositions, for every branch 
 of that faith which was once delivered to the saints ? If, 
 therefore, infants be solemnly sprinkled by divine right, 
 it must be the indispensable duty of Paedobaptists to 
 
 * Introduct. to Study of Prophecies, serm. viii. 
 f Importance of Doct. of Trinity, p. 206. 
 
XVI PREFACE. 
 
 contend for it ; but if, on the contrary, infant sprinkling 
 be a human invention, the Baptists are equally bound to 
 oppose it, as deserving to be banished from the worship 
 of God, where it has long usurped the place of a divine 
 institution. If Christ be the only Lord and Lawgiver 
 in his own kingdom, then certainly it is far from being a 
 matter of indifference whether the laws \Ahich he enacted 
 be regarded or not : for, with equal reason, might any 
 one question, whether our Saviour should be believed, in 
 what he declares ; as whether he should be obeyed, in 
 what he commands. Under the fair pretext of charity, 
 forbearance, and Catholicism, we might, with JNIelancthon 
 and other adiaphorists in the sixteenth century, consider 
 the doctrine of justification by faith alone, the number of 
 the sacraments, the jurisdiction claimed by the pope, 
 extreme unction, the observation of Popish festivals, and 
 several superstitious rites, as things indifferent : * or, 
 with others, we might assert the innocence of mental 
 error in matters of doctrine and of worship ; and so, by 
 unavoidable consequence, render the Bible itself of little 
 worth. 
 
 It has been often asserted, both by ancients and 
 moderns, that the followers of Christ should never seek 
 for peace at the expense of truth, nor of religious duty. 
 Thus, for example, Hilary, bishop of Poictiers : " The 
 name of peace is, indeed, very specious, and the mere ap- 
 pearance of unity has something splendid in it ; but who 
 knows not, that the church and the gospel acknowledge no 
 other peace than that which comes from Jesus Christ, that 
 which he gave to his a postles before the glory of his passion, 
 and that which he left in trust with them by his eternal 
 
 command, when he was about to leave them?"t Dr. 
 
 Owen: " We are not engaged in an enquiry merely after 
 
 * See Mosheim's Ecclos. Hist. cent. xvi. sect. iii. part. ii. § "^^S.. 
 Venemae Hist. Eccles. secul. xvi. § 156. 
 
 f In Claude's Defence of Reformation, part iii. p. 3. 
 
PREFACE. XVll 
 
 peace, but after peace with truth. Yea, to lay aside the 
 consideration of truth, in a disquisition after peace and 
 agreement, in and about spiritual things, is to exclude a 
 regard unto God and his authority, and to provide only 
 for ourselves. . . .The rule of unity, as it is supposed to 
 comprise all church communion, falls under many re- 
 strictions. For herein the special commands of Christ, 
 and institutions of the gospel committed unto our care 
 and observance, falhng under consideration, our practice 
 is precisely Hmited unto those commands, and by the 
 nature of those institutions .... We are not obliged to 
 accommodate any of the ways or truths of Christ unto 
 
 the sins and ignorance of men."* J. A. Turrettin : 
 
 " There ought to be no charity without truth; no charity 
 that is an injury to truth; no charity which causes us to 
 offend against the truth. . . .For this ought not to be 
 called charity, but a confederation and a conspiracy of 
 error. ' We wish,' says Jerome, ' for peace; and we 
 not only wish, but also pray for it : but it is the peace 
 of Christ, true peace, peace in which no war is in- 
 volved.' Otherwise, as Nazianzen teaches, ' war is 
 more eligible than that peace which separates us from 
 
 God.'"t Mr. Henry: "The method of our prayer 
 
 must be, first for truth, and then for peace; for such 
 is the method of the wisdom that is from above; it 
 isjirst pure, then peaceable.'" % With this both prophets 
 and apostles agree; for their language is, Love the truth, 
 and peace — Speaking the truth in love. § 
 
 The folly and impiety of pleading for charity and 
 peace, at the expense of divine truth and of religious 
 duty, are well represented and properly chastised by a 
 Paedobaptist author, in the following manner : " A con- 
 siderable succedaneum for the Christian unity, is the 
 Catholic charity; which is like the charity commended 
 
 * Discourse on Evangelical Love and Peace, p. 17, 24, 233. 
 f Oratio do Theologo Veritatis et Pacis Studioso. 
 X Exposit. on Rom. xv. 5. 
 § Zcch. viii. 19; Eph. iv. 15. 
 
XVIII PREFACE. 
 
 by Paul, in only this one instance, that it groweth e.v- 
 ceedingly. — Among the stricter sort, it goes under the 
 name oi forbear mice. We shall be much mistaken if we 
 think that, by this soft and agreeable word, is chiefly meant 
 the tenderness and compassion inculcated by the pre- 
 cepts of Jesus Christ and his apostles. It strictly means 
 an agreement to differ quietly about the doctrines and 
 commandments of the gospel, without interruption of 
 visible fellowship. They distinguish carefully between 
 fundamentals^ or things necessary to be believed and 
 practised ; and circumstantials^ or things that are indif- 
 ferent. Now, whatever foundation there may be for 
 such a distinction in human systems of religion, it cer- 
 tainly looks very ill-becoming in the churches of Christ, 
 to question how far He is to be believed and obeyed. 
 Our modern churches. . . .have nearly agreed to hold all 
 those things indifferent which would be inconvenient and 
 disreputable; and to have communion together, in ob- 
 serving somewhat like the customs of their forefathers. 
 Many of the plainest sayings of Jesus Christ and the 
 apostles are treated with high contempt, by the advo- 
 cates of this forbearance. — The common people are 
 persuaded to believe, that all the ancient institutions of 
 Christianity were merely local and temporary, excepting 
 such as the learned have agreed to be suitable to these 
 times; or, which have been customarily observed by their 
 predecessors. But it would well become the doctors in 
 divinity to show, by what authority any injunction of 
 God can be revoked, besides his own; or, how any man's 
 conscience can be lawfully released by custom, example, 
 or human authority, from observing such things as vvere 
 instituted by the apostles of Christ in his name. . . .This 
 corrupt forbearance had no allowed place in the primi- 
 tive churches. The apostle, in the Epistle to the Ephe- 
 sians, required of them, to adorn their vocation ' with 
 all lowliness and meekness, with long-suffering, forbear- 
 ing one another, in love.' But had they dispensed 
 
PREFACE. XIX 
 
 with the laws of Christ, for convenience and ease, it had 
 been forbearing one another in hatred; for those laws 
 were expressions of his love ; the most fervent love that 
 was ever shown among men, directed by infallible wis- 
 dom. Whosoever, therefore, would obliterate them, or 
 any how attempt to change them, must either suppose 
 himself wiser than Jesus Christ, or a greater friend to 
 mankind. He must be moved, either by an enormous 
 self-conceit, or by the spirit of malevolence. .. .The 
 more thinking part of religious men, observing what 
 great mischiefs have arisen from contentions about 
 truth, — have found it most desirable to let truth alone, 
 and to concern themselves chiefly about living profitably 
 in civil society. To be of some religion, is but decent; 
 and the interests of human life require that it be popular 
 and comphant. If men have different notions of Jesus 
 Christ, his divinity, his sacrifice, his kingdom, and the 
 customs of his religion, even from what the apostles 
 seemed to have; charity demands that we think well of 
 their religious characters, notwithstanding this. It is 
 unbecoming the modesty of wise men to be confident on 
 any side; and contending earnestly for opinions, injures 
 the peace of the Christian church. Thus kind and hum- 
 ble is modern charity ! Instead of rejoicing in or with 
 the truth, it rejoiceth in contemplating the admirable 
 piety that may be produced from so many different, yea, 
 opposite principles .... The Christians of old time were 
 taught, not to dispute about the institutions of their Lord, 
 but to observe them thankfully; and hereby they expressed 
 their affection to him and to each other. If that affection 
 be granted to be more important than the tokens of it, it 
 would be unjust to infer that the latter have no obliga- 
 tion; which would imply, that Christ and the apostles 
 meant nothing by their precepts. The Methodists have 
 not, indeed, gone so f^ir as their spiritual Brethren [the 
 Quakers] have done, in rejecting all external cere- 
 monies; but they are taught to believe, that all con- 
 
XX PREFACE. 
 
 cern about the ancient order and customs of the 
 Christians is mere party-spirit, and injurious to the 
 devout exercises of the heart. Thus the modern charity 
 vaunts itself, in answering better purposes than could 
 be accomplished by keeping the words of Christ. It 
 produces a more extensive and generous communion, 
 and animates the devotion of men, without perplexing 
 them by uncertain doctrines or rigorous self-denial .... 
 Although it supposes some revelation from God, and 
 some honour due to Jesus Christ, it claims a right to 
 dispense with both — to choose what, in his doctrine and 
 religion, is fit to be beheved and observed."* 
 
 While, however, we think it our duty with a reso- 
 lute perseverance to maintain the purity and import- 
 ance of baptism, as a divine institution ; we are far from 
 considering ourselves as the only disciples of Christ, or 
 our own communities as the only Christian churches. 
 Nor is an idea of that kind justly inferable from our deny- 
 ing communion at the Lord's table to Paedobaptists.f 
 Respecting this particular, Dr. Owen says; " There is no 
 necessity that any should deny all them to be true 
 churches, from whom they may have just reason to 
 withdraw their communion. . . .When we judge of our 
 own communion with them, it is not upon this question, 
 Whether they are true churches, or not? as though the 
 determination of our practice did depend solely thereon. 
 For as we are not called to judge of the being of their 
 constitution, as to the substance of it, unless they are 
 openly judged in the scripture, as in the case of idolatry 
 and persecution persisted in; so a determination of the 
 truth of their constitution, or that they are true churches, 
 will not presently resolve us in our duty, as to commu- 
 nion with them .... It is most unwarrantable rashness 
 
 * Strictures upon Modern Simony, p. 48 — 55. Luther, in his 
 vehement manner, says ; " Maledicta sit charitas quse servatur cum 
 jactura doctrinEe fidei, cui omnia cedere debent, charitas, apostohis, 
 angelus e ctclo." Comment, in Epist. adGalat. 
 
 f Sec my Apology for the Baptists. 
 
PREFACE. XXI 
 
 and presumption, yea, an evident fruit of ignorance, or 
 want of love, or secular private interest, when, upon 
 lesser differences, men judge churches to be no true 
 churches, and their ministers to be no true ministers."* 
 The same excellent author says; " There is nothing 
 more clear and certain, than that our Lord Christ. . . . 
 never joined with [the Jews] in the observance of their 
 own traditions and pharisaical impositions, but warned 
 all his disciples to avoid them and refuse them ; whose 
 example we desire to follow:, for, concerning all such 
 observances in the church, he pronounced that sentence, 
 ' Every plant that my heavenly Father hath not planted 
 shall be rooted up."'t 
 
 It is against what the author considers as an error 
 ■ in sentiment, and a corruption of worship, that the fol- 
 lowing Examination of Paedobaptism makes its appear- 
 ance : errors, not persons, are here opposed. He thinks, 
 with Mr, Leigh, that we should '' distinguish between 
 loving of men's persons and their errors;" J and, with 
 Bp. Burnet, that " whatever moderation or charity we 
 may owe to men's persons, we owe none at all to their 
 errors, and to that frame which is built on and supported 
 by them."§ Nay, as Dr. Waterland in another case 
 observes, " While we are of a contrary judgment, it 
 cannot but be guilty practice and conduct in us, and 
 very great too, to smother our sentiments, or not to bear 
 our testimony in such a way as Christ has appointed, 
 against all notorious corruptions, either of faith, or wor- 
 ship, or doctrine." II 
 
 Should this Examination of Paedobaptism have the 
 honour of being regarded as deserving an answer, and 
 
 * Discourse on Evangelical Love and Church-Peace, p. 82, 83, 
 84. See Plain Reasons for Dissenting from the Church of England, 
 part i. reason i. ; and Stapferi Theolog. Polem. torn. i. p. 518. 
 
 t Enquiry into Orig. and Nature of Churches, p. 253. 
 
 X Treatise on Relig. and Learning, b. i. chap vii. 
 
 § In Mr. Robinson's Plan of Lectures, Motto. 
 
 11 Importance of Doct. of Trinity, p. 135. 
 VOL. I. C 
 
\ 
 
 XXll PREFACE. 
 
 should any of our opposers write against me, it will not 
 avail to refute some particular parts of the work, de- 
 tached from the general principles on which I proceed. 
 No ; the data., the principal gTomids of reasoning, which 
 are adopted from Paedobaptists themselves, must be 
 constantly kept in view, or nothing to the honour of 
 infant sprinkling will be effected. For as the grand 
 principles on which my argumentation proceeds, and 
 whence my general conclusions are drawn, are those of 
 Protestants when contending with Papists, and those of 
 Nonconformists when disputing with English Episco- 
 pahans; it will be incumbent on such opposer to show, 
 either that the principles themselves are false, or that 
 my reasoning upon them is inconclusive. Now, as I do 
 not perceive how any Protestant can give up those prin- 
 ciples, without virtually admitting the superstitions of 
 Popery; nor how they can be deserted by any Dissenter, 
 without implicitly renouncing his Nonconformity; so I 
 conclude, that the whole force of any opponent must be 
 employed in endeavouring to prove, that I have reasoned 
 inconsequentially from those principles. That this might 
 be easily proved, I am not at present convinced; and 
 whether any of our Paedobaptist Brethren will consider 
 this publication as of sufficient importance to excite such 
 an attempt, is to me uncertain. 
 
 To the conclusions inferred from those very nume- 
 rous concessions which our opposers have made, (and 
 my reader will find that many of the greatest eminence 
 among them have been the most free in making con- 
 cessions,) it may, perhaps, be objected : " Notwithstand- 
 ing all their concessions, they continued in the profession 
 and practice of infant baptism." Granted; but then it 
 should be considered, that this objection is quite futile; 
 because I professedly argue against Paedobaptism, on 
 the principles, reasonings, and concessions of Pccdo- 
 baptists. Besides, though such an exception to my con- 
 clusions ex])resses a fact, yet it pays the consistency of 
 
PREFACE. XXUl 
 
 the authors concerned but a poor comphment. In this 
 light similar concessions from Roman Catholics have 
 always been viewed by Protestants; of which the reader 
 will meet with various instances in the course of this 
 work.* 
 
 Being fully persuaded, that I appear in defence of a 
 divine institution and of apostolic practice, I earnestly 
 commend this publication to the blessing of that sublime 
 Being, who " worketh all things after the couofei of his 
 will." Sincerely praying, that evangelical truth and 
 experimental religion, that purity of worship and the 
 practice of holiness, may flourish among all denomina- 
 tions of Christians, I conclude in the following words 
 of Lord Bacon: "Read, not to contradict or confute, 
 nor to believe and take for granted, nor to find talk and 
 discourse, but to weigh and consider. "f 
 
 A. BOOTH. 
 
 Goodman's Fields, 
 Aug. S, 1787. 
 
 * See particularly Vol. I. p. 268, 269, this edition. 
 
 t In Dr, Edwards's Discourse concerning Truth and Erroi', p. 456, 
 
ERRATA. 
 
 Vol. I. p. 28. 1. 24, /or supercription, read superscription. 
 
 48,1.22, — eavTov, — eavrov. 
 
 Vol. II. p. 25, 1. 7, — childisly, — childishly. 
 
 105, 1. 18, — fxa6rjT€V€iv , — (/.ad-^Tevtiv. 
 
 142, 1. 2, — parishoners, — parishioners. 
 
 431,1.29, — destitue, — ■ destitute. 
 
 Vol. III. p. 15(5, 1. 30, — (TOf^aTo,, — crafxara. 
 
 175,1. 5, — fortels, — foretells. 
 
 189, 1. 5, • — irvev/jaTi, — ntvevfxart. 
 
 236, 1. 10, — proxility, — prolixity. 
 
 246, 1. 24, — essense, — essence. 
 
 331, 1. 34, — ominions, — ominous. 
 
GENERAL CO]NTE]>![TS?Hn^ CITOIT 
 
 ^1 
 
 VOL. I. 
 PiEDOBAPTISM EXAMINED. 
 
 PART I. 
 
 TTie Mode 0/ Administration. 
 
 Page 
 
 Chapter I. — Concerning the Nature, Obligation, and Import- 
 ance of Positive Institutions in Religion . . _ 1 — 39 
 
 Chap. II. — Concerning the Signification of the Terms, Baptize 
 
 and Baptism --------- 40 — 131 
 
 Chap. III. — The Design of Baptism ; or, the Facts and Blessings 
 represented by it, both in regard to our Lord and his 
 Disciples 132—170 
 
 Chap. IV. — The Practice of John the Baptist, of the Apostles, 
 and of the Church in succeeding Ages, in regard to the 
 Manner of administering the Ordinance of Baptism - I7I — 238 
 
 Chap. V. — The present Practice of the Greek and Oriental 
 
 Churches, in regard to the Mode of Administration - 239 — ^244 
 
 Chap. VI. — The Design of Baptism more fully expressed by 
 
 Immersion, than by Pouring or Sprinkling . _ _ 245 — 252 
 
 Chap. VII. — The Reasons, Rise, and Prevalence of Pouring or 
 
 of Sprinkling, instead of Immersion - - - - 253 — 300 
 
 PART II. 
 
 The proper Subjects. 
 
 Chapter I. — No Express Precept nor Plain Example for 
 
 Psedobaptism, in the New Testament - - - - 303 — 367 
 
 Chap. II. — No Evidence of Psedobaptism, before the latter End 
 
 of the Second, or the Beginning of the Third Century - 368 — 411 
 
 Chap. III. — The high Opinion of the Fathers concerning the 
 Utility of Baptism, and the Grounds on which they proceeded 
 in administering that Ordinance to Infants, when Psedobaptism 
 became a prevailing Practice 412 
 
 VOL. 11. 
 
 Page 
 
 Chap. IV. — .Concerning the Modern Grounds of Psedobaptism ; 
 namely, Jewish Proselyte Baptism — External Covenant Re- 
 lation — Jewish Circumcision — Particular Passages of Scrip- 
 ture — and Apostolic Tradition. 
 
 Section 1. — Jewish Proselyte Baptism . . - _ 1 — 33 
 
XXVI GENERAL CONTENTS. 
 
 P.ige 
 
 Sect. 2. — External Covenant Relation 33 — 68 
 
 Sect. 3. — Jewish Circumcision ------ 68 — 97 
 
 Sect. 4. — Particular Passages of Scripture : viz. 
 
 § 1.— Matt, xxviii. 19 97—134 
 
 § 2.— Gen. xvii. 7 134—152 
 
 § 3.— Ezek. xvi. 20, 21 153—157 
 
 § 4.— Matt. xix. 14 157—164 
 
 § 5.— John iii. 5 164—170 
 
 § 6.— Acts ii. 39 170—177 
 
 § 7.— Acts xvi. 15, 33; 1 Cor. i. 16 . - - - 177—185 
 
 § 8.— Rom. xi. 16 186—189 
 
 § 9.— 1 Cor. vii. 14 189—231 
 
 Sect. 5. — Apostolic Tradition, and the Impracticability of point- 
 ing out the Time when Psedobaptisra commenced - - 231 — 251 
 
 Chap. V. — Infant Baptism and Infant Communion introduced 
 about the same Time, and supported by similar Argu- 
 ments ----- 252—279 
 
 General Remarks 279—342 
 
 PART III. 
 REPLY TO DR. WILLIAMS. 
 
 Chap. I. — Concerning the Title of Dr. Williams's Book, his 
 
 Professions, and his Conduct, relative to this Controversy, 353 — 395 
 
 Chap. II. — On the little Regard Dr. Williams pays to Quotations 
 produced from Psedobaptists ; and on his Disposition to extort 
 Concessions from the Baptists _ _ . . - 396 — 406 
 
 Chap. III. — On Dr. W.'s Pretence, that his Book includes a full 
 
 Reply to my Psedobaptism Examined - - - - 407 — 454 
 
 FOL. III. 
 
 Page 
 
 Chapter IV. — Concerning Positive Institutions and Analogical 
 
 Reasoning --------- 1 — 119 
 
 Chap. V. — On the Meaning of the Words Baptize and Baptism, 
 
 as represented by Dr. W. 120—236 
 
 Chap. VI. — The General Principles on which Dr. W. founds the 
 
 Right of Infants to Baptism ----- 237—325 
 
 Chap. VII. — Infant Communion and Infant Baptism com- 
 pared - . . . 326—344 
 
 Chap. VIII. — On the Utility and Importance of Baptism, as re- 
 presented by Dr. AV. - - - - - - - 345—366 
 
 PART IV. 
 
 REPLY TO MR. PETER EDWARDS. 
 
 Mr. Dorr's Preface ------- 369—388 
 
 The Reply 389—460 
 
PART L 
 
 P^DOBAPTISM EXAMINED, 
 
 THE MODE OF ADMINISTRATION, 
 
--. .u-'H i!-^i 
 THSOLO'; 
 
 PiEDOBAPTISM EXAMINEIJ;^^'^ 
 
 \ 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Concerning the Nature, Obligation, and Importance 
 of Positive Institutions in Religion. 
 
 Dr. Doddridge. — "Those are called positive in- 
 stitutions or precepts, which are not founded upon any 
 reasons known to those to whom they are given, or dis- 
 coverable by them, but which are observed merely be- 
 cause some superior has commanded them." Lectures, 
 Definit. Ixxi. p. 238. 
 
 2. Bp. Taylor. — " All institutions sacramental, and 
 positive laws, depend not upon the nature of the things 
 themselves, according to the extension or diminution of 
 which our obedience might be measured ; but they 
 depend wholly on the will of the Lawgiver, and the will 
 of the Supreme, being actually limited to this specifica- 
 tion, this manner, this matter, this institution : whatso- 
 ever comes besides, it hath no foundation in the will 
 of the Legislator, and therefore can have no warrant or 
 authority. That it be obeyed, or not obeyed, is all the 
 question and all the variety. If it can be obeyed, it 
 must; if it cannot, it must be let alone. . . .Whatsoever 
 depends upon a divine law or institution, whatsoever 
 God wills, whatsoever is appointed instrumental to the 
 signification of a mystery, or to the collation of a grace 
 or a power, he that does any thing of his own head, 
 either must be a despiser of God's will, or must suppose 
 himself the author of a grace, or else to do nothing at 
 
 VOL. I, B 
 
2 CONCEllNIXG THE NATURE 
 
 all in what he does; because all his obedience and all 
 the blessing of his obedience depend upon the will of 
 God, which ought always to be obeyed when it can : 
 and when it cannot, nothing can supply it, because the 
 reason of it cannot be understood .... All positive pre- 
 cepts, that depend upon the mere will of the lawgiver, 
 admit no degrees, nor suppletory and commutation ; 
 because in such laws we see nothing beyond the words 
 of the law, and the first meaning, and the named 
 instance : and therefore it is that in iiidividuo which 
 God points at ; it is that in which he will make the trial 
 of our obedience; it is that in which he will so per- 
 fectly be obeyed, that he will not be disputed with or 
 enquired of, luhy and hoiv, but just according to the 
 measures there set down ; so, and no more and no less, 
 and no otherwise. For when the will of the lawgiver 
 is all the reason, the first instance of the law is all the 
 measure, and there can be no product but what is just 
 set down. No parity of reason can infer any thing else; 
 because there is no reason but the w ill of God, to which 
 nothing can be equal, because his will can be but one." 
 Ductor Dub. b. ii. chap. Hi. § 14, 18. 
 
 3. Mr. Reeves. — " The distinction of obligations be- 
 tween moral and positive duties is to be understood 
 with great caution. For though the goodness of a law 
 be a great motive and inducement to obedience, yet the 
 formal reason of obligation does not arise from the 
 goodness of a law, but from the authority and will of 
 the legislator. God commands a thing which was be- 
 fore indifferent ; therefore that thing is as much a law 
 as if it was never so good in its own nature : he for- 
 bade the eating of a tree in the midst of the garden, 
 which without that prohibition had been indifi^erent. 
 But Adam, and in him all his posterity, was condemned 
 for the breach of a law purely positive. . , .When God 
 therefore says, that he ' w ill have mercy and not sacri- 
 fice,' it is not to be understood as if God would have 
 
OF POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS. 3 
 
 any of his laws broken ; but, as our Saviour explains it, 
 * These ought ye to have done, and not to leave the 
 other undone.' I ask then, what are natural laws? 
 Why, what we conclude merely from the light of nature 
 that God has commanded or forbidden, either to be 
 believed or done. What then are positive laws ? Why, 
 what we know to be the will of God by his express 
 word only. In both cases then we see, that it is the will 
 of God, and not the goodness of the thing, or the man- 
 ner of the discovery, which induces the obligation." 
 Apologies, vol.ii. p. 217, 218, edit. 1709. 
 
 4. Dr. Fiddes. — " The distinction between positive 
 law and moral law is founded in this difference : the 
 subject matter of positive law is something to which we 
 are antecedently under no obligation, and which only 
 obliges by virtue of its being enacted, and perhaps to a 
 certain limited period. The subject matter of a moral 
 law^ is, on the other hand, something antecedently, in 
 the visible reason of it, obligatory to us, and the obliga 
 tion thereof will always continue unchangeably the 
 same. . . .By a positive command, I understand an e:v- 
 press declaration made by competent authority, whether 
 concerning things to be done, or to be omitted." Theo- 
 log. Pract. b. i. chap. vi. p. 50; b. ii. part i. chap, i, 
 p. 105. 
 
 5. Dr. Owen. — " Positive institutions are the free 
 effects of the will of God, depending originally and soleli/ 
 on revelation, and which therefore have been various 
 and actually changed." Discourse concerning the Holy 
 Spirit, b. i. chap. iii. § 3. 
 
 6. Buddeus. — '' The obligation by which men are 
 bound rightly to use positive appointments, is to be 
 derived from the moral law itself; by which it is mani- 
 fest, that men are obliged to do all those things by which 
 their eternal felicity may be promoted .... God had the 
 wisest reasons, why he would have an appointment 
 administered in this or the other manner. It is not 
 
 B 2 
 
4 CONCERNING THE NATURE 
 
 lawful, therefore, for men to alter any thing, or to muti- 
 late the appointment. Thus the sacraments are to 
 be used, not according to our own pleasure, but in the 
 manner appointed by God." Institut. Theol. Moral, 
 pars i. c. V. § 18; i)ars ii. c. ii. § 50. Lips. 1727. 
 
 7. Bp. Butler. ^ — " Moral precepts are precepts, the 
 reasons of which we see ; positive prece})ts are pre- 
 cepts, the reasons of which we do not see. INIoral 
 duties arise out of the nature of the case itself, prior to 
 external command ; positive duties do not arise out of 
 the nature of the case, but from external command ; nor 
 would they be duties at all, were it not for such com- 
 mand, received from Him whose creatures and subjects 
 we are. But the manner in which the nature of the case, 
 or the fact of the relation is made known, this doth 
 not denominate any duty either positive or moral. . . . 
 The reason of positive institutions, in general, is very 
 obvious ; though we should not see the reason why such 
 particular ones are pitched upon, rather than others. 
 Whoever, therefore, instead of cavilling at words, will 
 attend to the thing itself, may clearly see, that positive 
 institutions in general, as distinguished from this or that 
 particular one, have the nature of moral commands, 
 since the reasons of them appear. Thus, for instance, 
 the external worship of God is a moral duty, though no 
 particular mode of it be so. Care then is to be taken, 
 when a comparison is made between positive and moral 
 duties, that they be compared no farther than as they 
 are different; no farther than as the former are positive, 
 or arise out of mere external command, the reasons 
 of which we are not acquainted with ; and as the latter 
 are moral, or arise out of the apparent reason of the 
 case, without such external command. Unless this 
 caution be observed, we shall run into endless confusion. 
 Now this being premised, suppose two standing pre- 
 cepts enjoined by the same authority ; that in certain 
 conjunctures it is impossible to obey both; that the 
 
OF POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS. O 
 
 former is moral, i. e. a precept of which we see the 
 reasons, and that they hold in the particular case before 
 us ; but that the latter is positive, i. e. a precept of which 
 we do not see the reasons : it is indisputable that our 
 obligations are to obey the former, because there is an ap- 
 parent reason for this preference, and none against it. . . . 
 As it is one of the peculiar weaknesses of human nature, 
 when, upon a comparison of two things, one is found to 
 be of greater importance than the other, to consider this 
 other as of scarce any importance at all ; it is highly 
 necessary that we remind ourselves how great presump- 
 tion it is, to make light of positive institutions of divine ap- 
 pointment ; that our obligations to obey all God's com- 
 mands vv'hatever, are absolute and indispensable; and 
 that commands merely positive, admitted to be from 
 him, lay us under a moral obligation to obey them ; an 
 obligation moral in the strictest and most proper sense." 
 Analogy of Religion, part ii. chap. i. 
 
 8. Dr. J. G. King. — " Positive duties, having no 
 obligation in the reason of things, can have no founda- 
 tion but in the e.vpress words of the institutor, from 
 which alone they derive their authority." Rites and 
 Ceremonies of the Greek Church in Russia, p. 12. 
 _ 9. Mr. Jonathan Edwards.- — " Those laws whose 
 obligation arises from the nature of things, and from the 
 general state and nature of mankind, as well as from 
 God's positive revealed will, are called moral laws. 
 Others, whose obligation depends merely upon God's 
 positive and arbitrary institution, are not moral : such 
 as the ceremonial laws, and the precepts of the gospel 
 about the two sacraments." .... Positive " precepts 
 are the greatest and most proper trial of obedience ; 
 because in them the mere authority and will of the 
 legislator is the sole ground of the obligation, and 
 nothing in the nature of the things themselves; and 
 therefore they are the greatest trial of any person's 
 respect to that authority and will." Sermons, p. 232. 
 
6 CONCERNING THE NATURE 
 
 Hartford, 1780. Sermons on Imp. Sub. p. 79. 
 Edinb. 1785. 
 
 10. Bp. Burnet. — " Sacraments are positive pre- 
 cepts, which are to be measured only by the insti- 
 tution, in which there is not room left for us to carry 
 them any farther." Exposit. Thirty-nine Articles, 
 Art. xxvii. p. 279, edit. 5. 
 
 11. Mr. Steele. — " Sacraments depend merely upon 
 their institution : hence doth their being result, and upon 
 this their matter and signification do depend. The in- 
 stitution, with the element, makes the sacrament ; and 
 so the o?iij/ rule and balance for them must needs be 
 their institution.*" Morning Exercise against Popery, 
 Serm. xxii. p. 764, 765. 
 
 12. Stapferus. — " Visible signs are the matter of sa- 
 craments .... Signs are either natural or arbitrary. Sa- 
 cred ceremonies are of the latter kind. But whatever 
 an arbitrary sign be, it is such by institution." Institut. 
 Theolog. Polem. tom. i. cap. iii. § 1623, 1624. 
 
 13. Dr. Goodman." — The term institution " implies 
 a setting up de novo, or the appointing that to become a 
 duty which was not knowable, or at least not known 
 to be so, before it became so appointed. For this word, 
 institution, is that which we use to express a positive 
 command by, in opposition to that which is moral in 
 the strictest sense, and of natural obligation. Now it is 
 very evident, that all things of this nature ought to be 
 appointed very plainly and e.vprcssly, or else they can 
 carry no obligation with them ; for seeing the whole 
 reason of their becoming matter of law or duty, lies in 
 the will of the legislator, if that be not plainly dis- 
 covered, they cannot be said to be instituted, and so 
 there can be no obligation to observe them ; because 
 where ' there is no law, there can be no transgres- 
 sion;' and a law is no law, in eft'ect, which is not 
 sufficiently promulgated." Preserv. against Popery, 
 title viii. p. 7. 
 
or POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS. 7 
 
 J 4. Dr. Sherlock. — " What is matter of institution 
 depends wholly upon the divine will and pleasure; and 
 though all men will grant, that God and Christ have 
 always great reason for their institution, yet it is not the 
 reason, but the authority which makes the institution. 
 Though we do not understand the reasons of the insti- 
 tution, if we see the command we must obey; and 
 though we could fancy a great many reasons why there 
 should be such an institution, if no such institution 
 appears, we are free, and ought not to believe there is 
 such an institution, because we think there are reasons 
 to be assigned why it should be." Preserv. against 
 Pop. title ix. p. 419. 
 
 15. Anonymous. — " We deny that there are any 
 accidental parts of instituted worship ; for if instituted, 
 (i. e. commanded by Christ,) it cannot be accidental, 
 (i. e. left to our liberty, as what may or may not be 
 done without sin.) If accidental, it may be a part of 
 somewhat else, but of the instituted worship of Christ 
 it cannot be. . . .Circumstances of worship (as such) un- 
 determined by the Lord, to be appointed by men, we 
 deny. . . .These circumstances are such as, without which 
 the worship of God is perfect, or it is not. If the Jirst, 
 we need them not; they are vain, fruitless, having with- 
 out them a perfect worship. If the second, the worship 
 God hath commanded, as it comes out of his hands, 
 without human additaments, is imperfect : but this is 
 little less than blasphemy. . . .To assert, it is lawful to 
 conform to any part of instituted worship, wdthout war- 
 rant from the scripture, reflects sadly upon the wisdom 
 and faithfulness of Christ. For, either he was not wise 
 enough to foresee that such a part of worship was or 
 would be requisite; or had not faithfulness enough to 
 reveal it : though the scripture compares him to Moses 
 for faithfulness, who revealed the whole will of God, 
 to the making of a pin in the tabernacle .... We had 
 thought, that the perfection of scripture had consisted 
 
8 CONCERNING THE NATURE 
 
 in this, that the whole of that obedience that God re- 
 quires of us, had therein been stated and enjoined ; for 
 which end we conceive it vvas at first commanded to be 
 written, and hitherto by the wonderful gracious provi- 
 dence of the Lord continued to us. The accidentals 
 of worship are either part of that obedience we owe to 
 God, or they are not. If not, how came they to be 
 such parts of worship, as without them we are inter- 
 dicted to perform it ? or, indeed, whence is it, that we 
 are tendering them up to God, when all our worship is 
 nothing else but the solemn tender of that obedience that 
 we owe to him? If they are, then there is some part of 
 our obedience that is not prescribed in the scripture : 
 then is the scripture imperfect, and that with respect 
 to the main end for which it was given forth, viz. to 
 indoctrinate and direct us in the whole of that obedi- 
 ence that God requires of us." Jerubbaal, chap. ii. 
 p. 154, 155, 156. 
 
 16. Chamierus. — " This is a most certain principle, 
 that the sacraments are nothing, except from their insti- 
 tution; and this institution must be divine. Whatever, 
 therefore, was invented by man, does not belong to a 
 sacrament. . . .The use of the sacraments depends upon 
 their institution. . . .Nothing belongs to the institution of 
 the Lord's supjier, that is not essential to it. . . .If the 
 whole essence of the sacrament be of divine institution, 
 certainly, that being violated, the sacrament itself can- 
 not stand." Panstrat. tom. iv. 1. v. c. xvi. §23; 1. vii. 
 c. iii. § 1 ; c. XV. § 7; 1. viii. c. ii. § 3. 
 
 17. Gerhardus. — " Seeing that a sacrament depends 
 entirely on the appointment of (lod, when we do not 
 what God has appointed, it certainly will not be a 
 sacrament." Loci Theolog. tom. iv. De Sacram. <§ 52. 
 Francof. 1657. 
 
 18. Dr. Clagett. — " To conclude, that in matters 
 depending upon the pleasure of God, he hath done that 
 ^vhich . eenieth best to our reason, is to suppose that 
 
OF POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS, 9 
 
 in these things we know what is best, no less than God 
 doth; that we have weighed all the conveniences and 
 inconveniences of either side; the advantages and dis- 
 advantages of every thing that lies before us ; the argu- 
 ments for, and the objections against this or that, with 
 the same exactness, wherein they are comprehended in 
 his infinite understanding. . , .When once the institutions 
 of God are revealed and testified to us, we must not 
 only conclude that they are wise and good, because thev 
 are his ; but we ought also to take notice of those foot- 
 steps of divine wisdom and goodness, which are dis- 
 cernible in them : and the more that a wise man con- 
 siders and understands their ends and usefulness, the 
 more worthy of their Author he will find them to be. 
 But their congruity to our reason is not the proof of 
 their divine institution; since there are very many things, 
 which to our finite understandings would appear as 
 useful and as reasonable, but which yet God hath not 
 instituted. . . . Even where the appointments of God are 
 evident, that wisdom and goodness which I can dis- 
 cover in them, is not the proper ground of my assurance 
 that he hath established them ; for that is no other than 
 the evidence of the institution. Nor can that discovery 
 alone give me the least assurance, that in making such 
 provision he hath not been wanting to our needs ; for 
 the reason of that assurance is this, that it is He, it 
 is God, I say, that hath made such provision for us. 
 When it once appears what God hath instituted in order 
 to our salvation, and no more, we are to conclude that 
 this is enough in its kind, because it is all that God hath 
 done. But for that other kind of arguing, that God 
 hath been wanting to us in his institutions, if he has not 
 instituted [this or that,] and therefore he has instituted 
 it, I leave to those whose conclusions need it; very 
 much desiring them to consider, what a cause that must 
 be which drives them to such bold reasonings as these 
 are.'' Preserv. against Pop. title vii. p. 9S. 
 
10 CONCERNING THE NATURE 
 
 19. Dr. Grosvenor,* — "The diminutive things that 
 have been said by some, of the positive appointments in 
 religion, and the extravagant things that have been said 
 by others, are two extremes which true reasoning leads 
 nobody into, on either hand. It is as contrary to the 
 nature of things to make nothing of them, as to make 
 them the whole of religion. To know exactly the re- 
 gard that is due to them, is to find out the rank and 
 order they are placed in by Him uho has appointed 
 them .... I shall lay togetlier •\\ hat I have to say on this 
 subject, under the following propositions. 
 
 " Proposition I. Some things are absolutely ne- 
 cessary to salvation, and in their own nature. We 
 call those things absolutely necessary, without which 
 there can be no salvation at all. Thus, a mind suited 
 to the happiness intended by the word salvation, is ab- 
 solutely necessary : or holiness, ' without which no 
 man shall see the Lord.' All the titles in the world to 
 heaven, can never give the pleasure of heaven, with- 
 out a suitableness to its enjoyments. Fitness here is 
 as the eye to the delights of colours and prospects; the 
 ear, to the pleasures of harmony ; and as the palate, to 
 those of taste and relish; that is, a capacity of enjoy- 
 ment. As there must be an animal nature for animal 
 pleasures, and a rational nature for rational ones ; so 
 there must be the divine and heavenly nature, for those 
 that are divine and heavenly. No man would care to 
 live even with a God whom he did not love. 
 
 " Prop. II. No merely positive appointments are 
 necessary in this sense, i. e., absolutely and in their 
 own nature. If there never had been a sacrament in 
 the world, I might have been happy without it : you 
 cannot say so of love to God and likeness to him. , . . 
 
 " Prop. III. A disposition to obey divine orders, 
 wherever they are discerned, either positive or moral, is 
 
 * Anonymous, indeed, but supposed to be Dr. lienj. Grosvenor. 
 
OF POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS. 11 
 
 part of that ' holiness, without which no man shall see 
 the Lord.' I may be saved without a sacrament; but 
 I cannot be saved without a disposition to obey God's 
 authority wherever 1 see it. A sacrament is a positive 
 rite, and not to be compared with moral virtue : but is 
 not a disposition to obey God's order, moral virtue and 
 Christian grace? Or can there be any moral virtue, 
 or Christian grace, without a disposition to obey the 
 authority of Christ, wherever I discern it? Surely, 
 obedience to God's command is a moral excellence, 
 though the instances of that obedience may lie in posi- 
 tive rites. The command to Abraham, to sacrifice his 
 son, was a positive order, and a very strange one too ; 
 seemingly opposite to some moral orders given out be- 
 fore : and yet his disposition to obey, when he was sure 
 of a divine warrant in the case, has set him as the head 
 of all the believing world ; as the hero of faith, the father 
 of the faithful, and the friend of God. The command 
 of sprinkling the blood of the passover upon the door- 
 posts of the Israelites, was an external positive rite : if 
 there had not been a disposition to obey that order, it 
 would have cost some lives; as it had like to have done 
 to Moses, the neglect of circumcising his child, as good 
 a man as he was in other respects. Was not the for- 
 bidden fruit a positive instance ? an external thing ? 
 Setting aside the divine prohibition, there was nothing 
 immoral in eating of that, any more than of any other 
 tree ; but disobedience is an immorality, let the instance 
 be what it will. 
 
 " Prop. IV. The sincerity and truth of such a dis- 
 position, is best known by its being uniform and univer- 
 sal. (Psalm cxix. 6 ; Col. iv. 3.) The Author of our 
 religion has told us, and added his example to his word, 
 that ' thus it becomes us to fulfil all righteousness,' 
 and so ordered himself to be baptized. Baptism was 
 a positive rite, an external thing; and yet he calls it 
 righteousness. Such righteousness as became Him who 
 
12 COXCERNING THE NATURE 
 
 was the Holy One of God; became Him who had in- 
 trinsically no need of any outward ceremony ; whose 
 inward purity was perfectly divine : and if it became 
 Him to fulfil such a sort of righteousness, it can hardly 
 become any mIio pretend to be his followers to ne- 
 glect it. 
 
 " Prop. V. As a competent evidence is supposed 
 needful, for any external rite being of divine appoint- 
 ment; so again, a wilful ignorance of that evidence, or 
 not discerning it, through criminal causes, will not ex- 
 cuse from guilt. The criminal causes of not seeing the 
 evidence for such appointments, are, in this case, as in 
 many other cases, non-enquiry, laziness, prejudice, lust, 
 pride, and passion. That an ignorance owing to these 
 causes, cannot be pleaded for a neglect of any of God's 
 appointments, is so much the general sense of all ca- 
 suists, that I shall only add here, that it is at every 
 man's peril, how he comes not to know the 
 WILL OF God, as well as not to do it. We must 
 look to it, how we came not to see the appointment, 
 and must answer that to God and our own conscience. 
 It is not enough to say, Zo;y/, / did not know it was 
 appointed ; when the answer may justly be. You never 
 enquired into the matter : you never allowed yourself' to 
 think of it : or if you did, you resolved in your mind 
 that you would not be convinced. You made the most 
 of every cavil, but never minded the solution to any of 
 your objections. 
 
 " Prop. VI. The duty and necessity of any external 
 rites, and particularly of sacraments, have their measures 
 and degrees. And here I apprehend, the measures of the 
 duty and necessity of sacraments to be, — The autliority 
 enjoining. When we see the broad seal of heaven, where 
 there is the divine warrant, ' Thus saith the Lord;' it is 
 worse than trifling, to cavil and say. It is but an external 
 rite. — The degree of evidence of their being so appointed. 
 Where the evidence is not so clear, the obligation is 
 
OF POSITIVE IXSTITUTIONS. 13 
 
 weakened in proportion; but where the terms are plainly 
 binding, and strongly commanding, there the obligation 
 is not to be evaded. When positive appointments and 
 moral duties cannot be both performed ; when the one 
 or the other must be omitted, the preference is given to 
 the moral and spiritual duty. — The stress God lays upon 
 them for the time they are to continue. Sprinkling the 
 blood of the passover upon the posts of the doors, was 
 not at all necessary in itself to preservation from the 
 destroying angel; but God laid that stress upon it. The 
 oracle, or the mercy-seat, was a mere positive appoint- 
 ment. God could have met Moses any where else; but 
 God laying that stress upon it, measures the degree of 
 the necessity of observing that order : ' There will I 
 meet thee, and commune with thee,' Exod. xxv. 22. 
 Moses might have reasoned with himself, God is every 
 where, and can meet me any where, if he pleases, and if 
 he does not please, he will not do it here; and so have 
 missed the honour of communion with his Maker; 
 broke the divine order; lost the benefit of the oracle; 
 and offended God, by the neglect. — The reason and end 
 of them. If there should be any reasons of these 
 injunctions that we do not know, it is sufficient that 
 they are known to God. Our obedience is always a 
 reasonable service whether we know God's reasons for 
 the injunction or not. His command is always reason 
 enough for us ... . 
 
 " Prop. VII. He that commands the outward 
 positive rite, commands the inward and moral temper 
 at the same time. He does not say. Do this, without 
 concerning himself hom it is done; whether in a manner 
 suitable to an end appointed or not .... There is no such 
 command of his, as enjoins the outward act without the 
 inward temper and disposition. 
 
 " Prop. VIII. Positive appointments for such 
 uses and ends as these, are of a quite different nature 
 from arbitrary impositions, with which they are too 
 
14 CONCERNING THE NATURE 
 
 often confounded. The idea of arbitrary I think, 
 implies a weakness incompatible to the divine nature ; 
 whose perfection it is, to do nothing but for some wise 
 reason, and for some good end. . . . 
 
 *' Prop. IX. Though no positive appointments are 
 absolutel}' necessary, yet the contempt of them, and 
 of the divine authority discerned in them, cannot con- 
 sist with holiness. This contempt may be shown — by 
 contemptuous language. . . .a careless attendance. . . .a 
 total neglect .... and by prostituting them to persons that 
 do contemn them, and to purposes that are unworthy. . . . 
 
 " To conclude: External rites are nothino; vvithout 
 the inward temper and virtue of mind; the inward 
 temper is but pretended to, in many cases, without the 
 external rites, and is acquired, promoted, and evidenced 
 by the use of them. If ' I give all my goods to the 
 poor, and have not charity ; ' there is the external act, 
 without the inward moral temper, and so it is all 
 nothing. If, on the other hand, I say, I have the 
 inward temper of charity, and give nothing to the poor, 
 but say to my brother, ' Be thou warmed ; be thou 
 clothed :' how dwelleth the love of God in that man? 
 Therefore what God hath johied together, let no man 
 put asunder. Whatever comparative excellence there 
 may be in the two different instances of obedience, they 
 are both instances of obedience; and the direction of 
 our regard is summed up in that text, (Matt, xxiii. 23.) 
 ' These ought ye to have done, and not to have left 
 the other undone.'" Moral Obligation to the Positive 
 Appointments in Religion, passim. Lond. 1732. 
 
 20. Bp. Hoadly. — " I. The partaking of the Lord's 
 supper is not a duty of itself, or a duty apparent to us 
 from the nature of things; but a duty made such to 
 Christians, by the positive institution of Jesus Christ. 
 
 " II. All positive duties, or duties made such by 
 institution alone, depend entirely upon the will and 
 declaration of the person who institutes or ordains them, 
 
OF POSITIVE INSriTUTIONS. 15 
 
 with respect to the real design and end of them; and 
 consequently to the due manner of performing them. 
 For, there being no other foundation for them with 
 regard to iis but the will of the institutors, this will 
 must of necessity be our sole direction, both as to our 
 understanding their true intent, and practising them 
 accordingly : because we can have no other direction in 
 this sort of duties, unless we will have recourse to mere 
 invention; which makes them our ozon institutions, and 
 not the institutions of those who first appointed them. 
 
 " III. It is plain, therefore, that the nature, the 
 design, and the due manner of partaking of the Lord's 
 supper, must of necessity depend upon what Jesus 
 Christ, who instituted it, hath declared about it. 
 
 " IV. It cannot be doubted, that he himself suffi- 
 ciently declared to his first and immediate followers the 
 whole of what he designed should be understood by it, 
 or implied in it. For this being a positive institution 
 depending entirely upon his will, and not designed to 
 contain any thing in it, but what he himself should please 
 to affix to it, it must follow, that he declared his mind 
 about it fidli/ and plainly : because otherwise, he must 
 be supposed to institute a duty, of which no one could 
 have any notion without his institution ; and at the same 
 time not to instruct his followers sufficiently what that 
 duty was to be. 
 
 '■' V. It is of small importance, therefore, to Chris- 
 tians to know what the many writers upon this subject, 
 since the time of the evangelists and apostles, have 
 affirmed. Much less can it be the duty of Christians to 
 be guided by what any persons, by their own authority, 
 or from their own imaginations, may teach concerning 
 this duty. This reason is plain : because in the matter 
 of an instituted duty, (or a duty made so by the positive 
 will of any person,) no one can be a judge, but the insti- 
 tutor himself, of what he designed should be contained 
 in it; and because, supposing him not to have spoken 
 
16 CONCERNING TFIE NATURE 
 
 his mind plainly about it, it is impossible that any other 
 person (to whom the institutor himself never revealed 
 his design) should make up that defect. All that is 
 added, therefore, to Christ's institution, as a necessary 
 part of it, ought to be esteemed only as the invention of 
 those who add it : and the more there is added (let it 
 be done with never so much solemnity, and never so 
 great pretences to authority,) the less there is remaining 
 of the simplicity of the institution, as Christ himself 
 
 ■left it 
 
 " VI. The passages in the New Testament, w4iich 
 relate to this duty, and they alone, are the original ac- 
 counts of the nature and end of this institution ; and the 
 only authentic declarations, upon which we of later ages 
 can safely depend." Works, vol. iii. p. 845, 846, 847. 
 See also Heidegg. Corp. Theol. loc. ix. § 40 ; loc. xxv. 
 § 2. Mr. Alsop's Antisozzo, p. 468. Dr. Ridgley's Bod. 
 Div. quest, xci. xcii. p. 491, 492. Glasg. edit. Puffen- 
 dorff's Law of Nat. and Nations, b. i. c. vi. § 18. Mr. 
 Reynolds on Angelical Worlds, p. 1 1, 12, 15. 
 
 REFLECTIONS. 
 
 Reflect. I. By this learned and respectable body 
 of P^dobaptists we are taught, that positive institutions 
 originate entirely in the sovereign will of God, No. 1 — 
 20 ; — that positive laws must be plain and express. No. 
 4, 8, 12, 13, 20; — that the obligation to observe them 
 arises, not from the goodness of the things themselves, 
 but from the authority of God, No. 2, 3 ; — that they 
 are determined by divine institution, as to their matter, 
 manner, and signification. No. 2, 16, 20; — that they 
 admit of no commutation, mutilation, or alteration, by 
 human authority. No. 2, 6 ; — that they depend entirely 
 on divine institution, and are to be regulated by it. No. 
 10, 1 1, 16; — that we ought not to conclude that God has 
 appointed such a rite, for such a purpose, because we 
 - imagine ourselves to stand in need of it, and that there 
 
OF POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS. 17 
 
 are sufficient reasons for it, No. 14, 18 ; — that our obli- 
 gation to observe them does not result from our seeing 
 the reasons of them, but from the command of God ; 
 and that his positive command is enforced by the moral 
 law. No. 6,7, 14 ; — that there are no accidental parts of 
 a positive institution, No. 15; — that it is unlawful to con- 
 form to any part of a religious rite, without a divine 
 warrant, No. 15; — that it is at our peril to continue 
 ignorant of the will of God, relating to his positive 
 appointments, No 19; — that it is great presumption to 
 make light of them. No. 7, 19 ; — that a disposition to 
 obey God in his positive institutes, is part of that holi- 
 ness without which none shall see the Lord, No. 19;— 
 and, that external rites are of little worth, detached from 
 virtuous tempers, No. 19- Such are the declared senti- 
 ments of these respectable authors concerning positive 
 institutions. 
 
 Reflect. II. As it seems to be the unanimous and 
 well attested opinion of these learned Pasdobaptists, that 
 positive institutions derive their whole being from the 
 sovereign pleasure of God ; so his revealed will must 
 have given them their existence under every dispensa- 
 tion of true religion. Consequently, we cannot know 
 any thing about their precise nature, their true design, 
 the proper subjects of them, or the right mode of their 
 administration, farther than the scriptures teach : for 
 " they are to be measured onli/ by the institution, in 
 which there is not room left for us to carry them any 
 farther." See No. 10, 20. It follows, therefore, from 
 the nature of the case, that positive ordinances must be 
 entirely under the direction of positive precepts, or of 
 examples in scripture, that are warranted by the Holy 
 Spirit. For, as Dr. Goodwin observes, " There is this 
 difference between doctrinal truths and institutions, that 
 one truth may be, by reason, better fetched out of 
 another, and more safely and easily than institutions: 
 for one truth begets another, and truth is infinite in the 
 
 VOL. I. c 
 
18 CONCERNING THE NATURE 
 
 consequences of it; but so institutions are not. And the 
 reason of the difference is this ; because they depend 
 upon a promise, and upon the power and will of God, 
 immediately to concur with them, and set them up. 
 They are things that are singled out by the will of God, 
 to a spiritual end, with a spiritual efficacy. We may 
 be assured what is an institution of God, by examples 
 which we meet with in the scriptures : for one way by 
 which Christ was pleased to convey his institutions to 
 us, is by way of examples in the New Testament; without 
 the which, being intended as a rule for us, we acknow- 
 ledge that a complete rule for all things could not be 
 made forth .... If an example be written as a rule, then 
 it will bind, because there is no supposition of error."* 
 
 Remarkably strong to our purpose, is the language 
 of Dr. Sherlock, who speaks as follows : " I would not 
 be thought wholly to reject a plain and evident con- 
 sequence from scripture ; but yet I will 7iever admit of 
 a mere consequence to prove an institution, which must 
 be delivered in plain terms, as all laws ought to be : 
 and where I have no other proof, but some scripture- 
 consequences, I shall not think it equivalent to a scrip- 
 ture-proof. If the consequence be plain and obvious, 
 and such as every man sees, I shall not question it : but 
 remote, and dubious, and disputed consequences, if we 
 have no better evidence, to be sure are a very ill foun- 
 dation for articles of faith, [or ordinances of worship.] 
 Let our Protestant then tell such disputants, that for the 
 institution of sacraments, and for articles of faith, he 
 expects plain positive proofs : that, as much as the Pro- 
 testant faith is charged with uncertainty, we desire a 
 little more certainty for our faith, than mere inferences 
 from scripture, and those none of the plainest neither."']' 
 — With Dr. Sherlock, Peter Martyr agrees, when he 
 
 * Works, vol. iv. Government of the Church of Christ, chap. iv. 
 p. 21, S^. 
 
 f Preserv. against Pop. vol. ii. Appendix, p. 23. 
 
OF POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS. 19 
 
 says, " It is necessary that we should have a clear testi- 
 mony from the holy scriptures, concerning sacraments."* 
 It seems, indeed, to be the general practice of all 
 Protestants, when contending with Roman Catholics 
 about their claims of prerogative and their numerous rites, 
 to proceed on this principle : nothing short of an e.vpUc'U 
 grant, a positive command, or a plain example in the 
 New Testament, can prove their divine origin. Is the 
 debate concerning Papal supremacy, or infallibility^ No 
 reasonings from remote principles, no conclusions from 
 far-fetched consequences, are allovved. The honours in 
 dispute being such as depend entirely on the sovereign 
 pleasure and special donation of God, an explicit divine 
 grant of these prerogatives is loudly demanded. — ^Are 
 five of their seven sacraments; the ceremonies performed 
 by them, when administering baptism and the Lord's 
 supper; their withholding the cup from the people, and 
 other things of a similar kind, the subjects in debate ? 
 Protestants hardly ever fail to require a direct proof, — 
 a positive precept, or a plain example, from the New 
 Testament. All arguments drawn from ancient Jewish 
 rites; all that are formed on general principles, or moral 
 considerations ; and all endeavours to produce inferen- 
 tial proof, are justly discarded as incompetent — as hav"- 
 ing nothing to do with the subject. For the subject be- 
 ing no other than the ritual part of that worship which 
 God requires under the New Testament; a divine insti- 
 tution of the rites in question, a plain positive order, or 
 an apostolic example, may well be required, before they 
 have a place in our creed, or become a part of our 
 solemn service. If, therefore, the New Testament say 
 nothing about the institution or the practice of such 
 rites, we have nothing to do with them, nor any thing 
 to believe concerning them.— On the same principle 
 Protestant dissenters proceed, when defending Non- 
 conformity ; using many of the same arguments 
 
 * Apud Chamierum, Panstrat. torn. iv. 1, i. c. xi. § 8. 
 C 2 
 
20 CONCERNING THE NATURE 
 
 against their Episcopalian opponents, which those Epis- 
 copahans employ when vindicating their own secession 
 from the church of Rome, The demand of Nonconfor- 
 mists upon their Episcopalian brethren is; Produce yow 
 warrant (for this, that, and the other,) from our only 
 rule of faith and practice — a divine precept, or an apos- 
 tolic e.rample, relating to the point in dispute. So im- 
 portant is this principle, respecting every thing of a 
 positive nature in Christianity, that I can hardly imagine 
 any sensible Protestant would ever think of writing 
 against the Popish system ; or any conscientious Dissen- 
 ter of justifying his Nonconformity, without availing 
 himself of it in many cases. Nay, so obvious and so 
 important is this principle, so congenial to that grand 
 maxim, the bible only is the religion of Pro- 
 testants ; that we might well wonder if a judicious 
 author omited it, when handling the doctrine of positive 
 rites ; except it appeared, that he laboured to establish 
 some hypothesis, to which this principle is inimical. 
 
 Nor does it appear from the records of the Old Tes- 
 tament, that when Jehovah appointed any branch of 
 ritual worship, he left either the subjects of it, or the 
 mode of administration, to be inferred by the people, 
 from the relatioti in which they stood to himself, or from 
 general moral precepts, or from any branch of his moral 
 worship; nor yet from any other well known positive 
 rite : but he gave them special directions relating to the 
 very case; and those directions they were bound to re- 
 gard, whether they appeared in a pleasing or a painful, 
 in a decent or a disgusting light. For as nothing but 
 the divine will can oblige the conscience, and as that w ill 
 ' cannot be known unless revealed; so, when made 
 known, whether in reference to moral or positive duties, 
 it must oblige. We are bound, therefore, to regard the 
 divine laws, not so much on account of what they are in 
 themselves, however excellent; as because they are the 
 will of Him whose claim of obedience is prior to every 
 
OF POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS. 21 
 
 Other consideration. See No. 2, 3. Consequently, see- 
 ing baptism is as really and entirely a positive institu- 
 tion, as any that were given to the chosen tribes ; we 
 cannot with safety infer, either the mode, or the subject 
 of it, from any thing short of a precept, or a precedent, 
 recorded in scripture, and relating to that very ordinance. 
 That the laws of positive worship under the Old 
 Testament were particular, clear, and decisive, will not 
 be denied ; and that our Lord has furnished the gospel 
 church with as complete a rubric of solemn service in 
 the New Testament, as that recorded by Moses in the 
 Pentateuch, our Paedobaptist brethren assert. Thus Dr. 
 Owen, for instance : " All things concerning the worship 
 of God in the whole church or house now under the 
 gospel, are no less perfectly and completely ordered and 
 ordained by the Lord Jesus Christ, than they were by 
 Moses under the law."* Dr. Isaac Chauncy : " Christ 
 hath been more faithful than Moses, and therefore hath 
 not left his churches without sufficient rules to walk by."'f 
 Dr. Ridgley : " It is a great dishonour to Christ, the 
 king and head of his church, to suppose that he has left 
 it without a rule to direct them, in what respects the 
 communion of saints ; as much as it would be to assert 
 that he has left it without a rule of faith. If God was 
 so particular in giving directions concerning every part 
 of that worship that was to be performed in the church 
 before Christ's coming, so that they were not, on pain 
 of his highest displeasure, to deviate from it ; certainly 
 we must not think that our Saviour has neglected to 
 give those laws by which the gospel church is to be go- 
 verned. "J Mr. Polhill : " Christ was as faithful in the 
 house of God as Moses; his provision was as perfect for 
 rituals, as that of Moses' was." § 
 
 * On Heb. ii. 2,3, vol. ii. p. 26. 
 
 f Preface to Dr. Owen's True Nature of a Gospel Church. 
 
 X Body of Divinity, quest. Ixi — Ixiv. 
 
 § Discourse on Schism, p. dQ. 
 
221 CONCERNING THE NATURE 
 
 Reflect. III. It seems natural hence to infer, that 
 our sovereign Lord must have revealed his will con- 
 cerning the ordinance of baptism, in a manner propor- 
 tional to its obligation and importance. For, as an 
 appointment of Christ, it originated in his will, and from 
 a revelation of that will the whole of its obligation re- 
 sults. In proportion, therefore, as we annex the idea 
 of obscurity to what he says about the mode and the 
 subject of it, we either sink the idea of obligation to 
 regard it, or impeach the wisdom, the goodness, or the 
 equity of our divine Legislator; for we neither have, 
 nor can have any acquaintance with a positive institu- 
 tion, farther than it is revealed ; and a natural incapa- 
 city will always excuse the non-performance of what 
 would otherwise be an indispensable duty. We are 
 therefore obliged to conclude, that our Lord has dearly 
 revealed his pleasure, with reference to both his positive 
 appointments, in that code of law and rale of religious 
 Avorship, which are contained in the New Testament. 
 See No. 20. 
 
 On this point let us hear Mr. Payne, when contend- 
 ing with the learned and artful Bossuet, bishop of 
 Meaux. " Surely," says the Protestant P^dobaptist, 
 " so wise a lawgiver as our blessed Saviour, would not 
 give a law to all Christians that was not easy to be un- 
 derstood by them ; it cannot be said without great reflec- 
 tion upon his infinite wisdom, that his laws are so obscure 
 and dark, as they are delivered by himself, and as they 
 are necessary to be observed by us, that we cannot know 
 the meaning of them without a farther explication. . . . 
 God's laws may be very fairly explained away, if they 
 are left wholly to the mercy of men to explain them."* 
 Agreeable to this is the language of Mr. Arch. Hall, 
 when he says, " The appointments of the Deity con- 
 cerning his worship, are not to be gathered from the 
 uncertain tradition of the elders, the authority of men, 
 
 * Freserv. against Popery, title vii. p. 147. 
 
OF POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS. 23 
 
 or the dictates of our own reason : no ; they slaad en- 
 grossed in the volume of his Book, which is the only 
 rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him."* 
 J. A. Turrettinus tells us, " That whatever of importance 
 the scripture delivers concerning the sacraments, may be 
 included in a few pages, nay, perhaps, in a few lines ; 
 and that so as a little child may understand it."'}" Once 
 more : Chemnitius assures us, that a positive rite "should 
 have an express divine command .... Whatever is main- 
 tained to be necessary in the church of Christ, should 
 have a command in the divine word, and scriptural exam- 
 ples."J Nay, even Bellarmine declares, that " in things 
 which depend on the will of God, nothing ought to be 
 affirmed, unless God hath revealed it in the holy scrip- 
 tures. "§ — Clear, however, as the positive laws of Christ 
 are. Dr. Waterland has well observed from Le Clerc, 
 that if men be " governed by their passions, and con- 
 ceited of their prejudices, the most evident things in 
 the world are obscure ; and, that there is no law so 
 clear, but a wrangler may raise a thousand difficulties 
 about it." II — It is, I think, worthy of remark, that 
 though Protestant authors in general, consider the 
 meaning of the law of Christ relating to his last supper, 
 as being evident beyond all reasonable doubt; and 
 though they severely censure the Roman Catholics for 
 insinuating the contrary, yet, with regard to the law of 
 baptism, they frequently represent its meaning, as am- 
 biguous and embarrassed ; nay, as favouring opposite 
 practices : so that whether an infant, or one professing 
 faith, be sprinkled, or immersed, the whole design of 
 the law may be fulfilled, and a divine blessing on the 
 administration expected. But whether this be con- 
 sistent or scriptural, is left with the reader. 
 
 * Gospel Worship^ vol. i. p. 30, f Cogitat & Dissertat, 
 
 torn. i. p. 18, 19 + Examen Concil. Trident, p. ^04, 285. 
 
 § In Prescrv. against Popery, title viii. p. 83. 
 II Importance of Doct. of Trinity, p. 461, edit. 2n(l. 
 
 ^ 
 
24 CONCERNING THE NATURE 
 
 Reflect. IV. That no addition should be made by 
 human authority to the positive appointments of Jesus 
 Christ ; and that it is not lawful, under any pretence, 
 either to corrupt or depart from the p7i??iithe institution 
 of those appointments ; are things generally maintained 
 and strongly urged against the Papists, by Protestants 
 of all descriptions. The following quotations may serve 
 as a specimen of their language and sentiments, in 
 reference to these particulars. Dr. Owen : " All wor- 
 ship is obedience; obedience respects authority; and 
 authority exerts itself in commands. And if this autho- 
 rity be not the authority of God, the worship performed 
 in obedience unto it is not the worship of God, but of 
 him or them whose commands and authority are the 
 reason and cause of it. It is the authority of God 
 alone that can make any worship to be religious, or 
 the performance of it to be an act of obedience unto him. 
 God would never allow that the will and wisdom of any 
 of his creatures should be the rise, rule, or measure of 
 his worship, or any part of it, or any thing that belongs 
 unto it. This honour he hath reserved unto himself, 
 neither will he part with it unto any other. He alone 
 knows what becomes his own greatness and holiness, 
 and what tends to the advancement of his glory. Hence 
 the scripture abounds with severe interdictions and 
 comminations against them who shall presume to do 
 or appoint any thing in his worship, besides or be- 
 yond his own institution .... Divine institution alone, 
 is that which renders any thing acceptable unto God .... 
 All divine service, or worship, must be resolved into 
 divine ordination or institution. A worship not or- 
 dained of God, is not accepted of God. . . .It is a hard 
 and rare thing to have the minds of men kept upright 
 with God in the observation of the institutions of divine 
 worship. Adam lost himself and us all by his failure 
 therein. The Old [Testament] Church seldom attained 
 unto it. . . .And at this day there are very few in the 
 
OF POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS. 25 
 
 world who judge a diligent observation of divine insti- 
 tutions to be a thing of any great importance. By 
 some they are neglected ; by some corrupted with ad- 
 ditions of their own ; and by some they are exalted 
 above their proper place and use, and turned into an 
 occasion of neglecting more important duties. . . .Our 
 utmost care and diligence in the consideration of the 
 mind of God, is required in all that we do about his 
 worship. There is nothing wherein men, for the most 
 part, are more careless. Some suppose it belongs unto 
 their own wisdom to order things in the worship of 
 God, as it seems most meet unto them ; some think 
 they are no farther concerned in these things, than only 
 to follow the traditions of their fathers. This, unto the 
 community of Christians, is the only rule of divine 
 worship. To suppose that it is their duty to enquire 
 into the way and manner of the worship of God, the 
 grounds and reasons of what they practise therein, is 
 most remote from them .... It were no hard thing to 
 demonstrate, that the principal way and means whereby 
 God expects that we should give glory unto him in this 
 world, is by a due observation of the divine worship 
 that he hath appointed. For herein do we in an especial 
 manner, ascribe unto him the glory of his sovereignty, of 
 his wisdom, of his grace, and holiness ; when in his 
 worship we bow down to his authority alone ; when 
 we see such an impress of divine wisdom on all his 
 institutions, as to judge all other ways folly in com- 
 parison of them ; when we have experience of the grace 
 represented and exhibited in them, then do we glorify 
 God aright. And without these things, whatever we 
 pretend, we honour him not in the solemnities of our 
 
 worship."* Turrettinus: " The appointment of God, 
 
 is the highest law, the supreme necessity."! ^^• 
 
 Archibald Hall : " As we live under the gospel dispen- 
 
 * On Heb. i. 6; ix. 1; viii. 5, 
 
 f Institut. Theol. loc, xix, qusest, xiv. torn, iii. p. 441. 
 
26 CONCERNING THE NATURE 
 
 sation, all our worship must be regulated by gospel in- 
 stitution, that it may be performed according to the 
 appointment of Christ, as king of the church." The 
 same author, when speaking of baptism, says : " This 
 ordinance should be observed with an honest simplicity, 
 and kept pure and entire, as Christ hath appointed it. 
 The rule given us in the word of God is our directory, 
 and we do well to take heed to it in this duty, as much 
 as in every other. How grand and awful is that weighty 
 preface to the institution of Christian baptism ! (Matt, 
 xxvii. 18, ly.) Who is the daring insolent worm, that 
 will presume to dispute the authority, or change the 
 ordinances of him who is given to be head over all 
 things to the church ?. . . .The solemnity of this ordi- 
 nance is complete, and all the great purposes of its 
 institution are secured by the authority and blessing of 
 Christ, who is a rock, whose work is perfect, and all 
 his commandments are sure. His laws are not subject 
 to any of those imperfections, which are attendants of 
 the best contrived systems among men, and frequently 
 need explanations, amendments, and corrections. It 
 is most dangerous and presumptuous, to add any cere- 
 mony, or to join any service, on any pretence, unto 
 heaven's appointment. This is the most criminal rash- 
 ness ; and, if it is not disputing the authority of Christ 
 directly, it is mingling the authority of men with the 
 authority of Him who has a name above every name. . . . 
 When divine authority is interposed to point out the 
 will of God concerning any service, which is enjoined 
 for standing use among the saints, such a service ought 
 to be observed without any regard to the manners and 
 usages of mankind; because both the substance and the 
 inanncr of it are the institution of Christ."* 
 
 Reflect. V. Concerning the circumstances of posi- 
 tive institutions, our Picdobaptist brethren speak as fol- 
 low. Mr. Vincent Alsop : " Under the Mosaical law 
 
 * Gospel Worshii), vol i. p. 32, 325, 326 j vol. ii. p. 434. 
 
OF POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS. %% 
 
 God commanded that they should offer to him the daily 
 burnt-offering ; and, in this case, the colour of the beast 
 (provided it was otherwise rightly qualified) was a mere 
 circumstance: such as God laid no stress upon, and 
 that man had proved himself a superstitious busy-body, 
 that should curiously adhere to any one colour. But, 
 for the heifer whose ashes were to make the water of 
 separation, there the colour was no circumstance, , but 
 made by God's command a substantial part of the 
 service. To be red, was as much as to be a heifer: 
 for when circumstances have once passed the royal 
 assent, and are stamped with the divine seal, they be- 
 come substantial in instituted worship .... We ought 
 not to judge that God has little regard to any of his 
 commands, because the matter of them, abstracted from 
 his authority, is little : for we must not conceive that 
 Christ sets little by baptism, because the element is 
 plain, fair water ; or little by that other sacrament, 
 because the materials thereof are common bread and 
 wine .... For though the things in themselves be small, 
 yet his authority is great .... Though the things be small, 
 yet God can bless them to great purposes, (2 Kings v. 
 11.)... .Nor are we to judge that God lays little stress 
 upon his institutes, because he does not immediately 
 avenge the contempt and neglect of them upon the 
 violaters. (Eccles. viii, 11; Matt. v. 29; 1 Cor. xi. 
 30.) .... As we must not think that God appreciates 
 whatever men set a high value upon, so neither are we 
 to judge that he disesteems any thing because it is grown 
 out of fashion, and thereby exposed to contempt by 
 the atheistical wits of mercenary writers .... If any of 
 Christ's institutions seem necessary to be broken, it will 
 be first necessary to decry them as poor, low, inconsider- 
 able circumstances ; and then to fill the people's heads 
 with a noise and din, that Christ lays little stress on 
 them ; and in order hereto call them the circumstantials, 
 the accidentals, the minutes, the punctilioes, and, if need 
 
28 CONCERNING THE NATURE 
 
 be, the petty Johns of reHgion, that conscience may not 
 kick at the contemning of them. . , .It would be inju- 
 rious to conclude that God has very little respect to his 
 own institutions, because he may suspend their exercise 
 pro hie (^' iiunc, rather than the duties imperated l)y a 
 moral precept. Mint, anise, and cummin, are inconsider- 
 able things, compared with the weightier matters of the 
 law, judgment, mercy, and faith ; and yet our Saviour 
 tells them, (Matt, xxiii. 23,) 'These ought ye to have 
 done, and not to have left the other undone'. . . .God is 
 the sovereign and absolute legislator, who may suspend, 
 rescind, alter his own laws at pleasure ; and yet he has 
 laid such a stress upon the meanest of them, that no 
 man may, nor any man, but the man of sin, dares pre- 
 sume to dispense with them, much less to dispense 
 against xhem. .. .Positives may be altered, changed, 
 or abolished, by the legislator, when and how far he 
 pleases ; but this will never prove that he lays little 
 stress upon them whilst they are not changed, not 
 abolished : nor will it prove that man may chop and 
 change, barter and truck one of God's least circum- 
 stantials, because the Lawgiver himself may do it. He 
 that may alter one, may, for aught I know, alter them 
 all, seeing they all bear the same image and supercrip- 
 tion of divine authority .... If God was so rigorous in 
 his animadversions, so punctual in his prescriptions, 
 when his institutions were so numerous, his prescriptions 
 so multiform ; what will he be when he has prescribed 
 us so few, and those so easy and useful to the observer? 
 If we cannot be punctual in the observation of a very 
 few positives of so plain signification, how should we 
 have repined had we been charged with a numerous re- 
 tinue of types and carnal rudiments ! If Christ's yoke 
 be accounted heavy, liovv should we have sunk under 
 the Mosaical pa^dagogy !'"* 
 
 ]\Ir. Payne : " It is from the institution of the siicra- 
 * Sober Enquiry, p. iJS9 — 304. 
 
OF POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS. 29 
 
 ment [of the Lord's supper,] that we know what belongs 
 to the substance of it, and is essential to it, and what is 
 only circumstantial and accidental. I own, there were 
 several things, even at the institution of it by Christ, 
 which were only circumstantials; as, the place, the time 
 when, the number of persons to whom, the posture in 
 which he gave it; for all these are plainly, and in their 
 own nature, circumstantial matters ; so that nobody can 
 think it necessary or essential to the sacrament, that it 
 be celebrated in an upper room, at night after supper, 
 only with twelve persons, and those sitting or lying 
 upon beds, as the Jews used to do at meals; for the 
 same thing which Christ bids them to do, may be done, 
 the same sacramental action performed in another 
 place, at another time, with fewer or more persons, 
 and those otherwise postured or situated ; but it cannot 
 be the same sacrament or same action, if bread 
 be not blessed and eaten, if wine be not blessed and 
 drunken, as they were both then blessed by Christ, 
 and eaten and drunk by his apostles. The doing 
 of these is not a circumstance, but the very thing 
 itself, and the very substance and essence of the sacra- 
 ment ; for without these we do not what Christ did ; 
 whereas we may do the very same thing which he did, 
 without any of those circumstances with which he did it 
 . . . .The command of Christ, Do this, does not in the least 
 extend to these [circumstances,] but only to the sacra- 
 mental action of blessing bread and eating it ; blessing 
 wine and drinking it, i?t remembrance of Christ: for 
 that was the thing which Christ did, and which he com- 
 manded them to do ... . He that does not plainly see 
 those to be circumstances [before mentioned,] and can- 
 not easily distinguish them from the thing itself which 
 Christ did, and commanded to be done, must not know 
 what it is to eat and drink, unless it be with his own 
 family, in such a room of his own house, and at such an 
 hour of the day : it is certainly as easy to know what 
 
30 CONCERXING THE NATURE 
 
 Christ instituted, and what he commanded, as to know 
 this ; and, consequently, what belongs to the essence of 
 the sacrament, without which it would not be such a 
 sacrament as Christ celebrated and appointed, as to 
 know what it is to eat and to drink ; and yet Monsieur 
 de Meaux is pleased to make this the great difficulty, 
 to know what belongs to the essence of the sacrament, 
 and what does not, and to distinguish what is essential 
 
 in it, from what is not."* Mr. Arch. Hall: " The 
 
 signs, and even every circumstance relative to the use of 
 them, must be appointed by Christ, and not contrived 
 by men : for here, as in every other duty, we must ob- 
 serve all things that Christ hath commanded us. It is 
 equally presumptuous and vain, to teach for doctrines 
 the commandments or inventions of men. The signs 
 that are used in the sacraments have a natural fitness to 
 bring the things they represent to our mind."'(' 
 
 Reflect. VI. With regard to positive institutions 
 Protestant Pasdobaptists farther inform us, that the Lord 
 Jesus Christ is jealous of his honour; that what is not 
 commanded, need not he foi^ bidden ; and that nothing is 
 lawful, which is not a duty. The following instance 
 may here suffice. — Dr. Witherspoon : Our obedience 
 " must be implicit ; founded immediately on the au- 
 thority of God. We must not take upon us to judge 
 of the moment and importance of any part of his will, 
 farther than he hath made it known himself It is 
 a very dangerous thing for us to make comparisons be- 
 tween one duty and another; especially with a view of 
 dispensing with any of them, or altering their order, and 
 
 substituting one in another's place.'':}: Dr. Owen : 
 
 " Christ marrying his church to himself, taking it to that 
 relation, still expresseth the main of their chaste and 
 choice affections to him, to lie in their keeping his insti- 
 tutions and his worship according to his appointment. 
 
 * Preserv. against Pop. title vii. p. 110, 137, 13S. 
 I Gospel Worship, vol. i. cliap. vii. p. 235. 
 I Practical Discourses, vol. i. p. 3,'^;'"). 
 
OF POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS. 31 
 
 The breach of this he calls adultery everywhere, and 
 whoredo7n: he is 2, jealous God, and he gives himself that 
 title only in respect of his institutions. And the whole 
 apostasy of the Christian church unto false worship, is 
 called fornication, (Rev. xvii. 5,) and the church that 
 leads the others to false worship, the mother of harlots. 
 On this account, those believers who really attend 
 to communion with Jesus Christ, do labour to keep 
 their hearts chaste to him in his ordinances, institutions, 
 and worship .... They will receive nothing, practise 
 nothing, own nothing in his worship, but what is of 
 his appointment. They know that from the foundation 
 of the world he never did allow, nor ever w ill, that in 
 any thing the will of the creatures should be the measure 
 of his honour, or the principle of his worship, either as 
 to matter or manner. . . .That principle, That the church 
 hath power to institute and appoint any thing, or cere- 
 mony belonging to the worship of God, either as to mat- 
 ter or to manner, beyond the orderly observance of such 
 circumstances as necessarily attend such ordinances as 
 Christ himself hath instituted, lies at the bottom of all 
 the horrible superstition and idolatry, of all the confu- 
 sion, blood, persecution, and wars, that have, for so long 
 a season, spread themselves over the face of the Chris- 
 tian world ; and it is the design of a great part of the 
 Revelation [of John] to make a discovery of this truth."*' 
 — — Mr. Arch. Hall : " God will bless nothing but his 
 own institutions. The inventions of men, in serving God, 
 are as unprofitable as they are wicked and presump- 
 tuous, (Deut. xii. 31, 32.). . . .We cannot think God 
 will honour the inventions of men, however they may be 
 dignified by the specious names of useful, decent, agree- 
 able, or prudent contrivances ; yet, if they are an addi- 
 tion to his system, will he not say, Who hath required 
 these things at your hands ?"t Hoornbekius : " In 
 
 * Commun. with God, part ii. chap. v. p. 169, 170. 
 t View of Gospel Church, p. 33, 82. 
 
32 CONCERNING THE NATURE. 
 
 what relates to the sacraments, and the affairs of reli- 
 gion, it is unlawful to do any thing that is not warranted 
 
 by the command of God.* Dr. Sherlock : " Our 
 
 [Popish] author, and some of his size, who do not see 
 half a consequence before them, think they have a 
 mighty advantage of us, in demanding the same proofs 
 from us to justify our rejecting their doctrines, which 
 we demand of them to justify their behef of them. That 
 is to say, as we demand of them a scripture-proof, that 
 there is such a place as purgatory ; they think they may 
 as reasonably demand of us a scripture- proof, that there 
 is no such place as purgatory : just with as much reason, 
 as if one should tell me, that, by the laws of England, 
 every man is bound to marry at twenty years old ; and 
 when I desire him to show me the law which makes this 
 necessary, he should answer. Though he cannot show 
 such a law, yet it may be necessary, unless 1 can show 
 him a law which expressly declares that it is not neces- 
 sary. Whereas nothing is necessary, but what the laiu 
 makes so ; and if the law has not made it necesssary, 
 there is no need of any law to declare that it is not ne- 
 cessary. "f Dr. Owen : " What men have a right to 
 
 do in the church, by God's institution, that they have a 
 
 command to do. "J -x\nonymous : " There is nothing 
 
 relating to instituted worship, as such, that is lawful, 
 but is our necessary duty ; viz. necessary, necessitate 
 prcecepti instituting it."§ 
 
 Reflect. VII. That the subjects of positive divine 
 laws cannot slight or neglect them without offending 
 God, is maintained with a decisi%'e tone by our learned 
 Paedobaptist brethren. Thus, for instance, Bp. Taylor : 
 " The positive laws of Jesus Christ cannot be dispensed 
 with by any human power. All laws given by Christ, 
 
 * Socin. Confut. torn. iii. p. 436. f Preservat, against 
 
 Pop. vol. ii. Appendix, p. G.5. + On Heb. vii. 4, .5, 6, vol. iii. 
 
 p. 1^7. § Jerubbaal, j). 458 
 
 1 
 
OF POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS. 33 
 
 are now made for ever to be obligatory."* Mr. Jo- 
 seph White, speaking of the ancient ceremonial law, 
 says : " To slight any of its services, was to insult the 
 authority which enjoined it."t Dr. Waterland : '' Po- 
 sitive duties stand upon a moral foot. . . .To obey God 
 in whatsoever he commands is the first moral law, and 
 the fundamental principle of all morality. The reason of 
 things, and the relation we bear to God, require that God 
 should be obeyed in matters otherwise indifferent : and 
 such obedience is moral, and the opposite disobedience 
 
 immoral Positives, therefore, while under precept, 
 
 cannot be slighted without slighting morals also. In short, 
 positive laws, as soon as enacted, become part of moral 
 law ; because, as I said, universal obedience to God's 
 commands, is the first moral law into which all laws re* 
 
 solve Whenever positive duties are so performed as 
 
 to become true obedience, they are as valuable in God's 
 sight as any moral performances whatever, because obey- 
 ing God's voice is all in all. Obedience was the thing 
 insisted upon with Adam, with Abraham, with Saul, 
 and with many others, in positive instances ; and God 
 laid as great a stress upon obedience there, as in any 
 moral instances whatever. To conclude then, moral 
 performances, without the obedience of the heart, are 
 nothing; and positive performances, without the like 
 obedience are nothing : but the sincere obeying of God's 
 
 voice in both, is true religion and true morality." | 
 
 Mr. Reynolds : "To call some law moral, in contra- 
 distinction from other law, as if it was nQt moral at all, 
 is improper enough. Every law, properly so called, is 
 regula moralis, or regula morum ; an obliging rule for 
 the moral creature to walk or act by ... . Positive com- 
 mands are more easily transgressed than those that bear 
 
 * Ductor Dub. b. ii. chap iii. p. 334. 
 
 f Sermons before University of Oxford, p. 130, edit. '2nd. 
 I Scripture Vindicated, part iii. p. 37, 7', 72. 
 VOL. I. D 
 
34 CONCERNING THE NATURE 
 
 hard upon the Hght and law of nature. The seeming 
 indifferency of the subject, or matter, in which they are 
 concerned, allays the awe, and fear, and distance, that 
 
 attends more criminal matter."* Mr. Wadsworth : 
 
 " Some may say, — Sure, God will not be so much con- 
 cerned with a failure in so small a punctilio as a ceremony ! 
 True, it [the Lord's supper] is a ceremony; but it is 
 such a one that beareth the stamp of the authority of 
 the Lord Jesus. If He appoints it, will you slight it, 
 and say. It is but a ceremony? — It is but a ceremony, 
 but you are greatly mistaken if you think that therefore 
 there is no danger to neglect it. What was the tree of 
 knowledge of good and evil, but a ceremony ? Yet, for 
 disobedience in eating thereof, do you not know and teel 
 what wrath it hath brought on the whole race of man- 
 kind ? And tell me, was circumcision any more than a 
 ceremony ? Yet it had almost cost Moses his life for 
 neglecting to circumcise his son ; for the angel stood 
 ready with his sword to slay him, if he had not pre- 
 vented it by his obedience, (Exod. iv. 24, 25, 26.) So, 
 for the Lord's supper, as much a ceremony as it is, yet 
 for the abuse of it, some of the church [at Corinth] were 
 sick and weak, others fell asleep, that is, died : and if 
 God did so severely punish the abuse, how think you to 
 escape, \hdl presumptuously 7ieglect \he use thereof? But 
 I am regenerate and become a new creature; — I do not 
 fear that God will cast me away for the disuse of a cere- 
 mony. Is this the reasoning of one regenerate ? Surely, 
 thou dost not understand what regeneration meaneth. 
 Is it not the same with being born of God? And what 
 is it to be obedient to the Father, but to do as he com- 
 mandeth ? And hath he not commanded you by his 
 Son, to remember your Saviour in this supper? When 
 you have considered this, then tell me what you think 
 of this kind of reasoning : I am a child of God, therefore 
 
 * Enquiries concerning Angelical Worlds, p. 11, 12, 15. 
 
OF POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS. 35 
 
 I will p7^esu7ne to disobey him. He bids me remember 
 Jesus in this supper, and I will not. Methinks thou 
 blushest at the very mentioning of it. And what, if he 
 should not cast thee quite off for this neglect ? yet thou 
 hast no reason to think, but that either outwardly, or in- 
 wardly, or both, he will scourge thee for this sin before 
 thou diest."* This reasoning, it is plain, mutatis mu- 
 tandis, applies with equal force to a neglect of baptism : 
 to which I will add the following passage from Dr. 
 Owen: " Slaves take liberty /ro?7z duty; children have 
 liberty in duty. There is not a greater mistake in the 
 world, than that the liberty of sons in the house of God 
 consists in this, they can perform duties, or take the 
 freedom to omit them : they can serve in the family of 
 God, that is, they think they may if they will, and they 
 can choose whether they will or nOo This is a liberty 
 stolen by slaves ; not a liberty given by the Spirit unto 
 sons."t 
 
 It is well observed by Chamier, and it is a dictate of 
 common sense, " That no law derives its authority from 
 the judgment [or the inclination] of those to whom it is 
 given."]; And it is equally clear, that when a law has 
 been fairly promulged, ignorance of its demands cannot 
 render a non-compliance innocent. For, as Dr. Water- 
 land observes, the law presumes, " that when a man has 
 done an ill thing, [or neglected his duty] he either knew 
 that it was evil, or else ought to have known it. Igno- 
 rantia juris non excusat delictum'' \ It is therefore 
 incumbent on every professor of Christianity, to make a 
 diligent and impartial search into the records of the 
 New Testament, that he may know and perform the will 
 of his Lord respecting baptism. Nor has any one reason 
 to consider himself as possessed of a pious and virtuous 
 
 * Supplem. to Morn. Exercise at Cripplegate, p. 243, 244. 
 f Communion with God, part ii. chap. x. p. 246. 
 \ Panstrat. torn. i. 1. vi. chap. xx. § 1. 
 § Import, of Doct. of Trin. p. 164. 
 D 2 
 
S6 CONCERNING THE NATURE 
 
 temper, while destitute of a disposition to make such an 
 enquiry. Because " virtue," says Heineccius, " is al- 
 ways united with an earnest, indefatigable care to un- 
 derstand the divine law. The greater progress one has 
 made in virtue, the more ardent is this desire in his 
 breast." Nay, though a person should plead conscience 
 for the omission or corruption of a positive institute, he 
 would not be exculpated ; for, as the last mentioned 
 author justly observes, " Though he be guilty who acts 
 contrary to his conscience, whether certain or probable, 
 yet he cannot, for that reason, be said to act rightly and 
 justly, who contends that he has acted according to his 
 conscience. Conscience is not the rule, but it applies 
 the rule to facts and cases which occur .... He who fol- 
 lows an erroneous conscience sins on this very account, 
 That he follows it rather than the will of the Legislator : 
 though he be more excusable than one who acts directly 
 against conscience, yet he is guilty."* The morality of 
 our conduct does not depend on the understanding ; for 
 our knowing, or being ignorant of a thing, is not the 
 reason of its being good or evil, any more than the na- 
 ture of an action does upon the will ; because the willing 
 a bad action to a good end, cannot render it innocent. 
 Divine law is the rule of our conduct ; and a want of 
 conformity to that rule is a sin. 
 
 It appears, therefore, by the preceding reasoning, 
 and from the authors produced, that none are worthy 
 the name of Christians who are destitute of a disposition 
 to acknowledge the authority of Christ by submission to 
 his positive appointments ; and, that ignorance of their 
 nature, obligation, and use, is far from excusing, except 
 it arise from 7iatural incapacity, and not from a bad 
 state of the will. Now-, in regard to baptism, we have 
 not only the command of our Lord, but his own example 
 also, to enforce our observance of it ; concerning which, 
 Mr. Wesley very properly says : " Let our Lord's sub- 
 
 * Universal Law, b. i. chap. ii. § 37, 45. 
 
OF POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS. 37 
 
 mitting to baptism teach us a holy exactness in the ob- 
 servance of those institutions which owe their obligation 
 merely to a divine command. Surely, thus it becometh 
 all his followers to fulfil all righteousness.'"* It has been 
 justly remarked by a learned Lutheran, " That so great 
 an honour was never conferred upon any ceremony, "f 
 as there was upon baptism, when our Lord himself was 
 immersed in Jordan, by the hands of John ; M'hen the 
 divine Father, with an audible voice, proclaimed him 
 his beloved Son ; and when the Holy Spirit descended 
 upon him. 
 
 I will conclude this part of our subject with the 
 reasoning of Dr. Gerard. " A total disregard to the 
 positive and external duties of religion, or a very great 
 neglect of them, is justly reckoned more blameable, and 
 a stronger evidence of an unprincipled character, than 
 even some transgressions of moral obligation .... Even 
 particular positive precepts, as soon as they are given 
 by God, have something moral in their nature. Sup- 
 pose the rites which are enjoined by them, perfectly in- 
 different before they were enjoined ; yet from that mo- 
 ment they cease to be indifferent. The divine authority 
 is interposed for the observance of them. To neglect 
 them is no longer to forbear an indifferent action, or to 
 do a thing in one way rather than another, which has 
 naturally no great propriety : it is very different ; it is 
 to disobey God, it is to despise his authority, it is to re- 
 sist his will. Can any man believe a God, and not ac- 
 knowledge that disobedience to him, and contempt of 
 his authority is immoral, and far from the least heinous 
 species of immorality ?.... All positive institutions of 
 divine appointment, are means of cultivating moral vir- 
 tue. Be the rites themselves what they will, their being 
 enjoined by God, renders them proper trials of our obe- 
 
 * Note on Matt. iii. 16. 
 
 t Centur. Magdeb. cent, i. 1. i. e. iv. p. 113. 
 
38 CONCERNING THE NATURE 
 
 dience to him, and renders our observance of them the 
 means of cherishing a sense of his authority, and of 
 improving a principle of subjection to it. A principle 
 of subjection to the authority of God, is one of the 
 firmest supports of all goodness and virtue ; and posi- 
 tive institutions are the most direct means of cultivating 
 it, for the observance of them proceeds solely from the 
 principle of obedience ; but in every moral virtue, other 
 principles are conjoined with this. All the rites ap- 
 pointed by God, are likewise direct and very powerful 
 means of improving many particular virtuous affections, 
 all the affections which are naturally exercised in per- 
 forming them. Neglect of the means demonstrates, in 
 every case, indifference about the end. Disregard to 
 external worship and positive institutions, shows the 
 want of all concern for moral improvement. But un- 
 concern for moral improvement is not the defect of a 
 single virtue, is not a single vice ; it is a corruption and 
 degeneracy of the xvhole soul, and therefore must appear 
 highly detestable to every person of sound and unbiassed 
 judgment, . . .It is not they who reckon a regard to po- 
 sitive institutions essential to a good and unblemished 
 character, that judge weakly, but they who reckon that 
 regard of no importance. Vain are their pretensions to 
 enlargement of sentiment, and elevation above prejudice ; 
 their minds are so contracted, that they can admit only 
 a partial idea of the nature of positive duties ; they con- 
 sider but the mere matter of them ; they comprehend 
 not their moral principles, their sublime end, or their 
 important signification."* 
 
 As the leading ideas in the preceding paragraphs are 
 the grand principles of legitimate reasoning on the doc- 
 trine of positive institutions ; as it is on these principles 
 that our most eminent Protestant authors proceed, 
 when exploding the superstitions of Popery ; and as it 
 
 * Sermons, vol. i. p. 312—314, 316, 317, 320, edit, 2ncl. 
 
OF POSITIVE INSTITUTIONS. 39 
 
 is our intention to examine Pasdobaptism on these very 
 principles ; the reader is desired to keep them in mind, 
 while perusing the following pages. It has been justly 
 remarked by Bp. Taylor, that " men are easy enough to 
 consent to a general rule ; but they will not suffer their 
 own case to be concerned in it."* This observation is, 
 doubtless, founded in fact, and it expresses an affecting 
 truth. While, therefore, we consider the forementioned 
 authors as having verified the remark by practising in- 
 fant sprinkling, we shall endeavour to avoid a similar 
 inconsistency. 
 
 * Ductor Dubitant. b. ii. chap. iii. p. 303. 
 
40 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Concejiiing the Sigiujication of the J'erm.s, Baptize and 
 
 Baptism. 
 
 [N^. B. To prevent mistakes, the reader is desired to 
 observe, that many of the following quotations are to 
 be considered as concessions made by these learned au- 
 thors ; no inconsiderable part of them asserting, not- 
 withstanding what they here say, that the word baptism 
 signifies pouring and sprinkling, as well as immersion.] 
 
 WiTSius. — " It cannot be denied, that the native 
 signification of the word ^a'^retv, and /5a7rT/^e/v, is to plunge, 
 to dip. So that it is, doubtless, more than e-TrnroXa^eiVj 
 which is to swim lightly on the surface ; but less than 
 ^vveivy which is to go down to the bottom and be de- 
 stroyed. . . .Yet I have observed, that the word Kara^vai^ 
 is frequently used by the ancients, with reference to bap- 
 tism." CEcon. Feed, 1. iv. c. xvi. § 13. 
 
 2. Salmasius. — " Baptism is immersion ; and was ad- 
 ministered, in ancient times, according to the force and 
 meaning of the word. Now it is only rhantism, or 
 sprinkling ; not immersion, or dipping." De Caesarie 
 Virorum, p. 669- 
 
 3. Gurtlerus. — " To baptize, among the Greeks, is 
 undoubtedly to immerse, to dip ; and baptism, is immer- 
 sion, dipping. BaiTTiaixo^ ev UvevfxaTi dyia), baptism in the 
 Hall) Spirit, is immersion into the pure waters of the 
 Holy Spirit, or a rich and abundant communication of 
 his gifts ; for he on whom the Holy Spirit is poured out, 
 is as it were immersed into him. . . .'Qaimaix.og ev -nvpi, 
 baptism injirc, is a figurative expression, and signifies 
 casting into a flame, which, like water, flows far and 
 wide; such as the flame that consumed Jerusalem. . . . 
 
BAPTIZE AXD BAPTISM. 41 
 
 The thing commanded by our Lord is baptism, immer- 
 sion into water." Institut. Theol. cap. xxxiii. § 108, 
 109, 110, llo. 
 
 4. Danaeus. — " BaTmafxoi, baptism, is derived airo 
 Tov (3a7tre(jBai, Or jSa'^Ti^eadai : the former of which pro- 
 perly signifies to dye ; the latter, to immerse^ especially 
 in water. But, as that which emerges out of the water 
 appears to be washed, and fair, and clean ; so the term 
 baptism is frequently used in the holy scripture, for wash- 
 ing and cleansing." In Leigh's Critica Sacra, under the 
 word, BaTTTia-fxog, edit. 2nd. 
 
 5. Gomarus. — " BaTrr^a/xo^- and BaTrr^cr^a, signify the 
 act of baptizing: that is, either plunging alone; or im- 
 mersion, and the consequent washing." Opera, Disputat. 
 Theolog. Disput. xxxii. § 5. 
 
 6. Buddeus. — " The words ^aTrn^eiv and {3a7rTicr[xofj 
 are not to be interpreted of aspersion, but always of 
 immersion." Theolog. Dogmat. 1. v. c. i. § 5. 
 
 7. Dr. Bentley. — " BaTrT/o-jOtouf, baptisms, dippings 
 — BaTTTia-ov creavrov ei$ SaXacrcrav, dip yourself in the sea." 
 Remarks on Disc, on Free Thinking, part ii. p. 56, 57, 
 edit. 6. 
 
 8. Bp, Reynolds. — " The Spirit under the gospel is 
 compared to water ; and that not a little measure, to 
 sprinkle, or bedew, but to baptize the faithful in, (Matt, 
 iii. 1 1 ; Acts i. 5,) and that not in a font, or vessel, which 
 grows less and less, but in a spring, or living river, 
 (Johnvii. 39.). . . .There are two words which signify suf- 
 fering of afflictions, and they are both applied unto 
 Christ, (Matt. xx. 22.) Are ye able to drink of the cup 
 that I shall drink of, or be baptized with that baptism 
 that I am baptized with ? He that drinketh hath the 
 water in him; he that is dipped or plunged, hath the 
 water about him : so it notes the universality of the wrath 
 which Christ suffered." Works, p. 226, 407. 
 
 9. Calvin. — " The word baptize, signifies to im- 
 merse; and the rite of immersion was observed by 
 
42 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 the ancient church." Institut. Christ. Relig. 1. iv. 
 c. XV. § 19. 
 
 10. Beza. — " Christ commanded us to be baptized; 
 by ^vhich word it is certain immersion is signified .... 
 BaTTTi^eaGai, in this place, is more than "xepviTrreiv ; be- 
 cause that seems to respect the whole body, this only the 
 hands. Nor does iSaTrri'Cetv signify to wash, except by 
 consequence: for it properly signifies to immerse for the 
 sake of dyeing .... To be baptized in water, signifies no 
 other than to be immersed in water, which is the exter- 
 nal ceremony of baptism .... Ba7rT;^&) differs from the 
 verb ^vvai, which signifies, to plunge in the deep and to 
 drown; as appears from that verse of an ancient oracle, 
 AcTKos PaTTTi^vj, "^vvai ^e toi ov Oeixi^ ea-Ti : in which these tw^o 
 terms are distinguished, as expressing different ideas." 
 Epistola II. ad Thom. Tilium, (apud Spanhem. Dub. 
 Evang. pars iii. Dub. 24.) Annotat. in Marc. vii. 4. 
 Acts xix. 3; Matt. iii. 11. 
 
 11. Meisnerus. — ^" Bann^eiv and jSaTrreiv, are ge- 
 nerally found used for plunging and a total immer- 
 sion." Apud Spanhem. Dub. Evangel, pars iii. Dub. 
 xxiv. § 2. 
 
 12. Danish Catechism. — " What is Christian dip- 
 ping? Water in conjunction with the word and command 
 of Christ. What is that command which is in conjunc- 
 tion with water? ' Go teach all nations,' and so on, 
 (Matt, xxviii. 19; Mark xvi. 15, 16.) What is implied 
 in these words? A command to the dipper and the 
 dipped, with a promise of salvation to those that believe. 
 How is this Christian dipping to be administered ? The 
 person must be deep-dipped in water, or overwhelmed 
 rith it, ' in the name of God the Father,' and so on." 
 N. B. The gentleman who favoured me with this ex- 
 tract, observes ; that (SaTrni^io is translated, by the Ger- 
 mans, ieuff; by the Dutch, doop; by the Danes and 
 Swedes, dobe; all which signify, to dip. 
 
 13. Spanhemius. — " Bami^d)/ and /oaitTeiv, are gene- 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 43 
 
 rally found used for plunging, or a total dipping." Dub. 
 Evang. pars iii. Dub. xxiv. § 2. 
 
 14. Vitringa. — " The act of baptizing, is the im- 
 mersion of believers in water. This expresses the force 
 of the word. Thus also it was performed by Christ and 
 his apostles." Aphorismi Sanct. Theolog. aphoris. 884. 
 
 15. Beckmanus. — " Baptism, according to the force 
 of its etymology, is immersion, and washing, or dipping." 
 Exercit. Theolog. exercit. xvii. p. 257. 
 
 1 6. Bucanus. — ^" Baptism, that is, immersion, dipping, 
 and, by consequence, washing. Baptistery, a vat, or large 
 vessel of wood, or stone, in which we are immersed, for 
 the sake of washing. Baptist, one that immerses, or 
 dips." Institut. Theolog. loc. xlvii. quaest. i. p. 605. 
 
 17. Bp. Patrick. — "I may say of him [Mr. John 
 Smith] in Antoninus's praise, he was hKaioa-wy} ^efSafj.- 
 fxevog eig (SaQog, DIPPED into Justice, as it were, over 
 head and ears; he had not a slight superficial tincture, 
 but was dyed and coloured quite through with it." 
 Funeral Serm. for Mr. J. Smith of Cambridge, sub- 
 joined to his Select Discourses, p. 509- 
 
 18. Zanchius. — " Baptism is a Greek word, and 
 signifies two things; first, and properly, immersion in 
 water : for the proper signification of BairTi^a, is to 
 immerse, to plunge under, to overwhelm in water. . . . 
 And this signification properly agrees with our baptism, 
 and has a resemblance of the thing signified." Opera, 
 tom. vi. p. 217. Genev. I6l9- N. B. Mr. De Courcy 
 tells us, that the opinion of Zanchius ' is worth a thou- 
 sand others.'" Rejoinder, p. 261. 
 
 19. Hoornbeekius. — " We do not deny that the 
 word baptism bears the sense of immersion; or that, in 
 the first examples of persons baptized, they went into 
 the water and were immersed; or that this rite should 
 be observed where it may be done conveniently and 
 without endangering health." Socin, Confut. 1. iii. c. ii. 
 sect. i. tom. iii. p. 268. 
 
44 
 
 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 20. Stapferus. — " By baptism we understand that 
 rite of the New Testament church, commanded by Christ, 
 in which behevers, by being immersed in water, testify 
 their communion with the church." Institut. Theolog. 
 Polem. torn. i. cap. iii. § 1635. 
 
 21. Burmannus. — ^' BairTia-ixo^ and /3a7rT<<r/Aa, if you 
 consider their etymology, properly signify immersion. 
 ' And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straight- 
 way out of the water,' (Matt. iii. 16. Compare Acts viii. 
 38.)" Synops. Theolog. loc. xliii. cap. vi. § 2. 
 
 22. Roell. — " Baptism, from (SaTrru, signifies immer- 
 sion." Exphcat. Epist. ad Ephesios, ad cap. iv.5. 
 
 23. Mr. John Trapp. — " 'Are ye able to — be 
 baptized with the baptism;' or plunged over head and 
 ears in the deep waters of affliction ?" Comment, on 
 Matt. XX. 22. 
 
 24. Limborch. — " Baptism is that rite, or ceremony, 
 of the new covenant, whereby the faithful, by immer- 
 sion into water, as by a sacred pledge, are assured of the 
 favour of God, remission of sins, and eternal life; and 
 by which they engage themselves to an amendment of 
 life, and an obedience to the divine commands." Com- 
 plete Syst. Div. b. v. chap. xxii. sect. i. Mr. Jones's 
 translation. 
 
 25. H. Altingius. — " The word baptism pro- 
 perly signifies immersion ; improperly, by a metonymy 
 of the end, washing." Loci Commun. pars. i. loc. xii. 
 p. 198. 
 
 26. Hospinianus. — " Christ commanded us to be 
 baptized ; by which word it is certain immersion is sig- 
 nified." Hist. Sacram. 1. ii. c. i. p. 30. 
 
 27. Casaubonus. — " This was the rite of baptiz- 
 ing, that persons were plunged into the water; which 
 the very word (3aTrTi^€tv, to baptize, sufficiently declares ; 
 which, as it does not signify Iweiv, to sink to the bottom 
 a?icl perish, so, doubtless, it is not eTrnroXa^erj, to suim on 
 the surface. For these three words, ini'7ro\a<^eiv, (SaTTTi^eiv, 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 45 
 
 and ^vv€iv, are of different significations. Whence we 
 understand it was not without reason, that some long 
 ago insisted on the immersion of the whole body in the 
 ceremony of baptism ; for they urge the word jSaTrri^eiv, 
 to baptize." Annotat. in Matt. iii. 6. 
 
 28. Diodati. — " Baptized; viz. plunged into water 
 .... In baptism, being dipped in water according to the 
 ancient ceremony, it is a sacred figure unto us, that sin 
 ought to be drowned in us, by God's Spirit. Annotat. 
 on Matt. iii. 6; Rom. vi. 4. 
 
 29. Calmet. — " Generally people [speaking of the 
 Jews] dipped themselves entirely under the water ; and 
 this is the most simple and natural notion of the word 
 baptism." Diet, of Bible, art. Baptism. 
 
 30. Luther. — " The term baptism, is a Greek word. 
 It may be rendered a dipping, when we dip something 
 in water, that it may be entirely covered with water. 
 And though that custom be quite abolished among the 
 generality (for neither do they entirely dip children, but 
 only sprinkle them with a little water,) nevertheless 
 they ought to be wholly immersed, and presently to 
 be drawn out again ; for the etymology of the word 
 seems to require it. The Germans call baptism taitff', 
 from depth, which they call tieff, in their language; as if 
 it were proper those should be deeply immersed, who are 
 baptized. And, truly, if you consider what baptism 
 signifies, you shall see the same thing required : for it 
 signifies, that the old man and our nativity, that is full 
 of sins, which is entirely of flesh and blood, may be 
 overwhelmed by divine grace. The manner of baptism, 
 therefore, should correspond to the signification of bap- 
 tism, that it may show a certain and plain sign of it." 
 In Dr. Du Veil, on Acts viii. 38. 
 
 31. Schelhornius, when explaining 1 Cor. xv. 21, 
 and understanding the word baptized in a metaphorical 
 sense, as expressive of being overwhelmed in calamities, 
 says ; " The word ^aitn^eaBai, which probably signifies 
 
46 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 to be immersed, or plunged under water; though not so 
 frequently used by profane authors in a metaphorical 
 sense, is nevertheless not unusual."* Biblioth. Bremens. 
 class, vii. p. 638. 
 
 32. Mr. Selden. — " In England, of late years, I 
 ever thought the parson baptized his own fingers, rather 
 than the child." Works, vol. vi. col. 2008. 
 
 33. Keckermannus. — " We cannot deny, that the 
 first institution of baptism consisted in immersion, and 
 not sprinkling; which is quite evident from Rom. vi. 
 3, 4." System. Theolog. 1. iii. c. viii. p. 369- 
 
 34. Dr. Tovverson. — "The third thing to be enquired 
 concerning the outward visible sign of baptism is, how 
 it ought to be applied ; whether by an immersion, or 
 an aspersion, or effusion ; — a more material question 
 
 * In confirmation of which he produces the following autho- 
 rities, which I will give in his own words. " Heliodorus, 1. ii. 
 c. iii. iEthiopic. Cnemon itaque cum omnino dolori ilium succu- 
 buisse et calamitate suhmersum (o-vfAfopa ^(^aTcha-i^evov) esse intellex- 
 isset, metueretque, ne sibi aliquid mali conscisceret. L. iv. c. xx. 
 O vos, qui adestis, Charicli quidem et postea lugere licebit. Nos vero 
 non mergainur {a-viABaTcli'i^oy.eOa) hujus dolore, neque inconsiderate 
 illius lacrymis, tanquam aquae impetu auferamur, occasionem negli- 
 gentes. L. v. C. xvi. Eire*S>; o-e ra avfAQe^'fiKola e^aivJi%ev, quoniam te 
 casus tui obruebant ac demergebant. Ita et eo sensu venit (L, ii. 
 c. xxvii.) ejusdem autoris verbum ^vOi^ea-Ocu. TlXetovi kKv^uh KaKoiv /3e/3u- 
 
 Bio-f^evoi, majore fluctu ffirumnarum obruti- Libanius, (In Parent. 
 
 Juliani, cap. cxlviii. p. 369.) Ea enim, quam ob Julianum sentimus, 
 tristitia, animam submergens {^aTcl tC,e(ra) mentemque obfuscans, 
 tenebras quasdam oculis quoque ofFundit, nee multum ab iis, qui in 
 
 tenebris nunc versantur, distamus. Plutarchus : (De Puerorum 
 
 Educatione, cap. xiii.) Sicut enim plantae quidem mediocribus aquis 
 nutriuiitur, plurimis vero sufFocantur: ad eundem modum anima 
 quidem mediocribus augetur laboribus, sed immoderatis (/3a7r7<^e7ow) 
 submergitur. Ita et Poeta anonymus: (Anthol. Gr. 1. ii. c. xlvii.) 
 BaTcliC^iaOou ad somnum transfert 
 
 BflMr7*^€7aj S'^Trvw yalovi re Oavala, 
 
 Vides heic /3a9r7*^eo-6at ru vTcvo) esse per nietaphoram somno sepeliri, 
 quam phrasin etiam alicubi in Heliodoro legisse memini.'' Ut supra, 
 p. 638, 639, 640. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 47 
 
 [this] than it is commonly deemed by us, who have been 
 accustomed to baptize by a bare effusion, or sprinkling 
 of water upon the party. For in things which depend 
 for their force upon the mere will and pleasure of him 
 who instituted them, there ought, no doubt, great re- 
 gard to be had to the commands of him who did so; as 
 without which there is no reason to presume we shall 
 receive the benefit of that ceremony, to which he hath 
 been pleased to annex it. Now, what the command of 
 Christ was in this particular, cannot well be doubted of 
 by those who shall consider the words of Christ, (Matt, 
 xxviii. 19,) concerning it, and the practice of those 
 times, whether in the baptism of John, or of our Saviour. 
 For the words of Christ are, that they should baptize, 
 or dip, those whom they made disciples to him (for so, 
 no doubt, the word (BaTnL^eLv properly signifies;) and 
 which is more, and not without its weight, that they 
 should baptize them into the name of the Father, 
 and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost : thereby 
 intimating such a washing, as should receive the party 
 baptized within the very body of the water, which they 
 were to baptize him with. Though if there could be 
 any doubt concerning the signification of the words in 
 themselves, yet would that doubt be removed by con- 
 sidering the practice of those times, whether in the bap- 
 tism of John, or of our Saviour. For such as was the 
 practice of those times in baptizing, such in reason 
 are we to think our Saviour's command to have been 
 concerning it, especially when the words themselves in- 
 cline that way; there being not otherwise any means, 
 either for those, or future times, to discover his in- 
 tention concerning it.' Of the Sacram. of Bap. part 
 iii. p. 53, 54, 55. 
 
 S5. Dan. Grade. — '* The word baptism generally 
 denotes immersion, for the sake of washing or cleans- 
 ing." In Thesaur. Theolog. Philolog. tom. ii. p. 560. 
 
 36. H. Clignetus. — " Baptism is so called from 
 
48 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 immersion, or plunging into ; because in the primitive 
 times those that were baptized were entirely immersed 
 in water." In Thesaur. Disputat. Sedan, torn. i. p. 769, 
 770. Genev. 1661. 
 
 ^7. Dr. Dan. Scott. — "The verb (3a7rTi^u expresses 
 the form of admitting a proselyte into the Christian 
 church, which tradition assures us was by a trine im- 
 mersion, or plunging under water. But of late asper- 
 sion, or sprinkling, is admitted by the church of Eng- 
 land instead of immersion, or dipping."* New Version 
 of St. Matt. Gospel. Note on Matt, xxviii. 19- 
 
 38. Bossuet. — "To baptize signifies to plunge, as is 
 granted by all the world." In Mr. Stennett, against 
 Mr. Russen, p. 174. 
 
 39- Suicerus. — " He is said (3a7rreiv v^piav, to baptize 
 a bucket, who draws water out of a well or a river; which 
 cannot be done except the bucket be entirely plunged 
 under the water. Wool and clothes are said to be 
 ^aTtrea-Sai, baptized, when they are dipped; because they 
 are quite immersed in the dyeing fat, that they may im- 
 bibe the colour. BaTrri^o), to baptize, hath properly the 
 same signification. — BaTrn^eiv eavrov eig Qakaaa-av, in the 
 ancient poet, is to plunge himself into the sea. — From the 
 proper signification of the verb, baptize, baptism properly 
 
 * To fix the signification of ^airh'^u, he produces a number of 
 passages from the following Greek authors: Joseph. Antiq. Jud. 
 1. iv. c. iv. § 6, p. 207; 1. xv. c. iii. § 3, p. 745. De Bell. Jud. 1. i. 
 c.xxii. § 2, p. 1 10; 1. i. c. xxvii § 1 ; 1. ii. c. xviii. § 4, p. 19S; 1. ii. 
 c. XX. § 1; 1. iii. c. ix. § 3, p. 251; I. iii. c. x. § 9, p. 259. Strab. 
 Geogr. 1. i. p.44, B; 1. xii. p. 809, D; 1. xvi, p. IIOS. Lucian.Ver. 
 Hist. 1. ii. p. 393, A. Plutarch. Quaest. Nat. torn. ii. p. 914, C. Orph. 
 Argonaut, v. 510. Soph. Aj. v. 354. In the same learned author's 
 Append, ad Thesaur. Graec. Ling, under the verb ^a.ivn%u, he quotes 
 passages from the following Greek writers: Polyb. Hist. 1. i. p. 73, 
 ult. 545, 10, f ; 1. iii. p. 31 1, ult. Joseph. Antiq. 1. ix. c. x. § 2. Vita, 
 § 3. Diod. Sicul. Bibl.l. i. p. 23, 12. Strab. Geogr. 1. i. p. 421, C; 
 I. xiv. p. 982, D. Athen. Deipn. 1. v. p. 221, c. 472, D. Lucian. 
 Bacch. p. 853, A. Plat. Euthydem. i. 277, C Diod. Sicul. 1. i. 
 p. 47, 4. Joseph. De Bell. I. iv. c. iii. § 3. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 49 
 
 denotes immersion, or dipping into." Thesaurus Eccles. 
 
 sub voce BaTTTtaixa. 
 
 40. Venema. — " The word ^aitri'i^eiv, to baptize, is no 
 where used in the scripture for sprinkling; no not in 
 Mark vii. 4, otherwise than appears to some." Insti- 
 tut. Hist. Eccles. Vet. et Nov. Test. torn. iii. secul. i. 
 § 138. 
 
 41. Magdeburg Centuriators. — " The word /SaTrr^^w, 
 to baptize, which signifies immersion into water, proves 
 that the administrator of baptism immersed, or washed, 
 the persons baptized in water." Cent. i. 1. ii. c. iv. 
 p. 382. 
 
 42. Anonymous. — " The word baptize doth certainly 
 signify immersio7i, absolute and total immersion, in Jose- 
 phus and other Greek writers. But this word is in 
 some degree equivocal ; and there are some eminent 
 Greek scholars who have asserted, that immersion is not 
 necessarily included in baptism. The examples pro- 
 duced, however, do not exactly serve the cause of those 
 who think that a few drops of water sprinkled on the 
 forehead of the child, constitute the essence of baptism. 
 In the Septuagint it is said, that Nebuchadnezzar was 
 baptized with the dew of heaven: and in a poem attributed 
 to Homer (called) The battle of the Frogs and Mice, it 
 is said, that a lake was baptized with the blood of a 
 wounded combatant. (E^airrero ^' ai[xari XifJ-VYj Tropipvpefp.) 
 A question hath arisen, in what sense the word baptize 
 can be used in this passage. Doth it signify immersion, 
 properly so called? Certainly not: neither can it sig- 
 nify a partial sprinkling. A body wholly surrounded 
 with a mist ; wholly made humid with dew ; or a piece 
 of water so tinged with and discoloured by blood, that 
 if it had been a solid body and dipped into it, it could 
 not have received a more sanguine appearance, is a very 
 different thing from that partial application which in 
 modern times is supposed sufficient to constitute full and 
 explicit baptism. The accommodation of the word 
 
 VOL. I. E 
 
50 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 baptism to the instances we have referred to, is not un- 
 natural, though highly metaphorical ; and may be re- 
 solved into a trope or figure of speech, in which, though 
 the primary idea is maintained, yet the mode of expres- 
 sion is altered ; and the word itself is to be understood 
 rather allusively than really; rather relatively than abso- 
 lutely. If a body had been baptized or immersed, it 
 could not have been more wet than Nebuchadnezzar's; 
 if a lake had been dipped in blood, it could not have 
 put on a more bloody appearance. Hitherto the Anti- 
 Paedobaptists seem to have had the best of the argu- 
 ment, on the mode of administering the ordinance. The 
 most explicit authorities are on their side. Their 
 opponents have chiefly availed themselves of inferences, 
 analogy, and doubtful construction." Monthly Review, 
 for May 1784, p. 396. 
 
 43. G. J. Vossius. — " BaTrr/^e^v, to baptize, signifies 
 to plunge. It certainly therefore signifies more than 
 eTrnroXa^eiv, which is, to swi??i lightly Oil the top; and less 
 than Ivveiv, which is, to sink to the bottom, so as to be 
 destroyed." Disputat. de Bap. disp. i. thes. i. p. 25. 
 Amstelod. 1648. 
 
 44. Mr. l)e Courcy. — " It is readily allowed, that 
 dipping is one of the included ideas in the original word 
 [/SaTTTf^w] — We never denied, that dipping is not ex- 
 cluded from the signification of the original word." Re- 
 joinder, p. 139, 143. 
 
 45. Turrettinus. — " The word baptism is of Greek 
 origin, and is derived from the verb (SaTrrco; which sig- 
 nifies to clip, and to dye: (SaTm^eiv, to baptize; to dip 
 into, to immerse. Plut. de Superstit. (BaiTTiaov o-e eig 
 QaXaaaav, plunge your self into the sea : and, in the life of 
 Theseus, he recites a Sibylline verse concerning the Athe- 
 nians, which better agrees to the church : 
 
 KaKO(; /SaTTTi^yj, ^vvai ^e rot ov Befxig eari. 
 
 Mergeris uter aquis, sed non submergeris unquam. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 51 
 
 Hence it appears, that jSanTi'^ei.v is more than eitiTcoXai^eiv, 
 which is to swim lightly on the surface; and less than 
 §yve/y, which is to go cJown to the bottom ; that is, to strike 
 the bottom so as to be destroyed." Institut. loc. xix. 
 qusest. xi. § 4. 
 
 4(3. Dr. Owen. — " Though the original and natural 
 signification of the word [/SaTTTi^w] imports, to dip, to 
 plunge, to dye; yet it also signifies to wash or cleanse." 
 In Dr. Ridgley's Bod. Div. quest, clxvi. p. 608, note. 
 
 47. Bas. Faber. — " Baptism, is immersion, wash- 
 ing." Thesau. Erudit. Scholast. Lips. 1717. 
 
 48. Eras. Schmidius. — " Bocureiv, is to dye, to im- 
 merse in water; also to wash, or to immerse for the 
 sake of washing or cleansing." Annotat. in Matt. iii. 6. 
 Norimb. 1658. 
 
 49. Mr. Daniel Rogers. — " None, of old, were 
 wont to be sprinkled ; and I confess myself uncon- 
 vinced by demonstration of scripture for infants' sprink- 
 ling. It ought to be the church's part to cleave to the 
 institution, which is dipping ; and he betrays the church, 
 whose officer he is, to a disorderly error, if he cleave not 
 to the institution, which is to dip. That the minister is 
 to dip in water, as the meetest act, the word (3a7rri^co notes 
 it: for the Greeks wanted not other words to express 
 any other act besides dipping, if the institution could 
 bear it. What resemblance of the burial or the resur- 
 rection of Christ is in sprinkling? All antiquity and 
 scripture confirm that way. To dip, therefore, is ea?- 
 ceedi?ig 77iaterial to the ordinance ; which was the usage 
 of old, without exception of countries, hot or cold." In 
 Dr. Russel's Just Vind. of Doc. and Prac. of John, &c. 
 Epist. Dedicat. p. 5. 
 
 50. Dr. Hammond. — " The word here used, /3aTr- 
 ri^ea-Bai, (as it differs from viTcreaGai, verse 3,) signifies 
 not only the washing of the whole body, (as when it is 
 said of Eupolis, that being taken and thrown into the 
 sea, eiSa-TTTi^eTo, he was immersed all over, and so the 
 
 E 2 
 
52 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 baptisms of cups, &c., in the end of this verse, is put- 
 ting into the water all over, rinsing them,) but washing 
 any part as the hands here, by way of immersion in 
 water, as that is opposed to affusion or pouring water 
 on them." Annotations, on Mark vii. 4. 
 
 51. Ikenius. — " The Greek word l3a7rTicr[/.og denotes 
 the immersion of a thing, or a person, into something ; 
 either with a view to expiation, or for washing and 
 cleansing. Here also [Matt. iii. 11, compared with 
 Luke iii. 16.] the baptism of Jire, or that which is 
 performed in fire, must signify according to the same 
 simplicity of the letter, an immission, or immersion, 
 into fire for a similar end: and this the rather, be- 
 cause here, to baptize in the Spirit, and injire, are not 
 only connected, but also opposed to being baptized in 
 water ; and, therefore, the connection of the discourse, 
 and the laws of opposition demand, that after whatever 
 manner these two phrases denote baptism in water, and 
 in the Spirit, to be performed, such must that be which is 
 performed in fire. . . .The Jewish rites of purification were 
 different; for either they were performed by an immersion 
 of the whole body, which the Jews call nS»Di3, and the 
 Greeks, PaTTTio-fxov, baptism; or by the washing of some 
 parts, as the hands, or the feet, v.hich is called by the 
 G reeks, €Kvi\pii; or by sprinkling ; which, in G reek, is deno- 
 minated pavTia-jxog, rhantism."" Dissert. Philolog. Theoiog. 
 dissert, xix. p. 325. Antiq. Hebraica?, parsi. c. xviii. §9. 
 
 52. Deylingius. — " The word (SaTrri^ea-Sai, as used 
 by Greek authors, signifies immersion and overwhelm- 
 ing. Thus we read in Plutarch, (de Superstit. tom. ii. 
 
 op. f. 166,) iSaTTTiaov aeavTOV €ig BaXacraav, (lip yourself 
 in the sea: like as Naaman, (in 2 Kings v. 14,) who 
 ' baptized himself seven times in Jordan,' ^vhich was an 
 immersion of the whole body. So Strabo, (lib. xiv. p. 458,) 
 when speaking about the soldiers of Alexander the 
 Great, marching in the winter season between Climax, a 
 mountain in Pamphylia, and the sea, says : They were 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. ^3 
 
 immersed, jSaim^ofx^vovg, up to the waist. The same 
 author, (Hb. xii. p. 391,) speaking of Tatta, a marsh, 
 situate between Galatia and Cappadocia, says : The 
 water rises, navri to? (Banria-BevTi. eig avTO, SO as to over- 
 whelm any thing. Diodorus Siculus, (Hb. i. c. xxxvi.) 
 when speaking of the Nile overflowing its banks, says: 
 * Many of the land animals perish, liro rov iroTafxov 
 TrepiXyjcpQevTa '^lacpdetpeadai fSawrt^ofxeva, being overtaken and 
 overwhelmed by the flood.' In Josephus, (Antiq. Jud. 
 lib. XV. cap. iii.) ^airn'i^ovTeg, persons baptizing, are per- 
 sons plunging down. It has the same signification 
 in the gospels, and in the writings of the apostles : if 
 you except Luke xi. 38, where (BairTil^ea-Qai seems to be 
 used concerning washing the hands, which is done by 
 sprinkling." Observat. Sac. pars iii. observ. xxvi. § 2. 
 Lips. 1715. 
 
 53. Le Clerc. "' At that time came John the Bap- 
 tizer.' He has been called the Baptizer, rather than 
 Baptist, because the latter word is a proper name in the 
 modern languages ; whereas in this place it is an appel- 
 lative, to signify a man that plunged in water those who 
 testified an acknowledgment of his divine mission, and 
 were desirous of leading a new life — * He shall baptize 
 you in the Holy Spirit.' As I plunge you in water, he 
 shall plunge you, so to speak, in the Holy Spirit." Re- 
 marques sur Nouv. Test, a Matt. iii. 1. 
 
 54. Danzius. — " BaTrna-fJiog, /5a7rr;a-/Aa, and ^airricng, 
 denote plunging, or dipping; also washing, or a bath." 
 De Bap, Proselyt. Judaic. § 1, in Ugolini Thesauro An- 
 tiq. Sac. tom. xxii. p. 883. 
 
 55. Reiskius. — " To be baptized signifies, in its pri- 
 mary sense, to be immersed. Hence vavg apairTiarog, a 
 ship unbaptized, is a vessel not immersed in the waves ; 
 and, in Gregory Thaumaturgus, a person immersed in 
 error, is called /3e^a7rTza-/x,evo$- ; and he who rescues such 
 persons from their dangerous mistakes, is said rovg (Sair- 
 T<^o/xevovf avi[Atxo-6a(, to lift Up or dra'H' out the parties 
 
S4 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 that were so baptized." Dissertat. de Bap. Judaeorum, 
 cap. i. § 1. 
 
 56. Heideggerus. — " The words ^aTrna-ixa and (Sarr- 
 ria-[xoi, baptism, (from fBaTrreiv, to plunge, to immerse,) 
 properly signify immersion." Corpus Theolog. Christ, 
 loc. XXV. § 21. 
 
 57' J. J. Wetstenius. — " To baptize, is to plunge, to 
 dip. The body, or part of the body, being under water, 
 is said to be baptized." Comment, ad Matt. iii. 6. 
 
 58. Dr. Doddridge. — " I have, indeed, a most 
 dreadful baptism to be baptized with, and know that I 
 shall shortly be bathed as it were in blood, and plunged 
 in the most overwhelming distress." Paraphrase on 
 Luke xii. 50. 
 
 59- Zepperus. — " If we consider the proper meaning 
 of the term, the word baptism signifies plunging into 
 water, or the very act of dipping and washing. It ap- 
 pears, therefore, from the very signification and etymo- 
 logy of the term, what was the custom of administering 
 baptism in the beginning ; whereas we now, for baptism, 
 rather have rhantism, or sprinkling." In Leigh's Crit. 
 Sac. under the word fSaTrria-fxc^. Lond. 1646. 
 
 60. Mr. Poole's Continuators. — " To be baptized, is 
 to be dipped in water; metaphorically, to be plunged in 
 afflictions. I am, saith Christ, to be baptized with 
 blood, overwhelmed with sufferings and afflictions." 
 Annotations on Matt. xx. 22, edit. 1688. 
 
 61 . Walaeus. — " The external form of baptism is im- 
 mersion into water, in the name of the Father, of the 
 Son, and of the Holy Spirit." Enchiridium, p. 425. 
 
 62. Articles of Smalcald. — " Baj)tism is no other 
 than the word of God, Avith plunging into water accord- 
 ing to his appointment and command." Kromayeri 
 Epitom. Lib. Concord. Christ, p. 107. 
 
 63. Anonymous. — "■ That the letter of the scripture 
 is in favour of the Baptists (or, as they are still absurdly 
 called Anabaptists,) cannot without evasion and equivo- 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 55 
 
 cation be denied." London Review, for June 1776, 
 p. 489. 
 
 64. Gerhardus. — " 'QairrLo-^og and (BaTnia-fxa, from 
 /SaTTTi^eiv, to baptize, to immerse, to dip, and that pro- 
 perly, into water : it has a likeness to the words jSvOi^a 
 and /3a6vvco, each of which signifies to plunge down 
 into the deep. Plutarch, (SaTma-ov aeavTOV eig BaXaaraav, 
 plunge yourself into the sea. The same biographer, in 
 the life of Galba, speaks metaphorically of being baptized, 
 or immersed in debt : /3e/3a7z-Tf o-/Aevof ocpeiX'^fxaai. In his 
 Morals, he speaks of being baptized, or oppressed, bi/ an 
 accumidation of affairs: /SaTrn^ea-Sai vtto tccv Ttpaji/.arm. 
 In his life of Phocion, of being baptized i?i, or plunged 
 under immoderate labours : (SaTTTi^ea-Sai roig itovoig vTrep- 
 [SaXkova-i. Aphrod. 1, i. probl. has the following expres- 
 sions ; (SePaTTTiaiJievog tco aix/fxaTi, plunged down in the 
 body. In this acceptation of immersing, it is used 
 (2 Kings V. 14,) ' Then went he down and dipped (e/3a7r- 
 Tia-aro) himself seven times in Jordan' .... But because 
 those who are immersed in water, and emerge out of it, 
 appear washed and clean, therefore ^airnaij^og and ^a-n- 
 Ti^eiv are consequentially used for any kind of ablution, 
 whether it be performed by merely sprinkling, or pour- 
 ing, or by a particular dipping. BtxTrn^eiv is derived from 
 ^(XTTTeiv, which signifies, in general, to dip, to wash, to 
 dye, to immerse." Loc. Theolog. tom. iv. De Bap, 
 p. 224. 
 
 65. Alstedius. — " BaTrn^eiv, to baptize, signifies only 
 to immerse; not to wash, except by consequence." Lexi- 
 con Theologicum, cap. xii. p. 221, 
 
 66. Mr. Wilson. — " To baptize, to dip into water, 
 or to plunge one into the water." Christian Dictionary, 
 edit. 1678. 
 
 67. Mr. Bailey. — " Baptism, in strictness of speech, 
 is that kind of ablution, or washing, which consists in 
 dipping; and when applied to the Christian institution 
 so called, it was used by the primitive Christians in no 
 
66 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 Other sense than that of dipping ; as the learned Grotius 
 and Casaubon well observe. But as new customs in- 
 troduce new significations of words, in process of time 
 it admitted the idea of sprinkling, as in the case of clini- 
 cal baptism." Dictionary, Dr. Scott's edit. 1772. 
 
 68. Mr. Leigh. — " BaTTTi^co. The word baptize, 
 though it be derived from jSaTz-Tw, to dip, or plunge into 
 the water, and signifieth primarily such a kind of wash- 
 ing as is used in bucks, where linen is plunged and 
 dipped ; yet it is taken more largely for any kind of 
 washing, rinsing, or cleansing, even where there is no 
 dipping at all, (as Matt. iii. 11. and so on.). . . .The na- 
 tive and proper signification of it is, to dip into water, 
 or to plunge under water, (John iii. 22, 23; Matt. iii. 16; 
 Acts viii. 38.)" Critica Sacra. 
 
 69- Schoettgenius. — " Ban-r/^w, from (BaTrxia; pro- 
 perly, to plunge, to immerse ; to cleanse, to wash." 
 Lex. in Nov. Test. Krebsii, edit. 1765. 
 
 70. Mr. Parkhurst. — " BaTmi^a, from fSocTma, to dip, 
 immerse, or plunge in water. To baptize, to immerse 
 in, or] wash with water. Figuratively, to be baptized, 
 immersed, or plunged in a flood, or sea, as it were, of 
 grievous afflictions and sufferings. " 
 
 71. Schrevelius. — " BaTTTi^w, to baptize, to plunge, 
 to wash." Cantab. 1685. 
 
 72. Pasor. — " BaTTTi^co, to baptize, to immerse, to 
 wash." Lips. 1735. 
 
 73. Trommius. — " BaTTTi^co, to baptize ; to immerse, 
 to dip." Concordantiae Graecas, sub voce. 
 
 74. Mintert. — BaTrr/^cc, to baptize; properly, indeed, 
 it signifies to plunge, to immerse, to dip into water : but 
 because it is common to plunge or dip a thing that it 
 may be washed, hence also it signifies to wash, to wash 
 away. . . .BaTrr/cr^of, baptism : immersion, dipping into ; 
 washing, washing away. Properly, and according to its 
 etymology, it denotes that washing which is performed 
 by immersion." 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 57 
 
 75. Scapula. — '' BaTrn^a, to baptize; to dip, or im- 
 merse; as we immerse any thing for the purpose of 
 dyeing, or cleansing in water. Also to dip, to plunge, 
 to overwhelm in water. Likewise to wash away, to 
 wash." Lond. 1652. 
 
 76. Hedericus. — " BaTrr/^w, to baptize; to plunge, 
 to immerse, to overwhelm in water; to wash away, to 
 wash .... BaTz-T^a/xa, baptism ; immersion, dipping into." 
 Lond. 1778. 
 
 77. Constantinus. — " BaTrr/cr/xo^, baptism ; the act 
 of dyeing, that is, of plunging." Edit. 1592. 
 
 78. Mr. Robertson. — " BaTTTi^a, to baptize; to im- 
 merse, to wash." Thesaurus Graec. 
 
 79. Mr. William Young. — " Baptize; to dip all 
 over, to wash, to baptize." Latin-English Dictionary. 
 
 80. Stockius. — " BaTTTKTfxa, baptism. Generally, 
 and in virtue of its etymology, it signifies immersion, or 
 dipping into. Particularly and properly, it denotes the 
 immersion or dipping of a thing into water, that it may 
 be cleansed or washed." Jenas, 1735. 
 
 81. Stephanus. — ^' BaTin^co, to plunge, or immerse. 
 To plunge ; that is, to plunge under, or overwhelm in 
 water. To cleanse, to wash." Thesaur. Grasc. Ling. 
 1572. 
 
 82. Schwarzius. " BaTrr;^©, to baptize; to plunge, 
 to overwhelm, to dip into.* To wash, by plunging, 
 
 * To authenticate this^ as the native and primary meaning of 
 the ternij he produces the following authorities. "Polyb. iii. c. 72. 
 MoX<5 ecci; xasv [Aa^uv ot Tre^ot ^airTi^oy-evoi ^le^aivov, vix transibant pedites 
 ad mammas usque mersi. Idem, v. c. 47. Ai^to* iit" avruv ^aitrt^oiJi.evQt 
 Km Kara^vvovreq €v TOi? TfXy.a(Tiv, ipsi a se ipsis mergebantur et deprime- 
 bantur in paludibus. Dio. xxxviii, p. 84. Uavrikui; ^ounriC.oyraiy ora- 
 nino merguntur. Idem, xxxvii. extr. p. 64, XeijAav toiovtoi; e^aifvYn 
 Tijv %(ypav anaa-ccv KaTeo-%ey, wr*— ra tiXoia, ra, ev rco Ti^epi'bi — ^cx.TCTKr^rivai, 
 tanta tempestas subito per totam regionem extitit, ut navigia in Ti- 
 beri mergerentur. Idem. 1. p. 49'3. Uui jitev av ovx ^w' avrov rov TtXri^ovq 
 T(Bj/ Kwnuv ^aTiTKrSreifj j quomodo non ipsa remorum rnultitudiiiej suhmcr- 
 gaturP Adde p. 502, 505. Porphyrius de Styge, p. 282. Oravh 
 
^S SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 (Luke xi. 38 ; Matt. vii. 4.) Sometimes to sprinkle, 
 to besprinkle, to pour upon.* To purify and conse- 
 crate to God, by plunging. (Matt. iii. 6, 11, 13, 14, 
 and elsewhere.). . . . Ba7z-T/o-T>;$-, the Baptist, who sustained 
 the singular and sacred office, of plunging men desirous 
 
 f%wv TO v^up ajAccprccv ^€, oXiyov irpo^a^ ^a.iiri'^erai jwe%p< /cf^aXvj?. Quum 
 autem accusatus ingreditur lacum, secure, si peccati sit expers, 
 transit, niersus usque ad genua. Sin peccarit, paulum progressus 
 suhmergitur iisque ad caput. Diodorus Siculus, i, p. 33. Tav Se 
 X€p<raiu> Byjpiuv ru TCoKka, jocev lito rov •norajAov icepiX'/jfGevra ^ta(p6eiperai. ^octt- 
 Tj^ejweva, Ttva 8e e<? rovt; (/.ereccpovi; eKfevjovra. tottou? Siao-w^erai, Animalium 
 terrestrium multa a flumine Nilo correpta mergendo perduntur : alia 
 in editos locos fugientia servantur. Adde Strabon. vi. p. 421. Jo- 
 seph, Bell. Jud. p. 259, init. Activum quoque in significatione pas- 
 siva est apud Joseph. Antiq. ix. c. x. § 2. Oa-ov ovita |WeXXovTo? /SawTi^ejv 
 rov (TKafovq, quum navis mergeretur tantum, quantum nondum coepe- 
 rat.'' — I will here add another passage from Diod. Siculus, 1. i. p. 67, 
 as I find it quoted and translated by Dr. Sam. Chandler : " Tou? 8e 
 iSiWTaj dia Tvji/ €K rovToiv evitopiav ov BAIITIZQTSI ran; €t<Tfopai(;. The 
 people were not oppressed with taxes." Defence of Prime Minister 
 of Joseph, p. ii. p. 388. 
 
 f His only authorities for the two latter of these ideas, are the 
 following: " .^schyl. Prometh. Vinct, p. 53. Ai^ktov ev (npayaia-i 
 Pa\pa.a-a ^icpoi;, ancipitem gladium csedibus tingens. Apud Platon. in 
 Conviv. p.316. Aristophanes de se dicit, /cat yap km avro; eifxt rav 
 xOei; /3e/3aTrTio-jM.e)/wv. Etenim ego quoque sum ex iis qui heri multum 
 biberunt." Whether these passages do not confirm the idea of 
 plunging and overwhelming, rather than that of sprinkling, or pouring, 
 for which they were produced, let the learned judge. Respecting the 
 latter of them. Dr. Daniel Scott says : " Plato uses this verh 
 [/SatzTTi^w] of a person who had drunk freely, drenched himself in 
 liquor." Note on Matt, xxviii. 19. — So Justin Martyr and Chry- 
 sostom speak of being baptized in wine ; and Clemens Alexandrinus, 
 of being baptized in sleep. Apud Suicerum, Thesaur. Eccles. tom. i. 
 J). 623. And as the word baptized, in tliese connections, expresses 
 the notion of being as it were buried in sleep, and overwhelmed in 
 wine ; so those corresponding adjectives, ebrius, drunk, and drunken, 
 are allusively used to signify soaked, dipped , drenched. Thus Mar- 
 tial : " Lana sanguine conchaj ebria." Thus Jehovah : " I will 
 make mine arrows drunk with blood." (Dent, xxxii. 42.) And 
 Shakespeare thus : " Then let tlie earth be drunken with our 
 blood." See Ainsworth and Johnson under the words. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 59 
 
 of salvation, that they might know themselves to be de- 
 voted to God." Comment. Crit. et Philolosf. Ling. 
 Grasc. See also Martini Lexicon Philologicum, sub 
 voce, Baptismus. Riisenii Summa Theolog. loc. xvii. 
 § 26. Glossarium Vetus, sub voce BaTrn^co. Damm. 
 Nov. Lex. Grasc. sub voce BaTrrco. Dr. Macknight's 
 Harm, part ii. p. 9,79, edit. 2nd. Petavii Theol. 
 Dogmat. 1. ii, de Poenitent. c. i. § 11. Mr. S. Davies's 
 Sermons, vol. ii. p. 169- edit. 5rd. 
 
 REFLECTIONS. 
 
 Reflect. I. It will be alloAved, I think, by every 
 competent and impartial judge, that many of the authors 
 from whose writings these quotations are made, may be 
 justly numbered among the first literary characters that 
 any age has produced. Now, as all these concessions, 
 declarations, and reasonings, proceeded from persons 
 that practised pouring or sprinkling in the administra- 
 tion of the ordinance under consideration; so there is 
 the highest reason to conclude, that nothing but the 
 force of evidence, and a conscientious regard to truth, 
 could have induced them thus to speak; for it is mani- 
 fest, that such language has the appearance of support- 
 ing a contrary practice. 
 
 To the foregoing quotations from Pasdobaptists, 
 whom candour itself must suppose inclined to make as 
 few concessions to the Baptists as the evidence of stub- 
 born facts would permit, we will add the attestations 
 of others, that may be justly considered as impartial 
 spectators of our controversy about the right manner of 
 administering baptism. The authors to whom I advert, 
 belong to the denomination of people called Quakers; 
 and their language is as follows. 
 
 1. Robert Barclay.—" BaTrn^w signifies immergo ; 
 that is, to plunge and dip in ; and that was the proper 
 use of water baptism among the Jews, and also by John 
 and the primitive Christians, who used it. Whereas our 
 
60 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 adversaries, for the most part, only sprinkle a little 
 water upon the forehead, which doth not at all answer 
 to the word baptism : so that if our adversaries will stick 
 to the word, they must alter their method of sprinkling." 
 Apology, proposition xii. § 10. 
 
 2. John Gratton. — " John did baptize into water; 
 and it was a baptism, a real dipping, or plunging into 
 water, and so a real baptism was John's." Life of John 
 Gratton, p. 231. 
 
 3. William Dell. — Speaking of baptism, he calls it, 
 " the plunging of a man in cold water." Select Works, 
 p. 389, edit. 1773. 
 
 4. Thomas EUwood. — " They [the apostles, at the 
 feast of Pentecost] were now baptized with the Holy 
 Ghost indeed ; and that in the strict and proper sense of 
 the word baptize; which signifies to dip, plunge, or put 
 under.'' Sacred Hist, of the N. Test, part ii. p. 307. 
 
 5. Samuel Fothergill. — " By which [baptism of the 
 Holy Spirit,] I understand such a thorough immersion 
 into his holy nature, as to know him, the only begotten 
 Son of God, to conform the soul to his own image." 
 Remarks on Address to People called Quakers, p. 27. 
 
 6. Joseph Phipps. — The baptism of the Holy 
 Spirit is " effected by spiritual immersion. . . .The prac- 
 tice of sprinkling infants, under the name of baptism, hath 
 neither precept nor precedent in the New Testament." 
 Dissertations on Bap. and Communion, p. 25, 30. 
 
 7. William Penn. — " I cannot see why the bishop 
 [of Cork, in answer to whom he wrote,] should assume 
 the power of unchristianing us, for not practising of that 
 which he himself practises so unscripturally, and that 
 according to the sentiments of a considerable part of 
 Christendom; having not one text of scripture to prove 
 that sprinkling in the face was the water baptism, — in 
 the first times. — Then it was in the river Jordan; now 
 in a basin.'' Defence of Gospel Truths, against the 
 Bishop of Cork, p. 82, 83. 
 
BAPTIZE A.ND BAPTISM. 61 
 
 8. George Whitehead. — " Sprinkhng infants, I deny 
 to be baptism, either in a proper or scripture sense. 
 For sprinkling is rhantism, and not baptism; coming of 
 pavTi^co, i. e. aspergo, to sprinkle, or to besprinkle, (Heb. 
 ix, 13, 19, compared with Heb. x. 22; fiavTi(T[j.o^, a 
 besprinkling, (and chap. xii. 24, and 1 Pet. i. 2.) But 
 /SaTTT/^o?, is to baptize, to plunge under water, to over- 
 whelm. Wherefore I would not have these men offended 
 at the word rhantism, it being as much English as the 
 word baptism. And also ^auriaiKovg is translated wash- 
 ing ; i.e. of cups, pots, brazen vessels, and tables, 
 (Mark vii. 4.) Now if washing here should be taken in 
 the common sense, cleanly people use not to do it only 
 by sprinkling some drops of water upon them, but by 
 washing them clean; so that rhantism can be neither 
 baptism, nor washing, in a true or proper sense." Truth 
 Prevalent, chap. ix. p. 116. 
 
 9- Elizabeth Bathurst. — " Sprinkling infants; this 
 they [the Quakers] utterly deny, as a thing by men im- 
 posed, and never by God or Christ instituted." Life 
 and Writings of Elizabeth Bathurst, chap. v. p. 44. 
 
 10. Thomas Lawson. — " Such as rhantize, or 
 sprinkle infants, have no command from Christ, nor 
 example among the apostles, nor the first primitive 
 Christians, for so doing .... The ceremony of John's 
 ministration, according to divine institution, was by dip- 
 ping, plunging, or overwhelming their bodies in water ; 
 as Scapula and Stephens, two great masters in the Greek 
 tongue testify; as also Grotius, Pasor, Vossius, Min- 
 ceus, Leigh, Casaubon, Bucer, Bullinger, Zanchy, Span- 
 hemius, Rogers, Taylor, Hammond, Calvin, Piscator, 
 Aquinas, Scotus .... As for sprinkling, the Greeks call 
 it rhantismos, which I render rhantism: for it is as 
 proper to call sprinkling rhantism, as to call dipping 
 baptism. This linguists cannot be ignorant of, that dip- 
 ping and sprinkling are expressed by several words, 
 both in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. It is very evident, 
 
62 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 \i sprinkling had been of divine institution, the Greeks 
 had their rhantismos; but as dipping was the institu- 
 tion, they used haptisjnos; so maintained the purity and 
 propriety of the language. . . .To sprinkle young or old, 
 and call it baptism, is very incongruous; yea, as impro- 
 per as to call a horse a cow; for baptism signifies dip- 
 ping. However, rhantism hath entered into, and among 
 the professors of Christianity ; and, to gain the more 
 ACCEPTANCE, it is Called baptism.'" Baptismalogia, 
 p. 117, 118, 119. 
 
 11. Anthony Purver. — ^'^ Baptized is but a Greek 
 word used in English, and signifying plunged." Note 
 on 1 Cor. XV. 29- — Such is the harmonious and united 
 testimony of these our impartial Friends : nor do I sup- 
 pose that any sensible person of the same denomina- 
 tion would for a moment scruple to subscribe the pre- 
 ceding declarations. 
 
 Reflect. II. By the numerous quotations here pro- 
 duced from the most learned Pasdobaptists, we are ex- 
 pressly taught, that immersion is the radical and obvious 
 meaning of the term baptism. No. 1 — 82 ;■ — that the 
 Danes, the Swedes, the Germans, and the Dutch, ren- 
 der the word (SairTii^w by expressions that signify to dip, 
 No. 12 ; — that it has no other signification in INlark vii. 
 4, No. 10, 40, 50, 82 ; — that the idea of immersion is 
 retained when the term is used metaphorically of the 
 Holy Spirit, No. 3, 8, 51, 53; of sufferings, No. 6, 8, 
 23, 58, 60, 70 ; and of other things. No. 42, 64, 82 ;— 
 that jSaiTTi^eiv is of a middle signification, between eTinro- 
 Xa^etv, to sxvim on the surface, and Iweiv^ to go dawn to the 
 bottom, No. 1, 10, 27, 43, 45, 64; — that the word bap- 
 tism is no where used in scripture to signify sprinkling, 
 No. 40; — that it signifies immersion only, not washing, 
 except by consequence, No. 65 ; — that the Greeks wanted 
 not other words to have expressed a different action, if 
 the institution would have borne it, No. 49; — that the 
 manner of baptizing should correspond to the significa- 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 63 
 
 tion of the ordinance, No. 30; — that all antiquity and 
 scripture confirm the idea of plunging, No. 49; — that 
 sprinkling is rhantism, rather than baptism. No. 2, 59 ; — 
 that new customs introduce new significations of words, 
 No. 67; — that our opponents chiefly avail themselves 
 of inferences, of analogy, and of doubtful construction, 
 No. 42; — and that the Baptists have the advantage in 
 point of argument. No. 42, 63. 
 
 Let us now review the testimonies of our impartial 
 friends the Quakers. They assert, that the word in 
 question signifies immersion. No. 1 — 11; — that the first 
 administrator practised accordingly, No. 2, 7, 10; — that 
 if sprinkling had been the institution, the Greeks had 
 their rhantismos, but that dipping being appointed, baptis- 
 mos was used in divine law, No. 10; — that sprinkling is 
 neither baptism, nor washing, No. 8; — that there is 
 neither precept nor precedent for sprinkling, No. 6, 7, 
 10; that the contrast between baptism and the rite 
 which is now practised, is like that between the waves 
 of Jordan, and the water in a portable basin, No. 7 ; 
 that sprinkling of infants is a human invention, No. 9, 
 10; and that sprinkling is called baptism, to keep it 
 in countenance, No. 10. — Such is the import of what 
 the most learned Peedobaptists assert, and of what the 
 impartial Quakers affirm, concerning the term in dis- 
 pute; which, whether it be in our favour, I leave the 
 reader to judge. 
 
 Reflect. III. Werenfelsius has well observed, in his 
 excellent dissertation De Scopo Interpretis, that " some 
 interpreters do not search the scripture so much for the 
 meaning of the Holy Spirit, as for praise and honour ; 
 others, not so much for the sense of scripture, as for 
 their own opinion ; and others, not so much for the true 
 meaning of scripture, as for one that is useful or agree- 
 able."* Now as our enquiry here is concerning the 
 sense of a term, an important enacting term of divine 
 
 * Opuscula Theolog. p. 373, 374. 
 
64 SIGNIFICATIOX OF THE TERMS, 
 
 law; and as the partiality and pride, so justly con- 
 demned by Werenfelsius, are too common to all theolo- 
 gical writers; to avoid the appearance of predilection 
 for a particular sense of the word in dispute, we will 
 have recourse to the observations and rules of our op- 
 posers themselves, respecting the true meaning of in- 
 spired writers, and the expounding of laws. The fol- 
 lowing extracts may perhaps be useful to direct us in 
 the present case, and are therefore submitted to the 
 reader's consideration. 
 
 First, then, Buddeus. — " It is necessary, doubtless, 
 that he who desires to be understood when he writes or 
 speaks, should intend to convey only 0)ie meaning; 
 which, if we obtain, we have the true and genuine 
 
 sense,"* Chamier: "There is but one genuine sense 
 
 of a text."t ^^- Owen : " If it [the scripture] have 
 
 not every-where one proper determinate sense, it hath 
 none at all." [J; Schelhornius : "The true sense of scrip- 
 ture, is not every sense the words willbear."§ Weren- 
 felsius : " The true meaning of scripture, is not every 
 sense the words will bear, and perhaps may excite in 
 the reader's mind ; nor yet every sense that is true in it- 
 self, but that which was really intended by the holy 
 
 writer." II Anonymous: " Laws being directed to the 
 
 unlearned, as well as the learned, ought to be construed 
 in their 7nost obvious meaning, and not explained away 
 by subtle distinctions; and no law is to suffer a figura- 
 tive interpretation, where the proper sense of the words 
 is as commodious, and equally fitted to the subject of 
 the statute."^— —Dr. Sherlock : "When the words of 
 the law are capable of different senses, and reason is for 
 one sense, and the other sense against reason, there it is 
 fit that a plain and necessary reason should expound 
 
 * Theolog. Dogmat l.i. c.ii. §24. f Panstrat. torn, i, 
 
 l.xiv. c.x, § 18. X On Heb.iii. 15, vol. ii. p. 155. 
 
 § Bib. Bremens. class, vi. p. 468. || Opuscula, p. 3*2. 
 
 ^ Encyclopaed. Britan. vol. vi. article Law, p. 41. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 65 
 
 the law. But when the law is not capable of such dif- 
 ferent senses, or there is no such reason as makes one 
 sense absurd and the other necessary, the law must be 
 expounded according to the most plain and obvious signi- 
 fication of the words, though it should condemn that 
 which we think there may be some reason for, or at 
 least no reason against; for otherwise it is an easy matter 
 
 to expound away all the laws of God." * Bp. Taylor: 
 
 " In all things ^here the precept is given in the pro- 
 per style of laws, he that takes the Jirst sense is the 
 likeliest to be well guided .... In the interpretation of 
 the laws of Christ, the strict sense is to be followed." f 
 
 Dr. Jonath. Edwards: " In words which are capable 
 
 of two senses, the natural and proper is the primary; 
 and therefore ought, in the first place and chiefly, to be 
 
 regarded." J Dr. Horsley : " It is a principle with 
 
 me, that the true sense of any phrase in the New Testa- 
 ment, is what may be called its standing sense; that 
 which will be the first to occur to common peo[)le of 
 
 every country and in every age."§ Vitringa: " This is 
 
 accounted by all a constant and undoubted rule of ap- 
 proved interpretation ; that the ordinary and most usual 
 signification of words must not be deserted, except for 
 
 sufficient reasons."]] Dr. Waterland: " Since words 
 
 are designed to convey some meaning, if we take the 
 liberty of playing upon words after the meaning is fixed 
 and certain, there can be no security against equivoca- 
 tion and wile, in any laws, or any engagements what- 
 ever. All the ends and uses of speech will hereby be 
 perverted."^ Dr. WiUiam Sherlock : "In expound- 
 ing scripture, we must confine ourselves to the plain and 
 
 * Preeerv. against Pop. vol. ii. Appendix, p. 11. 
 t Duct. Dub. b. i. ciiap. i. p. 26 j b. ii. chap. iii. p. 328. 
 % Preserv. against Socinianism, part iii. p. .52. 
 § Reply to Dr. Priestley, lett. iv. p. 23. 
 II De Synag. Vet. 1. i. pars i. c.iii. p. 110. 
 ^ Supplem. to Case of Arian Subscrlp. p. 9, 10. 
 VOL. I. Y 
 
^^ SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 natural signihcsition of the words . . .They [the Socinians] 
 take and challenge to themselves a liberty of putting any 
 sense upon the words of scripture which they can pos- 
 sibly bear, or are ever used in .... If we believe nothing 
 but what the scripture does plainly and expressly teach, 
 according to the most proper and usual acceptation of 
 the words; if we believe amiss, it is none of our fault, 
 unless just reverence to scripture be a fault. . . .It is 
 impossible to prove, that that is not the sense of scrip- 
 ture, which is the natui'al interpretation of the words of 
 any one text, and is not contradicted by any other text 
 .... Can they [the Socinians] prove, that the words do 
 not signify what we say they do? Or, that this is not 
 the most easy and obvious sense of the words, and what 
 every man would take to be the natural signification of 
 them, who did not think himself concerned to try his 
 skill to force some other sense on them? When the 
 words are plain, and the sense plain and obvious, nothing 
 can tempt any man to reject the plain sense of the words, 
 for some obscure, laboured, and artificial interpretations, 
 but a dislike of the doctrine which the plain and obvious 
 
 sense of the words teaches."* Dr. Doddridge: " I am 
 
 more and more convinced, that the vulgar sense of the 
 New Testament, that is, the sense in which an honest 
 man of plain sense would take it, on hisj^?'6'^ reading 
 the original, or any good translation, is almost every 
 where the true general sense of any passage .... I chose 
 to follow the plainest and most obvious and common 
 interpretation; which, indeed, I generally think the best 
 .... As it is certain that ap)^>; has not always that signi- 
 fication, [for which some contend] I judge it safe to give 
 what is more commonly the sense of it."f — Once more: 
 — Mr. Alsop says, " No cogent reason can be as- 
 signed, why we should depart from the plain, ordinary, 
 
 * Scripture Proofs of our Saviour's Div. p. 64, 65, 130, 131, 132. 
 f Fam. Exp. Note on Matt, xviii. 17 ; 2 Cor. Tiii, \ ; Rev. iii. 14. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 67 
 
 primary acceptation of the word Christ, for a figurative, 
 
 improper and secondary acceptation."*' Were I to 
 
 produce all the passages of this kind, from learned 
 Pa?dobaptists, with which observation has furnished me, 
 I should fill several more pages:! but I forbear, con- 
 sidering these as quite sufficient. 
 
 The leading idea of the foregoing paragraph is not 
 a merely speculative principle: it is considered and 
 treated, by great numbers of learned P^dobaptists, as 
 of the highest importance. In all controversies, where 
 an appeal is made to divine revelation, every one is 
 ready to avail himself, as much as possible, of the pri- 
 mary, obvious, and most common sense of inspired lan- 
 guage, both as to single terms and complete proposi- 
 tions. A sensible disputant is never willing to waive 
 this advantage; nor, so far as I have observed, will he 
 deliberately violate this principle, except when maintain- 
 iBg such hypotheses as he knows would be injured, if 
 not subverted by it. Of the latter, Socinians are ex- 
 tremely culpable; and, indeed, we need not wonder at 
 it : for the very life of their cause consists in explain- 
 ing some of the most capital terms of scripture, in an 
 improper and a secondary, a far-fetched and an arbi- 
 trary sense. They make exceptions to the clearest evi- 
 dence of scripture testimony ; insisting, that this or the 
 other emphatical term, on which the argument very 
 much depends, may be understood in a sense extremely 
 difi:"erent from its natural and obvious meaning : and 
 then, without any reason, besides the support of their own 
 hypothesis, they argue and infer any thing that suits 
 their purpose. Thus deserting at every turn the radical 
 and common acceptation of the most important scrip- 
 
 * Antisozzoj p. 35. f See, among others. Dr. Owen, On 
 
 the Nature of a Gosp. Church, p. 142. Ikenii Dissertat, Philolog. 
 Theolog. p. 69, 361. Jos. Flacaei Opera, torn. ii. p. 91, 255, 777", 
 875. Francof. 1703, Luther, De Servo Arbitrio, p. 115, 184. Ar- 
 gent, 1707. 
 
 F a 
 
68 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 tural expressions, they are never at a loss for an evasion. 
 Against this conduct their numerous opponents have 
 made very loud complaints; of which I will produce a 
 few examples. " Their whole design and endeavour," 
 says Dr. Owen, " is to put in exceptions against the 
 obvious sense and interpretation of the words ; not fixing 
 on any determinate exposition of [the passage in ques- 
 tion] themselves, such as they will abide by, in oppo- 
 sition unto any other sense of the place. Now this is a 
 most sophistical way of arguing upon testimonies, and 
 suited to make controversies endless. Whose wit is so 
 barren, as not to be able to raise one exception or other, 
 against the plainest and most evident testimony? So 
 the Socinians deal with us, in all the testimonies we 
 produce to prove the deity and satisfaction of Christ. 
 They suppose it enough to evade their force, if they can 
 but pretend that the words are capable oi another sense; 
 although they will not abide by it, that this or that is 
 their sense: for if they would do so, when that is over- 
 thrown, the truth would be established. But every testi- 
 mony of the scripture hath one determinate sense. When 
 1;his is contended about, it is equal those at difference 
 do express their apprehensions of the mind of the Holy 
 S})irit, in the word which they will abide by. When 
 this is done, let it be examined and tried, whether of the 
 two senses pretended unto, doth best comply with the 
 signification and use of the words, the context or scope 
 of the place, other scripture testimonies, and the analogy 
 of faith. . . .The words 77iai/ have another sense; there- 
 fore [say the Socinians] nothing from them can be con- 
 cluded ; whereby they have left nothing stable, or un- 
 shaken in Christian religion .... How will they prove 
 that [eyevero] may be rendered by fuit^ was ? They tell 
 you, it is so in two other places in the New Testament. 
 But doth that prove that it may so much as be so ren- 
 dered here? The proper sense and common usage of it 
 is, ^vas made; and because it is once or twice used in a 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 69 
 
 peculiar sense, mai/ it be so rendered here (John i. 14,) 
 where nothing requires that it be turned aside from its 
 most usual acceptation?. . . .The various signification of a 
 word, used absolutely in any other place, is sufficient for 
 these men to confute its necessary signification in any 
 
 context."* Dr. John Edwards: "Certainly, never 
 
 men made such ill use of grammar and criticism as these 
 [Socinians] do ; for they make use of them only to de- 
 prave the true sense of the holy writ. To avoid and 
 put by the force of some plain and express places, how 
 do they stickle, how do they tug ! To lexicons, dictiona- 
 ries, and glossaries they resort, and enquire into and pick 
 up all possible senses of the words and phrases which 
 they meet with in scripture, but what are most agreeable 
 to the matter and scope of the places they are con- 
 cerned in. If a word have any other meaning in any 
 author whatsoever, they make this a sufficient warrant 
 to depart from the true and genuine sense of the 
 
 place. "f Volkelius having asserted that, by the term 
 
 Godhead (Col. ii. 8,) "neither the nature of God, nor 
 of Christ, but the knowledge of the divine will, and 
 the manner of worshipping God, may be, and therefore 
 ynust be understood ;" Mr. Alsop replies, " The reader 
 is now satisfied why it must be so. It may be so, and 
 therefore necessarily it must be so:" and, in a similar 
 case, he says: " From may be in the premises, to must 
 
 be in the conclusion, is a high leap.";]: Once more : 
 
 Dr. Horsley says, " It is the particular happiness of 
 the Unitarian writers, that they are never found at a 
 loss for an expedient.":]: 
 
 Farther: When Protestant Paedobaptists are dispu- 
 ting with Roman Catholics about the meaning of that 
 
 * Nature of Gospel Church, p. 144, Mystery of the Gospel 
 vindicated, p. 160, 218 5 see also p. 228, 275, 303. Exposit. of 
 Heb. vol. iii. p, 468. f Discourse concerning Truth and 
 
 Error, p. 301. % Antisozzo, p. 37, 44. § Reply to 
 
 Dr. Priestley, lett, v. p. 30. 
 
70 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 capital term justificatioji, they constantly maintain the 
 necessity of abiding by its primary, obvious, and most 
 common acceptation, which is forensic; in opposition to 
 any real or pretended secondary sense, for which the 
 Papists earnestly plead. Of this I will give the follow- 
 ing instances. Turrettinus: " Proper li/ the verb justify, 
 is forensic ; and signifies, to absolve any one in judgment, 
 or to account anddeclarejust . . . .The Roman Catholics 
 do not deny, that the word Justification, and the verb Jus- 
 tify, are frequently used in a forensic sense; yet they will 
 not allow this to be the constant sense of the terms, but 
 maintain that they often signify the real production, ac- 
 quisition, and increase of righteousness; and that this 
 acceptation of the words takes place in a particular 
 manner, with reference to the justification of man before 
 God.... But though the word justification, in some 
 passages of scripture, depart from its proper significa- 
 tion, and take a sense that is not forensic; it does not 
 follow that we do ill by taking it in a judicial sense, 
 because its proper sense is to be regarded in those places 
 
 which are the seat of the doctrine."* Buddeus: '' It 
 
 may be demonstrated, that the forensic sense of the 
 word justijication, is the constant and perpetual signifi- 
 cation of it in holy scripture. Yet were it very clearly 
 shown, that in one or two places the word is used in a 
 different sense, our cause would not be injured; for it 
 would still be a fact, that the forensic sense is more 
 usual, and chiefly perspicuous in the sacred writings. f" 
 
 Dr. Owen, when endeavouring to vindicate the 
 
 forensic sense of the word Justify, against the exceptions 
 of a learned man, makes the following preliminary ob- 
 servation: " I shall premise that which I judge not an 
 unreasonable demand ; namely, that if the signification 
 of the word in any, or all the places which he mentions, 
 should seem doubtful unto any, (as it doth not unto me) 
 
 * Institut. loc. xvi. qutest. i. § 4, 5, 9. 
 
 f Theolog. Dogmat 1. iv. c, iv. § 11, p. 953. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 71 
 
 that the uncertainty of a very few places should not 
 make us question the proper signification of a word, 
 whose sense is determined in so many, wherein it is 
 clear and unquestionable."* 
 
 Once more : Our learned Paedobaptist brethren ap- 
 ply the same principle to the interpretation of Greek par- 
 ticles. Thus Dr. Doddridge: "It seems desirable, where 
 it can be done, to interpret the 'particles in their most 
 usual sense."'!' — — Mr. James Hervey, when disputing 
 the signification of a Greek particle with Mr. J. Wes- 
 ley, says: "I am ready to grant, that places may be 
 found where the preposition ev must be understood ac- 
 cording to your sense. But then every one knows that 
 this is not the native, obvious, literal meaning ; rather a 
 meaning swayed, influenced, moulded by the preceding 
 or following word. . . . He will not allow the Greek pre- 
 position ev to signify i7i ; though I can prove it to have 
 been in peaceful possession of this signification for more 
 than two thousand years. "| 
 
 Reflect. IV. If we examine the present prevailing 
 practice of pouring, or sprinkling, upon those principles, 
 rules, and reasonings, which the most eminent Paedo- 
 baptists have laid before us in the preceding quotations; 
 or if we pay any regard to the decision of those who 
 have no interest in this dispute, and may therefore be 
 justly considered as quite impartial ; we must conclude, 
 that neither sprinkling, nor pouring, is warranted by the 
 word baptism. For our learned opponents themselves 
 assure us, without so much as one exception occurring 
 to observation in the course of my reading, that the 
 primary meaning of the term in dispute, is immersion ; 
 and many distinguished characters among them unite in 
 
 * Doct. of Justif. chap. iv. Vid, Gomari Opera, pars ii, p. 92. 
 Walsei Enchirid. Relig. p. 337, 338. Mastricht. Theolog. I. vi. 
 c. vi, § 19. Witsii (Econ. Faed. l.iii. c. viii. § 5—14. 
 
 f Note, on Mark ix. 49. 
 
 + Letters to Mr. J. Wesley, lett. ii. p. 26; lett. x. p. 232. 
 
72 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 directing us, to interpret words and laws agreeably to 
 the primary, obvious, and most usual sense of the terms. 
 Now Pfedobaptism, as practised in these northern parts 
 of Europe, is not agreeable to the native, obvious, and 
 common acceptation of the word baptism. It adopts a 
 supposed secondary, remote, and obscure sense of the 
 term. It represents our divine Legislator as having more 
 meanings than one, under the same enacting term, of the 
 same law, and at the same time ; for so far as I have 
 observed, none deny that immersion is warranted by that 
 commanding word. It confronts an established prin- 
 ciple upon which, among other things, the great doc- 
 trine of justification is defended against the Papists ; a 
 principle on which every confutation of Socinian error 
 must proceed. And it opposes the grand rule of all in- 
 terpretation, that the ordinarij arid most usual significa- 
 tio7i of words must not be deserted, except for cogent 
 reasons; which rule is no other than the language of 
 reason, of observation, and common sense. Pa?dobap- 
 tism, however, has nothing to plead for departing from 
 this rule but — its oivn e.vistence. 
 
 Reflect. V. Dr. Addington has justly observed, 
 that " if there are two translations of a word, one of 
 which is certainly true, and the other may be false, it is 
 easy to say which the wise and candid would prefer."* 
 Now, on the authorities here produced — authorities of 
 commentators, of critics, and of lexicographers the most 
 respectable — we may venture to assert, that the word 
 baptism certainly signifies immersion, whatever meaning 
 it may have besides ; consequently, both candour and 
 prudence require us to embrace that acceptation in pre- 
 ference to any other. But supposing, without granting, 
 that the word under consideration is occasionally used 
 by inspired writers, by the Septuagint translators, or by 
 Greek classics, to signify washing, where there is no im- 
 mersion, or even to denote sprinkling ; vet Avhile it is al- 
 
 * Christian Minister's Rcas. p. 34. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 73 
 
 lowed by so many of the first characters for sacred cri- 
 ticism, that its primary and obvious meaning is immer- 
 sion ; there is no reason to depart from it in the ad- 
 ministration of a divine ordinance; except it can be 
 proved, that the design of the institution will not com- 
 port with it, or that the practice of the apostles was a 
 departure from it; concerning both which, we shall hear 
 the verdict of learned men in subsequent chapters. 
 Nay, if the numerous authors produced be not under a 
 gross mistake, in fixing the natural and primary meaning 
 of the term baptism; though many incontestable in- 
 stances could be brought, that /SaTrri^ix), in certain con- 
 nections, signifies to wash, without including the idea 
 of dipping ; and that on some occasions it also signifies 
 to pour, and to sprinkle; yet immersion would still be 
 the grand ruling idea. Surely, then, we ought not 
 hastily, or for trivial reasons, to desert the original, the 
 natural and proper sense of a term which was chosen 
 by the unerring Spirit, when a new branch of holy wor- 
 ship was appointed ; especially seeing that very term 
 was intended to direct the church in all future ages, how 
 the worship should be performed. 
 
 It should be well observed, that when our Lord after 
 his resurrection says. Go — baptize; he does not men- 
 tion baptism by way of allusion, or incidentally. No, 
 he speaks the language of legislation: he delivers divine 
 LAW. He mentions and appoints baptism as an ordi- 
 nance of God, and as a branch of human duty. Where 
 then must we expect precision in the use of terms, if not 
 on such an occasion? Can it be supposed, without im- 
 peaching the wisdom or the goodness of Christ, that he 
 enacted a law relating to his own worship, the principal 
 term in which is obscure and ambiguous ? Can it be 
 imagined that he intended an ambiguity so great in the 
 term baptism, which prescribes the duty to be performed, 
 as equally to warrant the use of immersion, of pouring, 
 or of sprinkling, which are three different actions? We 
 
I 
 
 ^74 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 may safely challenge our opposers to produce an instance 
 
 of this kind out of the Mosaic ritual Does Jehovah, 
 
 "when giving his positive laws, make use of a term that 
 properly signifies dipping 1 He means as he speaks, and 
 requires immersion, in contradistinction to pouring and 
 sprinkling. Does he, on the other hand, employ a word 
 which, properly understood, signifies joowri/?o- ? Or does 
 he choose an expression, the radical idea of which is no 
 other than sprinkling^. He still means as he speaks, 
 and enjoins what he mentions, in distinction from every 
 other action. 
 
 That dipping, pouring, and sprinkling, denote three 
 different actions, in the language of divine law, as 
 well as in the estimate of common sense, we have 
 many examples in the writings of IMoses. The follow- 
 ing are selected for the reader's notice. " And the 
 priest shall dip, j3aipei, (Septuag.) his finger in the 
 blood, and sprinkle, Trpoapavei, of the blood seven 
 times before the Lord, before the veil of the sanctuary. 
 And the priest shall — — pour, cK-x^eei, all the blood of 
 the bullock at the bottom of the altar."* " Moses 
 took the anointing oil — and he sprinkled, eppavev, 
 thereof upon the altar seven times, — and he poured, 
 eirex^e, of the anointing oil upon Aaron's head." " Moses 
 SPRINKLED, Trpoae'x^ee, the blood upon the altar round 
 about — and he washed, e-n-Xwev, the inwards and the 
 legs in water. I' He dipt, efSaxpe, his finger in the blood 
 — and poured out, e^ej^eev, the blood at the bottom of 
 the altar. — And Aaron's sons presented unto him the 
 blood, which he sprinkled, Trpoaeyj^ev, round about 
 upon the altar — And he did wash, eTrAyve, the inwards. 'J 
 *' As for the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar 
 wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip 
 them, ^a\\'iL avra, and the living bird, in the blood of 
 the bird that was killed And he shall sprinkle, 
 
 * Levit.iv. 6, 7; see v. 17, 18. f Chap. viii. 11, l^, 19,21. 
 + Chap. ix. 9, 12, 14. 
 
BAPTIZE AND liAPTISM. 15 
 
 Tiepippavu, upon him that is to be cleansed from the le- 
 prosy seven times And he that is to be cleansed shall 
 
 WASH, TtXvvei, his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and 
 WASH HIMSELF, Xovaerai, in water, that he may be 
 clean.* And whosoever toucheth his bed shall wash, 
 
 irXvvei, his clothes, and bathe himself, Xova-eTai, in 
 water." See the following verse.'j" — So in the New 
 Testament, washing the feet is distinguished from bathing 
 the whole body, washing a part of the body from being 
 baptized, and baptism from washing ; as appears by the 
 following instances. " He that is washed (or has been 
 bathing, o XeXov{x€vo$,) needeth not, save to wash his 
 FEET, TTo^a^ vi^aa-Sai.'' " He took them the same hour 
 of the night and washed, eXovaev, their stripes; and 
 was baptized, e^aTma-B'q, he and all his straightway." 
 " Arise and be baptized, (SaTTTia-ai, and wash away, 
 uTToXova-ai, thy sins.";]: By which it appears, that as 
 tasting, in the language of scripture, is distinguished 
 from drinking ;^ so are washing the feet, from bathing 
 the whole body, and washing a part of the body, from 
 being baptized. So that ancient patron of Paedobaptism, 
 Cyprian, expressly distinguishes between washing and 
 spri?ikling, when professedly pleading for the latter, in 
 what he thought a case of necessity. In his letter to 
 Magnus he intimates that some doubted, whether those 
 who received the clinical baptism, " were to be accounted 
 legitimate Christians ; eo quod aqua salutari non loti 
 sint, sed perfusi, because they were not washed, but 
 sprinkled, with the salutary water." || Whence it appears, 
 that in Cyprian's time sprinkling was quite a novel 
 practice ; that it was used only in favour of those who 
 were confined by illness ; and that baptismal washing, 
 
 * Lev. chap, xiv, 6, 7, 8. 
 
 f Chap.xv,5,63 seealso. Numb, xix.4,7, 18, 19j Deut. xxi. 6,7- 
 \ Job xiii. 10. See Dr. Doddridge in loc. ; Acts xvi. 33, and 
 xxii. 16. § Matt, xxvii. 34, (| Epist. Ixxvi. 
 
76 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 in the language of Cyprian, is no other than plunging. 
 Mr. Cleaveland also has very lately distinguished be- 
 tween dipping, sprinkling, and washing, in the follow- 
 ing manner : " We dip our hand in water, though not 
 all over, to baptize a person by sprijikling, or to wash 
 our face."* With what reason or shadow of propriety, 
 then, can any one pretend that the term baptism, is 
 equally expressive of these different actions ? 
 
 Were the leading term in any human law to have an 
 ambiguity in it equal to that for which our brethren 
 plead, with regard to the word baptism ; such law would 
 certainly be considered as betraying either the weakness 
 or wickedness of the legislator ; and be condemned as 
 opening a door to perpetual chicane and painful uncer- 
 tainty. Far be it, then, from us to suppose, that our 
 gracious and omniscient Lord should give a law re- 
 lating to divine worship, and obligatory on the most 
 illiterate of his real disciples, which may be fairly con- 
 strued to mean, this, that, or the other action — a law, 
 which is calculated to excite and perpetuate contention 
 among his wisest and sincerest followers — a law, in re- 
 spect of its triple meaning, that would disgrace a British 
 parliament, as being involved in the dark ambiguity of 
 a pagan oracle. It must, therefore, be at our peril, if 
 we indulge a wanton fancy in the interpretation of that 
 law which is now before us. For, as Mr. Charnock ob- 
 serves, " It is a part of God's sovereignty to be the in- 
 terpreter, as well as the maker, of his own laws ; as it is 
 a right inherent in the legislative power among men. 
 So that it is an invasion of his right to fasten a sense 
 upon his declared will, which doth not tiaturally JIow 
 from the words. For to put any interpretation, accord- 
 ing to our pleasure, upon divine as well as human laws, 
 contrary to their true intent, is a virtual usurpation of 
 this power ; because if laws may be interpreted accord- 
 
 * Infant Baptism from Heaven, p. 63. Salem, 1/84. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 77 
 
 ing to our humours, the power of the law would be 
 more in the interpreter than in the legislator."* 
 
 Were the same licence of interpretation used in con- 
 struing the law of the sacred supper, as numbers practise 
 on the term baptism ; we should probably soon behold 
 an obsolete and superstitious custom revived : the cus- 
 tom, I mean, of employing a reed, a glass tube, or some- 
 thing similar, by which to suck the wine out of the cup.f 
 When our Lord instituted the holy supper, his order 
 concerning the wine was ; n^ere e^ avrov Travre^, " drink 
 ye all of it," (Matt. xxvi. 27.) Now none will dispute, 
 that TT/ere is from tt/i/o) ; or that the natural and proper 
 signification of it is, to drink ; in the full and most pro- 
 per sense, to drink. Nay, it will be allowed, I sup- 
 pose, that if TTivw does not signify that precise idea, there 
 is never a word in the Greek Testament that can express 
 it. Yet the learned lexicographer Schwarzius tells us, 
 that it signifies not only. to drink; but also to suck, to 
 imbibe^ to admit, to receive, for which he refers to 
 Heb. vi. 7. 
 
 Our brethren ought not to forget, that the principal 
 terms of a law, and especially of a law relating to divine 
 worship, should be understood in their natural, obvious, 
 primary sense ; from which it is dangerous to depart, 
 except some glaring absurdity would follow. This re- 
 mark is perfectly agreeable to the doctrine of Sir William 
 Blackstone, who lays it down as a rule of legal interpre- 
 tation ; " that the words of a law are generally to be un- 
 derstood in their usual and most known signification ; 
 not so much regarding the propriety of grammar, as 
 their general and popular use :" — but, " where words 
 bear either none, or a very absurd signification, if lite- 
 rally understood, we must a little deviate from the re- 
 ceived sense of them.":]: This, we may venture to say, 
 
 * Of Man's Enmity to God, p. 98. f Hospiniani Hist. Sac. 
 
 L iv. c. ii. p. 248. Venem, Hist. Eccles. torn. vi. p. 193, 
 X Commentaries^ vol. i. Introduct, sect. ii. 
 
7"S SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 is a rule of good sense, as we\[ as of legal knowledge ; 
 and should be constantly regarded in our interpretation 
 of laws, whether divine or human. Whereas, if we 
 wantonly depart from it, almost any hypothesis may be 
 supported ; for by taking such a liberty, there is no word 
 in any language that might not have the whole of its 
 natural and primary sense expounded away. 
 
 Reflect. VI. While our brethren maintain that the 
 term baptism, when relating to the institution so called, 
 means any thing short of immersion ; it behoves them 
 to inform us, which of our English words is competent 
 to express its adequate idea. 1 have observed, indeed, 
 that they seldom fix upon any particular term and abide 
 by it, as answering to the word baptism ; but rather 
 choose to use, washing, pouring, or sprinkling, just as 
 their cause requires. Now, as those three expressions, 
 in their native signification, denote three different ac- 
 tions, it looks as if they were fearful of being embar- 
 rassed, were they to select one of them and uniformly to 
 employ it, in preference to the other two. As they do 
 not pretend our divine Lawgiver meant, that washing, 
 pouring, and sprinkling, should all be performed on the 
 same person to constitute baptism ; so, w hile they be- 
 lieve that any action short of immersion is warranted by 
 his command, they ought, as fair disputants, to tell us 
 what that action is, and by what name we should call it. 
 (See the quotations from Dr. Owen, Reflect, iii. p. 68, 69.) 
 At present, however, we can only ask. Is it ivasking? 
 If so, we may consider that word as a proper translation 
 of it,* and a complete substitute for it, wherever the or- 
 dinance before us is mentioned by the sacred writers.^ 
 
 * Baptism is the Greek word, with an English termination j con- 
 cerning which ]Mr. Lewis says, " Oiir last translators were directed 
 by the king to retain the old ecclesiastical words," of which baptism 
 was one. Hist, of Eng. Translations, p. 317, 326, edit. 2nd, 
 
 f It is an old rule, Definitiones debent cum delinito reciprocari : 
 that is, A definition and the thing defined should be convertible. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 79 
 
 Let US make the experiment on a few passages. We 
 will take, for instance, the words of Ananias to Saul, 
 (Acts xxii. 16,) which must be read thus: " Arise and 
 be WASHED, and wash away thy sins :" and those of 
 Paul, (Rom. vi. 3, and Gal. iii. 27,) " Know ye not, that 
 so many of us as were washed into Jesus Christ, were 
 WASHED into his death ? As many of us as have been 
 WASHED into Christ, have put on Christ." — Is it pouring? 
 Then we must read (Mark i. 9, and Acts ii. 38, 41,) thus ; 
 " Jesus came from Nazareth of Gahlee, and was poured 
 of John in (e;^-, into) Jordan." — "Repent and be pour- 
 ed every one of you." — " Then they that gladly received 
 his word, were poured." — Is it sprinkling? Then we 
 must read (John iii. 23 ; Rom. vi. 4 ; Col. ii. 12,) thus : 
 " John also was sprinkling in Enon near to Salim, 
 BECAUSE there WAS MUCH WATER there : and they 
 came and were sprinkled." — " Therefore we are bu- 
 ried with him by sprinkling into death." — " Bu- 
 ried with him by sprinkling." These few examples 
 may suffice to show, what an awkward appearance the 
 noble sense and masculine diction of inspiration wear, 
 when expressed according to this hypothesis. Whereas, 
 if instead of washing, pouring, or sprinkling, you employ 
 the word immersion, the preceding passages will make 
 a very different figure, and read thus : " Arise and be 
 immersed, and wash away thy sins." — " Know ye not, 
 that so many of us as were immersed into Jesus Christ, 
 were immersed into his death ?"^ — " As many of us as 
 have been immersed into Christ, have put on Christ." 
 — "Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was im- 
 mersed of John in (or into) Jordan." — " Repent and 
 be immersed every one of you." — " Then they that 
 gladly received his word were immersed." — " John 
 also was immersing in Enon near to Salim, because 
 there was much water there : and they came and were 
 immersed." — "Therefore we are buried with him 
 by immersion into death." — " Buried with him by 
 
80. SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 IMMERSION." Here we have, if I mistake not, both 
 dignity of sentiment, and propriety of language. Hence it 
 appears, that the word /SairTi^co is connected with such 
 particles (ev and ei^) as forbid our concluding that either 
 wash, pour, or sprinkle, is a proper substitute for it. 
 The form of expression adopted by evangelists and apos- 
 tles, is always, if I mistake not, baptizing in or into 
 something. Thus, for example, ev or eig, in or into 
 Jordan ;* ev, in water, in the Holy Spirit ;t e/$-, into the 
 name,| into ]Moses,§ into Christ, || into his death. ^ Eig, 
 in the case of baptism, cannot be rendered to ox towards; 
 because it would be absurd to say, that John baptized 
 to or towards Jordan ; nor in regard to this affair can ev 
 be translated with or hi/ ; because it would be awkward 
 to say, John baptized with or by Jordan ; besides, eig, 
 which is used of the same administration, cannot be so 
 rendered. Baptism, therefore, being always expressed 
 as performed in, or into something, must be immersion, 
 and not pouring, or sprinkling ; for persons cannot be 
 sprinkled or poured into water, though they may be 
 plunged into it. 
 
 Let us now apply the same terms to the different 
 metaphorical baptisms of which we read in the New 
 Testament. There we have, the baptism of sufferings, 
 of the Spirit and oijire, of the cloud and the sea. Ac- 
 cording to our brethren, the passages to which I refer 
 must be read, either thus : " I have a washing to be 
 WASHED WITH, and how am I straitened till it be ac- 
 complished." — " He shall wash you with (rather in, ev,) 
 the Holy Spirit and in fire." — " And were all m'ashed 
 unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea."** Or thus : 
 " I have a pouring to be poured with, and how am 
 I straitened till it be accompHshed !" — " He shall pour 
 
 * Matt. iii. 6j Mark i. 9. f Matt, iii 11. 
 
 * Matt, xxviii. 19. § I Cor. x. 2. || Gal. iii. 27. 
 % Rom. vi. 3. See Mr. M'Leans Nature and Import of Bap^ 
 
 tism, p. 6. ** Luke xii. 50; Matt. iii. 11 ; 1 Cor. x. 2. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 81 
 
 you in the Holy Spirit and in fire." — " And were all 
 POURED unto Moses, in the cloud and in the sea." — Or 
 thus : " I have a sprinkling to be sprinkled with, 
 and how am I straitened till it be accompHshed !" — " He 
 shall SPRINKLE you in the Holy Spirit and in fire." — 
 "And were all sprinkled unto Moses, in the cloud 
 and in the sea." According to us, the manner of read- 
 ing these passages will be this : " I have an immer- 
 sion to be immersed with, and how am I straitened till 
 it be accompHshed !" — " He shall immerse you in the 
 Holy Spirit and in fire." — " And were all immersed 
 unto Moses, in the cloud and in the sea." In regard to 
 Luke xii. 50, if you render the word baptism by the term 
 washing, you not only sink the vigorous idea, but convey 
 a sentiment foreign to the text. For the term washing 
 plainly suggests the notion of cleansing; whereas it is 
 manifest, that our Lord here speaks of himself person- 
 ally — of himself, not as to be cleansed from sin, hut pu- 
 nished for it; or, as the apostle asserts, made a curse 
 FOR us. To adopt the word pouri7?g, would exceedingly 
 dilute and impoverish the marvellous meaning, if not to ren- 
 der the passage absolutely unintelligible ; and, from using 
 the term sprinkling, common sense turns abhorrent ; 
 as it would render the emphatical and admirable text 
 quite ridiculous. For who can seriously imagine that 
 our Lord intended to represent his most bitter sufferings 
 by the act of sprinkling a few drops of water on a per- 
 son ? No ; he designed to express his being " baptized, 
 or plunged, into death," as Bugenhagius interprets the 
 passage.* So that, though the term baptism is here used 
 by way of allusion ; and, though I am far from thinking 
 that the allusive sense of a word should be the rule of 
 interpreting the same expression in a positive divine law ; 
 yet, as all pertinent metaphors have a literal and proper 
 sense for their foundation, we may conclude, that if it 
 
 * In Biblioth. Bremens. class, ii. p.6G5. 
 VOL. I. & 
 
82 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 be possible for any word, when used metaphorically, to 
 express the idea of immersion, plunging, overwhelm- 
 ing, we have it here in the term baptism. The same 
 observations will apply to a similar text, (Matt. xx. 22,) 
 " Are ye able to be baptized with the baptism that 1 am 
 baptized with?" which Dr. Doddridge thus paraphrases: 
 " Are you able to be baptized with the baptism, and 
 pliaiged into that sea of sufferings with which I am 
 shortly to be baptized, and, as it were, overwJielmed for a 
 time ?" — In respect of the two other passages, whether 
 our sense of the word in question, or that of Paedobap- 
 tists, be more emphatical, and the language more agree- 
 able, my reader will determine. 
 
 Farther : If it be lawful to administer the ordinance 
 before us by pouring or sprinkling, equally as by immer- 
 sion ; it must be, because that diversity of administra- 
 tion is warranted, either by the command of our divine 
 Lawgiver, or by the practice of his apostles. But if so, 
 is it not very surprising that the sacred penmen of the 
 New Testament, when recording precepts and facts for 
 our direction in this affair, have never used a term, the 
 natural and primary meaning of which is pouring, or 
 sprinkling ? This is the more surprising, as, in other 
 cases, apparently of much less consequence to the purity 
 of divine worship, they frequently employ such words as 
 are adapted to express those ideas without any ambi- 
 guity. \i pouring, for instance, be a legitimate way of 
 performing the rite, what can be the reason that /5aAAcy, 
 €K')(eco, €7ri')(^ecit}, eKyvvoo, KUTay^eco, Trp&a^^ew, or 7rpoa')(ya-ig, (all 
 which are found in the apostolic writings,) are never used 
 in the New Testament, concerning the administration of 
 baptism ? Or, if sprinkling be a proper mode of pro- 
 ceeding, how comes it that pavn^co, pavnaixog, or some 
 other term of the same signification, does not appear in 
 any command or precedent, relating to the subject of 
 this controversy ? Why should those Greek words I 
 have just mentioned, and all others of a similar meaning, 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. S3 
 
 (whether used by Pagan classics, or the Septuagint trans- 
 lators) be excluded from precepts and examples of the 
 institution before us ; M'hile (Sairri'i^oi, ^aTTTia-ixa, and (Sarr- 
 Tia-f/.o^, are appropriated to that service, if pouring or 
 sprinkling had been at all intended by our Lord, or ever 
 practised by his apostles ? See No. 49. — It must not 
 be supposed, as Jos. Placaeus has justly observed in 
 another case, that this was done by inspired writers 
 without design : * and on our principles the reason is 
 plain. The great Legislator intended that his followers 
 should be immersed, " in the name of the Father, and 
 of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit :" in pursuance there- 
 fore of this design, such words are used concerning the 
 ordinance, as naturally and properly convey that idea. — 
 We have, I think, as much reason to conclude that jSoctt- 
 T/^w and pavri^w are terms of opposite significations, as 
 that PaTTTia-T'/jpiov and irepippavryiptov denote things intended 
 for opposite uses. The former of these names, it is well 
 known, was applied by ancient Christians to the baptis- 
 mal font ; because candidates for communion were im- 
 mersed in it : the latter, it is equally clear, was appro- 
 priated by Pagan Greeks to the vessel which contained 
 their holy water ; because thence the idolatrous priest 
 sprinkled the consecrated element upon each worshipper.f 
 What then would the learned say, were any one pretend- 
 ing to an acquaintance with Christian and Greek anti- 
 quities, designedly to confound the two latter expres- 
 sions, as if they were convertible terms ? Be the just 
 censure what it might, I cannot help thinking it is due 
 to those who confound the two former, by labouring to 
 prove them equivalent, in regard to the ordinance before 
 us. Though our brethren maintain the lawfulness of 
 pouring and sprinkling, they cannot produce one in- 
 stance from the divine rubric of this institution, of any 
 
 * Opera, torn. ii. p. 267. 
 
 t Suiceri Thesaurus Eccles, torn. i. p. 659, Dr. Potter's Anti- 
 quities of Greece, vol. i. chap. iv. p. 195, 
 
 6 2 
 
84 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 word being used which primarily and plainly expresses 
 either of those actions. — It is very remarkable, that 
 while few or none of our learned opponents dare deny, 
 that the term baptism conveys the idea of immersion; 
 and while none of them, so far as I have observed, 
 venture to assert, that it never means any thing besides 
 pouring or sprinkling ; yet, in their practice, pouring, or 
 sprinkling, is constantly used. Thus what is allowed by 
 learned men in general to be the radical idea of a capi- 
 tal term in divine law, is entirely kept out of sight ; 
 while a presumed secondary sense, is the only thing that 
 appears in their mode of proceeding. 
 
 Dr. Addington, indeed, says : " We have not met 
 with one text, in the whole Bible, that requires the im- 
 mersion of the whole body." * Just so, I remember, 
 Socinus declared, that he could not find one text which 
 requires either immersion or sprinkling. The people 
 called Quakers adopt similar language. Nor could the 
 whole Council of Trent meet with so much as one text 
 that enjoins those whom they call the laity, to partake of 
 wine at the Lord's table.f " So hard a thing is it," 
 says Mr. Reeves, "to find any text plain enough for 
 some men!" J But though Dr. Addington has not met 
 with one text, which he considers as requiring immer- 
 sion, many of those learned authors with whose lan- 
 guage the reader has been entertained, seem to be of a 
 different opinion: and if the native signification of the 
 term baptism, be immersion, the action so called must 
 be required, wherever divine law enjoins the administra- 
 tion of baptism. This must be the case, except it can 
 be proved, that the leading terms of a law should be 
 understood in a real, or supposed, secondary sense. Has, 
 then. Dr. Addington met with any text which requires 
 pouring, or sprinkling, in opposition to immersion ? Has 
 he found any passage of sacred writ, that eiijoins pour- 
 
 * Christian Minister's Reasons, p. 176". f Sess.xxi. cap. i. 
 
 + Apologies, vol. i. Prefe^ce, p. 84, edit. 1709. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 85 
 
 ing or sprinkling water on the face^ in contradistinction 
 to plunging the whole body ? He will not, I think, dare 
 to assert either the one or the other. But if immersion 
 be not required, in contradistinction to pouring and 
 sprinkling; and if pouring or sprinkling be not required, 
 in opposition to immersion ; we should consider it as a 
 favour, if this opponent would inform us what is re- 
 quired. For the question relates to the wziw^o/' Christ: 
 it regards the meaning of a divine law: nor can we 
 forbear thinking, that something is required, really and 
 in earnest required, which is called baptism; or else our 
 Protestant principles would exclaim against us, for per- 
 forming any thing under that name as a branch of holy 
 worship. While, therefore, any of our opposers deny 
 that immersion is required, they are obliged to prove, 
 either, that their own mode of proceeding has the sanc- 
 tion of a divine requisition, exclusively of ours ; or, that 
 the most High has, for once, consulted the honour of 
 the human will, by leaving the manner of performing a 
 positive rite of religion entirely at the option of his wor- 
 shippers. The former will be an arduous task ; the latter 
 is pregnant with impious absurdity. 
 
 Reflect. VII. While the Paedobaptists maintain that 
 our great Lawgiver intended any thing less than dipping 
 the subject of the ordinance, whether it be washing, pour- 
 ing, or sprinkling ; it is necessary for them to consider, 
 whether his design was, that water should be applied, in 
 any of these ways, to the whole body, or to some particu- 
 lar part. If the former, why do they not comply with 
 his requisition? Why make such a partial application of 
 the element? If the latter, what part must it be ? Some 
 pour water on the back part of the head, and call it bap- 
 tism.* Others have washed the face, pronounced the 
 prescribed form of words, and thought the institution 
 was rightly administered.f What, if others were to 
 
 * Bp. Burnet's Second Letter of his Travels, p. 85. 
 
 f Mr. Neale's Hist. Purit, vol. i. p. .S43, .544, octav. edit. 
 
ii6 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 wash the hands of a candidate, call it baptism, and 
 plead, that washing the hands was a religious rite ap- 
 pointed by Jehovah ? * Nay, what if some should wash 
 the feet, pronounce it baptism, and appeal to John 
 xiii. 10, in justification of their conduct ?t I leave the 
 reader to consider, whether a minister has not as good a 
 warrant from the New Testament thus to proceed, as to 
 pour water upon, or to sprinkle the Jace ; and then to 
 conclude, that the party is duly baptized. — It has been 
 the opinion of some, that a child is baptized, on what- 
 ever part of his body the water may fall ::}: and we may 
 justly demand. By what law of Christ, or by what ex- 
 ample of the apostles, is any one authorized to apply 
 water to the face, or the head ; rather than to the hands, 
 the feet, or any other part of the body ? It should never 
 be forgotten, that the institution about which we treat, 
 is of a positive kind ; and that we are not at liberty to 
 perform it as we please, but are bound to observe the 
 law of administration enacted by our divine Sovereign. 
 See chap. i. 
 
 In opposition to this partial application of water, it 
 may be farther observed, that when Jehovah appointed 
 circumcision, he expressly mentioned the part on which 
 it should be performed. When also he commanded a 
 topical application of the sacrificial blood and the anoint- 
 ing oil, he did not fail to describe the parts intended : § 
 and such was the obligation of his directions in refe- 
 
 * Deut. xxi. 6". f The pedilavium practised in early 
 
 times, was actually considered by some, in the beginning of the 
 fourth century, as a proper substitute for baptism 3 on which ac- 
 count, washing of the feet by the bishop was forbidden by the Coun- 
 cil of Eliberis. See Dr. Gill, on John xiii. 15. — The church of Milan 
 practised washing of the feet, " because Adam was supplanted by 
 the devil, and the serpent's poison was cast upon his feet; there- 
 fore men were washed in that part for greater sanctification, that he 
 might have no power to supplant them any farther." Mr. Bing- 
 ham's Orig. Ecclesiast. b. xii. chap. iv. § 10. 
 
 X Venem. Hist. Eccles, tom. vi. p. 19'2. § Lev. xiv. 14, 17 . 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 87 
 
 rence to these affairs, that if Abraham had circumcised a 
 ■finger, instead oi ^Sx'^ foreskin ; or had the blood and the 
 oil been applied to any other parts of the body, than 
 those that were specified; guilt would have been con- 
 tracted, and the anger of the Lord incurred. So, on 
 the other hand, when God enjoined the priests or the 
 people to hathe, had they only sprinkled \\\&face, poured 
 water on the hands, or washed the feet, they would have 
 been equally culpable. Now, baptism being a positive 
 institution, as well as those ancient rites, what reason 
 can be assigned, if water should be applied only to a 
 particular part of the body, why that part was not men- 
 tioned, either in the institution of the ordinance, or in 
 some apostolic example of its administration ? yet I do 
 not remember to have observed, that any of our op- 
 ponents pretend that it is. 
 
 Reflect. VIII. That extraordinary communication 
 of spiritual gifts and of divine influence, which the dis- 
 ciples of Christ received at the feast of Pentecost, 
 being called the baptism of the Holy Spirit; and the Holy 
 Spirit being represented as poured out, doadi falling upon, 
 those first ministers in the Messiah's kingdom; our bre- 
 thren have often pleaded these facts in opposition to us, 
 and in favour of their own practice. In answer to which, 
 I would propose the following things to consideration. 
 
 The word baptism is here manifestly used in an im- 
 proper and allusive sense ; for there is no more literal 
 propriety in speaking of the Holy Spirit being poured, or 
 sprinkled, upon those first disciples of our ascended 
 Lord, than in representing them as immersed in the Holy 
 Spirit. Must we, then, expound the principal term of 
 a divine law, which is to be literally understood, by a 
 merely allusive expression ? so expound it, as to depart 
 from, its native, primary, and obvious meaning? It has 
 been common for learned men to examine the propriety 
 of metaphorical and allusive terms, upon the foundation 
 of their literal and primary meaning; but never, that I 
 
88 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 have observed, to consider an allusive application of 
 them, as the standard of their literal sense. Yet this is 
 the case here. For our dispute is about the meaning of 
 the term baptism, in a propei^ literal sense, and as oc- 
 curring in divine law : to determine which, our brethren 
 appeal to an impropei^ and an allusive sense of the 
 word as used with reference to a supernatural fact. This, 
 we think, is very extraordinary. For if the command 
 to baptize need any explanation from subsequent facts, 
 it seems natural for us to have recourse — not to the 
 language of metaphor, nor to any expression that is 
 merely allusive, — but, to apostolic practice in the admi- 
 nistration of baptism ; because, by making allusive ex- 
 pressions the rule of interpreting literal commands, any 
 divine law may soon be explained away. — For instance : 
 Had the mode of interpretation adopted by our oppo- 
 nents been approved and applied by the ancient He- 
 brews to the command of circumcision, they might have 
 evaded the painful rite. They would, it is likely, have 
 reasoned thus : " The law of circumcision is plainly 
 symbolical; and the chief moral instruction suggested 
 by it, is the circumcision of the heart. But that is not 
 the mutilating, or the impairing, of natural power: it 
 is no other than the superinducing of mental purity, by 
 an alteration of moral qualities. If, then, there be a 
 just correspondence, as doubtless there is, between the 
 rite itself and its principal moral design, the praeputium 
 should not be cut off, but some way or other purified.'''' 
 Thus the order of Jehovah miiiht have been evaded 
 under a fair pretext, and the divine rite essentially 
 altered. I cannot help thinking, therefore, that when 
 our brethren, in the case before us, make such appeals 
 to miraculous agency and metaphorical expression, they 
 tacitly confess that the obvious meaning of the word 
 baptism, and primitive practice, atford their cause but 
 little assistance. 
 
 Again: As it is not uncommon for us to speak of 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 89 
 
 being immersed in debt, in business, or in care; and of 
 being plunged in grief, or in ruin ; so we are never con- 
 sidered as using these metaphorical expressions with 
 elegance, or with propriety, except so far as the analo- 
 gical sense, in which we employ them, points to their 
 literal and primary meaning. The following rules, among 
 various others, have in this case been given. " It ought 
 to be remembered, that all figurative ways of using words 
 or phrases suppose a natural and literal meaning."* 
 " The figurative sense must have a relation to that 
 which is proper; and the more intimate the relation, 
 the figure is the more happy — The proper sense of 
 the word ought to bear some proportion to the figura- 
 tive sense, and not soar much above it, nor sink much 
 below it — To draw consequences from a figure of 
 speech, as if the word were to be understood literally, 
 is a gross absurdity."']' — Pertinent, on this occasion, is 
 the language of Chrysostom, who speaks of " being 
 BAPTIZED, or immersed, in cares innumerable;" i^vpiaig 
 l3a7fTi^o[xevo^ (ppovTicriv. and again, to the same effect, Itto 
 TrXrjSo^ (ppovTi'^av rov vow (3el3a7rTicr[xevov e'^ovreg. So Basil 
 the Great, describing a person who stands immovably 
 against the storms of temptation and persecution, calls 
 him ajSaTTTia-Tog ^^x^, '' a soul unbaptized, or not over- 
 whelmed."J See No. 31, 82. — Now here the very term 
 in question is used in a metaphorical way; yet so used, 
 as plainly to retain its obvious and primary meaning. 
 But how disagreeably would it sound, seriously to say of 
 a man that owes but a few pence, He is immersed in debt? 
 or, of one whose heart is broken with sorrow, He is 
 sprinkled with grief? The most illiterate would be struck 
 with such a glaring impropriety. When, therefore, we 
 
 * Dr. Reid's Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man, p, 74. 
 
 f Encyclopaed. Britan. under the article Figure of Speech. See 
 also Dr. Ward's System of Oratory, vol. i. p. 386. 
 
 X Apud Schelhorniumj Biblioth. Brem. class, vii. p. 638. Vid. 
 Suiceri Thesaur, Eccles. torn, i. p. 693. 
 
90 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 consider this metaphorical use of the term baptism, as 
 expressive of that divine energy, and that assemblage of 
 wonderful gifts, which were granted in the primitive 
 times to fit the apostles for their arduous work ; the 
 analogical sense of the word baptism, will appear much 
 more elegant and much more emphatical on our prin- 
 ciples, than on those of our opposers. Dr. Ward has 
 observed, that " we say, floods of fire, and clouds of 
 smoke, for large quantities;"* so when the scripture 
 speaks of being baptized with, or in, the Holy Spirit, the 
 great abundance of his gifts and graces must be intended. 
 One of our English authors has used the words, '^dipped 
 in scandal." t Now thus to represent a person is much 
 more expressive of that opprobrium under which he lies, 
 than if it were said : His character is greatly aspersed; 
 or, infamy is poured upon him ; because it immediately 
 leads us to think of his being overwhelmed with re- 
 proachful charges. — Dr. Owen speaks of " being bap- 
 tized into the spirit of the gospel." J As it is plain that 
 the word baptized cannot here mejn poured, or sprink- 
 led ; (for what sense is there in representing a person as 
 poured, or sprinkled, into any thing?) so it is equally 
 plain, that the author's words more strongly express the 
 sanctifying power of the gospel on the human heart, than 
 if he had talked of the spirit of the gospel being poured 
 or sprinkled upon a professor of religion. — Thus, in 
 the present case, we have a much stronger idea of that 
 sacred influence, and of those heavenly donatives, with 
 ^^ hich the apostles were indulged at the feast of Pente- 
 cost, by retaining the primary meaning of the word in 
 question ; than by thinking of some possible, but remote 
 sense of the term. For as the analogical signification of 
 the same word, when used of our Lord's unparalleled suf- 
 ferings, would be so diluted as to become ridiculous, or 
 
 * Ut supra, p. 404. 
 
 t Notes on Mr. Pope's Dunciad, p. 123, edit. 1729, 
 
 X Discourse on the Holy Spirit, b. iv, chap. i. p. 334. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 91 
 
 unintelligible, were we to consider the allusion as made to 
 the act of pouring, or of sprinkling, a few drops of water 
 upon any person ; so, in regard to the baptism of the Holy 
 Spirit, we must either abide by the natural sense of the 
 term, or greatly impoverish the scriptural notion of that 
 wonderful fact. Though all true believers are partakers 
 of a divine influence, yet they are not all baptized in the 
 Holy Spirit. For as those afflictions which are common 
 to the disciples of Christ, are not the baptism of suffer- 
 ings ; so neither are those communications of divine in- 
 fluence, which are common to real saints, the baptism of 
 the Holy Spirit. 
 
 Farther: Our brethren themselves I think will allow, 
 that a person may be so surrounded with subtle effluvia; 
 that a liquid may be so poured, or it may so distil upon 
 him, that he may be as if immersed in it. A certain 
 writer, when speaking about the different applications 
 of electricity for the cure of diseases, says: "The first 
 is the electrical bath; so called, because it surrounds 
 the patient with an atmosphere of the electrical fluid, 
 in which he is plunged, and receives positive electricity."* 
 This philosophical document reminds me of the sacred 
 historian's language, where narrating the fact under 
 consideration. Thus he speaks: "And when the day 
 of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one 
 accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound 
 from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled 
 
 ALL THE HOUSE WHERE THEY WERE SITTING. And 
 
 there appeared unto them cloven tongues, like as of 
 fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all 
 filled with the Holy Ghost.^" Now if the language of 
 medical electricity be just, it cannot be absurd, nay, it 
 seems highly rational, to understand this language of 
 inspiration as expressive of that idea for which we con- 
 tend. Was the Holy Spirit poured out, did the Holy 
 Spirit fall upon the apostles and others at that memo- 
 
 * Monthly Review, vol. Ixxii. p. 486. f Acts ii. 1,2,3,4. 
 
92 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 rable time? it was in such a manner, and to such a 
 degree, that they were hke a patient in the electric bath, 
 as if immersed in it. Did our opposers thus consider 
 the term pour, in this connection, we should not object; 
 because the primary and evident meaning of the word 
 baptism would be still preserved in their explanation of 
 its allusive sense. But to suppose that the pouring a 
 veri/ small quantity of water, or the falling of a few 
 (hops on the face of a person, is a just emblem of that 
 metaphorical baptism, is quite incongruous; as it ener- 
 vates and almost annihilates that grand idea which the 
 scripture gives of the marvellous fact. See No. 42. 
 
 Once more: We have the pleasure to find that va- 
 rious authors, who were not under the influence of 
 Antipeedobaptist sentiments, express themselves agree- 
 ably to our view of the case. Cyril of Jerusalem, 
 about the middle of tht: fourth century, speaks thus: 
 " As he, ev'^vvccv ev Toig voacrt, who is plunged in water 
 and baptized, is encompassed by the water on every 
 side ; so are they that are wholly baptized by the 
 
 Spirit."* Casaubon : "BaTrr/^e/v, is to immerse; 
 
 and in this sense the apostles are truly said to be bap- 
 tized; for the house in which this was done was filled 
 with the Holy Ghost, so that the apostles seemed to 
 
 be plunged into it, as into a fishpool."t Grotius: 
 
 " To be baptized here, is not to be slightly sprinkled, 
 but to have the Holy Spirit abundantly poured upon 
 
 them. "I Cor. a Lapide, Menochius, and Tirinus: 
 
 "A copious effusion of the Holy Spirit, is called the 
 
 baptism of the Holy Spirit." § Witsius : "A very 
 
 great communication of the fiery or purifying Spirit, 
 
 is called baptism, because of its abundance." || 
 
 Dr. Doddridge: "He [Christ] shall baptize you with 
 
 * In Dr. Gill's Exposit. on Acts i. 5. 
 
 t In Dr. Gill's Ancient Mode of Baptizing, p. 22, 23. 
 
 X Apud Poli Synopsin, ad Act. i. 5. § Ibid. 
 
 II Misccl. Sao. toni. ii. p. 535. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 93 
 
 a most plentiful effusion of the Holy Spirit."* — — 
 Mr. Leigh : " Baptized; that is, drown you all over, 
 dip you into the ocean of his grace; opposite to the 
 
 sprinkling which was in the law."')' Bp. Hopkins: 
 
 " Those that are baptized with the Spirit, are as it 
 were plunged into that heavenly flame, whose search- 
 ing energy devours all their dross, tin, and base alloy. ":|: 
 See No. 3, 8, 51, 53. — To all which I may add, As 
 the baptism of water was administered, ev llan, iisr 
 water ; § in Jordan ; |1 and in Enon ; % so the New 
 Testament uniformly represents the recipients of this 
 heavenly baptism, as baptized ev Ttvevixan ayiw, in the 
 Holy Spirit;** which unavoidably leads us to the 
 proper and primary sense of the word baptism, rather 
 than to any supposed secondary meaning that can be 
 imagined. 
 
 Reflect. IX. In opposition to all these authorities 
 and all this reasoning, Mr. John Horsey is of opinion, 
 that the word baptism is '•' an equivocal, open, general 
 term;" that nothing is determined by it farther "than 
 this, that water should be applied to the subject in some 
 form or other; " that " the mode of use," is " only the 
 ceremonial part of a positive institute; just as, in the 
 supper of our Lord, the time of day, the number and 
 posture of communicants, the quality and quantity of 
 bread and wine, are circumstances not accounted es- 
 sential by any party of Christians;" that "sprinkling, 
 
 * Paraphrase on Matt, iii, 11. f Annotat. onMatt, iii. 11. 
 
 + Works, p. 519. § Matt. iii. 11 j Mark i. 83 John i.26, 
 
 31, 33. So Montanusj so the Vulgate, Syriae, Arabic, and Ethi- 
 opia versions; and so Le Cene, Simon, and others in their French 
 versions, together with Wetham's English translation, published at 
 Douay, render Matt. iii. 11, with whom Tindal's translation, Cran- 
 mer's Bible, and the Bishops' Bible, as they are usually called, 
 agree. — N. B. What is here said respecting the French versions, 
 and our old English translations, depends on the observation of 
 a friend. |1 Matt. iii. 6j Mark i. 9. ^ John iii. 23. 
 
 ** Matt, iii 11 3 Mark i. 83 Luke iii. I63 John i. 333 Acts i. 
 5, and xi. 16. 
 
94 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 pouring, and plunging, are perfectly equivalent, equally 
 valid; and, that if our Lord had designed to confine his 
 followers to a particular mode, exclusive of all others," 
 he would hardly have used " an open general term, 
 {f3a7rri^ci})'' but "a word decided and limited in its im- 
 port." He adds, "the Greek language would have 
 furnished him with terms indisputably precise and exact. 
 Of this kind have been reckoned, and I think properly, 
 
 Kara/Sydi^ci), KaTaTrovTi^o), Kara^vvx Or Kara^vixi, not tO say 
 
 Ivirrca and fSvdi^w.'''* Mr. Edward Williams, when ad- 
 verting to the same subject, says: '"As the most eminent 
 critics, commentators, and lexicographers are divided in 
 their verdict, respecting the acceptation of the term 
 baptizo, and consequently the intention of our Saviour's 
 command to baptize; and as the practice of the disciples, 
 whence we should gather in what sense they understood 
 it, is attended with considerable difficulty, when reduced 
 to any one invariable method — we should vary it ac- 
 cording to circumstances, and in proportion as demon- 
 strable evidence is wanting, refer the mode to the 
 private judgment of the person or persons concerned." f 
 Such are the views and such is the lan^uase of Messrs. 
 Williams and Horsey: to whom 1 may say, as the 
 Athenians to Paul, "You bring certain strange things to 
 our ears, we would know therefore what these things 
 mean." 
 
 The word baptizo, then, is ati ecpuivocal, open, general 
 term ; so equivocal and so obscure, that the most learned 
 authors are divided about its meaning, in our Lord's 
 command to baptize. This, however, is mere assertion ; 
 and, indeed, I should be sorry to see it proved, because 
 it would greatly impeach the legislative character of 
 Jesus Christ. For, as Baron Montesquieu observes, 
 *' The style [of laws] should be plain and simple; a 
 
 * Infant Baptism Stated and Defended, p. 15, 16, 17, edit. '2iui. 
 f Notes on Mr. ]Maurice's Social Relig. p. 131, 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 95 
 
 direct expression being always better understood than an 
 indirect one .... It is an essential article that the words 
 of the laws should [be adapted to] excite in every body 
 the same ideas,... The laws ought not to be subde; 
 they are designed for people of common understanding, 
 not as an art of logic, but as the plain reason of a father 
 of a family."* Now can it be supposed that our Lord 
 would give a positive law of divine w^orship — a law that 
 is obligatory on the most illiterate of his real disciples, 
 in the very first stage of their Christian profession; and 
 yet express it in such ambiguous language, that the most 
 wise and eminent of his followers cannot now under- 
 stand it ? Love to his character and zeal for his cause 
 forbid the thought ! That ambiguity of which our 
 brethren speak, must, if real, have arisen in our great 
 Legislator's conduct, either from incapacity, from inad- 
 vertency, or from design. Not the jirst ; for he was 
 undoubtedly able clearly to have expressed his own 
 meaning. Not the second; for no incogitancy could 
 befal Him, in whom are all the treasures of wisdom and 
 knowledge. Not the last; for it would ill become One 
 wdio declared himself possessed of all authority in hea'ven 
 and in earth, to give a law of perpetual obligation, with 
 an intention that nobody now should understand it. — 
 A litde to illustrate this, it may be observed, that his 
 order to baptize, is a law ; a law of equal force with 
 that of the holy supper. This law extends its obliging 
 power to all that are taught ; so taught, as to be his 
 disciples. For them to neglect or transgress it, there- 
 fore, must be a sin ; and all sin exposes to punishment. 
 If, then, the grand enacting term of this law be so equi- 
 vocal, that no one can tell with certainty what it means, 
 we may suppose it probable that, in ten thousand in- 
 stances, a transgression of it has proceeded, not from 
 any thing wrong in the hearts of our Lord's disci ples^ 
 but from the designed obscurity of the law itself. Now 
 * Spirit of Laws, b.xxix. chap.xvi. 
 
96 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 a law designedly obscure is fitted for nothing so much 
 as to multiply crimes and punishments. Such a law is 
 unjust and cruel; consequently, could not proceed from 
 our divine Sovereign. 
 
 Again : According to Mr. Williams's view of the 
 case, we may safely conclude, that the law of baptism 
 is now obsolete ; nay, in regard to us, that it never was 
 promulged. The former, because when the enacting 
 terms of a statute become unintelligible, it is high time 
 to consider the law as antiquated. For to what purpose 
 is a law considered as obligatory, when the most learned, 
 sagacious, and impartial cannot understand it ? Here 
 we are landed at downright Quakerism, so far as bap- 
 tism is concerned in it. With regard to the latter, let 
 the following things be observed. It is generally agreed, 
 if I mistake not, that no positive law is obligatory till 
 promulged ; in other words, it is not a law. For what 
 is meant by the term law, but a rule of action prescribed 
 by sovereign authority? It cannot, however, be a rule 
 of action, any farther than it is made known. Agreeable 
 to this is the following language of Sir William Black- 
 stone : " A bare resolution, confined in the breast of the 
 legislator, without manifesting itself by some external 
 sign, can never be properly a law. It is requisite that 
 this resolution be notified to the people who are to obey 
 it."* See Chap. I. No. 12. — Now if any law, requiring 
 a single act of obedience, as in the case before us, do 
 not specify the act intended in such a manner as to be 
 understood by those who read and study it without par- 
 tiality, it is absurd to talk of its promulgation. For 
 what is meant by promulging a law, but publicly making 
 known the commanding will of the legislator, with re- 
 gard to this or the other afifair ? Yet this, according 
 to INIessrs. llorsev and Williams, has not been done, 
 respecting the law of baptism ; for the principal word 
 in that law is an equivocal, open, general term, and so 
 
 * Comment, vol. i. Introduct. sect. ii. 
 
BAPTIZE AXD BAPTISM. P7 
 
 obscure^ that the most eminent authors are divided about 
 its meaning. Nor does the apostohc practice explain it. 
 Our Lord, indeed, gave a command to baptize; by which 
 it is universally understood, that he designed the per- 
 formance of a single action; for nobody supposes, that 
 sprinkling, pouring, and plunging, must all be united 
 to constitute baptism. But what particular action he 
 meant by the Greek verb, is quite as uncertain as what 
 the Psalmist intended by the Hebrew term, Selah. All 
 we can learn is this : As the latter seems to contain a 
 direction to those concerned in the sacred music, to 
 perform that music in some way or other; so, the for- 
 mer denotes an application of water to the subject, 
 " in some form or other;'' for, on the authority of Mr. 
 Horsey, nothing farther is determined by it. Such is 
 the ne plus ultra of its meaning ! The trumpet gives an 
 uncertain sound, and who shall prepare himself to the 
 battle? It follows, therefore, on the principles opposed, 
 that the law of baptism has not, with regard to us, been 
 promulged. We have been used to think that the laws 
 of Christ were equally determinate, fixed, and plain, 
 with the gospel of Christ ; and Paul informs us, that the 
 gospel which he preached was not yea andnay, but always 
 affirmative and always the same. Not so the law of 
 baptism, if our opposers be right ; for it is this, that, and 
 the other, but nothing determinate, nothing certain. 
 
 The principal enacting word in a positive law of the 
 New Testament, an equivocal term; and so obscure, that 
 the most eminent writei^s are divided about its meaning! 
 Strange, indeed. For, fond as our brethren are of this 
 idea, were either of them the legislator in a civil state, 
 and to act a similar part, he would soon be accounted 
 either a fool or a tyrant. But I am persuaded, that his 
 wisdom, his rectitude, and his benevolence, would all re- 
 volt at the thought of such a procedure. Admitting this 
 representation of our Lord's conduct in his legislative 
 capacity to be just and fair, mankind may think thera- 
 
 VOL. T. H 
 
98 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 selves happy that he has not, in this respect, had more 
 imitators anipng the petty sovereigns of the earth. 
 Britons, at least, would quickly be disposed to execrate 
 the measures of parliament, were the three estates to 
 adopt the idea and act upon it. How often and how 
 justly have the canons and decrees of the Council of 
 Trent been severely censured for their studied ambiguity ! 
 Thus Bp. Stillingfleet, concerning that matter : " This 
 was one of the great arts of that council, to draw up 
 their decrees in such terms as should leave room enough 
 for eternal wranglings among themselves ; provided they 
 agreed in doing the business effectually against the here- 
 tics, as they were pleased to call them."* Thus We- 
 
 renfelsius : " Integrity was wanting in the fathers of the 
 Trent synod, when they studiously left ambiguity and 
 obscurity in a great part of their canons and decrees." t 
 Whether, in thus acting, they had the supposed ambi- 
 guity of our Lord's canon concerning baptism in their 
 eye, we dare not assert ; but every one must allow, if 
 Messrs. Horsey and Williams be right, that they might 
 have pleaded the most venerable example for such a 
 conduct. 
 
 BaTTTt^ci), an equivocal, open, general term; a term 
 which, with equal facility, admits the idea of plunging 
 in Jordan, of pouring from the palm of the hand, and 
 of sprinlvling from the ends of the fingers ! Our author 
 might as well have asserted, that its derivative, (SaTrna-Ty]- 
 piov, equally signifies a bath, large as King Solomon's 
 brazen sea ; a font, small as those in our modern-built 
 parish churches ; and a basin, precisely of the same di- 
 mensions with those he commonly uses when sprinkling 
 infants. But what would learning, what would impar- 
 tiality have said, had he made such an assertion ? 
 
 A capital word in positive divine law, an equivocal term 
 
 * Preservative against Popery, vol. ii. Appendix, p. 103. 
 f Opuscula^ p. 580. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 99 
 
 — a term, so ambiguous aiid so obscure, that the tnost 
 learned and upright do not with certainty knoxv what it 
 means! Then we have need of an infallible judge ; and 
 were there one at Rome, it would be worth our while to 
 visit his holiness, that we might have the obscurity all 
 removed. For while the Legislator considers himself 
 as having fairly promulged his law, whether we view its 
 enacting terms as equivocal or univocal, it will prove 
 a serious fact, that they who neglect or transgress it will 
 not be held innocent. With the idea of ambiguity, how- 
 ever, some of our brethren seem delighted. But so 
 were not the ancient Athenians : for Abp. Potter in- 
 forms us, that it was considered as criminal, for any 
 person among them to propose a law in ambiguous 
 terms.* I have heard, indeed, that some of our petti- 
 fogging lawyers boast the great uncertainty of our Eng- 
 lish law, with regard to the issue of numerous causes. 
 Nor do I wonder at it. But that such worthy charac- 
 ters, as Messrs. Horsey and Williams, should seek a 
 refuge for their cause in the supposed uncertainty of 
 divine law, is truly amazing ! Were they disputing with 
 Roman Catholics, or discussing almost any subject of a 
 theological kind, except that of infant sprinkling, they 
 would labour to establish against every opposer, the 
 certainty, the precision, and the sufficiency of divine law 
 and apostolic example. This at least has been the 
 common practice of Protestants. For instance : Tur- 
 rettinus (de Baptismo) speaks to the following effect : 
 It is not lawful to suppose that Christ, in a very im- 
 portant affair of Christianity, w^ould so express himself, 
 that he could not be understood by any mortal. f — ■ — 
 Dr. Ridgley: " In order to our yielding obedience, it is 
 necessary that God should signify to us, in xvhat instances 
 he will be obeyed, and the manner haw it is to be perform- 
 
 ■'t Antiquities of Greece, vol. i. chap. xxv. edit. 1697- 
 f Institut. loc.xix. quaest.xviii. §.4. ' 
 
 11 '1 
 
100 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 ed; otherwise it would rather be fultillinfj of our own will 
 
 than his."* Dr. Owen: ''The sole reason why he 
 
 [the apostle] did make use of it [the word surety] was, 
 that from the nature and notion of it among men in 
 other cases, we may understand the signification of it, 
 what he intends by it — It is not for us to charge the 
 apostle with such obscurity, and expressing his mind 
 
 in such uncouth terms. "| Mr. Benjamin Bennet : 
 
 *' It is a reproach to the lawgiver, blasphemy against 
 him, to suppose that any of his upright sincere subjects, 
 cannot find out the meaning of his laws, with all their 
 care and diligence, even in the necessary essential 
 points of their faith and obedience." J — • — Mr. Brad- 
 bury: "The words [of our Lord, Matt, xxviii. 19,] 
 ought to be taken in their plain and natural sense, 
 because they are a lasting form to the end of time. 
 For Christ to give us expressions that people cannot 
 understand, would be only to abuse them. It is un- 
 worthy of Him who is the light of the world, in whose 
 
 mouth there was no guile [Such] is the plain and 
 
 natural sense of the words; and therefore to twine and 
 torture them with conjectures and maybes, is making 
 Christ, not a teacher, but a barbarian, by not uttering 
 words that are easy to be understood." § Anony- 
 mous: "A confusion in terms would at length produce 
 entirely the same effect, as the confusion of languages; 
 vague and equivocal expressions would render the most 
 accurate notions liable to continual contradictions, and 
 expose truth itself to perpetual cavils. As the first 
 intention of words is to make known our ideas to each 
 other, the principal merit of every language [and of 
 every discourse] must consist in the clearness and pre- 
 cision of its terms." II Bp. Taylor: "It is certain 
 
 * Body of Div. quest, xci, xcii. p. 491. 
 
 f On Heb. vii. 9.1, 26, vol. iii. p. -222, 256. 
 
 + Irenicura, p. 60. § Duty and Doct. of Bap. p. 150, 173. 
 
 II Monthly Review, vol. Ixxiv. p. 537, 538. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 101 
 
 God put no disguises upon his own commandments, 
 and the words are meant plainly and heartily ; and the 
 farther you remove from their Jirst sense, the more 
 
 you have lost the purpose of your rule."* Samuel 
 
 Fothergill, one of the people called Quakers : " Thoii 
 [Mr. Pilkinton] concludest, that water baptism may be 
 properly administered in any decent and conveiiient manner 
 whatsoever. Pray, who must be judge of this decency 
 and convenience? Any thing subjected to human de- 
 cision, with respect to decency and convenience, wants, 
 in my judgment, those characters of divine institution 
 which become the religion of the holy Jesus; which is, 
 * not of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but 
 of God.'-f" Hence it appears, that the plea of our 
 brethren for a latitude of administration, from the sup- 
 posed ambiguity of the law, is not only contrary to the 
 avowed sentiments of Protestants in other cases, but an 
 encouragement to those who entirely reject the ordi- 
 nance. See Reflect. III. and Chap. I. No. 4, 8, 12, 13, 
 20. Reflect. II, III. 
 
 The following quotation, mutatis mutandis, will here 
 apply with peculiar force. Thus, then, Mr. Vincent 
 Alsop: ^' I cannot imagine what greater reproach he 
 [Dr. Goodman] could throw upon these famous [Thirty- 
 nine] Articles and their worthy compilers, than to suggest 
 that they were calculated for all meridians and latitudes; 
 as if the Church did imitate Ao^iag, the Delphian 
 Apollo, whose oracles wore two faces under one hood, 
 and were penned like those amphilogies, that cheated 
 Croesus and Pyrrhus into their destruction; or as if, 
 like Janus, they looked, itpoaaca Kai oiria-a-io, backwards 
 and forwards; and like the untouched needle, stood 
 indifferently to be interpreted through the two and thirty 
 points of the compass. The Papists do never more 
 
 * Ductor Dubitant. b. i. chap, i, p, 26. Vid. Chaniieium, Pan- 
 strat. torn. i. 1. xv. c. iv. § 16" 3 c, ix. § 2. 
 
 t Remarks on an Address to the People called Quakers, p. 6, 7, 
 
1031 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 maliciously reproach the scripture, than when they call 
 it a Lesbian rule, a nose of wa.v, a leaden dogger, a 
 pair of seanans trowsers, a moveable dial, you may 
 make it what o'clock you please ; and yet they never 
 arrived at that height of blasphemy, as to say it was 
 industriousli/ so penned by the amanuenses of the Holy 
 Ghost. I dare not entertain so little charity for an 
 assembly of holy and learned men, convened upon so 
 solemn an occasion, that they would play leger-de-main, 
 and contrive us a system of divinity which should be 
 msirumentum pads non veritatis. The conventicle of 
 Trent, indeed, acted like themselves, that is, a pack of 
 jugglers, who, when they were gravelled and knew not 
 how to hush the noise and importunate clamour of 
 the bickering factions, the craftier leading men found 
 out a temper, as they called it, to skin over that wound 
 which they could not heal, and durst not search. And 
 what was the success of these carnal policies? only this, 
 both parties retained their differing opinions, believed 
 just as they did before; and yet their opinions were 
 directly contrary to one another, though both supposed 
 to agree with the decree of the council .... If the trum- 
 pet gives an uncertain sound, it is all one as if it were 
 not sounded. That which is every thing and every 
 where, is nothing and no where. That which has no 
 determinate sense, has no sense; and that is very near 
 akin to nonsense. The Jews indeed have a tradition, 
 that the manna was what every man's appetite could 
 relish; and such a religion would these men invent 
 as should be most flexible .... Strange it is, that reli- 
 gion, of all things in the world, should be unfixed, 
 and like Delos or O-Brazile, float up and down in 
 various and uncertain conjectures!"* Perfectly similar 
 are the animadversions of Dr. Edwards on Bp. Burnet's 
 Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles ; for, among other 
 things, he says: " He hath made the articles of our 
 
 * Sober Enquiry, p. 60, 61, 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 103 
 
 church a nose of wax, and accordingly he bends and 
 wrests them which way he pleases .... According to 
 this learned prelate, we do not know the meaning of a 
 great part of our articles, and consequently they are 
 of no use, for what is unintelligible is so. . . .This way 
 of dealing with the articles seems to me to be a very 
 severe reflection on our first reformers, the pious and 
 learned compilers of these articles, as if they were not 
 able to write or dictate sense; or could not speak 
 grammatically, and so as to be understood; or as if 
 they purposely designed obscurity, and that in some of 
 the most considerable points of our religion; as if they 
 studied to perplex men's minds and ensnare their con- 
 sciences .... If the words and expressions be voted 
 doubtful and of uncertain signification, the thing itself, 
 the matter couched in them, will soon be insignificant 
 and vain."* 
 
 But why should the word baptism be esteemed so 
 equivocal and so obscure? Is it because, in different 
 connections, it is used in various acceptations; such as 
 immersion, washing, pouring, and sprinkling? For the 
 sake of argument, and for that only, we admit the 
 reality of those various acceptations. But is that a 
 sufficient reason for pronouncing the word equivocal, 
 and for considering the sense of it in divine law as 
 uncertain? If so, we shall find comparatively but few 
 terms in any language that are not equivocal and 
 of dubious meaning. The reader needs only to dip 
 into a Hebrew or a Greek Lexicon; into Ains worth's 
 Latin, or Johnson's English Dictionary, to be con- 
 vinced of this. The following instances, which have 
 some affinity with the subject of our dispute, may 
 serve as a specimen. 
 
 Sii3 is the word most commonly used, to signify the act 
 of circumcising ; and if that idea be not expressed by it, 
 
 * Discourse concerning Truth and Error, p, 425, 429. 
 
104 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 we may safely conclude there is never a term in the He- 
 brew language which can express it. Yet besides that 
 sense, and its prepositional acceptations, which are vari- 
 ous, it has the general signification of cutting off, cutting 
 down, and cutting to pieces. So it is used in Psalm Iviii. 7 ; 
 xc. 6; cxviii. 10, 11, 12, and in other places. Soj is 
 another word sometimes used for the same action : but, 
 besides its being equally various in its acceptation, as a 
 verb, it is the name of an ant, or of some little insect, 
 that is very sagacious and provident ; and is supposed 
 to cut or nibble grains of corn to fit them for being 
 stowed up in the earth. — On these two Hebrew roots the 
 learned Gussetius has the following remark : " Though 
 they do not occur in the conjugation Kal, except in the 
 sacramental or typical signification of circumcising ; yet 
 this is not to be considered as their primary sense, but 
 only as a species of their general signification of cutting; 
 which, therefore, is their proper meaning. The genuine, 
 general signification is to be fetched from Psalm xc. 6, 
 and cxviii. 10."* — ^Sny is used for the foreskin, but its 
 general and leading idea is, as Dr. Taylor informs us, a 
 superjiuous incumbrance ; and ]Mr. Julius Bate says its 
 primary meaning is, the top, or protuberance. Mr. Bate 
 farther observes, "So we render, to circumcise; but there 
 is no circum in the Hebrew. It is to cut ofi' the top, or 
 protuberance ; for so Siy, which was cut off", signifies."'!' — 
 '' The words ^lo Mul, and Vdj Namal,''' says Quenstedius, 
 " do not necessarily signify such an amputation of the 
 foreskin that no part of it remains ; and therefore it may 
 be true circumcision if the extremity of it be cut otf. — 
 The scripture says, ' Ye shall circumcise the flesh of 
 your foreskin.' Had the whole prteputium been strictly 
 to be understood, it would have been said, either, all the 
 
 * Comment. Ebraicse, sub Rad. Sio. 
 
 t See Dr. Taylor's Heb. Concord. Rad. 1165, 1414. Mr. Bate's 
 Critica Hob. p. ai5j 453, 454 Albert! Port. Ling, {^a^c■l. sub Rad.SiQ. 
 
BAPTIZE AND IJAPTISM, 105 
 
 Jicsh of your foreskin ; or, the Jiesh of your whole fore- 
 skin:'* 
 
 Now had there been any controversy among the 
 Jews, in the latter times of their civil state, about the 
 manner of performing circumcision, they might, on the 
 principles of our opposers, have reasoned thus : " The 
 forementioned words of our law are equivocal, open, ge- 
 neral terms ; by which nothing is determined, but that a 
 superfluous incumbrance (the top, or protuberance, of 
 something pertaining to the subject) should be, in some 
 form or other, cut, or cut off. We may therefore cut, 
 or pare, the nails of our fingers, or of our toes, instead 
 of circumcising the foreskin. For the cutting required, 
 is merely the ceremonial part of a positive institute ; and 
 therefore only a circumstance, like that of number, of 
 time, of gesture, or of place, in various other affairs. If 
 a sharp instrument be but applied to any part of our 
 bodies, so as to make an incision,* or an amputation of 
 something belonging to our own persons, it is perfectly 
 equivalent, equally valid, with cutting off the pn^putium. — 
 Besides, the latter is harsh, severe, and indecent, especi- 
 ally with regard to adult persons : it shocks our feehngs, 
 and exposes us to a thousand reproaches amongst our 
 Gentile neighbours. We have indeed our doubts, whe- 
 ther it was originally practised in that rigid sense for 
 which some of our brethren plead. But were it incon- 
 testably proved, that our father Abraham actually cir- 
 cumcised his foreskin, and that his immediate descend- 
 ants followed his example, there are, we conceive suffi- 
 cient reasons for our adopting a different method. The 
 
 X Antiq. Bib, Ecclesiast. pars. i. c. iii. p. 270. Witteberg. 1699. 
 See Ainsworth's Latin Diet, under the words Circumcido, and Cir- 
 cumcisus, for the various acceptations of those Latin terms. 
 
 f The learned Vander Waeyen informs us, that circumcision, as 
 performed by the Arabians and some others, is only an incision 
 made in the praeputium, which afterwards is entirely healed. Varia 
 Sacra, p. 332, 333. 
 
106 SIGNIFICATION OF THE "I'ERMS, 
 
 faith and obedience of the renowned Abraham, we all 
 know, were tried in a singular manner on various occa- 
 sions; and, perhaps, the blessed God might give him 
 some intimation of his will respecting the rite in question, 
 which, not being intended for general obligation, was 
 not recorded by the inspired writer. But it is the lan- 
 guage of God as penned by Moses, that is the rule of 
 our conduct ; and it is plain that the words are of an 
 equivocal, open, general meaning, and far from being 
 confined to the circumcising of the prseputium. It 
 should be carefully remembered also, that our great pro- 
 genitor and his immediate offspring, lived in times when 
 civilization, and a sense of delicacy were far from having 
 arrived at their present stage of refinement : nor had 
 our venerable fathers much intercourse with the na- 
 tions around them. Now it is evident, that what was 
 considered as decent, or not much disgustful, in a rude 
 uncultivated age, may become, in a course of time, 
 quite the reverse. This we apprehend is a fact in the 
 case before us. So that were we to insist on performing 
 the ceremony in that sanguinary and painful manner, 
 for which some few contend, it would be an insuperable 
 bar to the polished Greeks and Romans around us be- 
 coming proselytes to our divine religion, and an occasion 
 perhaps of their final ruin. But who can imagine that 
 the God of Israel would be pleased with such scrupulo- 
 sity, as tended to continue the Heathens in their ido- 
 latry ? a scrupulosity too, about that which is no where 
 precisely and iticontrovertibly required. We remember 
 with pleasure, nor can we forget that condescending de- 
 claration of God, recorded by one of our minor pro- 
 phets : ' I desired mercy and not sacrifice ; and the 
 knowledge of God, more than burnt offeriniis.' To en- 
 force the rite in a manner so disgusting to the delicacy 
 and ease of our polite neighbours, who may be at any 
 time inclined to forsake their old superstitions, and to 
 shelter themselves under the wings of the Schechina, 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 107 
 
 would be like putting new wine into old bottles, and 
 greatly retard the progress of our holy religion." Thus, 
 on the principles of our brethren, and in their language, 
 mutatis mutandis, might the Jews have reasoned away a 
 divine command. 
 
 Again : Were our opposers to apply their principles 
 and reasonings concerning the word baptism to one of 
 those Greek verbs that were used by our Lord in the 
 institution of his last supper, many of them would be 
 presented with a new discovery, both of the nature and 
 the design of the ordinance ; for, when contemplating 
 its administration, they would soon behold, with Roman 
 Catholics and some others, the officiating minister wear- 
 ing the character of spriest, and offering a sacrifice to 
 God. The original word, to which I advert, is the verb 
 TTQieiv ; which signifies to do, as plainly as (3a7iTi(^eiv signi- 
 fies to dip. Uoieiv, however, in different connections, 
 admits a great number of acceptations ; no fewer, even 
 in the New Testament, according to Mr. Parkhurst, than 
 twenty-si.v : and among others, like facere, to which it 
 answers, it undoubtedly signifies, in some passages of 
 the Greek classics and of the Septuagint version, to offer, 
 or present aji oblation to God. On this remote sense of 
 the term, the propriety of talking about a priest at the 
 Lord's table ; about his offering the bread and wine ; 
 about an altar, and a sacrifice, chiefly depends : just as 
 the practice of pouring or sprinkling, instead of immer- 
 sion, depends on a supposed secondary sense of the word 
 jSaTTTi^eiv. But let us hear Dr, Brett on the subject. 
 
 " There is yet," says he, " a more evident proof to 
 be found in the scripture, even in the very words of the 
 institution, to prove that we are required to offer the 
 bread and wine to God, when we celebrate the holy 
 eucharist, ' This do in remembrance of me.' Dr. Hickes, 
 in his Christian Priesthood, p. 58, &c., proves, by a 
 great many instances, that the word iroieiv, to do, also 
 signifi.es to offer, and is very frequently used both by 
 
108 SIGNlFICATtON OF THE TERMS, 
 
 profane authors, and by the Greek translators of the Old 
 Testament in that sense ; and so also is the Latin word 
 facere, I will transcribe a few of those instances, and 
 those who desire more may consult Dr. Hickes's book. 
 Herodotus, hb. i. cap. cxxxii. says : * Without one of 
 the Magi it is not lawful for them, Ttoma-Oai, to offer a 
 sacrifice.' And in the Septuagint translation of the Old 
 Testament, which all the learned know is followed by 
 the writers of the New Testament, even where they cite 
 the words and speeches of our Saviour, it is so used ; as 
 Exod. xxix. ^6, ' Thou shalt oifer, Ttoirjaeig, a bullock :' 
 verse 38, ' This is that which, Troivjaeig, thou shalt offer 
 upon the altar :' verse 39, ' The one lamb, Troivjcreig, thou 
 shalt offer in the morning, and the other lamb, Troiyjueigf 
 thou shalt offer in the evening.' So likewise Exod. x. 25. 
 In all which places the word, which is translated offer, 
 and which in this last text is translated sacrifice, and 
 ^^hich in these and many other places will bear no other 
 sense, is the very word which in the institution of the 
 eucharist is translated do. And even our English trans- 
 lators have sometimes used the word do in this sacrifi- 
 cial sense ; as particularly Lev. iv. 20. Here our English 
 translation is, ' And he shall do with the bullock, as he 
 did with the bullock for a sin oftering, so shall he do 
 with this.' Here indeed they have put in the Mord 
 zvith, without any authority : the Greek is, he shall do 
 the bullock, as he did the bullock, so shall he do this : 
 where do plainly signifies offer. . . .That the words of 
 the institution, tovto Troiene, do this, are to be understood 
 in this sacrificial sense, is manifest from the command 
 concerning the cup, which is, ' This do ye, as oft as you 
 drink it, in remembrance of me.' For except we under- 
 stand the words in such a sense, they will be a plain 
 tautology. But translate it, as I have showed the words 
 will very probably bear, Offer this : make an oblation 
 or libation of this, as oft as ye drink it in remembrance 
 of ME, and the sense is very good. . . .A priest therefore 
 
BAPTIZE ANT> BAPTISM. 109 
 
 is necessary and essential to the due administration of 
 this sacrament."* — On this reasoning Dr. Doddridge 
 remarks : " Because the word iroieiv signifies, in some 
 few instances, to sacrifice^ Dr. Brett would render it, 
 [rovTo TTomre] sacrifice this ; whence he infers, that the 
 eucharist is a sacrifice.'' 'f But though Dr. Doddridge 
 very justly considers the argument of Dr. Brett as 
 quite inconclusive, I may be permitted to observe ; that 
 he has proved the sacrificial sense of the term mieiv, in 
 certain connections, by far better evidence than I have 
 ever yet seen produced by our opposers, in favour of 
 that secondary sense of the word (SaTrn^eiv, on which 
 their constant practice proceeds. The reasoning of Dr. 
 Brett may therefore teach them the necessity of abiding 
 by the natural and obvious meaning of the term in dis- 
 pute; for it is impossible, I think, to confute him on 
 any other ground. 
 
 Farther: To show the impropriety of our brethren's 
 conduct when reasoning on the word before us, we will 
 suppose our Lord to have used the term vitttw, which, in 
 its primary acceptation, signifies a partial application of 
 water to a person, by washing his hands. Now had this 
 been our Legislator's commanding term, its native and 
 most common signification would undoubtedly have been 
 pleaded against an immersion of the whole body. But, on 
 the principle of interpretation adopted by our opposers, the 
 argument might easily have been evaded. For we might 
 have replied, N/tttw is an equivocal, open, general term. 
 It signifies not only to wash the hands, but also the feet 
 and the face. Nay, it is manifestly used to express an 
 entire plunging. For thus it is written : Every vessel of 
 wood shall be rinsed, vi(f>'^(7eTai, in water, (Lev. xv. 12.) 
 Agreeably to which, Mr. Parkhurst says, it signifies, 
 (in John ix. 7, 11, 15,) to wash the whole body; and 
 so Schwarzius understands it. So equivocal is the 
 
 * True Scrip. Account of the Eucharist, p. 81, 3-i, S3, 131. 
 f Note on 1 Cor. xi. 24. 
 
110 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 term, and of such various application, that the Sep- 
 tuagint uses it, as Mintert observes, to express the idea 
 of training down, or of sending a shoiver, (Job. xx. 23.) 
 — Again: We will suppose our Lord to have expressed 
 his law in Latin, and that he used the word perfundoy 
 instead of the Greek jBairri'i^o:. We|will farther suppose, 
 that the primary meaning of the Latin verb is pleaded 
 against us. In this case we might have replied, It not 
 only signifies to sprinkle and to pour, but also to bathe : 
 in proof of which, we appeal to Ainsworth, and to the 
 authorities produced by him.* 
 
 We will indulge imagination and suppose, on the 
 contrary, that our Lord had caused his law of baptism 
 to be written in modern English; and that, instead of 
 the word iSairTi^a, we had found the term bathe or dip; 
 even this would have been liable to similar objections. 
 Our opposers might still have recurred to their old 
 exception : It is an equivocal, open, general term ; and 
 signifies to sprinkle, to wet, or bedew, as well as to plunge. 
 In confirmation of which they might have said : " As 
 to the word bathe, it is frequently used by our correctest 
 writers and speakers, in such connections where plunging 
 cannot possibly be intended. Nothing, for instance, is 
 more common among us than to say, Such an one's 
 cheeks are bathed in tears ; when we only mean, that the 
 tears trickle plentifully down his cheeks: by which the 
 idea of sprinkling is conveyed, rather than that of plung- 
 ing. To bathe, signifies also to supple or soften by the 
 outward application of warm liquors, as Dr. Johnson 
 informs us : for which he produces the authority of Mr. 
 Dryden, who says, Fll bathe your wounds in tears for 
 my offence. Still the word bathe is rather in favour of 
 sprinkling than of immersion." — As to the term dip, they 
 might have said: " It is plain the word is often used 
 where a total immersion cannot be designed. So we 
 read that Jonathan ' put forth the end of the rod which 
 
 * To which maybe added, Virg. Ge(»rg. I, 194. Mu. VIII 589. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. Ill 
 
 was in his hand, and dipped it, e/3aif/ev avro, in a honey- 
 comb.'* Again, ' Send Lazarus that he may dip, /3ai|/>7, 
 the tip of his finger in water.' t It is also common for 
 us to speak oi dipping a pen in the ink. Sometimes also 
 the word is used allusively, in a sense equally foreign 
 from the idea of an entire immersion. For example, 
 thus : I have just dipped into the works of such an 
 author. Now this, far from signifying that I feel my 
 mind, as it were, immersed in the author's writings, only 
 means, as Johnson tells us, that I have entered slightly 
 into them. Nay, sometimes, when the term dip is used 
 with reference to a liquid, it means no more than to 
 moisten, to wet, as the same celebrated author informs 
 us ; who confirms that sense of the word, by appealing 
 to the following lines of our famous English classic, 
 Milton : 
 
 ' And tho' not mortal, yet a cold shudd'ring dew 
 Dips me all o'er, as when the wrath of Jove 
 Speaks thunder.' 
 
 Evident proofs, they might have added, that the words 
 dip and bathe, as well as (BaTno) and /SaTrr;^©, are equi- 
 vocal, open, general terms ; which do not determine any 
 thing farther, than that water should be applied to the 
 subject in some form or other." — On such principles, 
 and by such reasonings, the natural and primary mean- 
 ing of any word, in any law, or in any language, might 
 be quickly explained away. Were this principle of in- 
 terpretation universally admitted and applied, no law 
 upon earth could riiaintain its authority, or obtain its end. 
 The obligation of laws, and obedience to lawgivers, 
 would be little more than empty names. Nor could any 
 doctrine, or any fact, contained in the Bible, stand its 
 ground against the operation of this principle. For by 
 rejecting the natural sense of inspired terms, whenever 
 we find it uncompliant with our inclination ; and by 
 adopting a secondary, uncommon, or allusive acceptation 
 
 * 1 Sam. xiv. 17. Septuag. f Luke xvi. 24. 
 
11$ SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 of them, as often as we find occasion ; it is an easy 
 thing for the most ungodly person to manufacture a 
 creed, as well as ritual, entirely to his own liking, 
 out of those materials which the scripture furnishes, let 
 the real meaning of prophets and apostles be what it 
 may. Yes, he must be a dull genius who cannot, by 
 proceeding on this principle, frame a theological system 
 to suit his own taste, in such a manner as to leave but 
 little room for the subjecting of his understanding, his 
 conscience, and his will to divine authority; or so as to 
 have but little occasion for the practice of that self-denial, 
 which is represented by our Lord as a distinguishing 
 mark of true godliness. For, grant but the liberty of 
 taking the principal words of a law, of a narrative, or of 
 a doctrine, in a secondary and remote sense, where me- 
 taphor and allusion are out of the question, and a per- 
 son of genius might safely engage to evade any law, to 
 subvert any doctrine, and essentially to misrepresent any 
 fact, contained in the Bible. — My acquaintance, indeed, 
 with languages, ancient or modern, is very contracted ; 
 but yet I may venture to conclude, on the groundi of 
 analogy, that there are few terms in any language which 
 are not as liable to an improper, allusive, and secondary 
 acceptation, as the word baptism. Why, then, in the 
 name of common sense and of common impartiality — 
 why should that emphatical and enacting term /3a7rT<^co, 
 be singled out as remarkably equivocal? Why repre- 
 sented as obscure to such a degree, " that the most 
 eminent critics, commentators, and lexicographers are 
 divided in their verdict about" — what? Its primary 
 meaning? far from it. Here we think ]\Ir. Williams is 
 under a gross mistake; for, on the authority of those 
 numerous testimonies which have been laid before the 
 reader, we may safely assert, that there is hardly any 
 verb in the Greek Testament, about the natural, obvious, 
 primary meaning of which, the most eminent authors 
 appear to be less divided. I do not, indeed, recollect so 
 
BAPTIZE AXD D APT ISM. 113 
 
 much as one learned writer, in the whole course of my 
 reading, who denies that the primary sense of the term 
 is to dip: and as to the different acceptations for which 
 our opposers plead, we may ask, with Mr. Locke, 
 " What words are there not used with great latitude, 
 and with some deviation from their strict and proper 
 significations?"* 
 
 The manner of using water, when baptism is admi- 
 nistered, is a mere circumstance, according to Mr. Hor- 
 sey ; for he compares it with various particulars in the 
 administration of the holy supper, that are entirely cir- 
 cumstantial. This, if I mistake not, neither agrees with 
 his own principles; with the doctrine of positive insti- 
 tutes, as contained in scripture and acknowledged by 
 Protestants; nor with common sense. — Not with his own- 
 principles. For when he baptizes a child, in what does he 
 consider the act of baptizing to consist? In taking the 
 infant in his arms? he never imagined it. In pro- 
 nouncing the solemn form of words? by no means; for 
 then he must consider himself as baptizing the subject 
 without any water at all. In putting his fingers into the 
 water? no such thing; for still no water is applied. In 
 . verbal addresses to God for a blessing upon the child, or 
 in exhortations to the parents ? far from it ; because the 
 same consequence would follow. In what, then, but 
 the very act of sprinkling, or of pouring, in the name of 
 the Father, and so on ? But how can that, in which 
 the very act of baptizing consists, be a mere circwn- 
 stance of baptism ? Let a man's notions of baptism be 
 what they may, he always considers, and cannot but 
 consider, the act of applying water to a person, or of 
 plunging him into water, not as a circumstance of bap- 
 tism, but as baptism itself. If any of our Paedobap- 
 
 tist brethren still hesitate, let them ask their own con- 
 sciences, whether they consider themselves as performing 
 
 * Essay on Human Understanding, b.ii. chap, xxxii. § 1. 
 VOL. 1. I 
 
1 
 
 114 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 a circumstance no way essential to baptism, when, " in 
 the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
 Holy Spirit," they apply water to a child? The answer, 
 doubtless, will be in the negative. With equal reason, 
 therefore, might Mr. Horsey have told us, that eating 
 bread and drinking wine at the Lord's table, are circum- 
 stances of receiving the sacred supper, or that wali^ing 
 is a circumstance of local motion ; as that plunging, 
 pouring, or sprinkling, is a circumstance of baptism : 
 for no minister of Christ can consider his performance 
 of sprinkling, of pouring, or of plunging, in the sub- 
 limest of all names, as any thing but the very act of 
 baptizing. 
 
 Not with the doctrine of positive institutes, as con- 
 tained in scripture and acknowledged by Protestants. 
 If there be any force or propriety in what our opponent 
 says, it must be on supposition that what he represents 
 as a circumstance, is not enjoined by our divine Lord ; 
 for whatever he requires cannot be indifferent, and there- 
 fore is not a circumstance. Had the time of day, the 
 number and posture of communicants, or the quahty 
 and quantity of bread and wine, been appointed by the 
 great Lawgiver, with reference to his holy supper, not 
 one of those particulars would have been a circum- 
 stance: for, it is manifest, the^i would all have been 
 so many parts of one institution; nor would it have 
 been lawful to vary from them. Many particulars of a 
 similar nature were appointed by Jehovah in the ordi- 
 nance of the ancient passover: but, being appointed, 
 they were of divine obligation, even though the minuti<2 
 of the institution extended to "the time of day" when 
 that festival should commence. — The Roman Catholics, 
 like our author in the present case, would fain persuade 
 us, that a participation of wine at the Lord's table is a 
 mere circumstance; but they have been constantly told 
 by Protestants, that it is an essential part of the institu- 
 tion: yet not more so, than the use of water, in bap- 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 115 
 
 tism, let " the mode of use" be whatever it ma3\ Be- 
 sides, our opponent here begs the question in dispute 
 between us, respecting the term baptism. — Again : Omit- 
 ting various divine appointments which might be men- 
 tioned on this occasion, how multifarious were the rites en- 
 joined for the cleansing of an Israelitish leper, as particula- 
 rized in Leviticus the fourteenth ! They are too numerous 
 to be given in detail; but every reader of the heavenly 
 statute may soon perceive, that, according to Mr. Horsey, 
 many of them were such ceremonial parts of one positive 
 institute, as may be called circumstances: for there is 
 no reason to doubt but the original words there used 
 are as equivocal as the term baptism. — As to the avowed 
 sentiments of Protestatits, relating to the doctrine of 
 positive institutions, I would refer my reader to the pre- 
 ceding chapter, No, 2, 6, 10, 11, 15, 16, QO. Reflect. 
 II, III, V, VI, VII. 
 
 Not with common sense. For if the manner of using 
 water be a circumstance of baptism, what in the world 
 can baptism itself he} The circumstances of a thing are 
 always considered as different from the thing itself 
 They attend, they accompany, or, if you please, they 
 stajid about a thing ; but they are never considered as 
 THE thing. I should be glad to know, on these pre- 
 mises, what baptism, real, identical baptism is. It is 
 not sprinkling of water; it is not pouring of water; nor 
 is it plunging into water: for these are only so many 
 modes of using water; and the mode of use is no more 
 of the absence of baptism, than the number of commu- 
 nicants at the Lord's table is of the essence of the sacred 
 supper. Now as, according to Mr. Horsey, the man- 
 ner of using water is only a circumstance of baptism; 
 as the word /SaTTTf^w is an equivocal, open, general term;; 
 and as, according to Mr. Wilhams, the most eminent 
 authors are divided in their verdict about what our Lord 
 meant by it; all we can learn concerning the ordinance 
 is this: baptism is an unknown something, which has. a 
 
 I 2 
 
116 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 connection with water,* and was'practised by the apostles 
 in obedience to Jesus Christ; for on the authority of 
 Mr. Horsey, whether you sprinkle, or pour, or plunge, 
 in the name of the eternal Trinity, it is only a circum- 
 stance, and not baptism itself. — Sprinkling, pouring, or 
 plunging, as much a circumstance of baptism, as the 
 7iumber of communicants at the holy table is of the 
 sacred supper ! One step [farther,; and baptism itself 
 (whatever the equivocal word means) will be esteemed a 
 circumstance of something else, and its obligation con- 
 fined, as by the Quakers, to the ministry of John. Far 
 be it that I should imagine Messrs. Williams and Horsey 
 intended to relax the obligation of this positive rite; but 
 whether their manner of speaking has not a tendency so 
 to do, I leave the reader to judge. 
 
 It may, perhaps, be objected, " Baptism signifies 
 washing ; which may be performed by plunging, pour- 
 ing, or sprinkling: and it is in this view that the dif- 
 ferent modes of proceeding are called circumstances.''' 
 That washing is the native, primary, and obvious mean- 
 ing of the term, we do not believe, nor can we admit, 
 except for the sake of argument. Let it be granted, how- 
 ever, that baptism is no other than washing. What 
 follows ? That these three different ways of solemnly 
 using water are mere circumstatices of washing? nothing 
 less. Because whether one or another of these various 
 modes be adopted, it is the washing itself, and not a 
 circumstance of it; or else there is nothing in the whole 
 solemnity that has the least appearance of any such 
 thing. Nor can our opposers themselves deny it. For 
 whether they pour water on the head, or sprinkle the 
 face, it is all the washing they pretend to perform. Con- 
 sequently, on their own principles, it is not a circum- 
 stance; nor can they without absurdity consider it in 
 
 * Mr.Horsey's words are, " connection with a river j" but his 
 practice, I presume, is in connection with a basin. See his Ser- 
 mon, p. 19, 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 117 
 
 that light, while they are obliged to acknowledge, thai 
 the circumstances of a thing are always different from 
 the thing itself. — That various particulars relating to 
 baptism are merely circumstantial, we readily allow. 
 For instance: the age of the candidate, provided he 
 make a credible profession of repentance and faith. — 
 The t'mie of administration : it may be in the morning, 
 at noon, in the evening, or at midnight, as in the case of 
 the Philippian jailor. — The place: it may be in a river, 
 a pond, or a baptistery. — The number of spectators: 
 they may be many or few. These, and other things of 
 a similar kind, we look upon as indifferent; as, properly 
 speaking, circumstances : because, not being included in 
 the law of baptism, they make no part of the institu- 
 tion. These may greatly vary, while the qualifications 
 of the candidates, the whole form of administration, and 
 the gracious purposes to be answered by the ordinance, 
 are essentially the same. But it is quite otherwise, as 
 to the solemn use of water. For if that be omitted, 
 baptism itself is wanting: if used contrary to divine 
 order and primitive example, the ordinance is corrupted, 
 so corrupted, as not to deserve its original name. See 
 Chap. I. No. 15, and Reflect. V. — These things being 
 duly regarded, it will appear surprising that so many of 
 our opposers inadvertently speak of immersion, pouring, 
 and sprinkling, as if they'were mere circumstances of the 
 appointment under dispute: an idea, so contrary to 
 scripture, to fact, and to common sense, that it may be 
 considered as the last refuge of a desperate cause. 
 
 Spj^inkling, pouring, and plunging, are perfectly 
 EQUIVALENT, EQUALLY VALID, says Mr. Horscy. 
 " Those that are baptized, are either plunged into the 
 water, or water is poured upon them, or they are sprinkled 
 with water : now which soever of these three ways is ob- 
 served, we ought to believe baptism to be valid," says 
 the Council of Trent.* If plunging, pouring, and 
 
 * Catechism of the Council of Trent, part ii. Of Bap, § If. 
 
118 SIGNIFICATIOX OF THE TERMS, 
 
 sprinkling, be equally valid, it must be because they are 
 equally enjoined by divine law. But they are three 
 different actions, as before proved, and as all the world 
 will acknowledge, in reference to any other affair. How 
 then shall a single term, understood in its proper and 
 primary sense, equally respect three different actions? 
 yet an equal respect they must have from a single term 
 of positive divine law, to render them " perfectly equiva- 
 lent, equally valid." Before Mr. Horsey pretends to 
 evince, that the word ^aTrn^a has this plenitude of signi- 
 fication, vve wish him to prove, that any term, in any 
 language, either does or can equally and naturally sig- 
 nify three different actions. A word that has three senses, 
 equally proper and natural to it, is indeed equivocal; 
 nor has it, properly speaking, any determinate sense at 
 all. It is a mere term without an idea, and deserves to 
 be banished from the language to which it belongs. See 
 Reflect. III. — There have been many disputes concern- 
 ing what is the proper and true sense of a word; but 
 none, that I have read, about the number of true and 
 proper senses which the same word bears, in the same 
 connection. Disputes also have been multiplied, about 
 the real meaning of such or such a clause in divine and 
 human law; but theologians and civilians have seldom 
 taken it into their heads lo contend, whether the legis- 
 lator had thi^ee meanings, or only one, in any enacting 
 clause. It is pleasing, however, for us to reflect, that 
 phmging is valid ; for so it is, by the confession of IVIr. 
 Horsey, and by that of the whole Council of Trent, 
 whatever becomes of sprinkling or pouring.- — But though 
 Mr. Horsey assures us, that plunging is perfectly equiva- 
 lent, equally valid, with pouring or sprinkling ; and though 
 he has done it in emphatical capitals, yet he quickly 
 insinuates, that there is great severity in plunging; that 
 it must be often inconsistent with the mild genius of the 
 Christian religion; and that it is liarsh, painful, and ter- 
 rifying.^' He repents, alas ! he repents of his honest 
 
 ' ' * Infant. Bap. Stated, p. 20. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 119 
 
 concession. He no sooner grants us the sanction of his 
 opinion, than he resumes it with eagerness, by endea- 
 vouring to deprive us of all its authority. But does this 
 worthy author imagine that plunging is valid, independent 
 of divine authority? Or, that Jesus Christ would exert 
 his authority to sanction a rite that is inconsistent with 
 his own religion? This, I confess, appears to me as in- 
 compatible and unaccountable, as our great Legislator 
 having three meanings in the same enacting term of his 
 positive law. 
 
 Sprinkling, pouring, and pltmging, perfectly equiva- 
 lent, equally valid I As, by plunging, Mr. Horsey means 
 an immersion of the whole body ; and as we have no reason 
 to think, that he is for sprinkling or pouring water all 
 over the human frame; so, by his not mentioning any 
 particular part, on which the water should be poured or 
 sprinkled, we are led to conclude that, in his opinion, it 
 is quite indifferent on what part the water may fall. 
 Here, then, the administrator has full scope for his in- 
 clination to operate; and he may sprinkle any part, 
 from the crown of the head to the soles of the feet, just 
 as his sovereign will directs. How contrary this to the 
 whole analogy of positive divine law in the Old Testa- 
 ment ! If Mr. Horsey be right, the law of baptism is a 
 leaden rule, that will bend and take any form; rather, 
 it is no law — it is no rule; and with regard to the use of 
 water, every one may do that which seems right in- his 
 own eyes. But as it is absurd to suppose, that the pri- 
 mary sense of the same word will equally apply to three 
 different objects ; so it must be incongruous for any to 
 imagine, that the same enacting clause or term of a 
 law, can equally require three different actions, and at 
 the same time be completely satisfied with any one of 
 them. Before Mr. Horsey had inadvertently fixed an 
 imputation of this kind on a positive law of Jesus Christ, 
 he should have well considered, whether the whole his- 
 tory of legislation (sacred, civil, or ecclesiastical) could 
 
120 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 have furnished him with a single instance of such a fact. 
 That many tyrants and fools have given laws to secular 
 kingdoms, and have even presumed to legislate for Jesus 
 Christ himself, is a fact ; that some of their laws have 
 been marked with tyrannical subtlety, and others with 
 egregious folly, is also a fact; but that any of them 
 ever were so crafty, as to contrive a law which, by a 
 single enacting term, equally required three different acts 
 of obedience; and yet were so compliant, as to feel 
 themselves perfectly satisfied with having any one of 
 those acts performed, 1 do not believe. 
 
 Vary the mode of administration according to cir- 
 cumstances! — Refer the manner of 'performance to the 
 ■private judgment of the person or persons concerned! 
 Strange positions, from the pen of a Protestant Dissen- 
 ter ! How inimical to the grand principle of Noncon- 
 formity, and to that of the Reformation ! Surely, no 
 law of either God or man was ever so condescending to 
 the will of the subject, as the law of baptism. It is 
 reported, indeed, that those who sit as judges in the 
 court of Inquisition, may interpret the laws against 
 heretics, if there be any thing doubtful in them, accord- 
 ing to their own pleasure.* Nor do I wonder at it. 
 But that a Protestant, and a Protestant Dissenting 
 brother, should first pronounce the divine law of baptism 
 obscure, and then assure us that we may understand and 
 act upon it, vvith regard to the use of water, just as we 
 phase, is very amazing ! Mr. Williams, I presume, did 
 not recollect the manner in which our great Legislator 
 introduces the sovereign mandate, nor the words that 
 immediately follow- it. " All authority (e^ova-ia) is 
 given unto me in heaven and in earth" — introduces the 
 law under consideration. " Teaching them to observe 
 
 ALL things whatsoever I HAVE COMMANDED 
 
 you" — are the immediately following words. If ever 
 our Lord expressed himself in the high legislative tone, 
 
 * Venema Hist. Eccles. sccul. xiii. § 317- 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISiM. 121 
 
 if ever he spake like one who in earnest demands an im- 
 plicit and punctual obedience, it was on this occasion. 
 Can it then be supposed, that the Lord Redeemer as- 
 sumed such an air of divine majesty, and such a style of 
 divine authority, in giving a law of religious worship, 
 when he intended that his followers should administer 
 the rite just as they pleased? We may say with Chil- 
 lingworth, in another case, " He that can believe it, 
 let him." 
 
 Vajy the mode of administration according to cir- 
 cumstances! Refer the mariner of performance to the 
 private judgment of the administrator, or of the candi- 
 date! Incidental circumstances, then, or the caprice of 
 those concerned, must be the rule of proceeding. On 
 this principle, who can set bounds to that variety of ad- 
 ministration whichi may be lawfully'] practised ? The 
 Council of Trent is^of opinion that water should be ap- 
 plied, not to any part of the body, but to the head, be- 
 cause it is the seat of sensation.* Mr. Cleaveland 
 
 thinks \k\eface is the most proper part, because it is al- 
 ways naked, 'f Deylingius is confident that sprinkling 
 
 may be performed, once or thrice, on the head, i\\e fore- 
 head, or the breast.'\, r-The^Eunomians, it is reported, 
 
 " baptized only the upper parts of the body as far as the 
 breast ; and this they did in a very preposterous way, as 
 Epiphanius relates, tov; tro^ag ava, km rvjv Ke(paXYjv Karcti, 
 with their heels upwards, and their head downwai^d. 
 Which sort of men are called Histopedes, ox Pederectiy^ 
 Now here is variety, great variety ; yet Mr. Williams's 
 principle will admit of a much larger latitude in the 
 course of baptismal practice. It has indeed no other 
 bounds than the caprice and fancies of men are pleased 
 to affix. They only can say. Hitherto shalt thou go, and 
 
 * Catechism of the Council of Trent, part ii. Of Sac. of Bap. § 18. 
 
 f Infant Bap. from Heaven, p. 88, 89. 
 
 X De Prudent. Past, pars iii. c. iii. § 2.5. 
 
 § Bingham's Origines Ecclesiast. b. xi. chap. xi. § 4. 
 
122 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 no farther. Were an adult, therefore, or any parent on 
 the behalf of his child, to request of Mr. Williams an 
 application of baptismal water in any of these ways, he 
 could not refuse without confronting his own principle. 
 Or, were any one to prefer the use of water in imitation 
 of the ancient episcopal unction ; which was applied to 
 the forehead, the eyes, the ears, the nose, the mouth, 
 and the breast ; he could not decline it without depart- 
 ing from his own rule.* Nor could Mr. Horsey, be- 
 cause it would be an application of water " in some 
 form or other;" which is all, according to him, that the 
 word (SaiTTii^co determines : " the mode of use" being as 
 much a circumstance, as the number of communicants 
 at the Lord's table is of the holy supper. It is ob- 
 served by the laborious and learned Chamier, " That 
 no man in his senses will believe that to be the true reli- 
 gion, the law of which is no more fixed and certain, than 
 the rule of conduct contained in these lines : 
 
 " Cilm fueris Romse, Romano vivito more : 
 Cum fueris alibi, vivito sicut ibi."f 
 
 But, whatever this great opposer of papal usurpation 
 and superstition might think about a rule of true re/i- 
 gion, Messrs. Horsey and Williams have given what 
 they consider as a rule of true baptism, w\nc\\ has little 
 more fixedness or certainty in it, than that in the Latin 
 distich, which the learned Frenchman holds in such 
 contempt. For it is plain, that the application " of wa- 
 ter ill some form or otlier" will readily comply with the 
 custom of any age, or of any country; and referring 
 " the mode to the private J udgme?2t of the persons con- 
 cerned,'' will politely oblige any inclination. This re- 
 minds me of what Cardinal Cusanus affirms. " The 
 scripture," says he, " is fitted to the time, and variably 
 understood : so that at one time, it is expounded ac- 
 cording to the current fashion of the church ; and when 
 
 * Bingham's Origines Ecclesiast. b.xii chap. ii. § -l. 
 f I'anstrat. torn. i. 1. ii. c. xiv. § [)>. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 123 
 
 that fashion is changed, the sense of scripture is also 
 changed .... No wonder if the practice of the church do 
 take the scripture, one time one way, and another time 
 another ; for the sense of it keeps pace with the prac- 
 tice."* — Were these our Dissenting brethren, however, 
 to enter the hsts of controversy with a sensible Roman 
 Catholic, they would soon find themselves obliged, either 
 to proceed on different principles, and speak in a different 
 manner, or, in various articles, to give up the Protestant 
 cause. 
 
 Were my judgment of the term baptism to be formed 
 on those documents which Messrs. Horsey and Williams 
 have given us, I should be ready to say : It is the 
 strangest and most unaccountable word in the world, 
 when used respecting a divine institution. For, though 
 I never heard that learned men were much at a loss to 
 fix its meaning, when found in the Greek classics, in 
 Josephus, or in ancient ecclesiastical authors ; though 
 cold bathing was abundantly practised by many nations 
 in former times ; and though, in our own country, it is 
 frequently used by both sexes, for medical purposes and 
 for amusement, without any suspicion of danger or of 
 indecency ; yet we no sooner consider the term as making 
 a part of divine law, and as prescribing an act of Chris- 
 tian worship, than all is darkness, as to its meaning, and 
 all is terror, if considered as enjoining immersion. — If, 
 when used in this connection, you desire iojij: its mean- 
 ing, commentators, critics, and lexicographers are search- 
 ed in vain. It is a mere Proteus, or a chameleon ; for 
 it w^ill assume almost any appearance. In general, how- 
 ever, it is quite complaisant ; altering its colour, or 
 shape, just as you please. If you prefer sprinkling, it 
 is your devoted servant ; and you may sprinkle the head 
 or breast, the hands or the feet, for it makes no objec- 
 tion. Have you a predilection for pouring ? still it is at 
 your service : for whether you pour much or little, on 
 
 * In Mr. Clarkson's Pract. Divinity of Papists, p. 379. 
 
124 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 the face or the neck, on the fingers or the toes, it will 
 sanction your deed. Are you for washing, such washing 
 as cleanses from exterior pollution ? you may dip a 
 towel in the basin, instead of ycur fingers, and apply it 
 to the face or the hands, or to any part of the body you 
 please : for it will be quite satisfied if you do but apply 
 the water in some form or other ^ and you are at your 
 option. Nay, if you happen to he fond of water, and 
 to prefer plunging, this good-natured word will stamp 
 legality on the act ; for plunging is perfectly equivalent, 
 equally valid, with pouring and sprinkling. But here, 
 alas ! its complaisance takes leave of the plungers. For 
 though it will sturdily defend the perfect validity of their 
 practice against every opposer ; yet they must shift for 
 themselves as well as they can, if their conduct happen 
 to be suspected of severity, of harshness, or of any thing 
 terrifying. While, therefore, I cannot but admire the 
 versatility of this identical word, baptism, I am con- 
 strained to lament, that it is not quite so impartial in its 
 regards as one might have imagined ; for its beautifully 
 varying aspect is chiefly turned towards our opponents. 
 
 Once more : Mr. Horsey is of opinion, that if our 
 Lord had intended to confine his followers to the prac- 
 tice of immersion, he would probably " have used a 
 word that is decided and limited in its import f ' and 
 he thinks, that ^vQi'l^a or KarafSvOi^w, Ivtttco, Kara^ww or 
 KUTo^vco, or, finally, KaTanovTi^co, would have been " in- 
 disputably precise and exact," for such a purpose. Let 
 us enquire, therefore, into the opinion of lexicographers, 
 concerning the import of these expressions ; and we will 
 begin with the famous Henry Stephens. " BvGi^o}, to 
 cast into a gulf, (the deep, or the sea,) to plunge down: 
 KarapvOi^w signifies the same, and is more commonly 
 
 used." Pasor : (Schoettgenii edit.) "To plunge 
 
 down, to cast into the deep, (1 Tim. vi. 9; 2 IVIaccab. 
 
 xii. 4 ; Luke V. 7.)" Hedericus : " To plunge; from 
 
 /SvOoi, a whirlpool, a bottomless pit, or the deep. Kara- 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 125 
 
 (3v9i^a, to cast into a gulf, or the deep, to plunge down ; 
 to throw down, to ruin." See also Mintert, Schwarzius, 
 
 Leigh, and Parkhurst, under the word BvBi^co. He- 
 
 dericus : " Avtttw, to go under, or into, water; to 
 plunge." Schrevelius : " To go under, or into, wa- 
 ter ; from which the English terms, dip and dive, seem 
 
 to have been derived." H. Stephens : " Kara^vva, or 
 
 Kara^vco, to enter within, or into a more interior place ; 
 
 to enter into a gulf, or the deep." Hedericus : " To 
 
 go into a more interior place, to enter into a gulf, or 
 the deep ; to hide one's self, to lie hid ; to be ashamed, 
 to blush; to plunge down, to plunge under; to fall 
 
 down; to put on." Pasor : " To plunge, to destroy, 
 
 to descend, (Amos ix. 3; Ezek. xxvi. 13; Exod. xv. 5.) 
 KaTa'^v(Ti$, a descent ; a cave in which idolaters worship- 
 ped their gods, (1 Kings xv. 13.)" H. Stephens: 
 
 " Hovti^o), to plunge into the sea : KaraTrovTi^co is most 
 frequently used, and signifies to plunge down into the 
 
 sea, to plunge under." Hedericus : " To plunge 
 
 down into the sea, to plunge under, (Matt, xviii. 6.) 
 KaraTrovTiarv]^, is one who plunges others into the sea ; a 
 pirate, who, after making his capture, plunges the men 
 
 under the water." Schwarzius : " To plunge down." 
 
 See Mintert and Parkhurst, under the word, KaTaTrovTi^a. 
 — Such, according to these learned authors, are the sig- 
 nifications of the words before us : on which I would 
 make the following remarks. 
 
 These chosen terms are far from being so univocal 
 and precise in their import, in comparison with the word 
 (SaTTTi^co, as Mr. Horsey represents them to be; for several 
 of them have secondary senses, more distant from their 
 primary acceptation, than sprinkling is from plunging. 
 This, in a particular manner, is the case with Kara^wco or 
 Kara^vw. The natural sense of ^vtttco, and a secondary 
 acceptation of others, nearly coincide with the acknow- 
 ledged primary meaning of ^airri^o}', as the reader may 
 easily observe. Were these terms perfectly well adapted 
 
126 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 precisely to express a total immersion, without any dis- 
 agreeable idea attending it, as our opponent supposes, 
 it might be expected, that one or another of them would 
 have been frequently employed by the seventy transla- 
 tors, in their version of the Mosaic institutes. But it 
 does not appear, by the Concordance of Trommius, that 
 any one of these verbs is ever used by them, to express 
 those bathings which are so frequently mentioned in the 
 Hebrew ritual. No; for as vitttw is their usual word to 
 enjoin washing the hands and the feet^ and as ttAvvw is 
 their term for washing of garments, so Aouw is the verb 
 they use for bathing the ichole body. Of this, the fol- 
 lowing passage is a remarkable instance : " Whomso- 
 ever he toucheth that hath the issue, (and hath not 
 rinsed, vevi-urai, his hands in water,) he shall wash, irXwei, 
 his clothes, and bathe himself, Xova-erai ro a-co[xa, in water."f 
 Perfectly agreeable to which, is the observation of Dr. 
 Duport : "The grammarians remark a difference be- 
 tween Xoveiv, and irXweiv, and viTneiv ; that Xoveiv is spoken 
 of the whole body, TrXweiv of garments and clothes, and 
 viTTTeiv of the hands.":}: Aovco and fSaTTTi^a are used by 
 the Seventy as equivalent. For thus it is written : " Go, 
 and wash, Xova-ai, in Jordan seven times. — Then went he 
 down, and dipped himself, e^aTrriaaTo, seven times in 
 Jordan, according to the saying of the m.an of God."§ 
 As to l3vQt^(o, KaralSvBi^cc, and '^vTTTco, according to Trom- 
 mius, they are not so much as once used in the Septua- 
 gint ; and as to KaTa^wco and Ka.Ta'7rovTi(^co, though used 
 by the Seventy, yet in a sense quite foreign to the nature 
 of a positive rite. For instance : " Pharaoh's chariots 
 and his host hath he cast into the sea : his chosen cap- 
 tains also are drowned {KareiroByiaav ; but other copies 
 
 * Sometimes also the face, both in the Seventy and in the New 
 Testament. Sec Gen. xliii. 31, and Matt. vi. I7. 
 
 t Lev. XV. 11 J see also verse 5, 8, 13, 21, "22, 9.7 ; chap. xvi. 
 26, 285 and xvii. 15 j Numb. xix. 7, 8, 19. 
 
 X In Mr. Parkhurst's Greek Lexicon, under the verb Aokw. \id. 
 Mintert, sub voce Ncstto). § 2 Kings v. 10, 14. 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 127 
 
 read, KareirovTiaev ;) in the Red Sea. The depths have 
 covered them : they sank into the bottom, Karelvaav et^ 
 (3v6ov, as a stone."*' — " Why wilt thou swallow up, 
 KaraTrovri^eig, the inheritance of the Lord ? Far be it, 
 that I should swallow up, Kara'^ovna, or destroy."'}' 
 So, in the New Testament, KaraTrovTi'^co is used only in 
 the sense of sinking in the deep, and of drowning. Thus, 
 for instance, concerning Peter, when walking on the sea : 
 " He was afraid ; and beginning to sink, AcaraTrovT/^eo-fia;, 
 he cried, saying, Lord, save me ! " — " It were better for 
 him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and 
 that he were drowned, AraraTrovT/o-^Tj, in the depth of the 
 sea.":j: Bv^/^ct) is used likewise in the Apocrypha, and 
 in the New Testament, for sinking in the deep, and for 
 drowning. — Thus an apocryphal author : " When they 
 were gone forth into the deep, they drowned, e(3v6ia-av, 
 no less than two hundred of them."§ — Thus an evan- 
 gelist : " They came and filled both the ships, so that 
 they began to sink, (3v6i^ea-6ai avra.'' \\ — Thus the apostle 
 Paul: " They that will be rich, fall into temptation and 
 a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which 
 DROWN, l3v6i^ova-i, men in destruction and perdition."^ 
 — And thus Clemens Romanus: " Pharaoh and his host, 
 and all the rulers of Egypt — were drowned, e^vQia-Qfja-av, 
 in the bottom of the Red Sea, and perished."** Hence 
 it appears, that all those Greek verbs which are selected 
 by Mr. Horsey, except Ivirro), manifestly convey the 
 idea of danger, of injury, or of destruction to the subject 
 upon which an agent performs the action that is naturally 
 expressed by them ; yet of these terms, he thinks it pro- 
 bable that our Lord would have chosen one or another, 
 had he designed to confine his followers to the practice 
 of immersion ! As if no word could be decidedly for 
 
 * Exod. XV. 4, 5. t 2 Sam. xx. 19, 10. See Ps. Iv. 9; 
 
 Septuag. liv, 9 5 Lament, ii. 2, 5 j and many other places. 
 
 + Matt, xiv. 30, and xviii. 6. § 2 Maccab. xii. 4. 
 
 II Luke V. 7. 5[ 1 Tim. vi. 9. 
 ** Epist, ad Corinth. § 51, 
 
1 
 
 128 SIGXIIICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 dipping, if it did not, in its primary acceptation, denote 
 sinking in the deep, or drowniiig! With much greater 
 critical propriety might he have mentioned kova, than 
 any of the words proposed ; because that is the verb 
 which, above all others, the seventy translators adopted, 
 to signify the bathing of the whole body. Yet here, alas ! 
 the old exception would have recurred ; for Xova signifies 
 to wash ; and washing, they would have said, may be 
 performed by pouring or sprinkling. From what the 
 learned assert, concerning the native and obvious ac- 
 ceptation of pavTi^cc, eKyea, /SaTrr/^w, and most of the 
 terms Mr. Horsey has mentioned, there seems to be 
 much the same difference between them, as there is 
 between sprinkling, pouring, dipping, and drowning, in 
 our own language. 
 
 But what would IVIr. Horsey and others have said, 
 had any of his chosen terms, except Ivktw, been used 
 by our Lord to express that immersion about which 
 we contend? They would soon, I suppose, have ex- 
 claimed : " What, will nothing satisfy our opposers, 
 but plunging a candidate for the appointed rite into 
 a gulf, or the sea! Nothing short of what will put 
 life itself into the most imminent danger! Must we 
 always go to the sea, or to some abyss of water, to 
 administer the ordinance! Severe, harsh, terrifying! 
 The very thought shocks our feelings and plunges us 
 in horror. Impossible, that the law of our gracious 
 and condescending Lord should be rightly understood 
 by these dismal and cruel plungers. It muM have 
 
 another meaning; for common sense requires it," • 
 
 Here a secondary and remote acceptation of the word 
 in question (suppose Karalwo}, or Kara^vw,) would have 
 been sought. In which case, two copies of the Sep- 
 tuagint version of Psalm cxix. 136, would have fur- 
 nished them with an instance much to their purpose : 
 for there the word KaT^^va-av is used to express a copious 
 jiow and fall of tears; which might have been very 
 
BAPTIZE AND BAPTISM. 129 
 
 happily applied to prove, that the term, among other 
 acceptations, means to sprinkle* Nay, they might 
 have pleaded the use of the word by the author of 
 the ApostoHcal Constitutions, Basil the Great, Chry- 
 sostom, Theophylact, Damascene, and other ecclesias- 
 tical Greek writers, as tantamount to the term f3a7i:Ti^a.'\ 
 For, as no one doubts but they had a tolerable ac- 
 quaintance with their own language; as nobody dreams 
 of their administering baptism, by plunging people into 
 the depths of the sea; and as Mr. Horsey thinks he 
 has proved that the word baptize signifies to sprinkle; 
 so it follows, by an easy consequence, that the verb 
 Kara^vvoo, stubborn and terrifying as it may appear, 
 would have been quite as pliable and obliging to our 
 opponents as the term jSaTTTi^co. There is reason to 
 think, however, that it would be a much easier task 
 for any one to prove, that /SaTrrii^cc signifies, in certain 
 connections, to sink in the deep, or to drown and destroy; 
 than that it is ever used by Greek authors to express 
 the idea of pouring or of sprinkling a few drops of water 
 on the head or the face. See No. 52, 55, 64, and the 
 note subjoined to No. 82. — Agreeable to which is 
 the language of Damascene, and of Tertullian. By 
 the former, Noah's flood is called a baptism; and by the 
 latter, the baptism of the world.'^ 
 
 Mr. Horsey, when pleading the want of a word 
 more decidedly expressive of plunging than fSaTrn^io is, 
 reminds me of an evasion sometimes used by Arian 
 subscribers to the Thirty-nine Articles of the English 
 church. " Had the compilers, or imposers," they say, 
 " intended to have been more determinate upon any 
 point, they ought to have been more explicit and par- 
 
 * See Bos's Septuagint. 
 
 f See No. 1 of this Chap. Suiceri Thesaur. Eccles. sub voce, 
 kua^vw; and Spanhemii Dub. Evang. pars.iii. dub. xxiv. p. 70. 
 
 % Apud Suicerum, Thesaur. Eccles. torn. i. p. 623. 
 VOL. I. K: 
 
130 SIGNIFICATION OF THE TERMS, 
 
 ticular.'''* Now, as it is not so much a want of pre- 
 cision in the Articles and Liturgy of the national esta- 
 blishment which occasioned this exception, as a dislike 
 to the doctrines they contain; so I suspect, that it is 
 not so much a defect of meaning in the word (SaTTTi^o}, 
 to signify immersion, as a disapprobation of that ve}y 
 immersion, which was the reason of our opponent's 
 remark. It may, on our part, with reason be asked, 
 if our Lord intended, and if the apostles practised 
 pouring or sprinkling, why was not such or such a word 
 used, which, in its obvious and primary acceptation, 
 signifies to pour or to sprinkle? But it is quite foreign 
 to the purpose, and proves nothing so much as the 
 want of better arguments, to think of another word to 
 express the idea of immersion, when that is the radical 
 and obvious meaning of the term fSaTm^a. The fol- 
 lowing observation of Mr. Alsop will therefore apply, 
 mutatis mutandis, to the case before us. " If Xvrpov, 
 avTiXvTpov, and avTiXvrpov virep, will not evince a proper 
 price paid by way of ransom for another, we must 
 despair of ever expressing truth with that clearness, 
 but it shall be liable to misconstruction, by the possi- 
 bility of another meaning: and it is in vain to seek 
 a remedy against that evil for which there is no help 
 in nature." t 
 
 Reflect. X. Before I conclude this chapter, I will 
 present the reader with a pertinent quotation from Dr. 
 Waterland. " In all manner of controversy which 
 depends upon interpretation of dead writings, he that 
 undertakes to prove a point, or to establish a doc- 
 trine, lies under this disadvantage ; that, as long as 
 there appears any possibility of a different interpretation, 
 an adversary may still demur and demand farther 
 evidence. Now, considering the great latitude and am- 
 
 * In Dr. Waterland's Supplem. to Case of Arian Subscrip. p. 34, 
 f Antisozzoj p. 644. 
 
BAPTIZE AXD J5APTTSM. l^l 
 
 biguity of words and phrases, in all languages, (if a 
 man M'ould search into all the senses they are possibly 
 capable of,) and that even the most full and e.rpress 
 may be often eluded by having recourse to tropes and 
 figures, or to some other artificial turn of wit or criti- 
 cism ; I say, considering this, there may be always 
 something or other plausibly urged against any thing 
 almost whatever."* — Now, though every person of 
 reading and observation must acknowledoe this remark 
 to be just, yet we may venture to affirm, that if the 
 preceding authorities produced from the Quakers, whose 
 hypothesis is not afi^ected by any particrdar sense of the 
 term in dispute — from the most learned Pagdobaptists 
 themselves, whose cause is deeply interested in the 
 meaning of the word — and, by some of our opposers, 
 from Greek authors,'}' — do not sufficiently warrant our 
 sense of the word under consideration, we may justly 
 challenge our brethren to fix and authenticate the 
 meaning of any expression in the original scriptures, 
 against any opponent whatever. Nay, if the term bap- 
 tism do not determinately signify that the ordinance 
 should be administered by immersing the subject in 
 water, we should be glad of information what other 
 expression could have conveyed that idea, without being 
 liable to similar exceptions with those against which we 
 now contend. It may therefore be safely concluded, 
 that if there be nothing in the design of the ordinance, 
 nor in the apostolic practice, inconsistent with the 
 notion of dipping, we do not deserve reproach for 
 insisting, that baptism and i?nmersion are terms equi- 
 valent. 
 
 * Eight Sermons, Pref. p. 4, 5, edit. 2nd. 
 
 f To the authorities produced from Greek authors. No. 31, 45, 
 52, 55, 64, and 82, a multitude of others might be added j as the 
 reader may see by consulting Dr. Gale's Reflections upon Dr. Wall's 
 Hist, of Inf. Bap. lett. iii. 
 
 K 'J 
 
132 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 The Design of Baptism ; or the Facts and Blessings re- 
 presented by it, both in regard to our Lord and his 
 Disciples. 
 
 WiTsius. — " Our Lord would be baptized, that 
 he might conciliate authority to the baptism of John; 
 that he might manifest himself to be equally the head of 
 those who are baptized, as of those who are circum- 
 cised; that he has communion with both, and came that 
 of both he might make one; that by his own example, 
 he might commend and sanctify our baptism equally 
 as other sacraments to which he submitted; that men 
 might not be loth to come to the baptism of the Lord, 
 seeing the Lord was not backward to come to the 
 baptism of a servant; that by his baptism, he might 
 represent the future condition both of himself and his 
 followers — first humble, then glorious; now mean and 
 low, then glorious and exalted ; that represented by 
 immersion, this by emersion; that by the use of this 
 sacrament, the " promises of the covenant, which was 
 between himself and the Father, might be confirmed to 
 him, concerning the entire expiation of those offences 
 which he took on himself, the justification and sanc- 
 tification of those persons whom he represented, 
 and concerning a glorious resurrection, by which he 
 should soon emerge out of the waters of tribulation, 
 (Psalm ex. 7;) and, finally, to declare, by his voluntary 
 submission to baptism, that he would not delay the 
 delivering up of himself to be immersed in the torrents 
 of hell, yet with a certain faith and hope of emerging 
 .... Immersion into the water is to be considered by 
 us, as exhibiting that dreadful abyss of divine justice, 
 in which Christ for our sins, which he took on himself. 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. 133 
 
 was for a time as it were absorbed; as in David, his 
 type, he complains, (Psalm Ixix. 3.) More particularly, 
 seeing such an immersion deprives a person of light, 
 and of other things pertaining to this world, it excel- 
 lently represents the death of Christ, while his con- 
 tinuance under water, however short, denotes the burial 
 of Christ, and the lowest degree of his humiliation; 
 when, being laid in a sepulchre that was sealed and 
 guarded by the Roman soldiers, he was considered as 
 entirely cut off. Emersion out of the water, exhibits an 
 image of his resurrection, or of the victory which, being 
 dead, he obtained over death in his own dark domains, 
 that is, the grave. All these things the apostle inti- 
 mates, (Rom. vi. 3, 4.) Besides, baptism also repre- 
 sents those befieftts, both present and future, which 
 believers obtain in Christ. Among the present benefits, 
 the principal is, communion with the death, burial, 
 and resurrection of Christ; and, which is consequent 
 upon it, the mortification and burial of our old, and 
 resurrection of the new man, in virtue of the blood and 
 Spirit of Christ. For immersion into the water, repre- 
 sents the death of the old man, in such a manner as 
 shows, that he can neither stand in judgment to our 
 condemnation, nor exercise dominion in our bodies, 
 that we should obey his lusts. In respect of the former, 
 the death of the old man pertains to our justification; 
 in regard to the latter, it belongs to our sanctification. 
 The continuance under the water, represents the burial 
 of the body of sin, by which all hope of its revival is 
 cut off; so that it shall never be able afterwards, 
 either to condemn the elect, or to reign over them." 
 Miscel. Sac. tom. ii. exercit xv. § 63. Q^con. Feed. 
 1. iv. c. xvi. § 25 — 9,9. 
 
 2. Dr. Robert Newton. — " Baptism was usually 
 performed by immersion, or dipping the whole body 
 under water, to represent the death, and burial, and re- 
 surrection of Christ together; and therewith to signify 
 
134 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 the person's own dying to sin, the destruction of its 
 power, and his resurrection to new Hfe. St. Paul plainly 
 refers to this custom, (Rom. vi. 4.)" Pract. Exposit. ot 
 Catechism, p. 297, 298. 
 
 3. A. H. Frankius. — " The baptism of Christ repre- 
 sented his sufferings, (Matt. xx. 22,) and his coming 
 up out of the water, his resurrection from the dead." 
 Programmata, program, xiv. p. 343, 344. 
 
 4. INIr. Rich. Baxter. — " In our baptism, we are 
 dipped under the water, as signifying our covenant pro- 
 fession, that as he was buried for sin, we are dead and 
 buried to sin. . . .They [your lusts] are dead and buried 
 with him, for so your baptism signifieth ; in which you 
 are put under the water, to signify and profess, that 
 your old man is dead and buried. . , .We are raised to 
 hohness by his Spirit, as we rise out of the water in 
 baptism — (Col. ii. 11, 12, 13, where note,) — that the 
 putting of the body under the water did signify our 
 burial with Christ, and the death, or putting off of our 
 sins. And though we now use a less quantity of water, 
 yet it is to signify the same thing, or else we should 
 destroy the being of the sacrament: so also our rising 
 out of the water signifieth our risins; and being quick- 
 ened together with him. Note also, that it is not only 
 an engagement to this hereafter^ but a thing presently 
 done. They were in baptism buried with Christ; and 
 put off the body of sin, and were quickened with him : 
 and this doth all suppose their oxvn present profession to 
 put off the body of sin, and their consent to be baptized 
 on these terms." Paraphrase on the New Test, at Rom. 
 vi. 4; Col, ii. 12; 1 Pet. iii. 21. Disput. of Right to 
 Sacram. p. 58. 
 
 5. M. Saurin. — " Paul says, ' We are buried with 
 
 I him by baptism into death;' that is, the ceremony of 
 
 wholly immersing us in water, when we were baptized, 
 
 signified, that we died to sin; and that of raising us 
 
 again from our immersion signified, that we would no 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. 135 
 
 more return to those disorderly practices, in which we 
 lived before our conversion to Christianity." Sermons, 
 vol. iii. p. 171. Mr. Robinson's Translat. 
 
 6. Dr. T. Goodwin. — " The eminent thing signified 
 and represented in baptism, is, not simply the blood of 
 Christ, as it washeth us from sin ; but there is a farther 
 representation therein of Christ's death, burial, and re- 
 surrection, in the baptized's being first buried under 
 water, and then rising out of it; and this is not in a 
 bare conformity unto Christ, but in a representation of 
 a communion with Christ, in that his death and resur- 
 rection. Therefore it is said, ' We are buried with 
 him in baptism;' and, 'Wherein you are risen with 
 him.' It is not simply said, like as he was buried and 
 rose, but with him. So that our communion and oneness 
 with him in his resurrection, is represented to us therein, 
 and not only our conformity or likeness unto him therein. 
 And so baptism representeth this to us, that Christ hav- 
 ing once in himself sustained the persons of all the elect, 
 in his burial and resurrection; that now, upon the party 
 himself who is baptized, is personally, particularly, and 
 apparently reacted the same part again in his baptism; 
 thereby showing what his communion with Christ before 
 was, in what was then done to Christ; that he then was 
 buried with Christ, and rose with him; and upon that 
 ground is now, in this outward sign of baptism, (as in a 
 show, or representation) both buried and also riseth 
 again." Christ set forth, sect. iii. chap. vii. p. 82, 83. 
 
 7. Turrettinus. — " The passage of the Israelites 
 through the Red Sea, wonderfully agrees M-ith our bap- 
 tism, and represents the grace it was designed to ex- 
 press. For as, in baptism, when performed in the pri- 
 mitive manner, by immersion and emersion, descending 
 into the water, and again going out of it, of which descent 
 and ascent we have an example in the eunuch, (Acts 
 viii. 38, 39;) yea, and what is more, as by this rite, 
 when persons are immersed in water, they are over- 
 
136 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 whelmed, and as it were buried, and in a manner 
 buried 'together with Christ;' and again, when they 
 emerge, seem to be raised out of the grave, and are said 
 to rise again with Christ, (Rom. vi. 4, 5; Col. ii. 12;) 
 so in the Mosaic baptism, we have an immersion, and an 
 emersion; that, when they descended into the depths of 
 the sea; this, when they went out and came to the oppo- 
 site shore. The former, was an image of death; the lat- 
 ter, of a resurrection. For, passing through the bottom 
 of the sea, were they not near to death? And escaping 
 to the opposite shore, were they not as if revived from the 
 dead ? .... As in former times, the persons to be bap- 
 tized were immersed in the water, continued under the 
 water, and emerged out of it, (Matt. iii. 16; Acts viii. 
 38;) so the old man died in them and was buried, and 
 the new man arose, (Rom. vi. 4; Col. ii. 12.) As now, 
 persons to be baptized, are sprinkled with water; so 
 they are sprinkled with the blood and Spirit of Christ, 
 to the washing away of sin, (Acts xxii. 16; Ephes. v. 
 26, 27; Heb. ix. 14.)"* Disputat. de Bap. Nubis et 
 Maris, § 24. Institut. Theolog. tom. iii. loc. xix. 
 quaest. xi. § 14. 
 
 8. Bp. Patrick.- — "They [the primitive Christians] 
 put off their old clothes, and stripped themselves of their 
 garments ; then they were immersed all over, and buried 
 in the water, which notably signified the ' putting off the 
 body of the sins of the flesh,' as the apostle speaks, and 
 their entering into a state of death or mortification after 
 the similitude of Christ; according to the same apostle's 
 language elsewhere, ' We are baptized into his death — 
 We are buried with him in baptism.' — Though we by 
 going into the water profess that we are willing to take 
 up the cross and die for Christ's sake; yet, on God's 
 
 * "I should think that man's reasoning very weak," says Mr. 
 Bradbury, "who would pretend to prove sprinkling from [those 
 words,] ' your hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience.' This is 
 mere jingling upon words." Duty and Doct. of Bap. p, 153, 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. 137 
 
 part, this action of going into and coming out of the 
 water again, did signify that he would bring such per- 
 sons to live again," at the general resurrection. Dis- 
 course of the Lord's Supper, p. 421, 422, 436, edit. 5th. 
 9- Mr. Polhill. — " Where baptism is in the right 
 use, there is a seal of union with Christ. . . .They have 
 the power of his death in mortification, and the power 
 of his resurrection in a divine life: the one, is notably 
 adumbrated in the baptismal immersion into the M^ater; 
 the other, in the eduction out of it." Mystical Union, 
 chap. vii. p. 202, 203. 
 
 10. Mr. Scudder. — " Baptism — doth lively repre- 
 sent the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, to- 
 gether with your crucifying the affections and lusts; 
 being dead and buried with him unto sin, and rising 
 with him to newness of life, and to hope of glory. 
 (Rom. vi. 3,4, 5; Col. ii. 11, 12, 13.)" Daily Walk, 
 chap. V. p. 95. 
 
 11. Gerhardus. — "As plunging may signify that we 
 are baptized with Christ into his death, (Rom. vi. 3;) 
 and that our old man is drowned in baptism, (Rom. 
 vi. 6;) so aspersion may signify that we are sprinkled in 
 baptism with the blood of Christ, and cleansed from all 
 sin, (1 Pet. i. 2; 1 John i. 8.)" Loci Theolog. tom. iv. 
 De Circumcis. § 96. 
 
 12. Botsaccus. — " Baptism is a sepulchre: 'We 
 are buried with Christ, by baptism into death,' (Rom. 
 vi. 4.)" Promptuarium Allegoriarum, § 1295. 
 
 13. Mr. Marshall. — " Baptism signifieth the appli- 
 cation of Christ's resurrection to us, as well as his death; 
 we are raised up with him in it to newness of life, as 
 well as buried with him, (Rom. vi. 4, 5, 10, 11.)" 
 Gospel Mystery of Sanct. direct, iii. p. 50. 
 
 14. Mr. iVlexander Ross. — " Immersion into the 
 water, represents to us the death and burial of Christ, 
 and therefore our mortification : likewise the very emer- 
 sion out of the purifying w'ater, is a shadow of the re- 
 
138 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 surrection of Christ, and of our spiritual quickening." 
 Annotat. in Wollebii Compend. Theolog. 1. i. c. xxiii. 
 p. 150. 
 
 15. Chamierus. — " They who are baptized repre- 
 sent the death of Christ, and at the same time their own, 
 (Rom. vi. 3, 4.)" Panstrat. torn. iii. 1. xxvi. c. xix. § 12. 
 
 16. Buddeus. — " Immersion, which was used in for- 
 mer times, was a symbol and an image of the death 
 and burial of Christ ; and at the same time it informs 
 us, that the remains of sin, which are called the oldvian, 
 should be mortified." Dogmat. Theolog. 1. v. c. i. <§ 8. 
 
 17. Dr. Whitby. — '"Therefore we are buried with 
 him by baptism,' plunging us under the water, into a 
 conformity to his death, which put his body under the 
 earth; 'that like as Christ was raised up from the dead, 
 by the glorious power of the Father, even so we also,' 
 thus dead in baptism, 'should' rise with him, and 'walk 
 in newness of life.' " Paraphrase on Rom. vi. 4. 
 
 18. Bp. Hall. — " Ye are, in baptism, buried to- 
 gether with Christ, in respect of the mortification of 
 your sins, represented by lying under the water; and in 
 the same baptism, ye rise up wdth him in newness of 
 life, represented by your rising up out of the water 
 again, through that faith of yours which is grounded 
 upon the mighty power of God, who hath raised him 
 from the dead," Hard Texts, on Col. ii. 12, edit. 1633. 
 
 19- Pictetus. — " That immersion into, and emersion 
 out of the water, practised by the ancients, signify the 
 death of the old, and the resurrection of the new man, 
 (Rom. vi.; Col. ii.)" Theolog. Christ. 1 xiv. c. iv. § 13. 
 20. Bp. Davenant. — " In baptism, the burial of the 
 body of sin, or of the old Adam, is represented, when 
 the person to be baptized is put down into the water; as 
 a resurrection, when he is brought out of it.'' Expos. 
 Epist. ad Coloss. in cap. ii. 12. 
 
 21. Dr. Boys. — "The dipping in holy baptism has 
 three parts : the putting into the water, the continuance 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. 139 
 
 in the water, and the coming out of the water. The 
 putting into the water, doth ratify the mortification of 
 sin by the power of Christ's death, as Paul, (Rom. vi. 3,) 
 ' Know ye not that all we which have been baptized into 
 Jesus Christ, have been baptized into his death, and 
 that our old man is crucified with him?' The continu- 
 ance in the water, notes the burial of sin ; to wit, a con- 
 tinual increase of mortification by the power of Christ's 
 death and burial, (Rom. vi. 4.) The coming out of the 
 water, figured our spiritual resurrection and vivifica- 
 tion to newness of life, by the power of Christ's re- 
 surrection, (Rom. vi. 4; Col. ii. 12.)" Works, p. 294, 
 edit. 1629. 
 
 22. Mastricht. — " As in the baptismal washing, 
 especially when performed by immersion, we are plunged 
 in water, abide in it a little while, and then emerge; so 
 Christ was immersed for us in death, continued under 
 its dominion the space of three days, and then emerged 
 by his resurrection. .. .As in the baptismal washing, 
 especially when performed by immersion, we are planted 
 in water; so we are planted both in the blood and body 
 of Christ, when we are baptized into his mystical body, 
 (1 Cor. xii. 13;) and as we, in a manner, put on water, 
 so also do we put on Christ, (Gal. iii. 27.) Again: As 
 Christ, by that baptism of his own blood, (Matt. xx. 22,) 
 died, was buried, and rose again ; so we are planted 
 in him, spiritually die with him to sin, are buried and 
 rise again, (Rom. vi. 3 — 6. Col. ii. 1 1, 12, 13.) Further: 
 As by water the body is cleansed, (1 Pet. iii. 21,) so by 
 the blood and Spirit of Christ the soul is purified, (1 John 
 i. 7.) Finally: As in baptism we emerge out of a 
 sepulchre of water, and pass, as it were, into a new life ;^ 
 so also being delivered from every kind of death, we shall 
 be saved to eternal life, (Mark xvi. 16.)" Theoret. Pract. 
 Theolog. 1. vii. c. iv. § 10. 
 
 23. Grotius. — "' Buried with him by baptism.' Not 
 only the word baptism, but the very form of it, intimates 
 
140 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 this. For an immersion of the whole body in water, so 
 that it is no longer beheld, bears an image of that burial 
 which is given to the dead. So Col. ii. 12. . . .There 
 was in baptism, as administered in former times, an 
 image both of a burial and of a resurrection; which, in 
 respect of Christ, was external ; in regard to Christians, 
 internal, (Rom. vi. 4.)" In Rom. vi. 4; Col. ii. 12. 
 
 24. Mr. Burkitt. — " 'We are buried with him by 
 baptism into death.' The apostle alludes, no doubt, to 
 the ancient manner and way of baptizing persons in 
 those hot countries, which was by immersion, or putting 
 them under water for a time, and then raising them up 
 again out of the water; which rite had also a mystical 
 signification, representing the burial of our old man, sin 
 in us, and our resurrection to newness of life." Expos. 
 Notes on Rom. vi. 4. 
 
 25. Vitringa. — " To be immersed in water, and to 
 be under water, represent the death and burial of our 
 old man, in virtue of the death of Christ. To be washed 
 with water, denotes our being justified and sanctified. 
 To emerge out of the water, signifies our being saved 
 from death, in virtue of Christ's death; our being re- 
 generated to a lively hope; and our being raised again 
 to a new life, that shall never cease." Aphorismi Sanct. 
 Theolog. aphor. 89 1 . 
 
 26. Confession of Sueveland. — " As touching bap- 
 tism we confess, that which the scripture doth in divers 
 places teach thereof, that we by it are buried into the 
 death of Christ, made one body, and do put on Christ." 
 Chapter xvii. in Harmony of Confess, p. 410. Cam- 
 bridge, 1586. 
 
 27. Bucanus. — Our Lord was baptized of John " to 
 signify that he was sent to be baptized, that is, plunged 
 in death; and that he might wash away our sins with 
 his own blood .... Immersion into water, or aspersion, 
 plainly denotes the sprinkling of the blood of Christ for 
 the remission of sins, and the imputation of righteous- 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. 141 
 
 ness: and the continuance under water, however short, 
 the death and burial of our native corruption, (in virtue 
 of our Lord's death and burial,) that is, the mortifica- 
 tion of the old Adam, which is the first part of our re- 
 generation ; but emersion, the rising of the new man, or 
 quickening and newness of life; and so, analogically, 
 our future resurrection is, as it were, presented to view. 
 (Rom. vi. 3, 4, and iv. 5, 13.)" Institut. Theolog. 
 loc. xlvii. p. 621, 631. 
 
 28. Zanchius. — " Baptism is a sign of the morti- 
 fication and burial of the old man .... For immersion 
 into the water, which was used of old, represented this 
 mortification, death, and burial; in which infants remain, 
 as it were, under the water, when baptized. I speak 
 agreeably to the ancient practice of the church. The 
 apostle, therefore, says : ' We are crucified with Christ, 
 and buried, by baptism into death.'" Opera, tom. iv. 
 p: 437, 438. 
 
 29- Limborch. — " Baptism is a figure and mark of 
 our spiritual burial. For by that immersion into water, 
 and continuance under the water, which represent a 
 burial, baptized persons express their being buried to 
 sin." Comment, in Epist. ad Rom. ad cap. vi. 4. 
 
 30. Castalio. — •" 'Else what shall they do who are 
 baptized for the dead?' — That you may understand 
 this place of Paul, consider the manner and nature of 
 baptism, as described, (Rom. vi.) in these words : ' As 
 many of us as have been baptized into Jesus Christ, 
 were baptized into his death.' And a little after, ' For 
 if we have been planted together in the likeness of his 
 death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection.' 
 This, therefore, is the argument of Paul; when Chris- 
 tians are baptized, they are baptized for this purpose, 
 that they may die with Christ, and then rise again." In 
 1 Cor. XV. 29- 
 
 31. Schoettgenius. — " The apostle forms a com- 
 parison between baptism and death. He that is bap- 
 
142 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 tized, is entirely under water, and no longer seems to 
 live. When, therefore, we Christians are baptized, it is 
 into the death of Christ; namely, that we should be- 
 come imitators of his death. Baptism obligeth us to 
 become like our Lord in his death and resurrection." 
 Horas HebraicEe, ad Rom. vi. 4, p. 515. 
 
 32. Hoornbeekius. — '* The apostle, speaking of what 
 was notorious and certain, says: ' Know ye not, that 
 so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were 
 baptized into his death?' (Rom.vi, 3,) referring to what 
 is performed in baptism; namely, the entrance into 
 water, and the going out of it. For he immediately 
 adds: 'Therefore, we are buried with him by baptism.' 
 And, (Col. ii. 12,) ' Buried with him in baptism, wherein 
 also ye are risen with him.' As, in respect of Christ, 
 his death was followed by his resurrection from the 
 dead, so our conformity to him consists in dying and 
 rising again with him. This is clearly presented to our 
 view and sealed, by that immersion and emersion which 
 are in baptism." Theolog, Pract. 1. ix. c. xxii. tom. ii. 
 p. 388. 
 
 33. Tilenus. — " The ceremony in baptism is three- 
 fold ; immersion into the water, a continuance under the 
 water, and a rising out of the water. . . .The internal and 
 essential form of baptism is no other than that analo- 
 gical proportion of the signs, already explained, with the 
 things signified. For as it is a property of water to 
 wash a^ay the filth of the body, so it represents the 
 power of Christ's blood in the cleansing from sin. Thus 
 immersion into the water declares, by the most agree- 
 able analogy, the mortification of the old man; and 
 emersion out of the water, the vivification of the new 
 man . . . .The same plunging into the water exhibits to our 
 view that dreadful abyss of divine justice, in which Christ, 
 on account of our sins, was for a time in a manner swal- 
 lowed up. Abiding under the water, however short the 
 time, denotes his descent to hell; that is, as we have 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. 143 
 
 elsewhere declared, the lowest degree of abasement, when, 
 in a sealed and guarded sepulchre, he was considered as 
 one entirely cut off. Emersion out of the water, pre- 
 sents us with an image of that victory which he, though 
 dead, obtained over death, even in his own pavilion; 
 that is, the sepulchre. Thus, therefore, it is right that 
 we who are baptized into his death, and buried with him, 
 should also rise again with him, and walk in newness of 
 life. (Rom. vi. 3, 4; Col. ii. 12.)" Syntag. Disputat. 
 pars ii. disp. xli. § 15, 32, 34. 
 
 34. Stapferus " The apostle explains the sacra- 
 ment of baptism, by communion with the death and re- 
 surrection of Christ, (Rom. vi. 3, 4; Col. ii. 12.)" In- 
 stitut. Theolog. Polem. torn. i. cap. iii. § 1638. 
 
 S5. Burmannus. — " The external rite, in baptism, 
 having the image, as well of overwhelming and suffoca- 
 tion, as of washing, bears also a twofold figure : and it 
 signifies, partly, the death and burial of Christ, and our 
 communion with them; — partly, the washing away of 
 sin, by the blood and Spirit of Christ, or the justifica- 
 tion and sanctification of a sinner. (Rom. vi. 4; 1 Pet. 
 iii. 20; Acts ii. 38; Tit. iii. 5.)" Synops. Theolog. torn. ii. 
 loc. xliii. c. viii. § 3. 
 
 36. Roell. — " The signification of baptism is taught, 
 (Rom. vi.) namely, that it is a sign and seal of the death, 
 burial, and resurrection of Christ, and of our commu- 
 nion with them. For he that is immersed in water, 
 which has the power of suffocating, is considered as in a 
 state of death; and likewise, as long as he continues 
 immersed, he is there buried. But when he rises out of 
 the water, he rises, as it were, from a state of death, and 
 begins to live afresh. Of what kind this newness of life 
 is, baptism also at the same time distinctly represents. 
 For as w^ater has the power of washing and purifying, it 
 sif^nifies that, in virtue of our Lord's death, the person 
 baptized is cleansed from sin, and that he ought to live 
 a new and a pure life without the pollution of sin. . . . 
 
144 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 When persons are baptized in faith, they are buried with 
 Christ; to signify that they are no longer under the 
 curse. They rise with Christ, or rather they are raised; 
 as they that are baptized, after immersion into water, 
 rise again out of the water, when they repent and so rise 
 again from a death in sin. Thus also they rise again 
 to a new life and are quickened: they live with Christ 
 here in grace, and shall for ever live in glory." Explicat. 
 Epist. ad Ephes. in cap. iv. 5. Exegesis Epist. ad 
 Coloss. in cap. ii. 13. 
 
 57' Lampe. — " Water, in the sacrament of baptism, 
 represents the passive obedience and death of Christ, 
 and the communion of believers with them." Prolegom. 
 in Joan. 1. i, c. ii. § 23. 
 
 38. Abp. Leighton. — " That baptism doth apply and 
 seal to the believer his interest in the death and resur- 
 rection of Christ, the apostle St. Paul teaches to the full, 
 (Rom. vi. 4,) ' We are buried with him by baptism into 
 death; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead 
 by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk 
 in newness of life.' Where the dipping into water is 
 referred to, as representing our dying with Christ; and 
 the return thence, as expressive of our rising with him." 
 Comment upon 1 Pet. iii. % 1 . 
 
 39. Braunius. — " By baptism we are plunged under 
 the water, and, as it were, buried; but we do not con- 
 tinue in a state of death, for we immediately rise again 
 from thence : to signify that we, through the merits of 
 Christ, and with Christ, mortify the old man, are buried 
 with Christ, and with him arise to newness of life. ' We 
 are buried with him by baptism into death; that like as 
 Christ was raised from the dead, to the glory of the 
 Father, so we also should walk in newness of life,' (Rom. 
 vi. 4, 5.)" Doct. Feed, pars iv. cap. xxi. § 11. 
 
 40. Dr. JNIanton. — " ' We are buried with him in 
 baptism into his death:' the like expression you have, 
 (Col. ii. 12,) ' Buried with him in baptism, wherein also 
 
BLESSINGS KEPRESENTTPID BV IT. 145 
 
 ye are risen with him.' The putting the baptized person 
 into the Avater, denoteth and proclaimeth the burial of 
 Christ, and we by submitting to it are baptized [buried] 
 with him, or profess to be dead to sin; for none but the 
 dead are buried : so that it sio;nifieth Christ's death for 
 sin, and our dying unto sin." Sermon on Rom.vi. 4. 
 
 41. Church of England. — "As we be buried with 
 Christ by our baptism into death, so let us daily die to 
 sin, mortifying and killing the evil motions thereof. And 
 as Christ was raised up from death by the glory of the 
 Father, so let us rise to a new life, and walk continually 
 therein." Homily of the Resurrec. 
 
 42. H. Altingius. — '' As in ancient times the persons 
 to be baptized were immersed into water, continued 
 under water, and emerged out of the water, (Matt, iii, 16; 
 Acts viii. 38;) so the old man in them died and was 
 buried, and the new man rose again, (Rom. vi. 4; Col. 
 ii. 12.) As, now, the persons to be baptized are sprinkled 
 with water, so they are sprinkled with the blood and 
 Spirit of Christ, to the washing away of sin, (Acts xxii. 
 16; Ephes. v. 25,9.6; Heb. ix. 14.)" Loci Commun. 
 pars. i. loc. xii. p. 200. Explicat. Catechis. Palat. 
 parsii. quasst. Ixix. p. 311, 312. 
 
 43. Wolfius. — " Immersion into water, in former 
 times, and a short continuance under the water, prac- 
 tised by the ancient church, afforded the representation 
 of a burial in baptism." Curae, ad Rom. vi. 4. 
 
 44. G. J. Vossius. — " In our baptism, by a con- 
 tinuance under water, the burial of the body of sin, or 
 the old Adam, is represented. The similitude consists 
 in this : That as a corpse is overwhelmed and pressed by 
 the earth; so, in baptism, a man is overwhelmed with 
 water; and as a man is pressed with water, so the power 
 of sin should be pressed in us and enervated, that it 
 may no longer drive us whither it pleases, or hinder our 
 salvation." Disputat. de Bap. disp. iii. thes. 4. 
 
 45. Dr. Cave. — " i\.s in immersion there are in a 
 
 VOL. I. L 
 
146 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 manner three several acts, the putting the person into 
 water, his abiding there for a Httle time, and his rising 
 up again ; so by these were represented Christ's death, 
 burial, and resurrection ; and in conformity thereunto, 
 our dying unto sin, the destruction of its power, and our 
 resurrection to a new course of hfe. By the person's 
 being put into water, was lively represented the putting 
 off the body of the sins of the flesh, and being washed 
 from the filth and pollution of them. By his abode 
 under it, which was a kind of burial in the water, his 
 entering into a new state of death or mortification, like 
 as Christ remained for some time under the state or 
 power of death. Therefore, ' as many as are baptized 
 into Christ,' are said to be ' baptized unto his death,' 
 and to be ' buried with him by baptism into death;' that 
 the ' old man being crucified with him, the body of sin 
 might be destroyed, that henceforth he might not serve 
 sin ;' for that ' he that is dead is freed from sin,' as the 
 apostle clearly explains the meaning of this rite. And 
 then by his emersion, or rising up out of the water, was 
 signified his entering upon a new course of life, differing 
 from that he lived before ; ' that like as Christ was raised 
 up by the glory of the Father, even so we also should 
 walk in newness of life.' " Primitive Christianity, part i. 
 chap. X, p. 204, edit. 6th. 
 
 46. Luther. — " That the minister dippeth a child 
 into the water, signifieth death ; that he again bringeth 
 him out of it, signifieth life. So Paul explains it, 
 (Rom. vi.) .... Being moved by this reason, I would have 
 those that are to be baptized, to be entirely immersed, 
 as the word imports and the mystery signifies." In Dr. 
 Du Veil, on Acts viii. 38. Vid. Lutheri Catechis. 
 Minor. 
 
 47. Bp. Fowler. — " Christians being plunged into 
 the water in baptism, signifies their obliging themselves, 
 in a spiritual sense, to die and be buried with Jesus 
 Christ, (which death and burial consist, in an utter re- 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. 147 
 
 nouncing and forsaking of all their sins,) that so, an-, 
 swerably to his resurrection, they may live a holy and 
 godly life." Design of Christianity, sect. i. chap. viii. 
 p. 79, edit. 4th. 
 
 48. Dr. Sam. Clarke.' — " ' We are buried with Christ 
 by baptism into death ; that like as Christ was raised 
 up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so 
 we also should walk in newness of life,' (Rom. vi. 4.) 
 In the primitive times, the manner of baptizing was by 
 immersion, or dipping the whole body into the water. 
 And this manner of doing it, was a very significant em- 
 blem of the dying and rising again, referred to by St. 
 Paul, in the abovementioned similitude." Exposition 
 of the Church Catechism, p. S94. edit. 6th. 
 
 49- Cajetan. — " ' We are buried with him by bap- 
 tism into death.' By our burying he declares our death, 
 from the ceremony of baptism ; because he who is bap- 
 tized, is put under the water, and by this bears a like- 
 ness of him that is buried, who is put under the earth. 
 Now because none are buried but dead men, from this 
 very thing, that we are buried in baptism, we are assi- 
 milated to Christ when he was buried." In Mr. Hen. 
 Laurence's Treatise of Bap. p. 71, 72. 
 
 50. Cornelius a Lapide. — " We are baptized into a 
 similitude of the death of Christ. For they who are 
 put under the water, allegorically represent Christ dead 
 and buried." In Mr. Hen, Laurence's Treatise of Bap. 
 p. 73, 74. 
 
 51. Dr. Hammond. — " It is a thing that every 
 Christian knows, that the immersion in baptism refers 
 to the death of Christ ; the putting the person into the 
 water, denotes and proclaims the death and burial of 
 Christ." On Rom. vi. 3. 
 
 52. Bp. Nicholson. — " The ancient manner in bap- 
 tism, the putting of the person baptized under the water, 
 and then taking him out again, did well set forth these 
 two acts ; the first his dying, the second his rising again 
 
 L 2 
 
148 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 .... Into the grave with Christ, we went not ; for our 
 bodies were not, nor could be buried with his : but in 
 our baptism, by a kind of analogy or resemblance, while 
 our bodies are under the water, we may be said to be 
 buried with him." In Mr. Davye's Bapt. of Adult Be- 
 liev. p. 1 14. 
 
 53. Heideggerus. — " Baptism signifies the death and 
 burial, both of Christ and of believers, in the aboHtion of 
 the old man, as well initial, in this life, as perfect, in 
 laying down the body of the sins of the flesh ; the resur- 
 rection and vivification, first of Christ, then of ourselves ; 
 the obedience of Christ, even to death, which has the 
 power of justifying and of delivering from death ; rege- 
 nerating grace, and the Spirit, purifying our hearts ; our 
 union with Christ, and the communion of believers with 
 him ; and lastly, a resurrection to life." Historia Patri- 
 arch, torn. i. p. 565. 
 
 54. Momma. — " As baptism represents the death 
 and burial of our Lord, so also his resurrection, and 
 seals our communion with him. Paul therefore teaches, 
 (Col. ii. 12,) that ' we are buried with him by baptism.' 
 For the baptismal water, so far as it suffocates, is a ma- 
 nifest emblem of death ; as it covers, of a burial ; as it 
 purifies, of a resurrection." De Statu Eccles. tom. ii. 
 c. V. § 199. 
 
 55. Rigaltius. — " Dipping into the baptismal water, 
 denotes the person to be deeply tinctured with the 
 Christian faith; his being overwhelmed, signifies his 
 cleansing from moral stains and filth ; and his rising up 
 out of the water, his resurrection." In Mr. Stennett 
 against Mr. Russen, p. 71. 
 
 56. Anonymous. — " The apostle seems here (Rom. 
 vi. 4,) to allude to the manner of baptism ; indicating 
 that this, as well as the words made use of at the time, 
 signified a kind of death : for the body being wholly im- 
 mersed in water at baptism, so that it no longer appear- 
 ed, represented its being buried .... And the body rising 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. l49 
 
 from the water, after it had been wholly immersed in it, 
 so as to be, as it were, buried under it, was in some de- 
 gree a figure, or representation, of Christ's rising from 
 the grave." Illustration of the Bible, on Rom. vi. 4. 
 
 57. Dr. Wells.—" St. Paul here alludes (Rom. vi. 4,) 
 to immersion, or dipping the whole body under water, 
 in baptism : which he intimates did typify the death and 
 burial (of the person baptized) to sin ; as his rising up 
 out of the water did typify his resurrection to newness 
 of life." On Rom. vi. 4. 
 
 58. Mr. Hardy. — " ' Therefore we are buried with 
 him by baptism.' He alludes to the rite of immersing, 
 which bears an image of our Lord's burial. ' That like 
 as Christ was raised.' For the rising again of the body 
 out of the water, bore an image of that fact." Annotat. 
 in Rom. vi. 4. 
 
 59' Dr. Barrow. — " The action is baptizing^ or im- 
 mersing in water. The object thereof, those persons of 
 any nation, whom his ministers can by their instruction 
 and persuasion render disciples ; that is, such as do sin- 
 cerely believe the truth of his doctrine, and seriously 
 resolve to obey his commandments. . . .The mersion 
 also in water, and the emersion thence, doth figure our 
 death to the former [worldly defilements,] and receiving 
 [reviving] to a new life." Works, vol. i. p. 518, 520, 
 edit. 1722. 
 
 60. Dr. John Edwards. — " Some of the fathers 
 hold, that the apostle's argument in the text (1 Cor. 
 XV. 29,) is of this sort : If there shall be no rising of the 
 dead hereafter, why is baptism so significant a symbol of 
 our dying and rising again, and also of the death and 
 resurrection of Christ ? For those that were proselytes 
 to the Christian religion, were interpreted to make an 
 open profession of these, in their being plunged into the 
 baptismal water, and in being there overwhelmed and 
 buried, as it were, in the consecrated element. The immer- 
 sion into] the water, was thought to signify the death of 
 
150 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 Christ ; and their coming out, denoted his rising again, 
 and did no less represent their own future resurrection. 
 On which account, the minister's putting in of the Chris- 
 tian converts into the sacred waters, and his taking them 
 out thence, are styled by St. Chrysostom, ' The sign 
 and pledge of descending into the state of the dead, and 
 of a return from thence.' And thus because the wash- 
 ing and plunging of the newly admitted Christians was 
 a visible proof and emblem, first of Christ's, and then 
 of their resurrection from the grave ; the forementioned 
 fathers have been induced to believe, that this passage 
 of our apostle, which I am speaking of, hath a particular 
 respect to that, and is to be interpreted by it. Nay, this 
 seems to agree exactly with the language and tenour of 
 our apostle himself, who may be thought to be the 
 best interpreter of his own words : ' Know ye not,' saith 
 he, ' that so many of us as have been baptized into 
 Christ were baptized into his death ? Therefore we are 
 buried with him by baptism,' &c. (Rom. vi. 3, 4.)" En- 
 quiry into four Remarkable Texts, p. 143, 144. 
 
 61. Peter Martyr. — " As Christ, by baptism, hath 
 drawn us with him into his death and burial ; so he 
 hath drawn us out unto life. This doth the dipping 
 into the water, and the issuing forth again, signify, \\hen 
 we are baptized." Oration concerning the Resurrec- 
 tion of Christ, subjoined to Comm. Places, p. 11, 
 edit. 1574. 
 
 62. E. Spanhemius. — " As immersion signifies the 
 death of the old man, and emersion the life of the new 
 man ; so sprinkhng signifies and seals the sprinkling of 
 the blood of Christ, (1 Pet. i. 2.)"' Disputat. Syntag. 
 Disp. de Bap. § 21. 
 
 63. Cocceius. — " ' We are buried with him by bap- 
 tism into death,' (Rom. vi. 3, 4, 5.) We are baptized 
 into death, by which the servitude of sin is laid aside ; 
 and thus a seal of our communion with him is bestowed 
 on us, that we may be considered as buried with him. 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. 151 
 
 .... In baptism there is a resemblance of our Lord's 
 death." Summa Doct. de Feed. c. vi. § 209- 
 
 64. Bp. Taylor. — " ' We are buried with him in 
 baptism,' saith the apostle. * In aqua tanquam in se- 
 pulchre caput immergentibus vetus homo sepelitur et 
 submergitur, deinde nobis emergentibus novus resurgit 
 inde.' — So S. Chrysostom : ' The old man is buried 
 and drowned in the immersion under water; and when 
 the baptized person is lifted up from the water, it repre- 
 sents the resurrection of the new man to newness of 
 life.' In this case, therefore, the contrary custom [of 
 pouring, or sprinkling,] not only being against an eccle- 
 siastical law, [of the church of England] but against the 
 analogy and mysterious signification of the sacrament, 
 is NOT TO BE COMPLIED WITH ; unless in such cases 
 that can be of themselves sufficient to justify a liberty 
 in a ritual and ceremony, that is, a case of necessity." 
 Ductor Dubitantium, b. iii. c. iv. rule xv. p. 645. 
 
 65. Sir Norton Knatchbull, — " The proper end of 
 baptism ought not to be understood, as if it were a sign 
 of the washing away of sin — but, properly, it is the sign 
 of a resurrection, by faith in the resurrection of Jesus 
 Christ, of which baptism is a very lively and expressive 
 figure; as was also the ark of Noah, out of which he re- 
 turned, as it were out of a sepulchre to a new life. . . . 
 And so was the whale's belly, out of which Jonah arose, 
 after a three davs' burial : and the cloud and the Red 
 Sea, in which the people of Israel are said to have been 
 baptized ; that is, not washed, but buried. For all these 
 were types of the same thing with baptism ; not of the 
 washing away of sin, i. e. the putting off thejilth of the 
 
 Jlesh, but of the death and resurrection of Christ, and 
 at the same time of ours. To this truth, apostles, 
 fathers, schoolmen, and almost all interpreters, give their 
 suffrage. The thing is indeed so manifest, that there is 
 no need of testimonies to confirm it : but because there 
 are not a few that otherwise teach, it will not be super- 
 
159. DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 fluous, (that I may not seem to speak without proper 
 authority) out of innumerable testimonies to produce a 
 few. We begin with St. Paul. ' Know ye not that so 
 many as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized 
 into his death ? Therefore we are buried with him by 
 baptism into death, that like as Christ was raised from 
 the dead by the Father of glory, even so we also should 
 walk in newness of life,' (Rom. vi. 3, 4, and Col. ii. 12 ; 
 as also 1 Cor. xv. 29.) ' P21se what shall they do who 
 are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all?' 
 As if he had said, If there be no resurrection, to what 
 purpose are we baptized ? In vain does the church use 
 the sign of baptism, if the dead rise not. Similar testi- 
 monies frequently occur in the fathers. For instance : 
 ' That believing on his death, by his baptism ye may be 
 rendered partakers of his resurrection.' Ignat. Ep. ad 
 Tral. — ' Baptism was given,' or appointed, ' to set forth 
 the death of our Lord.' Ep. ad Philadel. in the name of 
 Ignat. — ' In baptism we perform the signs of his pas- 
 sion and resurrection.' Just. Mart. — ' We know one 
 saving ba|)tism, seeing there is but one death for the 
 world, and one resurrection from the dead, of which 
 baptism is a type.' Basil. Mag. — ' Hear Paul speaking 
 aloud. They passed through the sea, and were all bap- 
 tized in the cloud and in the sea. He calls their passage 
 through the sea, baptism; for it was an escape from 
 death accomplished by water.' Basil. Seleuc. — ' To be 
 baptized and plunged, then to return and emerge, are a 
 sign of our descent to Hades, and of an ascent from it.' 
 Chrysost. — ' Baptism is a pledge and figure of the resur- 
 rection.' Ambros. — ' Baptism is an earnest of the re- 
 surrection.' Lactan. — ' Dipping bears the resemblance 
 of death, and of a burial.' Bern. — I might accumulate 
 innumerable testimonies; but these, I think, are abund- 
 antly sufficient to prove, that baptism is properly a type 
 of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ ; — and also 
 of all believers that are baptized into the faith of him. 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. 153 
 
 from a death in sin to newness of life ; which if they do 
 in this world, they have a most firm hope, that after death 
 they shall, with Christ, arise to glory." Animadvers. in 
 Lib. Nov. Test, ad 1 Pet. iii. 20, 21, p. 178, 179, 180. 
 Oxon. 1677- 
 
 66. Bp. Hoadly. — " This latter expression [buried 
 with Christ and rising with him] made use of by St. 
 Paul, with relation to baptism, is taken from the custom 
 of immersion in the first days, and from that particular 
 manner of baptizing proselytes ; by which they were first 
 covered with water, and in a state, as it were, of death 
 and inactivity, and then arose out of it into a sort of new 
 state of life and action. And if baptism had been then 
 performed as it is now amongst us, we should never 
 have so much as heard of this form of expression, of 
 dying and rising again in this rite." Works, vol. iii. 
 p. 890. 
 
 67. Dr. Scott. — " Those phrases, ' buried with 
 Christ,' and ' risen with Christ,' are only the sense and 
 signification of that eastern custom in baptism, viz. of 
 plunging the baptized person under water, and raising 
 him up again — and the significancy of them, the apostle 
 here (Rom. vi. 3, 4, 5,) plainly tells us, wholly refers 
 to the death, and burial, and resurrection of Christ ; and 
 therefore the plunging under water must necessarily re- 
 fer to Christ's death and burial, and the raising up again 
 to his resurrection." Works, vol. i. 446, edit. 1718. 
 
 68. Anonymous. — "The water [of baptism] sym- 
 bolically expresses, by immersing into it, the death of 
 Christ, or — being baptized — into his death, (Rom. vi. 3;) 
 emersing out of it, his resurrection, and our rising with 
 him unto righteousness — the whole body of sin, with 
 all its members, dying with him to sin by immersion, 
 and by emersion rising with him to newness of life." 
 Cure of Deism, vol. i. chap. iv. p. 120, 121, 124. 
 
 69 Mr. Doutrin. — " What did this dipping in [in 
 the administration of baptism] signify? By the dipping 
 
154 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 in, and remaining for a little space under, and rising up 
 out of the water, was signified the communion of be- 
 lievers with Christ, in his death, burial, and resurrec- 
 tion. (See Rom. vi. 3,6.)" Scheme of Div. Truths, 
 chap. xxii. quest. 25. 
 
 70. Dr. Balguy. — " Baptism represents to our 
 view a purification from sin. The apostle indeed carried 
 his idea farther, and considered the act of immersion 
 in water as signifying a burial; the termination of our 
 sinful life: and the risino; again from the water as a 
 new birth; as an entrance, that is, on a Hfe of piety and 
 virtue." Discourses on Various Subjects, p. 302. 
 
 71. Dr. Towerson. — " One other particular there 
 is, wherein I have said the water of baptism to have 
 been intended as a sign; and that is in respect of that 
 manner of application, which was sometime used, I 
 mean the dipping or plunging the party baptized in it. 
 A signification which St. Paul will not suffer those 
 to forget, who have been acquainted with his Epis- 
 tles. For with reference to that manner of baptizing, 
 we find him afiirming, (Rom. vi. 4,) that we are 
 ' buried with Christ by baptism into death; that like as 
 Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the 
 Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.' 
 And again, (verse 5,) that ' if we have been planted 
 together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also 
 in the likeness of his resurrection.' To the same pur- 
 pose, or rather yet more clearly, doth that apostle dis- 
 course, where he tells us, (Col. ii. 12,) that as we are 
 ' buried with Christ in baptism,' so we do ' therein rise 
 also with him through the faith of the operation of 
 God, who hath raised him from the dead.' For what 
 is this but to say, That as the design of baptism was to 
 oblige men to conform so far to Christ's death and resur- 
 rection, as to die unto sin, and live again unto righte- 
 ousness; so it was performed by the ceremony ot im- 
 mersion, that the person immersed might, by that very 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. 155 
 
 ceremony, which was no obscure image of a sepulture, 
 be minded of the precedent death; as, in like manner, 
 by his coming again out of the water, of his rising from 
 that death to life, after the example of the Institutor 
 thereof?. . . .The thin^ signified bv the sacrament of 
 baptism, cannot otherwise be well represented, than by 
 an immersion; or, at least, by some more general way 
 of purification, than that of eftusion, or sprinkling. 
 For though the pouring, or sprinkling of a little water 
 upon the face, may suffice to represent an internal 
 washing, which seems to be the general end of Christ's 
 making use of the sacrament of baptism; yet can it 
 not be thought to represent such an eyitire washing, as 
 that of new-born infants was, and as baptism may seem 
 to have been intended for, because represented as the 
 lover of regeneration: That, though it do [not] require 
 an immersion, yet requiring such a general washing at 
 least, as may extend to the whole body; as other than 
 which cannot answer its type, nor yet that general, 
 though internal purgation, which baptism was intended 
 to represent. The same is to be said yet more upon the 
 account of our conforming to the death and resurrection 
 of Christ, which we learn from St. Paul, to have been 
 the design of baptism to signify. For though that 
 might, and was well enough represented, by the bap- 
 tized person's being buried in baptism, and then rising 
 out of it, yet can it not be said to be so, or at least 
 but very imperfectly, by the pouring out, or sprinkling 
 the baptismal water on him. But, therefore, as there 
 is so much the more reason to represent the rite of 
 immersion, as the only legitimate rite of baptism, 
 because the only one that can answer the ends of 
 its institution, and those things which were to be signi- 
 fied by it; so, especially if (as is well known, and un- 
 doubtedly of great force,) the general practice of the 
 primitive church was agreeable thereto, and the prac- 
 tice of the Greek church to this very day. For who 
 
156 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 can think either the one or the other Mould have been 
 so tenacious of so troublesome a rite, were it not that 
 they were well assured, as they of the primitive church 
 might very well be, of its being the only instituted 
 AND legitimate ONE?" Of the Sacram. of Bap. 
 part. iii. p. 51, 52, 53, 56, 57, 5S. 
 
 72. Bengehus. — " He that is baptized puts on Christ, 
 the second Adam; he is baptized, I say, into a whole 
 Christ, and therefore also into his death: and it is 
 like as if, in that very moment, Christ suffered, died, 
 and was buried for such a man; and such a man suf- 
 fered, died, and was buried with Christ." Gnomon, ad 
 Rom. vi. 3. 
 
 73. Bochartus. — " The plunging performed in bap- 
 tism, signifies a death to sin; and the emersion, a new 
 life." Opera, tom. i. p. 1029, edit. 1682. 
 
 74. Daille. — " In the primitive church, the greater 
 part of those that were baptized, being persons of 
 age, were unclothed, and then plunged into the water, 
 whence they immediately came forth;— whereby they 
 testified that they did put oflf the body of sin, the 
 habit of the first Adam, and buried it in the saving 
 waters of Jesus Christ, as in its mystical grave, and 
 came forth thence risen up to a new life." Sermons on 
 Epist. to Coloss. chap. ii. 12, p. '245. 
 
 75. Venema. — " It is generally agreed among di- 
 vines, that the communion of a believer with Christ 
 and the effects of his obedience, by which the guilt, 
 the pollution, and the punishment of sin are taken 
 away, and so the remission of sin, sanctification, and 
 glorification are conferred, are presented to view in 
 baptism; yet they do not sufficiently show the way 
 and manner in which that representation is made, 
 and frequently speak with but little consistency. If, 
 in baptism, the appearance of nothing but zvashing 
 offered itself to our consideration, the thing would be 
 easy. For seeing we are delivered from sin by the 
 
BLESSINGS REPRKSENTED BY IT. 157 
 
 obedience of Christ, that would be readily understood 
 by every one, as the cause of our purification, and as 
 represented by water, in which there is a cleansing 
 virtue ; especially, as the scripture usually comprehends 
 it under the emblem of water. But washing is neither 
 the only idea, nor, as I think, the principal one, of this 
 sacrament; but more truly that of suffocating, and of 
 bringing death on the flesh, an effect which water pro- 
 duces, seems here to be intended : as well, because the 
 apostle asserts it in express words, (Rom. vi. 3, 4; Col. 
 ii. 12,) as that baptism is elsewhere compared to the 
 deluge and the Red Sea, (1 Pet. iii. 21; 1 Cor. x. 1, 2.) 
 Why? Because in the former passage Peter calls bap- 
 tism avTiTVTiov, the antitype of the water of the deluge; 
 which word there, in a special and peculiar sense, 
 denotes a parallel; by which is declared, that the de- 
 luge and baptism depict the same spiritual thing, and 
 in a mystical representation answer one another: and, 
 lastly, because the apostle (1 Pet. iii. 21,) seems to 
 derive the idea of washing, from that power of killing 
 which there is in water. For the death of sin, and of 
 the flesh, really and properly consists in the washing 
 away of spiritual filth; and therefore is rightly com- 
 prehended under the appearance of putting to death. 
 When, therefore, Peter had compared baptism to the 
 deluge, and so had attributed to it the power of cleans- 
 ing; he immediately beholds in it crapKog uTroOea-iv pvirov, 
 a putting off the Jilth of the Jlesh. Farther: That the 
 idea of washing is not the first and the principal signi- 
 fication of baptism, plainly appears from the rite of 
 immersion; in which way it used to be administered 
 by the apostles and first Christians; for that leads us 
 to think, not so much of washing, as oi putting to death. 
 Once more: The phrase, laver of regeneratio7i, which 
 is used by Paul, (Tit. iii. 5,) does not so properly signify 
 washing, as renovation from death. 
 
 " Let us try, then, in this way to unfold the mystery. 
 
158 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 The water, as is manifest, both from the immersion 
 of Christ, and the comparison with the deluge and the 
 Red Sea, denotes what is called, the punishhig justice 
 of God; by which a sinner is not acquitted, without 
 the public sanctification of Jehovah's name, which is 
 usually denominated the wrath of God. Into this justice 
 Christ was immersed. He took it on himself, when 
 he was perfected by sufferings and put to death; by 
 which he not only bore, but placated the wrath of God. 
 So that, being freed from the sins which were laid upon 
 him, he rested in the sepulchre in peace; for the curse 
 was then taken from the earth. But he obtained a 
 more excellent sign of sin being expiated, and of justice 
 being satisfied, in his resurrection from the dead ; when 
 he was not only justified, but also obtained the whole 
 promised glory, which is his most complete emersion. 
 This is the baptism of Christ, concerning which he 
 speaks, (Matt. xx. 22;) and this was represented by the 
 baptism of water, that was administered to him by John. 
 This is the righteousness of Christ, accomplished by his 
 obedience and death ; by which, being released from a 
 charge of guilt, he received a right to the promised 
 blessings. Hence, farther, a judgment must be formed 
 concerning the baptism of believers ; seeing their com- 
 munion, not only with the righteousness of Christ, but 
 also with the manner of obtaining it, is, in a certain 
 way, signified and sealed; in which the mystery of 
 baptism consists. 
 
 " That this may a little more plainly appear, it must 
 be maintained, that the aforesaid communion with Christ 
 consists both in the imputation of his righteousness, as 
 it is usually called in the schools, and in a real com- 
 munication of it. The former, for the sake of Christ's 
 righteousness, confers justification by the gracious sen- 
 tence of God, and implies that believers were compre- 
 hended in their Sponsor; so that whatever Christ suf- 
 fered, they may be esteemed as having underwent. 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. 159 
 
 According to this benign interpretation, they are them- 
 selves reputed as immersed in the justice of God; and, 
 in Christ, they also possess a right of acceptance in a 
 more excellent manner than if they themselves had 
 obtained it: which great mystery of our faith is first 
 of all presented to view in baptism, and is made sure to 
 believers by a seal and pledge. . . .This, if I may so 
 speak, is our imputative immersion in the justice of God, 
 and emersion out of it; our death and resurrection, 
 which baptism exhibits to view." Dissertat. Sac. L ii. 
 c. xiv. §9, 10, 11, 12. — See also Dr. Watts's Hymns, 
 b. i. No. 122. Mr. Marchant's Exposit. of New Test, 
 on Col. ii. 12. Vander Waeyen Varia Sacra, in Gal. iii. 
 27, p. 84. H. Hulsii Comment, in Israel. Pris, Praerog. 
 p. 801. Mr. T. Bradbury's Duty and Doct. of Bap. 
 p. 83. Hist, of Popery, vol. i. p. 19^. 
 
 REFLECTIONS. 
 
 Reflect. I. Baptism being a gracious appointment 
 of God, it must have an important meaning; and as it 
 is a positive ordinance, the whole of its design must 
 be fixed by divine institution : for we have no more au- 
 thority to invent a signification for any rite of holy wor- 
 ship than vve have to appoint the rite itself. The design 
 of baptism, therefore, must be learned from the New Tes- 
 tament, and from such parts of that sacred volume as 
 have an immediate reference to it. See Chap. I. No. 2, 
 16, 20. 
 
 Were we divested of partiality and prepossession, 
 there is reason to conclude, that it would not be very dif- 
 ficult to discover the chief design of our Lord in his 
 positive appointments. The following words of Dr. 
 Owen are here worthy of notice. " This was a great 
 part of the imperfection of legal institutions, that they 
 taught the things which they signified and represented 
 obscurely, and the mind of God in them was not learned 
 but with much difficulty, . . .But all the ordinances and 
 
l60 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 institutions of the gospel do give light into, and exhibit 
 the things themselves unto the minds and faith of be- 
 livers. Hereon they discern the reasons and grounds of 
 their use and benefit ; whence our whole Avorship is 
 called our reasonable service, (Rom. xii. 1.)"* 
 
 That positive ordinances derive all their utility from 
 divine institution, and that it is of great importance to 
 know and comply wth the revealed intention of God in 
 their appointment, Paedobaptists have abundantly taught. 
 Thus Dr. Hunter, for instance : " Positive and arbitrary 
 institutions derive all their value and use, from a right 
 understanding of their meaning and the design of their 
 
 author.''^ Dr. Owen : " There is nothing in religion 
 
 that hath any efficacy for compassing an end, but it hath 
 it from God's appointment of it to that purpose. . . . God 
 may in his wisdom appoint and accept of ordinances 
 and duties unto one end, which he will refuse and reject 
 when they are applied unto another. . . .To do a thing 
 appointed unto an end, w ithout aiming at that end, is no 
 better than the not doing it at all ; in some cases much 
 worse.":}: Mr. Baxter: "We must not take liberty, 
 upon our own fancies, to add new ends to God's ordi- 
 nances :"§ nay, he represents the annexing of a new 
 design to the ordinance before us, as the inventing of a 
 new baptism. || To these declarations we cordially assent 
 without the least hesitation. 
 
 Reflect. II. These learned authors are almost una- 
 nimous in considering baptism as principally intended, 
 by the great Legislator, to represent the death, burial, 
 and resurrection of Christ; the communion his people 
 have with him in those momentous facts; and their in- 
 terest in the blessings thence resulting. To confirm and 
 illustrate which, they agree in applying the declarations 
 
 * On Heb. vii. 11, voJ. iii, p. 17 1. f Sacred Biography, 
 
 vol iii. p. 215. X Mortification of Sin, chap. iii. On Heb. x. 
 
 5— 10,and on Heb.ii.l. § Plain Scrip. Proof, p. 301, edit. 4th. 
 
 II Disputations of Right to Sac, p. 162. 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. l6l 
 
 of Paul, recorded in Rom. vi. 4, and Col. ii. 12. Now, 
 if such be the chief design of the ordinance ; if these 
 passages of holy writ be pertinently applied; and if there 
 be any correspondence between the sign and the things 
 that are signified by it, immersion must be the mode of 
 administration. Nay, supposing our purification from 
 sin by the blood of Christ were the first and princi- 
 pal thing intended and suggested by baptism, yet the 
 same consequence would naturally follow; for that 
 purification must be either partial, or complete. Not the 
 former, our opposers themselves being judges: it must, 
 therefore, be the latter. Of perfect purification, then, 
 baptism is either an expressive emblem, or it is not. If 
 not, why such a ritual service appointed in preference 
 to any other that might have exhibited the blessing in 
 a far more striking point of light ? To this reasoning 
 Pasdobaptist authors give attestation. Thus, for exam- 
 ple, Stapferus : " Between an arbitrary sign and the 
 thing signified, there may be an agreement, or similitude; 
 which is the reason of one sign being chosen rather 
 than another. And by how much the more a sign is 
 fitted to excite certain thoughts, and to represent the 
 thing signified, by so much the better, or more use- 
 ful, it is. Whence it follows, that the illustration of an 
 invisible thing, depends on the likeness there is be- 
 tween the SIGN and the spiritual object to he repre- 
 sented in the mind.''''* Mr. Blake : "They [sacraments] 
 
 are analogical signs, such as carry analogy and pro- 
 portion with the thing signified ; they have ever an 
 aptness in them for resemblance. That of Austin is fa- 
 mous : ' If sacraments carry no resemblance of the things 
 whereof they are sacraments, they are no sacraments 
 
 at all."'t Jacob. Laurentius : "In all sacraments 
 
 there ought to be some similitude, or analogy, between 
 
 * Institut. 'JCheolog. Polem. torn. i. cap. iii. § 1625. 
 f Covenant sealed^ p, 45. 
 VOL. 1. M 
 
}6^ DESIGN' OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 the sign and the thing signified."*— — Mastricht: "Si- 
 mihtude and analogy, between the sign and the thing 
 signified, are necessarily supposed in every sacrament. "t 
 — Charaiferus, when handling this particular, and having 
 produced the saying of Austin that is mentioned by Mr. 
 BJake, iiTunediately adds: "In which all divines have 
 acquiesced, as in an oracle." J— If in baptism, then, there 
 be an expressive emblem of perfect purification from 
 sin, immersion must be the mode of administration ; be- 
 cause nothing short of that represents a total washing. 
 I may here venture an appeal to the common sense of 
 mankind ; whether pouring or sprinkling a little water 
 on the face, or an immersion of the ivhole body, be better 
 adapted to excite the idea of an entire cleansing. See 
 No. 71. 
 
 Reflect. III. Dr. Addington tells us, that "the sup- 
 position of Paid's alluding here (Rom. vi. 3, 4,) to the 
 mode of immersion in baptism, as bearing a resemblance 
 to the burial and resurrection of Christ, is entirely 
 founded on a mistaken interpretation of the passage. 
 Without referring in the least to that, or any other mode 
 of administering the ordinance, Paul gives us an account 
 of the nature and design of it ; as figuring, not any 
 scenes through which our Redeemer passed, but that 
 great change on the heart of the true Christian convert,, 
 which is effected by the washing of regeneration. "§ If,, 
 then, the apostle gives " us an account of the nature'^ of 
 baptism as well as of its design, he must speak of bap- 
 tism itself; which cannot but include the mode of adr 
 ministration. This he does when representing it under 
 the notion of a burial with Christ. — Yet were we, in 
 opposition to these numerous and respectable authors, 
 to understand the passage as referring only to the digsign 
 of the ordinance, immersion would still be the })roper 
 
 * Dialog. Eucharist, cap. iv. § 51. f Theologia, 1. vii. 
 
 c. iii. § 8. X Panstrat. torn. iv. 1. i. c. xi. § 29. 
 
 § Christian Minist. Keas. p. 44, 45. 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. l63 
 
 mode of administration. For supposing, though far 
 froim granting, that Paul means only to give an account 
 of the ordinance, as figuring that great change on the 
 heart of a real convert ; yet, while it is allowed that he 
 speaks of this important change under the notion of a 
 death, a burial, and a resurrection; and while it is main- 
 tained that baptism is a Jigure of that change, we are 
 naturally led to conclude, that immersion is the only 
 suitable mode. What^^7/?'e, what ixsemhlance is there, 
 of a death, a burial, and a resurrection, in sprinkling a 
 few drops of water on the face of a person ? or, if there 
 be any similitude between the act and the things intended, 
 it is of that kind which Dr. Addington himself describes, 
 when he says : " A strong imagination, or a prejudiced 
 mind, may find an object, and then point out a resemblance 
 in many particulars; but no reader of judgment and cau- 
 tion will strain so obscure an allusion." * See Chap. II. 
 No. 1, 33, 36, 71, 75.— Mr. Henry having given a view of 
 the passage similar to that of Dr. Addington, Mr. Jenkins 
 replies: "A Quaker would thank him for the remark, 
 that our conformity to Christ lies not in the sign, but in 
 the thing siguified ; and prove from his own nords, that 
 this text does not intend water-baptism, but some in- 
 ward work so expressed; as also, that the Lord's supper 
 means no external ordinance, but an inward conformity 
 to Christ's death." f — The people called Quakers, when 
 commenting on the passage before us, express themselves 
 in the following manner. William Dell: " You see, 
 that the same baptism of the Spirit that makes us die 
 with Christ, doth also quicken us into his resurrection, 
 and deprives us of our own life; not that we may re- 
 main dead, but that it may communicate to us a better 
 
 life than our own, even the life of Christ himself "J 
 
 John Gratton : " Can any man conclude, that Paul 
 here speaks of water-baptism ? Is it not plainly said, 
 
 * Ut supra, p. 37. f Inconsistency of Infant Sprinkling 
 
 with Christian Bap. p. 98. + Select Works, p. 404, 405. 
 
 iM 2 
 
164 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 into Christ? Not into water, but into Christ, into 
 
 death."* -Robert Barclay considers Rom. vi. 3, 4; 
 
 Gal. iii. 27 ; and Col. ii. 12, as expressing the effects of 
 what he calls the baptism of the Spirit, t So nearly 
 does the sense of the passage, according to Dr. Ad- 
 dington, coincide with that of the Quakers. We may 
 therefore conclude, that whether baptism was intended 
 to represent a purification from sin, by the blood of 
 Christ; or the death of the old, and the quickening of 
 the new man, by the Spirit of God; or the death, burial, 
 and resurrection of our divine Sponsor ; immersion is 
 the only proper way of its administration. By this mode 
 of proceeding, all those ideas are fully and strongly 
 expressed ; which cannot be affirmed of pouring or 
 sprinkling, because neither the one nor the other is 
 adapted to the allusions in the sacred text. Besides, it 
 is highly probable, as Bp. Hoadly has well observed, 
 that if pouring or sprinkling had been practised in the 
 apostolic times, " we should never have so much as 
 heard of dying, and rising again,'''' in baptism. See 
 No. 66. 
 
 Reflect. IV. Witsius has observed, that there is 
 little or no analogy between wafers, which are used in 
 the holy supper by Roman Catholics, and the bread 
 which our Lord appointed for that purpose.;}: It has 
 also been maintained, that real bread should not only be 
 used, but broken, at the Lord's table, to preserve and 
 exhibit the intended analogy. With reference to this, 
 Heidegger says : " Between the breaking of bread and 
 the criicifiiion of the body of Christ, there is an analogy, 
 or likeness; which analogy sufficiently demonstrates the 
 necessity of break'ing the bread in the sacred supper." § 
 So, likewise, various eminent Paedobaptists have pleaded 
 for the baptismal immersion, to prevent the gracious 
 
 * Life of John Gratton, p. 171, edit. 1720. 
 
 f Apology, proposition xii. § 4. | CEcon. 1. iv. c. xvii. § 7 • 
 
 § Corp. Theolog;. loc. xxv. § 83. 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. l65 
 
 design of our Lord in the ordinance from being obscured 
 and lost. Thus Wolfius: " There have been some 
 learned Christians, who were of opinion, that the rite 
 of plunging should be recalled into practice, lest the mys- 
 tical signification of baptism sJwuld he entirely lost.'"* 
 Sir Norton KnatchbuU observes, that the true and genuine 
 reason of baptism being appointed " is almost lost,'' by 
 the change of immersion into pouring or sprinkling.'!" 
 The very famous Buddeus, after having given a sum- 
 mary view of the arguments for immersion, from Zelt- 
 nerus, adds : " He who accurately considers these things, 
 will be of opinion, that they are by no means to be 
 blamed, who, though they do not reject sprinkling, yet 
 wish that immersion had never been deserted; or, if pos- 
 sible, that it might be restored : among whom is Spenerus, 
 nay, Luther himself. . . .That all doubts and scruples 
 may be removed, the advice of Zeltnerus, a very 
 learned divine of Altorf, should certainly be received ; 
 who persuades to the use of a larger affusion, that by so 
 doing the want of immersion may be compensated.";); — 
 Now, reader, what think you of these declarations from 
 the pens of Psedobaptists, whose characters are high in 
 the learned world, and in the Protestant churches ? 
 Could they have spoken more strongly in our favour, 
 without pronouncing pouring and sprinkling a mere nul- 
 lity? What but evidence of the strongest kind could in- 
 duce persons of such a character implicitly to condemn 
 their OMn practice, as insufficient to answer the design of 
 baptism? The Papists, indeed, may as well pretend that 
 the bread, or the wine, used alone at the Lord's table, 
 fully represents the design of the ordinance, as for any 
 to say that the intention of baptism is completely an- 
 swered by pouring or sprinkling a few drops of water on 
 any part of the body; and as well might Franciscus 
 (a Sancta Clara) reconcile the Thirty-nine Articles to 
 
 * Curse^ ad Rom. vi. 4. f Annotat. ad iPet, iii.21. 
 
 X Theolog. Dogmat. ]. V. c.i, § v. p. 1055. 
 
}66 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OU Till: 
 
 the canons of the Council of Trent,* as any of our 
 brethren accommodate Rom. vi. 3, 4, and Col. ii. 12, to 
 their own practice. Dr. Nichols, in defiance of com- 
 mon sense, when defending the custom of kneeling at 
 the Lord's table, asserts, that the Dissenters themselves, 
 " by their posture of sitting, no more represent a feast, 
 than we [of the church of England] do by kneeling :"" '\ 
 and it is with equal propriety pretended by some, that a 
 death, a burial, and a resurrection, are exhibited to view, 
 as well by pouring or sprinkling, as by immersion. 
 
 Hence it is that some of those learned Psedobaptists, 
 produced in the preceding pages, finding it hard, if not 
 impossible, to reconcile the obvious and genuine mean- 
 ing of Rom. vi. 3, 4, and Col. ii. 12, with the natural 
 import of their own practice, manifestly speak, as if the 
 ordinance of baptism represented one thing in the apos- 
 tolic times, and another now. See No. 7, 42. — What can 
 be the reason of this ? If there be only one baptism, as 
 the apostle asserts ; and if that institution be not altered 
 since the time of Paul, it must have the very same sig- 
 nification, and that in the same degree; because it must 
 represent the same objects, with an equal perspicuity, 
 and in the same way, as when administered by that am- 
 bassador of Christ. It must be entirely the same, 
 whether practised in Judea, or in Britain ; in the first, 
 or in the eighteenth century. How lamentable it is to 
 think, that such great men as H. Alting, F. Turrettin, 
 and various others, should sacrifice thus to the love of 
 hypothesis ! 
 
 Reflect. V. Some of these eminent Paedobaptists, 
 far from viewing the metaphorical baptism of which the 
 apostle speaks, (1 Cor. x. 2,) as militating against the 
 necessity of immersion; represent it as conveying the 
 same leading idea with Rom. vi. 4, and Col. ii. 12; which 
 latter passages are undoubtedly much in our favour. 
 
 * See Dr. Waterland's Importance of Doct. of Trinity, p. 211. 
 f In Mr, Peirce's Vindicat. of Dissenter?^ part iii, p,206. 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. l67 
 
 See No. 7, 65, 75.— To the opinion of Turrettin, Knatch- 
 bull, and Venema, on 1 Cor. x. 2, we may add the sen- 
 timents of several others, whose characters are high in 
 the learned world. Grotius, on the passage, expresses 
 himself thus : " The cloud hung over the heads of the 
 Israelites ; and so the water is over those that are bap- 
 tized. The sea surrounded them on each side; and so 
 the water encompasses those that are baptized." — Wit- 
 sius, when remarking on the text, speaks to this effect : 
 " How were the Israelites baptized in the cloud, and in 
 the sea, seeing they were neither immersed in the sea, 
 nor wetted by the cloud? It is to be considered, that 
 the apostle here uses the term baptism in a figurative 
 sense; yet there is some agreement even in the external 
 sign. The sea is water, and a cloud differs but little 
 from water. The cloud hung over their heads ; and so 
 the water is over those that are baptized .... The sea sur- 
 rounded them on each side; and so the water, in regard 
 to those that are baptized.'"^ — Braunius, in perfect agree- 
 ment with No. 7, 65, 75, says: "The Israelites are said 
 to be baptized in the cloud afid in the sea; and it repre- 
 sented a death, and a resurrection ( 1 Pet. iii. 2 1 ; Rom. vi. 
 3, 4.t)" — Still more fully Mr. Gataker : "The going 
 down of the IsraeHtes into the bottom and middle of the 
 sea^ and their coming up from thence to dry ground, have 
 a great agreement with the rite of Christian baptism, as 
 it was administered in the first times : seeing the persons 
 to be baptized went down into the water, and again 
 came up out of it; of which going down and coming up, 
 express mention is made in the baptism of the Ethiopiah 
 eunuch, (Acts viii. 38, 39.) Nay, farther, as in the 
 Christian rite, when persons are baptized, they are over- 
 whelmed, and) as it were, buried in water, and seem in a 
 manner to be buried with Christ; and again, when they 
 emerge, they arise as out of a sepulchre, and are repre- 
 
 * (Econ. Foed. l.iv. ex. § 11. Vid.ejusdemMiscell. Sac. torn. ii. 
 p. 529. t Doctfina Foed. loc. xviii. ex. § 7. 
 
168 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, OR THE 
 
 sented as risen again with Christ, (Rom. vi. 4, 5 ; Col.ii. 
 12 ;) so the Israelites might seem, when passing through 
 the waters of the sea, that were higher than their heads, 
 to be overwhelmed, and, as it were, buried; and again 
 to emerge and arise, when they escaped to the oppo- 
 site shore."* Mr. Poole's Continuators: "Others 
 
 most probably think, that the apostle useth this term 
 [baptism] in regard of the great analogy betwixt bap- 
 tism, as it was then used; the persons going down 
 into the waters, and being dipped in them, and the Is- 
 raehtes going down into the sea, the great receptacle of 
 water : though the waters at that time were gathered on 
 heaps, on either side of them, yet they seemed buried in 
 the water, as persons in that age were when they were 
 baptized." Dr. Hammond : The cloud was " a con- 
 cave body over their heads, and so coming down to the 
 ground like wings inclosing and encompassing them on 
 every side — and dry ground being left them in the midst 
 of the channel, and the sea encompassing them on every 
 side, before them, behind them, on the right hand, and 
 on the left, and so the cloud environed them in like 
 
 manner; the sea environed them also." Dr. Whitby: 
 
 " They were covered tvith the sea on both sides, (Exod. 
 xiv. 22.) So that both the cloud and the sea had some 
 resemblance to our being covered with water in baptism. 
 Their going into the sea, resembled the ancient rite of 
 going into the water; and their coming out of it, their 
 
 rising up out of the water." Hulsius : " Baptism, and 
 
 indeed immersion in the sea, continued for a time; but 
 
 they were baptized longer under the cloud. "f Bp. 
 
 Patrick: "God, by the covering of the cloud, took them 
 under his wings and protection, owning them for his 
 people; and they, passing through the heart of the sea, 
 the waters enclosing them round about, did profess to 
 trust in God, and there to drown all the thoughts of 
 
 * Adversar. Miscel. cap. iv. 
 
 f Coniiment. in Israel. Prise. I'rcerog. dissert, ii. § "25. 
 
BLESSINGS REPRESENTED BY IT. 1 69 
 
 Ecrypt, which sometimes they feared, and sometimes they 
 loved over much."* — — Mr. Burkitt: " The Israelites 
 are here said to be baptised in the cloud, and in the sea: 
 that is, the cloud which overshadowed them, did some- 
 times bedew and sprinkle them; and the Red Sea, 
 through which they passed, had its waters gathered into 
 two heaps, one on the right hand, and the other on the 
 left, betwixt which the Israelites passed, and in their 
 passage seemed to be buried in the waters; as persons 
 in that age were put under the water, when they M'ere 
 baptized: and thus were Israel baptized in the cloud 
 and in the sea." 
 
 Other learned Paedobaptists there are, who, when 
 commenting on the text, do not seem to have the least 
 suspicion of its beipg inimical to the necessity of immer- 
 sion. For instance: Camero, on the passage, says: 
 " How were the Israelites baptized in the cloud and in the 
 sea? for they were neither dipped in the sea, nor w-etted 
 
 by the cloud." Bengelius: "They were baptized in the 
 
 cloud, inasmuch as they were under it; and in the sea, 
 seeing they passed through il : but neither the cloud nor 
 the sea wetted, much less immersed them, (though some 
 conjecture, from Psalm Ixviii. 9, and cv. 39, that a mira- 
 culous rain fell from the cloud,) nor is the appellation, 
 baptism, extant in the narrative of Moses. Neverthe- 
 less, Paul very agreeably denominates it thus, because a 
 cloud and the sea are both of a watery nature; there- 
 fore Paul says nothing of the fiery pillar: and because 
 the cloud and the sea withdrew the fathers from sight 
 and returned them, almost in a similar manner as the 
 
 water does those that are baptized." 1[ Marckius : " The 
 
 Israelites were covered with the cloud from above under 
 the conduct of Moses, so that they were as if immersed 
 in those heavenly waters : and this was intended, not to 
 prefigure the future external baptism of water in the 
 
 * Discourse of the Lord's Supper, p. 417^418. 
 f Gnomon^ in loc. 
 
170 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, ETC. 
 
 Christian church, as many, both ancients and moderns, 
 have rashly thought; but to intimate the same grace of 
 Christ which baptism now seals to us.*" See Chap. IV. 
 No. 20. — Now, either these learned authors were ex- 
 tremely inadvertent, or they were very generous to their 
 opponents, in giving up an argument well adapted to 
 defend their own practice; or our opposers proceed on 
 a gross mistake, when they plead this passage against 
 us. Besides, as every one sees the term baptized is here 
 used merely by way of allusion; and as the allusive 
 acceptation of a word should never be made the standard 
 of its literal and proper sense; it must be very incon- 
 gruous to produce this passage in favour of sprinkling, 
 and shows great poverty of argument in defence of the 
 common practice. See Chap. II. Reflect. VIII. 
 
 Reflect. VI. If then so many of the most eminent 
 Paedobaptists agree, that the term baptism, properly 
 speaking, signifies immersion; and if, to so great a de- 
 gree, they farther unite in declaring, that the principal 
 facts represented by the ordinance are, the death, burial, 
 and resurrection of Christ, as the substitute of his chosen 
 people; their communion with him in those facts, and 
 their interest in the blessings procured by them; we have 
 reason to conclude, on their own principles and con- 
 cessions, that there neither is, nor can be, any valid plea 
 for pouring or sprinkling, as a proper mode of adminis- 
 tration. This must be the case, except it should appear 
 on farther enquiry, that the apostles and first Christians 
 did not practise what the name of the ordinance is 
 allowed to imply, and the design of the institution seems 
 to require. We must therefore consider, in the follow- 
 ing chapter, what some of the most learned Paedobap- 
 tists have to say on that part of the subject. 
 
 * Bib. Exercitat. exercit.viii. § 12. 
 
PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, &C. 171 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 The Practice of John the Baptist, of the Apostles, and 
 of the Church in succeeding Ages, in regard to the 
 Manner of administei^ing the Ordinance of Baptism. 
 
 \_N. B. Candour demands we should here acknow- 
 ledge, that though these numerous and learned authors 
 have expressed themselves in the following manner ; yet 
 many of them insist upon it as highly probable, that the 
 apostles did sometimes administer baptism by pouring 
 or sprinkling.] 
 
 WiTsius. — " It is certain that both John the Bap- 
 tist, and the disciples of Christ, ordinarily practised im- 
 mersion ; whose example was followed by the ancient 
 church, as Vossius hath shown, by producing many tes- 
 timonies from the Greek and Latin writers. Disp. I. 
 de Baptismo, thes. vi., and also Hoornbeek, de Bap- 
 tismo Veterum, sect, iv." (Econ. Foed. 1. iv. c. xvi. § 13. 
 
 2. L'Enfant. — " ' In the water — in the Holy Ghost.' 
 These w-ords do very well express the ceremony of bap- 
 tism, which was at first performed by plunging the 
 whole body in water, as also the copious effusion of 
 the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost." Note on 
 Matt. iii. 11. Eng. translat. 
 
 3. Anonymous.—" If we have regard to the man- 
 ner in which the idea of baptism is naturally adapted to 
 the situation of a guilty creature, zealous to express his 
 abhorrence of sin ; or to the general practice of the 
 Jewish, as well as other eastern nations ; to the example 
 of our Lord, and of his disciples; and to the most 
 plain and obvious construction of the Greek language ; 
 we shall be inclined to believe that infant sprinkling is 
 not an institution of Christianity, but a deviation from 
 the original ritCj which was performed by dipping, or 
 
172 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 plunging into water.... The arguments by which the 
 Pgedobaptists support their practice and doctrine, appear 
 to us to be so forced and violent, that we are of opinion, 
 nothing but the general prevalence of infant sprinkling 
 could have so long supported it." English Review, for 
 Nov. 1783, p. 351. 
 
 4. Gurtlerus. — " The action in this element of wa- 
 ter, is immersion ; which rite continued for a long time 
 in the Christian church, until, in a very late age, it was 
 changed into sprinkling : of M'hich an example is hardly 
 to be found in ancient history, except what relates to the 
 clinics, or sick persons, who, when confined to their beds, 
 were to be initiated by the sign of the covenant of grace. 
 Hence baptized persons are said to have ' descended 
 into the water,' and to be ' buried with Christ into death,' 
 (Matt. iii. 16; Acts viii. 38; Rom. vi. 4;) for they 
 who are immersed in water are covered with it, and as it 
 were buried in it, until they arise out of it." Institut. 
 Theolog. cap. xxxiii. § 117, 118. 
 
 5. Bp. Davenant. — '' In the ancient church, they 
 not only sprinkled, but immersed those whom they bap- 
 tized." Expos. Epist. ad Colos. in cap. ii. 12. 
 
 6. Pictetus. — " As to the manner of administering 
 baptism, it was usual in ancient times for the whole 
 body to be immersed in water; as appears from Matt. iii. 
 6, 16; John iii. 23; and yVcts viii. 38. This rite might 
 be used in those warm countries ; and it must be con- 
 fessed, that such a rite most happily represented that 
 grace by which our sins are, as it were, drowned, and we 
 raised again from the abyss of sin." Theolog. Christ. 
 1. xiv. c. iv. § 17. Genev. 1696. 
 
 7. Dr. Robert Newton. — " It must be confessed, that 
 in the primitive times, and in those hot countries where 
 the gospel was first [jreached, baptism for the most part 
 ■was administered by dipping or plunging the person 
 baptized into water. . . .This ceremony of washing with 
 water was the usual way among the Jews of receiving 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 173 
 
 proselytes — and from thence it was introduced by our 
 Saviour into his church." Pract. Exposit. of Catechism, 
 p. 294, Q95. 
 
 8. Piscator. — " 'T'^ara TroXXa, signifies ma7iy rivers; 
 as vhffip, in the singular number, denoted the river Jor- 
 dan. This is mentioned to signify the ceremony of bap- 
 tism which John used ; that is, immersing the whole 
 body of a person standing in the river. Whence Christ, 
 being, baptized of John in Jordan, is said to ascend out 
 of the water^ (Matt, iii.) The same manner was ob- 
 served by Philip, (Acts viii. 38.)" Ad Job. iii. 23, in 
 Mr. Henry Lawrence's Treatise of Bap. chap. v. p. 64. 
 
 9. Abp. Seeker. — " Burying, as it were, the person 
 baptized in the water, and raising him out of it again, 
 without question, was anciently the more usual method : 
 on account of which St. Paul speaks of baptism, as re- 
 presenting both the death, and burial, and resurrection 
 of Christ, and what is grounded on them, our being dead 
 and buried to sin, renouncing it, and being acquitted of 
 it ; and our rising again to walk in newness of life." 
 Lectures on the Catechism, lect. xxxv. 
 
 10. Mastricht — " The sign representing, or the ele- 
 ment in baptism, is water ; — the sign applying, is wash- 
 ing, — whether it be performed by immersion, (Matt. iii. 
 6, 16; John iii. 23; Acts viii. 38,) which only was 
 used by the apostles and primitive churches ; because it 
 is not only more agreeable in the warm eastern countries, 
 but also more significant, (Rom. vi. 3, 4, 5 ;) or whe- 
 ther it be performed by sprinkling, which is not destitute 
 of its foundation and analogy, (1 Pet. i. 2 ; Heb. x. 22; 
 compare Isa. Hi. 15, and Ezek. xxxvi. 25,) and is more 
 agreeable in these countries." Theologia, 1. vii. c. iv. § Q. 
 
 11. Calvin. — " From these words, (John iii. 23,) it 
 may be inferred, that baptism was administered by John 
 and Christ, by plunging the whole body under water 
 .... Here we perceive how baptism was administered 
 among the ancients ; for they immersed the whole body 
 
174' PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 ro water. Now it is the prevailing practice for a minis- 
 ter only to sprinkle the body or the head. In Joan. iii. 23 ; 
 Comment, in Act. viii. 38. 
 
 12. Spanhemius. — "To be baptized is denominated 
 by Paul, a being buried, according to the ancient man- 
 ner of baptizing. For immersion is a kind of burial ; 
 and emersion, a resurrection, to which the apostle alludes. 
 Col. ii. 12. So Christ, being baptized, went up out of 
 the watery (Matt. iii. 16.) The same is related concern- 
 ing the Ethiopian eunuch, (Acts viii. 38.)" Dubiorum 
 Evang. pars. iii. dub. xxiv. § 2. 
 
 13. Vitringa. — "The act of baptizing, is the im- 
 mersion of believers in water. This expresses the force 
 of the word. Thus also it was performed by Christ and 
 the apostles." Aphorismi Sanct. Theolog. aph. 884. 
 
 14. Bp. Patrick. — " They [the primitive Christians] 
 put oif their old clothes, and stript themselves of their 
 garments ; then they were immersed all over, and buried 
 in the water." Discourse of the Lord's Supper, p, 421. 
 
 15. Marloratus. — " From these words (John iii. 23,) 
 it may be gathered, that baptism was performed by John 
 and Christ, by plunging of the whole body." Comment, 
 ad Joan. iii. 23. 
 
 16. Mr. Stackhouse. — " The observation of the 
 Greek church, in relation to this matter [the baptism of 
 
 jj Christ] is this : That he who ascended out of the water, 
 
 must first descend down into it ; and consequently, that 
 baptism is to be performed, not by sprinkling, but by 
 "washing the body. And indeed, he must be strangely 
 ignorant of the Jewish rites of baptism who seems to 
 doubt of this ; since, to the due performance of it, they 
 required the immersion of the whole body to such a de- 
 gree of nicety, that if any dirt VAas upon it, that hindered 
 . the water from coming to the part, they thought the ce- 
 remony not rightly done. The Christians, no doubt, 
 took this rite from the Jews, and followed them in their 
 manner of performing it. Accordingly, several authors 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 175 
 
 bave shown, that we read no where in scripture of any 
 one's being baptized, but by immersion ; and from the 
 acts of councils and ancient rituals have proved, that 
 this manner of immersion continued (as much as pos- 
 sible) to be used for thirteen hundred years after Christ. 
 But it is much to be questioned, whether the prevalence 
 of custom, and the over fondness of parents, will, in 
 these cold climates especially, ever suffer it to be re^- 
 stored." History of the Bib. b. viii. chap. i. p. 1234, 
 1235, Note. See also Dr. Whitby, on Matt. iii. \6. 
 
 17. Mr. Burkitt. — " Observe the manner of the 
 administration of baptism to the eunuch ; he went down 
 into the water, and was baptized by Philip. In those 
 hot countries it was usual so to do, and we do nol op- 
 pose the lawfulness of dipping in some cases,, but the 
 necessity of dipping in all cases." Expos. Notes., oro 
 Acts viii. 38. 
 
 18. Mr. John Wesley. — " Mary Welsh, aged eleven' 
 days, was baptized according to the custom of the first 
 church, and the rule of the church of England, by im- 
 mersion. The child was ill then, but recovered fromi 
 that hour ' Buried with him ; alluding to the an- 
 cient manner of baptizing by immersion." Extract of 
 Mr. J. Wesley's Journal, from his embarking for Georgia, 
 p. 11, edit 2nd; Note on Rom. vi. 4. 
 
 IS. Confession of Helvetia. — " Baptism was insti- 
 tuted and consecrated by God ; and the first that bap- 
 tized was John, who dipped Christ in the water, in Jor- 
 dan. ' Harmony of Confess, p. 3^5. 
 
 20., Zanchius. — " The ancient church used to im- 
 merse those that were baptized. Thus Christ went 
 down into Jordan and was baptized; as also others that 
 were baptized by John. Of this thing, and of immer- 
 sion, the passage of the people through the midst of the 
 sea was a type; concerning which the apostle speaks, 
 1 Cor. X. 2. 'They were baptized.,' says he, ' in the 
 sea.'" Opera, tom. vi. p, 217. 
 
176 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 21. Hoornbeekius. — " We do not deny that, in 
 the first examples of persons baptized, they went into 
 the water and were immersed." Socin. Confut. 1. iii. 
 c. ii. sect. i. tom. iii. p. 268. 
 
 22. Daille. — " It was a custom heretofore in the 
 ancient church, to plunge those they baptized over head 
 and ears in the water. . . .This is still the practice, both 
 of the Greek and the Russian church, even at this very 
 day." Right Use of the Fathers, b. ii. p. 148. 
 
 25. Salmasius. — " The ancients did not baptize 
 otherwise than by immersion, either once, or thrice." 
 Apud Witsium, (Econ. Feed. 1. iv. c. xvi. § 13. 
 
 24. jMr. Bower. — " Baptism by immersion, was un- 
 doubtedly the apostolical practice, and was never dis- 
 pensed with by the church, except in case of sickness, 
 or when a sufficient quantity of water could not be had. 
 In both these cases baptism by aspersion, or sprinkling, 
 was allowed, but in no other." Hist of the Popes, vol. ii. 
 p. 110, Note. See also p. 121, Note. 
 
 25. Mr. Poole's Continuators. — " A great part of 
 those who went out to hear John were baptized, that is, 
 dipped in Jordan. .. .It is true, the first baptisms of 
 which we read in holy writ, were by dippings of the per- 
 sons baptized. It was in a hot country, where it might 
 be at any time without the danger of persons' lives ; 
 where it may be, we judge it reasonable, and most resem- 
 bling our burial with Christ by baptism iuto death : but 
 we cannot think it necessary, for God loveth mercy rather 
 than sacrifice ; and the thing signified by baptism, viz. 
 the washing away the soufs sins with the blood of Christ, 
 is in Scripture expressed to us by pouring and sprinkling, 
 
 (Ezek. xxxvi. 25 ; Heb. xii. 14; 1 Pet. i. 2) It is 
 
 from this (John iii. 23,) apparent, that both Christ 
 and John baptized by dipping the body in water ; else 
 they need not have sought places where had been a 
 great plenty of water. . . .He [Paul] seems here (Rom. 
 vi. 4,) to allude to the manner of baptizing in those 
 
THE CHITRCH IN FO LLOM' I XC; AGf.S. 177 
 
 warm eastern countries, which was to dip, or plunge the 
 party baptized ; and, as it were, to bury him for a while 
 under water. See the Uke phrase, Col. ii. 12." An- 
 notations on Matt. iii. 6, and xxviii. 19, 20; John iii. 2 1 ; 
 Rom. vi. 4. 
 
 26. Ravaneilas. — " In the first institution of bap- 
 tism, when adult persons were chiefly baptized, and that 
 in a warm country, immersion was used ; as appears 
 from Matt. iii. 16 ; Acts viii. 36, 38, 39 ; Rom. vi. 4, 5. 
 But in the present age, in which infants are generally 
 baptized, and that in cold countries, aspersion is prac- 
 tised, according to the law of charity, yet without any 
 injury to the nature of the sacrament." Bibliotheca, 
 sub voce, Baptismus. Genev. 1652. 
 
 27. Marckius. — " The action to be performed in 
 the administration of baptism, is washing the body with 
 water; which we think is rightly done, I. by immersion. 
 
 (1) As in that act there is the greatest washing of the 
 whole body. To signify which, the word is therefore 
 
 (2) most frequently used. (3) It was commonly prac- 
 tised by John the Baptist, the disciples of Christ, 
 (Matt. iii. 6, 16; John iii. 23; Acts viii. 38,) and the 
 first Christians; and (4) to which reference is had, 
 Rom. vi. 3, 4; Gal. iii. 27; Col. ii. 12." Compend, 
 Theolog. Christ, cap. xxx. § 11. Vid. ejusdem Bib. 
 Exercitat.j exercit. xxvii. § 2, 3. 
 
 28. Mosheim. — " The exhortations of this respec- 
 table messenger [John the Baptist] were not without 
 effect; and those who, moved by his solemn admo- 
 nitions, had formed the resolution of correcting their 
 evil dispositions and amending their lives, were initiated 
 into the kingdom of the Redeemer by the ceremony of 
 immersion, or baptism, (Matt. iii. 6; John i. 22). . . . 
 The sacrament of baptism was administered in this [the 
 second] century, without the public assemblies, in places 
 appointed and prepared for that purpose, and was per- 
 formed by immersion of the whole body in the baptismal 
 
 VOL. I. TV 
 
178 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 font. . . .Those adult persons, that desire to be baptized 
 [among the collegiants] receive the sacrament of bap- 
 tism, according to the ancient and primitive manner of 
 celebrating that institution, even by immersion.'' Eccles. 
 Hist. cent. i. part i. chap. iii. § 3 ; cent. ii. part ii. 
 chap. iv. § 8 ; and cent. xvii. sect. ii. partii. chap, vii, § 1. 
 
 29. Bp. Taylor. — " The custom of the ancient 
 churches was not sprinkling, but immersion ; in pursu- 
 ance of the sense of the word [baptize] in the com- 
 mandment, and the example of our blessed Saviour. 
 Now this was of so sacred account in their esteem, that 
 they did not account it lawful to receive him into the 
 clergy, who had been only sprinkled in his baptism, as 
 we learn from the Epistle of Cornelius to Fabius of 
 Antioch, apud Euseb. lib. vi. cap. xliii." Ductor Du- 
 bitantium, b. iii. chap. iv. rule xv. p. 644. 
 
 30. CHgnetus. — " In the primitive times, persons 
 baptized were entirely immersed in water. Thus Christ 
 was baptized, as we are informed Matt. iii. 16, where it 
 is said that Christ ' went up out of the water ;' for 
 a coming out, supposes a going in. To which form of 
 baptizing Paul seems to have referred, (Rom. vi. 4 ; 
 Col. ii. 12,) where he says, that ' we are buried with 
 Christ by baptism :' for a death and burial are better 
 expressed by immersion, than by sprinkling." In The- 
 saur. Disputat. Sedan, tom. i. p. 769, 770. 
 
 31. Mr. Doutrin. — " How is this [baptismal] water 
 administered to the baptized ? Formerly it was done by 
 dipping quite in; but in our climate only by sprinkling." 
 Scheme of Div. Truths, chap. xxii. quest. 24. 
 
 32. Mr. David ]\Iartin. — " As baptism was per- 
 formed by immersion, or plunging the entire person in a 
 great depth of water, Jesus Christ has here (Mark x. 38,) 
 used this expression in the same sense as the prophets 
 have mentioned gulplis and great waters, metaphorically 
 to represent great afflictions." Note sur Marc. x. 38. 
 
 33. Dr. Priestley. — '' This rite appears to have 
 
 \ 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 179 
 
 been generally, though probably not always, performed 
 by dipping the whole body in water .... It is certain 
 that in very early times there is no particular mention 
 made of any person being baptized by sprinkling only, 
 or a partial application of water to the body." Hist. 
 Corrupt, vol. ii. p. 66, 67. 
 
 34. Burmannus.— " Immersion w^as used by the 
 Jews, the apostles, and the primitive church, especially 
 in warm countries. To this various forms of speaking 
 used by the apostles refer, (Rom. vi. 3, 4; Col. ii. 12; 
 Gal. iii. 27.) But in the west, and colder parts of the 
 world, sprinkhng prevailed." Synops. Theolog. torn. ii. 
 loc. xliii. c. vi. § 9- 
 
 35. Mr. John Trapp. — " There were, saith one, 
 many ceremonies in baptism used in the primitive church; 
 viz. putting off old clothes, drenching in water, so as to 
 be buried in it, putting on new clothes at their coming 
 out, to which Paul alludeth in these words." Commen- 
 tary on Col. ii. 12. 
 
 36. Grotius. — " That baptism used to be performed 
 by immersion, and not by pouring, appears both from 
 the proper signification of the word, and the places cho- 
 sen for the administration of the rite, (John iii. 23 ; 
 Acts viii. 38;) and also from the many allusions of the 
 apostles, which cannot be referred to sprinkling, (Rom. vi. 
 3, 4 ; Col. ii. 12.)" Apud Polum, Synops. ad Matt. iii. 6. 
 
 37. Castalio and Camerarius. — ''And were baptized; 
 that is, they were immersed in water." Apud Poll 
 Synopsin, ad Matt. iii. 6. 
 
 38. Beza. — " Ve have put on Christ — This phrase 
 seems to proceed from the ancient custom of plunging 
 the adult, in baptism." Annotat. ad Gal. iii. 27. 
 
 39. Mr. Bingham. — " The ancients thought that 
 immersion, or burying under water, did more lively re- 
 present the death, and burial, and resurrection of Christ, 
 as well as our own death unto sin, and rising again unto 
 righteousness; and the divesting or unclothing of the 
 
 N % 
 
180 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 person to be baptized, did also represent the putting off 
 the body of sin, in order to put on the new man, which 
 is created in 7is!'hteous??ess and true holiness .... Persons 
 thus divested, or unclothed, were usuall}' baptized by 
 immersion, or dipping of their whole bodies under water 
 . . . .There are a great many passages in the epistles of 
 St. Paul, which plainly refer to this custom ; as this was 
 the original apostolical practice, so it continued to be 
 the universal practice of the church for many ages, upon 
 the same symbolical reasons as it was first used by the 
 apostles. .. .It appears from Epiphanius and others, 
 that almost all heretics, who retained any baptism, re- 
 tained immersion also.... The only heretics against 
 whom this charge [of not baptizing by a total immersion] 
 is brought, were the Eunomians, a branch of the Arians." 
 Origin. Eccles. b. xi. chap. xi. § 1, 4. 
 
 40. Buddeus. — " Concerning baptism, it is particu- 
 larly to be observed, that in the apostolic church it was 
 performed by immersion into water : which, not now to 
 mention other things, is manifest from this : The apostle 
 seeks an image, in this immersion, of the death and bu- 
 rial of Christ, and of mortifying the old man and raising 
 up of the new, (Rom. vi. 3, 4.) There are, indeed, 
 some authors who think otherwise, and contend that 
 sprinkling was practised in the apostolic church : to 
 convince us of which. Dr. Lightfoot has left no stone 
 unturned. But what may be said in answer to his ar- 
 guments, has already appeared in my Institut. Theolog. 
 Dogmat. 1. v. c. i. § 5." Ecclesia Apostolica, cap. vii. 
 p. 825, 826. 
 
 41. Heidanus. — "That John the Baptist and the 
 apostles immersed, there is no doubt, (Matt. iii. 6, ](); 
 John iii. 23 ; Acts viii. 38;) whose example the ancient 
 church followed, as is most evident from the testimo- 
 nies of the fathers." Corp. Theol. Christ, loc. xiv. 
 tom.ii. p. 475. 
 
 42. Mr. Twells. — "'Therefore we are buried with 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOMING AGES. 181 
 
 him' by being plunged into a sort of death. [So the 
 author of the New Text and Version of the New Testa- 
 ment renders Rom. vi. 4.] What blundering expli- 
 cation is here ! He should rather have said, by being 
 plunged into a sort of grave, viz. the waters of baptism." 
 Critical Examination, part. i. p, 98. 
 
 43. Menochius and Estius. — " The apostle, in 
 Rom. vi. 4, alludes to the rite of immersion, when the 
 body is, as it were, buried, and in a little while drawn 
 out again, as from a sepulchre." Apud Poli, Synops. 
 ad Rom. vi. 4. 
 
 44. Lampe. — " ' Because there was much water 
 there.' That plenty of water was necessary to the ad- 
 ministration of baptism by immersion, to a very great 
 multitude of people, is readily acknowledged." Com- 
 ment, in Evangel, secund Joan, ad cap. iii. 9,3. 
 
 45. Limborch. — " Baptism, then, consists in wash- 
 ing, or rather immersing the whole body into water, 
 as was customary in the primitive times. . . .The apostle 
 alludes to the manner of baptizing, not as practised at 
 this day, which is performed by sprinkling af water; 
 but as administered of old, in the primitive church, 
 by immersing the whole body in water, a short con- 
 tinuance in the water, and a speedy emersion out of 
 the water." Complete Syst. of Divin. B. V. chap, xxvii. 
 sect. i. Comment, in Epist. ad R.jm. in cap. vi. 4. 
 
 46. Sir Thomas Ridley. — ^"The rites of baptism, in 
 the primitive times, were performed in rivers and foun- 
 tains; and this manner of baptizing the ancient church 
 entertained from the example of Christ, who was bap- 
 tized of John in Jordan." In Thomas Lawson's Bap- 
 tismalogia, p. 105. 
 
 47. Mr. John Claude. — ■" In his baptism, he [Christ] 
 is plunged in the water." Essay on Compos, of Serm. 
 vol. i. p. 272. 
 
 48. H. Altingius. — " This baptismal washing, in 
 warm countries and ancient times, was performed by 
 
18a PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 immersion into water, a continuance under the water, 
 and an emersion out of the water; as the practice of 
 John the Baptist, (Matt. iii. 6, 16; John iii. 23;) of 
 Christ's apostles, (John iii. 22, and iv. 1, 2;) and of 
 PhiHp, (Acts viii. 38;) and also the signification of 
 these rites teach, (Rom. vi. 4.)" Loci Commun. pars i. 
 loc. xii. p. 199. 
 
 49* Hospinianus. — " John the Baptist baptized 
 Christ in Jordan, and Philip baptized the eunuch in a 
 river, (Acts viii.) Lydia also, together with her house- 
 hold, seems to have been baptized in a river, near to 
 Philippi, at which prayers were usually made, (Acts 
 xvi.)" De Temphs, 1. ii. c. iv. p. 80. 
 
 50. Curcellasus. " Baptism was performed by 
 
 plunging the whole body into water, and not by sprink- 
 ling a few drops, as is now the practice. For 'John 
 was baptizing in iEnon, near to Salim, because there 
 was much water; and they came and were baptized,' 
 (John iii. 23.) Nor did the disciples that were sent out 
 by Christ administer baptism afterwards in any other 
 way: and this is more agreeable to the signification 
 of the ordinance, (Rom. vi. 4). I am therefore of opi- 
 nion, that we should endeavour to restore and introduce 
 this primitive rite of immersing, if it may be done 
 without oftbnce to the weak; otherwise it seems better 
 to tolerate this abuse, than to raise a disturbance in the 
 church about it ... . They are now ridiculed who desire 
 to be baptized, not by sprinkling, but as it was per- 
 formed by the ancient church, by an immersion of the 
 whole body into water." Relig. Christ. Institut. 1. v. 
 c. ii. et apud Heidegg. Libert. Christ, a Lege Cib. 
 Vet. c. xiv. § 3. 
 
 51. Wolfius. — "That baptismal immersion was 
 practised in the first ages of the Christian church, 
 many have shown from the writings of the ancients. . . . 
 Some learned Christians therefore have judged, that the 
 same rite of immersion should be recalled into practice 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 183 
 
 at this day, lest the mystical signification of the ordi- 
 nance should be lost,... Here the apostle alludes to 
 immersion in baptism, practised of old." Curae, ad 
 Rom. vi. 4, et Col. ii. 12. 
 
 52. G.J. Vossius. — "That John the Baptist ana 
 the apostles immersed persons whom they baptized, 
 there is no doubt. For thus we read : ' And they were 
 baptized in Jordan. . . .And Jesus, when he was bap- 
 tized, went up straightway out of the water,' (Matt. iii. 
 6, 16. It is also written, (John iii. 23:) 'John also 
 was baptizing in Mnon, near to Salim, because there 
 was much water there.' And (Acts viii. 38,) it is said : 
 * They went down both into the water, both Philip 
 and the eunuch.' And that the ancient church followed 
 these examples, is very clearly evinced by innumer- 
 able testimonies of the Fathers." Disputat. de Bap. 
 disp. i. § 6. 
 
 53. Sir Peter King.— "'To me it seems evident, 
 that their [the primitive Christians'] usual custom was, 
 to immerse, or dip, the whole body." Enquiry into the 
 Constitut. of Prim. Church, part. ii. chap. iv. § 5. 
 
 54. Abp. Tillotson. — "Anciently, those who were 
 baptized, put off their garments, which signified the 
 putting oflf the body of sin; and were immersed and 
 buried in the water, to represent their death to sin; 
 and then did rise up again out of the water, to signify 
 their entrance upon a new life. And to these cus- 
 toms the apostle alludes, Rom. vi. 2 — 6; Gal. iii. 27." 
 Works, vol. i. serm. vii. p. 179, edit. 8vo. 
 
 55. Frid. Spanhemius, F. — " This rite of immersion, 
 and of bringing out of the baptismal water, was common 
 and promiscuous in the apostolic age. Whence the 
 apostle alludes to it, as a rite common to all Christians, 
 Rom. vi. 4; Col. ii. 12." Disputat. De Bap. pro 
 Mortuis, p. 16, annexed by Dr. Du Veil, to his Literal 
 Exposition of the Acts. 
 
 56. Bp. Pearce. — " I think the most probable 
 
184 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 meaning of the phrase [baptized for the dead,] is to be 
 fetched from Matt. xx. 22; Luke xii. 50; and Mark 
 X, 38; in all which|places /SaTTTi^ea-Gai signifies to die a 
 violent death, by the hands of persecutors. It seems 
 to have been a metaphor taken from the custom of 
 those days in baptizing; for the person baptized went 
 down under the water, and was (as it were) buried 
 under it. Hence, St. Paul says, (in Rom. vi. 4, and 
 Col. ii. 12,) that they 'were buried with Christ by bap- 
 tism.' So that this custom probably gave occasion to 
 our Saviour to express his being to suffer death by the 
 hands of the Jews, in the phrase of a baptism that he 
 was to be baptized with. And St. Paul seems to have 
 taken up the same phrase with a little variation, but 
 still with the same meaning." Note on 1 Cor. xv. 29- 
 
 67. Abp. Usher. — " Some there are that stand 
 strictly for the particular action of diving or dipping 
 the baptized under water, as the only action which 
 the institution of the sacrament will bear ; and our 
 church allows no other, except in case of the child's 
 weakness ; and there is expressed in our Saviour's bap- 
 tism, both the descending into the water, and the 
 rising up." Sum and Subs, of the Christ. Relig. p. 413, 
 edit. 6th. 
 
 58. Momma. — "They were wont to go down into 
 the water. Philip and the eunuch ' went down into the 
 water,' (Acts viii. 38; compare verse 39.) Christ also, 
 being baptized, went up from the water, (Matt. iii. 16;) 
 therefore, he went down into the water to be baptized." 
 De Statu Eccles. torn. ii. c. v. § 193. 
 
 59- Theod. Hasaeus. — "Though, in the time of the 
 apostles, the custom was not known which prevailed 
 in the following ages; namely, that persons, immediately 
 after their baptism, were clothed M'ith white garments 
 which they wore for a week afterward, and thence were 
 called, Albati, Candidafi ; yet seeing they were entirely 
 immeri:ed in water, they could not be baptiz;ul without 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. ^^ 
 
 putting off, and again putting on, their clothes." Biblioth, 
 Bremens. class, iv. p. 1042, 1043. 
 
 60. Mr. Rich. Baxter. — " We grant that baptism 
 then, [in the primitive times] was by washing the whole 
 body; and did not the differences of our cold country, 
 as to that hot one, teach us to remember, ' I will have 
 mercy and not sacrifice,' it should be so here. . . .It is 
 commonly confessed by us to the Anabaptists, as our 
 commentators declare, that in the apostles' times, the 
 baptized were dipped over head in the water, and that 
 this signified their profession, both of believing the 
 burial and resurrection of Christ; and of their own 
 present renouncing the world and flesh, or dying to sin 
 and living to Christ, or rising again to newness of life, 
 or being buried and risen again with Christ, as the 
 apostle expoundeth, in the forecited texts of Col. iii. 
 [Col. ii.] and Rom. vi. And though (as is before 
 said) we have thought it lawful to disuse the manner 
 of dipping and to use less water, yet we presume not to 
 change the use and signification of it. . . .For my part, 
 I may say as Mr. Blake, that I never saw a child 
 sprinkled; but all that I have seen baptized had water 
 poured on them, and so were washed." Paraphrase on 
 the New Test, at Matt. iii. 6. Disputations of Right to 
 Sacram. p. 70. Plain Script. Proof, p. 134. 
 
 61. Bp. Burnet. — "They [the primitive ministers of 
 the gospel] led them into the water, and with no other 
 garments but what might cover nature ; they at first laid 
 them down in the water, as a man is laid in a grave, 
 and then they said those words : ' I baptize thee in the 
 name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.' Then they 
 raised them up again, and clean garments were put on 
 them ; from whence came the phrases of being ' baptized 
 into Christ's death;' of our being 'buried with him by 
 baptism into death;' of our being 'risen with Christ,' 
 and of our ' putting on the Lord Jesus Christ ;' of ' put- 
 ting off the old man,' and ' putting on the new,' (Rom. 
 
186 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 vi. 3,4, 5; Col. ii. 12; Col. iii. 1,, 10; Rom. xiii. 14.) 
 After baptism was thus performed, the baptized per- 
 son was to be farther instructed in all the specialities 
 of the Christian religion, and in all the rules of life 
 that Christ had prescribed." Expos. Thirty-nine Arti- 
 cles, p. 374, 375. 
 
 69, Braunius. — " Christ went down into Jordan, to 
 be baptized by John, (Matt, iii.) The same thing seems 
 to be intimated by the apostle, when he speaks of being 
 'buried by baptism,' (Col. ii. 12; Rom. vi. 3, 4; Gal. 
 iii. 27.)" Doctrina Feed. pars. iv. cap. xxi. § 8. 
 
 63. Mr. De Courcy. — " I grant, that the word 
 [baptize] signifies to dip, and that the ordinance might 
 have been administered by immersion in the ancient 
 church." Rejoinder, p. 265, 266. 
 
 64. Mr. Weemse. — "When [in the primitive times] 
 they were baptized, they went down into the water, and 
 were baptized all over the body." Exposit. of Laws of 
 Moses, b. i. chap. xliv. 
 
 65. Mr. T. Wilson. — " Baptism was performed in 
 the primitive times by immersion." Arclvdsolog. Diet, 
 article. Baptism. 
 
 66. Assembly of Divines. — "'Were baptized.' 
 Washed by dipping in Jordan, (as Mark vii. 4 ; Heb. 
 ix. 10.), . . .' Buried with him by baptism,' (See Col. ii. 
 12.) In this phrase the apostle seemeth to allude to 
 the ancient manner of baptism, which was to dip the 
 parties baptized, and, as it were, to bury them under the 
 water for a while, and then to draw them out of it, and 
 lift them up, to represent the burial of our old man, 
 and our resurrection to newness of life." Annotations 
 on Matt. iii. 6, and Rom. vi. 4. 
 
 67. Mr. Joseph Mede. — "There was no such 
 thing as sprinkling, or pavTia-[xo^, used in baptism in the 
 apostles' days, nor many ages after them." Discourse 
 on Tit. iii. 5. Works, p. 63, edit. 1677. 
 
 68. Dr. Cave. — " The party to be baptized was 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 18/ 
 
 wholly immerged, or put under water, which was the 
 almost constant and universal custom of those times ; 
 whereby they did more notably and significantly express 
 the three great ends and effects of baptism." Pri- 
 mitive Christianity, part i. chap. x. p. 203. 
 
 69- Dr. Towerson. — ■" What the practice of those 
 [primitive] times was. . , .will need no other proof than 
 resorting to rivers, and other such like receptacles of 
 waters, for the performance of that ceremony, and that 
 too, ' because there was much water there.' For so the 
 scripture doth not only affirm concerning the baptism of 
 John, (Matt. iii. 5, 6, 13 ; John iii. 23 ;) but both inti- 
 mate concerning that which our Saviour administered 
 in Judea (because making John's baptism and his to be 
 so far forth of the same sort, John iii. 22, 23,) and ex- 
 pressly affirm concerning the baptism of the eunuch, 
 which is the only Christian baptism the scripture is 
 any thing particular in the description of. The words 
 of St. Luke (Acts viii. 38,) being, that 'both Phihp and 
 the eunuch went down into a certain water,' which they 
 met with in their journey, in order to the baptizing of 
 the latter. For what need would there have been either 
 of the Baptist's resorting to great confluxes of water, or 
 of Philip and the eunuch's going down into this, were it 
 not that the baptism both of the one and the other, 
 was to be performed by an immersion ? A very little 
 water, as we know it doth with us, sufficing for an 
 effusion, or sprinkling." Of the Sacram of Bap. part iii. 
 p. 55, 56. 
 
 70. Bossuet. — " The baptism of St. John the Bap- 
 tist, which served for a preparative to that of Jesus 
 Christ, was performed by plunging. .. .When Jesus 
 Christ came to St. John, to raise baptism to a more 
 marvellous efficacy in receiving it, the scripture says, 
 that 'he went up out of the water' of Jordan, (Matt. iii. 
 16; Mark i. 10.). . . .In fine, we read not in the scrip- 
 ture that baptism was otherwise administered ; and we 
 
188 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 are able to make it appear by the acts of councils, and 
 by the ancient rituals, that for thirteen hundred 
 YEARS baptism was thus administered throughout the 
 whole churchy as far as was possible." In Mr. Stennett 
 against Russen, p. 175, 176. 
 
 7 1 . Mr. Chambers. — " In the primitive times this 
 ceremony was performed by immersion ; as it is to this 
 day in the oriental churches, according to the original 
 signification of the word." Cyclopaedia, article. Bap- 
 tism, edit. 7th. 
 
 72. Mr. George Whitefield. — " It is certain, that in 
 the words of our text (Rom. vi. 3, 4,) there is an allusion 
 to the manner of baptism, which was by immersion ; 
 which our own church allows, and insists upon it, that 
 children should be immersed in water, unless those that 
 bring the children to be baptized assure the minister that 
 they cannot bear the plunging." Eighteen Sermons, 
 p. 297. 
 
 '7^. Dr. Doddridge. — '' And after Jesus was bap- 
 tized, as soon as he 'ascended out of the water' to the 
 bank of Jordan .... And John was also at that time 
 baptizing at iEnon, which was a place near Salim, a 
 town on the east side of Jordan; and he particularly 
 chose that place, because there was a great quantity of 
 water there, which made it very convenient for his pur- 
 pose. Nothing, surely, can be more evident, than that 
 TToAAa vha-TOi^ many waters, signifies a large quantity of 
 water ; it being sometimes used for the Euphrates, (Jer. 
 li. IS. Septuag.) To which I suppose there may be 
 an allusion. Rev. xvii. 1. Compare Ezek. xliii. 2, and 
 Rev. i. 15, xiv. 2, xix. 6; where 'the voice of many wa- 
 ters' does plainly signify the roaring of a high sea*. , . . 
 Considering how frequently bathing was used in those 
 
 * Dr. Bentley has given the following criticism on the words €©•* 
 T^'v i'baTiiv Tuv vro'hKuv, (Rev. xvii. 1.) Upon the many waters; "upon 
 the vast, wide, and spacious waters : for it is known, that -sroKvi is 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWIKG AGES. 189 
 
 hot countries, it is not to be wondered, that baptism was 
 generally administered by immersion ; though I see no 
 proof that it was essential to the institution. It would 
 be very unnatural to suppose that they [Philip and the 
 eunuch] went dow?i to the ivater, merely that Philip might 
 take up a little water in his hand to pour on the eunuch. 
 A person of his dignity had, no doubt, many vessels 
 in his baggage, on such a journey through so desert a 
 country ; a precaution absolutely necessary for travellers 
 in those parts, and never omitted by them. (See Dn 
 Shaw's Travels, Pref. p. 4.) .... ' Buried with him in bap- 
 tism.' It seems the part of candour to confess, that here 
 [Rom. vi. 4,] is an allusion to the manner of baptizing 
 by immersion, as most usual in those early times ; but 
 that Avill not prove this particular cicumstance essential 
 to the ordinance .... They who practise baptism by im- 
 mersion, are by no means to be condemned on that ac- 
 count; since, on the whole, that mode of baptism is evi- 
 dently favoured by scripture examples, though not re- 
 quired by express precept." Fam. Expos, on Matt. iii. 
 16; John iii. 23; Acts viii. 38; Rom. vi. 4. Lectures, 
 proposit. cliii. corol. 1. 
 
 74. M. Jurieu. — " The ancients used to plunge 
 persons into the water, calling on the adorable Trinity." 
 In Dr. Gale's Reflect, on Dr. Wall's Hist. Inf. Bap. 
 p. 193. 
 
 75. Mr. Le Clerc. — " The manner of baptizing at 
 that time, by plunging into the water those whom they 
 baptized, was an image of the burial of Jesus Christ." 
 In Dr. Gale's Reflect, p. 193. 
 
 76. Venema. — "It is without controversy, that bap- 
 tism in the primitive church was administered by immer- 
 sion into water, and not by sprinkling; seeing John is 
 
 often applied to continued quantity, as well as to discontinued ; to 
 magnitude and dimensions, as well as to number." Sermon upon 
 Popery, p. 6. Camb. 1715. 
 
190 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 said to have baptized in Jordan, and where there was 
 much water, as Christ also did by his disciples in the 
 neighbourhood of those places, (Matt. iii. and John iii.) 
 Philip also going down into the water baptized the 
 eunuch, (Acts viii.) To which also the apostle refers, 
 Rom. vi Nor is there any necessity to have re- 
 course to the idea of sprinkling in our interpretation of 
 Acts ii. 41, where three thousand souls are said to be 
 added to Christ by baptism ; seeing it might be per- 
 formed by immersion, equally as by aspersion, espe- 
 cially as they are not said to have been baptized at the 
 same time.... The essential act of baptizing, in the 
 second century, consisted, not in sprinkling, but in im- 
 mersion into water, in the name of each Person in the 
 Trinity. Concerning immersion the words and phrases 
 that are used sufficiently testify; and tnat it was per- 
 formed in a river, a pool, or a fountain .... To the essen- 
 tial rites of baptism, in the third century, pertained im- 
 mersion, and not aspersion ; except in cases of necessity, 
 and it was accounted a /?«//'- perfect baptism. . . .Immer- 
 sion, in the fourth century, was one of those acts that 
 were considered as essential to baptism; — nevertheless, 
 aspersion was used in the last moments of life, on such 
 as were called clinics, and also where there was not a 
 sufficient quantity of water. . . .Beveridge, on the fiftieth 
 Apostolical Canon, asserts, that the ceremony of sprink- 
 ling began to be used instead of immersion, about the 
 time of Pope Gregory, in the sixth century; but without 
 producing any testimony in favour of his assertion ; and 
 it is undoubtedly a mistake. Martene declares, (in his 
 Antiq. Eccles. Rit. 1. i. p. i. c. i.) that in all the ritual 
 books, or pontifical MSS. ancient or modern, that he 
 had seen, immersion, is required ; except by the Ceno- 
 manensian, and that of a more modern date, in which 
 pouring on the head is mentioned. In the council of Ra- 
 venna also, held in tlie year thirteen hundred and eleven, 
 both immersion and pouring are left to the determina- 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 191 
 
 tion of the administrator: and the council of Nismes, in 
 the year one thousand two hundred and eighty-four, 
 permitted pouring, if a vessel could not be had; therefore 
 only in case of necessity. . . .The council of Celichith, 
 in the beginning of the ninth century, forbade the pour- 
 ing of water on the heads of infants, and commanded 
 that they should be immersed in the font. . . . Baptism was 
 administered by immersion, in the twelfth century . . . .In 
 the thirteenth century, baptism was administered by im- 
 mersion, thrice repeated; yet so, that one immersion 
 was esteemed sufficient, as appears from Augerius de 
 Montfaucon. That was a singular synodal appointment 
 under John de Zurich, bishop of Utrecht, in the year 
 one thousand two hundred and ninety one, which runs 
 thus : " We appoint, that the head be put three times 
 in the water, unless the child be weak, or sickly, or the 
 season cold; then water may be poured, by the hand of 
 the priest, on the head of the child, lest, by plunging, or 
 coldness, or weakness, the child should be injured and 
 die." Hist. Eccles. secul. i. § 138; secul. ii. § 100; 
 secul.iii. § 51; secul, iv. § 1 10; secul. vi. § 251 ; secul. 
 viii. §206; secul. xii. "§45; secul, xiii. § 164. 
 
 Ill . Altmannus. — " In the primitive church, per- 
 sons to be baptized were not sprinkled, but entirely im- 
 mersed in water; which was performed according to the 
 example of John the Baptist. Hence all those allusions : 
 seeing, by im.mersion, they plainly signified a burial; by 
 the following emersion out of the water, a resurrection ; 
 and agreeably to these ideas are those passages of scrip- 
 ture to be explained which refer to this rite. (See Rom. 
 vi. 3,4,5; Col. ii. 12, and Gal. iii. 27.)" Meletem. 
 Philolog. rit. torn. iii. exercit. in 1 Cor, xv. 29, § 8. 
 
 78. Magdeburg Centuriators. — "The Son of God 
 was dipped in the water of Jordan, by the hand of John 
 the Baptist .... Phihp baptized the eunuch in a river, 
 (Acts viii. 38.) It seems also, that Lydia and her house- 
 hold at Philippi were baptized in a river, at which prayers 
 
192 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 were usually made, (Acts xvi. 13, l6.)" Cent. i. 1. i. 
 c. iv. p. 118; 1. ii. c. vi. p. 381. 
 
 79. Dr. Hammond. — John baptized "in a river, 
 in Jordan, (Mark i. 5;) in a confluence of much watery 
 (John iii. 23;) because, as it is added, there was much 
 water there: and therefore as the Jews, writing in Greek, 
 call those lakes wherein they wash themselves KoXviJ.(3vj6pai ; 
 so, in the Christian church, the (BairriaTfipiov, or vessel 
 which contained the baptismal water, is oft called, 
 f<oXv[x(3vi6pa, a swimming or diving place." Annotations 
 on Matt. iii. 1 . 
 
 80. Chamierus. — " Immersion of the whole body 
 was used from the beginning, which expresses the force 
 of the word baptize; whence John baptized in a river. 
 It was afterwards changed into sprinkling, though it is 
 uncertain when or by whom it commenced." Panstrat. 
 Cathol. t. iv. 1. V. c. ii. § 6. 
 
 81. Bp. Fell. — "The primitive fashion of immer- 
 sion under the water, representing our death, and eleva- 
 tion again out of it, our resurrection, or regeneration." 
 On the Epistles of Paul. Note on Rom. vi. 4. 
 
 82. Dutch Annotators.— " ' Because there was much 
 water there.' Because they that were baptized by John, 
 went into the water with their whole bodies. (See Matt, 
 iii. 16; Actsviii. 38.). . . .The apostle seems here [Rom. 
 vi. 3,] to allude to the manner of baptizing, much used 
 in those warm eastern countries ; where men were wholly 
 dipped into the water, and remained a little while under 
 water, and afterwards rose up out of the water: to show 
 that their dipping into and remaining in the water, is a 
 representation of Christ's death and burial; and the 
 rising up out of the water, of his resurrection." On 
 John iii. 23, and Rom. vi. 3. 
 
 83. Bp. Stillingfleet. — " Rites and customs aposto- 
 lical are altered; therefore men do not think that apos- 
 tolical practice doth bind: for if it did, there could be 
 no alteration of things agreeable thereunto. Now let 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOM'INO AGES. 193^ 
 
 any one consider but these few particulars, and judge 
 how far the pleaders for a divine right of apostoHcal 
 practice do loolv upon themselves as bound now to ob- 
 serve them : as dipping in baptism, the use of love- 
 feasts, community of goods, the holy kiss, by TertuUian 
 called ' signaculum orationis:'* yet none look upon 
 
 * 1 will here subjoin a quotation from that spirited writer, Mr. 
 Vincent Alsop : " The feasts of love and the holy kiss," he replies, 
 in his answer to Dr. Goodman, " were not at all institutions of the 
 apostles. All that the apostle determined about them was, that 
 supposing in their civil congresses and converses they salute each 
 other, they should be sure to avoid all levity, wantonness, all ap- 
 pearance of evil : for religion teaches us not only to worship God, 
 but to regulate our civil actions in subordination to the great ends of 
 holiness, the adorning of the gospel, and thereby the glorifying of 
 our God and Saviour. I say the same concerning the feast of love. 
 The apostle made it no ordinance, either temporary or perpetual ; 
 but finding that such a civil custom had obtained among them — he 
 cautions them against gluttony, dmnkenness, all excess and riot, to 
 which such feasts, through the power of corruption in some, and the 
 remainders of corruption in the best, were obnoxious: which is 
 evident from iCor. xi. "21. The apostle Paul, (iTim. ii.8,) com- 
 mands that men pray every where lifting up holy hands: can any 
 rational creature imagine, that he has thereby made it a duty as oft 
 as we pray to elevate our hands? That was none of his design to 
 that age, or the present : but under a ceremonial phrase he wraps 
 up an evangelical duty. As if he had said. Be sure you cleanse your 
 hearts J and if you do lift up your hands, let them be no umbrage 
 for unholy souls. 
 
 " Concerning deaconesses, I can find no such order or constitu- 
 tion of the apostles. It is true, they used in their travels and other 
 occasions the services and assistances of holy women, who cheer- 
 fully administered to their necessities, and are thence called Iicckovm, 
 and said haKoveiv. But how childish is it to conclude an order or 
 institution from so slippery a thing as an etymology ? The angels 
 are called X«Tovpyi/ca meviJi.ara,, ministering spirits, (Heb. i. 14.) Will 
 any from hence infer that they read the liturgy ? Magistrates are 
 styled Xeirovpyoi rov @eov, and liaKovoi ©eov, (Rom. xiii. 4, 6j) and yet 
 it is no part of their office to read divine service.. ... In a word, the 
 duty of saluting with a holy kiss j the order of all our feasts of love 
 to God's glory ; the ministering in our respective places to the 
 necessities of the saints, are as much in force as ever, unless holi- 
 ness be grown out of fashion." Sober Enquiry, p. 285, 286. 
 VOL. I. © 
 
I 
 
 194 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 themselves as bound to observe them now, and yet all 
 acknowledge them to have been the practice of the apos- 
 tles," Irenicum, part ii. chap. vi. p. 345. 
 
 84. H. Hulsius. — " Some interpret 1 Cor. xv. 29, 
 concerning the baptism of dimes, or persons confined 
 to their beds; but this baptism changed dipping into 
 sprinkling, and was not practised in the time of Paul." 
 Comment, in Israel. Pris. p. 819- 
 
 85. Deyiingius. — " It is manifest, that while the 
 apostles lived, the ordinance of baptism was adminis- 
 tered, not out of a vessel, or a baptistery, which are the 
 marks of later times; but out of rivers and pools: and 
 that, not by sprinkling, but by immersion. . . .So long 
 as the apostles lived, as many believe, immersion only 
 was used; to which afterwards, perhaps, they added a 
 kind of pouring, such as the Greeks practise at this day, 
 having performed the trine immersion." Observat. Sac. 
 pars ii. observ. xliv. § 3 ; par iii. obs. xxvi. § 2. 
 
 8G. Heideggerus. — " Plunging, or immersion, was 
 most commonly used by John the Baptist and by the 
 apostles. . . .It is of no importance whether baptism be 
 performed by immersion into water, as of old in the 
 warm eastern countries, and even at this day; or by 
 sprinkling, which was afterward introduced in colder 
 climates." Corpus Theolog. Christ, loc. xxv. § 35. 
 
 87. Mr. Edward Leigh. — " The ceremony used in 
 baptism, is either dipping, or sprinkling: dipping is the 
 more ancient. At first, they went down into the rivers; 
 afterwards they were dipped in the fonts. . . .Zanchius 
 and Mr. Perkins prefer (in persons of age and hot coun- 
 tries, where it may be safe) the ceremony of immersion 
 under the water, before that of sprinkling, or laying on 
 the water, as holding more analogy to that of Paul, 
 Rom. vi. 4." Body of Div. b. viii. chap. viii. p. 665. 
 
 88. Mr. Hardy. — "'They were baptized;' that is, 
 they were immersed in water. That this rite was com- 
 monly performed by plunging, and not by pouring, is 
 
THE CUUIUH IK FOLLOM'ING A(iKS. 19-5 
 
 indicated both by the proper meaning of the word, and 
 by the passages relating to the ordinance; for the custom 
 of sprinkhng seems to have prevailed somewhat later, in 
 favour of those who desired to give up themselves to 
 Christ, or to be baptized, when lying ill of disease; 
 whom others called clinics. . . .In baptism: The allusion 
 is to the ancient custom of baptizing, M-hen the body was 
 immersed in water; and therefore putting off the clothes 
 was required : whence those phrases, putting off the old, 
 and putting on the new man, had their origin. This rite 
 was a figure and an imag;e, both of a burial and a resur- 
 rection; as well of Christ, which were conspicuous, as 
 of what is internal, in Christians. (Rom.vi.4.)" An- 
 notat. in Matt. iii. 6; Col. ii. 12. 
 
 89- Mr. Locke. — " We Christians, who by baptism 
 were admitted into the kingdom and church of Christ, 
 were baptized into a similitude of his death: We did 
 own some kind of death, by being buried under water, 
 which being buried with him, i. e. in conformity to his 
 burial, as a confession of our being dead, was to signify, 
 that as Christ was raised up from the dead, into a 
 glorious life with his Father, even so we, being raised 
 from our typical death and burial in baptism, should lead 
 a new sort of life." Paraphrase on Rom, vi. 4. 
 
 90. J. J. Wetstenius. — "John baptized in the river 
 Jordan, in ^non, ' because there was much water,' 
 (John iii. 23;) and Christ, when he was baptized, 'went 
 down into the water ^ (Matt. iii. 16.) And Christians, 
 in baptism, are said to put off their clothes, (Gal. iii. 27;) 
 to be washed, (Tit. iii. 5 ;) and to be buried under the 
 water, (Rom.vi.4:) all which are expressive, not of 
 sprinkling, but of dipping." Comment, ad Matt. iiL 6. 
 
 9 1 . Roell. — " It is certain that immersion into water, 
 and emersion out of it, were practised — in Christian 
 baptism, in the beginning." Exegesis Epist. ad Col. iij 
 cap. ii. 12. 
 
 92. Mr. Walker. — *' Mr. Rogers was for retrieving 
 
 o 2 
 
196 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 the use of dipping, as witnessed to by antiquity, ap- 
 proved by scripture, required by the church, (as then it 
 was, except in case of weakness,) and symbolical with 
 the things signified in baptism : Which I could wish as 
 well and as heartily as he, in order to making of peace 
 in the church, if that would do it. If I may speak my 
 thoughts, I believe the ministers of the nation would be 
 glad if the people would desire, or be but willing, to 
 have their infants dipped, without fear of being de- 
 stroyed." In Dr. Wall's Hist. Inf. Bap. part ii. 
 chap. ix. p. 475. 
 
 93- Dr. Whitby. — " It being so expressly declared 
 here, [Rom. vi. 4,] and Colos. ii. 12, that we are ' buried 
 with Christ in baptism,' by being buried under water; 
 and the argument to oblige us to a conformity to his 
 death, by dying to sin, being taken hence; and this im- 
 mersion being religiously observed by all Christians 
 FOR THIRTEEN CENTURIES, and approved by our 
 church, and the change of it into sprinkling, even with- 
 out any allowance from the Author of this institution, or 
 any licence from any council of the church, being that 
 which the Romanist still urgeth to justify his refusal of 
 the cup to the laity; it were to be wished, that this 
 custom might be again of general use, and aspersion only 
 permitted, as of old, in case of the clinici, or in present 
 danger of death." Note on Rom. vi. 4. 
 
 94. Bp. Nicholson. — " The sacrament of baptism 
 was anciently administered by plunging into the water, 
 in the western as well as the eastern part of the church; 
 
 and that the Gothic word (Mark i. 8, and 
 
 Luke iii. 7, 12,) the German word Tauffe9i, the Danish 
 word Dobe, and the Belgic Doope/i, do as clearly make 
 out that practice, as the Greek word /3a7rT/^w." In 
 Dr. Gale's Reflect, on Dr. Wall's Hist. Inf. Bap. 
 p. 121,192. 
 
 95. Quenstedius. — " It is highly probable, if not 
 certain, that John the Baptist and the apostles immersed 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES, 197 
 
 the persons to be baptized into water. For thus we read, 
 (Matt. iii. 6, 16,) ' And they were baptized in Jordan. 
 When Jesus Mas baptized, he immediately came up' 
 (or, as Grotius renders it, he had scarcely ascended) 
 * out of the water.' Our Saviour, therefore, when he was 
 baptized, first went down into the river, was plunged 
 into the water, and afterwards came up out of it. . . . 
 That immersion into the water was practised by John, 
 is gathered also from that reason of the evangelist, 
 (John iii. 23,) ' John was baptizing in iEnon near to 
 Salim, because there was much water there'. . . .With 
 St. Paul, to be baptized is to be buried, (Rom. vi. 3, 4.) 
 Immersion is, as it were, a burial ; emersion, a resurrec- 
 tion ; to which the aposde alludes. Col. ii. 12. It is 
 written, (Acts viii. 38, 39,) that Philip went down with 
 the eunuch iiito the water, and there baptized him ; and 
 it is added, that, the ordinance being administered, they 
 both came up out of the water .... Both the eastern and 
 the western churches were very observant of the rite of 
 immersion, for a great number of years. . . .Nor is there 
 any instance among the more ancient writers, that I 
 have observed, of baptism being administered by a 
 simple aspersion." Antiq. Bib. pars. i. c. iv. sect. ii. 
 num. i. § 1, 2, 4. 
 
 96. Dr. Wall. — " Their [the primitive Christians'] 
 general and ordinary way was to baptize by immersion, 
 or dipping the person, whether it were an infant, or 
 grown man or woman, into the water. This is so plain 
 and clear by an infinite number of passages, that as one 
 cannot but pity the weak endeavours of such Psedobap- 
 tists as would maintain the negative of it ; so also we 
 ought to disown and show a dishke of the profane 
 SCOFFS which some people give to the English Anti- 
 pasdobaptists, merely for their use of dipping. It is 
 one thing to maintain, that that circumstance is not ab- 
 solutely necessary to the essence of baptism ; and an- 
 
198 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 Other, to go about to represent it as ridiculous and foolish, 
 or as shameful and indecent; when it was, in all proba- 
 bility, the way by which our blessed Saviour, and for 
 certain was the most usual and ordinary way by which 
 the ancient Christians did receive their baptism. . . .It 
 is a great want of prudence, as well as of honesty, to re- 
 fuse to grant to an adversary what is certainly true, and 
 may be proved so. It creates a jealousy of all the rest, 
 that one says .... It is plain that the ordinary and gene- 
 ral practice of St. John, the apostles, and primitive 
 church, was to baptize by putting the person into the 
 water, or causing him to go into the water. Neither 
 do I know of any Protestant w ho has denied it ; and 
 but very few men of learning that have denied, that 
 where it can be used with safety of health, it is the most 
 fitting way. . . .John iii. ^3; Mark i. 5; Acts viii. 38, 
 are iindeniable proof s that the baptized person went or- 
 dinarily into the water, and sometimes the baptist too. 
 We should not know by these accounts, whether the 
 whole body of the baptized was put under water, head 
 and all, were it not for two later proofs, which seem 
 to me to put it out of question. One, that St. Paul 
 does twice, in an allusive way of speaking, call baptism 
 a burial; which allusion is not so proper, if we conceive 
 them to have gone into the water only up to the arm- 
 pits, &c. as it is if their whole body was immersed. 
 The other, the custom of the near succeeding times .... 
 As for sprinkling, I say as Mr. Blake, at its first coming 
 
 up in England, Let them defend it that use it They 
 
 [who are inclined to Presbyterianism] are hardly pre- 
 vailed on to leave off that scandalous custom of 
 having their children, though never so well, baptized 
 out of a basin, or porringer, in abed-chamber; hardly 
 persuaded to bring them to church ; much farther from 
 having them dipped, though never so able to endure it." 
 Hist, of Inf. Bap. part ii. chap. ii. p. 462, 463. De- 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. \99 
 
 fence of Hist. Inf. Bap. p. 129, 131, 140, 147.* — 
 See also Dr. Robertson's Hist. Emp. Charles V. vol iii. 
 p. 78. CEderi Cateches. R^coviens. Profligat. p. 98. 
 Milton's Parad. Lost, b. xii. 1. 438, 441, 442. Ency- 
 clopasd. Britan. art. Baptism, vol. ii. p. 995. Thesaur. 
 Theolog. Philolog. torn. ii. p. 569. Leydeckeri Idea 
 Theolog. I. vii. c. v. § 7. Petavii Theol. Dogmat. 
 1. ii. de Pcenitent. c. i. § 11. Episcopii Respons. ad 
 Quest. XXXV. Dr. Grabe's Unity of the Church, and 
 Expediency of Forms of Prayer, Preface. Cajetani 
 Annotat. ad Matt. iii. 16. Cases to Recover Dissen- 
 ters, vol. iii. p. 31. Diet, of the Bible, (three vols, 
 octavo) vol. ii. p. 709- Brandt's Hist. Reform, b. xlviii. 
 vol. iv. p. 56. Mr. Ostervald's Grounds and Principles 
 of Christ. Relig. p. 31 1, edit. 6th. Scheuchzeri Physica 
 Sacra, tab. dclxiv. 
 
 REFLECTIONS. 
 
 Reflect. I. Here we have a great number of the 
 most respectable characters for solid learning, and many 
 of them for eminent piety. They appear to testify what 
 they know and what they believe concerning an ancient 
 fact; a fact, in an acquaintance with which, the purity 
 of a divine institution, and obedience to the will of our 
 Lord are not a little involved. The principal question 
 on which they are cited to give their opinion, is : Whe- 
 ther John the Baptist, and the apostles of Christ, admi- 
 
 * The anonymous author of a book entitled, Le Baptfeme Re- 
 tabli, gives us the following remarkable anecdote respecting im- 
 mersion, as performed by one of the Roman pontiffs, " Pope Be- 
 nedict XIII. having occasion, more than once, to baptize adult per- 
 sons, and among others, nine Jews and Turks at one time ; he in- 
 structed them himself, and after that he immersed them. With a 
 view to every thing being performed in its natural and proper or- 
 der, he made use of the ancient rituals ] which so much displeased 
 the cardinals, that not one of them would assist at the ceremony. 
 This is what I myself, as well as others, have read under the article 
 Rome, in the public newspapers." Le Bap. Retab. part ii. p. 92, 93. 
 
200 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OB" 
 
 nistered baptism by immersion ? A question this, w hich 
 regards both fact and right. Because, in whatever man- 
 ner those venerable men, and hghts of the world, per- 
 formed that institution, we are bound to believe it was 
 right; for they had too much knowledge and too much 
 integrity to administer this branch of holy worship in a 
 wrong way. Besides, they were not ignorant that their 
 practice, in this respect, was to be viewed as a pattern, 
 and to be considered as law, by the succeeding disciples 
 of Christ. The character and profession of those au- 
 thors, who appear to give their thoughts on this impor- 
 tant subject, leave no room for suspicion that they 
 were biassed in favour of the Baptists : because partiality 
 itself must confess, that if their judgment was under the 
 influence of predilection, it most probably lay on the 
 contrary side. JNIany of them also are beyond the reach 
 of suspicion, in regard to their knowledge of ecclesias- 
 tical antiquity. 
 
 Let us now see what our impartial friends, the 
 Quakers, have to say on this part of the subject. 
 
 1. Thomas Lawson. — " John the Baptist, that is, 
 John the dipper; so called because he was authorized to 
 baptize in water, . . . Such as j^katiti.ze, or sprinkle infants, 
 have no command from Christ, nor example among the 
 apostles, nor the first primitive Christians for so doing 
 . . . .See ihe'siuthor of jim}itis)?i, that is, sprinkling; not 
 Christ, nor the apostles, but Cyprian ; not in the days 
 of Christ, but some two hundred and thirty years after." 
 Baptismalogia, p. 7, 75, 117. 
 
 2. Thomas Ellwood. — " Philip went down with 
 him [the eunuch] into the water, and baptized him ; 
 which was no sooner done, and they come up out of the 
 water again, but the Spirit of the Lord caught away 
 Philip." Sacred Hist, of the New Test, part ii. p. 335. 
 
 3. John Gratton. — " Down into the water he [Jesus] 
 goes, and fulfilled John's dispensation, or that righteous- 
 ness required by it, and having fulfilled it, he ncnt up 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 201 
 
 Straightway out of the water." Life of John Gratton, 
 p. 150. See Chap. II. Reflect. I. No. 1, 7. — Such is the 
 language of those who have no perceivable interest in 
 the decision of this dispute. 
 
 On a brief review of the preceding quotations from 
 learned Paedobaptist authors, it appears, that immersion 
 was practised by John the Baptist, by the apostles of 
 Christ, and by the primitive Christians, No. 1 — 94; 
 — that our Lord himself was immersed by the venerable 
 John, No. 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 16, 19, 20, 26, 27, 29, 30, 
 37, 41, 46, 47, 52, 57, 58, 62, 70, 73, 76, 78, 90, 95, 
 96; — that some of them expressly assert, and many of 
 them implicitly allow, that the scripture no where speaks 
 of any being baptized, but by immersion, No. 10, 16, 
 23, 31, 36, 50, 67, 69, 71, 76, 80, 83, 85 ;— that the 
 practice of immersion gave occasion for some very sin- 
 gular and emphatical phrases to be used by the apostles. 
 No. 9, 12, 18, 30, 34, 36, 40, 45, 54, 55, 61, 66, 73, 
 82, 88, 89 ; — that the baptism of the three thousand 
 affords no objection to the universal practice of immer- 
 sion in those times, No. 76; — that plunging was the 
 general and almost universal practice, for a long course 
 of ages. No. 4, 70, 76, 93 ;~that the churches of Hel- 
 vetia acknowledge, and the church of England, in com- 
 mon cases, requires immersion. No. 19, 57, 93 ; — that 
 one of these authors knew of no Protestant, who had 
 denied immersion to have been the general practice of 
 apostolic times ; and of but very few learned men, who 
 denied its being the fittest, if a regard to health do not 
 forbid. No. 96 ; — that the custom of sprinkling is abso- 
 lutely indefensible, ibid. ; — that they who ridicule the 
 practice of immersion deserve censure, ibid.; — that 
 sprinkling of infants is not an institution of Christ, 
 No. 3, 67; — that it is uncertain when, and by whom, 
 sprinkling was introduced. No. 80; — and, that a resto- 
 ration of the primitive practice is very desirable. No. 50, 
 51, 92, 93. See Chap. III. Reflect. IV.— Such is the 
 
202 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 verdict which these Pasdobaptists give on the cause be- 
 fore us. 
 
 Reflect. II. Now is it not strange, strange to asto- 
 nishment, that so many eminent men should thus agree 
 in bearing testimony to immersion, as the apostohc ex- 
 ample ; when it is notorious that their own practice was 
 very different? Just so the Papists acknowledge, that 
 the apostolic church communicated at the Lord's table in 
 both kinds ; while they themselves unite in a contrary prac- 
 tice. Thus Toletus, for instance : " It was an ancient 
 custom in the church, from the times of the apostles, to 
 communicate under both species. About this there is 
 no controversy. This ancient custom is manifest from 
 
 the words of Paul, 1 Cor. x. and xi."- Salmero : 
 
 " No one denies that the Corinthians communicated 
 under both species; yet we deny that custom to have 
 the force of a divine precept."* At what these veterans 
 in the cause of superstition may say, we have httle 
 reason indeed to be surprised; but is it not a won- 
 derful phenomenon in the religious world, that such a 
 number of the most learned Lutherans, Calvinists, and 
 Arminians, abroad; together with English Episcopa- 
 lians, Presbyterians, and Independents; should all unite 
 in one attestation, respecting the primitive mode of ad- 
 ministering this ordinance; even while they opposed the 
 Baptists, for considering immersion as absolutely neces- 
 sary to a compliance with the divine command ; and 
 while they greatly differed among themselves, in respect 
 of several particulars relating to the subjects and the 
 design of baptism ? To what can this remarkable agree- 
 ment with us, as to the primitive mode of proceeding, 
 be ascribed ? And what is the reason of their differing 
 so much among themselves ? The true reason, I take to 
 be this : When they unite in declaring their views of 
 the apostolic pattern, they have clear, strong, indubi- 
 table evidence, arising from the meaning of the name 
 
 Apiul Laurentiumj Dialog. Eucharist, c. ii. § 62, 63. 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. i:i03 
 
 u'hich the ordinance bears, and the inspired narrative of 
 the first Christian churches. Each of them feels the 
 ground on which he treads. Hence their union ; and 
 here they agree with us. — On the other hand, when 
 they differ among themselves, about the foundation of 
 an infant's claim on the ordinance ; concerning the de- 
 gree of necessity and the utility of Psedobaptism ; about 
 sponsors, the sign of the cross, and so on; they argue 
 on general principles and moral considerations. This 
 kind of argumentation is quite foreign to the nature of 
 positive rites; and yet, by a long train of deductions from 
 such principles, they infer their various rules of pro- 
 ceeding in the administration of baptism. Hence they 
 differ among themselves. Nor need we wonder. For 
 as moral considerations are exceedingly various, and as 
 the application of each to practice may be greatly diver- 
 sified; so, according to the complexion of the principle 
 adopted as the foundation of an argument, will the 
 natural inference be, whether it regard the mode or the 
 subject of any ordinance. Whenever ideas, therefore, 
 of moral fitness, of expediency, or of necessity, usurp 
 the place of divine precepts and apostolic examples, re- 
 lating to positive institutions of the Christian church; 
 the most learned and the best of men will always differ 
 in their conclusions, and that in proportion as their 
 notions of what is fitness, expediency, or necessity, vary. 
 For it is notorious, that while one esteems this or the 
 other thing extremely proper and highly useful to the 
 cause of religion ; another despises it as absurd, or de- 
 tests it as injurious. But when our divine Lord, ad- 
 dressing his disciples in a positive command, says, * It 
 shall be so;' or when, speaking by an apostolic ex- 
 ample, he declares, ' It is thus ;' all our own reason- 
 ings about fitness, expediency, or utility, must hide their 
 impertinent heads. The finest powers of reason have 
 nothing to do, in this case, but only to consider the natu- 
 ral, the obvious import of his language, and then submit. 
 
204 PRACTICK OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 To reason any farther here, is only to seek a plausible 
 excuse for rebellion against the sovereign majesty of 
 Him who is king in Zion. 
 
 Reflect. III. It is, I think, a good rule which Dr. 
 Owen gives, relating to divine institutions, when he says: 
 " That which is Jirst in any kind, gives the measure of 
 what follows in the same kind."* — With Dr. Owen, 
 Abp. Tillotson perfectly agrees. He expresses himself 
 thus: " This is reasonable, that \hQ first in every kind 
 should be the rule and pattern of the rest, and of all that 
 follow after, because it is likely to be the most perfect. 
 In process of time, the best institutions are apt to de- 
 cline, and, by insensible degrees, to swerve and depart 
 from their first state; and therefore it is a good rule to 
 preserve things from corruption and degeneracy, often 
 to look back to i\\Q first institution, and by that to cor- 
 rect those imperfections which almost unavoidably creep 
 in with time."'!" — To the judgment of these two eminent 
 authors, I will add the suffrage of Mr. Henry, who 
 speaks with a professed regard to baptism in the follow- 
 ing manner: "When a question was put to our Lord 
 Jesus, by the Pharisees, concerning marriage, he refers 
 them to the institution and original law, (Matt. xix. 
 3, 4,) to teach us to go by the same rule in other ordi- 
 nances. Run up the stream of the observation (which 
 in a long course sometimes contracts filth) to the 
 spring of the institution, and see what it was from the 
 beginning.'" '\, — These directions perfectly coincide with 
 that maxim of unerring wisdom, to which Mr. Henry 
 adverts : From the be<^imiino- it was not so. A maxim 
 this of such importance, that whoever can is ready to 
 avail himself of it. For, as Mr. lilake justly observes, 
 "If we can but say. From the bcginni)ig\it ivas not 
 
 * Enquiry into Orig, Nat. and Constitut, of Churches, Pref. p. 54. 
 t Works, vol. ii. p, 170, fol. 172'2. 
 t Treatise on Bap. p. 18. 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 205 
 
 SO — we have sufficient."* — To which I will add the suf- 
 rage of Dr. Ridgley : " The example of our Saviour 
 and his apostles ought to be a rule to the churches in 
 all succeeding ages."']' Consequently, if at the begin- 
 ning of the Christian church baptism was immersion, as 
 appears by the foregoing testimonies, it ought to be so 
 now.;|: This must be the case, except there be evidence 
 of our sovereign Lord having repealed his first order, 
 and altered the original plan of proceeding : but no such 
 pretence is made by our brethren. — Perfectly agreeable 
 to this, is the following language of a learned Pasdobap- 
 tist in opposition to the church of Rome. " If so then, 
 [in the apostolic times] why not now? Does not that 
 reason still hold good ? Who hath made this change ? 
 Who hath sown these new tares in the church? How 
 crept in this false doctrine? How grew up this corrupt 
 absurd practice ? Certainly, from no other than that abo- 
 minable root, which gives being to the whole body of 
 Popery, viz. pride and usurpation." § 
 
 It must, indeed, be acknowledged, that though the 
 numerous and learned authors just produced, consider 
 immersion as practised by the apostles; yet many of 
 them think it highly probable, that pouring or sprink- 
 ling was used on some occasions, in those primitive 
 times. A supposition this, too much like that of the 
 Roman Catholics, when they speak to the following 
 effect: "Though, wine was commonlij used by those 
 who partook of the holy supper, in the apostolic age ; 
 yet a participation of that element is not essential to the 
 ordinance : nor is it demonstrable that the apostles 
 
 * Covenant Sealed, p. 111. Vid. Vitring, De Synag. Vet. Prole- 
 gom. p. 75. t Body of Div. quest. 168, 169, 170. Vid, 
 
 Dr. Owen, on Church Government, p. 62, 92. 
 
 X Id esse verum quodcunque prius : id esse adulterum, quod- 
 cunque posterius, says Tertullian. That is. Whatever was first, is 
 true : Whatever was introduced afterwards, is a corruption, 
 
 § Hist, of Popery, vol. i. p. 160, 
 
206 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 always used it when they celebrated the death of their 
 Lord. Nay, the contrary seems rather to be implied, 
 ■when they call the administration of that solemn ap- 
 pointment, Breaking of bread." — Mr. Payne has 
 justly observed, with regard to the holy supper, that it 
 •would have been very strange had the apostles acted 
 contrary to its institution in the course of their practice, 
 and in so short a time after its first appointment : * 
 which observation may be applied to the subject before 
 us, — But we answ^er more directly, by asking : Whether 
 the apostles and their associates did not administer 
 baptism in obedience to divine law ? Whether the com- 
 manding terms in every law^, divine or human, should 
 not be understood in their most commonly received 
 sense ; except there be some intimation of a different 
 acceptation being intended ? Whether the primary and 
 most common meaning of the word baptism, be not im- 
 mersion ? And, whether the act of solemnly immersing 
 a person does not more fully express the great design of 
 the ordinance, than pouring or sprinkling ? Now, if 
 learning and impartiality unite in demanding an affirm- 
 ative answer to these queries, as appears from quo- 
 tations already produced ; there is not the least reason 
 to doubt, but the apostles always practised immersion. 
 
 Very few of our opposers, if I mistake not, have 
 dared absolutely to deny, either the lawfulness of im- 
 mersion, or that the apostles ever used it. But if lawful, 
 it must be so in virtue of a divine command, or of some 
 authentic example ; because it is a positive rite, and 
 when performed by us, it is as a religious duty. If, then, 
 a divine precept require immersion, by what authority is 
 pouring or sprinkling at all used? for that plunging, 
 pouring, and sprinkling, are three different actions, will 
 not admit of a doubt. Or, does our Lord, in the same 
 enacting term of the same law, warrant all those different 
 modes of proceeding, and compliment the human will 
 
 * Preservative against Popery, title vii. p. 111. 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 207 
 
 with a liberty of choosing that which is most agreeable ? 
 Were that the case, it would be a strange law indeed, 
 when considered as enacted by our divine Sovereign ! 
 Have we any instance of this kind in the sacred records? 
 Nay, the majesty of a human legislator would be dis- 
 graced by such a conduct, — On the other hand, if pour- 
 ing or sprinkling be naturally inferible from our Lord's 
 command (and he must be of a perverse turn, who 
 pleads for an inference confessedly unnatural;) and if 
 the apostles, or the primitive church, ever practised the 
 one or the other ; it is hard to imagine how they came 
 to use immersion at all : either of the former, considered 
 simply in itself, being more easy, and more agreeable to 
 human feelings, both in regard to the administrator and 
 the candidate. So, had Abraham and his male posterity 
 been left at their option to circumcise either O-Jinger, or 
 the foreskin, we might have safely concluded, without 
 express information, which they would have preferred — 
 so preferred, as never to have practised the other. It is 
 far more natural therefore to conclude, that immersion 
 was changed into sprinkl'mg, than that sprinkling was 
 laid aside for immersion : and of this Pgedobaptists 
 themselves will furnish us with sufficient evidence in a 
 following chapter. 
 
 Farther : Had the apostles practised pouring or 
 sprinkling, a basin, or something similar, must have been 
 frequently used on the solemn occasion. Is it not then 
 a wonder that the sacred historians, when recording so 
 many instances of the ordinance being administered, no 
 where mention such a domestic utensil, nor any thing 
 like it, as employed by the administrator? Our brethren 
 perhaps may say : " This was a trifling circumstance, 
 and not worthy of particular notice." We find, however, 
 that when our Lord M'ashed the feet of his disciples, as 
 he made use of a basin, it is expressly mentioned.*' Now 
 that pedilavium being a single instance, not intended as 
 
 * John xiii. b; see Exod. xii. 9.9,, and xxiv. 6. 
 
208 TRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 an ordinance of divine \vorship, nor yet, in a literal 
 sense, as a binding example on the followers of Christ; 
 it is quite unaccountable that the inspired historic pen 
 should so expressly mark the use of a basin on that 
 occasion, and yet pass over in silence its very frequent 
 service at the administration of baptism : for its use must 
 have been frequent indeed, had the mode of proceeding 
 adopted by our opposers been then practised. Besides, 
 there would have been the greatest propriety in men- 
 tioning a circumstance of this kind, had pouring or 
 sprinkling been the mode of administration ; because it 
 would have been a plain intimation, that the term 
 baptism was not to be understood in its primary and 
 obvious, but in a secondary and remote acceptation. Of 
 what importance was it for us to know, that our Lord 
 poured water into a basin, before he performed the con- 
 descending act; in comparison with an explicit account 
 of something similar, if any thing similar there had been, 
 prior to the administration of baptism, and preparatory 
 to it ? How comes it that these expressions, or others 
 equivalent : " Peter, or Paul, or Philip (for instance) 
 poured water into a basin, and baptized such a one, are 
 entirely unknown to the New Testament? How came 
 the inspired page to speak, not of basins, but of ?ivers ; 
 not of a litt/e, but of much zvater; not of bringing water 
 to the candidate, but of his going to, and into the water; 
 not oi wetting, but oi burying ; when the administration 
 and the design of the ordinance are described ? Were 
 one of our opponents to publish a history ot his own 
 practice, in regard to baptism, he must either use dif- 
 ferent language from that of inspiration, respecting this 
 matter ; or expose himself to a violent suspicion of 
 having deserted the cause he once espoused. His cha- 
 racter would certainly appear problematical among his 
 brethren, and his conduct bear a dispiite, whatever he 
 might intend. If therefore the sacred historians prac- 
 tised aspersion, their conduct as writers was extremely 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 20.9 
 
 remarkable : for though, on that supposition, they set 
 the example which our opposers follow, as to the mode 
 of administration ; yet, in their narrations, they adopt 
 such expressions, and mention such circumstances re- 
 lating to baptism, as would make a very singular figure 
 from the pen of an English Paedobaptist, when de- 
 scribing his own conduct and vievvs in reference to that 
 institution. Were my reader to peruse a narrative of 
 baptismal practice, penned by a foreigner, or by any 
 anonymous author, of whom he had no knowledge but 
 what was obtained from his writings; — were he to find 
 him speak of choosing a place for the administration of 
 baptism, in preference to others, because there was much 
 water there — of his baptizing in a river — of going down 
 with the candidate into, and coming up out of the water; 
 — were he to find him reminding baptized persons of 
 their having been buried and inised with Christ in 
 baptism ; and were he to observe, that the author 
 always uses a word for the ordinance, which, in its 
 primary acceptation, signifies intmersion, but never talks 
 of bringing water to the candidate, or of using a basin, 
 as preparatory to the administration ; he would, 1 pre- 
 sume, be ready to say : " This author, whoever he be, 
 writes like a Baptist. He speaks the language of one 
 that considers baptism as nothing short of immersion. 
 If, however, contrary to all appearances, he practise 
 aspersion, and intended to inform the public of that par- 
 ticular, he has chosen a very singular method in which 
 to do it, and has expressed himself in the most awkward 
 manner imaginable." Now, supposing the apostles to 
 have practised pouring, or sprinkling, it is highly reason- 
 able for us to conclude, that the inspired penmen in- 
 tended to inform us of it. But if so, how comes it that 
 a serious and uniform adoption of their expressions, by 
 an unknown author, respecting the administration and 
 meaning of the sacred rite, is enough to raise an imme- 
 diate suspicion that he approves of immersion? And 
 VOL. 1. p 
 
210 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 how comes it, that our present opposers never talk of 
 going to a place where there is much water, of going into 
 the water, and of coming up out of the water, when they 
 speak of performing the solemn service? A similarity 
 of practice, in other cases, usually produces a similarity 
 oilanguage, when that practice is narrated. This, there- 
 fore, is a presumptive evidence, that the apostolic prac- 
 tice was different from theirs. For while they avoid 
 the use of this remarkable apostolic language, it looks as 
 if they were conscious that it would not properly express 
 the facts to which it should be applied. 
 
 To illustrate the point and confirm the argument, 
 it may be observed, that when Justin Martyr describes 
 the manner of proceeding in his time, he speaks cf the 
 candidates being " brought to a place of water,'' * that 
 they might be baptized. A kind of language this which 
 is not at all used, that I recollect, by Paedobaptists in 
 our country. The ancient apologist, however, saw rea- 
 son for such expressions. Was it, then, because he de- 
 signed to inform the Roman emperor how baptism was 
 practised in those times? Undoubtedly; and we have 
 equal grounds to conclude, that the apostles intended 
 to inform posterity how baptism was administered by 
 John, and by themselves. Is this phraseology of Justin 
 like that of the New Testament in similar cases ? None, 
 wdth any appearance of reason, can deny it ; and hence 
 it has been inferred, that religious practice, in this re- 
 spect, was the same in the second as it was in the first 
 century. What then has been the opinion of learned 
 men concerning the mode of administration, as intimated 
 in these remarkable words of the martyr? They have, 
 I think, universally understood him, as meaning to con- 
 vey the idea of immersion. Mr. Reeves, for instance, in 
 his Note on this very passage, has the following words . 
 " It is evident, from this place of Justin, and that of 
 
 * Mr. Reeves's Apologies, vol. i, p. 105. Vid. Buddei Theol. 
 Dogmat, 1. V. c. i. § 5. 
 
TUT. CIHTRCH TN FOLLOMTNG AGES. 211 
 
 Tertullian (De Cor. Mil. c. iii.) that ponds and livurs 
 were the only baptisteries or fonts the church had for 
 the first two hundred years.'"* — But whether the apos- 
 tles and Justin administered the ordinance by plunging 
 or sprinkling, one thing is plain ; Various remarkable 
 expressions, found in the writings of those ancients re- 
 lative to baptism, are seldom, if ever, used in the same 
 connection by our opposers, though common enough 
 aaiong such as practise immersion. This reminds me 
 of what is reported concerning some Popish priests in 
 Scotland, who imagined that the New Testament was- 
 composed by Martin Luther.f A wild imagination, 
 doubtless. It may be supposed to have arisen, how- 
 ever, from that similarity of sentiment and of expression, 
 which they perceived to exist, between the apostolic 
 writings and those of the great reformer. Now, as it is 
 natural for persons to make use of language that is agree- 
 able to their own religious practice ; and as the obvious 
 meaning, not only of Justin's expressions, but of inspired 
 phraseology, relating to baptism, is much more agreeable 
 to the practice of plunging, than to that of pouring or 
 sprinkhng a little water upon the face ; I cannot but 
 think, that both the apologist and the apostles constantly 
 practised immersion. 
 
 That the principle of reasoning adopted in the two 
 preceding paragraphs is not peculiar to us, appears by 
 the following extract from Dr. Waterland ; which, mu- 
 tatis mutandis, will apply in the present case. '' The 
 Arians never use any expressions like to some which 
 they subscribe to. They will never say from the press, 
 or from the pulpit, or in common conversation, that Fa- 
 ther, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God ; that they are 
 coequal, coeternal, and so on. They allow of these ex- 
 pressions as often as they subscribe, but never else. . . . 
 
 * Mr. Reeves's Apologies, vol. i. p. 105. Vid. Buddei Theol. 
 Dogmat. 1. V. c.i. § 5. 
 
 f Mr. Clarkson's Practical Div. of Papists, p. 79- 
 
 P 2 
 
212 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 Should any man of them, in a treatise or sermon, throw 
 out any such shocking assertions, (shocking, I mean, to 
 them,) he would be looked upon as a deserter by the 
 party, and a betrayer of the cause which he had under- 
 taken to defend."* 
 
 Reflect. IV. It has been sometimes objected, that 
 there is no mention of any change of raiment at the ad- 
 ministration of baptism ; which must have taken place, 
 and would probably have been mentioned, had immer- 
 sion been the common practice. Various learned and 
 eminent Paedobaptists have taught us, however, that in 
 the apostolic writings there are plain allusions to such 
 change of raiment. See No. 54, 59, 61. — But suppo- 
 sing no such allusive expressions to have been used, yet 
 as the inspired writers inform us, that John baptized our 
 Lord in, or into Jordan; that Philip and the eunuch 
 went down into the water, and that the latter was baptized; 
 we should not have wanted any farther information re- 
 specting that affair. Who can doubt whether the Syrian 
 leper changed his garments, when, according to the 
 order of the man of God, he dipped himself seven times 
 in Jordan, though the sacred historian is silent as to 
 that particular? Nor is any mention made of changing 
 the raiment, that I recollect, either in the laws or in the 
 history of legal i)urification by bathing, among the an- 
 cient Israelites ; yet that mode of purification often 
 occurs in the Old Testament.'!" 
 
 Reflect. V. To favour the cause of sprinkling, some 
 Paedobaptists have given such a representation of the 
 manner in which John performed the sacred rite, as is 
 quite ludicrous. Dr. Guise, for instance, when speak- 
 ing of the multitude baptized by our Lord's harbinger, 
 says : " It seems therefore to me, that the people stood 
 in ranks near to, or just within the edge of the river; 
 and John, passing along before them, cast water upon 
 
 * Case of Arian Subscription, p. 33. 
 
 t See Mr. Martin's Letters to Mr. Horsey, p. 145, 146. 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 213 
 
 their heads or faces, with his hands, or some proper 
 instrument ; by which means he might easily baptize 
 many thousands in a day." * Of this Mr. J. Wesley 
 has been the humble transcriber ; f and Mr. Arch. Hall 
 gives Dr. Guise's Note the sanction of his express appro- 
 bation.! — ^^^- Horsey also adopts the same view of the 
 fact, when he says : " I presume, that the multitude 
 stood i?2 rmiks at the brink, or just within the edge of 
 the river, while the administrator sprinkled or poured 
 the running water upon them."§ — Very different, how- 
 ever, is the following language of that eminent and 
 learned Lutheran, Buddeus : " Though a great multi- 
 tude was baptized by John, yet thence it does not follow 
 that they could not be baptized by immersion ; seeing 
 nothing hinders but they might be baptized separately, 
 one by one." II — That so grave an author as Dr. Guise 
 should give such a puerile and farcical turn to the con- 
 duct of him who came in the spirit and power of Elijah, 
 when administerin": a solemn ordinance of divine wor- 
 ship, is matter of wonder. Nor can I account for its 
 being approved by others, but on a supposition, that 
 they feel themselves embarrassed, when attempting to 
 reconcile their own practice with the natural and obvious 
 meaning of what the evangelists have said concerning 
 John's administration of the rite. If, however, the credit 
 of sprinkling cannot be supported without burlesquing 
 the sacred history, and exposing in this manner one of 
 the most exalted human characters to the ridicule of 
 infidels, it ought for ever to sink in obHvion. But what 
 will not the love of hypothesis do, when cherished by 
 any writer ! To justify my censure, let the following 
 things be considered. 
 
 This account of the fact represents him who was 
 more than a prophet, as less than a man — represents 
 
 * Note on Matt. Hi, 6. f Ibid, Compare No. 18. 
 
 + Gospel Worship, vol,i, p. 271. § Inf. Bap, Stated and 
 
 Defended, p. 20. || Theolog. Dogmat, 1, v. c, i. § 5, 
 
214 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 him, who was all severity in his manners, and all solem- 
 nity in his ministry, as acting the part of a playful boy. 
 Accordino; to these authors, there was not half the solem- 
 nity in John's baptism, which there is in that annual 
 festival of the Romish church, which is called The Bene- 
 diction of Horses. Concerning the latter. Dr. Middle- 
 ton says: " It is always celebrated with much solemnity 
 in the month of January, when all the inhabitants of 
 the city and neighbourhood send up their horses, asses, 
 and so on, to the convent of St. Anthony, near St. Mary 
 the Great; where a priest in his surplice at the church- 
 door sprinkles with his brush all the animals singly, as 
 they are presented to him, and receives from each owner 
 a gratuity proportionable to his zeal and ability. Amongst 
 the rest, I had my own horses blest at the expense of 
 about eighteen- pence of our money; as ^vell to satisfy 
 my own curiosity, as to humour the coachman."* — 
 Whether Dr. Guise, and those who follow him in this 
 particular, imagine the son of Zacharias to have used 
 his naked hand, a scoop, a squirt, a brush, or a bunch 
 of hyssop, I cannot say; though the last, I thini-:,is most 
 likely, on the principle of Mr. Horsey 's reasoning.^ This, 
 however, is clear: The priest of superstition in his white 
 
 * In Conformity of Ancient and Modern Cerem. Pref. p. 5, 6, 
 f Mr. Gay has mentioned another instrument that is well fitted 
 to sprinkle a multitude expeditiously. These are his words : 
 " When dext'rous damsels twirl the sprinkling mop." 
 See Dr. Johnson's Diet, under the verb sprinkle. Whether this 
 was the instrument used by John, we leave our opposers to judge. 
 But how strange it is to hear of casting water on tlie head or face 
 with an instrument ! It leads one to think, rather of a pagan priest, 
 than of the Messiah's harbinger — of ancient heathenism, rather than 
 Christian baptism. For an account of the aspergilla, or instruments 
 of sprinkling, used in the riles of paganism, Lomeierus De Vet. 
 Gent. Lustrat. Syntag. cap. xxxv. may be consulted; but whither 
 the reader must have recourse for intelligence concerning the asper- 
 giUurn of John, or of any apostle, I confess myself entirely ignorant ; 
 because the only authors that mention it, have not condescended to 
 give us (he leajt description of it. 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 215 
 
 surplice, appears to act with more care and more solem- 
 nity, than the servant of God in his hairy garment. The 
 former, though paid for his labour at so much per head, 
 cautiously sprinkles the cattle one by one: the latter, 
 though mortified to secular gain, burning with zeal for 
 God, and full of love to the souls of men, being all in a 
 hurry to finish his business, casts luater^ on half a dozen 
 or half a score at a time. Of this haste, it may be sup- 
 posed, the consequence was, that the water was very 
 unequally divided among the candidates. How many 
 deep the ranks were, our authors indeed have not in- 
 formed us; but according to them there must have been 
 more than o?ie rank, because they speak in the plural. 
 It is plain, therefore, that the front rankj must have had 
 the most copious application of the liquid element: 
 while many individuals, we may justly suppose, that 
 were farther distant from the administrator, had little or 
 none at all. This presumed conduct of John, considered 
 in one view, presents us with a mercenary drudge in the 
 service of God, who cares not how slovenly the solemni- 
 ties of holy worship are performed, provided they do but 
 appear in full tale: in another, with a wanton boy, who 
 makes himself sport by squirting water upon all that are 
 near him : in every view, not only with something quite 
 inimical to the character of John, but also to the solemn 
 and gracious import of that ordinance which he adminis- 
 tered. But, as the learned Chamier observes, " there 
 is nothing so extraordinary, nothing so unusual, nothing 
 so obscure, that is not urged by one or another against 
 a divine appointment."* — Dr. Hammond informs us, 
 that the manner of immersing proselytes among the Jews 
 " is said to be, that they should sit in water up to the 
 neck,'' and in that situation, " learn some of the precepts 
 of the law, both hard and easy.f" Now, after such a 
 representation of John's baptism, who could have ima- 
 
 * Panstrat. torn. iv. l.viii. c. vi. §38. f Note on Matt. iii. 1. 
 
216 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 gined these very authors to consider it as originating in 
 the proselyte bathing ; yet so it is ! 
 
 The people stood in ranks, near to, or just within 
 tJie edge of the river; and John, passing before them cast 
 water upon their heads or faces. But had this been a 
 fact, there is reason to think it would have been men- 
 tioned : because, when our Lord miraculously fed five 
 thousand men with a few loaves and fishes, we are ex- 
 pressly told that the hungry multitude were seated in 
 ranks.* As John was the first administrator of bap- 
 tism, and as his example, in the use of water, was to be 
 a pattern for the church in following ages ; it was appa- 
 rently of much more importance for us to have been in- 
 formed, had it been a fact, that the people were baptized 
 when standing in ranks, than it was to be told in what 
 position the five thousand were placed, when they par- 
 took of miraculous food. Because the former concerned 
 a standing ordinance of New Testament worship : the 
 latter, it is plain, was an extraordinary and transient fact. 
 Yet the sacred historians have not said a word about 
 the people standing in ranks when John baptized them, 
 though sitting in ranks be so plainly mentioned respect- 
 ing the miracle. It may be observed also in regard to 
 the latter case, that a great multitude vvere to be served 
 by a few disciples, and to be fed when the day was far 
 advanced. Expedition, therefore, was highly necessary, 
 that the people might be refreshed, and afterward go to 
 their own habitations. In reference to this afiair, the 
 idea of ejcpedition forces itself upon us; but not at all, 
 in regard to John's baptizing a multitude, farther than 
 was consistent with deep solemnity; for it is no where 
 said, that he baptized them all in a day. What then 
 would serious readers have thought, if Dr. Guise had 
 represented Jesus Christ as giving his disciples the broken 
 loaves and the divided fishes to fling among the ranks, 
 and leave the hungry thousands to scramble for them ? 
 
 * Mark vi, 40. 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 217 
 
 I cannot help supposing, that they would have execrated 
 the representation as a vile impeachment of our Lord's 
 conduct, and as worthy of a Woolston, rather than a 
 Guise. My reader will apply this to the case before us. 
 Again : Do any of our opponents imagine that our 
 Lord, standing in one of these ranks, was baptized by 
 having a little water cast upon him in this random way? 
 Or, do they suppose that John baptized him in a singu- 
 lar manner? Few, I think, will assert the former; and 
 as to the latter, there is no appearance of evidence. 
 For, are we informed that the people of Judea and of 
 Jerusalem were all baptized by John in the river Jordan'i . 
 We are assured by the same authority, that Jesus came 
 from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John 
 in Jordan* Such is the testimony of Matthew and of 
 Mark; with which the language of sacred history in the 
 Old Testament, as given by the Seventy, may be com- 
 pared. Of Naaman, it is written: " Then went he down 
 and dipped himself, ePaTrna-aTo, seven times in Jordan."'}" 
 With equal reason therefore might we suppose, that the 
 Syrian general went only to the biHnk, or just within the 
 edge of Jordan, and there cast'water upon his head or his 
 face ; as adopt the imagination of these authors, respect- 
 ing the manner of John's proceeding. When the Seventy 
 interpreters express the idea of coming to Jordan, their 
 words are, ewf rov lop^avov : '\, when they convey the no- 
 tion of standing by Jordan, they use the terms, em rov 
 hp'^avov : § and when they represent a person standing 
 upon the brink, or Just within the edge ofjordati, their 
 language is, eiri rov '/eiXovg rov lof^avov.^ But when the 
 evangelists mention Jordan, in connection with John's 
 baptizing, they represent him as performing the rite, ev 
 Tw lop^avYj, IN Jordan; or as baptizing, eig rov lop^avvjv, 
 INTO Jordan.^ As coming to the brink of Jordan, and 
 
 * Mark i. 5, 9 5 Matt. iii. 6. f 2 Kings v. 14. 
 
 X 9. Sam. xix. 15 ; 2 Kings vi. '2, and vii. 1.5. 
 
 § ^2Kingsii.7. || SKings ii. 13. ^ Matt. iii. 6 j Mark i. 9. 
 
218 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 being in that river, manifestly denote different situations; 
 so they are plainly distinguished in the Septuagint. " When 
 ye are come to the brink, ctt* jxcpovg, of the water of 
 Jordan, ye shall stand still, ev lop^avvj, in Jordan."* 
 So, in the history of the Ethiopian eunuch, it is written, 
 " As they went on their way, they came to a certain 
 water, €7r/ T/ v^ap-^' which is an approach to the brink: 
 but when the act of baptizing was to be performed, 
 *' they went down both into the water, eig to v^cop, both 
 Philip and the eunuch ;"'f which, doubtless, expresses an 
 idea somewhat different from the eunuch standing o?i the 
 brink, or just within the edge of the water, that Philip 
 might cast a few drops upon his head or his face. 
 
 Or, if the sacred historians designed to inform us, 
 that our Lord accompanied John into Jordan, that he 
 might be baptized by having a little water, not cast in 
 his face, but poured upon his head; how comes it that 
 none of them says a word about that memorable, so- 
 lemn, and significant ^ow7*i;/o'.^ It is manifest they were 
 not so sparing in their narratives on other occasions, 
 though of much less importance to our instruction, and 
 to the purity of a divine institution. Is om\.mer\i poured 
 on the head of our Lord, once and again? it is expressly 
 mentioned by those very evangelists who represent him 
 as baptized in Jordan.^ Yet none can doubt that it 
 was of much greater moment for us to know, in ^^hat 
 manner he was baptized; than it was precisely to be 
 informed, how two godly women applied their costly 
 ointment to his sacred person. 
 
 The peojjle stood in ranks, near to, or Just within the 
 edge of the river ; and John, passing before them, cast 
 water upon their heads or faces. Such, according to 
 these authors, was the truly primitive mode of proceed- 
 ing ! But if any of our opposers really believe this, 
 why do they not imitate an example of such antiquity 
 and so well recommended? Why, when calleil to admi- 
 
 * Jobh.iii. 8. t Acts viii.3G,38. + Matt.xxvi. 7; Mark xiv.3. 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLl. OWING AGES, 219 
 
 nister baptism, do they not go to a river, or some col- 
 lection of water, place the candidate on the brink, and 
 then, standing in the liquid element, cast some of it 
 upon his head or his fiice ? This would be a compliance 
 with what these authors consider as original practice. — 
 It may be observed, however, that their own representa- 
 tion of John's proceedings does not give us a very 
 strong idea of his baptizing infants. For mere infants 
 could not stand in ranks, either on the brink, or just 
 within the edge of Jordan. Were they then laid in 
 ranks ? our opposers, I think, will not assert it. They, 
 it may be presumed, if present for the purpose of being 
 baptized, must have been held in the arms; of which, 
 nevertheless, there is no mention. Nor could the ad- 
 ministrator take them into his arms one by one; for 
 that, according to this representation, his expedition 
 in baptizing multitudes would not permit. If, therefore, 
 he sprinkled infants along with adults, it must have 
 been while they were in the arms of their parents, or of 
 their friends; of which there is no intimation, or shadow 
 of probability. It is to be feared, therefore, that this 
 remarkable anecdote of primitive sprinkling, of which 
 some Paedobaptists are so fond, has a tendency to ex- 
 clude infants from a share in the rite. However, be 
 that as it may, for any of our Protestant Dissenting bre- 
 thren to fix the idea of original example in opposition 
 to us, and never to imitate that example, has but an 
 awkward look; as it is too much like the conduct of 
 Roman Catholics, respecting the holy supper. Who- 
 ever believes the divine mission of John, cannot have 
 any just reason to be ashamed of doing as he did, in 
 regard to the use of baptismal water. Yet were I in- 
 formed that Mr. Horsey, for instance, frequently goes 
 into a river, merely to sprinkle an infant, or an adult; 
 I should certainly impeach, either the credibiHtif of my 
 information, or the intellects of the administrator. Nor 
 would a consideration of all I have read in Mr. Hor- 
 
220 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 sey's Discourse, concerning John's being the son of a 
 priest, concerning legal pur ificatioiis, and running water ^ 
 at all relieve my anxiety about the punctuality of my 
 informant, or the sanity of my friend. Because, when 
 John baptized, it was, not as the son of a priest, but as 
 the forerunner of Christ; not as influenced by Jewish 
 customs, but as feeling the force of divine authority. Be- 
 sides, vvere it granted that mere water was ever sprinl^led 
 with a view to legal purification, which nevertheless can- 
 not be proved ; it would be as hard to evince, that the 
 Jewish priests w ent into a river to sprinkle the running 
 water, as it would be to demonstrate that they purified 
 any person by plunging him in water. Nor, among 
 all the laws of ceremonial purification, do I recollect 
 one, that enjoined pouring water on the head, or sprink- 
 ling it on \X\Q face: much less, that the officiating priest 
 should thus apply the liquid element, when standing on 
 the brink, or just within the edge of a stream. 
 
 It may perhaps be said : John chose a river for the 
 purpose of sprinkling, not only because it was running 
 water, but also on account of the nndtitude that came 
 to his baptism; and therefore his example in entering 
 a river does not, in common cases, oblige. So the Ro- 
 man Catholics tell us, that in primitive times, when the 
 sacred supper was administered to a small number of 
 communicants, they might all partake of the cup without 
 inconvenience ; but afterward, when communicants be- 
 came numerous, it was necessary to make an alteration 
 in that particular.^ — The futility of this plea will farther 
 appear, if it be considered, that a basin, or a pail, would 
 have contained a sufficient quantity of water for the 
 sprinkhng of great numbers. See No. 60. — Besides, 
 we are informed, that w hen Philip baptized a single in- 
 dividual, both he and the candidate ivent into the water. 
 Were Mr. Horsey, therefore, to act upon that represen- 
 tation of John's baptism which he has given, I cannot 
 help thinking, that serious Picdobaptist spectators would 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 221 
 
 find themselves in a predicament not much different 
 from that of the poet : 
 
 " To laugh were want of goodness and of grace ; 
 And to be grave exceeds all power of face." 
 
 If our Lord's harbinger discovered no more solem- 
 nity and caution in hearing a profession of repentance 
 made by the candidates, and in declaring by what au- 
 thority and for what purposes they were to be baptized, 
 than these our opponents represent him as having when 
 he used the water; there was, we may venture to conclude, 
 but little appearance of his baptism being /row heaven^ 
 or of much devotion subsisting in his heart. The love 
 of hypothesis must surely be very great, when it impels 
 godly and sensible men to seek refuge for their cause in 
 such extravagant fancies as these. But, as Mr. Alsop 
 observes, " when men are pressed with express scripture, 
 and yet are resolved (cost what will) to adhere to their 
 own conclusions, it is advisable to cast about, to turn 
 their thoughts into all shapes imaginable, to hunt for the 
 extremest possibilities. If a word, a phrase, an expres- 
 sion, is but capable of another sense, let it be probable 
 or improbable, true or false, agreeable to the scope of 
 the place, or alien, all is a case; something must be 
 said, that they may not seem to say nothing: and if 
 they can say. It is possible it may he othei^wise, (as who 
 cannot ?) though they do not believe themselves, they 
 hug themselves for their ready wit, and applaud them- 
 selves for grave respondents." * 
 
 Reflect. VI. The baptism of the three thousand '\ 
 has been frequently pleaded, as a presumptive evidence 
 in favour of pouring, or of sprinkling. The Roman 
 Catholics also imagine, that they find a warrant in the 
 same fact, for persons who do not bear the ministerial 
 character to administer baptism, when a supposed ne- 
 cessity urges ; because they conclude that the apostles 
 
 * Antisozzo, p. 549, 550. f Acts ii. 41. 
 
222 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 could not baptize so great a number in so short a 
 time.*^ Agreeable to which is the following language of 
 Mr. Ferdinando Shaw : " IVIany learned men are of 
 opinion, that the believers, the brethren, lay-christians, 
 assisted the apostles in baptizing them ; without which it 
 is hard to be conceived how it could be done in so 
 short a time." t One very learned, sagacious, and im- 
 partial writer, already quoted, (No. 76,) frankly acknow- 
 ledges, that the passage is far from affording an argu- 
 ment against immersion ; to whom I will now add a 
 few more Picdobaptists. Thus then, Mr. Marchant : 
 " The only question is, how^ such a multitude of con- 
 verts could be baptized in one day? To which some 
 reply, that this rite of initiation into the Christian church 
 was then performed by way of sprinkling, as it is 
 among us: but whoever looks into history will find, 
 that the form of baptism among the Jews was plung- 
 ing the whole body under water ; and that in confor- 
 mity to them, the primitive Christians did, and the 
 eastern church even to this day does administer that 
 sacrament in this manner. There is no necessity, there- 
 fore, for us to suppose, that all those proselytes to 
 the Christian faith were baptized in one day. St. 
 Luke delivers in the gross, what might possibly be 
 
 transacted at several times.":}: Buddeus : "When 
 
 those three thousand persons that were brought to re- 
 pentance in one day, by the preaching of Peter, were to 
 be baptized, they were led to another place ; and might 
 be baptized, [i. e. immersed] by the apostles, by others 
 in company with them, and also by the seventy disciples. 
 For though I.uke has not mentioned this, yet we cannot 
 thence infer that it is not a fact, seeing many circum- 
 stances are frequently omitted for the sake of brevity." § 
 
 * Forbesii Instruct. Hist. Theol. 1. x. c. xiii. § 13. 
 
 f Valid, of Bap. by Dissent. Ministers, p. 92, edit. 2nd. 
 
 ■^ Exposit. in loc. § Theolog. Dogmat. 1. v. c. i. § 5. 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 223 
 
 Bp. Wilson: " The same day, i. e. at that time, 
 
 on account of that sermon ; though they might not all 
 be baptized in one day, but were at that time con- 
 verted."* Bp. Taylor: "Aquinas supposes the 
 
 apostles did so, [that is, used sprinkhng instead of im- 
 mersion,] when the three thousand, and when the five 
 thousand, were at once converted and baptized. But 
 this is but a conjecture, and hath no tradition and no 
 
 record to warrant it."t Bossuet : " It appears not, 
 
 that the three thousand and the five thousand, men- 
 tioned in the Acts of the Apostles, who were converted 
 at the first sermons of St. Peter, were baptized any 
 other way [than by immersion ;] and the great numbers 
 of those converts is no proof that they were baptized by 
 sprinkling, as some have conjectured. For, besides that 
 nothing obliges us to say that they were all baptized on 
 the same day ; it is certain that St. John the Baptist, who 
 baptized no less numbers, seeing all Judea flocked to 
 him, baptized no other way than by dipping : and his 
 example shows us, that to baptize a great number of 
 people those places were chosenwhere there was abund- 
 ance of water. Add to this, that the baths and purifi- 
 cations of the ancients rendered this ceremony easy and 
 familiar at that time." J 
 
 People who are but little accustomed to cold bathing, 
 either for amusement, for medical purposes, or with re- 
 ligious views, may wonder how such multitudes could 
 be accommodated, if they were immersed in water; but 
 when it is considered that this was done at Jerusalem, 
 where immersion was quite familiar, and must, by the 
 laws of Judaism, be daily practised, not only there, but 
 in all parts of the country, their amazement will cease. 
 For, as Bp. Patrick observes, " There are so many wash- 
 ings prescribed [in the law of Moses,] that it is reason- 
 
 * Note in loc. f Duct Dub. b. ill. chap, iv, p. 644, 
 
 X In Mr. Stennett's Answer to Mr, Russen, p, 175, 176. 
 
224 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 able to believe, there were not only at Jerusalem, and in 
 all other cities, but in every village, several bathing 
 places contrived for these legal purifications, that men 
 might, without much labour, be capable to fulfil these 
 precepts." * Thus also D'Outreinius : " Whoever con- 
 siders the number of unclean persons, who daily had 
 need of washing, and he who reads the Talmudic Trea- 
 tises concerning purifications, and collections of water 
 convenient for those purposes, will be easily persuaded, 
 that Bethesda and other pools at Jerusalem subserved 
 that design. "f 
 
 Again : We are informed by the sacred historian, 
 that when king Solomon dedicated his magnificent tem- 
 ple, he offered two and twenty thousand o.ven, and a hun- 
 dred and twenty thousand sheep. Now, supposing a 
 Deist were to question the truth of this historical fact, 
 on account of the great number of animals that were 
 ofliered ; it would soon be replied by our opponents 
 themselves : " A great number of priests were employed ; 
 nor was the work performed in one day.";j: Why then 
 may not a similar answer suffice in the present case ? 
 All the Jewish males were enjoined, by divine law, to 
 appear before the Lord in Jerusalem three times in a 
 year. Now it may be asked, How could that metro- 
 polis contain such multitudes as came up from all parts 
 of the country, at each of their grand festivals ? Though 
 far from thinking this difficulty insurmountable, yet I 
 am persuaded, that it is full as easy to account for the 
 three thousand being immersed in one day, as it is to 
 conceive how such a prodigious concourse of strangers 
 were accommodated with lodgings, in the city and 
 suburbs of Jerusalem. But as, in the one case, there is 
 no necessity of supposing that the strangers were turned 
 into the fields to sleep with cattle ; § so, in the other, 
 
 * On Lev. xv. 12. f Kiblioth. Breinens. class, i. p. 614. 
 
 + See Mr. Martin's Letters to Mr. Horsey, p. 150, l.'il. 
 § See Dr. Jennings's Jewish Antiq. vol. ii. p. 169, 1/0. 
 
THE CHURCH IN" FOLLOWING AGES. 225 
 
 there is no occasion to imagine that plunging was con- 
 verted into sprinkHng. 
 
 Farther: Were the method of arguing adopted by 
 our opposers with reference to this passage legitimate, 
 and their inference vahd, it might be rendered highly 
 probable, that the first instance of circumcision was per- 
 formed, not by cutting off the foreskin, but by making a 
 slight incision in that pellicle. For Moses assures us, 
 that Abraham circumcised himself and his son Ishmael, 
 tocfether with all the males that were born in his house 
 and bought with his money, on the very same day that 
 he received the divine order.* We are also informed 
 by the sacred historian, that long before Abraham 
 received the command of circumcision, lie had three 
 hundred and eighteen male servants, who were born in 
 his own house, and able to bear arms ;'\ consequently, it 
 is highly probable the whole number of males that were 
 born in his house, and then living, vvas four hundred 
 or upwards ; besides those that were bought with his 
 money, concerning the number of whom we have no in- 
 formation. Nor is there any reason to think that his 
 household was diminished, but rather increased, when he 
 obeyed the heavenly mandate under consideration. Now 
 if we may estimate the time required for circumcising 
 four or five hundred persons, by the time spent, exclu- 
 sive of devotional exercises, when the modern Jews per- 
 form the same rite upon an infant; we may safely con- 
 sider the difficulty as much greater in the case of Abra- 
 ham's circumcising his numerous household in one day, 
 than that which attends the immersion of three thousand. 
 For, by an instance of circumcision which the author 
 saw performed, he cannot help thinking that the time 
 employed in merely cutting off the foreskin, and taking 
 care of the part wdth a view to its healing, would have 
 sufficed for the solemn immersion of at least four 
 
 * Gen. xvii. 23, 24. f Gen. xiv. 14. 
 
 VOL. I. Q, 
 
226 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 persons.* It must indeed be admitted, as exceedingly 
 probable, that the precautions used by Abraham to abate 
 the pain and to heal the part, were different from those 
 of the modern Jews in similar cases ; but some care, 
 doubtless, must have been immediately necessary, sup- 
 posing the prasputium of each to have been cut off, 
 especially with regard to grown persons in that hot 
 country. But how to account for one man doing all 
 this in a single day, I do not perceive. The difficulty 
 will increase if it be admitted, as I think it ought, that 
 Abraham set the first example in his own person, for, 
 as there is no intimation of any thing miraculous on that 
 occasion, the soreness and the pain must greatly incom- 
 mode him, while performing the rite upon others. On 
 the principle of reasoning here opposed, we might there- 
 fore infer, that the venerable patriarch did not cut off, 
 but only made a trnfting incision in the part specified. 
 But, whatever difficulties may attend speculation upon 
 the fact, I have not heard that any of the Jews ever 
 doubted whether their great progenitor performed a real 
 circumcision upon the males of his very numerous 
 household ; nor that they ever declined an imitation of 
 the original example, on account of any inconveniences 
 which attended it. See Chap. II. Reflect. IX. — It may 
 perhaps be said ; There is no necessity to conclude, that 
 the hoary patriarch himself circumcised all the males of 
 his numerous family; because he might be said to do 
 what was performed by his order. To which it may be 
 replied; The record of the fact expressly marks both 
 the performer and the time ; nor will it, I conceive, ad- 
 mit of such an interpretation ; for it is written, " Abra- 
 nam took Ishmael his son, and all that were born in his 
 house, and all that were bought with his money, every 
 male among the men of Abraham's house, and circum- 
 cised the flesh of their foreskin in the selfsame day, as 
 
 * See Leo Modena's Hist, of the Rites and Customs of the Jews, 
 part iv. chap. viii. 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWINCr AGES. 227 
 
 God had said unto him." Now it is plain, that this 
 language ascribes to Abraham the whole performance of 
 the rite, exclusive of any assistant ; for it was the pa- 
 triarch himself who took Ishmael, and every male in his 
 house, and circumcised them. That all this was per- 
 formed by Abraham in one day, we have no doubt; 
 because the fact rests upon divine testimony : but that 
 speculation when employed upon it is embarrassed, ex- 
 cept we admit of a trifling incision instead of circum- 
 cision, must I think be acknowledged. When our op- 
 posers, therefore, have clearly accounted for the aged 
 patriarch's circumcising four or five hundred persons in 
 one day, they will not be much at a loss to conceive of 
 twelve apostles, and seventy disciples, immersing three 
 thousand in the same space of time. 
 
 That three thousand should be solemnly immersed 
 at such a place as Jerusalem, and at a time when, as the 
 sacred historian remarks, the disciples had favour with all 
 the people, even supposing them all to have been baptized 
 in one day, is not half so strange as various accounts 
 relating to facts of the same nature, that we find in the 
 page of history. Thus, for example, Mr. Marchant: 
 "Peter [and his companions in the ministry] baptizing in 
 one day three thousand persons by immersion, need not 
 be wondered at; since we read in the authentic life of 
 Gregory, the apostle of the Armenians, that he baptized 
 twelve thousand together, by immersion, in the river 
 Euphrates: which Isaac, the patriarch of that nation, 
 
 confirms in his first invective." *■ Mr. Bingham : "Pal- 
 
 ladius observes, in the hfe of St. Chrysostom, that at 
 Constantinople three thousand persons were baptized at 
 
 once, upon one of [their] greater festivals." f Dr. J. 
 
 ^ G.King: "Wolodimer, a Russian prince, was baptized 
 by the name of Basilius; and it is said tweiity thousand 
 of his subjects were baptized the same day." J Mr. 
 
 * Exposit. on Matt.iii 7- f OriginesEccles. b. xi. chap.vi. §9. 
 X Rites and Cerem. of Greek Church, p. 4. 
 
 Q 2 
 
228 PRACTICE OF THE ATOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 John Fox informs us, that Austin, the monk, " baptized 
 and christened ten thousand Saxons, or Angles, in the 
 West river, that is called Swale, beside York, on a 
 Christmas day."* Dr. Robertson: "A single clergy- 
 man baptized in one day above Jive thousand Mexicans, 
 and did not desist till he was so exhausted by fatigue, 
 that he was unable to lift up his hands."'!' — Nay, Sal- 
 mero asserts, (with what credibility the reader will judge,) 
 that " Francis Xavier, among the Indians, baptized 
 Jifteen thousand in one day." Upon which the learned 
 Chamier pertinently asks, " Could fifteen thousand be 
 baptized by one person; and might not three thousand 
 be baptized by many? "J — Respecting the administration 
 of baptism, Dr. Doddridge says: I think " the office was 
 generally assigned to inferiors, as requiring no extraor- 
 dinary abilities, and as being attended with some trouble 
 and inconvenience, especially where immersion was used, 
 as I suppose it often, though not constantly, was." >§ That 
 persons much inferior to the apostles in office and gifts 
 were sometimes employed by them to baptize those who 
 professed faith, we have no doubt: but that it was be- 
 cause of any trouble or inconvenience which attended the 
 administration, we do not believe; nay, we consider such 
 an idea as unworthy the character of those laborious 
 and self-denying ambassadors of Christ. 
 
 Our opponents, however, seem to forget that the prin- 
 cipal difficulty, in regard to time, does not lie in such a 
 multitude being baptized, whether by plunging or other- 
 wise; but in their making a satisfactory profession of 
 repentance and faith. For the three thousand were 
 adults; and our opposers agree, that all adults, pre- 
 vious to baptism, should make such a profession. It is 
 
 * Acts and Mon. under A.D. 602. 
 •f Hist, of South America, vol. ii. p. 3S4, quarto, 
 X Panstrat. torn. iv. 1. V. c. xiv. §39. 
 
 § Note on 1 Cor. i. 16. Vid. Turrett. Institut. loc. xix. quaest. 
 xiv. § 11. 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 229 
 
 much easier to conceive of their being immersed in the 
 course of a day, by such a number of administrators, 
 and with such conveniences as were then at Jerusalem; 
 than it is to imagine how those administrators could 
 receive a profession of faith in the Son of God, from 
 each of the candidates, in an equal space of time. I may 
 here venture an appeal to Pasdobaptist ministers. Whe- 
 ther, when adults apply for baptism, they do not spend 
 more time in hearing a declaration of the grounds of 
 their faith and hope, than they themselves would think 
 necessary for the solemn immersion of such candidates, 
 a river, a pond, or a baptistery being at hand? The pas- 
 sage before us, therefore, might be adduced with much 
 more appearance of argument, in opposition to the neces- 
 sity of personally professing faith previous to baptism, 
 than it can in favour'of pouring or sprinkling. — But why 
 should our opposers raise an objection, which, as Mr. 
 Martin observes, if it have any force, militates against 
 the idea of pouring, as well as of plunging ? For, as but 
 one person could be baptized at once, and as the same 
 form of words must have been used at the baptism of 
 each, the difference in respect of time between their 
 being plunged, and having- water poured or sprinkled 
 upon them, must be considered as very small. Besides, 
 according to another branch of that hypothesis which we 
 oppose, it seems as if many of these three thousand must 
 have had their children sprinkled in the same sj:)ace of 
 time; which will greatly increase the number, and more 
 than counterbalance the extra time required for immer- 
 sion. — Should it be objected, There is no occasion for 
 supposing that the children of those believers were bap- 
 tized on the same day: it may be replied, Neither does 
 Luke say that the three thousand were baptized, but 
 added to the church, the same day. Besides, an objec- 
 tion of that kind would be a departure from their usual 
 way of stating the matter; for they have often told us, 
 that infants were baptized along ivith their parents ; and 
 
230 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 it is full as likely that those children whose parents were 
 among the three thousand should be baptized at the same 
 time, as that the jailor's infants, if he had any, should 
 have their sweet repose disturbed by being baptized at 
 midnight. Yet this their argument, from the latter of 
 these facts, implies. — I will add a remark of Mr. Ditton's : 
 " If the evidence be good," says he, *' by all the laws of 
 human nature, I do not care for ten thousand difficul- 
 ties, if they were ever so insuperable, provided they are 
 not such as infer simple impossibility, or palpable ab- 
 surdity."* 
 
 Once more : Supposing it appeared with indisputable 
 evidence, that the three thousand were baptized by pour- 
 ing or sprinkling; yet, according to Protestant Paedo- 
 baptists, it would not prove the lawfulness of such an 
 administration in common practice, except it appeared 
 to agree with divine law, or to have been the appoint- 
 ment of Christ. For this was undoubtedly an extraor- 
 dinary case; and learned Paedobaptists assure us, when 
 disputing with Roman Catholics about the sacred sup- 
 per, That a scriptural example in an extraordinary in- 
 stance, must not be considered as the rule of general 
 conduct. — Thus Mr. Steele: " The relation of an exam- 
 ple in an extraordinary case, [is not] sufficient to cancel 
 
 a direct precept and clear example with it. "t Chem- 
 
 nitius thus: " A general rule must not be taken from 
 extraordinary examples; — for that should be derived 
 
 from the institution of the sacraments." J JNIr. Payne, 
 
 in answer to an argument of the Papists for communion 
 in one kind, which is drawn from supposed instances of 
 such a practice in the ancient church, thus reasons: 
 " What will this signify, [could it be proved] to the 
 justifying the constant and pubHc communions in one 
 kind, when there are no such particular or extraordinary 
 
 * Discourse on the Resurrection of Christ, part iii. sect. Ixix. 
 -)- Morning Exercise against Popery, ]). 774. 
 X Exam. Concil. Trident, p. 216. Vid. p.327. 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 231 
 
 reasons for it?. . . .The doing this, is as if the Jews, be- 
 cause whilst they were in the wilderness they could not 
 so well observe the precept of circumcision, and so were 
 at that time, for a particular reason, excused from it, 
 should ever after have omitted it as unnecessary. This, 
 sure, had been making too bold with a positive precept, 
 although there might be a particular case, or instance, 
 wherein it was not so exactly to be observed .... David's 
 eating the show-bread, which it was not lawful but for 
 the priests ordinarily to eat, is approved by our Saviour; 
 not upon the account of tradition, or the judgment of 
 the high-priest, but the extreme hunger which he and 
 his companions were then pressed with, and which made 
 it lawful for them to eat of the hallowed bread, when 
 there was no other to be procured. But did this make 
 it lawful afterwards for the high-priest, or the Sanhe- 
 drim, to have made the holy bread always common to 
 others when there was no such necessity?"* 
 
 Reflection VII. If the numerous and learned au- 
 thors, in the beginning of this chapter, be not under a 
 gross mistake, with regard to apostolic practice, my 
 reader has reason to be surprised, offended, shocked, at 
 the following reflection Avhich is cast on immersion ; 
 because he cannot but perceive it to fall on some of the 
 most venerable and excellent persons that ever appeared 
 in the world. " To baptize naked, or neM to naked, 
 (which is SUPPOSED, and generally practised in im- 
 mersion) is against the law of modesty ; and to do such 
 a thing in public solemn assemblies, is so far from being 
 tolerable, that it is abominable, to every chaste soul : 
 and especially to baptize women in this manner." f — 
 When, in perusing the treatise, I came to these words, I 
 paused, I was astonished, I was almost confounded. 
 What, thought I, is this the language of the amiable and 
 
 * Preserv. against Popery, title vii. p, 124, 149. 
 
 t Mr. Matt. Henry's Treatise on Baptism, p. 138, 139. 
 
232 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 excellent Mr, Henry ? Does immersion SUPPOSE 
 the subject of the ordinance naked, or next to naked? 
 Is this PRACTISED, GENERALLY practised, prac- 
 tised in PUBLIC SOLEMN ASSEMBLIES, and that upon 
 WOMEN too ? Where have you been, ye sons of 
 sensuality ! that you have not crowded around our bap- 
 tisteries, when we have immersed any of the fair sex ? 
 How many fine opportunities have you missed, of feast- 
 ing your lascivious eyes, and exulting in the wonderful 
 sight ! And what are you about, ye infidels ; ye who 
 laugh at every thing sacred, and take a malignant 
 pleasure in exposing Christianity to ridicule ! what, I 
 again ask, are ye about, that you have not published our 
 praise for gratifying your enmity to the religion of Jesus 
 Christ ! For on the word of an author, who has long 
 been held in a high degree of esteem by the religious 
 public, vve have often committed the most enormous 
 outrage — I will not say, on the solemnities of religion^ 
 because you do not regard them — but, on the laws of 
 decorum, and on the modest feelings of the tender sex ; 
 even while professing to act by the authority and ex- 
 ample of Christ. What, are ye silent, all silent on such 
 an interesting occasion ; while the pen of a Christian 
 minister, of a sacred expositor, and of a Protestant Dis- 
 senting Brother, is thus officiously employed? This, 
 ah! this — but I forbear; and shall only add a salutary 
 prohibition, a gentle reprehension, and a candid extenu- 
 ation. Thou shalt not bear false witness 
 AGAINST thy NEIGHBOUR; is the prohibition of 
 Jehovah, the God of Israel. " We ought to disown 
 and show a dislike of the profane scoffs which 
 some people give to the English Antipaedobaptists, 
 merely for their use of dipping;" is the reprehension 
 of Dr. Wall, the Episcopalian. See No. 96. — I wot that 
 THROUGH IGNORANCE ye did it ; is the extenuation of 
 Peter the apostle, when the most unjustifiable conduct 
 \Aas un(l(n- hi^ notice. 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING ACES. 233 
 
 I will now subjoin the remark of a Paedobaptist 
 writer upon this passage of Mr. Henry. " This calumny 
 against immersion," says one of the Monthly Reviewers, 
 " might possibly have had some grounds in the practice 
 of a few enthusiasts in the last age. Mr. Baxter uses 
 almost the same words, when speaking of the indecency, 
 as well as the danger, of administering baptism by im- 
 mersion, as Mr. Henry ; and indeed the latter appears 
 to have copied from him. The reflection, however, 
 should by no means be extended to the general practice 
 of the Antipaedobaptists, especially those of modern 
 times. We almost question if it ever had a foundation : 
 
 we are certain it hath none at present."* It has, 
 
 indeed, been supposed by many of the learned, and there 
 seems to be some evidence of it, that the ancients did 
 sometimes administer the ordinance to persons of both 
 sexes, in pur is naturalibus : against this, however, the 
 famous Voetius has entered his protest, as a mistake of 
 the moderns, and a misrepresentation of ancient prac- 
 tice.f But, admitting the fact, all whom I have ob- 
 served agree, that a becoming decorum was constantly 
 observed, as far as the nature of the case would permit. 
 Thus, for instance, Dr. Wall : " They took great care for 
 preserving the modesty of any woman that was to be 
 baptized. There was none but women came near, or in 
 sight, till she was undressed, and her body in the water : 
 then the priest came, and putting her head also under 
 water, used the form of words. Then he departed, 
 and the women took her out of the water, and clothed 
 her again in white garments. J" 
 
 Those who have read the writings of Dr. Featley, 
 and of Messrs. Baxter, Wills, Russen, Burkitt, and 
 
 * Monthly Review, for Sep. 1784, p. 237. 
 
 f Apud. Witsium, OEcon. 1 iv. e. xvi, § 14. 
 
 + Hist. Inf. Bap. part ii. chap. ix. § 3. Vid. Vossium, Dis- 
 putat. de Bap. disput. i. thes, vi. vii. viii., and Mr. Bingham's 
 Origines Ecclesiast. b, xi. chap, xi. § 1,2^3, 
 
.234 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 various others, in vindication of Paedobaptism, cannot 
 be ignorant, that the Baptists have been frequently 
 treated in the most illiberal manner. I will here present 
 the reader with an extract from the famous Mr. Baxter, 
 and leave the impartial to judge, whether it be the 
 language of calm reason, of authenticated fact, and of 
 Christian charity ; or the clamour of prejudice, the dis- 
 tortion of misrepresentation, and the raving of a per- 
 secuting temper. Thus, then, Mr. Baxter : " My sixth 
 argument shall be against the usual manner of their 
 baptizing, as it is by dipping over head in a river, or 
 other cold water. . . .That which is a plain breach of the 
 sixth commandment, Thou shall not kill, is no ordinance 
 of God, but a most heinous sin. But the ordinary 
 practice of baptizing over head in cold water, as neces- 
 sary, is a plain breach of the sixth commandment. 
 Therefore it is no ordinance of Cod, but an heinous sin. 
 And as Mr. Cradock in his book of Gospel Liberty 
 shows, the magistrate ought to restrain it, to save the 
 lives of his subjects. . . .That this is flat murder, and 
 no better, being ordinarily and generally used, is un- 
 deniable to any understanding man .... And I know 
 not what trick a covetous landlord can find out to get 
 his tenants to die apace, that he may have new fines and 
 heriots, likelier than to encourage such preachers, that 
 he may get them all to turn Anabaptists. I wish that 
 this device be not it that countenanceth these men. And 
 covetous physicians, methinks, should not be much 
 against them. Catarrhs and obstructions, which are the 
 two great fountains of most mortal diseases in man's 
 body, could scarce have a more notable means to pro- 
 duce them where they are not, or to increase them where 
 they are. Apoplexies, lethargies, palsies, and all coma- 
 tous diseases, would be promoted by it. So would 
 cepbalalgies, hemicranies, phthises, debility of the 
 stomach, crudities, and almost all fevers, dysenteries, 
 diarrlia'as, colics, iliac passions, convulsions, spasms, 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 235 
 
 tremors, and so on. All hepatic, splenetic, pulmoniac 
 persons, and hypocondriacs, would soon have enough 
 of it. In a word, it is good for nothing but to despatch 
 men out of the world that are burdensome, and to ranken 
 churchyards....! conclude, if murder be a sin, then 
 dipping ordinarily in cold water over head, in England, 
 is a sin : and if those that would make it men's religion 
 to murder themselves, and urge it on their consciences 
 as their duty, are not to be suffered in a common 
 wealth, any more than highway murderers ; then judge 
 how these Anabaptists, that teach the necessity of 
 such dipping, are to be suffered .... My seventh argu- 
 ment is also against another wickedness in their man- 
 ner of baptizing, which is their dipping persons naked, 
 as is very usual with many of them ; or nea:t to naked, 
 as is usual with the modestest that I have heard of . . . . 
 If the minister must go into the water with the party, 
 it will certainly tend to his death, though they may escape 
 that go in but once. . . .Would not vain young men 
 come to a baptizing to see the nakedness of maids, and 
 make a mere jest and sport of it?"* — Were this repre- 
 sentation just, we should have no reason to wonder if 
 his following words expressed a fact: " I am still more 
 confirmed, that a visible judgment of God doth still 
 follow Anabaptistry, wherever it comes. f" Compare 
 Chap. III. No. 4, and No. 60, of this Chapter. — It was 
 not without reason, I perceive, that Mr. Baxter made 
 the following acknowledgment : "I confess my style is 
 naturally keen'''^ I am a little suspicious also, that Dr. 
 Owen had some cause for speaking of his writings as 
 follows. " I verily believe, that if a man who had 
 nothing else to do, should gather into one heap all the 
 expressions which in his late books, Confessions and 
 Apologies, have a lovely aspect towards himself, as to 
 ability, diligence, sincerity, on the one hand ; with all 
 
 * Plain Scripture Proof, p. 134 — 137. 
 
 t Ut supra^ p,88. + Ibid. p. 246. 
 
236 PRACTICE OF TJIE APOSTLES, AND OF 
 
 those which are full of reiproach and contempt towards 
 others, on the other ; the view of them could not but a 
 little startle a man of so great modesty, and of such 
 eminency in the mortification of pride, as Mr. Baxter 
 is.*" — Hence we learn, that Baptists are not the only 
 persons who have felt the weight of Mr. Baxter's hand ; 
 so that, if a recollection of others having suffered under 
 his keen resentment can afford relief, the poor Baptists 
 may take some comfort : and it is an old saying, 
 
 Solamen miseris socios habuisse doloris. 
 
 Besides, there is a precept of Horace which occurs to 
 remembrance, and is of use in the present exigence. 
 Amara lento temperet risu, is the advice to which I 
 refer ; and under the influence of this direction, vve are 
 led to say : Poor man ! He seem.s to be afflicted with a 
 violent hydrophobia ! for he cannot think of any person 
 being immersed in cold water, but he starts, he is con- 
 vulsed, he is ready to die with fear. Immersion, you 
 must know, is like Pandora's box, and pregnant with 
 a great part of those diseases which Milton's angel pre- 
 sented to the view of our first father. A compassionate 
 regard, therefore, to the lives of his fellow creatures, 
 compels Mr. Baxter to solicit the aid of magistrates 
 against this destructive plunging, and to cry out in the 
 spirit of an exclamation once heard in the Jewish tem- 
 temple : ' Ye men of Israel, help!' or Baptist ministers 
 will depopulate your country. Know you not, that these 
 plunging teachers are shrewdly suspected of being pen- 
 sioned by avaricious landlords, to destroy the lives of 
 your liege subjects? Exert your power; apprehend the 
 delinquents ; appoint an Auto da Fe ; let the venal dip- 
 pers be baptized in blood, and thus put a salutary stop 
 to their pestiferous practice." — What a pity it is, that 
 the celebrated History of Cold Bathing, by Sir John 
 
 * Of the Death of Christ, p. 5, subjoined to his Mystery of the 
 Gospel vindicated. 
 
THE CHURCH IN FOLLOWING AGES. 237 
 
 Floyer, was not published half a century sooner ! It 
 might, perhaps, have preserved this good man from 
 a multitude of painful paroxysms, occasioned by the 
 thought of immersion in cold water. — Were I seriously 
 to put a query on these assertions of Mr. Baxter, it 
 should be, with a little variation, in the words of David : 
 " What shall be given unto thee, or what be done unto 
 thee, thou false pen?" Were the temper which dic- 
 tated the preceding caricatura to receive its just reproof, 
 it might be in the laniTuage of Michael : " The Lord 
 rebuke thee ! " 
 
 Before I dismiss this extraordinary language of Mr. 
 Baxter, it is proper to be observed, that the charge of 
 shocking indecency, which he lays with such confidence 
 against the Baptists of those times, was not suffered by 
 them to pass without animadversion. No, he was chal- 
 lenged to make it good : it was denied, it was confuted 
 by them. With a view to which Dr. Wall says : " The 
 English Antipeedobaptists need not have made so great 
 an outcry against Mr. Baxter, for his saying that they 
 baptized naked; for if they had, it had been no more 
 than the primitive Christians did."* But surely they 
 had reason to complain of misrepresentation ; such mis- 
 representation, as tended to bring the greatest odium 
 upon their sentiment and practice. Besides, however 
 ancient the practice charged upon them w^as, its antiquity 
 could not have justified their conduct; except it had 
 been derived from divine command, or apostolic exam- 
 ple, neither of which appears. — Whether Mr. Henry, in 
 the passage already marked, proceeds on the authority 
 of Mr. Baxter, in regard to that outrage on decency 
 with which we are charged, or what induced him to 
 record such things, is not for me to determine; but I 
 cannot forbear wondering that Mr. Robins should publish 
 the obnoxious sentence ; as it appears from his own de- 
 claration,t that he has very much abridged the treatise. 
 
 * Hist. Inf. Bap. part ii, chap. ix. § 3. f Advertisement, p. 7, 
 
238 PRACTICE OF THE APOSTLES, ETC. 
 
 He hopes, indeed, that very few expressions will be 
 found in the work, that are " offetisive to serious and 
 candid readers of any denomination :"* but whether the 
 expressions to which I advert be not Justly offensive; 
 whether the offence given to many of his brethren, who, 
 I trust, have some degree of candour and seriousness, 
 be not owing to his labours, as the editor ; and whether 
 both candour and seriousness do not oblige him to imitate 
 the following confession of Mr. Baxter, I leave to my 
 reader's judgment. " Upon the review of my argu- 
 ments, upon the controversy about infant baptism," says 
 the famous Nonconformist, " I find that 1 have used 
 too many provoking words, for M'hich I am heartily 
 sorry, and desire pardon of God and him,"'f i.e. of 
 Mr. Tombes. 
 
 Now, as it appears by the concessions, declarations, 
 and reasonings of so many learned Paedobaptists them- 
 selves, that the natural and proper idea of the term 
 baptism, the design of the institution, and the example 
 of the apostles, are all in favour of immersion, and all 
 agree with our practice ; we do not, we cannot want any 
 thing more to justify our conduct, either before God or 
 man. This must be the case, except the united testimony 
 of such a cloud of witnesses, and the reasons of it, can 
 be confronted with superior evidence. We have, how- 
 ever, a few more testimonies and concessions to review, 
 relating to this branch of the subject. 
 
 * Ut supra, p. 8. 
 
 f Ii| Mr. Crosby's Hist. Bap. vol. iii, Pref. p. 55. 
 
PRESENT PRACTICE, ETC. 239 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 The present Practice of the Greek and Oriental Churches, 
 in regard to the Mode of Administration. 
 
 Hasselquist. — "The Greeks christen their children 
 immediately after their birth, or within a few days at 
 least, dipping them in warm water ; and in this respect 
 they are much wiser than their brethren the Russians, 
 who dip them into rivers in the coldest winter." Tra- 
 vels, p. 394. 
 
 2. Anonymous. — " The Muscovite priests plunge 
 the child three times over head and ears in water." 
 Encyclopasd. Britan. vol. ix. p. 6910. 
 
 3. Venema. — " In pronouncing the baptismal form 
 of words, the Greeks use the third person, saying, ' Let 
 the servant of Christ be baptized, in the name of the 
 Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit ;' and 
 immerse the whole man in water." Hist. Eccles. 
 tom. vi. p. 660. 
 
 4. Deylingius. — " The Greeks retain the rite of im- 
 mersion to this day ; as Jeremiah the patriarch of Con- 
 stantinople declares." De Prudent. Pastoral, pars. iii. 
 c. iii. § 9,6. 
 
 5. Mr. Millar. — " In baptism they [the Muscovites] 
 dip their children in cold water." Propagation of Christ, 
 vol. ii. chap. vi. p. 115. 
 
 6. Buddeus." — " That the Greeks defend immersion 
 is manifest, and has been frequently observed by learned 
 men ; which Ludolphus informs us is the practice of the 
 Ethiopians." Theolog. Dogmat. 1. v. c. i. § 5. 
 
 7. Witsius. — " That immersion may be practised in 
 cold countries, without any great danger of health and 
 life, the Muscovites prove by their own example ; who 
 
240 PRESENT PRACTICE OF THE 
 
 entirely immerse their infants three times in water, not 
 believing that baptism can be otherwise rightly adminis- 
 tered. Nor do they ever use warm water, except for 
 those that are weak or sickly." CEcon. Feed. 1. iv. 
 c. xvi. § 13. 
 
 8. Sir Paul Ricaut. — " The modern Greek church 
 defines baptism to be, ' A cleansing, or taking away of 
 original sin, by thrice dipping or plunging into the wa- 
 ter ;' the priest saying at every dipping, ' In the name 
 of the Father, Amen ; and of the Son, Amen ; and of 
 the Holy Ghost, Amen.' This thrice dipping, or plung- 
 ing into the water, this church holds to be as necessary 
 to the form of baptism, as water to the matter." Pre- 
 sent State of the Greek Church, p. 163. 
 
 9. Dr. J. G. King. — " The Greek church uniformly 
 practises the trine immersion, undoubtedly the most 
 primitive manner." Rites and Cerem. of the Greek 
 Church in Russia, p. IQQ- 
 
 10. Dr. Wall. — ''AH the Christians in Asia, all in 
 Africa, and about one third part of Europe, are of the 
 last sort, [i. e. practise immersion ;] in which third part 
 of Europe are comprehended the Christians of Grascia, 
 Thracia, Servia, Bulgaria, Rascia, Walachia, Moldavia, 
 Russia Nigra, and so on ; and even the Muscovites, 
 who, if coldness of the country will excuse, might plead 
 for a dispensation with the most reason of any. Hist, of 
 Inf. Bap. partii. chap. ix. p. 477. 
 
 REFLECTIONS. 
 
 Reflect. I. As it appears from the preceding chapter, 
 that immersion was the general and almost universal 
 practice for a long course of ages ; and, as various of 
 those learned authors assert, for thirteen centuries; 
 so it is manifest from these quotations, that it has been 
 uninterruptedly continued as the general mode of pro- 
 ceeding, in all the Greek and oriental churches. Now 
 these churches, as Dr. Wall informs us, comprehend 
 
GREEK AND ORIENTAL CHURCHES. ^41 
 
 " very near one half the Christians in the world."* Nay, 
 Dr. King tells us, that they have '' a greater extent than 
 the Latin, with all the branches which are sprung from 
 it."t Consequently, though we are far from considering 
 the numbers that adopt a sentiment, or a practice, as 
 the criterion of truth, or of right; yet we may confi- 
 dently assert, that our practice of immersion, as essential 
 to the ordinance, is neither that novel, not yet that sin- 
 gular thing, which many of our opponents are very de- 
 sirous of makino; their neighbours believe it to be. Nor 
 can I forbear to wonder at their inadvertency, when they 
 act in this manner : and as to ministers of the Eno-lish 
 establishment, it requires an uncommon degree of igno- 
 rance, of prejudice, of prevarication, or of assurance, for 
 any of them to treat immersion as a novel, an indecent, 
 or an unjustifiable practice ; because the rubric of their 
 liturgy, that rubric which they have solemnly professed 
 to believe and approve, even that very rubric which they 
 have engaged to treat as the Imv of their proceedings, in 
 the administration of baptism, as well as in other cases, 
 expressly requires it ; except the sponsors inform the 
 priest, that the child cannot well bear to be dipped. 
 To which the catechism of the same establishment 
 plainly adverts, when it instructs the catechumen to say; 
 " Water, wherein the person is baptized." For the idea 
 of pouring, or of sprinkling, cannot be applied here 
 without rendering the language absurd. " Upon the 
 review of the Common Prayer-book at the restoration," 
 says Dr. Wall, " the church of England did not think fit 
 (however prevalent the custom of sprinkling was) to 
 forego their maxim ; That it is most Jitting to dip chil- 
 dren that are well able to bear it. But they leave it 
 wholly to the judgment of the godfathers and those that 
 
 * See Vol. II. Chap. V. No 7, of this work, 
 f Rites and Cerem. of the Greek Church, p. 3. 
 VOL. T. R 
 
Sl4i2! PRESENT PRACTICE OF THE 
 
 bring the child, whether the child may well endure dip- 
 ping or not. The difference is only this : By the rubric, 
 as it stood before, the priest was to dip, unless there 
 w ere an averment or allegation of weakness : now he is 
 not to dip, unless there be an averment or certifying of 
 strength sufficient to endure it."* Agreeable to this, is 
 the former confession of Helvetia: " Baptism, according 
 to the institution of our Lord, is the font of regeneration; 
 in which holy font we do therefore dip our infants."t 
 The confession of Saxony, thus: " Baptism is an entire 
 action ; to wit, a dipping, and the pronouncing of those 
 words, ' I baptize thee in the name,' and so on."f 
 
 Reflect. II. In respect of the tnne immersion, prac- 
 tised by the Greek Church and the eastern Christians, 
 though it be undoubtedly of great antiquity ; and though 
 it appear to have originated in a strong but misapplied 
 regard to that capital article of the Christian creed, the 
 doctrine of the Holy Trinity; yet as there is no intima- 
 tion in the New Testament, that it was either enjoined 
 by Christ, or practised by his apostles, we cannot agree 
 with Dr. King, when he calls it, " the most primitive 
 manner." See No. y. — An apostle indeed mentions the 
 doctrine of baptisms ; but, as a Pasdobaptist author ob- 
 serves, " That the trine immersion was the occasion of 
 the expression, there is no ground to believe, because so 
 much later than that time.";|; It was, however, practised 
 even here, in the time of Edward the Sixth ; for, accord- 
 ing to his first Common Prayer-book, " the minister is 
 to dip the child in the water thrice; first dipping the 
 right side ; secondly, the left ; the third time, dipping 
 the face towards the font.'"<^ 
 
 * Hist. Inf. Bap. part. ii. chap. ix. p. 473. 
 t Harmony of Confessions, p. 397, 404, 
 X Cure of Deism, vol.i. chap, iv, p. 131, 132. 
 § Encyclopaedia Britan, article, Baptism. 
 
GREEK AND ORIENTAL CHURCHES. 243 
 
 Mr. Henry, when pleading the cause of aspersion, 
 says : " I believe that immersion, yea trine immersion, 
 or plunging the person baptized three times, was com- 
 monly used in very early ages ; and that, as far as Po- 
 pery prevailed, a great deal of stress was laid upon 
 it."* Would this ingenious author, then, persuade us 
 that immersion, whether once or thrice, originated in 
 Popery, and that it was peculiar to such professors 
 of Christianity as acknowledged the Papal authority? 
 If so, he labours to possess his readers of a gross mis- 
 take. For as to immersion, it appears, I think with suf- 
 ficient evidence, by quotations already produced from 
 the most eminent Paedobaptists, that it has the sanction 
 of divine authority in the apostolic practice. And as 
 to the trine immersion, it is manifest from Tertullian, 
 that it was commonly used, long before the supremacy 
 of the bishop of Rome was either claimed by himself, 
 or acknowledged by others ; yet the term Popery signi- 
 fies a system of religious principles and practices, in 
 which an acknowledgment of that supremacy makes a 
 distinguishing and capital figure. " By Popery, says that 
 excellent polemical author, Stapferus, we understand 
 that religion which considers the Pope as the visible and 
 principal head of the church ; — whence also it has its 
 name."'!' Besides, it appears that the Greek and oriental 
 churches, which include one half of the Christian world, 
 have always practised immersion ; and that, for a long 
 course of ages, the trine immersion has been their gene- 
 ral custom : yet they never acknowledged the Papal 
 power; nor, so far as I have observed, was their profes- 
 sion of Christianity ever called Popery. How unfair 
 then is the insinuation contained in these words; "As 
 far as Popery prevailed !" As if the Papists in former 
 
 * Treatise on Bap. p. 137. 
 f Institut. Theolog. Polem. cap. xiv. § 1. 
 R 2 
 
5244 PRESENT PRACTICE, ETC. 
 
 times had been the only persons that pleaded for the 
 baptismal plunging ; and as if our practice had been de- 
 rived from them ! That an author of Mr. Henry's 
 learning, reading, and character should insinuate such 
 things, is amazing. We are indeed so far from having 
 derived immersion from Popery, that quite the reverse 
 is a fact ; for learned Paedobaptists themselves assure 
 us, that pouring and sprinkling, as a common practice, 
 have an exclusive claim to the honour of such an origi- 
 nal. See Chap. VII. No. 21, 23, and Reflect. V. 
 
DESIGN OF BAPTISM, ETC. 245 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 The Desigti of Baptism more fully e.vpressed hy Immer- 
 sion, than by Pouring or Sprinkling. 
 
 WiTSius. — " It must not be dissembled, that there 
 is in immersion a greater fruitfulness of signification, 
 and a more perfect correspondence between the sign 
 and the thing signified ; as we shall show, when we 
 come to that part of our subject." (Econ. Feed. 1. iv. 
 c.xvi. § 13. 
 
 2. Alstedius. — " The rite of immersion, which is 
 intimated by the very word baptism, certainly bears a 
 greater analogy to the thing signified." Lexicon Theo- 
 logicum, cap. xii. p. 223. 
 
 3. Mr. John Rogers. — " I dare not deny my judg- 
 ment to teach thus far for dipping, above the other 
 forms of sprinkhng or pouring; that were it as orderly 
 in our church, and used, and no offence to weak souls, I 
 would sooner be induced to dip one that was never be- 
 fore baptized, than to sprinkle one ; for to me it would 
 be more significant, and full, and pregnant with former 
 practices." In Mr. Crosby's Hist. Bap. vol. iii. Pref. 
 p. 53. 
 
 4. Heideggerus. — " Though the rite of immersion 
 be more ancient, and on account of its more fully re- 
 presenting a death and burial, more expressive, (Rom. 
 vi. 4;) yet it appears, from what has been said, that 
 aspersion makes no alteration in the essence and mystery 
 of baptism." Corpus Theolog. loc. xxv. § 35. 
 
 5. Estius.— -" Though the ceremony of immersion 
 was anciently more common, as appears from the una- 
 nimous language of the fathers, as often as they speak 
 about baptism ; and in a more expressive manner re- 
 
246 DESIGN OF BAPTISM 
 
 presents the death, burial, and resurrection of our Lord, 
 and of us ; — whence St. Thomas affirms, that the rite 
 of dipping is more commendable ; yet there have 
 been many reasons, for which it was sometimes con- 
 venient to alter immersion into some other kindred 
 ceremony. Hence, therefore, the ceremony of pourings 
 as a medium between dipping and sprinkling, was much 
 used ; which custom, Bonaventure says, was in his time 
 much observed in the French churches and some others; 
 though he confesses that the ceremony of immersioa 
 was the more common, the more fit, and the more safe, 
 as S. Thomas teaches." Apud Knatchbul. Animadvers. 
 in Lib. Nov. Test. p. 181. 
 
 6. Dr. Clarke. — " Li the primitive times, the manner 
 of baptizing was by immersion, or dipping the whole 
 body into the water. And this manner of doing it was 
 a very significant emblem of the dying and rising again, 
 referred to by St. Paul, Rom. vi. 4." Expos, of Church 
 Catechism, p. 294. 
 
 7. Mr. W. Perkins. — " A question may be made, 
 whether washing of the body in baptism must be by 
 dipping, or by sprinkling ? Answer: In hot countries, and 
 in the baptism of men in years, dipping was used, and 
 that by the apostles; and to this Paul alludes, Rom. vi. 
 3: and dipping doth more fully represent our spiritual 
 washing than sprinkling." Works, vol. ii. p. 256. 
 
 8. Pictetus. — " It was usual in ancient times 
 for the whole body to be immersed in water — and it 
 must be confessed, that such a rite most happily repre- 
 sented that grace by which our sins are, as it were, 
 drowned, and we raised again from the abyss of sin." 
 Theolog. Christ. 1. xiv. c. iv. § 17. 
 
 9. Mastricht. — " Immersion was used by the 
 apostles and primitive churches, because it is not only 
 more agreeable in the warm eastern countries, but also 
 more significant, (Rom. vi. 3, 4, 5.)" Theologia, 1. vii. 
 G. iv. §9. 
 
BEST EXPRESSED BY IMMKRSfON. 247 
 
 10. H. Altingius. — After briefly stating the argu- 
 ments for plunging, and for sprinkling, he adds: "We 
 confess, first, that immersion was the prior rite ; because 
 it was first used by John the Baptist and the apostles. 
 Secondly, it is also more expressive, on account of the 
 distinct acts, (Rom. vi.)" Thelog. Problem. Nov. 
 loc. xiv. prob. xi. p. 657. 
 
 11. M. Morus. — "Baptism was formerly cele- 
 brated by plunging the whole body in water, and 
 not by casting a few drops of water on the forehead; 
 that representing death and the resurrection much bet- 
 ter than this." In Mr. Stennett's Answer to Mr. 
 Russen, p. 149. 
 
 12. Vossius. — " All the particulars that we have 
 mentioned, concerning the signification of baptism, will 
 appear with sufficient perspicuity in the rite of immer- 
 sion; but not equally so if mere sprinkling be used. It 
 should not be supposed, however, that all analogy is 
 destroyed by it." Disputat. de Bap. disp. iii. § 10. 
 
 1 3. Daille, speaking of a twofold effect of baptism, 
 says: " In the primitive church, this double eftect of 
 baptism was more clearly represented in the external 
 action of the sacrament [by immersion] than it is at 
 this day." Serm. on Epist. to Coloss. on chap, ii. 12, 
 p. 245. 
 
 14. Buddeus. — "Though immersion is to be pre- 
 ferred, yet baptism administered by sprinkling, or pour- 
 ing, is not therefore to be accounted unlawful .... Immer- 
 sion, which was used in former times, as we have before 
 declared, was a symbol and an image of the death and 
 burial of Christ: by which we are taught, that the re- 
 mains of sin, which are called the old man, should also 
 be put to death ; that is, as Paul elsewhere speaks, our 
 
 Jlesh, with its affections and lusts, should be crucified. 
 For in that way, we, as it were, die and are buried with 
 Christ; which Paul expressly shows, Rom. vi. 4. An 
 emersion out of the water follows, (Matt, iii, 16,) which 
 
248 DESIGN OF BAPTISM 
 
 exhibits a most beautiful imao;e of the resurrection of 
 Christ; and at the same time it affords matter of in- 
 struction concerning that spiritual resurrection, which 
 is effected by daily renovation, (Rom. vi. 4.) Now 
 though all these things are a little more clearly exhibited 
 by immersion, than by pouring or sprinkling; yet, never- 
 theless, in the latter some likeness of them is beheld : 
 seeing, even by pouring, especially if it be performed by 
 a remarkably large quantity of water, the infant is in a 
 manner covered and buried in water; like as it emerges 
 thence, when the water poured upon it is all run off." 
 Theolog. Dogmat. 1. v. c.i. §5, 8. 
 
 15. Dr. Cave. — " The party to be baptized was 
 wholly immerged, or put under water; whereby they 
 did more notably and significantly express the three 
 great ends and effects of baptism." Primitive Christi- 
 anity, part i, chap. x. p. 203. 
 
 16. Dr. Wall.- — " I had the disadvantage [in de- 
 fending the common practice] to plead for a way of 
 baptism, of which the best I could say was. That it is 
 sufficient for the essence of baptism ; but could not deny 
 the other (except in the case of danger of health) to be 
 the fittest. . . .The immersion of the person, whether 
 infant or adult, in the posture of one that is buried and 
 raised up again, is much more solemn, and expresses 
 the design of the sacrament and the mystery of the 
 spiritual washing much better, than pouring a small 
 quantity of water on the face. And that pouring of 
 water, is much better than sprinkling, or dropping a 
 drop of water on it. If it be done in the church, in, or 
 at the font, and the congregation do join in the prayers 
 there used; it is much more solemn than in a bed- 
 chamber, out of a basin, or pipkin, a tea-cup, or a punch- 
 bowl ; and a bed chamber is perhaps not quite so scan- 
 dalous as a kitchen or stable, to which things look as if 
 they would bring it at last. . . .We have reason to give 
 God thanks, that the present orders and rubrics of our 
 
BEST EXPRESSED BY IiMMERSiOX. 249 
 
 church are all calculated for the reforming of these 
 abuses, and preserving the dignity of this holy sacra- 
 ment; and that there wants nothing but the due execu- 
 tion of them, and our conscientious performing of that 
 which Me solemnly promised before God and the bishop, 
 when we had the charge of souls committed to us, that 
 we ivoulcl conform to the Liturgy of the church of Eng- 
 lajid, as it is now by law established . . . ,1 know that 
 some mid wives and nurses do, on the christening day, 
 (which they think is observed, not so much for the sacra- 
 ment itself, as for their showing their pride, art, and 
 finery,) dress the child's head so, that the face of it being 
 hid deep under the lace and trimming which stands up 
 so high on each side, the minister cannot come at the 
 face to pour water on it, so as that it ma}' run off again ; 
 but what water he pours, will run in among the head- 
 cloths, which really is likely to do the child more hurt 
 than dipping would have done." Defence of Hist. Inf. 
 Bap. p. 404—408. 
 
 REFLECTIONS. 
 
 Reflect. I. From these quotations we learn, that 
 immersion, compared with pouring or sprinkling, has the 
 honour of priority, in respect of time, No. 4, 10, 14; — • 
 that it is more significant, No. 1- — 16; — that it is more 
 safe, or certain of being right, No. 5 ; — and that one of 
 these learned authors, who had well studied the subject, 
 felt by painful experience the disadvantage under which 
 a Paedobaptist labours, and the arduous task he has to 
 perform, when he undertakes to defend any mode of 
 administration short of dipping; because the best he 
 can say of it is, that the essence of baptism is not want- 
 ing. No. 16. SeeChap.III.Reflect.lv. 
 
 Reflect. II. I can hardly forbear supposing that 
 the attentive reader anticipates my reflections here, and 
 is ready to exclaim : What ! practise a mode of adminis- 
 tering baptism, that is rejected by one half of the world ; 
 
250 DESIGN OF BAPTISM 
 
 while you cannot but acknowledge, that antiquity, signi- 
 ficancy, and safety of being right, may be all fairly 
 pleaded against it ? As if they professedly imitated the 
 Roman Catholics, in regard to the invocation of saints! 
 For Chemnitius tells us, " Many among the Papists 
 acknowledge, that it is better, more agreeable to rule, 
 more certain, and more safe, to invocate God himself 
 in the name of Christ, than to address prayer to saints."* 
 Strange that there should be such charms in a reli- 
 gious custom, which is a confessed variation from the 
 examples of apostles, of martyrs, of Christians almost 
 universally for the long time of thirteen hundred years, 
 and of so great a part of those who bear the character 
 of Christians at this day ! Strange, indeed, that any 
 who are the friends of Christ, should confessedly im- 
 poverish the significancy of a sacred rite; and then 
 labour, and strive, and toil, in order to prove that they 
 have not annihilated the essence of it! Very singular 
 conduct this, relating to an ordinance of God, a branch 
 of divine worship, and a mean of human happiness! 
 But is it commendable, is it justifiable, is it rational, 
 that the professed followers of Jesus Christ should study 
 to find out the exact boundaries of essence, in a positive 
 institution; that they may be able to determine with 
 precision, how far they may vary from the natural im- 
 port of our Lord's command, his own example, and the 
 practice of his ambassadors, without intrenching on what 
 is essential to the appointment? Let candour, let com- 
 mon sense determine. Dr. Mayo has well observed, 
 that " all great errors and evils in the Christian church 
 had small beginnings; we are, therefore, not to make 
 light of those things in religion, which yet may not be 
 of the essence thereof.'" t 
 
 How much is the conduct of these authors like that 
 of the Roman Catholics in another case! The latter, 
 we know, administer the Lord's supper to the people in 
 
 * Exam.Concil Trident, p. 613. f Aix)loe:y and Shield, p. 166. 
 
BEST EXPRESSED BY IMMERSION. 251 
 
 one kind ; — even while they cannot but acknowledge that 
 Christ appointed the use of wine, as well as of bread ; 
 that the apostles administered both kinds; that the 
 church for many centuries received the sacred supper 
 in both kinds; and that the representation of our Lord's 
 death is more complete, by the administration of both 
 kinds; — after all these concessions pretending, that they 
 do not intrench on the essence of the ordinance, by ad- 
 ministering the bread only! But, strange as their pro- 
 cedure is, it must be with an ill grace that any of the 
 writers here produced object against that mutilation of 
 the holy supper. For though they do not explicitly 
 avow, they seem entirely to approve the reasoning of 
 Bellarmine, when he speaks in the following manner: 
 *' Though more grace and advantage be received by par- 
 taking of both kinds, than only of one, it is not there- 
 fore necessary that all should communicate of both spe- 
 cies; because of two evils, the less ought always to be 
 chosen. Now, it is a less evil that some persons should 
 want a benefit which is not necessary, than that the 
 sacrament should be exposed to the evident danger of 
 being irreverently used."* It is danger of irreverence, 
 we see, that is pleaded by Papists for their mutilation of 
 the holy supper: it is also datiger of indecency, or of 
 health, which urges Paedobaptists to lay aside immer- 
 sion, as the reader may learn from the following chapter. 
 How lamentable to reflect, that, respecting the adminis- 
 tration of positive appointments, there should be such a 
 coalition between the subjects of the triple crown and 
 professed Protestants ! 
 
 Besides, the best evidence yet produced, that pour- 
 ing or sprinkling contains the essence of baptism, has 
 always been treated, by a very large part of the Chris- 
 tian world, as extremely doubtful. In proof of this 
 assertion, I appeal to the authorities produced. Chap. 
 IV. and V. and to those which follow in the next. — 
 
 * Apud Chamierum, Panstrat. torn. iv. 1. ix, ex. § 6. 
 
252 DESIGN OF BAPTISM, ETC. 
 
 Being taught, therefore, by so many respectable Pa3do- 
 baptists, that the radical idea of the term baptism, the chief 
 design of the ordinance, the apostolic example, the pre- 
 sent practice of one half of the Christian world, and the 
 emphasis of signification, are all in favour of immersion; 
 we must stand acquitted of blame, and our conduct in 
 regard to dipping deserve imitation. It cannot indeed 
 be otherwise, except it should hereafter appear, that sub- 
 stantial reasons may be assigned for altering the prac- 
 tice of immersion to that of pouring, or of sprinkling : 
 and substantial they must be to answer so important 
 an end, in the face of all these concessions and all this 
 evidence. It would be the height of precipitancy, and 
 little short of religious madness to desert, without the 
 most cogent reasons, a practice thus recommended, for 
 one that appears in such embarrassment. What those 
 reasons are, that have been thought sufficient by many 
 of the most learned Paedobaptists; what their force, and 
 what regard they deserve, must be considered in the fol- 
 lowing chapter. 
 
REASONS, RISE, AND PREV^ALENCE, ETC. Q53 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 The Reasons, Rise, and Prevaleiice of Pouring, or 
 SprinkUng, instead of Immersion. 
 
 Deylingius. — "So long as the apostles lived, 
 as many believe, immersion only was used:* to which 
 afterward, perhaps, they added a kind of affusion, such 
 as the Greeks practise at this day, after having per- 
 formed the trine immersion. At length, after the 
 apostles were dead, the baptism of cHnics was known; 
 when disease, or extreme necessity in any other respect, 
 forbade immersion, sprinkling and pouring began to be 
 introduced ; which in a course of time were retained, 
 plunging being neglected. For in following times, when 
 adult persons were very seldom baptized, infants were 
 initiated into the Christian church by pouring and by 
 sprinkling." Observat. Sac. pars. iii. observ, xxvi. <§ 2. 
 
 2. Salmasius : — "The clinics only, because they 
 were confined to their beds, were baptized in a manner 
 of which they were capable ; not in the entire laver, as 
 those who plunge the head under water, but the whole 
 body had water poured upon it. As Cypr. iv. epist. vii. 
 Thus Novatus, when sick, received baptism ; being 
 {TfepiyvBei?) besprinkled, not (^jBaTTTia-Oeii) baptized. Euseb. 
 vi. Hist. cap. xliii." Apud Witsium, CEcon. Foed. 1. iv. 
 c. xvi. § 13. 
 
 3. Mr. Formey. — " Putting off their clothes, they 
 were dipped three times in water ; but when they ad- 
 ministered baptism to the cliniques, i. e. to those who 
 
 * Of this opinion is Mr, Picart, who says : " Baptism by ab- 
 lution^ or aspersion^ was not known in the first century of the 
 church, when immersion was only used ; and it is said it continued 
 so till St, Gregory's time." Relig. Cerem. vol. ii. p. 82. 
 
 &. 
 
254 REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 were confined to their beds from illness, they made use 
 only of simple sprinkling." Abridg. Eccles. Hist. vol. i. 
 p. 33. 
 
 4. Turrettinus. — " Immersion was used in former 
 times and in warm climates, as we are taught by the 
 practice of John the Baptist, (Matt. iii. 6, 16;) of Christ's 
 apostles, (John iii. 22, and iv. 1,2;) and of Philip, (Acts 
 viii. 38.) But now, especially in cold countries, when 
 the church began to extend itself towards the north, 
 plunging {KaraTrovTKTjj.og) was changed into sprinkling, and 
 aspersion only is used." Institut. Loc. xix. quaest. xi. 
 
 5. Mr. W. Perkins. — " The ancient custom of bap- 
 tizing was to dip ; and, as it were, to dive all the body 
 of the baptized in the water, as may appear in Paul, 
 Rom. vi. and the councils of Laodicea and Neocaesarea; 
 but now, especially in cold countries, the church useth 
 only to sprinkle the baptized, by reason of children's 
 weakness ; for very few of ripe years are now-a-days 
 baptized. We need not much to marvel at this alter- 
 ation, seeing charity and necessity may dispense with 
 ceremonies, and mitigate in equity the sharpness of 
 them." Works, vol. i. p. 74, edit. 1608. 
 
 6. Dr. Manton. — "You will say, If the rite [of 
 immersion] hath this signification, [Christ's death for 
 sin, and our death to sin] why is it not retained ? I 
 answer, Christianity lieth not in ceremonies : the prin- 
 cipal thing in baptism is the washing away of sin, 
 (Acts xxii. 16;) that may be done by pouring on of 
 water, as well as dipping." Serm. on Rom. vi. 4. 
 
 7. Wala^us. — "In warm countries, the ancients 
 practised an immersion of the whole body; but in 
 colder climates, they generally used aspersion : because, 
 a ceremony that is free ought always to give way to 
 charity." Enchiridium, de Bap. p. 425. 
 
 8. Pamehus. — "Whereas the sick, by reason of 
 their illness, could not be immersed or plunged (which, 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. 255 
 
 properly speaking, is to be baptized,) they had the salu- 
 tary water poured upon them, or were sprinkled with it. 
 For the same reason, I think, the custom of sprinkling 
 now used, first began to be observed by the western 
 church ; namely, on account of the tenderness of in- 
 fants, seeing the baptism of adults was now very seldom 
 practised." Apud Forbesium, Instruct. Hist. Theolog. 
 1. X. c. V. § 57. 
 
 9' Hoornbeekius. — " In the eastern churches bap- 
 tism was more anciently administered by immersing the 
 body in water. Afterward, first in the western churches, 
 on account of the coldness of the countries, bathing 
 being less in use than in the east, and the tender age of 
 those that were baptized, dipping or sprinkling was 
 admitted." Miscell. Sac. 1. i. c. xvii. sect. iv. § 1. 
 
 10. Grotius. — "The custom of pouring or sprink- 
 ling seems to have prevailed in favour of those that were 
 dangerously ill, and were desirous of giving up them- 
 selves to Christ ; whom others called clinics. See the 
 Epistle of Cyprian to Magnus." Apud Poli Synopsin, 
 ad Matt. iii. 6. 
 
 11. H. Altingius. — "The baptismal washing, in 
 warm countries and ancient times, was performed by 
 immersion ; but now, especially in cold countries, it is 
 performed by only sprinkling .... The cause of the 
 alteration is, that immersion, which was used in the 
 warm eastern and southern countries, is less convenient 
 in the cold western and northern climates ; where there 
 is danger of health from immersion, especially of infants. 
 And therefore that rule is here in force ; ' I will have 
 mercy and not sacrifice.' " Loci Commun. pars i. loc. xii. 
 p. 198, 199. Theolog. Problem. Nov. loc. xiv. prob. xi, 
 p. (y57. 
 
 12. E. Spanhemius. — " In these northern and colder 
 countries, out of regard to the tender age of infants, we 
 use aspersion in the place of immersion ; which, of old, 
 w as usually practised, either in open rivers or in private 
 
256 REASONS, RISE, AND PR J':^'A LENCE 
 
 baptisteries, and vessels filled with water." Disputat. 
 Syntag. Disp. de Bap. § 16. 
 
 13. Quenstedius. — "When occasion was but seldom 
 given of baptizing adults, and very frequently of bap- 
 tizing infants, the church consulted their weakness ; 
 whence, by little and little, aspersion was introduced, till 
 at length, immersion being laid aside, it prevailed. Of 
 which change there was a threefold reason ; the tender- 
 ness of infants — shame, especially in regard to female 
 catechumens — and because, even in the very act of bap- 
 tizing, 7iatura cur sum suum tenet; sicut contigit magnis 
 impp. in oriente Constantino Copronymo cognominato, 
 et in occidente Wenceslao ; qui cum immergerentur, 
 aquam baptis7nalem macularunt.'"* Antiq. Bib. c. iv. 
 sect. ii. num. i. §4. p. 319. 
 
 14. Riissenius. — " Though in warm countries im- 
 mersion was practised in former times, yet now, especially 
 in colder climates, aspersion may be rightly used." 
 Summa Theolog. loc. xvii. § 31. 
 
 15. Keckermannus. — "Though the term baptism 
 properly signifies immersion, and though also in the 
 ancient church, through the eastern countries, when 
 baptism was administered, it was, not by sprinkling,, but 
 by immersion ; yet in the colder parts of Christendom, 
 aspersion is used instead of immersion, on account of 
 infants : because charity and necessity may dispense 
 with ceremonies, and temper them with gentleness, so 
 far as may be done without injuring tbe analogy." 
 System. Theolog. 1. iii. c. viii. 
 
 16. Piscator. — " Whether the whole body be dipped, 
 and that thrice, or once; or whether water be only poured 
 
 * Had any Baptist assigned such a reason for immersion's being 
 laid aside, he would, 1 suspect, have been charged with gross in- 
 delicacy, and loaded with censure, by many of our opposcrsj even 
 though they could not have disproved the fact. Tliis, however, 
 proceeds from an eminent Lutheran, who was no friend fo the 
 Baptists. Sec Hist, of I'opory, vol. i. p. 141. 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. SL51 
 
 or sprinkled on the party ; this ought to be free to the 
 churches, according to the difference of countries." 
 Aphorismi Doct. Christ, loc. xxiv. aph. 9. 
 
 17. Mr. Rich. Baxter. — "We grant that baptism 
 then [in the primitive times] was by washing the whole 
 body ; and did not the difference of our cold country, as 
 to that hot one, teach us to remember, ' I will have mercy 
 and not sacrifice,' it should be so here." Paraphrase 
 on the New Test, at Matt. iii. 6. 
 
 18. Bp. Burnet. — "The danger of dipping in cold 
 climates, may be a very good reason for changing the 
 form of baptism to sprinkhng." Exposition of Thirty- 
 nine Articles, p. 436. 
 
 19. Venema. — "Sprinkling was used in the last 
 moments of life, on such as were called clinics; and 
 also where there was not a sufficient quantity of water." 
 Hist. Eccles. torn. iv. secul. iv. § 110. 
 
 20. Dr. Towerson. — "The first mention we find of 
 aspersion in the baptism of the elder sort, was in the 
 case of the dimci, or men who received baptism upon 
 their sick beds; and that baptism is represented by S. 
 Cyprian as legitimate, upon the account of the neces- 
 sity that compelled it, and the presumption there was of 
 God's gracious acceptation thereof because of it. By 
 which means the lawfulness of any other baptism than 
 by an immersion will be found to lie in the necessity 
 there may sometimes be of aiiother manner of adminis- 
 tration of it." Of the Sacram. of Bap. part iii. p. 59, 60. 
 
 21. Sir John Floyer. — "The church of Rome hath 
 drawn short compendiums of both sacraments. In the 
 eucharist, they use only the wafer, and instead of immer- 
 sion they introduced aspersion .... I have now given what 
 testimony I could find in our English authors, to prove 
 the practice of immersion from the time the Britons 
 and Saxons were baptized, till king James's days; when 
 the people grew peevish with all ancient ceremonies, 
 and through the love of novelty, and the niceness of 
 
 VOL. T. s 
 
258 REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 parents, and the pretence of modesty, they laid aside 
 immersion; which never was abrogated by any canon, 
 but is still recommended by the present rubric of our 
 church, which orders the child to be dipped discreetly 
 and warily." Hist, of Cold Bathing, p. 15, 61. 
 
 22. Dr. R. Wetham. — " The word baptism signifies 
 a washing, particularly when it is done by immersion, or 
 by dipping, or plunging a thing under water, which was 
 formerly the ordinary way of administrating the sacra- 
 ment of baptism. But the church, which cannot change 
 the least article of the Christian faith, is not so tied up 
 in matters of discipline and ceremonies. Not only the 
 Catholic church, but also the pretended Reformed 
 churches, have altered this primitive custom in giving 
 the sacrament of baptism, and now allow of baptism by 
 pouring or sprinkling water on the person baptized. Nay, 
 many of their ministers do it now-a-days by filliping a 
 wet finger and thumb over a child's head, or by shaking 
 a wet finger or two over the child, which it is hard 
 enough to call a baptizing in any sense." Annotations 
 on the New Test, at Matt. iii. 6. 
 
 23. Dr. Wall. — " In the case of sickness, weakness, 
 haste, want of quantity of water, or such like extraor- 
 dinary occasions, baptism by aft'usion of water on the 
 face, was by the ancients counted sufficient baptism. I 
 shall out of the many proofs of it produce two or three 
 of the most ancient. Anno Dom. two hundred and fifty 
 one, Novatian was, by one party of the clergy and people 
 of Rome, chosen bishop of that church, in a schismatical 
 way, and in opposition to Cornelius, who had been be- 
 fore chosen by the major part, and was already ordained. 
 Cornelius does in a letter to Fabius, bishop of Antioch, 
 vindicate his right, showing that Novatian came not 
 canonically to his orders of priesthood, much less was 
 capable of being chosen bishop ; for that ' all the clergy 
 and a great many of the laity, were against his being 
 ordained presbyter, because it was not lawful (they 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. 259 
 
 said) for any one that had been baptized in his bed in 
 time of sickness, [rov ev kKivt} ^la voaov '7Tepiyy6evroL\ as he 
 had been, to be admitted to any office of the clergy'. . . . 
 France seems to have been the first country in the world 
 where baptism by affusion was used ordinarily to persons 
 in health, and in the public w^ay of administering it. . , . 
 It being allowed to weak children [in the reign of queen 
 Elizabeth] to be baptized by aspersion, many fond ladies 
 and gentlewomen first, and then by degrees the com- 
 mon people, would obtain the favour of the priest to 
 have their children pass for weak children, too tender to 
 endure dipping in the water. Especially, as Mr. Walker 
 observes, ' if some instance really were, or were but 
 fancied or framed, of some child's taking hurt by it'. . . . 
 Calvin had not only given his dictate in his Institutions, 
 that ' the difference is of no moment, whether he that is 
 baptized be dipped all over, and if so, whether thrice or 
 once; or whether he be only wetted by the water poured 
 on him :' but he had also drawn up for the use of his 
 church at Geneva, and afterwards published to the 
 world, A Form of administering the Sacraments; where, 
 when he comes to order the act of baptizing, he Avords 
 it thus: 'Then the minister of baptism pours water on 
 the infant,' saying, ' I baptize thee,' and so on. There 
 had been — some synods in some dioceses of France, 
 that had spoken of affusion without mentioning immer- 
 sion at all, that being the common practice; but for an 
 office or liturgy of any church, this is, I believe, the 
 first in the world that prescribes aspersion absolutely 
 .... And for sprinkling, properly called, it seems it was, 
 at sixteen hundred and forty-five, just then beginning, 
 and used by very few. It must have begun in the dis- 
 orderly times after forty-one. . . . But then came The 
 Directory, and says: ' Baptism is to be administered, 
 not in private places, or privately ; but in the place of 
 public worship, and in the face of the congregation,' and 
 
 s 2 
 
260 REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 SO on. ' And not in the places where fonts, in the time 
 of Popery, were unfitly and superstitiously placed.' So, 
 they reformed the font into a basin. This learned 
 Assembly could not remember, that fonts to baptize in, 
 had been always used by the primitive Christians, long 
 before the beginning of Popery, and ever since churches 
 were built; but that sprinkHng, for the common use of 
 baptizing, w as really introduced (in France first, and then 
 in other Popish countries,) in times of Popery. And that 
 accordingly, all those countries in which the 
 
 USURPED POWER OF THE PoPE IS, OR HAS FOR- 
 MERLY BEEN OWNED, HAVE LEFT OFF DIPPING 
 OF CHILDREN IN THE FONT: BUT THAT ALL OTHER 
 COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD, WHICH HAD NEVER 
 REGARDED HIS AUTHORITY, DO STILL USE IT; AND 
 THAT BASINS, EXCEPT IN CASE OF NECESSITY, 
 WERE NEVER USED BY PaPISTS, OR ANY OTHER 
 
 Christians whatsoever, TILL BY THEM- 
 SELVES. . .What has been said of this custom of pour- 
 ing or sprinkling water in the ordinary use of baptism, is 
 to be understood only in reference to these western parts 
 of Europe; for it is used ordinarily no where else. The 
 Greek church, in all the branches of it, does still use 
 immersion; and they hardly count a child, except in 
 case of sickness, well baptized without it: and so do 
 all other Christians in the world, except the Latins. 
 That which I hinted before, is a rule that does not fail 
 in any particular that I know of; viz. All the nations of 
 Christians, that do now, or formerly did submit to the 
 authority of the bishop of Rome, do ordinarily baptize 
 their infants by pouring, or sprinkling. And though the 
 English received not this custom till after the decay of 
 Popery, yet they have since received it from such neigh- 
 bour nations as had begun it in the time of the Pope s 
 power. But all other Christians in the world, who never 
 owned the Pope's usurped power, do, and ever did, 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. 26l 
 DIP THEIR INFANTS IN THE ORDINARY USE." Hist. 
 
 of Inf. Bap. part ii. chap. ix. p. 463, 467, 470, 471, 
 472, 477. 
 
 24. Anonymous. — " The custom of sprinkling chil- 
 dren, instead of dipping them in the font, which at first 
 was allowed in case of the weakness or sickness of the 
 infant, has so far prevailed, that immersion is at length 
 quite excluded. What principally tended to confirm 
 the practice of affusion or sprinkling was, that several of 
 our Protestant divines, flying into Germany and Switzer- 
 land during the bloody reign of queen Mary, and return- 
 ing home when queen Elizabeth came to the crown, 
 brought back with them a great zeal for the Protestant 
 churches beyond sea, where they had been sheltered and 
 received ; and having observed that, at Geneva, and 
 some other places, baptism was administered by sprink- 
 ling, they thought they could not do the church of 
 England a greater piece of service than by introducing a 
 practice dictated by so great an oracle as Calvin. This, 
 together with the coldness of our northern climate, was 
 what contributed to banish entirely the practice of dip- 
 ping infants in the font." Encyclopsed. Britan. article, 
 Baptism, vol. ii. p. 996. 
 
 REFLECTIONS. 
 
 Reflect. I. By the quotations here produced from 
 eminent Pasdobaptists, vve are taught, that the most an- 
 cient instance on ecclesiastical record, which is yet ad- 
 duced, of pouring or sprinkling, is that of Novatian, in 
 the year two hundred and fifty-one, No. 23 ;■ — that the 
 reason of it, both then and afterwards, was not any real, 
 nor even, pretended command or example, in the New 
 Testament ; but a supposed necessity, arising, either 
 from bodily disease, a want of water for immersion, or 
 some other similar circumstance. No. 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 10, 
 16, 20; — that even then, the water was applied by pour- 
 ing upon or sprinkhngj not the face, but the whole body, 
 
262 REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 No. 2 ; — that it was considered as an imperfect admi- 
 nistration of the ordinance; so imperfect, as rendered 
 the subject of it inehgible to the ministerial office, and 
 was denominated sprinklings not baptizi?ig, No. 2, 23; — 
 that pouring, or sprinkling, as a common practice, ori- 
 ginated in the apostate church of Rome, and that the 
 Protestant churches thence derived it, No. 21,' 23; — 
 that this mode of proceeding commenced among the 
 English in the time of Queen Elizabeth, but that im- 
 mersion was the prevailing practice till the reign of 
 James I., No. 2 1, 23 ; — that the reasons of this alteration 
 in England were, the love of novelty, niceness of parents, 
 pretence of modesty, and a high regard for the character 
 of Calvin, No. 21, 23, 24; — that Calvin's form of ad- 
 ministering the sacraments was probably the first in the 
 world, that prescribed pouring absolutely. No. 23; — that 
 sprinkling, strictly so called, did not commence in Eng- 
 land, till the year sixteen hundred and forty-five, and 
 was then used by very few, ibid. ; — that the assembly of 
 divines at Westminster, converted the font into a basin ; 
 and that basins, unless in case of necessity, had never 
 been used by Papists, or any other Christians whatever, 
 till by the members of that assembly, ibid.; — that Ro- 
 man Catholics ridicule some of the Protestant ministers, 
 for using only a few drops of water, No. 22 ; — that the 
 reasons assigned for this novel mode of proceeding are, 
 coldness of climate. No. 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, H, 12, 14, 15, 
 17, 18; — tenderness of infants, No. 5, 8, 13; — Christi- 
 anity's not consisting in ceremonies, No. 6; — that sacred 
 maxim, " God will have mercy and not sacrifice," No. 1 1 , 
 12; — the authority of the church to alter ceremonial 
 appointments, No. 22 ; — and (most delicately to crown 
 the whole) because, in the very act of baptizing, it was 
 observed that natura cursum simm tenets No. 1 3 ; — 
 finally, that all the Christians in the world, who never 
 owned the Pope's usurped power, now do, and ever did, 
 dip their children in the common course of their prac- 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. 263 
 
 tice, No. 9,3. Such is the information which these learned 
 authors give. 
 
 Reflect. II. According to this representation, the 
 practice of pouring and sprinkling makes but a poor 
 figure in the eyes of a consistent Protestant ; for, if this 
 be a just account, it had no existence till many corrup- 
 tions had taken deep root in the church ; it originated 
 in dangerous error ; was fostered by the mother of abo- 
 minations; and under the powerful influence of her au- 
 thority and her example, it became the general custom 
 in all those parts of the world to which her tyranny ever 
 extended; but no where else. It seems to have 
 been under the combined operation of different errors 
 that the practice took its rise. For though, as Mr. 
 Henry justly observes, "Many in the primitive times, 
 upon a mistaken apprehension of the unpardonableness 
 of sin committed after baptism, deferred it long, some 
 even till the dying moment;"* yet they imagined the 
 ordinance necessary to their salvation. When, therefore, 
 they were seized with affliction, confined to their beds, 
 and apprehensive of death, the expedient of pouring, or 
 of sprinkling, was devised in the pressing emergency, as 
 a happy succedaneum for immersion. That laborious 
 and learned enquirer, Dr. Wall, could find no instance, 
 of the kind, prior to the case of Novatian ; which case 
 is thus described in Eusebius : " He fell into a grievous 
 distemper, and it being supposed that he would die im- 
 mediately, he received baptism, being besprinkled with 
 water on the bed whereon he lay, if that can be termed 
 baptism."'!' On which passage Valesius observes: " This 
 word, Trepi-xvdeig, Rufinus very well renders perfusus, be- 
 sprinkled. For people which were sick and baptized in 
 their beds, could not be dipped in water by the priest, 
 but were sprinkled with water by him. This baptism 
 was thought imperfect, and not solemn, for several rea- 
 
 * Treatise on Baptism^ p, 27. 
 
 f Eccles. Hist, b, vi. chap.xliii, Cambridge., 1683. 
 
264 REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 sons. Also they who M^ere thus baptized, were called 
 ever afterwards, clinici; and, by the twelfth canon of 
 the Council of NeocJEsarea, these clinici v.ere prohibited 
 priesthood/' Yea, so imperfect was this baptism es- 
 teemed, that Bp. Taylor tells us: " It was a formal and 
 solemn question, made by Magnus to Cyprian, Whether 
 they are to be esteemed right Christians who were only 
 sprinkled with water, and not washed or dipped? He 
 [Cyprian] answers, that the baptism was good, when it 
 was done in the case of necessity ; God pardoning, and 
 necessity compeUing. And this," adds the bishop, " is 
 the sense and law of the church of Enojand: not that it 
 be indifferent, but that all infants be dipped, except in 
 cases of sickness, and then sprinkling is permitted."* — 
 Now, that this clinical baptism had no existence in the 
 apostolic times, we are led to conclude, not only by 
 considering the erroneous foundation on which it rests, 
 and the total silence of the New Testament concerning 
 it, but also by the testimony of some learned Paedo- 
 baptists. Witness Altmannus, who says, " It has not 
 yet been proved, that the baptism of clinics was used in 
 the time of the apostles; nor, certainly, can any passages 
 be produced from the apostolic writings, nor from those 
 of the first fathers, from which it may be concluded that 
 it is a rite of such great antiquity."! See Chap. IV. 
 No. 84. 
 
 It is worthy to be remarked, that a gross mistake 
 about the necessity of baptism, not only introduced 
 sprinkHng instead of immersion ; but, in some instances, 
 has operated so far as entirely to exclude water from 
 any concern in the ordinance. The following examples 
 have occurred to observation, in the course of my read- 
 ing. Nicephorus informs us, that a certain Jew, per- 
 forming a journey in company with Christians, and 
 being suddenly seized with a dangerous illness, earnestly 
 
 * Ductor Dubitantium, b.iii. chap. iv. rule 15. 
 t Meletem, Philoloe:. Critic, tom.iii. ]>. 131. 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. 9.65 
 
 desired baptism at the hands of his fellow travellers. 
 They, not having a priest in their company, and being 
 destitute of water, were at first reluctant; but, he con- 
 juring them not to deny him the favour, they yielded to 
 his request. On which, taking off his clothes, they 
 sprinkled him thrice with sand instead of water; adding, 
 that they "baptized him, in the name of the Father," 
 and so on.* — Deylingius furnishes another example of 
 a singular kind. He tells us, that near the beginning of 
 the Reformation, a certain midwife in Thuringia, under 
 the fair pretext of necessity, baptized some sickly chil- 
 dren without water, merely by pronouncing these words; 
 " I baptize thee in the name," and so on. The same 
 learned author, from Seckendorf, mentions others who 
 taught that baptism might be administered without wa- 
 ter.f — To BAPTIZE by sprinkling a few drops of water; 
 to BAPTIZE by sprinkling of sand, without any water; 
 to BAPTIZE by merely pronouncing a form of words; 
 what misnomers they are ! and what an improvement on 
 the institution of Christ! I will here add the foUowino; 
 words of Dr. Wiilett: "We condemn the foolish and 
 ungodly practices and inventions of heretics, that either 
 exclude water altogether, as the Manichees, with others; 
 or do use any other element, as the Jacobites, that, in- 
 stead of water, burned them that were to be baptized 
 with an hot iron; or as the Ethiopians, which are called 
 Abissines, that used fire instead of w^ater ; misconstruing 
 the words of the gospel, (Matt. iii. 1 l.)"J 
 
 * Apud Centur. Magdeburg, cent. ii. c. vi, p, 82. 
 
 f De Prudentia Pastoral, pars. iii. c.iii. § 20. 
 
 X Synopsis Papismi, p. 562. Our brethren who practise Free 
 Communion frequently plead, that those persons whose claim to 
 the holy supper is under dispute, consider themselves as really bap- 
 tized, and on that ground should be admitted to the Lord's table. 
 This reminds me of what Vasques, a Popish casuist, says : " If any 
 man think that to be a relic of a saint, which indeed is not so, he is 
 not frustrate of the merit of his devotion." Thus thfit veteran in 
 siiperstition, as quoted by Mr. Clarkson, Prac. Div. of Papists, 
 
9,66 REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 Reflect. III. The reasons assigned by these Paedo- 
 baptists for pouring or sprinkling, may be compared 
 with the arguments of Roman Catholics, in defence of 
 withholding the cup from the people; the answers re- 
 turned by Protestants to their futile reasonings ; and 
 these, with the replies that Baptists make to the rea- 
 sonings in favour of sprinkling. Do the Roman 
 Catholics argue, That the whole essence of the Lord^s 
 supper is contained in one kind ? So do Protestant 
 Psedobaptists, that the entire essence of baptism is re- 
 tained in pouring or sprinkling. — Do the former main- 
 tain, that they who have the thing sigmjied, need not 
 contend about the sig7i ? So do many of the latter. — 
 Do the votaries of Rome tell us, there is no spiritual 
 benefit enjoyed by receiving both bread and wine, which 
 is not possessed by those who partake only of the bread ? 
 So do our Protestant brethren argue, in reference to 
 pouring and sprinkling, compared with immersion. — Do 
 the subjects of the triple crown endeavour to persuade 
 the Reformed, that there were various types andjigures of 
 the holy supper, in the Old Testament, which favour the 
 receiving it in one kind ? Do they plead for this end the 
 paschal lamb, the manna, the show-bread, and the sacri- 
 fices, the flesh of which was to be eaten, but their blood 
 not to be drunk ? So Paedobaptists endeavour to per- 
 suade us, that some typical rites, and that various allu- 
 sive expressions in the Old Testament, (such as, I will 
 pour water on him that is thirsty — He shall sprinkle 
 many nations* with others of a similar kind,) are in 
 
 p, 189. But would our bretlien receive a candidate for commu- 
 nion, who sincerely believes he has been baptized, merely because 
 he was sprinkled with sand, as, in the case of this Jew ; or on ac- 
 count of some zealous midwife having pronounced over him a so- 
 lemn form of words ; or because he has been marked with a hot 
 iron ? Let them consider of it, take advice, and speak their minds, 
 (Judges xix. 30.) 
 
 * Mr, Henry's Treatise on Bap. ji. 140, 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. 267 
 
 favour of sprinkling. — Have Protestants united in re- 
 plying to the first of these arguments : It is not a fact, 
 that the whole essence of the Lord's supper is contained 
 in the species of bread ? So do we assert, that the en- 
 tire essence of baptism is not retained in pouring or 
 sprinkling; because an immersion of the whole body, 
 is as really a distinct act from applying a few drops of 
 water to the face only, as eating bread is distinct from 
 the drinking of wine. — Do the Reformed answer to the 
 second ; This is the ready way to cast off all sacraments 
 and ordinances at once ? So do we ; for if the servants 
 of Christ may administer baptism in either of the dif- 
 ferent ways, because the candidate is considered as hav- 
 ing the blessings to which it refers, they are at liberty, 
 for the same reason, to neglect or use any ordinance 
 just as they please. — Do the opposers of Papal corrup- 
 tions reply to the third ; That supposing an equal de- 
 gree of benefit to result from each mode of administra- 
 tion, yet there is not, there cannot be the same degree 
 of humble obedience to Jesus Christ, who appointed the 
 sacred supper? So do we, in regard to the different 
 ways of administering baptism. Do the friends of the 
 Protestant cause agree, in respect to the fourth argu- 
 ment; That none of the things mentioned were types 
 or figures of the LorcTs supper, and therefore the ana- 
 logical reasoning has no force ? We also maintain, that 
 none of the purifications practised in the ancient Jewish 
 church, (whether by dipping, washing, or sprinkling,) 
 were types or figures of baptism. Besides, we have the 
 authority of a learned and famous Peedobaptist, when 
 we assert, That among all the various rites of purifica- 
 tion prescribed to the chosen tribes, " the sprinkling of 
 mere water was not appointed ; for it was either mixed 
 with blood or ashes."* Consequently, no allusion to 
 any of those ancient rites, whether it be found in the Old 
 or in the New Testament, can be a proper direction for 
 
 * Lainpe, Comment, in Evang Joan. ad. cap. iii. 5. 
 
268 REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 US in the administration of baptism. See Chap. I. 
 No. 4, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 20. Reflect. II. III. 
 
 Again : When Protestant writers oppose that muti- 
 lation of a divine appointment, which is practised by 
 those of the Romish communion at the Lord's table, 
 they do not fail to show, that the declared will of God is 
 the rule of duty ; and that the institution of the ordi- 
 nance, the example of the apostles, the end of the ap- 
 pointment, and the practice of the church for thirteen 
 hundred years, are all against that partial administration, 
 and all in favour of the Reformed.* Now, are not these 
 the very principles on which the Baptists proceed, in all 
 their disputes with Paedobaptists about the right manner 
 of performing baptism ? Nay, does it not appear from 
 the preceding chapters, and from the pens of our oppo- 
 nents themselves, that these principles are just, and 
 supported by facts, relating to the controversy about 
 baptism, as well as to that concerning the holy supper ? 
 
 Farther : Do some of the learned Catholics acknow- 
 ledge, that receiving the Lord's supper in both kinds, is 
 more complete and more e.vpressive; and that the present 
 practice of their church, is a departure from the institu- 
 tion, from apostolic example, and from the general cus- 
 tom of Christians for many ages ? Do certain of their 
 learned writers express an ardent wish to have the pri- 
 mitive practice restored among themPf All this, it 
 appears, have some of our learned opposers done, in re- 
 gard to the administration of baptism. How far the 
 following reflection upon a concession of Cassander, 
 concerning communion in one kind, may be fairly ap- 
 plied to any of the Paedobaptists, I leave my reader to 
 judge. " Behold," says my author, " behold here an 
 
 * See Morning Exercise against Popery, serm. xxii. Dr. Wil- 
 let's Synoj)s. Papismi, controv. xiii. q. viii. p. 640 — G47 j and Mr. 
 Leigh's Bod. Div. b. viii. chap. ix. 
 
 t Dr. V/illct, ut supra, p. 642. Morning Excr. against Po- 
 pcryj p. 772. 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. 269 
 
 acknowledgment so plain and so full, that I wonder with 
 what countenance men can resist so manifest a truth, 
 and withhold it in unrighteousness ! And yet here they 
 muster up the best strength they have, and will not yield 
 an inch of what they have once established, be it right or 
 wrong." * 
 
 Once more: Do not Protestant Pasdobaptists urge 
 the 7iecessity of adhering, strictly adhering to the original 
 institution, in administering the holy supper ; the ab- 
 surdity and iniquity of departing from it, on account 
 of any supposed inconvenience; and the danger of 
 practising any thing in religious worship that is not 
 warranted by the word of God? Hear a specimen of 
 what they say, and see whither the reasoning tends; 
 for it proceeds on principles that are common to every 
 positive institution of true religion. — Thus Dr. Clarke:, 
 " In things of external appointment, and mere positive 
 institution, where we cannot, as in matters of natural 
 and moral duty, argue concerning the natural reason 
 and ground of the obligation, and the original necessity 
 of the thing itself, we have nothing to do but to obey 
 the positive command. God is infinitely better able 
 than we to judge of the propriety and usefulness of 
 the things he institutes; and it becomes us to obey 
 with humility and reverence." f — " The command of 
 Christ," says the judicious Turrettin, "ought not to be 
 violated under any pretence whatever; and in what way 
 soever the thing signified may be received, the sign ap- 
 pointed by Christ is always to be retained." :{: — "There 
 is in the church," says Heidegger, " no more power of 
 changing the rites of the sacraments appointed by 
 Christ, than there is power of changing his word and 
 law. For as his word contains a sign audible, so those 
 rites contain a visible sign of his divine will."§ — "It 
 
 * Morning Exercise, p. 772. f Expos. Church Cat. 
 
 p. 305, 306. X Institut. loc. xix. quaest, xxv. § 22. 
 
 § In Dr. Du Veil, on Acts viii. 38. 
 
270 REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 is a universal axiom," says the learned and eminent 
 Chamier, " that the sacrament be celebrated according 
 to its first institution."* — ''There being, in this whole 
 institution, the greatest simplicity and unity of design 
 that can be," says Bp. Taylor; " the same form of M^ords, 
 a single sacrament, the same address, no difference in 
 the sanction, no variety, or signs of variety, in the 
 appendages, in the parallel places, or in any discourse 
 concerning it; to suppose here a difference will so 
 intricate the whole affair, that either men may imagine 
 and dream of variety when they please, and be or not 
 be obliged as they list; or else if there be a difference 
 intended in it by our Lawgiver, it will be as good as none 
 at all, he having left no mark of the distinction, no 
 shadow of different commandments, under several re- 
 presentations." ')" — "All reasoning upon this head," says 
 Bp. Burnet, "is an arguing against the institution; as if 
 Christ and his apostles had not well enough considered 
 it, but that twelve hundred years after them, a conse- 
 quence should be observed, that till then had not been 
 thought of, which made it reasonable to alter the 
 manner of it ... . He who instituted it, knew best what 
 was most fitting and most reasonable; and we must 
 choose rather to acquiesce in his commands, than in 
 our own reasonings.":}; — "The institution, with the 
 elements, makes the sacrament; and so the only rule 
 and balance for them [the elements] must needs be their 
 institution. This being the ground of this ordinance, 
 no man or angel may violate it under a fearful curse. 
 And indeed, if men's will or wisdom might alter and 
 change the revelation of God, nothing would abide 
 firm in rehgion. It is true, the laws of men may be 
 corrected and annulled, because they foresee not their 
 inconveniences; but our Saviour, certainly, when he 
 
 * Panstrat. torn. iv. 1. i. c. xiii. § 1. 
 
 f Ductor Dubitant. b. iii. chap. vi. p. 412. 
 
 + Expos, xxxix Art, p. 436, AAJ. 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. 271 
 
 appointed this ordinance, well knew what was neces- 
 sary and useful for his church to the end of the world. 
 And for this reason the apostle Paul, when some dis- 
 orders were broken into the church of Corinth, in the 
 use of the Lord's supper, recalls them to the insti- 
 tution, and endeavours by that straight rule to rectify 
 their irregularities, (1 Cor, xi. 23.) By which place it is 
 evident, that there is no such way to obviate any 
 mistake, which in after-times creeps upon God's own 
 ordinance, as by going back to the spring, by consi- 
 dering the institution: insomuch as the same apostle, 
 for their violating Christ's institution in their adminis- 
 tration of this ordinance, saith. This is not to eat the 
 Lord's supper.'''* — • — Dr. Erskine, when answering an 
 objection against frequently receiving the sacred supper, 
 says : " Whatever danger there is, God foresaw it, but 
 yet did not see meet to guard against it, by enjoining 
 us to communicate seldom. Shall we then pretend to 
 be wiser than God? Have we found out better means 
 for securing the honour of his institutions, than the 
 means prescribed and practised by those who were 
 under the infallible guidance of his Spirit? Have not 
 attempts of this kind proved the source of the worst 
 corruptions in Popery? Reason has no power to dis- 
 pense with, or to derogate from the positive laws of 
 God, on pretence of doing them a service. It is blas- 
 phemous presumption, though it may put on a cloak of 
 humility, to judge that a sufficient reason to hinder thee 
 from frequent communicating, which our Lord did not 
 judge a sufficient reason to hinder him from commanding it. 
 If thou thus judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, 
 but a judge "f — Once more : The church of England says, 
 " Before all other things this we must be sure of espe- 
 cially, that this supper be in such wise done and minis- 
 tered as our Lord and Saviour did and commanded to 
 
 * Morning Exercise against Popery, p. 764, 765. 
 t Theolog. Dissert, p. ^89, 
 
272 REASONS, KISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 be done, as his holy apostles used it, and the good 
 fathers in the primitive church frequented it. For, as 
 that worthy man S. Ambrose saith, ' He is unworthy of 
 the Lord, that otherwise doth celebrate that mystery, 
 than it was delivered by him.' Neither can he be devout, 
 that otherwise doth presume than it was given by the 
 Author."* — Quotations of this kind might be greatly 
 multiplied; but I forbear, and appeal* to the reader. 
 Whether these be not the very principles on which u e 
 proceed ; nay, whether these be not some of those very 
 arguments, mutatis mutandis, that are used by us against 
 pouring and sprinkling? If, then, this way of arguing 
 be valid from the pens of Protestants, against a mutila- 
 tion of the holy supper; it must be equally so from the 
 pen of a Baptist, in relation to the substitution of pour- 
 ing, or sprinkhng, instead of immersion. For if these 
 arguments have any force, they will equally apply to 
 every positive institution that is not administered accord- 
 ing to its original form. We may, therefore, adopt the 
 following observation of Dr. Owen, respecting the cause 
 of Nonconformity : " We find as yet no arrows shot 
 against us, but such as are gathered up in the fields, shot 
 at them that use them, out of the Roman quiver."f 
 
 Nor are Roman Catholics insensible of that advan- 
 tage which Paedobaptist Protestants give them, in regard 
 to this affair; for thus Bossuet reasons : "Though these 
 are incontestable truths, [namely, that baptism is im- 
 mersion, and that immersion was practised by the 
 apostles;] yet neither we, nor those of the pretended 
 Reformed religion, hearken to the Anabaptists, who hold 
 mersion to be essential and indisjiensable; nor have 
 either they or we feared to change this dipping, as I may 
 say, of the whole body, into a bare aspersion, or infu- 
 sion on one part of it. No other reason of this altera- 
 
 * Homily on the Sacram. part i. 
 
 t Enquiry into the Orig and Insfitut. of Churches, Pref. j). 52. 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. 273 
 
 tion can be rendered, than that this dipping is not of 
 the substance of baptism; and those of the pretended 
 Reformed rehgion agreeing with us in this, the first 
 "principle we have laid down is incontestable. The se- 
 cond principle is, That to distinguish in a sacrament, 
 what does or does not belong to the substance of it, we 
 must consider the essential efficacy of the sacrament. 
 Thus, although the word of Jesus Christ, baptize, as 
 has been said, signifies dip, it has been thought, that 
 the efficacy of the sacrament was not annexed to the 
 quantity of water;* so that baptism by infusion and 
 sprinkling, or by mersion, appearing in reality to have 
 the same efficacy, both the one and the other mode 
 are judged good. Now seeing, as we have said, we 
 cannot find in the eucharist any essential efficacy of 
 the body, distinguished from that of the blood ; the 
 grace of the one and of the other, as to the sum and 
 substance of it, cannot but be the same. It signifies 
 nothing to say. The representation of the death of our 
 Lord, is more e.vpress in the two kinds. I grant it; and 
 in like manner the new birth of a believer, is more de- 
 press in immersion, than in bare infusion, or aspersion. 
 For the believer being plunged in the water of baptism, 
 is ' buried with Jesus Christ,' as the apostle expresses it, 
 (Rom. vi. 4; Col. ii. 12;) and coming out of the water, 
 quits the tomb with his Saviour, and more perfectly re- 
 presents the mystery of Jesus Christ, who regenerates 
 him. Mersion, in which water is applied to the whole 
 body and to all its parts, also more perfectly signifies, 
 that a man is more fully and entirely washed from his 
 
 * So says Mr. Henry : " In sacraments, it is the truth, and not 
 the quantity of the outward element, that is to be insisted upon." 
 Here he inadvertently coincides with Bossuet. In another place, 
 however, he says : " Strict conformity to the scripture rule, without 
 the superadded inventions of men, is the true beauty of Christian 
 ordinances." This is the language of a sound Protestant, and wor- 
 thy of himself. See his Treatise on Bap. p. 139, 149. 
 VOL. I. T 
 
274 REASOXS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 defilements ; and yet, baptism performed by immersion, 
 or plunging, is not better than that which is administered 
 by simple infusion, and on one part only. It is sufficient, 
 that the expression of the mystery of Jesus Christ, and 
 of the efficacy of grace, is found in substance in the sa- 
 crament, and the utmost exactness of representation is 
 not required in it. Thus, in the eucharist, the expression 
 of the death of our Lord, being in substance found in 
 it, when that body which was delivered up for us is 
 given to us; and the expression of the grace of the 
 sacrament being also found in it, when the image of our 
 spiritual nourishment is given us, under the species of 
 bread; the blood, which only adds to it a more express 
 signification, is not absolutely necessary." * 
 
 The same artful defender of Papal superstition, in 
 another of his books, expresses himself thus: " Baptism 
 by immersion, which is as clearly established in the scrip- 
 ture, as communion under the two kinds can possibly 
 be, has nevertheless been changed into pouring, with as 
 much ease and as little dispute, as communion under 
 one kind has been established ; for there is the same 
 reason why one should be preserved as the other. It is 
 a fact most firmly believed by the Reformed, (though 
 some of them at this time wrangle about it,) that baptism 
 was instituted to be administered by plunging the body 
 entirely; that Jesus Christ received it in this manner; 
 that it was thus performed by his apostles ; that the 
 scriptures are acquainted with no other baptism ; that 
 antiquity understood and practised it in this manner; 
 and that to baptize, is to plunge; — these facts, I say, are 
 unanimously acknowledged by all the Reformed tea- 
 chers; by the Reformers themselves; by those who best 
 understood the Greek language, and the ancient customs 
 of both Jews and Christians; by Luther, by IMelanc- 
 thon, by Calvin, by Casaubon, by Grotius, with all the 
 rest, and since their time by Jurieu, the most ready to 
 
 * In Mr. Stennett against Mr. Russen^ p. 176 — 178. 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. 9.15 
 
 contradict of all their ministers. Luther has even re- 
 marked, that this sacrament is called Tauf^ in German, 
 on account of the depth ; because they plunged deeply 
 in the water those whom they baptized. If then there be 
 in the world a fact absolutely certain, it is this. Yet it is 
 no less certain, that with all these authors, baptism with- 
 out immersion is considered as lawful; and that the 
 church properly retains the custom of pouring. . . .There 
 is, then, the same foundation for continuing the commu- 
 nion under one kind, as to continue baptism by pouring; 
 and the church, in supporting these two customs, which 
 tradition proves are equally indifferent, has not done 
 any thing unusual; but maintained, against troublesome 
 persons, that authority upon which the faith of the igno 
 rant rests."* — I am reminded here of a remark made 
 by Mr. James Owen, concerning Episcopacy; which, 
 with a slight alteration, will apply to the case before us. 
 These are his words : "Our English Episcopacy hath 
 scarce one argument for its defence, but what will indif- 
 ferently serve the Popish prelacy." f 
 
 Our English Episcopalians also do not fail to argue 
 on the same topic, when defending their hierarchy, and 
 various rites, against the objections of Paedobaptist 
 Dissenters. Thus, for example, Bp, Burnet, after hav- 
 ing mentioned several things which he thought for his 
 purpose, proceeds : " To these instances another may be 
 added, that must needs press all that differ from us, one 
 body only excepted, very much. We know that the 
 first ritual of baptism, was by going into the waters, 
 and being laid as dead all along in them ; and then the 
 persons baptized were raised up again, and so they came 
 out of them. This is not only mentioned by St. Paul, but 
 in two different places he gives a mystical signification 
 of this rite, that it signified our being hurled with Christ 
 in baptism, and our being raised up with him to a 7ieiv 
 
 * Hist, des Eglises Protest, torn. ii. p. 469, 470. 
 f Plea for Scrip. Ordinat. p. \7 , 171 • 
 
276 REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 life; so that the phrases, of rising ivith Christ, and 
 of putting on Christ, as oft as they occur, do plainly 
 relate to this: and yet, partly out of modesty, partly 
 in regard to the tenderness of infants, and the coldness of 
 these climates, since such a manner might endanger their 
 lives, and we know that God ' loves mercy better than 
 sacrifice,' this form of baptizing is as little used by those 
 [Pasdobaptists] who separate from us, as by ourselves 
 ....From all these things this inference seems just, 
 That according to the practices of those who divide from 
 us, the church must be supposed to have an authority 
 to adjust the forms of our religion, in those parts of 
 them that are merely ritual, to the taste, to the exi- 
 gencies, and conveniences of the several ages and cli- 
 mates."* — The right reverend prelate here speaks out. 
 He talks like one who heartily believes, that " the church 
 hath power to decree rites or ceremonies." This will 
 do almost as well, so far as the ritual part of religion is 
 concerned, as the claim of infallibility, of a dispensing 
 power, and the pretence of unwritten apostolic tradition, 
 which are advanced by the partisans of another com- 
 munion. Such, however, is the bishop's avowal; and 
 such, he insists upon it, is the implicit language of those 
 Dissenters who practise pouring or sprinkhng instead of 
 immersion. What a pity but the church, under the 
 ancient Jewish economy, had been acquainted with this 
 doctrine of taste, of eaigence, and of convenience, rela- 
 ting to the ceremonial part of divine worship ! What a 
 pity but the hoary Abraham had u ell understood it, when 
 he received an order to circumcise himself and his male 
 posterity ! for had he known and approved of it, he 
 would certainly have performed the rite on a ditierent 
 part from that which Jehovah specified. What shall I 
 say ? This doctrine of taste, of exigence, and of conve- 
 
 * Four Discourses to the Clergy, p, ^81, 282. Compare this 
 with what he says, Exposit. of Thirty-nine Art. p. 436, 437, as 
 quoted before, p. 301. 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. ^11 
 
 nience is of such extensive application, that it would 
 have saved the venerable ancients a world of trouble, 
 and screened them from a thousand reproaches of their 
 Gentile neighbours, had it been duly improved; be- 
 cause, as God is " in one mind," it cannot be doubted, 
 that " he loved mercy better than sacrifice" in those 
 early times as well as now. 
 
 But let us hear another learned Episcopalian or two 
 in reference to the same subject. Thus, then, Mr. 
 Evans, when defending a kneelino; gesture at the Lord's 
 table. " There is a confessed variation allowed of, and 
 practised by the generality of Dissenters, both Presby- 
 terians and Independents, from the institution and prac- 
 tice of Christ and his apostles, in the other sacrament 
 of baptism ; for they have changed immersion or dip- 
 ping, into aspersion or sprinkling, and pouring water on 
 the face. Baptism by immersion or dipping, is suitable 
 to the institution of our Lord and the practice of his 
 apostles, and was by them ordained and used to repre- 
 sent our burial with Christ, a death unto sin, and a new 
 birth unto righteousness, as St. Paul explains that rite, 
 (Matt. iii. 16, and xxviii. 19; Rom. vi. 4, 6, 11 ; Col. 
 ii. 12.) Now, it is very strange that kneeling at the 
 Lord's supper (though a ditFerent gesture from that 
 which was used at the first institution) should become a 
 stumbling-block in the way of weak and tender consci- 
 ences, and that it is more unpassable than the Alps; and 
 yet they can with ease and cheerfulness pass by as great 
 or a greater change in the sacrament of baptism, and 
 christen as we do, without the least murmur or com- 
 plaint. Sitting, kneeling, or standing, were none or 
 them instituted or used to signify and represent any 
 thing essential to the Lard's supper, as dipping all over 
 was : why cannot kneeling then be without any wrong 
 to the conscience, as safely and innocentl}/^ used as 
 sprinkling? How comes a gnat (to use our Saviour's 
 proverb) to be harder to swallow than a camel? Or 
 
278 REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 why should not the peace and unity of the church, and 
 charity to the public, prevail with them to kneel at the 
 Lord's supper, as much, or rather more, as mercy and 
 tenderness to the infant's body, to sprinkle or pour water 
 
 on the face, contrary to the first institution?"* Thus 
 
 also Dr. Whitby: " If, notwithstanding the evidence 
 produced, that baptism by immersion is suitable both to 
 the institution of our Lord and his apostles; and was by 
 them ordained to represent our burial with Christ, and 
 so our dying unto sin, and our conformity to his resur- 
 rection by newness of life, as the apostle doth clearly 
 maintain the meaning of this rite; I say, if, notwith- 
 standing this, all our [Paedobaptist] Dissenters do agree 
 to sprinkle the baptized infant, why may they not as 
 well submit to the significant ceremonies imposed by 
 our church? For, since it is as lawful to add unto 
 Christ's institutions a significant ceremony, as to dimi- 
 nish a significant cereaiony which He or his apostles 
 instituted, and use another in its stead, which they never 
 did institute; what reason can they have to do the latter, 
 and yet refuse submission to the former ? And why 
 should not the peace and union of the church be as pre- 
 vailing with them to perform the one, as is their mercy 
 
 to the infant's body to neglect the other ?"'{" Hence 
 
 the reader may plainly perceive, how much the practice 
 of aspersion is calculated to embarrass Protestants, in 
 their disputes with Papists; and Nonconformists, in their 
 controversies with Episcopalians. 
 
 Reflect. IV. Admitting the tenderness of infants to 
 be a sufficient reason for not immersing them, what is the 
 natural inference? That they should be sprinkled, or 
 have water poured upon them? By no means; but that 
 our divine Legislator does not require them to be bap- 
 tized. For, as our opposers themselves have proved, 
 
 * Cases to Recover Dissenters, vol. iii. p. 105, 106, edit. 3rd. 
 f Protestant Reconciler, p. 289. See also Bp. Stillingfleet's 
 Irenicum, part ii. p. 345. 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMLRSIOX. Q79 
 
 we must insist that baptism is immersion. Consequently, 
 were it evinced that infants cannot bear plunging, without 
 the hazard of health and of life, it would only be a pre- 
 sumptive argument against their claim to the ordinance: 
 and the greater the danger the stronger the presumption; 
 for our opponents inform us, that a natural incapacity 
 will always excuse,* — That it is better to omit a positive 
 ordinance than to perform it contrary to divine appoint- 
 ment, Pjedobaptists themselves assure us. Thus the 
 famous Buddeus: " Persons who cannot drink wine, 
 had better entirely abstain from the sacred supper than 
 
 receive it under one species only."'f Deylingius : 
 
 ''It is better entirely to abstain from using the holy 
 supper, than receive it contrary to the appointment of 
 
 Christ." J Mr. Blake: "Omissions seem better to 
 
 me, than a prohibited, or a disorderly proceeding, ex- 
 pressly against a command, or ordinance of Jesus Christ. 
 The ark had better stayed where it was, than a new cart 
 should have carried it in that disorder to the place ap- 
 pointed for it. Better that Saul and Uzziah had let 
 sacrifice alone, than any to whom it did not appertain 
 
 should have undertaken it I never saw sufficient 
 
 reason given, that a man should break an express rule, 
 rather than omit a duty of mere positive institution. 
 Jeroboam must rather have no sacrifice, than that Dan 
 and Bethel should be the place for it."§ Mr. Brad- 
 bury: " It is better, I think, to leave such a duty [as 
 baptism] undone, than not to have it well done. God 
 never expects it either from you or me, when he has 
 thrown a bar in our way, that we should break it, or 
 leap over it." || To which I may add, Better that the 
 Israelites had entirely omitted circumcision while in the 
 
 * Morning Exercise against Popery, p. 771. 
 f Theolog, Moral, pars. iii. c, iii. § 77- 
 J De Prudent. Pastoral, pars iii. c. v. § 16. 
 § Covenant Sealed, p. 255, 256. 
 I) Duty and Doct; of Bap. p. 21. 
 
280 REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 wilderness, than to have circumcised a finger instead of 
 the foreskin. So in the present case ; better omit bap- 
 tism entirely, than practise pouring or sprinkling. 
 
 But whether, in these colder climates, and in coi^- 
 mon cases, there be any reason to consider health as 
 endangered by the practice of immersion, let Paedobap- 
 tists themselves declare. That learned physician, Sir 
 John Floyer, gives his opinion on the subject without 
 reserve, both in a theological and medical point of light. 
 Among many other things, he says : " I do here appeal 
 to you, [the dean and canons, residentiaries of the cathe- 
 dral church of Litchfield,] as persons well versed in the 
 ancient history, and canons, and ceremonies of the 
 church of England ; and therefore are sufficient witnesses 
 of the matter of fact which I design to prove ; viz. That 
 immersion continued in the church of England till about 
 the year sixteen hundred. And from hence I shall 
 infer, That if God and the church thought that prac- 
 tice innocent for sixteen hundred years, it must be ac- 
 counted an unreasonable nicety in this present age, 
 to scruple either immersion or cold bathing, as dan- 
 gerous practices. Had any prejudice usually happened 
 to infants by the trine immersion, that custom could 
 not have continued so long in this kingdom. We must 
 always acknowledge, that He that made our bodies, 
 would never command any practice prejudicial to our 
 health ; but, on the contrary, he best knows what 
 will be most for the preservation of our health, and 
 does frequently take great care both of our bodies and 
 souls, in the same command."* — This eminent phy- 
 sician endeavours to show, as Dr. Wall observes, " by 
 reasons taken from the nature of our bodies, from the 
 rules of medicine, from modern experience, and from 
 ancient history, that washing or dipping infants in cold 
 water, is, generally speaking, not only safe, but very use- 
 ful; and that though no such rite as baptism had been 
 
 * Hist of Cold Bathing, p. 11, 51. 
 
OF SPRINIvLIXG INSTEAD OF IMMERSION". 281 
 
 instituted, yet reason and experience would have directed 
 people to use cold bathing, both of themselves and their 
 children ; and that it has in all former ages so directed 
 them. For — he shows, that all civilized nations, the 
 Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, and so on, made frequent 
 use of it, and gave great commendations of it; and that 
 nature itself has taught this custom to many barbarous 
 nations; the old Germans, Highlanders, Irish, Japanese, 
 Tartars, and even the Samoiedes, who live in the coldest 
 climate that is inhabited .... He prognosticates that the 
 old modes in physic and religion will in time prevail, 
 when people have had more experience in cold baths; 
 and that the approbation of physicians would bring in 
 
 the old use of immersion in baptism."* Dr. Cheyne 
 
 thus: "I cannot forbear recommending cold bathing; 
 and I cannot sufficiently admire how it should ever have 
 come into such disuse, especially among Christians, 
 when commanded by the greatest Lawgiver that ever was, 
 under the direction of God's Holy Spirit, to his chosen 
 people, and perpetuated to us in the immersion at bap- 
 tism, by the same Spirit; who with infinite wisdom in 
 this, as in every thing else that regards the temporal and 
 eternal felicity of his creatures, combines their duty with 
 their happiness."'}' — ^To the decided opinion of these 
 medical authors, relating to the salutary tendency of cold 
 bathing, we may add the suffrage of that great philo- 
 sopher. Lord Bacon, who speaks as follows: " It is 
 strange that the use of bathing, as a part of diet,^ is left. 
 With the Roman and Grecians it was as usual as eating 
 or sleeping; and so it is amongst the Turks at this day." J 
 
 Thus also Dr. Franklin: "Damp, but not wet hnen, 
 
 may possibly give colds; but no one catches cold by 
 bathing, and no clothes can be wetter than water itself." § 
 
 * Hist, of Inf. Bap, part ii. chap. ix. p. 476, 477- 
 
 t Essay on Health, p. 100, 101. 
 
 J In Dr. Stennett's Answer to Dr. Addington, part i. p. 34. 
 
 § Letters and Papers on Various Subjects, p. 460. 
 
28^ REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 — To all which I will subjoin the following attestation 
 of a nameless opponent: " A child may, with as much 
 propriety, and commonly with equal safety to its health, 
 be baptized by immersion as an adult."* See Chap. V. 
 No. 7. 
 
 But supposing there were both difficulty and danger 
 attending the performance of our Lord's positive com- 
 mand, Pagdopabtists would still assure us, that we must 
 submit without repining, and without hesitation. Thus, 
 for example, Dr. Sherlock: " If an express law may be 
 disobeyed, as often as men fancy they see reason to do 
 what the law forbids, this overthrows the whole autho- 
 rity of making laws, and makes every subject a judge 
 whether the laws of a sovereign prince should be obeyed 
 or not. At this rate, he has the greatest authority who 
 has the best reason; and since every man believes his 
 own reason to be best, every man is the sovereign lord 
 of his own actions. It is to be presumed, that no prince 
 makes a law, but what he apprehends some reason for ; 
 and to oppose any man's private reason against a law, 
 is to set up a private man's reason against the public 
 reason of government : and yet it is much worse to oppose 
 our reason against a divine law ; which is to oppose the 
 reason of creatures against the reason of God : unless 
 we will say, that God makes laws without reason; and 
 those who can believe that, may as easily imagine, that 
 those laws which he makes without reason, should be 
 obeyed without reason also; and then, to be sure, all 
 their reasons cannot repeal a law, nor justify them in 
 the breach of it. It becomes every creature to believe 
 the will of God to be the highest reason; and therefore, 
 when God has declared his will by an express law, while 
 his law continues in force, it is an impudoit thing to urge 
 our reasons against the obligations of it; especially, 
 when the matter of the law is such, [as it is in positive 
 institutions] that whatever reasons may be pretended on 
 
 * Simple Truth, or A Pica for Infants, p. 9,. 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. 283 
 
 one side or other, it must be acknowledged to be wholly 
 at the will and pleasure of the lawgiver which side he 
 will choose. . . .That no reason or aro;uments can absolve 
 us from our obedience to an express law till it be re- 
 pealed, appears from this; that our obligation to obedi- 
 ence does not depend merely upon the reason of the law, 
 but upon the authoriti/ oi i\\Q lawgiver; and therefore, 
 though the reason of the law should cease, yet while it 
 is enforced by the same authority it obliges still."* — 
 PuffendorfF shows, and I suppose it is generally agreed, 
 that laws do not oblige because they are good, but be- 
 cause the legislator has a right to command; and that 
 no objection arises to the express words of a law, on 
 account of the requisition seeming to be hard in some 
 particular instances. f — Mr. Charnock says, " They 
 must be evasions past understanding, that can hold water 
 against a divine order. . . .God never gave power to any 
 man to change his ordinances, or to dispense with 
 
 them." J " Surely it is enough," says Abp. Seeker, 
 
 " that He is Lord and King of the whole earth, and 
 that all his deahngs with the works of his hands are just 
 and reasonable. Our business is to obey, and trust him 
 
 with the consequences." § " No circumstances of 
 
 prudence or conveniency," says Dr. Hunter, " can ever 
 be with propriety urged as a dispensation with a clearly 
 commanded duty. .. .Observe the delicacy, and the 
 danger of admitting a latitude and a liberty in sacred 
 things. In what concerns the conduct of human life, 
 in our intercourse one with another as the citizens of 
 this world, many things must be left to be governed by 
 occasions and discretion ; but in what relates to the im- 
 mediate worship of God, and where the mind of the 
 Lord has been clearly made known, to assume and 
 
 * Preservative against Popery, title vii. p. 21. 
 f Law of Nature and Nations, b. i. chap, vi, § 1, 17} b.v. 
 chap. i. § 24. % Works, vol. ii. p. 763, 773, first edit. 
 
 § Lectures on the Catechism, lect, ii. 
 
284 REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 exercise a dispensing power is criminal and hazard- 
 ous. The tabernacle must be constructed, to the mi- 
 nutest pin and loop, according to the pattern delivered 
 in the mount. If Uzzah presume to put forth his hand 
 to support the tottering ark, it is at his peril. A holy 
 and a jealous God will be served only by the persons, 
 and in the maner which he himself has appointed. . . . 
 When the great Jehovah condescends to become a lesis- 
 lator, the utmost extent of possibility lying open to his 
 View, provision is made from the beginning for every case 
 that can happen.""* — A Deistical writer having objected 
 against circumcision, on account of the pain and danger 
 attending it. Dr. Waterland replies : " The presumption 
 which the author goes upon is, that he is wise enough to 
 direct the counsels of heaven, and to pass an unerring 
 judgment upon all the works and ways of God. It is a 
 fact that God did require circumcision : and who art 
 thou that repUest against God? Even Mr, Bayle might 
 teach this author, that when we are certain God does such 
 or such a thing, it is blasphemy to say it is useless. God 
 has his own reasons. This writer might be certain of 
 the fact, if any historical fact whatever can be made 
 certain."! "Surely," says Mr. Towgood, "the su- 
 preme Bishop and only Head of his church, well knew 
 what institutions were most for its edification, and what 
 ceremonies and rites would best promote the order and 
 decency of its worship; and either by himself, or by his 
 inspired apostles, has left a perfect plan of both. For 
 any weak uninspired men, therefore, to rise up in after 
 ages, and fancy they can improve the scheme of worship 
 which Christ hath left ; that they can add greatly to its 
 beauty, its splendour and perfection, by some ceremonies 
 of their own, is, to be sure, a rude invasion of Christ's 
 throne, which every sober Christian ought highly to 
 
 * Sacred Biography, vol. iii. j). 93, 94, 362, 363, 435. 
 f Scripture Vindicated, part i. p. 63, 64. 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. 285 
 
 detest. " * — Remarkable, and quite in point, is the 
 declaratioii_of Dr. Owen : " That divine revelation is the 
 only foundation, the only law, and the only rule of all 
 rehgious worship that is pleasing to God, or accepted 
 by him, is a maxim of the last importance in divinity. 
 This maxim teaches, that every thing appointed by God 
 in his worship, however absurd, or difficult, or unprofit- 
 able, it may seem to reason, is to be regarded and per- 
 formed with the deepest reverence and submission, on 
 account of that supreme authority whicH appointed and 
 required it."'j' — ^To these testimonies I will add that 
 of Bernard: " Non attendit verus obediens, quale sit 
 quod praecipitur; hoc solo contentus quia pr^ci- 
 
 PITUR." 
 
 Mr. Henry has observed, that circumcision was " a 
 painful and bloody rite." J So the wife of Moses con- 
 sidered it; but yet Abraham and his posterity were bound 
 to observe it, on the peril of Jehovah's keen displeasure. 
 Concerning that sanguinary ceremony, Paedobaptists 
 have spoken their minds very freely. M. Saurin, for 
 instance, tells us: "The command of circumcision did, 
 without doubt, frighten those who first received it; it 
 was dangerous to grown persons in hot countries : but 
 for an old man to receive the token of circumcision in so 
 advanced an age, was in all appearance to be put out of 
 the condition of seeing himself a father. . . .The pain 
 which circumcision produced was extremely sensible, 
 especially to grown people ; this we may infer from the 
 example of the Shechemites."§ Quenstedius : " Cir- 
 cumcision was a work full of pain, as Philo asserts ; 
 which appears by the history of the Shechemites, 
 (Gen. xxxiv. 25.) Hence Zipporah, having circumcised 
 her son, said to Moses, ' A bloody husband art thou to 
 
 * Dissent. Gent. Letters, lett. Hi. p. 10, 11. 
 
 f Theologoumena, 1. iv. c. iii. digress, iii. p. 326. 
 
 X Treatise on Bap. p. 12. 
 
 § Uisscrtat. upon the Old Test. vol. i. p. 141, 143. 
 
286 REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 me ' . . . . As if she had said, This rite of thy nation forces 
 me to shed blood, (Exod.iv. 25.)"* Bucanus: "Cir- 
 cumcision could not be performed without putting the 
 
 infant to most exquisite pain/'f Sir John Chardin : 
 
 " I have heard from divers renegadoes in the East who 
 had been circumcised, some at thirty, some at forty 
 years of age, that the circumcision had occasioned them 
 a great deal of pain, and that they were obliged to keep 
 their bed upon it, at least twenty or twenty-two days." J 
 Mr. Findlay : " IMaimonides having said. Circum- 
 cision luas a 7ite of such a nature^ that no person would 
 perform it upon himself or his children, but on account of 
 i^eligion; gives the reason of his judgment: For it is 
 not a slight hurt of the leg, or burning of the arm, but a 
 thins; MOST HARSH and uneasy. . . .So likewise Philo 
 speaks of circumcision, as an operation attended with 
 grievous anguish. .. .It may even seem to have been 
 hazardous to life : for Lightfoot, in his Exercitations 
 upon 1 Cor. vii. 19, produces some passages from Rab- 
 binical writings, in which mention is made of a man 
 whose brethren had died of circumcision. Nay, one 
 from the Jerusalem Talmud itself, where R. Nathan 
 says, ' There was a woman in Cesarea of Cappadocia, 
 who had lost three sons successively by it.'"§ Now, 
 can any thing like this be asserted with propriety con- 
 cerning the baptismal immersion ? Yet Abraham, who 
 first received the command, readily obeyed ; for he cir- 
 cumcised himself and his son Ishmael, together with all 
 the males that were born in his house, or bought with his 
 money, on the very day he received the divine order. |j 
 
 * Antiq. Bib. pars. i. c. iii. p. 269, 270. 
 
 f Theolog. Loc. loc. xlvi. § 31. 
 
 X In Mr. Harmer's Observations, vol. ii. p. 498, 499. 
 
 § Vindicat. of the Sacretl Books, p. 2/8, Note. Vid. Gussetii 
 Comment. Ebr. sub rad. '^o } and Scheuchseri Physica Sacra, p. 93, 
 450. Aug. Vindilic. 1731. 
 
 11 Gen. xvij. 23, 24. 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMEUSION. 287 
 
 In regard to the supposed indecency of plunging, 
 about which a hideous outcry is often raised, as if that 
 of itself were a sufficient conviction of our practice pro- 
 ceeding on a gross mistake, we answer with Mr. Baxter, 
 in another case; " It is God's way, and then no incon- 
 venience will disgrace it."* Some of the Romish ca- 
 suists have told us, indeed, that it is no sin to break a 
 divine law, if it be very difficult to keep ; if we should 
 be thought fools for observing it ; or if the observance 
 of it would be accounted ridiculous :f but we dare not 
 place much dependence on their determination. Be- 
 sides, whatever of this kind is objected by our brethren, 
 would have applied with incomparably greater force 
 against the ancient rite of circumcision. But let us hear 
 what Pasdobaptists themselves have said concerning this 
 particular. Calvin : " This command, ' Ye shall cir- 
 cumcise the flesh of your foreskin,' might at first sight 
 
 appear extremely absurd and ridiculous. "| Witsius 
 
 having described the painful rite, expresses himself thus: 
 " On account of which ceremony, the Jews were con- 
 temptuously, and by way of reproach, called ApeUce, 
 and Recutiti, because they wanted that pellicle or little 
 skin. But it pleased God, to confound all carnal wis- 
 dom, and to try the faith and obedience of his people, 
 to appoint a rite for the seal of his covenant, at which 
 they might blush, and be almost ashamed of performing 
 it : like as he founded our whole salvation in a fact, 
 which seems no less shameful to the flesh, namely, the 
 
 cross of Christ." § Heideggerus: " God, according 
 
 to his unsearchable wisdom, appointed a rite so much to 
 be blushed at, to be a type of what was yet more shame- 
 ful, namely, the cross of Christ. " || Buddeus : " The 
 
 * Disputat. of Right to Sacram, p. 32. 
 
 f In Mr. Clarkson's Pract. Div. of Papists, p. 385, 386, 
 
 \ In Gen. xvii. 11. 
 
 § CEcon. Foed. l.iv. c. viii. § 2. .^gyptiaca, 1. iii, c. vi, § 4, 
 
 II Corp. Theolog. loc, xii. § 86. 
 
288 REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 rite of circumcision, considered in itself, was contempti- 
 ble, and almost shameful."* F. Fabricius : "Cir- 
 cumcision, I confess, considered externally, that is, 
 without a divine institution, and without the design and 
 signification of that institution, might seem to be an 
 exceedingly ridiculous and shameful rite."t — Nay, were 
 not some other appointments of Jehovah, under the 
 Jewish economy, such as the customs of our country, 
 and present prevailing notions of the rational, the decent, 
 and the useful, would lead many persons to consider as 
 puerile, indelicate, and unprofitable ? Such, if I mis- 
 take not, were several of those laws which related to 
 ceremonial impurity; and yet the posterity of Abraham, 
 of both sexes, were obliged to regard them with strict 
 punctuality. It must, therefore, be at our peril to pro- 
 nounce that indecent which God requires. J — But why 
 such complaints of indelicacy against the baptismal 
 plunging, as performed in public assemblies ? What 
 immodesty is there in the solemn immersion of candi- 
 dates for baptism, when properly clothed, anymore than 
 in the public and promiscuous bathing of both sexes, at 
 Bath, Southampton, or any other place of a similar 
 kind?§ As to the baptizing of persons that are not 
 properly clothed, it has our cordial disapprobation. 
 
 Farther : For any of our opposers to imagine that 
 pouring, or sprinkling, is lawful, without being necessary; 
 or that it is necessary noio and in these countries, though 
 not so in the apostolic times and in the eastern parts, is 
 unbecoming the character of any Protestant. Remark- 
 able are the words, and forcible is the argument of Dr. 
 Willet, w hen he says : " If it be not necessary to receive 
 [the Lord's supper] in one kind, it is not to be done at 
 all. For, either it is agreeable to the institution of 
 
 * Theolog. Dogmat. 1. iv. c. i, § 15, 
 
 f Christologia, dissert, xi. § 16. 
 
 + Vid. Pfeifferi Dub. Vexat. p. 310. Lips. 1G85. 
 
 § Sec Dr.StenncU's Alls, to Dr.Addiiigfon^part i. p. 31, 3*2, Note. 
 
OF SPRIXK-LTNG INSTEAD OF I M IM F.USTON. 289 
 
 Christ, to receive in one kind, or disagreeable. If it be 
 agreeable and prescribed, it is of necessity to be observed : 
 if it be not prescribed, it is of necessity not to be used 
 at all.*' This \\\\\ apply, with all its force, to the sub- 
 ject before us. — The celebrated Montesquieu's reasoning 
 will also apply in the present case. " It is in the nature 
 of human laws, to be subject to all the accidents which 
 can happen, and to vary in proportion as the will of 
 man changes ; on the contrary, by the nature of the laws 
 of religion, they are never to vary. Human laws ap- 
 point for some good; those of religion for the best: good 
 may have another object, because there are many kinds 
 of good; but the best is but one: it cannot, therefore, 
 change. We may change [human] laws, because they 
 are reputed no more than good ; but the institutions of 
 religion are always supposed to be the best."'|' — Thus 
 Mr. Arch. Hall : " All that concerns the glory of God, 
 [and the honour of his church] is unerringly and unalter- 
 ably settled in the word of God, which is 'not yea and 
 nay.' It does not accommodate its doctrines to succeed- 
 ing periods of time, nor to the changing tempers, hu- 
 mours, or fashions of place ; like its divine Author, it is 
 ' the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever.' ";}: 
 
 Latomus having represented the first Christian 
 churches as in a rude, uncultivated state, while the peo- 
 ple received both kinds at the Lord's table, but as omit- 
 ting the wine in following ages, when they were better 
 taught and more polished — Chamier exclaims, " Shall 
 I be silent ? or shall I refute him ? For, verily, the 
 absurdity is of such a magnitude, that every one may 
 see it, and euard against its influence, without mv assist- 
 ance."§ — One of our Dissenting Brethren also, when 
 
 * Synopsis Papismi, p. 643. f Spirit of Laws, 
 
 b, xxvi. chap. ii. + Gospel Church, p. 52. 
 
 § Panstrat. tom.iv. 1. viii. ex. §^4, 25. 
 VOL. T. U 
 
290 REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 engaged in the Popish controversy, says : " Let us con- 
 sider; Things necessary — at one time, and not at another? 
 Necessary in our days, and not so in the days of the 
 apostles ? Necessary to Christians of later ages, and 
 not so to the primitive Christians ? Sure, this cannot 
 be true: I always thought that to be the Christian faith, 
 which was once, and at once delivered to the saints, by 
 Christ and his apostles."* — Again : For any to prac- 
 tise aspersion, on a presumption that it includes the 
 whole essence of baptism, and to avoid supposed in- 
 decency, even while they acknowledge that immersion 
 was appointed by Christ and used by the apostles ; is to 
 impeach the wisdom of our divine Lawgiver, by impli- 
 citly saying, that he did not well consider to w hat a pitch 
 the refined and virtuous delicacy of his disciples would 
 arise in our modern times. " As if," says Mr. Bing- 
 ham, " Christ himself could not have foreseen any dan- 
 gers that might happen, or given as prudent orders as 
 the Pope concerning his own institution." f It is to 
 proceed on the same foundation with the Council of 
 Constance, when forbidding the use of the sacred cup 
 to the people : for that prohibition was founded on a 
 supposition, that communicants receive the entire body 
 and blood of Christ, under the species of bread ; and 
 it was intended to preclude certain dangers and scandals, 
 supposed to arise from the ancient practice. J The mem- 
 
 * Mr. Smyth's Serm. at Salters' Hall, on the Church of Rome's 
 Claim oflnfallib. p. 30, 31. 
 
 f Origines Eccles. b.xv. chap.iil. §34. 
 
 X Vid. Caranzse Sum. Concil. p. 389. Lovan. 1681. Venem. 
 Hist. Eccles. tom.vi. p. 193. The learned Chemnitius, when ex- 
 ploding the futile reasons of Roman Catholics for withholding the 
 cup from the people, among other things observes : " Their argu- 
 ments reproach the Author of the sacrament himself, who instituted 
 it so that it cannot be observed in the church without danger of 
 scandal. . . . The church is now become exceedingly delicate." Exam. 
 Concil. Trident, p. 308, 309. 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMFRSION. 291 
 
 bers of that council, it seems, discovered something as 
 dangerous and as offensive, in administering both species 
 at the holy table, as others do in the baptismal immer- 
 sion ; and they were equally unwilling to acknowledge 
 that the substance of the sacred supper was at all im- 
 paired by their innovation. But would any authority 
 on earth bear, without marks of displeasure, to be treated 
 in a similar manner? We will suppose, for example, 
 that a subject, or a servant, neglects the law of a ma- 
 gistrate, or the command of a master; we will farther 
 suppose him called to account for his disobedience, and 
 that in his own vindication he says, " I considered the 
 precise performance of the order as of little importance, 
 provided it were but substantially observed. I have, 
 therefore, substituted something in its room, that will do 
 quite as well, without being attended with such incon- 
 veniences as would have been inseparable from a punc- 
 tual compliance." Would this be thought a modest 
 excuse, or a just vindication ? It may be answ^ered, in 
 that obsolete phrase of our biblical version, I trow not. 
 
 Once more : As the primitive immersion has been 
 laid aside for pouring or sprinkling, upon a supposi- 
 tion of its being dangerous and indecent; so kneeling 
 at the Lord's table has been substituted for a table ges- 
 ture, and is defended under a fair pretext, that the latter 
 is a bold and saucy posture. Dr. Nichols, when vindi- 
 cating the practice of his own communion, and when 
 showing that various of our festal customs are improper 
 to be used at the holy table, has the following words. 
 " Now since these customs at other feasts are not 
 admitted here, why may not sitting, for the same 
 reason, be changed, as too bold and saucy a posture, far 
 from a becoming humility and modesty, when we are 
 so immediately in the presence of God?" — To which 
 Mr. Peirce repHes: "Say you so? Do you think the 
 posture the apostles used, with our Saviour's appro- 
 
 u 2 
 
29S REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 bation, was too bold and saucy, or not sufficiently 
 humble and modest? Do not you see whom you injure 
 by these reproaches ? Truly, not so much the Dissenters, 
 as the apostles, and our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ 
 himself."* — So when Teriphyllius, a Cyprian bishop, 
 having occasion before Spiridion to cite those words of 
 our Lord, " Take up thy bed and walk," used the term 
 (jKiixTTo^a, as being in his opinion more elegant than the 
 word Kpaj3/3aTov; Spiridion, with becoming resentment, 
 replied, " Art thou better than He who said Kpa(3f3aTov, 
 that thou shouldst be ashamed to use his words? "t 
 The reader will apply these particulars to the case 
 before us. 
 
 Reflect. V. From the preceding reflections it ap- 
 pears, I think, with superior evidence, that the sacred 
 maxim, " I will have mercy and not sacrifice," must be 
 misapplied when urged against us. For if it will apply 
 so as to justify sprinkling in a cold country, when im- 
 mersion was intended by our Lord, submitted to by 
 him, commanded by him, and practised by the apostles, 
 it would certainly have applied much more strongly in 
 many cases under the former economy; for the maxim 
 is founded in moral truth, which is the same in all ages 
 and in every nation. That God loves mercy better than 
 sacrifice, was always a fact, since man transgressed and 
 ceremonial obedience was required : nor did our Lord 
 give the least intimation, by his application of that 
 important saying, of any thing contained in it being 
 peculiar to gospel times. The Christian dispensation 
 is indeed much superior to that of the ancient Hebrews: 
 but that superiority is far from consisting in our having 
 more liberty to neglect, alter, or transgress the divine 
 appointments than they had. For as Mr. Reeves ob- 
 
 * Vindication of Dissenters, part iii. p. 204. 
 t Sozom. Hist. Eccles, l.i. c. i. 
 
or SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. 293 
 
 serves, "When God says that he ' will have mercy and 
 not sacrifice,' it is not to be understod as if God would 
 have any of his laws broken; but as our Saviour ex- 
 plains it, ' These ought ye to have done, and not to 
 leave the other undone.' "*" — Bellarmine, when vindi- 
 cating a mutilated administration of the holy supper, 
 argues upon a supposition of the gospel "church having 
 a greater liberty than the church under the law ; though 
 she have no power to alter things of a moral, but only 
 such as are of a positive nature."']' How lamentable 
 and how shameful, to think of eminent Protestants 
 adopting the principle, and arguing upon it, in favour 
 of pouring and sprinkling! For I am persuaded, that 
 none of them ever considered the Jewish church as 
 authorized by these words, " I will have mercy and 
 not sacrifice," to alter any divine appointment. Shall 
 Christians, then, make more free with divine authority 
 than Jews, because they live under a better dispen- 
 sation? far be it! That would represent the Holy One 
 of God as the minister of sin — would be contrary to 
 scripture and reason, to conscience and common sense. 
 The disciples of Christ are as much obliged to regard 
 the positive laws of the New Testament with strict 
 punctuality, as the Jews were to observe their divine 
 ritual contained in the books of Moses. Nay, our supe- 
 rior privileges are so many additional motives to per- 
 petual obedience. Whenever any one therefore is in- 
 clined to substitute aspersion for plunging, on a sup- 
 position of the latter being burdensome or indelicate, 
 upon the foundation of those condescending words, " I 
 will have mercy and not sacrifice; " he should recollect 
 that command of God to Abraham, " Ye shall circum- 
 cise the flesh of your foreskin;" and see how far the 
 
 * SeeChap. I. No.3. 
 
 t In Morning Exercise against Popery, p. 777- 
 
294 REASONS, RISK, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 gracious declaration would have applied there, before 
 he ventures to alter a positive appointment of Christ on 
 that ground. 
 
 Here also the argument used by Protestant Pasdo- 
 baptists in opposition to immersion, is like that of the 
 Papists against communion in both kinds. For thus 
 we find Salmero argues : " If it had not been lawful 
 from the beginning of the church to communicate under 
 one species, either very many must have been entirely 
 deprived of communion, or obliged to that which they 
 could not perform ; as is manifest with regard to those 
 who have not plenty of wine, which is the case with 
 many in the northern parts of the world ; in respect of 
 those who are abstemious, and of those also that are not 
 able to drink wine without a nausea being excited .... 
 Seeing, therefore, that the yoke of our Lord is easy, and 
 his burden light, it should not be believed that he re- 
 quires what is impossible, or that he obliges to commu- 
 nicate under both kinds."* — That Mr. Horsey took the 
 hint from Salmero I dare not assert, nor do I believe ; 
 but be that as it may, he has learned to argue against 
 plunging as a grievous hardship, and that from the same 
 text which is pleaded by the Papal veteran for com- 
 munion in one kind. For he says, " Christ's yoke is 
 easy, and his burden light. His commandments are not 
 grievous : ''f and hence, among other things, he infers 
 that immersion is not the proper mode of proceeding. 
 
 This brings to remembrance a good-natured rule 
 
 which Popish casuists have given for the interpretation 
 of divine laws, with a view to relieve scrupulous con- 
 sciences. The rule to which I advert, as produced by 
 Mr. Clarkson, is this: Persons " must persuade them- 
 selves that they sin not, though they break the law in a 
 
 * Apud Chamierum, Panstrat. torn. iv. 1. ix. c. iv. § 25. 
 t Inf. Bap. Defend, p. 20. 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. S.9S 
 
 strict sense, if they observe it according to some com- 
 plaisant interpretation. A benign sense is rather to be 
 put upon any precept, than that which is strict; for the 
 precepts of God and the church are not against that 
 pleasantness which a scrupulous interpretation takes 
 away." On which Mr. Clarkson makes the following 
 remark : " That a person may be the better pleased, he 
 may make the interpretation himself, and so make it as 
 benign as he desires, and as favourable as his incUnation 
 and interest would have it. For though in other courts 
 the interpretation belongs to him who makes the law, 
 yet, according to their St. Antonius, in the court of con- 
 science it belongs to every one to do it for his own 
 practice."* 
 
 Were it allowable to prosecute the hint which some 
 of these learned authors give, (No. 5, 7, 15;) that is for 
 charity and necessity to erect a court of chancery, to sit 
 in judgment on the equity of God's commands, and 
 either mitigate their severity, or dispense with them, as 
 we think proper ; something indeed might then be done, 
 that would effectually obviate those shivering apprehen- 
 sions, and that painful modest feeling, which the word 
 baptize might otherwise excite in the breasts of some. 
 Nor would the relief afforded by such a court, be con- 
 fined to the frighful idea of plunging ; for it would 
 extend its benign influence to every other case, in which 
 our sovereign wills happen to clash with positive laws ; 
 because the uniform language of its decrees would be 
 that of Peter to Christ, Spare thyself. While 
 however the validity of such a court of equity remains 
 doubtful, it will be our wisdom when the Most High 
 speaks, not to reason and object, but to adore and 
 obey. 
 
 How strange it is that Protestant authors should 
 
 * Pract. Div. of Papists, p. 384, 385. 
 
2y6 REASONS, RISK, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 ever talk of dispensing with divine laws, or of mitigating 
 their severity ! Not much more detestable, though a 
 little more blunt, is the well-known saying ascribed to 
 Alphonso, "Si ego adfuissem, melius ordinassem." But 
 let the learned Vossius assert, if he please, " That we 
 
 are compelled " By what ? not the appointment of 
 
 Christ ; not the design of the ordinance ; nor yet by 
 apostolic practice; but by something which he calls 
 the law of charity, and of necessity, " to retain sprink- 
 Ung in our churches :"'* we had much rather adhere to 
 that excellent maxim of Turrettin, " The appointment 
 of God is to us the highest law, the supreme necessity. "f 
 With sincerity and zeal may we adopt the language of 
 Dr. Cotton Mather, and say, " Let a precept be never 
 so difficult to obey, or never so distasteful to flesh and 
 blood, yet if I see it is God's command, my soul says, 
 It is good; let 77ie obey it till I die.'' '^ — Dr. Wither- 
 spoon has remarked, that, " when men will not conform 
 their practice to the principles of pure and undefiled 
 religion, they scarce ever fail to endeavour to accommo- 
 date religion to their own practice." §— Mr. Henry also 
 has justly observed, that " in sacraments, where there 
 is appointed something of an outward sign, the inven- 
 tions of men have been too fruitful of additions, [and of 
 alterations too,] for which they have pleaded a great deal 
 of dece?ici/ and significancy : while the ordinance itself 
 hath been thereby miserably obscured and corrupted." || 
 — To which I will add the following remark of Dr. Os- 
 wald : '* To take advantage of dark surmises, or doubtful 
 reasoning, to elude obligations of any kind, is always 
 looked upon as an indication of a dishonest heart. "^ 
 
 * Disputat. de Bap. disp. i. § 9. 
 f Institut. Theolog. loc. xix. quaest. xiv. § 14. 
 X Life, by Dr. Jennings, p. 118. § Treatise on Rege- 
 
 neration, p. 178. II Treatise on Baptism, p. 153. 
 
 ^ Aj)pcal to Common Sense, p. 21. 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. '^^1 
 
 Reflect. VI. Suffer me now to reason and remon- 
 strate in the language of Mr. Charnock ; after which I 
 will conclude this part of my subject with the ingenuous 
 confession of a learned foreigner, and the declaration of 
 Dr. Wall. " The wisdom of God is aflTonted and in- 
 vaded," says the famous Charnock, " by introducing 
 new rules and modes of worship, different from divine 
 institutions. Is not this a manifest reflection on this 
 perfection of God, as though he had not been wise 
 enough to provide for his own honour, and model his 
 own service ; but stood in need of our directions, and 
 the capricios of our brains ? Some have observed, that 
 it is a greater sin, in worship, to do what we should not, 
 than to omit Avhat we should perform. The one seems 
 to be out of weakness, because of the high exactness of 
 the law ; and the other out of impudence, accusing the 
 wisdom of God of imperfection, and controlling it in its 
 institutions. — Whence should this proceed, but from 
 a partial atheism, and a mean conceit of the divine 
 wisdom ? As though God had not understanding 
 enough to prescribe the form of his own worship ; and 
 not wisdom enough to support it, without the crutches 
 of human prudence. . . .The laws of God, who is summa 
 ratio, are purely founded upon the truest reason, though 
 every one of them may not be so clear to us. Therefore, 
 they that make [any] alteration in his precepts, either 
 dogmatically or practically, control his wisdom and 
 
 charge him with folly Hence it is that sinners are 
 
 called fools in scripture. It is certainly inexcusable 
 folly, to contradict undeniable and infallible wisdom. 
 If infinite prudence hath framed the law, why is not 
 every part of it observed ? If it were not made 
 with the best wisdom, why is any thing of it ob- 
 served?"* 
 
 * Works, vol. i. p. 401. On Man's Enmity to God, p. 112, 113. 
 
2^8 REASONS, RISE, AND PREVALENCE 
 
 The ingenuous confession to which I refer, is that of 
 M. de la Roque, and it is as follows. " The greatest 
 part of them [the Protestants] hitherto baptize only by 
 sprinkling: but it is certainly an abuse; and this practice 
 which they have retained from the Romish church, 
 without a due examination of it, as well as many other 
 things which they still retain, renders their baptism very 
 defective. It corrupts both the institution and ancient 
 usage of it, and the relation it ought to have to faith, 
 repentance, and regeneration. Monsieur Bossuet's re- 
 mark, that dipping was in use for thirteen hundred years, 
 deserves our serious consideration, and our acknowledg- 
 ment thereupon, that we have not sufficiently examined 
 all that we have retained from the Romish church; that 
 seeing her most learned prelates now inform us, that it was 
 SHE who first abolished a usage authorized by so many 
 strong reasons, and by so many ages, that she has done very 
 ill on this occasion, and that we are obliged to return to 
 the ancient practice of the church, and to the institution 
 of Jesus Christ. I do not say, that baptism by aspersion 
 is null; that is not my opinion: but it must be confessed, 
 if sprinkling destroys not the substance of baptism, yet 
 it alters it, and in some sort corrupts it; it is a defect 
 which spoils its lawful form."* 
 
 The declaration of Dr. Wall is as follows : " Since 
 the time that dipping of infants has been generally left 
 off, many learned men -in several countries have endea- 
 voured to retrieve the use of it; but more in England 
 than any where else in proportion." Then, after having 
 mentioned Sotus, Mr. Mede, Bp. Taylor, Sir Norton 
 Knatchbull, Dr. Towerson, and Dr. Whitby, as being 
 all desirous of having immersion restored to common 
 use, he adds: " These, and possibly many more, have 
 openly declared their thoughts concerning the present 
 
 * In Mr. Stcnnctt's answer to Mr. Russen, p. 185, 186. 
 
OF SPRINKLING INSTEAD OF IMMERSION. 299 
 
 custom. And abundance of others have so largely and 
 industriously proved that a total immersion was, as Dr. 
 Cave says, ' the almost constant and universal custom of 
 the primitive times,' that they have sufficiently intimated 
 their inclinations to be for it now. So that no man in 
 this nation, who is dissatisfied with the other way, or 
 does wish, or is but wiUing, that his child should be 
 baptized by dipping, need in the least to doubt, but that 
 any minister in this church would, according to the pre- 
 sent direction of the rubric, readily comply with his de- 
 sire, and, as Mr. Walker says, be glad of it." * 
 
 * Hist. Inf. Bap. part ii. chap. ix. p. 473— 476.— The desire 
 of many learned men in the church of England to have immersion 
 restored, reminds me of another particular in that establishment j 
 concerning which Mr, Bingham, who was a true son of the church, 
 speaks as follows : 
 
 "The church of England [in her Office for Ash- Wednesday] 
 has for two hundred years wished for the restoration of this [primi- 
 tive] discipline, and yet it is but an ineffective wish : for nothing 
 is done towards introducing it, but rather things are gone back- 
 ward, and there is less discipline for these last sixty years, since the 
 times of the unhappy confusions, than there was before." Origines 
 Eccles, b.xv, chap. ix. § 8. 
 
 Thus Mr. Hervey, when adverting to the subject of discipline, 
 as practised in his own church : " The grosser kind of simony seems 
 to be practised by a certain court, styled spiritual or ecclesiastical ; 
 which thunders out excommunications and curses, debars poor crea- 
 tures from religious privileges, and causes them to be ' buried with 
 the burial of an ass 3' unless they pacify their pious indignation by 
 a little filthy lucre," 
 
 Again : " This is the language of that same spiritual judicature : 
 ' If thou wilt lug out a few crowns or guineas from thy purse, all 
 shall be wellj heaven shall smile, and the church open her arms. 
 Whereas, if thou art refractory in this particular 3 and unwilling, 
 or unable, to comply with our pecuniary demands 3 thou art cut 
 Oiff from the means of grace. Thou shalt no longer hear that word 
 of the gospel, by which the spirit of faith cometh. Nor any more 
 be partaker of that sacramental ordinance, which is a sign and seal 
 of spiritual benefits.' " 
 
 Again : " Is not this a most infamous traffic, whereby sacred 
 
300 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 things are bought and sold ? In the present state of affairs, what 
 can be a nearer approach to the sin of the mercenary magician ? 
 What can be a more indelible blot on the purity and discipline of 
 any church ? 
 
 ' Pudet haec opprobria nobis 
 Et did potuisse, et non potuisse refelli.'" 
 
 See Theron and Aspasio. 
 
 Mr. Bissetj thus : " I have returned several of my charge, for 
 scandalous immoralities, to the spiritual court j but nothing was 
 done, only some money was squeezed out of them." Plain Eng- 
 lish, p. 28. Dublin, 1705. 
 
 An observation of Dr. Owen, respecting pluralities, will here 
 apply. ** An evil this, like that of mathematical prognostications 
 at Rome, always condemned, and always retained.'' Gospel Church 
 and its Government, p. 107- 
 
PART II. 
 
 THE SUBJECTS 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
[ 303 ] 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Neither Eayress Precept, nor Plain Example, for 
 Pcedobaptism, in the New Testament. 
 
 Bp. Burnet. — " There is no express precept, or rule, 
 given in the New Testament for baptism of infants." 
 Exposit. of Thirty-nine Articles, art. xxvii. 
 
 2. Dr. Wall. — " Among all the persons that are 
 recorded as baptized by the apostles, there is no express 
 mention of any infant. . . .There is no express mention 
 indeed of any children baptized by him," i. e. John the 
 Baptist. Hist. Inf. Bap. Introduct. p. 1, 55. 
 
 3. Mr. Fuller. — " We do freely confess, that there 
 is neither express precept, nor precedent, in the New 
 Testament, for the baptizing of infants. . . .There were 
 many things which Jesus did, which are not written; 
 among which, for aught appears to the contrary, the 
 baptizing of these infants [Luke xviii. 15, 16, 17,] might 
 be one of them." Infant's Advocate, p. 71, 150. 
 
 4. Mr. Marshall. — " I grant, that in so many words 
 it is not found in the New Testament, that they should 
 be baptized ; no express example where children were 
 baptized .... Express command there is, that they [the 
 apostles] should teach the heathen, and the Jews, and 
 make them disciples, and then baptize them .... It is 
 said indeed that they taught and baptized, and no ex- 
 press mention of any other .... Both John and Christ's 
 disciples and apostles did teach before they baptized, 
 because then no other were capable of baptism." In 
 Mr. Tombes's Examen, p. 110, l6l; and Antipsedobap- 
 tism, part ii. p. 84. 
 
 5. Luther. — " It cannot he proved by the sacred 
 scripture that infant baptism was instituted by Christ, 
 
304 so PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 or begun by the first Christians after the apostles." In 
 A. R.'s Vanity of Inf. Bap. part ii. p. 8. 
 
 6. Mr. Baxter. — " If there can be no example given 
 in scripture, of any one that was baptized without the 
 profession of a saving faith, nor any precept for so 
 doing, then must we not baptize any without it. But 
 the antecedent is true; therefore so is the consequent 
 ... .In a word, I know of no one word in scripture, 
 that giveth us the least intimation that ever man was 
 baptized without the profession of a saving faith, or 
 that giveth the least encouragement to baptize any upon 
 another's faith." Disputat. of Right to Sac. p. 149, 151. 
 
 7. Mr. Obad. Wills. — " Christ did many things that 
 were not recorded, and so did the apostles; whereof this 
 was one, for aught we know, the baptizing infants .... 
 Calvin, in his fourth book of Institutes, chap. xvi. con- 
 fesseth, that it is no where expressly mentioned by the 
 evangelists, that any one child was by the apostles bap- 
 tized." To the same purpose are Staphilus, Melancthon, 
 and Zuinglius quoted. Inf. Bap. Asserted and Vindi- 
 cated, part ii. p. 37, 40, 199, 200. 
 
 8. Vitringa. — " That some in the ancient church 
 long ago doubted, and that others now doubt, whether 
 infants ought to be baptized, proceeds principally, I think, 
 from hence; It is not related as a fact, in the Gospels, 
 and in the Acts of the primitive church, that infants 
 were baptized by Christ, or by the apostles." Observat. 
 Sac. 1. ii. c. vi. § 2. 
 
 9. Mr. Samuel Palmer. — " There is nothing in the 
 words of the institution, nor in any after accounts of the 
 administration of this rite, respecting the baptism of 
 infants; there is not a single precept for, nor example 
 of, this practice through the whole New Testament." 
 Answer to Dr. Priestley's Address on the Lord's Sup. p. 7. 
 
 10. Stapferus. — " There is not any express com- 
 mand in the holy scripture concerning the baptism of 
 infants." Theolog. Polem. cap. iii. § 1647. 
 
FOR Py=F.DOBAPTISM. 305 
 
 1 1 . Limborch. — " There is no express command for 
 it in scripture; nay, all those passages wherein baptism 
 is commanded, do immediately relate to adult persons, 
 since they are ordered to be instructed, and faith is pre- 
 requisite as a necessary qualification, which [things] are 
 peculiar to the adult. . . .There is no instance that can be 
 produced, from whence it may indisputably be inferred, 
 that any child was baptized by the apostles. . . .The 
 necessity of Paedobaptism was never asserted by any 
 council before that of Carthage, held in the year four 
 hundred and eighteen .... We own that there is no pre- 
 cept, nor undoubted instance, in scripture, of infant bap- 
 tism; but this is not enough to render it unlawful." 
 Complete Syst. Div. b. v. chap. xxii. sect. ii. 
 
 12. M. De la Roque. — "As to the baptism of in- 
 fants, I confess there is nothing formal and express in 
 the gospel, to justify the necessity of it; and the pas- 
 sages that are produced, do at most only prove that it 
 is permitted, or rather, that it is not forbidden to bap- 
 tize them. If all the Anabaptists only held to this, 
 without condemning this practice as criminal and sacri- 
 legious, they would have reason on their side, and would 
 say nothing but what is founded on such principles as 
 are common to all Protestants." In Mr. Stennett's 
 Answer to Mr. Russen, p. .188. 
 
 13. Magdeburg Centuriators. — " Examples prove 
 that adults, both Jews and Gentiles, were baptized. 
 Concerning the baptism of infants, there are indeed no 
 examples of which we read." Cent. i. 1. ii. c. vi. p. 381. 
 
 14. Erasmus. — "Paul does not seem in Rom. 
 V. 14, to treat about infants. . . .It was not yet the cus- 
 tom for infants to be baptized." Annotat. ad Rom. 
 V. 14. Ba-s. 1534. 
 
 15. Mr. Leigh. — " The baptism of infants may be 
 named a tradition, because it is not expressly delivered 
 in scripture that the apostles did baptize infants, nor any 
 express precept there found that they should so do ; 
 
 VOL. T. X 
 
306 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 yet is not this so received by bare and naked tradition, 
 but that we find the scripture to deUver unto us the 
 ground of it." Body of Div. b. i. chap. viii. p. 93, 94. 
 
 16. Dr. Freeman. — " The traditions of the whole 
 CathoHc church — confirm us in many of our doctrines; 
 which, though they may be gathered out of scripture, 
 yet are not laid down there in so many words : such as 
 infant baptism, and of episcopal authority above presby- 
 ters." Preservative against Popery, title iii. p. 19- 
 
 17. Mr. T. Boston.—" It is plain that he [Peter, in 
 Acts ii. 38,] requires their repentance antecedently to 
 baptism, as necessary to qualify them for the right and 
 due reception thereof. And there is no example of 
 baptism recorded in the scriptures, where any were bap- 
 tized but such as appeared to have a saving interest in 
 Christ." Works, p. 384. 
 
 18. Mr. Cawdrey. — "The scriptures are not clear, 
 that infant baptism was an apostolical practice .... We 
 have not in scripture either precept or example of 
 children baptized." In Mr. Crosby's Hist, of Bap. 
 vol. iii. pref. p. 53. Mr. Tombes's Antipa^dobaptism, 
 partii. p. 84. 
 
 19. Dr. Field. — " The baptism of infants — is there- 
 fore named a tradition, because it is not expressly deli- 
 vered in scripture, that the apostles did baptize infants; 
 nor any express precept there found, that they should 
 do so." On the Church, p. 375. 
 
 20. Bp. Prideaux. — " Pasdobaptism, and the change 
 of the Jewish sabbath into the Lord's day, rest on no 
 other divine right than Episcopacy." Fascicul. Contro- 
 vers. loc. iv. sect. iii. p. 210. 
 
 21. Bp. Sanderson. — "The baptism of infants, and 
 the sprinkling of water in baptism, instead of immersing 
 the whole body, must be exterminated from the church 
 — according to their principle; i.e. that nothing can be 
 lawfully performed, much less required, in the affairs of 
 religion, which is not either commanded by God in the 
 
FOR P/EDO BAPTISM. 307 
 
 scripture, or at least recommended by a laudable ex- 
 ample." De Obligat. Conscient. prajlect. iv. §17,18. 
 
 22. Bp. Stillingfieet. — "Whether baptism shall be 
 administered to infants, or no, is not set down in express 
 words, but left to be gathered by analogy and conse- 
 quences." Irenicum, part ii. chap. iv. p. 178. 
 
 23. Dr. Towerson. — "That which seems to stick 
 much with the adversaries of infant baptism, and is ac- 
 cordingly urged at all times against the friends or asser- 
 ters of it, is, the want of an express command, or direc- 
 tion, for the administering of baptism to them. Which 
 objection seems to be the more reasonable, because bap- 
 tism, as well as other sacraments, receiving all its force 
 from institution, they may seem to have no right to, or 
 benefit by it, who appear not by the institution of that 
 sacrament to be entitled to it; but rather, by the quali- 
 fications it requires, to be excluded from it." Of the 
 Sacram. of Bap. part xi. p. 349, 350. 
 
 24. Mr. Walker. — " Where authority from the scrip- 
 ture fails, there the custom of the church is to be held 
 as a law .... It doth not follow, that our Saviour gave 
 no precept for the baptizing of infants, because no such 
 precept is particularly expressed in the scripture; for 
 our Saviour spake many things to his disciples concern- 
 ing the kingdom of God, both before his passion and 
 also after his resurrection, which are not written in the 
 scriptures; and who can say, but that among those 
 many unwritten sayings of his, there might be an express 
 precept for infant baptism?"* Modest Plea for Inf. 
 Bap. p. 221,368. 
 
 25. Anonymous. — " As to the seed of the church, 
 the children of Christians, at what age, under what cir- 
 cumstances, in what mode, or whether they were bap- 
 tized at all, are particulars the New Testament does 
 not expressly mention .... We may safely conclude, 
 
 * Just so Andradius, in defence of Popish traditions. Vid. 
 Chemnitii Exam. Concil. Trident, p. 21. 
 
 X 2 
 
308 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 whatever the apostle Paul might do, who baptized 
 households among the Gentiles, yet the other apostles, 
 and the church at Jerusalem did not baptize in- 
 fants ; for this reason, because they still continued to 
 circumcise, — which [circumcision] initiated into the law 
 of Moses; and they could not initiate their infants both 
 into Moses and into Christ. But after the destruction 
 of Jerusalem, which evidently proved the Mosaic eco- 
 nomy to be at an end, circumcision subsided by degrees, 
 and infant baptism took place of it. Thus infant bap- 
 tism came into the church, in the very manner our Lord 
 foretold his kingdom should come, without observation; 
 neither lo here, nor there." Simple Truth, p. 5, 2 1. 
 
 26. Heideggerus. — "Though there be neither ex- 
 press precept, nor example, for infant baptism, yet that 
 it is implicitly contained in the scripture, sufficiently ap- 
 pears from what we have said. Nor was it necessary 
 that it should be expressly enjoined. Nay, it is quite 
 sufficient that it was not forbidden by Christ." Corp. 
 Theolog. loc. XXV. § 55. 
 
 27. Witsius. — " We do not indeed deny that there 
 is no express and special command of God, or of Christ, 
 concerning infant baptism ; yet there are general com- 
 mands, from which a particular one is deduced." fficon. 
 1. iv. c. xvi. §41. 
 
 28. Anonymous. — " I do not remember any pas- 
 sage in the New Testament, which says expressly, that 
 infants should be baptized ; and, as I am informed by 
 better judges, the evidences for this practice from anti- 
 quity, though very early, do not fully come up to the 
 times of the apostles." In Mr. Richards's Hist, of 
 Antichrist, p. 19. 
 
 29- (Ecolampadius. — "No passage in the holy 
 scripture has occurred to our observation as yet, which, 
 as far as the slenderness of our capacity can discern, 
 should persuade us to profess Pa^dobaptism." Apud 
 Schyn Hist. Mennonit. p. 1 68, 169. 
 
FOR P.liDOBAPTISM. 309 
 
 30. Cellarius. — " Infant baptism is neither com- 
 manded in the sacred scripture, nor is it contirmed by 
 apostolic examples." Apud Schyn, ut supra. 
 
 31. Staphilus. — " It is not expressed in holy scrip- 
 ture, that young children should be baptized." In T. 
 Lawson's Baptismalogia, p. 1 15. — N. B. Mr. Lawson, 
 who Mas one of the people called Quakers, has produced 
 Zuinglius and Melancthon, as expressing themselves to 
 the same effect. He also tells us the Oxford divines, 
 in a convocation held one thousand six hundred and 
 forty-seven, acknowledged, " that without the consenta- 
 neous judgment of the universal church, they should be 
 at a loss, when they are called upon for proof, in the 
 point of infant baptism." Ut supra, p. 113, 1 15, 1 16. 
 Vid. Chemnitium, Exam. Concil. Trident, p. 69- Cha- 
 mierum, Panstrat. torn. i. 1. ix. c. x. §40. 
 
 REFLECTIONS. 
 
 Reflect. I. As these Paedobaptists unanimously 
 agree that there is neither express precept, nor plain ex- 
 ample for infant baptism in the New Testament ; so it 
 appears from one or another of them, that the passages 
 usually produced for it only prove that it is permitted, 
 or not forbidden, No. 12; — that all those places where 
 baptism is commanded regard none but adults No. 1 1 ; 
 — that Paedobaptism must be supported by analogy and 
 illation. No. 22, 27; — that there is no instance from which 
 it may be incontrovertibly inferred, that any child was 
 baptized by the apostles, No. 1 1 ; — that infant baptism 
 rests on the same foundation as diocesan Episcopacy, 
 No. 20 ; — that Paedobaptism is properly denominated a 
 tradition, No. 15, 16; — that though Paul baptized cer- 
 tain households, it is doubtful whether he ever practised 
 Paedobaptism; and very certain that the other apos- 
 tles did not baptize infants ; because a supposition of 
 their so doing would infer a gross absurdity. No. 14, 
 25; — that umvritten truth (or weak surmise) and tradi- 
 
310 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 tion, are a succedaneum for express precept and plain 
 example, No. 3, 7, 24, 31 ; and that persons have need 
 of great penetration to find a warrant in scripture for 
 the avowal of Pasdobaptism, No. 29. 
 
 Such concessions are our opponents obliged to 
 make, in reference to this affair ! With propriety, there- 
 fore, I may here demand and remonstrate, in the re- 
 markable words of Mr. Baxter: ''What man dare go 
 in a way which hath neither precept nor example to 
 warrant it, from a way that hath a full current of both? 
 ....Who knows what will please God but himself? 
 And hath he not told us what he expecteth from us? 
 Can that be obedience which hath no command for it? Is 
 not this to supererogate, and to be righteous over- 
 much ? Is it not also to accuse God's ordinances of in- 
 sufficiency, as well as his word, as if they were not 
 sufficient either to please him, or help our on n graces ? 
 O the pride of man's heart, that instead of being a law- 
 obeyer, will be a law-maker; and instead of being true 
 worshippers, they will be worship-makers ! , . . . For my 
 part, I will not fear that God will be angry with me 
 for doing no more than he hath commanded me, and for 
 sticking close to the rule of his word in matter of wor- 
 ship; but I should tremble to add or diminish."* 
 
 Let us now see what our impartial friends the Qua- 
 kers have to say on this part of the subject. 
 
 1. Robert Barclay. — " As to the baptism of in- 
 fants, it is a mere human tradition, for which neither 
 precept nor practice is to be found in all the scripture." 
 Apology, proposition xii. 
 
 2. Samuel Fothergill. — " I do not find in any part 
 of the holy scripture, either precept or example for the 
 j)ractice of sprinkling infants. . . .If any such proof, or 
 plain declaration, could be produced in support of sprink- 
 ling infants, it would have been long ere now produced, 
 
 * Plain Scrip. Proof, j). 'li, 303. 
 
FOR P.iLDOCAPTISM. 311 
 
 by those who have continued the practice of that cere- 
 mony. The present advocates for it would not be re- 
 duced to the necessity of 'presumptive arguments, and 
 uncertain consequences; such as the supposition, that 
 there were children in the household of Lydia, the 
 gaoler of Philppi, and Stephanas. . . .The sprinkling of 
 infants is utterly destitute of any proof of divine institu- 
 tion." Remarks on an Address, p. 5, 6, 30. 
 
 3. Joseph Phipps. — " The practice of sprinkling 
 infants under the name of baptism, hath neither precept 
 nor precedent in the New Testament. For want of 
 real instances, rnere suppositions are offered in support 
 of it. Because it is said, in the case of Lydia, that 
 'she was baptized and her household;' and by the 
 apostle, ' I baptized also the household of Stephanas ; ' 
 it is supposed there might be infants, or little children, 
 in those households: from whence it is inferred such 
 were baptized." Dissertations on Bap. and Communion, 
 p. 30. 
 
 4. Elizabeth Bathurst. — " Infant baptism, or sprink- 
 ling infants, this they [the Quakers] utterly deny, as a 
 thing by men imposed, and never by God or Christ in- 
 stituted; neither is there any scripture precept or prece- 
 dent for it. Indeed how should there, since it was not 
 taken up. nor innovated for above two hundred years after 
 Christ died ? . . . . Yet we grant the baptism of those that 
 were adult, or come to age, and had faith to entitle them 
 to it. This was the baptism of John." Testimony and 
 Writings, p. 44, 45, edit. 4th. 
 
 5. Thomas Lawson. — " Sprinkling of infants is a 
 case unprecedented in the primitive church; an irrepti- 
 tious custom, sprung up in the night of apostasy, after 
 the falling away from the primitive order. . . .Such as 
 rhantize, or sprinkle infants, have no command from 
 Christ, nor example among the apostles, nor the first 
 primitive Christians for so doing." Baptisraalogia, 
 p. 69, 117. 
 
3\Q NO PUECKPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 6. Richard Claridge.— .'' As for the baptism of in- 
 fants, it ought not to be retained in the church, there 
 being neither precept nor example for it in the scripture." 
 Life and Posthumous Works, p. 179- 
 
 7. George Whitehead. — " As to dipping or sprinlv- 
 hng infants, or young children, we find no precept or 
 precedent in holy scripture for the practice thereof. . . . 
 What great hypocrisy and insincerity are these persons 
 justly chargeable with, in the sight of God, angels, and 
 men, in their not practising that baptism they have 
 pleaded for from the practice of the apostles ! but in- 
 stead thereof rhantism, or sprinkling of infants, to make 
 them thereby members of Christ, and of his church mi- 
 litant, who are neither capable of teaching, nor of con- 
 fession of faith. If these men believe what they them- 
 selves write, argue, and urge on this subject, for the ne- 
 cessity of baptizing only believers when taught, by what 
 authority do tliey in practice so easily dispense with this, 
 and evade and change it into their rhantizing, or sprink- 
 ling and crossing infants on the face ; and yet so de- 
 murely profess and tell the people, the holy scripture is 
 their onlj/ rule of faith and practice? when they can, 
 contrary to their own demure pretences, practisa un- 
 scriptural traditions, both human and Popish." The 
 Rector Examined, p. 23. Truth Prevalent, p. 125, 126. 
 
 8. William Penn. — There is "not one text of scrip- 
 ture to prove that sprinkling in the face was the water 
 baptism, or that children were the subjects of water bap- 
 tism, in the first times." Defence of Gospel Truths, 
 against the Bishop of Cork, p. 82. 
 
 Such being the concessions of our learned opposers, 
 and such the harmonious testimony of impartial Friends, 
 1 am reminded of the following apostolic declarations, 
 which may be here applied; "We gave no such com- 
 mandment — We have no such custom."* The apos- 
 tles, it seems, gave no command for the ba[)tizing of in- 
 
 * Acts XV, '24 ; 1 Cor. xi. 16. 
 
FOR P.EDOBAPTISM. 313 
 
 fants; and therefore a precept cannot be found. They 
 had no such custom, and therefore an example of it is 
 not recorded in the history of their practice. 
 
 Reflect. II. As it is evident by the confession of our 
 opposers, that nothing exphcit is contained in the New 
 Testament relating to infant baptism; and as Pa?do- 
 baptists have taught us, that positive institutions cannot 
 be inferred by remote consequences from general princi- 
 ples, but require an express appointment;* it might 
 have been expected, had consistency prevailed, that 
 Paedobaptism would have made as little appearance in 
 the practice of Protestants, as it does in the writings of 
 the apostles. For it is generally maintained by the Re- 
 formed, when contending with Papists; and by Non- 
 conformists, when disputing with English Episcopalians; 
 that it is the safest way to take things as we find them 
 in the records of inspiration, and to perform nothing, as 
 a part of religious worship, which is not commanded or 
 exemplified in the New Testament. — Thus Mr. Alsop, 
 for instance : " I never liked either the addition of offi- 
 cers to those Christ has commanded to govern his 
 church, nor the addition of canons to those by which he 
 has appointed his church to be governed : I always 
 thought it safest, to leave the doctrine, worship, and go- 
 vernment of Christ as we found them. We may be 
 chidden for adding, or subtracting, but never for being 
 no wiser than the gospel : and when we have done our 
 best, and chopped and changed, we shall hardly ever 
 
 make better than those Christ made for us."'!' Mr. 
 
 Polhill: "The pattern of Christ and the apostles is 
 more to me than all the human wisdom in the world." :|; 
 
 Mr. White : " As Protestants, we have only to bear 
 
 the Bible in our hands; to expatiate on its importance 
 and its truth; to teach what it reveals with sincerity; 
 
 * See Part I. Chap. I. No. 4, 8, 12, 13, 20, Reflect. II. III. 
 f Antisozzo, p. 156, 157. + Discourse on Schism, p. 74. 
 
\ 
 
 314 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 and to enforce what it commands with earnestness.'* 
 Dr. Owen : " It is not safe for us to venture on du- 
 ties not exempHfied [in the scripture;] nor can any in- 
 stance of a necessary duty be given, of whose perform- 
 ance we have not an example in the scripture. . . . It 
 [an enthusiastic affection for Christ] is no way directed, 
 warranted, approved by any command, promise, or rule 
 of the scripture. As it is without precedent, so it is 
 without precept ; and hereby, whether we w ill or no, all 
 our graces and duties must be tried, as unto any accept- 
 ation with God. Whatever pretends to exceed the di- 
 rection of the word, may be safely rejected ; cannot 
 safely be admitted."'}' — Now^ if these declarations be 
 founded in truth, what becomes of Pasdobaptism ? It 
 must be consigned over to that obscurity in which it was 
 left by the sacred writers. 
 
 Reflect. III. That the testimony of scripture, in 
 favour of any religious tenet or practice, is of great im- 
 portance, none but Infidels will deny : for even the 
 Papists themselves, notwithstanding their two great re- 
 sources of confidence, tradition and infallibility, are ne- 
 ver willing to waive the advantage of pleading it in their 
 own defence, if it can be done with the least appearance 
 of reason. That the sacred writino;s are our onlv rule 
 of doctrine and worship, was the grand principle of the 
 Reformation ; and happy would it have been, if each 
 concerned in that excellent work had uniformly acted 
 under its influence. On this foundation, and in many 
 cases, Protestant writers have successfully opposed the 
 Papal system. Nor is any thing more frequent with 
 them, when engaged in that controversy, than a recur- 
 rence to this capital principle, and an adoption of Chil- 
 lingworth's maxim: The Bible only is the reli- 
 gion OF Protestants. Here, that excellent saying 
 of Basil is {)leaded : " It is a manifest mistake, in regard 
 
 * Sermons before the Universityj p. 4/2. 
 f On the Person of Christ, p. 134, 170. 
 
FOR p.4:dobaptism. 315 
 
 to faith, and a clear evidence of pride, either to reject any 
 of those things which the scripture contains; or to intro- 
 duce any thing that is not written in the sacred page."* 
 That of Ambrose also is held in esteem; "Where the 
 scripture is silent, who shall speak ?" f — Nor is Ter- 
 tullian's maxim in less repute : " The scripture for- 
 bids what it does not mention." J — Here they tell us, 
 that " we ought to respect the silence of the scrip- 
 ture ;"§ and they lay it down as a general rule, that 
 " no one need be ashamed of not knowing what God 
 has not revealed;" because, "he that would go farther, 
 gives up his wisdom and endangers his safety." || They 
 farther assure us, " that divine revelation is the only 
 foundation, the only rule, and the only law, of all re- 
 ligious worship that is pleasing to God, or accepted by 
 him;" and that, "when once a person maintains it 
 allowable to pass over the limits of the divine com- 
 mand, there is nothing to hinder him from running the 
 most extravagant lengths."^ They assure us " that 
 will-worship was always condemned of God, and that 
 it is profane to present to God what he does not re- 
 quire, or to perform worship which he did not ap- 
 point." ** — They tell us that " we ought not to worship 
 God with any other external worship, than what himself 
 hath commanded and appointed us in his holy word."ff 
 — " The scripture," say they, " hath set us our bounds 
 for worship, to which we must not add, and from which 
 we ought not to diminish; for whosoever doth either the 
 
 * In Bp. Taylor's Liberty of Prophesying, sect. v. No, xi. p. 97. 
 
 f In Morning Exercise against Popery^ p. 214. 
 
 X De Monog. cap. iv. 
 
 § Mr. Claude's Essay on Comp. of a Serm. vol.i. p. 316. 
 
 II Dr. Ellis's Knowledge of Divine Things from Revelation, 
 p, 434, edit. 2nd. 
 
 ^ Dr. Owen's Theologoumena, 1. iv. digress, iii. § 8 j 1. v. c.xv. 
 § 2. See also his Exposit. of Heb. vol.ii. p. 68^ 133. 
 
 ** Christ. Schotanus, apud Lomeieruni, De Vet. Gent. Lust, 
 cap. xiv. ff Bp. Hopkins's Works, p. 107, 
 
316 
 
 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 one or the other, must needs accuse the rule either of 
 defect in things necessary, or of superfluity in things 
 unnecessary: which is a high affront to the wisdom of 
 Ciod, who, as he is the object, so is he the prescriber of 
 that worship which he will accept and reward."*- — They 
 insist, that he who "shall appoint with what God shall 
 be worshipped, must appoint what that is by which he 
 shall be pleased ;" that "by nothing can he be wor- 
 shipped, but by what himself hath declared that he is 
 well pleased with;" that " to worship God, is an act 
 of obedience and of duty, and therefore must suppose 
 a commandment — and is not of our choice, save only 
 that we must choose to obey ; " consequently, that " he 
 that says God is rightly worshipped, by an act or cere- 
 mony, concerning which himself hath no way expressed 
 his pleasure, is superstitious, or a will-worshipper." f 
 They " admire that ever mortal man should dare, in 
 God's worship, to meddle any farther than the Lord 
 himself hath commanded.";]: They tell us, that " no- 
 thing is lawful in the worship of God, but what we 
 have precept or precedent for; which, whoso denies, 
 opens a door to all idolatry and superstition, and will- 
 worship in the world." § They say, " From the words 
 of our Saviour, ' In vain do they worship me, teaching 
 for doctrines, (viz. about worship,) the commandments 
 of men,' we clearly demonstrate that it is unlawful to 
 worshij) God with any rites, however indifferent in 
 themselves, if they are not prescribed by God." || They 
 entreat us " to consider, that what God hath thought 
 needless to appoint, men ought not to make, or pretend 
 to be necessary or important, or even useful. What 
 he commands not in his worship, he virtually forbids."^ 
 
 * Bp. Hopkins's Works, p. 107, 
 
 f Bp. Taylor's Ductor. Dub. b. ii. chap. iii. p. 347, 348. 
 
 X Mr. Marshal, in Jerubbaal, p. 484. 
 
 § Mr. Collin^s, in Jerubbaal, p. 487- 
 
 II Mr. Peirce's Vindicat. of Dissenters, part i. p. 16. 
 
 ^ Dr. Mayo's Apology and Shield, p. 44. 
 
FOR p.i:dobaptism. 317 
 
 They inform us, that *' a practice [in religious worship] 
 not being enjoined, is forbidden; — being disallowed, is 
 reprobated;"* that, "the declared will of God being 
 the most certain and happy rule of man's practice, 
 especially in those duties which have no foundation, 
 save in divine revelation; it is the greatest arrogance 
 and affront to the wisdom and will of our Lawgiver, 
 to contradict him therein;"']' that "to prescribe any 
 thing [in religious worship] which God hath not com- 
 manded, though he hath not forbidden it, is such an 
 invasion of his prerogative, that he hath punished it by 
 a remarkable judgment, (Lev. x. 1 ;)";j: that "in reli- 
 gious matters, and es[)ecially in the worship of God, it 
 is not only sinful to go contra statutum, but to go supra 
 statutum ; " or that, " to speak home in the case, in 
 religious matters, acting supra statutum, is all one with 
 acting contra statutum: therein God's not requiring 
 being equivalent to forbidding; and doing more than he 
 commandeth, to doing contrary to it." § They insist, 
 that " works not required by the law, are no less an 
 abomination to God, than sins against the law." || " To 
 serve God," they assure us, " is to do every thing under 
 this contemplation, that what we do is the will of God. 
 His will must be not only the rule of what we do, but 
 the very reason why we do it; else our doings are 
 not his servings."^ They tell us, " that the silence 
 of scripture" is a sufficient ground of rejecting the 
 sign of the cross, exorcism, and similar appendages of 
 baptism in the church of Rome ; because those things 
 " not being written in the sacred volume, are there- 
 
 * Bp. Kurd's Introduct. to Stud, of Proph. p. 393, edit. 1st. 
 
 f Morning Exercise against Popery, p. 760. 
 
 X Mr. Charnock On Man's Enmity to God, p. 97. 
 
 § Vanity of Human Inventions, p. 23, 24. 
 
 II Dr. Owen on Justification, chap, xiv, p. 494. 
 
 5F Mr. Caryl on Job. xxxvi. 11. 
 
318 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 fore condemned."*' — Once more: They commend the 
 renowned Waldenses, for declaring and maintaining, 
 soire hundreds of years ago, that " nothing is to be 
 admitted in religion but what only is commanded in 
 the word of God."f 
 
 Reflect. IV. Such being the grounds of those argu- 
 ments, and the tenour of that reasoning, which are used 
 against the unscriptural ceremonies of the Romish 
 church; what should hinder a fair application of the 
 same principles and the same arguments to Paedo- 
 baptism, if there be neither precept nor precedent for 
 it in the sacred volume? No Protestant, I presume, 
 will question the propriety of Chillingworth's remark, 
 or the justness of that inference to which it leads, 
 when, reasoning against the Papal infallibility, he says: 
 ''That our Saviour designed the bishop of Rome to 
 this office, and yet would not say so, nor cause it to be 
 written — ad Rei memoriam — by any of the evangelists or 
 apostles, so much as once; but leave it to be drawn out 
 of uncertain principles, by thirteen or fourteen more 
 uncertain consequences; he that can believe it, let 
 him." J — Is then the infallibility of the Roman pontiff, 
 so strange and so incredible to Protestants, because it 
 is not once mentioned by Christ or his apostles; and 
 shall any of our Brethren charge us with gross ignorance 
 or strong prejudice, for opposing infant baptism, while 
 they themselves allow that it is not so much as once 
 expressly mentioned in all the New Testament? Were 
 the Papal infallibility a fact, it must be considered as 
 a positive grant of our divine Lord, resulting merely 
 from his own sovereign pleasure; and, consequently, 
 it would be impossible for us to know any thing about 
 it farther than revealed in the Bible. And is not Pa^- 
 dobaptism, in this respect, a similar case? JMay not 
 
 * Mastricht Theoloe;. 1. vii. c.iv.§ 19. Turret. I nstitut. Theolog. 
 loc. xix. quaest. xviii. § 3, 4. f In Jerubbal, p. 162. 
 
 X Relig. of Protest, part i. chap. ii. § 22. 
 
FOR P.EDOBAPTISM. 319 
 
 we therefore, with a little alteration, adopt the lan- 
 guage of Mr. Chillingworth ? Yes, we will thus take 
 up his idea : That our Saviour designed infants should 
 be baptized, and yet would not say so, nor cause it to 
 be written so much as otzce by evangehsts or apostles ; 
 though they often mention baptism, as appointed, as 
 practised, as important; but leave the claim of infants 
 on that ordinance to be made out by the long labour of 
 inferential proof — by a consideration of proselyte bap- 
 tism, Jewish circumcision, the Abrahamic covenant, and 
 such passages of scripture where baptism is either not 
 mentioned at all, or mentioned only in reference to 
 adults; he that can believe it, let him. — Or, shall we 
 renounce this Protestant principle of the famous Chil- 
 lingworth, and follow the example of Mr. Fisher the 
 Jesuit? who, when vindicating the worship of images, 
 says : " In the scripture there is no express practice, nor 
 precept, of worshipping the image of Christ ; yet there 
 be principles which, the light of nature supposed, con- 
 vince adoration to be lawful."* — The following ap- 
 peal of Dr. Mayo will also apply, mutatis mutandis, in 
 all its force : " Had our Lord and his apostles, who es- 
 teemed not their lives dear unto them to promote the 
 good of souls, thought parochial, diocesan, and metro- 
 politan districts necessary, or even important and useful, 
 judge you whether they would not have given at least 
 one instruction or command concerning them." f 
 
 Reflect. V. Is it not strange, is it not absolutely un- 
 accountable, if our Lord intended infants should be 
 baptized, and if they actually were baptized by the 
 apostles, that it should not be so much as once expressly 
 recorded in all the New Testament? Baptism itself is 
 frequently mentioned — mentioned, as an appointment 
 of Christ, as a duty to be performed, as an ordinance 
 
 * In Popery confuted by Papists, p. 127. Vid. Chemnitium, 
 Exam. Concil. Trident, p. 562. 
 f Apology and Shield, p. 21. 
 
320 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 often administered, as a motive to holiness, and also by 
 way of allusion ; yet, though all these occasions of ex- 
 pressly mentioning infants as entitled to baptism, or as 
 partakers of it, repeatedly occurred, the sacred writers 
 have united in observing a profound silence with regard 
 to both the one and the other. Admitting the baptism 
 of infants to be from heaven, the silence of inspired 
 authors on this head is the more surprising, because 
 they were far from being backward expressly to mention 
 children on other occasions of much less importance to 
 the purity of Christian worship, the conduct of believing 
 parents, and the edification of our Lord's disciples. For 
 instance : Do infants fall a sacrifice to envy and cruelty, 
 by the sanguinary edict of an Egyptian tyrant, or the 
 bloody order of an infamous Herod ? they are expressly 
 mentioned.* Do children partake with their parents, 
 once and again, of miraculous food ? it is expressly re- 
 corded, a first and a second time.t Are little children 
 presented to Christ for his healing touch, or his heavenly 
 blessing? we are expressly informed of it by three evan- 
 gehsts.;]: Did children along with their parents attend 
 Paul, when taking leave of his Christian friends in the 
 city of Tyre? they also are expressly mentioned. § Now 
 though the particular mention of children in all these 
 cases was pertinent, they being concerned in the several 
 transactions recorded ; yet, as none of these instances 
 refers to a positive ordinance of divine worship, of which 
 kind baptism is ; we may safely conclude, that if Christ 
 had warranted, and if the apostles had practised infant 
 baptism, it was of much greater importance to the 
 church of God for the sacred writers to have expressly 
 mentioned it, than for them to have been so particular in 
 the cases here adduced. It is observable also, that the 
 explicit mention of children in these passages has little 
 
 * Actsvii. 19; Mutt, ii. 16. f Matt. xiv. 21, and xv. 38. 
 
 X Matt. xix. 13; Mark X. 13; Luke xviii. 15. 
 § Acts xxi. 5. 
 
FOR P^DO BAPTISM. 3^1 
 
 or no tendency to establish any doctrine, to enforce any 
 duty, or to prevent any dispute among the disciples of 
 Christ; whereas a plain information of our Lord's havin:^ 
 commanded children to be baptized, or of the apostles' 
 baptizing infants, might have answered those important 
 purposes. But infants are not expressly said to be bap- 
 tized, our opponents themselves being judges ; conse- 
 quently, we may conclude, that infants were not then 
 concerned in any such transaction. 
 
 Again : Remarkable are the words of Luke, with 
 which he introduces his evangelical narrative, and his 
 apostolic history : " Forasmuch as many have taken in 
 hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things 
 which are most surely believed among us — it seemed 
 good to me also, having had perfect understanding in all 
 things from the very first, to WTite unto thee in order, 
 most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the 
 certainty of those things wherein thou hast been in- 
 structed. . . .The former treatise have I made, O Theo- 
 philus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach." 
 From an exordium of this kind to each of his inspired 
 narratives, the reader may justly suppose, that an article 
 of such importance as Peedobaptism has long been 
 esteemed by miUions, would not have been entirely 
 omitted by him, had our Lord enjoined, or had the 
 apostles practised such a rite. Yes, had it been the 
 custom of those times to baptize infants, it might be 
 justly expected the sacred historian would have expressly 
 mentioned it once and again, with some of its lead- 
 ing circumstances. Considering his conduct with re- 
 gard to other affairs, in which he omits, or mentions 
 children, we certainly had reason to expect it.^ — To the 
 instances already produced from his writings, I will here 
 add one or two more. Does Luke, for example, inform 
 us, when describing the outrageous conduct of Saul, that 
 he "committed men and women to prison," without 
 mentioning children ? Relating the triumphs of divine 
 
 VOL. I. Y 
 
322 NO PRECEPTj NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 truth, he also tells us, that when the Samaritans be- 
 heved, they " were baptized, both men and women ;" but 
 says not a word of infants.^' If then we justly infer, 
 that little children, along with their parents, were not the 
 objects of Saul's persecuting rage, because they are not 
 mentioned as such in the history of his cruelty ; why 
 may we not for the same reason conclude, that infants, 
 together with their parents, were not the subjects of 
 baptism, as administered by Phihp? It was, undoubt- 
 edly, as much the business of Luke to relate, with 
 explicit precision, what Philip did in the course of his 
 evangelical ministry, as it was to narrate the persecuting 
 conduct of a blind bigot, who endeavoured to extermi- 
 nate the Christian cause ; and a plain account of the 
 former was of incomparably more importance to suc- 
 ceeding generations, than the most accurate inform- 
 ation respecting the latter. For Philip's beneficent 
 labours, in preaching and baptizing, are an example 
 which the ministers of Christ are obliged to imitate ; 
 but every one is bound to detest the persecuting con- 
 duct of Saul. Must we then consider the historian, 
 when mentioning men and luonien in verse the third, 
 as meaning adults only; but, in verse the twelfth, where 
 he uses the very same words, as intending parents and 
 their infant offspring? Nothing but the rage of hypo- 
 thesis can suggest the thought. If, then, common sense 
 and common honesty unite in affixing the same ideas to 
 the same words in each of those places, the conse- 
 quence is obvious; for, either no infants were baptized 
 in those days, or Philip departed from the usual prac- 
 tice. To prove the latter, w ill be an arduous task ; to 
 grant the former, is giving up the cause. — This reason- 
 ing, if I mistake not, is perfectly agreeable to the follow- 
 ing rule of bishop Taylor: " If that which is omitted in 
 the discourse be pertinent and material to the enquiry, 
 then it is a very good probability that that is not true 
 
 * Acts viii. 3, 12 j compare chap. xxii. 4. 
 
FOR P.EDOBAPTISM. 323 
 
 that is not affirmed .... The reason is, every thing is to 
 be suspected false that does not derive from that foun- 
 tain whence men justly expect it, and from whence it 
 ought to flow. If you speak of any thing that re- 
 lates to God, you must look for it there where God 
 hath manifested himself; that is, in the scriptures. . . . 
 We cannot say, because a thing is not in scripture, 
 therefore it is not at all; but therefore it is nothing 
 of divine religion."* Conformable to this rule is the 
 reasoning of that learned author, Vitringa, in oppo- 
 sition to Episcopacy. " Certainly," says he, " if we 
 were disposed to judge impartially, laying aside all pre- 
 judices and predilections, we should scarcely be induced 
 to believe, that neither Luke in the Acts, nor Paul, nor 
 yet any of the apostles in their epistles, should not have 
 made the least mention of any bishop superior to pres- 
 byters, if there had really been any such pre-eminence, 
 or dignity, or peculiar office, or singular title of one of 
 the presbyters, instituted or knovvn in their time. For 
 they were obliged frequently to speak, and actually did 
 speak about the churches, and concerning the govern- 
 ment of the churches. Now seeing they often wrote 
 concerning all other offices, but are entirely silent about 
 what was afterwards called Episcopacy ; it is to us an 
 evidence, that in their time the name of such an office 
 or dignity was not in use."f Or shall we say with Bel- 
 larmine, "Things that are generally known, and daily 
 practised, do not use to be written?";]: But this would 
 be to insult common sense. 
 
 Once more: Supposing the divine authority of in- 
 fant baptism, it will readily be allowed, that it was of 
 unspeakably more importance for us to have been plainly 
 informed of an apostle baptizing some little child, than 
 to be expressly told that Paul circumcised Timothy. Of 
 
 * Ductor Dubitantium, b. ii. chap, iii, p. 383, 384. 
 f De Vet. Synag. p. 479, 480. % In Preserv. against Popery, 
 
 title vii, p. 85. 
 
 y 2 
 
324 NO PilECEPr, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 the former, however, Luke says not a word; though of 
 the latter he is most explicit.* Did many Jewish 
 Christians in the apostolic churches circumcise their 
 children ? of that also we have the most plain informa- 
 tion from the pen of our divine historian.'}" This last 
 particular is very remarkable. For who, on Paedobap- 
 tist principles, can possibly account for the perfect 
 silence of Luke, respecting the baptism oi m^m'iis', while 
 he so plainly informs us, that the Jewish believers in 
 general circumcised their offspring, even after the obliga- 
 tion of that rite had entirely ceased ? If, as our opposers 
 imagine, all the ministers and members of the aposto- 
 lic churches were Pa^dobaptists, baptism, for an ob- 
 vious reason, must have been much oftener adminis- 
 tered to infants than circumcision, fond as the Jewish con- 
 verts were of the latter. Shall an ordinance, then, of the 
 New Testament, which is to continue to the end of time 
 — an ordinance, that was very frequently performed and 
 of great importance, be quite overlooked by an histo- 
 rian, who knew he was writing for the direction of the 
 church in all future ages; while he so expressly men- 
 tions children as partakers of a rite which had been an- 
 tiquated for many years? What! shall he plainly men- 
 tion a practice which was then the fruit of ignorance, 
 and of bigotry to an obsolete system; while he quite 
 overlooks a still more common practice, that was matter 
 of indispensable duty to every Christian parent on the 
 behalf of his infant ottspring? Plainly mention a pre- 
 vailing faidt among the primitive Jewish converts, re- 
 specting their male children; but omit their duty and 
 ^e\Y obedience, in regard to both male and female infants 
 respecting baptism? Not over-kind, surely, would he 
 in this case be to the character of those ancient Chris- 
 tians, nor over-scrupulous in his examples for the use 
 of posterity ! This, though not naturally impossible, 
 exceeds the utmost bounds of probability; and, there- 
 fore, should be rejected as an absurdity. — The language 
 * Acts xvi. 3. t Acts xxi. 21. See No. ^5. 
 
FOR P.EDOliAi'TJSM. 39,5 
 
 of archbishop Wake, in opposition to an idle opinion 
 concerning the apostles' composing a creed which goes 
 under their name, will here apply, " It is not likely, that 
 had any such thing as this been done by the apostles, 
 St. Luke would have passed it by without taking the 
 least notice of it."* 
 
 Our opponents insist, that the writers of the New 
 Testament were all Paedobaptists. But either this is a 
 great mistake, or those venerable authors must have had 
 a very low idea of their own practice — much lower than 
 Cyprian or Austin, or any of our zealous opposers in 
 the present age. For while those infallible writers men- 
 tion children on various occasions, where baptism is not 
 concerned; they relate the baptizing of great numbers, 
 in different parts of the world, without once mentioning 
 infants as parties in that affair. Nay, they relate the 
 baptizing of believers, in different places, with as little 
 notice of infants, as if no infant had belonged to any 
 whom they did baptize; yet, strange to conceive, the 
 hypothesis of our opposers manifestly implies that in- 
 fant baptism was then a very common practice ! For it 
 implies, that the baptism of children always accom- 
 panied that of their parents; and that the future offspring 
 of such converted parents were made partakers of the 
 sacred rite. On this principle, what a prodigious num- 
 ber of children must have been baptized, before the 
 canon of scripture was completed ! Yet all passed over 
 in profound silence by the sacred writers ! — Now as this 
 is an example which no ecclesiastical historian, allowed 
 to have been a Paedopabtist, has chosen to imitate; 
 and as it is an example which could not have been imi- 
 tated, when recording the transactions of later times, 
 without omitting facts that were essential to a good 
 narrative; so there is ground to believe, that the inspired 
 historians had really no facts to relate, concerning the 
 baptism of infants; which is a sufficient reason for their 
 
 * Apostolical Fathers, Introduct. p. 103, 104, edit. 2d. 
 
3^6 NOR PECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 saying nothing about it. For, surely, they were not infe- 
 rior to later historians, either as to spiritual wisdom, or 
 holy zeal, or historic fidelity ; nor could they be igno- 
 rant that the immortal productions of their pens were to 
 be considered by all the disciples of Christ, not only as 
 a mirror of past facts, but also as the law of divine 
 worship, and the rule of religious practice, to the end 
 of time. — We may, therefore, confidently say with Mr. 
 Baxter : " I conclude that all examples of baptism in 
 scripture do mention only the administration of it to the 
 professors of saving faith; and the precepts give us no 
 other direction. And I provoke Mr. Blake [and all 
 other Pasdobaptists,] as far as is seemly for me to do, to 
 name one precept or example for baptizing any other, 
 and make it good if he [or they] can."* — The learned 
 and laborious Dupin tells us, agreeably enough to his 
 own principles; That the apostles did not give them- 
 selves the trouble of regulating what related to the cere- 
 monies of Christian worship; but that their successors 
 in the ministry settled those affairs. t This, though ini- 
 mical to the creed of a consistent Protestant, is in my 
 opinion true, as to infant baptism. For it does not ap- 
 pear that the apostles either did or said any thing re- 
 lating to that ceremony, but that it was invented in a 
 succeeding period, with a number of other things that 
 were equally foreign to the language of the New Testa- 
 ment, and to the practice of apostolic churches. 
 
 The following words of an Episcopalian author, 
 concerning the Congregational Pasdobaptists, shall con- 
 clude this reflection : " If I had seen it my duty to 
 accede to the church order of the Inde})endents, I know 
 not but their principles would have led me from them 
 again to join with the Baptists. How they who, main- 
 taining infant baptism, press scripture precedent so 
 strongly upon me, answer the Baptists, who, in this 
 
 * Disput. of Right to Sacram. p. 156. 
 
 f Hist. Ecrlcs. Writers, vo\ i. p. IS], edit. 2ik1. 
 
FOR P.EDOBAPTISM. $&7 
 
 point, press it as strongly upon themselves, is not my 
 concern,"* 
 
 * Apologia, p. 108. Leaving- our Independent brethren to solve 
 the difficulty here suggested as well as they can, I w^ould observe j 
 That as this worthy author informs us he made the subscription 
 required of candidates for orders in the national establishment, 
 " REALLY ex animo," so we may take it for granted, he cordially 
 approves of that article in the national creed, which says ; " The 
 church hath power to decree rites or ceremonies." This being the 
 case, it is no wonder that he does not feel himself much embar- 
 rassed by the thought of departing from scriptural precedents ; be- 
 cause, whoever has authority to decree new rites or ceremonies in re- 
 ligious worship, must possess a plenitude of power to lay old ones 
 aside, by whomsoever they were appointed. " They who may in- 
 stitute new worship," says Mr. Alsop, " may destroy the old wor- 
 ship. For Cujus est instituere, ejus est destituere; the same autho- 
 rity that can make a law, can repeal a law." Sober Enquiry, p. 282. 
 I have observed, however, that this author, in his Messiah, talks in 
 a different strain, and treats the language of inspiration with due 
 respect. For, speaking of real converts, he says : " One, thus saitlf 
 the Lord, has the force of a thousand arguments. They desire no 
 farther proof of a doctrine, no other warrant for their practice, no 
 other reason for any dispensation, than Thus the Lord has said, this 
 he requires, and this is his appointment. Thus their wills are brought 
 into subjection ; and they so understand, as to believe and obey,'' 
 vol i. p. 224, 225. This is the language of Protestantism j this, I 
 will venture to say, is the language of Nonconformity ; and exceed- 
 ingly different from that irreverent manner, in which he has treated 
 " scripture precedents," when defending his own conformity. Yet 
 how he can reconcile these things, " is not my concern." 
 
 But, though Mr. Newton, in his Apologia, does not consider 
 himself as obliged by scriptural precedents; and though he ex- 
 pressly says, '*' I thought the example of our Lord pleaded as much 
 for circuvi-cision as for baptism;" yet, while he abides by this ac- 
 knowledgment, " I am BOUND, by my subscription, to the form and 
 rubric of the Common Prayer j" it might be expected that he 
 would never publicly sprinkle an infant, and call the ceremony 
 baptism, unless the sponsors informed him that the child could not 
 bear immersion. For a Protestant minister to think himself at li- 
 berty to desert scriptural precedents, while he confesses himself 
 bound to the rubric of a hturgy] and yet notoriously contradict 
 that very rubric, by constantly sprinkling infants instead of im- 
 mersing them J are things that grate upon my understanding. 
 Apologia, p. 108, 109, 124. See Part I. Chap. VI. No. 16. 
 
328 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 Reflect. VI. That the argument here employed is 
 neither novel nor inconclusive, will appear by adverting 
 to the conduct of Protestants in general, when disputing 
 with Roman Catholics, and that in a great variety of 
 cases. For instance : Do the Popish writers assert, 
 that Peter was the bishop of Rome for a course of years, 
 and mention many particulars of his conduct there? 
 "All these things," replies Mr. Millar, "seem to be 
 false, and without foundation ; as appears from the 
 silence of Luke, the inspired writer of the Acts of the 
 Apostles, who recorded many things concerning Peter 
 .... Peter himself speaks not one m ord of what the 
 Papists allege. If he had founded the Roman church, 
 why does he no where make mention of it?"*- — Thus 
 also the learned Buddeus: " If Peter had been at Rome 
 when Paul wrote his epistle to the church there, who 
 can believe that he would have omitted him among 
 others whom he salutes bv name ? Or, if he had been 
 there before, who can believe that Paul would have- 
 made no mention of him in any part of that epistle? 
 especially seeing various occasions offered for him to 
 have done so."'f — Is the supremacy of Peter, or that of the 
 Pope, the subject in question ? Chamier says : " If Christ 
 appointed Peter to obtain both temporal and spiritual 
 power, what is the reason that he does not so much as 
 once carefully, explicitly, and most emphatically express 
 it? Had it been a fact, he would have expressed it. 
 But he has not expressed it; therefore it was not his in- 
 tention that Peter should have it.'":|: — Is it the Papal in- 
 faUibiUtij? Abp. Tillotson says : " There is not the least 
 intimation in scripture of this privilege conferred upon the 
 Roman church; nor do the apostles, in all their epistles, 
 
 * Propagat. of Christianity, vol. i. chap. iii. p. 2/8. Vid. Turret, 
 Institut. loc. xxviii. q. xviii. § 4 ; and Dr. Doddridge's Note on 
 Rom. xvi. 15, f Ecclesia .Apostolica, p. 714, 
 
 + Panstrat. toni, ii. 1. xv. c. xv. § 2. ^'id.Dr. Doddridge's Note 
 on 1 Car. ^i^•, 2^. 
 
FOR P.EIJOBAPTISM. 39,9 
 
 ever so much as give the least directions to Christians, 
 to appeal to the bishop of Rome for a determination of 
 the many differences, which even in those times hap- 
 pened among them. And it is strange they should be 
 so silent in this matter, when there were so many occa- 
 sions to speak of it, if our Saviour had plainly appointed 
 such an infallible judge of controversies."* — Is it the in- 
 vocation of saints? Dr. Hughes declares: "That the 
 very silence of scripture is enough to condemn the pray- 
 ing to saints."'!' Dr. Doddridge: " Dr. Whitby justly 
 
 observes, that it is very remarkable that Paul, who so 
 often and so earnestly entreats the intercession of his 
 Christian friends, should never speak of the intercession 
 of the Virgin Mary, or of departed saints, if he be- 
 lieved it a duty to seek it.":j: — Is it confession to a 
 priest? Bp. Stratford says : " We find no such sort of 
 confession required by Christ or his apostles." § — Is it 
 confirmation? Chemnitius opposes it by saying: "The 
 Popish sacrament of confirmation was neither ap- 
 pointed nor dispensed, either by Christ or by the apos- 
 tles; because it is not mentioned in scripture." || — Is it e.v- 
 treme unction ? The same author declares against it, by 
 observing: " That there is neither precept nor precedent 
 for it in the scripture, except so far as relates to the 
 miraculous gift of healing." ^ — Is it their clerical celi- 
 bacy ? Mr. Wharton considers the silence of scripture, 
 as the " greatest of all" arguments against it.** Thus 
 Protestants, at every turn, against the Papists. 
 
 We will now produce an instance or two of similar 
 conduct among Protestant Dissenters, when disputing 
 with Episcopalians about the hierarchy and rites of the 
 
 * Preserv. against Popery, title iii. p. 231. 
 
 f Sermon at Salters' Hall, on Veneration of Saints, p. 37. 
 
 X Note on Col. iv. 3. See also his Note on chap. li. 18. 
 
 § Preserv. against Popery, title i. p. 21. 
 
 II Exam. Concil. Trid. p. 250, ^ Ibid. p. 205. 
 
 ** Preserv. against Popery, title i. p. 281. 
 
NO PRECEPT, NOR, PRECEDENT, 
 
 church of England. Is diocesan Episcopacy the subject 
 of debate, or of animadversion? Dr. Doddridge sa3's: 
 " The late learned, moderate, and pious Dr. Edmund 
 Calamy observes, that if the apostles had been used, as 
 some assert, to ordain diocesan bishops in their last visit- 
 ation, this had been a proper time [when Paul took his 
 leave of the Ephesian elders] to do it ; or that, if Timo- 
 thy had been already ordained bishop of Ephesus, Paul, 
 instead of calling them all bishops, would surely have 
 given some hint to enforce Timothy's authority among 
 them .... Ignatius would have talked in a very different 
 
 style and manner on this head."* Mr. James Owen, 
 
 thus : " How comes it to pass, when the apostle (Eph. 
 iv. 1 1,) reckons up the several sorts of ministers which 
 Christ had appointed in his church, that he makes no 
 mention of superior bishops, if they be so necessary as 
 some W'ould have us believe ?.... It is unaccountable 
 that St. Paul should write an epistle to the Ephesians, 
 — and not mention their pretended bishop, Timothy, in 
 the whole epistle .... It is a certain evidence he was nei- 
 ther bishop there, nor resident there. "t — Is it the sign 
 of the cross, as an attendant on baptism ? JNIr. Arch. 
 Hall says: " The reader will give me leave to quote the 
 words of Mr. Thomas Bradbury on this point: ' If,' says 
 that excellent person, ' Christ had thought that washing 
 with water was not sufficient without the sign of the 
 cross, he ivoiild have told us so.' ":j: — Thus also Noncon- 
 formists reason in various other cases ; and thus the 
 most eminent writers in all cases, where the silence of 
 sacred, of ecclesiastical, or of profane authors, can be 
 fairly pleaded against any hypothesis ; concerning which 
 no person of reading and of observ^ation is ignorant. 
 
 * Note, on Acts xx. 25. Vld. his Note on Ephes. iv. 11 ; and 
 Lectures, proposit. cl. p. 494. 
 
 f Plea for Scrip. Ordination, p. 16, 17,^2. Vid. Turrett. loc. 
 xxviii. q. xxi. § 9. J Gospel Worship, vol. i. p. 326. 
 
 Vid. Turrett. Institut. lor. xix. (|. xviii. § 3. 
 
FOR P/EDOBAPTISM. 331 
 
 Again : That Protestants of different communions 
 unite in considering negative arguments of this kind as 
 conclusive, may still farther appear by the following in- 
 stances. Turrettinus : " The silence of scripture ought, 
 
 with us, to have great weight."* Bp. Porteus: " Our 
 
 divine Lawgiver showed his wisdom equally in what he 
 enjoined, and what he left unnoticed .... He knew ex- 
 actly — where to be silent, and where to speak."'!' 
 
 Dr. Owen : " The scripture is so absolutely the rule, 
 measure, and boundary of our faith and knowledge in 
 spiritual things, as that what it conceals is instructive, 
 as well as what it expresseth." :]: — ■ — Dr. Doddridge: 
 "To be willing to continue ignorant of what our great 
 Master has thought fit to conceal, is no inconsiderable 
 part of Christian learning." § Anonymous: "Pro- 
 testant divines have ever thought this a sufficient con- 
 vincing argument, against the fooleries of the Papists; 
 That Christ hath no where commanded them; therefore 
 they may justly reject them as unlawful." || -Anony- 
 mous: "To demand more than — perpetual silence in 
 these cases is unreasonable; because no satisfactory 
 account can be given of it but this. That the worship we 
 speak of, ivas indeed no part of their religioti.'" ^ 
 
 In opposition, however, to this capital principle of 
 Protestantism, Mr. Cleaveland says : " It belongs to 
 them [the Baptists] to produce an e^ipress and positive 
 precept, or command, for the exclusion of infant-mem- 
 bership under the New Testament administration of 
 the covenant; and till they can produce such a precept, 
 they act without any warrant or authority from the 
 word of God in refusing to baptize the children of 
 covenanting parents."** Mr. Reeves: " Circumci- 
 
 * Ut supra^ quaest. xxvii. § 19. Vid. q. xxix. § 6> 75 q. xxx. 
 § 6, 7. f Sermons, p. 421, edit. 4th. 
 
 + On Heb. vii. 1, 2, 3, vol. iii. p. 116. 
 
 § Note on John viii. 6. || Jerubbaal, p, 16'3. 
 
 ^ Discourse concerning the Worship of the blessed Virgin, 
 }). 37, 38. ** Infant Baptism from Heaven, p. 39. 
 
332 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 sion being changed into baptism without any change 
 of time, that must continue upon the old foot, without 
 some eiyress command to the contrary; and therefore 
 there was no occasion for any particular express precept 
 
 in the gospel for baptizing infants."* Dr. Taylor: 
 
 " We may not say, The apostles did not [baptize infants;] 
 therefore we may not. But thus, they were not for- 
 bidden to do it; there is no law against it; therefore it 
 
 may be done."t ^^^- ^^ Courcy: "Since I find 
 
 infant baptism not forbidden by any e.vpress pi^ohibition, 
 I rather think it virtually enjoined by the very silence 
 of scripture.":]; 
 
 Reflecting on these doughty arguments in defence 
 of infant baptism, I am reminded of one that is quite 
 similar, which is used to prove the divine right of 
 tithes; or to "establish," as Mr. Adair expresses it, 
 "the most delicious part of the Jewish law."§ — "We 
 need," says the author of The Snake in the Grass, no 
 new com.mandment for [tithes] in the gospel, if they 
 are not forbidden and abrogated by Christ." — To which 
 friend Wyeth replies: " If they are not expressly com- 
 manded to be continued under the gospel, they are not 
 of force ; that law being temporary, by which they were 
 commanded, and now expired. It was adapted to the 
 economy of the Jews; m.ade to answer that dispen- 
 sation, , . .So that an express abrogation of tithes, in 
 the gospel, was no more necessary than an express re- 
 peal of an act of parliament which was but temporary, 
 and would expire of course at the end of that term for 
 which it was appointed." |1 
 
 The intelligent reader will easily perceive, that this 
 
 * Apologies, vol. i. Preface, p. 17, 18. 
 
 f In Mr. Leigli's Body of Divinity, b. viii. chap. viii. p. 671. 
 
 + Rejoinder, p. 88. See also Cases to Recover Dissenters, 
 vol. ii. p. 441. Dr. Lightfoot's Horee Heb. on Matt. iii. 6, cum 
 multis aliis. § History of the American Indians, p. 463. 
 
 II Switch for the Snake, p. 419, 4-20. 
 
FOR PiEDOBAPTISM. 333 
 
 reasoning applies with all its force to the case before 
 us. For that interest which the infant offspring of 
 Abraham's descendants had in the Jewish church, be- 
 ing part of a temporary and less perfect economy, 
 must in the very nature of the case be temporary ; nor 
 could it, without a new divine charter, have an exist- 
 ence under the gospel dispensation, any more than the 
 divine right of tithes. To produce a new charter, how- 
 ever, our Brethren do not pretend. As well, there- 
 fore, may persons who are manifestly unregenerate plead 
 their title to full communion with any particular church, 
 on the ground of ancient privilege granted by Jehovah 
 to the carnal Israelites, provided they were not guilty 
 of some flagitious evil, or ceremonially unclean ; as any 
 contend that infants must be members of the church 
 now, because they were so under the former economy. 
 With equal reason may the professed members of a 
 national church argue from the want of an express pro- 
 hibition lying against an ecclesiastical constitution of 
 that kind, as any of our opponents require an explicit 
 declaration that the church-membership of infants is 
 now at an end. Such membership is indeed the very 
 basis of national churches; but quite inconsistent with 
 churches of the congregational form. — An apostle has 
 taught us, that the ancient " priesthood being changed, 
 there is made of necessity a change also of the law."* 
 That is, as Dr. Owen explains it, " the whole ' law of 
 commandments contained in ordinances ; ' or the whole 
 law of Moses, so far as it was the rule of worship and 
 obedience unto the church; for that law it is that 
 followeth the fates of the priesthood." We may, there- 
 fore, adopt the sacred writer's principle of reasoning, and 
 say; The constitution of the visible church being mani- 
 festly and essentially altered, the law relating to quali- 
 fications for communion in it, must of necessity be 
 changed. Consequently, no valid inference can be 
 
 * Heb. vii, 12. 
 
334 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 drawn from the membership of infants under the former 
 dispensation, to a similarity of external privilege under 
 the new covenant. 
 
 I shall take the liberty of once more adverting to 
 the article of tithes. The Snake in the Grass having 
 asserted, that "there are plain intimations in the gospel " 
 of tithes being continued; Mr. Wyeth, having in his 
 hand a convenient Switch, gives him the following lash : 
 ^^Intimations! — Is it come to that? Must the world be 
 decimated by intimations? Does God's right, God's 
 due, God's tithes, depend upon intimations at last?"* — 
 Excuse me, reader, if I should express my suspicions, 
 that the divine right of tithes, and the jus divinmn of 
 infant baptism, depend upon similar intimations. Or, 
 if you please, they are both, in regard to substantial 
 evidence, like the doctrine of purgatory; which, ac- 
 cording to Peter a Soto, though not demonstrated in 
 scripture, is nevertheless insinuated there, t We will 
 venture to assert, however, with Dr. Ridgley : ''As for 
 the [positive] ordinances, our attendance on them de- 
 pends on a divine command,'' % or an apostolic example; 
 and not on intimations, or insinuations. — There is ano- 
 ther particular, or two, in which a likeness appears 
 between the divine right of tithes, and that of infant 
 baptism. For as those who earnestly plead the former 
 are compelled to confess, that the apostolic ministers did 
 not act upon it; so the most strenuous patrons of the 
 latter are obliged to acknowledge, that the apostles have 
 not plainly told us, either of our Lord appointing, or of 
 themselves performing it. . . .As our opposers imagine 
 satisfactory reasons may be given, why the apostles, who 
 are supposed to have baptized vast numbers of children, 
 said nothing expressly about our Lord's command for 
 that purpose, nor concerning their practice of it; so 
 
 * Switch for the Snake, p. 417. 
 
 f Apud Chemnitium, Exam. Concil. Trident, p. 562. 
 
 X Bod. of Div. quest, ox, p. 509. 
 
FOR p^:dobaptism. 335 
 
 those who feel their interest in decimating the property 
 of their neighbours, can easily assign sufficient causes 
 why the primitive ministers waived that lucrative pri- 
 vilege : * while they maintain on solid grounds the 
 antiquity of paying tithes, as prior to the Mosaic system 
 — prior to circumcision 'f — and, were it not for what some 
 of our learned opposers have said, 1 should have boldly 
 added, prior to the proselyte baptism. But I am aware 
 that antediluvian, and almost paradisiacal antiquity, is 
 claimed for that rabbinical rite. 
 
 That our opponents may see whose weapons they 
 use, when attacking us after the manner of Mr. Cleave- 
 land and others, I will transcribe a few lines from a 
 nameless Roman Catholic author. The writer to whom 
 I advert, when addressing Protestants, defies their oppo- 
 sition in the following words. " You cannot show one 
 positive argument against the invocation of saints, either 
 from scripture or from fathers ; not one against the doc- 
 trine of the real presence, transubstantiation, veneration 
 of images upon account of their representations ; not 
 one against the number of sacraments; not one to 
 prove communion under both kinds to be indispensable; 
 or that children dying without baptism are saved. In a 
 word, you cannot show one positive argument against 
 any one doctrine of our church, if you state it right : , all 
 you can say, is, It does not appear to us out of scripture; 
 it does not appear to us from antiquity. Show us, you 
 say, your authentic records, your deeds of gift., your 
 revelation, and we will believe : as if an uninterrupted 
 possession were not sufficient.":}: — I will now present the 
 reader with this Popish objection, as expressed by Mr. 
 West, and with part of the answer which he returns. 
 Thus then my author: Cavil: " We have brought never 
 
 * See Mr. Bingham's Orig. Eccles. b. v. chap, v, § 2. 
 t Gen. xiv. 20 j Heb, vii. 4, 6, 9. 
 
 X Vindicat, of Bishop of Condom's Exp. of Doct. of Cath. 
 Church, p. Ill, 112. 
 
336 NO PRECEPT, NOR PECEDENT, 
 
 a positive scripture, that says, There is no such place as 
 'purgatory; and a huge outcry is on such occasions taken 
 up against our negative way of arguing against a doctrine 
 that they positively profess. . . .Truly, on their part it 
 lies to have given us positive and express scripture for 
 purgatory, that would impose it on us as a positive 
 article of faith. . . .It seems absurd to provoke to posi- 
 tive express scripture against every chimera that may 
 come into men's heads a thousand years after the scrip- 
 tures were writ; for so, if any man should assert, espe- 
 cially if many should agree to it, that Mahomet is a true 
 prophet, or that the moon was a mill-stone, or whatever 
 else can be supposed more unlikely; I am bound to sub- 
 scribe to it, except I can bring particular, positive, ex- 
 press scripture against it."* — Thus also Mr. Vincent 
 Alsop: "Amongst all the crafty devices of the devil to 
 induce our grand-mother Eve to eat of the tree of know- 
 ledge ; and of all the weak excuses of Eve for eating of 
 that tree, I wonder this was not thought on; That it 
 was not contrary to any express law of God. For (Gen. 
 ii. 16, 17,) ' God commanded the man, saying, Of every 
 tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat; but of the 
 tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not 
 eat.' But it seems the devil had not learnt the sophistry 
 to evade the precept, because the express law was given 
 to the man, and not to the woman.... \i had been 
 impossible that all negatives should be expressed, Thou 
 shalt not stand upon thy head; Thou shalt not wear a 
 fooVs coat ; Thou shalt not play at dice, or cards, in the 
 worship of God : but thus [l)y pleading the want of an 
 express prohibition] he [Dr. Goodman] thinks he has 
 made good provision for a safe conformity to the cere- 
 monies; because it is not said, Thou shalt not use the 
 cross in baptism; Thou shalt not use cream, oil, spittle; 
 Thou shalt not conjure out the devil. At Mhich back- 
 door came in all the superstitious fopperies of Rome. 
 * Morning Exercise against Popery, p, 830. 
 
FOR P/EDO BAPTISM. ^^7 
 
 And with this passport we may travel all over the world; 
 from Rome to the Porte, from thence amongst the 
 Tartars and Chinese, and conform to all; for perhaps 
 we shall not meet with one constitution that contradicts 
 an express law of scripture."* 
 
 Reflect. VII. Many were the positive rites ordained 
 by Jehovah, in the ancient Jewish church ; some of 
 which were intended for the people at large, and others 
 for particular characters among them. There is not, 
 however, that I remember, a single instance of any 
 ritual service designed for persons of a particular de- 
 scription ; and of those persons, whether priests, Levites, 
 or others, being under a necessity of inferring their in- 
 terest in that service by a chain of reasoning from re- 
 mote principles. No, the persons whose duty it was to 
 regard the rite, were plainly described, as well as the 
 manner of performing it ; so that the most ignorant 
 among them, as far as we can perceive, were at no loss 
 in that respect. Nor have we any reason to think that 
 the positive laws of the New Testament are less easy 
 to be understood, than those of the Jewish economy. 
 Dr. Owen, however, seems to have been of this opinion 
 when he said, ^' Every thing in scripture is so plain 
 as that the meanest believer may understand all that 
 belongs unto his duty, or is necessary unto his hap- 
 piness. . . .There can be no instance given of any ob- 
 scure place or passage in the scripture, concerning 
 which a man may rationally suppose or conjecture, that 
 there is any doctrinal truth requiring our obedience con- 
 tained in it, which is not elsewhere explained."! 
 
 Thus also *Mr. W. Bennet: "What is the rule of all 
 instituted worship? — The revealed will of God only; 
 who hath given us a full discovery thereof, in all things 
 
 * Sober Enquiry, p. 345, 346. 
 
 f Ways and Means of Understand, Mind of God, p. 176, 185. 
 VOL. T. Z 
 
338 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 necessary for our faith and practice, by his written 
 word." * 
 
 To imagine, therefore, that the first positive rite of 
 rehgious worship in the Christian church, is left in so 
 vague a state as Pasdobaptism supposes, is not only 
 contrary to the analogy of divine proceedings in similar 
 cases, but renders it morally impossible for the bulk of 
 Christians to discern the real grounds on which the or- 
 dinance is administered. For, doubtless, a great majo- 
 rity of those who profess Christianity, are quite incapa- 
 ble of entering into several subjects, the discussion of 
 which is found so necessary by learned men, in order to 
 establish the right of infants to baptism. On this plan 
 of proceeding, a plain unlettered man, with the New 
 Testament only in his hand, though sincerely desirous 
 of learning from his Lord what baptism is, and to 
 whom it belongs, is not furnished with sufficient docu- 
 ments to form a conclusion. No ; he must study the 
 records of Moses, and well understand the covenant 
 made with Abraham, as the father of the Jewish nation. 
 Stranger still ! he must, according to the opinion of 
 many, become a disciple of those who are the humble 
 pupils of Jewish rabbles — of those learned authors who, 
 being well versed in the writings of Maimonides, and in 
 the volumes of the Talmud, imagine themselves to have 
 imported into the Christian church a great stock of intel- 
 ligence concerning the mind of Christ, relative to the 
 proper subjects of baptism. For it is thence only he is 
 able to learn, that the children of proselytes were bap- 
 tized along with their parents, when admitted mem- 
 bers of the Jewish church; and thence also he must 
 infer, that our Lord condescended to borrow of his ene- 
 mies an important ordinance of religious worship for 
 his own disciples. — Nor is this all: He must study the 
 antiquated rite of circumcision ; he must know to whom 
 
 * View of Relig. Worship, quest, vjii. See Preface, p. I — 6. 
 
FOR P^DOBAPTISM. 339 
 
 it belonged, and the reasons why : then he must com- 
 pare it with baptism, in this, that, and the other par- 
 ticular; after which he must draw a genuine inference, 
 respecting the point in hand. — Nor has he yet performed 
 the arduous task. For, as the New Testament says 
 nothing expressly about the object of his enquiry, he 
 must sift the meaning of several passages in sacred writ 
 that say not a word about it, in order to find that in- 
 fants, of a certain description, are entitled to baptism. 
 For instance: He must consider 1 Cor. vii. 14, in a 
 very particular manner. Here he must settle what is 
 meant by the word sanctified, and by the term holi/. He 
 must accurately distinguish between the holiness attri- 
 buted to the child, and the sanctification ascribed to the 
 unbelieving parent; so as to give the infant a right, 
 which the parent has not, in a positive institution of 
 Jesus Christ. — When all this is duly performed, he must 
 fortify his mind against the objections to which this fine^ 
 spun theory is liable. He must enquire, for example, 
 so as to satisfy his own conscience, Why, when our 
 Lord gave commision to teach and baptize ; why, when 
 his apostles required a profession of faith from those 
 Avhom they did baptize, no exception was made in fa- 
 vour of infants: and, by a train of reasoning, he must 
 at last infer, that, so far as appears, they meant what 
 they never said, nor ever did.* Such is the round- 
 about logical labour which the ploughman has to per- 
 form, if he would not pin his faith on the sleeve of the 
 learned. 
 
 But if, on the other hand, we consider positive pre- 
 cepts and apostolic examples as the onli^ rule of adminis- 
 tering baptism ; if we consider evangelists and apostles as 
 recording, plainly recording, all that our Lord meant us 
 to know concerning this institution; the labour of the 
 
 * So the Papists are justly charged by Mr. Hurst, with repre- 
 senting Peter as thinking one thing, and writing another. Morning 
 Exercise against Popery, p. 55. 
 
 Z 2 
 
340 NO PRECEPT, NOH PKECKDEXT, 
 
 most illiterate, who can read his own language, is both 
 short and easy. For the New Testament being the only 
 book that he wants to give him a complete idea of bap- 
 tism, he has nothing to do but to open that sacred volume ; 
 consult a few express commands and plain examples; 
 consider the natural and proper sense of the words; and 
 then, without the aid of commentators, or the help of 
 critical acumen, he may safely decide on the question 
 before him : because, our opponents themselves being 
 judges, we have in that code of divine law and history 
 of apostolic practice, both express commands and ex- 
 press examples for baptizing such as profess faith in 
 Jesus Christ, but none else. 
 
 When these things are duly considered, we shall not 
 w'onder that learned and eminent Pasdobaptists have ex- 
 pressed themselves as follows. Lord Brooke, for in- 
 stance, has made the ensuing acknowledgment : " To 
 those that hold we may go no farther than scripture, for 
 doctrine or discipline, it may be very easy to err in this 
 point now in hand [i. e. infant baptism;] since the scrip- 
 ture seems not to have clearly determined this parti- 
 cular."* Mr. Baxter: "If the very baptism of in- 
 fants itself, be so dark in the scripture, that the contro- 
 versy is thereby become so hard as we find it; then, to 
 prove not only their baptism, but a new distinct end of 
 their baptism, will be a hard task indeed." f N. B. This 
 acknowledgment is contained in his book, entitled, Plain 
 Scripture Proof of Infants' Church-membership and 
 
 Baptism. Dr. Wall: "At what age the children of 
 
 Christians should be baptized, whether in infancy, or to 
 stay till the age of reason, is not so clearly delivered, 
 but that it admits of a dispute that has considerable per- 
 plexities in it-":|: Mr. Henry: " There are difficulties 
 
 in this controversy, which may puzzle the minds of well- 
 
 * On Episcopacy, sect, ii. chap, vii. p. 97- 
 
 f Plain Scrip. Proof, p. 301, 
 
 X Hist. Inf. Bap. part ii. chap. xi. p. 547. 
 
FOR p.i:dobaptism. 341 
 
 meaning Christians."* Dr. Isaac Watts : "Though 
 
 there be no such express and plain commands or examples 
 of it [infant baptism] written in scripture, as we might have 
 expected; yet there are several inferences to be drawn 
 from what is written, which afford a just and reasonable 
 encouragement to this practice, and guard it from the 
 censure of superstition and will-worship. "f Anony- 
 mous: "In the controversy about infant baptism, the 
 enquiry ought not to be, Whether Christ hath com- 
 manded infants to be baptized ? but. Whether he hath 
 
 excluded them from baptism?" J Thus also the very 
 
 learned and excellent Vitringa : " He, in my opinion, 
 that would argue prudently against the Anabaptists, 
 should not state the point in controversy thus; Whether 
 infants born of Christian parents, ought necessarily to 
 be baptized ? but, Whether it be lawful, according to 
 the Christian discipline, to baptize them ? Or, what evil 
 is there in the ceremony of baptizing infants ?"§ — These 
 extracts remind me of a remarkable interview between 
 Saul and Samuel. The former, when recent from his 
 expedition against Amalek, said; " I have performed the 
 commandment of the Lord." To which the venerable 
 prophet replied, " What meaneth then this bleating of 
 the sheep in mine ears, and the lowing of the oxen 
 which I hear?" II So, in the present case, these respect- 
 able authors would fain persuade us that they perform 
 the will of the Lord when they sprinkle infants. But if 
 so, we may ask, What mean these concessions and cau- 
 tions which we hear? Do they not betray a conviction of 
 some capital defect in the foundation upon which Pae- 
 dobaptists proceed ? Yes, the two last of these learned 
 authors especially, were keenly sensible that Pasdobap- 
 
 * Treatise on Bap. p. 70. 
 
 f Berry Street Sermons, vol. ii. p, 180, 185. 
 
 \ Cases to Recover Dissenters, vol. ii. p. 405. 
 
 § Observat. Sac. tom.i. l.ii, c.vii. § 9. 
 
 II 1 Sam. XV. 13, 14. 
 
542 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 tism is tender ground ; and that whoever walks upon it 
 had need be careful how he treads. 
 
 Reflect. VIII, We are taught by various learned 
 pens, that the practice of John, surnamed the Baptist, 
 and the qualifications required of those persons for whom 
 our Lord intended the ordinance, unite in excluding in- 
 fants from a participation of it. Riissenius, for instance, 
 in answer to this objection ; " John admitted no one to 
 baptism, except he confessed his sins ; " replies as follows : 
 " His business was with adults, that were to be baptized 
 and called to the Christian church ; but it does not 
 thence follow, that the same thing should have place in 
 
 respect of infants who are already in the church."* 
 
 Anonymous : " The baptism [of John] belongs not pro- 
 perly to infants : for, first, it is a baptism of repentance, 
 of which infants are not capable ; secondly, it is for 
 remission of sins, which therefore imply actual sins, 
 whereas infants are only guilty of original sin, and that 
 
 is but one."t Turrettin ; " John admitted none to 
 
 baptism, but those who confessed their sins ; because 
 
 his business was to baptize the adult." J Dr. Whitby: 
 
 " It is not to be wondered at, that infants were not bap- 
 tized during John's ministry; because the baptism then 
 used by John and Christ's disciples, was only the bap- 
 tism of repentance, and faith in the Messiah which was 
 for to come, of both which infants were incapable." § 
 
 Thomas Lawson : " Faith and repentance were 
 
 the qualifications of such as were admitted to John's 
 baptism." || Thus that impartial Friend. 
 
 That the qualifications required of those for whom 
 our Lord intended the ordinance, do not agree to an 
 infantile state, appears from the declarations of many 
 others. The celebrated Cocceius, for instance, informs 
 us; " That sacraments, properly speaking, were insti- 
 
 * Sum. Theolog. loc. xvii. p.719. \ Nonconformists' 
 
 Advocate, i).4S. } Institut. loc.xix. qua>st. xxii. § 14. 
 
 § Aniiotat. on Matt. xix. 13^ 14. || IJaptismalogia, p. 108. 
 
FOR P.^LDOBAPTISM. 343 
 
 tuted for believers, and given to them, (Rom. iv. 1 1 ;) 
 that is, for those ' who hunger and thirst after righteous- 
 ness.'"* The language of Limborch is remarkably 
 
 strong. " The subject of baptism," says that learned 
 Arminian, " to whom it is to be administered, is a be- 
 liever; one who is endued with a true faith in Jesus 
 Christ, and touched with a serious repentance for his past 
 
 offences." t Meierus thus: " None have a title to 
 
 baptism, but such as profess faith and the true religion." J 
 Doutrin : " To whom ought baptism to be admi- 
 nistered ? Only to believers, or those that may be con- 
 sidered as such, (Matt, xxviii. 19; Acts viii. 37.) "§ 
 
 Turrettin : " Faith, devotion, and an internal exercise of 
 the mind, are required to the efficacy of a sacrament; 
 because the scripture expressly asserts it, (Mark xvi. 16; 
 1 Cor. xi. 27; Acts ii. 37, 38;) because without faith it 
 is impossible to please God, (Heb. xi. 6 ;) and because 
 the promise, as contained in the sacraments, and faith, 
 
 are correlates." || Calvin: " From the sacrament of 
 
 baptism, as from all others, we obtain nothing except so 
 
 far as we receive it in faith." ^ Dr. Doddridge : " I 
 
 think that illumination as well as regeneration, in the 
 most important and scriptural sense of the words, were 
 regularly to precede the administration of that ordi- 
 nance," i. e. baptism.** Mr. Jonathan Edwards: 
 
 " That baptism, by which the primitive converts were 
 admitted into the church, was used as an exhibition 
 and token of their being visibly regenerated, dead to 
 sin — as is evident by Rom. vi. throughout. . . .He [the 
 apostle] does not mean only that their baptism laid them 
 under special obligations to these things, and was a mark 
 and token of their engagement to be thus hereafter; 
 but was designed as a mark, token, and exhibition of 
 their being visibly thus already. . . .There are some du- 
 
 * Sum. Doct. de Foed. c.vi. §209. f Syst, Div. b.v. 
 
 chap. xxii. §2. X Biblioth. Brem. class iv. p. 169. 
 
 § Schemeof Div. Truths,, p. 260. y Institut. loc.xix. q.viii. 
 
 § 12. 5[ Institut. 1. iv. c.xv. | 15. ** Note on Heb.vi. 4. 
 
344 NO niECEPT, NOIi PRLCEDENT, 
 
 ties of worship that imply a profession of God's covenant ; 
 whose very nature and design is an exhibition of those 
 vital active principles and inward exercises, wherein the 
 condition of the covenant of grace [consists.] Such 
 are the Christian sacraments; whose very design is to 
 make and confirm a profession of compliance with that 
 covenant, and whose very nature is to exhibit or ex- 
 press those uniting acts of the soul."* Venema: 
 
 " Faith and repentance — are pre-required in baptism. 
 He who presents himself as a candidate for baptism, 
 professes, by that very act, to be a Christian; declares 
 himself to have passed into the discipline of Christ. 
 Hence Philip said, ' If thou believest with all thy heart, 
 thou mayest,' (Acts viii. 37.) The command of Peter 
 was, ' Repent and be baptized,' (Acts ii. 38;) the effect 
 of which was, that they who gladly and sincerely be- 
 lieved his gospel were baptized .... In baptism, there- 
 fore, we have a sign and testimony of joresent rege- 
 neration; and in regard to the person baptized, a public 
 
 demonstration of it."'!" Mr. Thomas Boston gives 
 
 us, not only his own views of the subject, but those 
 also of Mr. Rutherford and of Ursinus, in the following 
 words. " The sacraments are not converting, but con- 
 firming ordinances; they are appointed for the use and 
 benefit of God's children, not of others; they are given 
 to believers, as beUevers, as Rutherford expresseth it, 
 so that none other are capable of the same before the 
 Lord. . . .Ursin, upon that question, Who oiigiit to come 
 to the supper? tells us, the sacraments are appointed for 
 the faithful and converted only, to seal the promise 
 
 of the gospel to them, and confirm their faith." ;j: 
 
 Dr. Goodwin : " Baptism supposeth regeneration sure 
 in itself first. Sacraments are never administered for 
 to begin or work grace; you su[)pose children to believe 
 before you baptize them. Read all the Acts, still it is 
 
 * Enquiry into Qualif. for full Coinnmn. p. 20, 114, 115. 
 
 f Dissertat. J^ac. 1. ii. c. xiv. § 4. + Works, p. 334,385. 
 
FOR P.EDOBAPTISM. 345 
 
 said, They believed and were baptized. I could give you 
 
 a multitude of places for it." * " There are, or may 
 
 be, innumerable persons baptized externally with water," 
 says Hoornbeekius, "who yet are not real Christians; 
 neither were they rightly baptized, because they were 
 unbelievers; nor can they be justly said to have baptism, 
 not that which Christ appointed .... Without faith, 
 water baptism cannot by any means be lawful; for the 
 command is, believe, first; then also, and not otherwise, 
 be baptized. ' He that beheveth and is baptized,' (Mark 
 xvi. 16.) ' Then they that gladly received his word were 
 baptized,' (Acts ii. 41.) 'If thou believest with all thy 
 heart, thou mayest be baptized,' (Acts viii. 37; xvi. 
 31, 33.)"t " A profession of faith," says Dr. Water- 
 land, " was from the beginning always required of persons 
 before baptism. We have plain examples of, and allu- 
 sions to, something of that kind, even in scripture itself, 
 (Acts viii. 1^2, 37; 1 Pet. iii. 21.) Upon these instances 
 the Christian church proceeded.";]: " Faith and re- 
 pentance were the great things required," says Dr. 
 Watts, "of those that were admitted to baptism. This 
 was the practice of John, this the practice of the 
 apostles, in the history of their ministry, (Matt. iii. ; Acts 
 ii. 38, xix. 4, and viii. 37.). .. .Those who are bap- 
 tized, are professed Christians; they are avowed disciples 
 of Christ."§ Anonymous: "Sacraments are admi- 
 nistered only to those, who either have faith, or pretend 
 
 to have it." jj Once more: Dr. Erskine says, "I 
 
 have fully shown, that the seals of the covenant are, 
 under the New Testament, peculiar to the inwardly 
 pious." ^ — That these authors had any intention to 
 impeach the propriety of infant baptism, is not pre- 
 
 * Works, vol. i. part i. p. 200. f Socin. Confut. 
 
 torn. iii. p. 384, 389. | Eight Serm. p. 317, edit. 2nd. 
 
 § Berry Street Serm. vol. ii. p. 177^ 178. 
 II In Mr. Baxter's Disput. of Right to Sac. p. 245. 
 ^ Theolog. Dissertations, p. 82. 
 
346 NO PRECEPT, XOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 tended ; but whether the natural import of their language 
 be quite consistent with it, the reader will judge. 
 
 Reflect. IX. Some of these authors imagine that 
 Paedobaptism is lawful, though it be not commanded. 
 But here they seem to forget that baptism is a positive 
 rite, and that when practised it is as an act of divine 
 worship. A precept therefore, or an example, must be 
 necessary to warrant the performance of it ; and conse- 
 quently to authorize its administration to any description 
 of persons whatever. Whether infants only ; whether 
 all infants, or only some; and if the latter, whether none 
 but the children of church-members, or of all that ap- 
 pear to be converted ; or, finally, whether those persons 
 only who profess faith in Jesus Christ, should be bap- 
 tized ; are things which lie entirely at the sovereign 
 pleasure of the great Institutor. His will, which is 
 always perfectly wise and good, is the sole determiner 
 here. Now as we cannot know his divine pleasure 
 unless it be revealed ; as every intimation of his plea- 
 sure is attended with divine authority ; and as the whole 
 of his revealed will is contained in scripture ; if the 
 sacred page exhibit no command for Paedobaptism, nor 
 any example of it, the lawfulness of baptizing infants 
 must be a mere surmise — a conjecture without proba- 
 bility. For, not to urge the common arguments against 
 Popish superstition; and, waiving that excellent maxim 
 of Ambrose before mentioned, "Who shall speak where 
 the scripture is silent?" I would only demand, Mhether 
 the performance of a religious rite, in the name of 
 Jehovah, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, can 
 be lawful, if the divine Majesty have not appointed it? 
 It is clear, ]\Ir. James Owen thought it was not ; because 
 in a similar case he says, " It is a plain profanation of 
 God's holy name, and of a great and holy ordinance, by 
 lying and taking God's name in vain."* So Chem- 
 nitius, having informed us that the unction used in the 
 
 * Validity of Difscnting Ministry, p. 143. 
 
FOR P.^DOBAPTISM. 347 
 
 Popish sacrament of confirmation, is performed in the 
 name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, says, " If 
 the divine name be employed without the injunction of 
 God, it is an offence against the second command ; 
 which offence is the more aggravated, in proportion as 
 the effects attributed to that which has neither the com- 
 mand nor the promise of God, are supposed to be the 
 more excellent." * — Or is the name of Him who is a 
 consuming fire so cheap, that we may borrow its most 
 venerable sanction to dignify and adorn our own inven- 
 tions? Surely, if the performance of any thing either 
 does or can require the most explicit divine authority, it 
 must be that which, if performed at all, should be ex- 
 pressly done in the name of the great Supreme. A 
 requisition to administer baptism in that most holy 
 name, implies the strongest prohibition of performing it 
 in any manner, or on any subject, different from what is 
 required by the law of administration. In this case, 
 may and must are the same thing ; agreeably to the fol- 
 lowing words of Mr. Baxter : " We enquire whether we 
 either must., or may, baptize such ; and suppose that the 
 licet and the oportet do here go together : so that what 
 we may do, we must do, supposing our own call ; as, no 
 doubt, what we must do, we may do."'}" — Thus also 
 Dr. Owen : " What men have a right to do in the 
 church by God's institution, that they have a command 
 to do." J If then the law of proceeding, in this 
 case made and provided, require that infants should 
 partake of the institution ; we undoubtedly must act a 
 condemnable part in withholding it from them. If, on 
 the contrary, that divine rubric, that sacred canon, con- 
 line all that is said of it to such as profess faith in the 
 Son of God ; our opponents, for the same reason, must be 
 highly culpable : because their practice restrains it al- 
 
 * Exam. Concil. Trident, p. 248, 253. 
 f Disputat. on Right to Sacrani. p. 42. 
 + On Fleb. vii. 4, 5, 6 j vol. iii. p, 127. 
 
348 NO i'RECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 most entirely to such as lie under a natural incapacity 
 of professing repentance and faith. Nor do we imagine 
 any of them will say, with some of the Popish casuists, 
 That a practice is innocent, because it is customary. * 
 
 We are frequently charged with being extremely 
 fond of getting people into the water ; but whether it be 
 really so, I leave the impartial to judge. We, however, 
 may say this for ourselves, that we never immerse a 
 person in the sublimest of all names, without his con- 
 sent; no, nor yet without his eTpUcit request : whereas, 
 those who lodge the complaint against us are well aware, 
 that it would in general be very absurd for them to ask 
 the consent of those whom they sprinkle in the same 
 glorious name, because they are certain it could not be 
 granted. Besides, they consider the consent of a parent, 
 or of a proxy, as quite sufficient, though the subject of 
 the ordinance be ever so reluctant 
 
 Farther : Positive laws imply their negative. A 
 command from undoubted authority to perform an 
 action in such a manner, and on such a subject, must 
 be considered as prohibiting a different manner, and a 
 different subject. So, for instance, when God com- 
 manded Abraham to circumcise his male posterity, on 
 tlie eighth day ; there was no necessity that a prohi- 
 bition should be annexed, relating to any similar cere- 
 mony which might have been performed on females; 
 nor to expressly forbid the circumcision of a finger, 
 instead of the foreskin ; nor to say in so many words. It 
 shall not be performed on the seventh day ; those po- 
 sitive precepts, " Ye shall circumcise the flesh of your 
 foreskin — he that is eight days old shall be circumcised," 
 plainly implying the forementioned prohibitions. So 
 when Jehovah commanded the Israelites to take a lamb, 
 a male of the first year, for the paschal feast, there was 
 no need to forbid the choice of a ewe lamb, nor yet a 
 ram of the second or third year. So likewise, when 
 
 * See ]Mr. Clarkson'? Pract. Div. of Pivpists, p. 377, 378. 
 
FOR P.ED0J3APTISM. 349 
 
 Paul, speaking of the sacred supper, says, '' Let a man 
 EXAMINE HIMSELF, and SO let him eat," there was no 
 necessity of adding. Those who cannot examine them- 
 selves ought not to eat. — Thus in regard to the ordinance 
 before us. Our Lord having given a commission to 
 baptize those that are taught, without saying any thing 
 elsewhere, by way of precept or of example, concerning 
 such being included in that commission as are not in- 
 structed ; there was no necessity for him to prohibit the 
 baptizing those who are not taught ; much less to forbid 
 the baptizing of infants, that cannot be taught, in order 
 to render the baptism of them unlawful. We may 
 safely conclude, therefore, that though negative argu- 
 ments in various cases have no force ; yet, in positive 
 worship and ritual duty, they are, they must be valid. 
 Otherwise, it will be impossible to vindicate the divine 
 conduct in punishing the sons of Aaron, for offering 
 strange jire ; or Uzzah, for touching the ark ; seeing 
 neither the one nor the other of these particulars was 
 expressly forbidden. 
 
 Remarkably strong to our purpose, are the words of 
 Dr. Owen, on Heb. i. 5 : " An argument taken nega- 
 tively," says he, "from the authority of the scripture, 
 in matters of faith, or what relates to the worship of 
 God, is valid and effectual, and here consecrated for 
 ever to the use of the church by the apostle." And on 
 those words : Our Lord sprang out of Judah ; of which 
 tribe Moses spake nothing conceiiiing the priesthood ; 
 the same excellent author says : " This silence of Moses 
 in this matter, the apostle takes to be a sufficient argu- 
 ment to prove that the legal priesthood did not belong, 
 nor could be transferred unto, the tribe of Judah. And 
 the grounds hereof are resolved into this general maxim : 
 That whatever is not revealed and appointed in the 
 worship of God, by God himself, is to be considered as 
 nothing, yea, as that which is to be rejected. And such 
 he conceived to be the evidence of this maxim, that he 
 
350 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 chose rather to argue from the silence of Moses in 
 general, than from the particular prohibition, that none, 
 who was not of the posterity of Aaron, should approach 
 unto the priestly office. So God himself comdemneth 
 some instances of false worship on this ground, That he 
 never appoiiited them ; that they never came into his 
 heart; and thence aggravates the sin of the people, 
 rather than from the particular prohibition of them, 
 (Jer. vii. 31.)" 
 
 That it may still farther appear we are not led by 
 mere hypothesis thus to reason and thus to conclude, 
 I will present my reader with an extract from another 
 learned Pgedobaptist and an able writer, who adopts 
 the principle on which we argue in the present case, 
 and considers it as applicable to laws and duties in 
 general. " Since office, or duty," says Heineccius, 
 " means an action conformable to law, it is plain that 
 duty cannot be conceived without a law ; that he does 
 not perform a duty who imposes on himself what no 
 law commands ; that an action ceases to be duty, when 
 the law, or the reason of the law ceases ; and that when 
 a law extends to certain persons only, of two persons 
 who do the same action, the one performs his duty, and 
 the other acts contrary to his duty."* — To all which 
 I may add, unless the principle of reasoning here adopted 
 be just, the arguments of Protestants against unscriptural 
 ceremonies in the Romish communion, will almost uni- 
 versally fail of proving the several points for which they 
 were produced. 
 
 Reflect. X. Mr. Edward Williams, convinced there 
 is no express precept, nor plain example for infant bap- 
 tism in the New Testament, endeavours to evade the 
 force of our arguments in the following manner: " What- 
 ever there may be in the ordinance of baptism of a 
 positive consideration, there is nothing relative to the sub- 
 jects of it so merely positive as to be independent on all 
 
 * System of Universal Law, b. i. chap. v. § 121. 
 
FOR P.EDOBAPTISM. 351 
 
 moral grounds; — nay farther, whatever relates to the 
 qualifications of the subjects, is of a nature entirely 
 moral ; and to say otherwise must imply a contradiction. 
 Baptism, therefore, is an ordinance of a mived nature, 
 partly positive and partly moral. As far as this, or any 
 such ordinance, partakes of a moral nature, the reason 
 and design of the law, or if you please the spirit of it, is 
 our rule of duty — and only so far as it partakes of a 
 positive nature is the letter of the law our rule. As 
 what relates to the qualification of the subjects is of 
 moral consideration, we are necessitated to seek in them 
 the reason and intention of the command ; but infants 
 partaking of the great primary qualification, which the 
 evident design of the ordinance requires, ought to be 
 baptized ; and it must imply a breach of duty in a 
 minister to decline it. To argue on this principle — 
 Baptism is a positive rite, and therefore ought to be ea:- 
 press, full, and circumstantial — is, on the principles, 
 concessions, and practice of Antipaedobaptists, demon- 
 strably fallacious. For the law of baptism is evidently, 
 in fact, not circumstantial and determinate ; and there- 
 fore is not, cannot be an institution entirely positive."* 
 
 Baptism then, according to Mr. Williams, is of a 
 micved nature; an ordinance, partly moral and partly 
 positive. This, to me, is a new idea ; for, of all the 
 writers quoted in this work, of all the authors I have 
 perused, not one occurs to remembrance who has thus 
 represented baptism. Nor do I suppose Mr. Maurice's 
 annotator would have adopted the singular notion, if he 
 had not felt himself embarrassed by the want of both 
 precept and precedent for infant baptism. If, however, 
 the evidence produced be valid, the novelty of his notion 
 is not material. His principal reason in favour of the 
 position is; " Whatever belongs to the qualifications of 
 the subjects is entirely moral." But will this prove that 
 baptism is not, strictly speaking, a positive institute? 
 
 * Notes on Mr. Maurice's Social Religion, p. 68, 69. 
 
352 NO PRECEPT, ^OR PRECEDENTj 
 
 Will it not apply with all its force to the Lord's supper? 
 On this principle, we have no ordinance entirely positive 
 under the new economy ; because it is plain the qualifi- 
 cations for that appointment are chiefly of the moral 
 kind. Many are those theological writers who have 
 more or less treated on positive institutions ; some of 
 whose books I have seen and perused with care : but I 
 do not recollect any author, who so defines or describes 
 a religious appointment merely positive, as to exclude 
 every idea of what is moral from the qualifications of its 
 proper subjects. To constitute any branch of religious 
 duty purely positive, it is enough that the rite itself, the 
 manner of performing it, the qualifications of the sub- 
 ject, the end to be answered by it, and the term of its 
 continuance, depend entirely on the sovereign pleasure 
 of our divine Legislator. The nature of the qualifica- 
 tions, whether moral or not, makes no part of those 
 cinteria by which the definition of a positive rite should 
 be directed. Consequently, baptism is a positive insti- 
 tute; and therefore, by his own acknowledgment, the 
 lettei' of the law must be the rule of its administration, 
 both as to mode and subject.* 
 
 Whatever belongs to the qualijications of the subjects 
 is ENTIRELY moral. Agreed: it must be allowed, how- 
 ever, that those qualifications are absolutely depend- 
 ant on the sovereign pleasure of God. But how should 
 an infant, of a few days or of a month old, be a par- 
 taker of such qualifications, to render it a proper sub- 
 ject of baptism ? Or, supposing such qualifications to 
 exist, by what means are they to be discovered? What 
 is there discernible, that can with propriety be called 
 morale in one that is not capable of moral agency ? 
 Morality, in all its branches, is nothing but the dis- 
 charge of moral obligation ; or, a conformity of heart and 
 of life to the rule of duty. Of this, it is manifest, mere 
 infants are naturally incapable. On whatever ground, 
 * See Part I. Chap. I. No. 1—20. 
 
FOR P.EDOBAPTlSM. 353 
 
 therefore, Mr. Williams fixes the right of infants to bap- 
 tism, I do not see how it either is or can be of a moral 
 nature. Parents may have the requisite moral qualifi- 
 cations for the ordinance; but I cannot conceive how 
 their new-born offspring, for whom our author pleads as 
 proper subjects of the rite, should' be so qualified ; and 
 yet he maintains, that "whatever belongs to the quahfi- 
 cations of the subjects is entirely moral." This re- 
 spectable annotator is here guilty, if I may so express it, 
 oi \og\<i2i\ felo-de-se ; for his argument subverts the cause 
 it was intended to serve, and proves the reverse of what 
 he designed. 
 
 Infants partake of the great primary qualification 
 which the design of the ordinance requires, and therefore 
 should he baptized. Infants — what, in general ? Of all 
 mankind ? He will not, I presume, assert it. Or if he 
 did, his argument would be equally feeble. I take it 
 for granted, however, that he means the infants of pro- 
 fessed believers. But there is no more of a moral tem- 
 per, or of a moral conduct, in the mere infant of a real 
 Christian, than there is in that of a Jew, or of a Turk. 
 Besides, Mr. Williams himself has opposed the notion 
 of hereditary grace.* If then the infants he means be 
 descended from parents of a certain description, their 
 qualifications must be derived from those parents, who- 
 ever they be ; consequently, not from any thing moral 
 in themselves. But our author's position requires that 
 the infants themselves possess moral qualifications, to 
 render them the subjects of baptism. What that " great 
 primary qualification" is which infants have, he has 
 not informed us ; nor will I indulge conjecture : but I 
 may venture to say, that it is not their being taught; 
 that it is not repentance; that it is noi faith; that it is 
 not a py^ofession of the one or the other. Consequently, 
 whatever it be, it is not that which John the Baptist re- 
 quired ; it is not that which the evangelist Philip required ; 
 
 * See Part II. Chap. IV. Sect. IV. § ii. No. 11. 
 VOL. I. 2 A 
 
354 NO PRECEPT, JVOll PRECEDENT, 
 
 nor is it that which our Lord in his commission ap- 
 pointed ; and if so, it is not the primitive qualification, 
 whatever else it may be. 
 
 Our annotator speaks with a decisive tone when he 
 adds; The laiv of haptism is evidently and in fact not 
 circumstantial and determinate, and therefore cannot be 
 an institution entirely positive. The law of baptism. 
 Then some specific action, called baptism, is absolutely 
 and in earnest required by it ; contrary to what he 
 maintains in another place, on which we have already 
 animadverted. This divine law, however, is 7iot ciixum- 
 stantial — is not determinate. In one of his notes, to 
 which I have just adverted, he would fain persuade us, 
 that the meaning of our Lord, in his enacting term bap- 
 tize, is not now understood with precision, even by the 
 most eminent authors; and therefore he is of opinion, 
 that persons concerned in the administration should have 
 it performed according to their own mind ; which, to be 
 sure, is the way for every one to be pleased, whether 
 Jesus Christ be obeyed or not. Now he tells us, with 
 an air of assurance, that this law of the Lord is, " not 
 circumstantial and determinate,^' with regard to the sub- 
 jects of the institution. According to him, therefore, 
 nothing is plain, determinate, or certain, relating to 
 either the mode or the subject. Aristotle is reported to 
 have said, of some of his works, " That they were Edita 
 quasi non edita; so published as not to be made public, 
 by reason of their obscurity."* Just such, according to 
 our author, is the promulgation of the heavenly statute 
 under consideration. But what a representation this, of 
 a positive divine law! If Mr. Williams be right, one 
 might almost as well study John viii. 6, 8, to know 
 what our Lord wrote on the ground, as endeavour to 
 penetrate his meaning in the law of baptism. When I 
 consider the language of our annotator on another occa- 
 sion, I do not see how he can steadily believe any thing 
 
 * History of Popery, vol, ii. p, 468. 
 
FOR P/EDOBAPTISM. 355 
 
 at all relating to this positive institute. For he declares, 
 in the passage to which I refer, That " nothing should 
 be considered as an established principle of faith, which 
 is not in some part of scripture delivered with per- 
 spicidfi/.''^' The baptismal command, therefore, being 
 so indeterminate and so obscure, in regard to both mode 
 and subject, he ought, on his own principle, to be silent 
 about it. How much more agreeable is the language of 
 Mr. Vincent Alsop, when he says ; " The law of Christ 
 was as perfect as his discoveries. He has told us as 
 fully and clearly what we should do, as what we should 
 believe. He that may invade the royal office, upon pre- 
 tence there are not laws enow, [or not sufficiently clear,] 
 for the government [or worship] of the church; may, 
 with equal appearance of reason, invade the prophetic 
 office too, upon pretence there are not revelations now 
 for its instruction." t — Though I take it for granted that 
 Mr. Williams is not a stranger to the Popish controversy, 
 relating to positive ordinances of holy worship, yet I 
 cannot help thinking that he quite overlooked it, when 
 penning his notes concerning baptism ; because that 
 want of perspicuity and of precision, which he charges 
 on a positive law, is much more becoming the creed of a 
 Papist, than that of a Protestant Dissenter. 
 
 That the law of baptism is neither circumstantial, 
 nor determinate, in favour of the present prevailing 
 custom, is cheerfully granted ; for it says nothing at all 
 about pouring or sprinkling wat^r upon infants : nor does 
 the history of baptismal practice in the apostolic churches. 
 But is this any proof that the law itself is not explicit, 
 either as to mode or subject? Mr. Maurice's annota- 
 tor seems to have assumed, as a principle. That infaiits 
 are to be baptized: but applying this principle to the law 
 of baptism, he soon perceives a disagreement between 
 them. Then, instead of renouncing the principle as 
 false, he impeaches the law as obscure. Take but the 
 
 * Notes on Social Keligion, p. 368. f Sober Enquiry, p. 42. 
 
 2 A 2 
 
356 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 commanding terms* of the heavenly statute in their 
 natural, primary, obvious meaning; and I appeal to im- 
 partiality, whether the law of baptism be not as plain as 
 that of the holy supper. If indeed our Lord intended 
 infants to be baptized, and if he designed to publish that 
 intention by his evangelists,']' the law of baptism might 
 well be considered as vague and obscure. But this, we 
 contend, is not the case; as it is inconsistent with the 
 nature of a positive institution, impeaches the legislative 
 character of Jesus Christ, and enervates the arguments 
 of Protestants against Papal superstition. See Part I. 
 Chap. I. No. 4,8, 12, 13,20. Reflect. II. III. 
 
 Farther: That neither infants nor adults have any 
 thing to do with baptism as a religious rite, except in 
 virtue of divine institution, will be acknowledged. If, 
 therefore, infants, Jure divino, be entitled to baptism, 
 it must be because the institution itself gives them that 
 right, of which it makes an essential part. Now, of 
 what nature the institution is, and to whom it relates, 
 cannot be known, unless by the formula of it, ^j: or by the 
 practice of the apostles. But that neither the right of 
 infants to the ordinance, nor their participation of it, is 
 plainly mentioned, either in the words of the institution, or 
 in the history of apostolic practice, is readily granted by 
 our opposers. Must we then suppose that an essential 
 part, nay, according to modern custom, the prijicipal 
 part of the institution was passed over in silence by evan- 
 gelists and apostles, and left in obscurity for posterity to 
 infer by a train of consequences? Chamier, I remem- 
 ber, when opposing the pretended necessity of mixing 
 the eucharistical wine with water, and when pleading the 
 silence of the New Testament, says : " No one main- 
 tains the necessity of mixing wine with water on the 
 ground of divine institution; unless the evangelists and 
 Paul were traitors, who passed over in silence a part of 
 
 * MaSijTeKO-aTe and j9aTO-T»^ovTe?. f Matt, xxviii. 19 j 
 
 Mark xvi. 15, 16. t Ibid. 
 
FOR P^DOBAPTISM. 357 
 
 the institution so useful and so important,"* Now is 
 any thing said concerning infants, in the baptismal ap- 
 pointment, any more than about water, in the institu- 
 tion of the holy supper? Supposing it should t^e objected, 
 " There was no occasion for children to be mentioned in 
 the divine command, because it was then common for them 
 to partake of the proselyte baptism." It would be easy 
 to answer, There is abundantly more ground to conclude, 
 that it was customary among the ancient Jews, in their 
 convivial entertainments, to mix the wine with water, 
 than any one has to assert, that the proselyte baptism was 
 of so early a date; as will appear in its proper place. If, 
 therefore, the institution of baptism comprehend infants, 
 why may not our Lord's appointment of the sacred sup- 
 per include that mixture for which the Papists plead ? 
 Consequently, supposing infants to have been compre- 
 hended by our Lord in his baptismal institution, and 
 admitting the observation of Chamier to be just; the 
 severity of his remark will equally apply to such evange- 
 lists as professedly recorded the divine appointment of 
 baptism, as to that particular for which it was designed. 
 That Christ, in his institution, should order infants to be 
 baptized, and the evangelists not be inclined to mention 
 it ; or that, with a full intention to inform us of it, they 
 should use such language as they do, in recording the 
 appointment, are to me alike incredible. 
 
 Mr. Williams farther says : " Should any ask me 
 why, as a Christian minister, I baptize an infant ? I can 
 truly answer, that I have the very same reason for doing 
 it that John the Baptist had for baptizing penitent sin- 
 ners, in Jordan and Enon ; the same reason that Jesus, 
 by the ministry of his apostles, had for baptizing a still 
 greater multitude; and, finally, the same reason that our 
 Baptist brethren have, or ought to have, and which they 
 profess to have, in the general tenour of their practice. 
 
 * Panstrat. torn. iv. 1. vi, c. iii, §. 23. 
 
358 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 for baptizing adults."* But why distinguish between 
 penitent sinners, and those adults of whom he speaks ? 
 for Mr. WilHams either knows, or might have known, 
 that we do not baptize adults because of their age, but 
 because they profess repentance. Or does he mean to 
 distinguish between penitent r/rM^^ and penitent infants? 
 — Again : Why did not the annotator inform us, what 
 that "very same reason" is, of which he speaks? Had he 
 done this, we might, perhaps, have concluded with some 
 degree of precision, whether there be that identity of 
 reason for him to baptize an infant, as there was for 
 John, and for the apostles, to baptize penitent sinners. 
 That reason, however, is not specified, nor is there any 
 thing but mere assertion; on which account we cannot 
 forbear to hesitate. It is indeed extremely singular, 
 that he should speak of " the very same reason — the 
 same — the same;''' and yet leave us entirely to conjec- 
 ture what that reason is. It brings to remembrance the 
 following words of an old Nonconformist, when con- 
 tending with Papists: '■'Jure Z)ii?mc»," saith the Canonist, 
 " by divine right; but the Canonist who saith it, hath the 
 wit to let us seek the text."t — Pleasing it is to think, 
 that, in the judgment of this opponent, we baptize per- 
 sons on " the very same reason," or ground, as that 
 upon which the harbinger of Christ and all the apostles 
 proceeded, when administering the sacred rite: but we 
 have our suspicions whether Mr. Williams "can truly" 
 say this, with regard to his pouring or sprinkling water 
 upon any infant. John, it appears, received a com- 
 mission from heaven to baptize those who made a credi- 
 ble profession of repentance; and this we consider as 
 "the reason" of his baptizing penitent sinners. But 
 has our opposer a divine command for baptizing an in- 
 fant that cannot repent? John, it is plain, frowned upon 
 some who came for his baptism, because they gave no 
 
 * Notes on Social Relig. p. 68. 
 
 t Morning Exercise against Popery, p. 71. 
 
FOR P^DOBAPTISM. 359 
 
 evidence of repentance. Does Mr. Williams reject any 
 infants for that "very reason?" — The apostles received 
 an express order to " teach all nations," by preaching 
 " the gospel to every creature;" and to baptize those that 
 were taught — so taught as to believe in Jesus Christ. 
 This we consider as "the very reason" of their bap- 
 tismal conduct. But has our Paedobaptist Brother any 
 divine injunction to baptize those who cannot be taught, 
 by either preaching or conversation, and who are equally 
 incapable of believing? The Baptists profess to act on 
 the united ground of divine precept and apostolic exam- 
 ple, in baptizing those, and only those, who make a 
 credible declaration of repentance and faith, without 
 regard to age or any other circumstance. But is this 
 "the very reason," or the single ground, on which Mr. 
 "WiUiams proceeds, when he baptizes an infant? 
 
 Farther : Why, in the name of consistency, why 
 should this opponent speak with such assurance of 
 having " the very same reason" for baptizing an infant, 
 which John and the apostles had for baptizing a multi- 
 tude of penitent sinners ? while it is clear, from his own 
 confession, that he does not know what our Lord meant 
 by his command to baptize. Nay, so sensible is he of 
 his own ignorance in this respect, and so suspicious that 
 a want of certainty is now become universal; that he 
 thinks it quite reasonable for the parties concerned, to 
 use the water as they may think proper. See Part I. 
 Chap. IL Reflect. IX. — His reasoning admits, indeed, 
 that the apostles perfectly understood the mind of our 
 Lord, in his commanding term, baptize; and as they 
 were fully disposed to perform his will, we may safely 
 conclude that they administered the ordinance to one 
 and another ; for " the very same reason." But as 
 every mode of using water cannot be baptism, any more 
 than it can be sprinkling; as that only can be real bap- 
 tism which our Lord appointed, in distinction from 
 every other action ; and as Mr. Williams acknow- 
 
360 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 ledges his ignorance of what the Lawgiver intended by 
 the enacting word baptize; he must act upon a con- 
 jecture extremely shrewd and uncommonly happy, if at 
 any time he really baptize an infant for " the veiy same 
 reason" that John or the apostles baptized multitudes 
 of penitent sinners. The very same form of vvords 
 might, indeed, be used by him; whether, with John, he 
 plunged a penitent in Jordan, or sprinkled a few drops of 
 water on the face of an infant; but surely he could not 
 act upon " the very same reason" in both cases. This, 
 I think, must be allowed; except he can prove, that a 
 commission to immerse penitents, is equally an order to 
 sprinkle infants. But, besides the absurdity of any one 
 making such an attempt, it is a task to which this op- 
 poser cannot pretend; because, by so doing, he would 
 endeavour to fix the sense of a word which is considered 
 by him as indeterminable : for he insists that the most 
 eminent authors are divided about our Lord's mean- 
 ing in the term baptize; and therefore proposes that 
 people should please themselves, with regard to the mode 
 of administration. If Mr. Williams, however, should 
 at any time write professedly against the Baptists, it may 
 be expected, (unless he give up this point,) that his grand 
 reason for sprinkling infants, will be the veiy same which 
 is given by us for immersing penitent sinners; and then 
 the author of a certain Apology for clerical conformity 
 will have an humble imitator.* 
 
 * In the Apologia, to which I refer, the following: uncommon 
 and surprising positions are contained. "My ?^r^Ai a.nCi principal 
 reason [for ministerial conformity] is. The regard I owe to the 
 honour and authority of the Lord Jesus Christ, as Head and Law- 
 giver of his church. ... It jeems to me, that I could no more offi- 
 ciate as a minister among any people who insist upon other terms 
 of communion than those which our Lord has a})pointed, faith 
 and holiness, than I cculd subscribe to the dogmas of the Council 
 of Trent. . . . My second reason for not being a Dissenter is, Be- 
 cause I highly value the right (f private judgment, and my liberty as 
 a moil and as a Christian. . . .1 cannot become a Dis-entcr till I am 
 
FOR P.'EDOBAPTISM. 36l 
 
 Reflect. XI. I will present the reader with an 
 extract from a celebrated Roman Catholic author, ex- 
 pressing the opinion that Papists have concerning the 
 mode of reasoning used by Protestants in favour of Pse- 
 dobaptism. The writer to whom I refer is Bossuet, the 
 bishop of Meaux, and his language is as follows : " As 
 for infants, those of the pretended Reformed religion 
 indeed say, their baptism is founded on the scripture; 
 but they produce no passage express to that purpose, but 
 argue from very remote, not to say very doubtful, and 
 even very false consequences. It is certain, that all the 
 proofs they bring from the scripture on this subject, 
 
 weary of my liberty," Apologia, p. 61, 116, 119, 121. — If these 
 be solid reasons for clerical conformity, those ministers that were 
 ejected in the year sixteen hundred and sixty-two must be consi- 
 dered as a set of maniacs. Being loth, however, to impeach the 
 intellects of two thousand persons, who suffered so much for the 
 sake of a good conscience, I cannot forbear suspecting, that these 
 positions are an insult upon the understandings of Dissenters, and 
 that sensible Episcopalians themselves must despise them ; for it is 
 on these and similar principles Dissenters have always proceeded 
 in justifying their Nonconformity, When our Apologist says, " We 
 [conforming clergy] are not so much at the mercy of our hearers 
 for our subsistence, as the Dissenting ministers are," we perfectly 
 understand him. We have been frequently told of this, by those 
 who have defended civil establishments of religion; and we freely 
 acknowledge, that secular prudence is very apparent iu many who 
 act upon the principle thus avowed. But when we find a pious 
 Episcopalian author seizing the grand principles of our Protestant 
 Dissent, in order to found a vindication of his own Conformity 
 upon them, we are surprised, and cannot forbear thinking of those 
 doughty champions for Popery, Jacob, de Graffiis, and Father Mum- 
 ford the Jesuit: the former of whom found image-worship en- 
 joined in the second command; and the latter discovered a convincing 
 proof of clerical celibacy in those words of Paul, A bishop must be 
 the husband of one wife. See Preserv, from Popery, title i. p, 341. 
 vol. ii. Gen, Discourses against Popery, p. 140. — Nor can we avoid 
 considering the conduct of this Apologist as unprecedented in the 
 Nonconformist controversy— as betraying an uncommon degree of 
 rage for hypothesis, and of predilection for paradox. See Apologia, 
 p. 136. 
 
369 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 have no force at all; and those that might have some 
 strength, are destroyed by themselves. . . .The proofs 
 that are drawn from the necessity of baptism, to compel 
 men to allow it to infants, are destroyed by our Re- 
 formed gentlemen ; and these that follow are substituted 
 in their room, as they are noted in their catechism, in 
 their confession of faith, and in their prayers ; namely, 
 that the children of believers are born in the covenant, 
 according to this promise, * I will be thy God, and the 
 God of thy offspring to a thousand generations.' From 
 whence they conclude, that since the virtue and sub- 
 stance of baptism belongs to infants, it would be in- 
 jurious to them to deny them the sign, which is inferior 
 to it. By a like reason, they will find themselves forced 
 to give the communion together with baptism ; for they 
 who are in the covenant, are incorporated with Jesus 
 Christ: the infants of believers are in the covenant; 
 therefore, they are incorporated with Jesus Christ. 
 And having by this means, according to them, the 
 virtue and substance of the communion; they ought 
 to say, as they do of baptism, that the sign of it cannot 
 without injury be refused them."* 
 
 Reflect. XII. To the tenour of this reasoning: it is 
 often objected; That there is no express command to 
 baptize believers. With an air of confidence, in refer- 
 ence to this affair. Dr. Addington asks and answers ; 
 " Is there no express command of Christ to baptize 
 believers? Not 0}?e in all the New Testament."'}" If, 
 by an express command, he mean these very words. 
 Baptize believers, it is allowed ; but what is that to the 
 purpose, while the ideas conveyed by those terms, are 
 as plainly and strongly expressed, as if the identical 
 words had been repeatedly used? Nor will Dr. Ad- 
 dington deny this. With equal reason, therefore, does 
 cardinal Bellarmine object the want of these express 
 
 * In Mr. Stennett against Mr. Russen, p. ISO, 182, 183. 
 f Summary of Cliristian Minister's Reasons, p. 24. 
 
FOR P^DOBAPTISM. 363 
 
 words, the imputed righteousness of Christ, against the 
 Protestant doctrine of justification; or Socinus oppose 
 the atonement, because the term satisfaction is not 
 syllabically used concerning that capital fact. — But let 
 us reflect on a passage or two. Does not Christ say, 
 "Preach the gospel to every creature: he that be- 
 LiEVETH and is baptized shall be saved?" Is it not the 
 language of his evangelist, " If thou believest with all 
 thy heart, thou mayest " be baptized? Now can any 
 person thus believe the gospel, without being a believer? 
 Or will this opponent aver, that neither of these pas- 
 sages erijoins the administration of baptism to believers? 
 Let him produce a text from the New Testament, that 
 is equally express for the baptism of infants, and we 
 will immediately give up the argument. — Besides, Dr. 
 Addington well knows that we connect the want of a 
 plain example, with the want of an express command 
 for infant baptism. To have done our objection justice, 
 he ought, therefore, to have put the question thus : Is 
 there no e.vpress command of Christ, nor any plain apos- 
 tolic example, for baptizing believers? and then he 
 would have been far from teaching his catechumen to 
 answer; "Not one in all the New Testament." Such 
 a negative, to such a question, would have been an 
 outrage on the common faith of the whole Christian 
 world; and yet, if you substitute the term infants, for 
 the word believers, Pasdobaptists themselves must an- 
 swer in the negative. 
 
 It is farther objected; That there is neither precept 
 nor example for baptizing the children of Christian pa- 
 rents when they are grown up; and that on the same 
 principles, applied in similar arguments, we must neither 
 observe the Lord's day j nor admit women to the holy 
 table. Thus, Dr. Mayo, for instance: "They [the 
 Baptists] have not a single precedent in scripture — of 
 their subjects of baptism, the children of Christian 
 parents, whose baptism w-as delayed till they were of 
 
364 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 adult years, to make a profession of their faith." * But 
 if this objection have any weight, it must He with equal 
 force against the continuance of baptism among Chris- 
 tians, or the administration of it to any description of 
 subjects; except in reference to such persons as are 
 converted from Judaism, Mohammedanism, or Pa- 
 ganism : and it was, if I mistake not, first employed by 
 Socinus for that purpose. f To which the learned Hoorn- 
 beek replies; "That such as were educated in the 
 Christian religion, and were never alienated from it, are 
 not expressly mentioned in the New Testament as bap- 
 tized ; does not arise from hence, That such never were 
 baptized, nor ought so to have been : but because the 
 apostolic writings contain the history of the Jirst times, 
 when Christianity was recent." J This answer applies 
 to the case before us. Our opposers, therefore, should 
 be cautious how they urge such an objection against us, 
 lest inadvertently they give up to the arguments of 
 Socinus, of Emlyn, and of others, the continuance of 
 baptism, except in extraordinary cases. — But is it not 
 enough, that we have both an express command, and 
 plain examples, for baptizing those who are taught^ who 
 are made disciples, and profess faith in the Son of God? 
 Nay, I appeal to Dr. Mayo himself, who on another 
 occasion declares ; " It is sufficient for my purpose, that 
 our practice can be found in the New Testament." § 
 It is but grateful to acknowledge, how much we are 
 obliged to this author for presenting us with such a 
 shield, to prevent the dart of his own objection from 
 piercing our cause. — It seems, indeed, hard to conceive 
 why our Brethren should lay such a stress upon this 
 particular, as if it were decisively against us, unless it be 
 the want of more cogent objections. For it is manifest, 
 that the idea of carnal descent, from parents of any de- 
 
 * Apology and Shield, p. 82. f De Baptismo, cap. x. 
 
 X Socin. Confut. torn. iii. i).279. See Dr. Doddridge's Lectures, 
 p. 510, oil. § Ut supra, p, 7^, 79. 
 
FOR PyEDO BAPTISM. 365 
 
 scription, makes no part of the institution, or law of 
 baptism ; and consequently should have no influence 
 upon our practice. No; whether the candidate be de- 
 scended from real, or from barely nominal Christians ; 
 whether his parents be Jews, Turks, or Pagans ; nay, 
 whether he be old or young ; it is, properly speaking, a 
 mere circumstance; provided he make a credible profes- 
 sion of faith — equally a circumstance, with learning or 
 illiteracy, riches or poverty. The character of parents, 
 and family relations, have nothing to do in the new 
 economy, which is entirely spiritual — are of no avail in 
 that kingdom which " is not of this world;" the subjects 
 of which " are born, not of blood, nor of the will of the 
 flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." If the can- 
 didate give evidence of his being a disciple of Christ, it 
 is all the institution demands, and all that apostolic 
 practice required. Such being the true state of the 
 case, why should our opposers insist on a scriptural pre- 
 cedent for baptizing the adult offspring of Christians? 
 Why call for an example of that which makes no part 
 of the institution, but is merely circumstantial? We 
 sometimes baptize persons of sixty or seventy years of 
 age. As well, therefore, might it be objected, that there 
 is no instance in sacred writ of any person so far ad- 
 vanced in years being baptized by the apostles. How 
 far the following observation of Dr. Owen will here 
 apply, is left with my reader. "It is merely from a 
 spirit of contention that some call on us, or others, to 
 produce express testimony, or institution, for every cir- 
 cumstance in the practice of religious duties in the 
 church; and on a supposed failure herein, to conclude, 
 that they have power themselves to institute and ordain 
 such ceremonies as they think meet, under a pretence of 
 their being circumstances of worship."* 
 
 As to the Lord's day, our opponents themselves al- 
 low, that we have not only apostolical examples of as- 
 
 * Enquiry into the Orig. and Nat. of Churches, p. 14. 
 
366 NO PRECEPT, NOR PRECEDENT, 
 
 sembling on the first day of the week for the solemni- 
 ties of public devotion, but plain intimations that this 
 was the common practice of the primitive churches;* 
 and therefore, the objector himself being judge, there is 
 no force in what is alleged. Besides, there is something 
 of a moral nature in the observation of a sabbath; but 
 not so in the administration of baptism. In regard to 
 the supposed want of an explicit warrant for admitting 
 women to the holy table, we reply by demanding ; Does 
 not Paul, when he says, " Let a man examine himself, 
 and so let him eat," enjoin a reception of the sacred 
 supper ? Does not the term avGpwTrog, there used, often 
 stand as a name of our species, without regard to sex? 
 Have we not the authority of lexicographers, t and, 
 which is incomparably more, the sanction of common 
 sense, for understanding it thus in that passage ? When 
 the sexes are distinguished and opposed, the word for a 
 ma}2 is not avOpomog, but avrip.'^ This distinction is very 
 strongly marked in that celebrated saying of Thales, as 
 given in his Life, by Diogenes Laertius.§ The Grecian 
 sage was thankful to Fortune, " that he was avBpaTrog, 
 
 * Acts XX. 7; 1 Cor. xvi. 1, ^, 
 
 f Mr. Parkhurst says : " AvS-ptyiro? is a name of the species, with- 
 out respect to sex."' Mintert : '' Homo, in genere, sive mas sit, 
 
 sive foemina." Schwarzius : "Homo, i, e. human&. natur^ prae- 
 
 ditus, habens ea quae horainis natura postulat." " Saepissime," 
 
 says the learned Schaubius, " in scriptur^ sacrd JUii pro utroque 
 sexu occurrunt, ut 1 Joh. ii. 1 ; iii. 7, 18 3 v. 12. 28. Imo pro tota 
 posteritate et prole, vid. Ps, ciii. I75 Prov. xiii, 22 . . . . Etenim, 
 tam a Graecis, quam in jure Romano, pronunciatio sermonis in mas- 
 culino sexu, ad utrumque sexum plerumque porrigit; et semper sexus 
 masculinus foemininum continet." Bib. Bremens. class iv. p. 722,723. 
 Vid. Bezam, in 1 Cor. xiii. 11. Stockium, Interpres Graecus, cap. ii. 
 § 28. So the words, d*in, Homo, and Man, are frequently used for 
 one of the human species, without regard to sex. 
 
 X See, amongst a multitude of instances, 1 Cor. xi, 3 — 12. 
 
 § Lib. i. cap. i. § 7. Lips. 1759. Thus Mr. Blackwall : 
 " AvBpwTtoi — is generally, in the best writers, used to include both 
 sexes, all the human race. Herodotus uses it foryrvvj." Sacred Clas- 
 sics, vol. i. part i. chap. ii. § 9. 
 
FOR P^DOBAPTISM. 367 
 
 one of the human species, and not a beast ; that he was 
 avT?/?, a man, and not a woman ; that he was born a 
 Greek, and not a barbarian. Besides, when the apostle 
 delivered to the church at Corinth what he had received 
 of the Lord, did he not deliver a command — a command 
 to the whole church, consisting of women as well as 
 men ? When he farther says, " We, being many, are 
 one bread, and one body ; for we all are partakers of 
 that one bread ;" does he not speak of women, as well 
 as of men ? * Again : Are there any prerequisites for 
 the holy supper, of which women are not equally capa- 
 ble as men? And are not male and female one in 
 Christ? When we oppose the baptism of infants, it is 
 not because of their tender age ; but because they nei- 
 ther do nor can profess faith in the Son of God. When- 
 ever we meet with such as are denominated by the apos- 
 tle, TeKva 71 KTxa, faithful, OX believing children, 'f whoever 
 may be their parents, or whatever may be their age, we 
 have no objection to baptize them. A credible profes- 
 sion of repentance and faith being all we desire, in refer- 
 ence to this affair, either of old or young. 
 
 * 1 Cor. X. 17, and xi. 28. Compare Acts i. 13, 14, with 
 Acts ii. 42, 47. t Tit. i. 6. 
 
368 NO EVIDENCE OF P.EDOBAPTISM 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 No Evidence of Padobaptism, before the latter End of the 
 Second, or the Beginning of the Third Century. 
 
 Salmasius and Suicerus. — '' In the two first cen- 
 turies no one was baptized, except, being instructed in 
 the faith, and acquainted with the doctrine of Christ, he 
 was able to profess himself a behever; because of those 
 words, ' He that beheveth and is baptized.' First, 
 therefore, he was to beheve. Thence the order of cate- 
 chumens in the church. Then, also, it was the constant 
 custom to give the Lord's supper to those catechumens, 
 immediately after their baptism." Epist. ad Justum 
 Pacium, apud Van Dale Hist. Baptism. Suiceri Thesaur. 
 Eccles. sub voce Hwa^ig, torn. ii. p. 1136. 
 
 2. Ludovicus Vives. — " No one in former times 
 was admitted to the sacred baptistery, except he was of 
 age, understood what the mystical water meant, desired 
 to be washed in it, and expressed that desire more than 
 once. Of which practice we have yet a resemblance in 
 our baptism of infants ; for an infant of only a day or 
 two old, is yet asked, ' Whether he will be baptized r' 
 and this question is asked three times. In whose name 
 the sponsors answer, 'He does desire it.'" Annot. in 
 Aug. de Civ. Dei, 1. i. c. xxvii. 
 
 3. M. Formey. — " They baptized from this time, 
 [the latter end of the second century,] infants as well as 
 adults." Abridg. Eccles. Hist. vol. i. p. ^"3. 
 
 4. Curcellasus. — " The baptism of infants, in the two 
 first centuries after Christ, was altogether unknown; but 
 in the third and fourth was allowed by some few. In 
 the fifth, and following ages, it was generally received 
 . . . .The custom of baptizing infants did not begin be- 
 fore the third a^e after Christ was born. In the former 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CENTURY. 369 
 
 ages no trace of it appears — and it was introduced with- 
 out the command of Christ." Institut. ReHo;. Christ. 
 1. i. c. xii. Dissert. Secund. de Pecc. Orig. § 56. 
 
 5. M. De la Roque. — " The primitive church did 
 not baptize infants; and the learned Grotius proves it 
 in his Annotations on the Gospel. Even the practice 
 of the Romish church is an evident token of it ; for with 
 them baptism must be desired before they enter into the 
 church, and it is the godfather that asks it in the name of 
 the child. A formal and express profession of faith 
 must be made, which the godfather also makes in the 
 child's name; a promise must be made, to renounce 
 the world and the pomps of it, the flesh, and the devil; 
 all which is done by the godfather in the name of the 
 child. Is not this a visible sign, that formerly it was the 
 persons themselves, who in their own name desired bap- 
 tism, made a profession of their faith, and renounced 
 their past hfe, to consecrate themselves to the Lord Jesus 
 Christ for the time to come?" In Mr. Stennett's An- 
 swer to Mr. Russen, p. 188, 189- 
 
 6. Mr. Chambers. — " It appears, that in the primi- 
 tive times none were baptized but adults." Cyclo- 
 paedia, article Baptism. 
 
 7. Johannes Bohemius. — " Baptism of old w^as ad- 
 ministered to none (unless upon urgent necessity) but 
 to such as were before instructed in the faith and cate- 
 chized. But when it came to be judged necessary to 
 everlasting life, it was ordained that infants should be 
 baptized, and that they should have godfathers and god- 
 mothers, who should be sureties for infants, and should 
 renounce the devil in their behalf." In Thomas Law- 
 son's Baptismalogia, p. 88. 
 
 8. Rigaltius. — " In the Acts of the Apostles we 
 read, that both men and ivomen were baptized, when they 
 believed the gospel preached by Philip, without any 
 mention being made of infants. From the apostolic 
 age, therefore, to the time of TertuUian, the matter is 
 
 VOL. r. 2 b 
 
370 NO EVIDENCE OF P^DOBAPTISM 
 
 doubtful. Some there were, from that saying of our 
 Lord, ' Suffer Httle children to come to me,' (to whom, 
 nevertheless, our Lord did not command water to be 
 ministered,) who took occasion to baptize new born in- 
 fants. And as if they had been transacting some secu- 
 lar affair with God, they offered sponsors or sureties to 
 Christ, who engaged that they should not depart from 
 the Christian faith when adult ; which practice displeased 
 Tertullian." In Mr. Stennett's Answer to Mr. Russen, 
 p. 74, 75. 
 
 9. Dr. Holland. — " In the first plantation of Chris- 
 tianity amongst the Gentiles, such only as were of full 
 age, after they were instructed in the principles of the 
 Christian religion, were admitted to baptism." In Dr. 
 Wall's Hist. Inf. Bap. part ii. chap. ii. p. 281. 
 
 10. Cattenburgh. — " Though it cannot be unanswer- 
 ably proved, that infant baptism was practised from the 
 beginning of Christianity; yet its original is to be de- 
 rived much higher than those learned men, Episcopius 
 and Limborch, have admitted."* Spicileg. Theol. Christ, 
 p. 1059. 
 
 11. Wolfgangus Capito. — " In the first times of the 
 church no one was baptized, nor received into the holy 
 communion of Christians, till after he had given himself 
 up entirely to the word and authority of Christ." A pud 
 Schyn Hist. Mennonit. p. 170. 
 
 12. Venema. — "It is indeed certain, that Pasdo- 
 baptism was practised in the second century; yet so, 
 that it was not the custom of the church, nor the gene- 
 ral practice; much less was it generally esteemed neces- 
 sary that infants should be baptized. . . .Tertullian has 
 no where mentioned Ptedobaptism among the tradi- 
 
 * Episcopius denies that any tradition can be produced for 
 Paedobaptism, till a little before the Milevitan Council, A. D. 418 j 
 and maintains, that it was not practised in Asia till near the time of 
 that council. Institut. l.iv. c. xiv. — Mr. Brandt speaks to the same 
 effect. Hist. Reform. Annotat. on b. ii. vol. i. p. 9. 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CENTURY. 371 
 
 tions of the church, nor even among the customs of the 
 church that were publicly received and usually observed; 
 nay, he plainly intimates, that in his time it was yet a 
 doubtful affair. For in his book, De Baptismo, (cap. xviii.) 
 he dissuades from baptizing infants, and proves by cer- 
 tain reasons, that the delay of it to a more mature age is 
 to be preferred; which he certainly would not have done, 
 if it had been a tradition and a public custom of the 
 church, seeing he was very tenacious of traditions; nor, 
 had it been a tradition, would he have failed to mention 
 it. It is manifest, therefore, that nothing was then deter- 
 mined concerning the time of baptism; nay, he judged 
 it safer that unmarried persons should defer their bap- 
 tism .... Nothing can be affirmed with certainty, con- 
 cerning the custom of the church before Tertullian; see- 
 ing there is not any where in more ancient writers, that 
 I know of, undoubted mention of infant baptism. Justin 
 Martyr, in his Second Apology, when describing bap- 
 tism, mentions only that of adults. Irensaus alone 
 (Contra Hasres. 1. ii. c. xxii.) may be considered as re- 
 ferring to Paedobaptism, when he says; ' Christ passed 
 through all the ages of man, that he might save all by 
 himself; all I say,' thus he proceeds, ' who by him are 
 regenerated to God, infants, and little ones, and chil- 
 dren, and youths, and persons advanced in age.' For 
 the word, regenerated, is Avont to be used concerning 
 baptism ; and in that sense I freely admit it may be here 
 understood. Yet I do not consider it as undoubtedly 
 so, seeing it is not always used in that sense, especially 
 if no mention of baptism precede or follow ; which is 
 the case here : and here, to be regenerated by Christ, may 
 be explained by sanctified, that is, saved by Christ. The 
 sense, therefore, may be; That Christ's passing through 
 all the ages of man, intended to signify, by his own ex- 
 ample, that he came to save men of every age, and also 
 to sanctify or save infants. I conclude, therefore, that 
 Paedobaptism cannot be certainly proved to have been 
 
 S B 2 
 
372 NO EVIDENCE OF P.EDOBAPTISM 
 
 practised before the times of Tertullian ; and that there 
 were persons in his age who desired their infants might be 
 baptized, especially when they were afraid of their dying 
 without baptism : which opinion TertuUian opposed, 
 and by so doing, he intimates that Paedobaptism began to 
 prevail. These are the things that may be affirmed with 
 apparent certainty, concerning the antiquity of infant 
 baptism, after the times of the apostles ; for more are 
 maintained without solid foundation," Hist. Ecclcs. torn, 
 iii. secul. ii. ^ 108, 109. 
 
 REFLECTIONS. 
 
 Reflect. I, It is well observed by Limborch, '•' That 
 many, when they enquire after the opinions of ancient 
 writers, ascribe to them, not what they really taught, 
 but what they wish them to have taught. Hence 
 different opinions are attributed to them, according 
 to the various prejudices that are entertained by the 
 enquirers."* This, there is reason to think, is a fact; 
 and therefore it is to the honour of our cause, that the 
 writers produced have made such declarations. For 
 though, as Dr. Bishop remarks, " the scriptures are the 
 only rule of faith, — we are apt to enquire how the earliest 
 authors understood and explained them ; what opinions 
 they held and professed, as the true and necessary doc- 
 trines [and practices] of Christianity; and what they 
 denied and condemned." '(' We farther observe, uith 
 the celeltrated Mr. Claude; "That the scripture is the 
 only rule of our faith; that we do not acknowledge any 
 other authority able to decide the disputed points in 
 religion, than that of the word of God; and that if we 
 sometimes dispute by the fathers, it is but by uay of 
 condescension to [our opposers,] to act upon their own 
 principle, and not to submit our consciences to the 
 word of men."]; 
 
 * Liber Sentent. Inquisit. Tholos. Prsef. p. 3. 
 
 f Eight Sermons, Serm. iv. p, 132. 
 
 J Defence of the Refornaation, part iii. p. 81,8'2, 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OK THIRD CENTURY. 373 
 
 That most of these authors were well versed in the 
 ancient monuments of the Christian church, few of my 
 readers acquainted with their characters will deny; and 
 heing Pasdobaptists, they were under no influence, from 
 their avowed hypothesis, to make such declarations as 
 these before us. Consequently, we must consider these 
 learned men, as led by plain historical evidence, and by 
 a commendable regard for truth, to express their views 
 of the case in this remarkable manner. Now such con- 
 cessions, from writers whose literary abilities cannot be 
 questioned, and who are entirely free from suspicion of 
 intending to sink the reputation of Paedobaptism, afford 
 a strong presumption in our favour, so far as ecclesias- 
 tical antiquity is concerned in the dispute. Nay, I may 
 venture to add, concessions of this kind from the pens 
 of such men as Salmasius and Suicerus, of Rigaltius 
 and Venema, must rebuke that haughty confidence with 
 which we are sometimes treated, even by juvenile oppo- 
 nents; as if the highest and purest ecclesiastical anti- 
 quity were quite against us, and as if no man of learn- 
 ing and of impartiality would risk a denial of it. But 
 Mhether our opposers be hoary with learned age, or 
 bloom with precipitate youth, it must, I think, be con- 
 fessed, that these authorities have sufficient force to ac- 
 quit us from the charge of ignorance, and of partiality 
 to a favourite opinion, because we maintain, That the 
 first two centuries knew either nothing at all, or very 
 little, of infant baptism. 
 
 To the foregoing quotations I would here subjoin 
 the attestation of Mr. Lawson, and of an ecclesiastical 
 writer in the ninth century. — Thus Thomas Lawson, an 
 impartial Friend: "See the author of rhantism, that is, 
 sprinkling; not Christ, nor the apostles, but Cyprian; not 
 in the days of Christ, but some two hundred and thirty, 
 years after. . . .Augustine, the son of the virtuous Mo- 
 nica, being instructed in the faith, was not baptized till 
 about the thirtieth year of his age. — Ambrose, born of 
 
374 NO EVIDENCE OF P^DOBAPTISM 
 
 Christian parents, remained instructed in Christian prin- 
 ciples, and was unbaptized till he was chosen bishop 
 of Milan. — Jerome, born of Christian parents, vvas 
 baptized when about thirty years old. — Nectarius was 
 made bishop of Constantinople before he was bap- 
 tized .... It seems the doctrine of Fidus, concerning 
 dipping, or sprinkling of children, w^as new^, and seem- 
 ed strange to Cyprian ; seeing he could not ratify, nor 
 confirm the same, without the sentence and advice of 
 sixty-six bishops. Had it been commanded by Christ, 
 practised by the apostles, and continued in matter and 
 manner to Cyprian's days, there had not been a ne- 
 cessity for the concourse of so many bishops concerning 
 
 the same." * The ecclesiastical writer to whom I 
 
 refer, is Walafridus Strabo, who speaks as follows : " It 
 should be observed, that, in the primitive times, the 
 grace of baptism was usually given to those oiilij who 
 were arrived at such maturity of body and mind, that 
 they could understand what were the benefits of bap- 
 tism ; what was to be confessed and believed; and, 
 finally, what was to be observed by those that are rege- 
 nerated in Christ."'!' ^^ ^^is paslage the remark of 
 
 Colomesius, as quoted by a nameless writer, is as fol- 
 lows: " Hence with reason you may infer, that adults 
 only are the proper subjects of baptism.":]: Perfectly 
 conformable to which is a canon of the Council of Paris, 
 in the year eight hundred and twenty-nine, as produced 
 by the same anonymous author. Thus it reads: "In 
 the beginning of the holy church of God, no one was 
 admitted to baj)tism, unless he had before been in- 
 structed in the sacrament of faith and of baptism ; 
 which is proved by the words of Paul, Rom. vi. 3, 4."§ 
 
 Reflect. II. One of these learned men supposes, 
 indeed, that a passage in Irena^us may be understood, 
 
 * Baptlsmalogia, p. 75, 80, 81, 86, 87. f Apud Vossium, 
 
 Thes. Theolog. p. 4'^29. + En Le Bapt^me Retabli, part ii. p. 3, 
 
 § Ibul. p. 1()6, lt;7. 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CENTURY. 375 
 
 as referring to infant baptism; yet candidly confesses 
 it admits of a doubt, whether the ancient father had 
 any such practice in view : nay, he asserts, that there is 
 no certainty of Pasdobaptism being practised before the 
 time of Tertullian. See No. 12. — Le Clerc, however, 
 seems confident that the quotation from Irenasus, to 
 which we advert, has no relation to baptism. " We see 
 nothing here," says he, "concerning baptism; nor is 
 there any thing relating to it in the immediately preced- 
 ing or following words." * — A writer in one of our pe- 
 riodical pubHcations, when reviewing a pamphlet of Mr. 
 John Carter's, in defence of infant baptism, says; "The 
 authorities produced [by Mr. Carter] are J. Martyr and 
 Irenaeus, in the second century; called by the author 
 Xhejirst century after the apostles, in order, we sup- 
 pose, to give it a more ancient look .... With respect to 
 the testimony of Justin, it requires very considerable in- 
 genuity to make it, in any view, an argument in favour 
 of infant baptism. There is a passage in Irenaeus more 
 to the purpose: but the passage is equivocal; and no- 
 thing can with certainty be decided from it, in favour of 
 that species of infant baptism which is generally con- 
 tended for by the Pasdobaptists of modern times." f Be- 
 sides, if these expressions, " Who by him are regene- 
 rated to God," signify the same as being baptized, they 
 convey the idea of our Lord's baptizing persons of diffe- 
 rent ages. But this was far from being a fact; for 
 " Jesus himself baptized not." Of this the ancient 
 writer could not be ignorant ; and therefore it is 
 not likely that he should in such a connection, substi- 
 tute the term regenerated for the word baptized. It is 
 also worthy of observation, that th^ supposition against 
 which we contend, represents our Lord as coming into 
 the world to save those only who are baptized ; an ima- 
 
 * Hist. Eccles. secul. ii. ann. 180, § 33, p. 778. 
 t Monthly Review for May 1784, p. 394, 395. 
 
376 
 
 NO EVIDENCE OF P^DOBAPllSM 
 
 gination which is abhorrent from truth, and ought not, 
 without the clearest evidence, to be charged on the 
 venerable ancient. 
 
 Perfectly agreeable to this is the language of Mr. 
 Hebden, who, having produced the words of Irenaeus, 
 proceeds thus : " This has been often cited against the 
 Antipaedobaptists. . . .It is one of the passages usually 
 quoted to support the practice of baptizing infants from 
 ancient testimonies ; baptism being, say these learned 
 Paedobaptists. often called regeneration by the ancients, 
 and Irenaeus here speaking of infants and little ones as, 
 together with persons of other ages, regenerated or bap- 
 tized. But, though baptism may be here alluded to, it 
 does not seem to be directly intended. The all whom 
 Christ came to save, are said to be regenerated to God. 
 Can this be meant of baptism? Are none saved but 
 such as are baptized ? Or, are all who are baptized 
 saved by Christ? That must be the case, according to 
 Irenaeus, if regeneration was here put for baptism; for 
 he evidently intimates, that all whom Chribt came to 
 save are regenerated ; and that all vvho are regenerated 
 to Cod are saved. A plain proof this, supposing the 
 passage to be genuine, that Irenieus did not believe uni- 
 versal redemption, in the modern Arminian sense, and 
 that he had no notion of the baptismal regeneration 
 since devised, . . .1 cannot help questioning whether the 
 passage of Irenaeus is so clear and full in favour of Pae- 
 dobaptism as learned men suppose."* 
 
 Incompetent, however, as the testimony of Irenaeus 
 is in favour of Pasdobaptism, Dr. Wall will have it 
 speak directly in point, saying : " This is the tirst ex- 
 press mention we have met with of infants baptized."')' 
 Eccpress mention ! Then the terms baptized and rege- 
 nerated, must be })erfectly equivalent, in the works of 
 Irenaeus, and the ecclesiastical authors of those times. 
 
 * Baptismal Regeneration disprovefl. Appendix^ p. 55. 
 ■j- Hist. Inf. Ba[). pari i. rhnp. iii. p. 16. 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CENTURY. 377 
 
 But this cannot be proved, as the learned and impartial 
 Venema acknowledges. See No. 12. — Yet, while we 
 insist that this is far from being an express testimony, or 
 indeed any testimony at all in favour of infant baptism ; 
 we may venture to conclude, that it is the first passage 
 in ecclesiastical antiquity, which Dr. Wall considered as 
 having any appearance of being directly to his purpose, 
 and the very best he could find to support his hypo- 
 thesis. But if it had been a divine appointment, and 
 Customary in the church from the apostohc age, is it not 
 strange, is it not quite unaccountable, that such ambi- 
 guous words as those of Irenaeus should be considered 
 by our opponents, as the most explicit of any on record, 
 in proof that Peedobaptism was practised so early as the 
 year one hundred and eighty? What! is there nothing 
 in those monuments of Christian antiquity, which go 
 under the name of Barnabas, of Clemens Romanus, of 
 Ilermas, of Ignatius, and of Polycarp, as much to the 
 purpose as this passage of the celebrated bishop of 
 Lyons ? Is there nothing in the writings of Justin Mar- 
 tyr, of Athenagoras, or of Theophilus Antiochenus, 
 (which are all considered by learned men as prior to 
 those of Irenteus) that is equally plain, and equally 
 favourable to the antiquity of Peedobaptism ? Strange, 
 indeed, supposing infant baptism to have been derived 
 from the apostles, and to have been generally practised 
 in the times of those authors, that none of them should 
 speak of it with as much clearness and precision as 
 the venerable Ireneeus in those equivocal words before 
 us ! That confidence with which the passage under 
 consideration has been often produced against us, re- 
 minds me of another, that is quoted from the same 
 father by the Papists, in favour of invocating the vir- 
 gin Mary. Thus, then, the ancient author, as translated 
 by Dr. Clagett : " As Eve was seduced and forsook 
 God, so Mary was induced to obey God, that the virgin 
 ]\Iary might be a comforter of the virgin Eve ; and that 
 
378 NO EVIDENCE OF PiEDOBAPTISM 
 
 as mankind was, through a virgin, bound over to death, 
 so they should be released through a virgin : one thing 
 being thus rightly balanced against another, the disobe- 
 dience of a virgin by the obedience of a virgin." Dr. 
 Clagett observes, that " Fevardentius triumphs in this 
 testimony, as if he had found here the primitive church, 
 and all antiquity, for the invocation of the blessed 
 virgm. * 
 
 Dr. Wall has produced a passage from Clemens 
 Alexandrinus, who wrote a little before Tertullian, by 
 which he seems to think it apparent, that the Alexan- 
 drian catechist considered the apostles as having bap- 
 tized infants. The words of that ancient author, as 
 quoted and rendered by Dr. Wall, are these : " If any 
 one be by trade a fisherman, he would do well to think 
 of an apostle, and the cJiUdren taken out of the water."f 
 — If, however, we would not be led by the sound of 
 these words, rather than their sense, it seems necessary 
 we should advert to the title and scope of the work, in 
 which the passage is found; concerning which, let us 
 hear a learned Paedobaptist. Dupin, when describing 
 the works of Clement, and speaking of that book from 
 which the quotation is made, says : " The second book, 
 entitled the Pedagogue, is a discourse entirely of mo- 
 rality. It is divided into three books. In the first, 
 he shows what it is to be a pedagogue, that is to say, a 
 conductor, pastor, or director of men. He proves that 
 this quality chiefly and properly belongs only to the 
 Word incarnate. He says, that it is the part of the pe- 
 dagogue to regulate the manners, conduct the actions, 
 and cure the passions. . . .That he equally informs men 
 and women, the learned and the ignorant, because all 
 men stand in need of instruction, being all children in 
 one sense. Yet, however, that we must not think that 
 the doctrine of the Christians is childish and contempti- 
 
 * Preservative against Popery, title vi. p. 194. 
 f Defence of Hist. Inf. Bap. Appendix, p. 8, y. 
 
 'ii^i 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CENTURY. 379 
 
 ble; but that, on the contrary, the quality of cJiildren, 
 which they receive in baptism, renders them perfect in 
 the knovvledo;e of divine things."* 
 
 From this account of the work, we are naturally led 
 to suppose that Clement, when addressing, or speaking 
 of Christian converts, would frequently call them chil- 
 dren; and, that this is a fact, appears by those extracts 
 which Mr. Barker has made from the book, which he 
 seems to have carefully read with a view to this particu- 
 lar. The design of this ancient book, as concisely re- 
 presented by him, and part of his quotations from it, are 
 as follow : "The catechist of Alexandria here describes 
 the persons he was to teach, what they were to be 
 taught, and how they were to be admitted into the 
 church. Paed. i. 5. ' Ilai^ay(>)yia, instruction, is guiding 
 of children^ (irai'^av ayayr}) as the name shows : it remains 
 to see whom the scripture calls children, and then to set a 
 master (irai^ayayog) over them. We then are the chil- 
 dren — who are in the state of disciples. — Unless ye be 
 converted, and become as these children, ye shall not 
 enter into the kingdom of heaven; not figuring a new 
 birth, (avayevvrjcrig,) but commending the innocence of 
 children' .... Representing the innocence of the mind 
 by childhood, he calls us children, (jrai^ag,) young, little 
 ones, (yrjTnovg,) SOUS, — and a new people .... He figura- 
 ratively calls us young ones, who are not enslaved to sin, 
 — pure, leaping to the Father only, — running to the 
 truth, and swift to salvation ; — such — our divine Guide 
 of the young (TrwAo^a/xvyy^-) takes care of . . . . The Lord 
 plainly shows who are meant by children: when a ques- 
 tion arose among the apostles, which of them should 
 be the greatest, Jesus set a child among them, saying: 
 Whoever shall humble himself as this [little^ child, the 
 same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven .... Those are 
 truly children, who know God only as their father, are 
 pure, meek, (yyjTrm,) and sincere. . . . He commands us to 
 * Hist. Eccles. Writers, vol. i. p. 62, 63. 
 
380 NO EVIDENCE OF P^DOBAPTISM 
 
 be without care of things here, — and cleave only to the 
 Father: — he who fulfils this command, is truly a little 
 one, (vyjmo^,) and a child (iraii) of God. . . .The Lord is 
 called a. perfect man, as being perfect in righteousness; — 
 but we are little ones (vyjttioi') perfected (jeXeiovixeSa) when 
 Me become of the church, and receive Christ as our head* 
 .... A person is not called vriinog, because foolish, — but 
 as meek and mild (vyjttio^, Yjniog) — a little one is meek, — • 
 without guile, — which is the foundation of truth :— the 
 new minds of little ones were once foolish, now newly 
 wise. . . . He calls the Lord himself a child, — ' Shall not 
 the instruction of this child be perfect, — who guides us 
 children (irai'^ai) who are his (vy^Triovi) little ones?' 
 
 " Far from confining the words, irai^eg and vYjitioi, to 
 infants, he [Clement] calls all children, whom he, as a 
 teacher (irai^aywyoi), is to instruct; as having before been 
 ignorant, now become sensible, yet still meek, teachable, 
 and unprejudiced; judging it the perfection of a man to 
 imitate the innocence and teachableness of children. 
 But those who are in a course of instruction for baptism, 
 are what he especially calls children (jrai^eg and vyittloi ;) 
 for when baptized they become perfect, reXeioi. — Paed. 
 iii. 10. 'The Lord taught his disciples to catch men, as 
 lishes out of the water. — Pa?d. iii. 11. If any be a 
 fisher, let him remember the apostle, and the children 
 (Tiaibiav) drawn out of the water.' — Those are baptized, 
 who believe and seek Christ. The children (vr,iTioi and 
 Trai'^io) here said to be baptized, whom Wall supposes to 
 be infants, are, as appears above, all, of whatever age, 
 who being meek and teachable, seek Christ the true 
 teacher (o irai^aycoyci), and submit to him."f 
 
 It is worthy of remark, that the frequent use of these 
 familiar terms, children and little children, here applied 
 
 * Just so Pixul opposes TrajSta to TfXfiOf, (1 Cor. xiv. 20.) 
 f Duty and Benefits of Bap. p. 73, 74,75- Note : The edition 
 of Clement's works, from which tlie ((uotations are made, is that of 
 Dr. Totter, j). 101, 106, 107, 108, 109, 112, '285, 289. 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CENTURY. 381 
 
 by Clement to such as were under a course of instruc- 
 tion, of whatever age they might be, seems to have been 
 derived from the example of Paul, and of John, in their 
 epistles. For the words, v^irioi and irailia, so frequently 
 used by the Alexandrian catechist, are applied by those 
 apostles in various places, to young or feeble converts.* 
 The term reKvta, little children, is also abundantly used 
 in the same acceptation. f So the word Trai^aycoyov^, 
 pedagogues, instructors of children, is used by Paul for 
 such as succeeded him in preaching the gospel among 
 the Corinthians.^ — To which I may add an observation 
 of the learned Mr. Bingham: "The Christians were 
 wont to please themselves with the artificial name pis- 
 ciculi,Jishes; to denote, as TertuUian [who was cotem- 
 porary with Clement] words it, that they were regenerate, 
 or born again into Christ's religion by water, and could 
 not be saved but by continuing therein. And this name 
 was the rather chosen by them, because the initial letters 
 of our Saviour's names and titles in Greek, Ivjo-ovg Xpiarog, 
 
 Qeov 'Tiog, 'Ecar-^p, JesUS ChRIST, THE SoN OF GoD, 
 
 OUR Saviour, technically put together, make up the 
 name IXOTS; which signifies a Jish, and is alluded to 
 both by Tertullian and Optatus."§ — While it appears, 
 therefore, that the title, the phraseology, and the design 
 of Clement's performance, unite in leading us to con- 
 sider the term irai'^icov, as expressive of young converts 
 to Christianity, and not of infants; there cannot be the 
 least ground for concluding, that the celebrated cate- 
 chist had any thought of infant baptism, when he spake 
 of '^ irai^iav, children, drawn out of the water;" but of 
 solemnly immersing such as had been instructed in the 
 doctrine of Christ. And, indeed, as Dr. Wall is the 
 only one of our learned opponents, whom I have ob- 
 
 * See 1 Cor. iii. 1 ; Ephes,iv.l43 Heb.v.l3,14j iJohnii. 13,18. 
 f See Matt. xi. 25 3 Luke x, 21 j iJohnii, Ij xii. 28 3 iii.7, 18; 
 iv. 4 j V.21 ; and Dr. Doddridge's Note on 1 Pet. ii. 2. 
 
 X 1 Cor. iv. 15. § Origines Eccles. b, i. chap, i, § 2. 
 
382 NO EVIDENCE OF P^DOBAPTISM 
 
 served, that has produced the passage against us in the 
 course of this controversy, there is reason to think, that 
 few of them ever considered it as proving any thing at 
 all in iheir favour. 
 
 Reflect. III. As I humbly conceive it must be al- 
 lowed by all competent and impartial judges, that Ter- 
 tullian is the first author who speaks expressly of infant 
 baptism; and as it is equally clear that he opposes it; 
 so, we may justly presume, it was then a novel practice, 
 was just commencing, and approved by very few. Had 
 it been otherwise, there is no reason to imagine that the 
 celebrated African father would have treated it as he 
 did; not only because he was very tenacious of ecclesi- 
 astical traditions, as Venema has well observed. No. 12; 
 but also because he mentions with approbation various 
 religious rites as practised by the church, which in his 
 own view had no pretence to scripture authority. His 
 opposition to infant baptism is expressed in the follow- 
 ing manner, as the passage is translated by Dupin: 
 " What necessity is there to expose godfathers to the 
 hazard of answering for those whom they hold at the 
 fonts? since they may be prevented by death, from be- 
 ing able to perform those promises which they have 
 made for the children, or else may be disappointed by 
 their evil inclinations. Jesus Christ says, indeed, 
 'Hinder not little children from coming to me;' but 
 that they should come to him as soon as they are ad- 
 vanced in years, as soon as they have learned their reli- 
 gion, when they may be taught whither they are going, 
 when they are become Christians, when they begin to be 
 able to know Jesus Christ. What is there that should 
 compel this innocent age to receive baptism? And since 
 they are not yet allowed the disposal of temporal goods, is 
 it reasonable that they should be entrusted with the con- 
 cerns of heaven? For the same reason it is proper to 
 make those who are not married wait for some time, by 
 reason of the temptations they have to undergo till they 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CENTURY. 383 
 
 are married, or have attained to the gift of continency. 
 Those who shall duly consider the great weight and mo- 
 ment of this divine sacrament, will rather be afraid of 
 making too much haste to receive it, than to defer it for 
 some time, that so they may be the better capable of 
 receiving it more worthily/'* The treatise of Tertullian, 
 (De Baptismo,) from which this is extracted, is sup- 
 posed by learned men to have been written about the 
 year two hundred and four.^ Again he says; " Bap- 
 tism is the seal of faith; which faith is begun and 
 adorned by the faith of repentance. We are not, there- 
 fore, washed that we may leave off sinning, but because 
 we have already done it, and are already purified in 
 heart." :j; Sentiments and assertions these, that cannot 
 be reconciled with the baptism of infants. — On the for- 
 mer of these passages Rigaltius makes the following 
 remark : " Tertullian thought that one vvho has no 
 understanding of the Christian faith, should not be 
 admitted to baptism ; and that he does not want the re- 
 mission of sins, who is not yet capable of deceit, or of 
 any fault." § Vossius, when adverting to the same pas- 
 sage, says, " Some reply. The discourse of Tertullian 
 regards the infants of infidels. To us it seems more 
 probable, that he treats concerning the children of be- 
 lievers." || To this we readily agree, and here subjoin 
 the following acknowledgment of Mr. Baxter: "Again 
 I will confess, that the words of TertuUian and Nazian- 
 zen show, that it was long before all were agreed of 
 the very time, or of the necessity, of baptizing infants 
 before any use of reason, in case they were like to live 
 to maturity."^ 
 
 * Hist. Eccles. Writers, cent. iii. p. 80, 
 
 t Vid. J. Fabrieium, Hist. Biblioth, Fab rician. torn, i, p. 157. 
 
 X Opera, De Poenitenti&,, p. 144. § Observat. de TertuU. 
 
 p. 72. Lutet. 1634. || Disputat. de Bap, disput. xiv. §12. 
 
 See Dr. Whitby's Note on Matt, xix. 13, 14. 
 
 ^ In Dr, Wall's Hist. Inf. Bap. part. i. p. 23. See Dr. Dod- 
 dridge's Lectures, p. 522, 
 
384 NO EVIDENCE OF P.EDOBAPTISM 
 
 That Tertullian had a high regard for traditional 
 rites in the affairs of rehgion, is plain beyond a doubt, 
 from what he says when professedly handling that sub- 
 ject. His words, as given us by an eminent P£edo- 
 baptist, are as follow: "Let us try, then, whether no 
 tradition ought to be allowed that is not written; and I 
 shall freely grant that this need not to be allowed, if the 
 contrary be not evinced by the examples of several other 
 customs, which without the authority of any scripture 
 are approved, only on the account that they were first 
 delivered, and have ever since been used. Now, to 
 begin with baptism — When we are taken up out of the 
 water, we taste a mixture of milk and honey; and from 
 that day we abstain a ^^hole week from bathing our- 
 selves, which otherwise we use every day. The sacra- 
 ment of the eucharist, which our Lord celebrated at 
 meal-time, and ordered all to take, we receive in our 
 assemblies before day; and never but from the hands of 
 the pastor. We give oblations every year for (or in 
 commemoration of) the dead, on the day of their mar- 
 tyrdom. . . .At every setting out, or entry on business; 
 whenever we come in, or go out from any place; when we 
 dress for a journey; when we go into a bath; when we 
 go to meat; when the candles are brought in; when 
 we lie down, or sit down; and whatever business we 
 have, we make on our foreheads the sign of the cross. 
 If you search in the scriptures for any command for 
 these and such like usages, you shall find none. Tradi- 
 tion will be urged to you, as the ground of them ; custom, 
 as the confirmer of them; and our religion teaches to 
 observe them."* Hence it appears, with superior evi- 
 dence, that this ancient author considered infant baptism 
 as a novel invention — as a practice that was neither en- 
 joined by divine command, nor warranted by a})Ostolic 
 example, nor yet recommended by the poor pretence of 
 tradition, nor even countenanced by prevailing custom. 
 
 * In Dr. Wall's Hist. Inf. Bap, partii. chap, ix, p. 4S0, 481. 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR TlUllD CENTURY. 385 
 
 While, it is very observable, tradition and custom are 
 actually pleaded by him, in favour of certain rites (and 
 one of them an appendage of baptism) A^hich Protestants 
 have generally agreed to reject, as manifestly super- 
 stitious. 
 
 It seems apparent also, from Tertullian, that the use 
 of sponsors is of as high antiquity as the practice of 
 infant baptism. For as this famous African father is 
 the first that expressly mentions the former, so Deylin- 
 gius tells us, that he is the first who says any thing about 
 the latter;* with whom Mr. Towgood agrees. f Of 
 these sponsors, Deylingius informs us, there were three 
 sorts; namely, for infants who could not answer for 
 themselves, by reason of their tender age; for such 
 adults as were incapable of answering, on account of 
 great affliction; and for all adults in general. ;|: Nor 
 have we sufficient reason to suppose, that sponsors were 
 first used at the administration of Peedobaptism : no, 
 the learned Mosheim is express to the contrary. His 
 words are these: "Adult persons were prepared for 
 baptism by abstinence, prayer, and other pious exer- 
 cises. It was to answer for them that sponsors, or god- 
 fathers, were first instituted, though they were afterwards 
 admitted also in the baptism of infants." § Sponsors 
 were used for adults in the following ages also, as 
 learned writers inform us : || nay, the church of Eng- 
 land still requires godfathers and godmothers in the 
 administration of baptism to those who are able to 
 answer for themselves. For thus the rubric: " When 
 any such persons as are of riper years are to be bap- 
 tized. . . .if they shall be found fit, then the godfathers 
 
 * De Pastoral, Prudenti^^ pars iii. c. iii. § 29. 
 
 f Dissent. Gent. Letters, let. ii. p. 6, 
 
 X Ut supra. See Bingham's Orig. Eccles. b. xi. chap, viii, 
 
 § Ecclesiastical Hist, vol, i, p. 17 !_, 172. || Magdeb.Centur. 
 
 cent. vii. c. vi. p. 73. Fox's Acts and Mon. vol. i. A. D. 636j p. 123. 
 Forbesii Instruct, Hist. Theolog. 1.x. c. v. §22 
 VOL. I. 2 C 
 
386 NO EVIDENCE OF P.EDOBAPTISM 
 
 QLwd godmothers (the people being assembled upon the Sun- 
 day or holy day appointed) shall be ready to present them 
 at the font, . . .Then shall the priest take each person to 
 be baptized by the right hand, and placing him conve- 
 niently by the font, according to his direction, shall asic 
 the godfathers and godmothers the name; and then shall 
 dip him in the water, or pour water upon him."* — As 
 to infants, Dr. Wall assures us ; " There is no time, or 
 age, of the church, in which there is any appearance 
 that infants were ordinarily baptized without sponsors, 
 or godfathers."'!' — Bucanus tells us, when writing in 
 favour of sponsors, that " as a midwife is used to facili- 
 tate the birth in carnal generation; so in the spiritual 
 generation of baptism some one is employed who acts 
 in the place of a midwife, and of a pedagogue in those 
 things which pertain to the end of baptism and to the 
 Christian life." J What an admirable proof is this of 
 the utility of sponsors! Few, I suppose, however, 
 have had the honour conferred on a girl mentioned by 
 Moschus, for whom two angels were sureties at her 
 baptism. § 
 
 The Baptists have often been charged with Anabap- 
 tism ; a sentiment and practice which they detest, as 
 much as any of their opposers. It may be observed, 
 however, that, were \he^ inclined to vindicate Anabap- 
 tism, Tertullian might be challenged as an evidence of 
 its high antiquity. For though he says there is but one 
 baptism, and that it should not be repeated, yet he ex- 
 cepts the baptism of heretics; " who," he adds, "are not 
 able to give it, because they have it not; and there- 
 fore it is, that we have a rule among us to rebaptize 
 them." II 
 
 * Baptism of such as are of Riper Years. 
 
 f Hist. Inf. Bap. part ii. chap. ix. p. 477. 
 
 % Institut. Theolog. loc. xlvii. §47, 
 
 § In Dupin's Eccles Hist. cent. vii. p. 20. 
 
 II In Dupin's Hist. Eccles. Writers, cent. iii. p. 80. 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CENTURY. 387 
 
 Reflect. IV. It is common for our opponents, when 
 defending the antiquity of infant baptism, to produce 
 various passages from Origen, who flourished in the for- 
 mer part of the third century ; some of which passages, 
 it must be allowed, are plain and express to the point. 
 It ought, however, to be observed, that those quotations 
 are made, not from the Greek of that celebrated father, 
 but from such Latin versions of his works as are very 
 corrupt, and consequently render it quite uncertain what 
 was his opinion in reference to that affair. That the 
 works of Origen have been greatly injured by his trans- 
 lators, the most learned Peedobaptists declare. — Gro- 
 tius, for instance, when speaking of that celebrated 
 ancient with regard to infant baptism, says: "Some 
 things ascribed to him, were penned by an uncertain 
 author ; and some things are interpolated .... What 
 Origen thought about the final puTiishment of the wicked, 
 is difficult from his writings to be asserted ; all things 
 
 are so interpolated by Rufinus."* The Magdeburg 
 
 Centuriators inform us, that Origen's Homilies on Paul's 
 Epistle to the Romans, " were translated by Rufinus ; ■ 
 who rather altered and corrupted than faithfully trans- 
 lated, as Erasmus intimates in the censure he passed 
 
 upon them."f Scultetus asserts, "That Rufinus, the 
 
 translator of many of Origen's books, used so great 
 a liberty, that he retrenched, added, and altered such 
 things as appeared to him necessary to be cashiered, 
 added, or changed. So that the reader is often uncer- 
 tain, whether he peruses Origen or Rufinus ; seeing the 
 Greek works of Origen are not now extant, by which 
 the Latin version might be corrected and amended." '^ 
 
 ■ Vossius, having produced a passage from Origen's 
 
 Homilies upon the Romans, in favour of infant bap- 
 
 * Apud Poli. Synops. ad Matt. xix. 14 j xxv, 46. 
 t Cent. iii. ex. p. ISO. + Medull. Theolog. Patrum, 
 
 p. 124. Francf. 1634. 
 
 2 c 2 
 
388 NO EVIDENCE OF P.EDOBAPTISM 
 
 tism, adds : " But concerning Origen we say the less, 
 because the things which might be quoted are not extant 
 in the Greek."* The learned Vitringa, when hand- 
 ling the same subject, makes a similar acknowledg- 
 ment, and blames Rufinus-f M. Daille is very ex- 
 plicit on this point; his language is; "Certainly, Ru- 
 finus — hath so filthily mangled, and so licentiously 
 confounded the writings of Origen, Eusebius, and others, 
 which he hath translated into Latin, that you will 
 hardly find a page in his translations where he hath 
 not either cut off, or added, or at least altered some- 
 thing." J— ^Dupin says, "We have none of the 
 Scholia [written by Origen] remaining, nor have \\e 
 hardly any of the Homilies in Greek ; and those which 
 we have in Latin, are translated by Rufinus and others 
 with so much liberty, that it is a difficult matter to 
 discern what is Origen's own, from what has been foisted 
 in by the interpreter. . . .The liberty which Rufinus has 
 given himself is still more evident, by what he has 
 written in the prologue to his version of the Commen- 
 tary upon the Epistle to the Romans ; which, he says, 
 he has abridged by above the half. St. Hierom's ver- 
 sions are not more exact; and the most faulty of all is 
 that of an ancient translator, who has interpreted the 
 Commentaries upon St. Matthew. . . .Having only the 
 jl version of the greatest part of the Homilies, we cannot 
 ' be certain whether that which relates to doctrine and 
 
 discipline be Origen's own, or Rufinus's."§ Mr. 
 
 Western, speaking of Rufinus as a translator of Euse- 
 bius, passes the following severe censure upon him. He 
 " hath ventured on downright forgery, and pretended to 
 
 I * Thes, Theolog. de Paedobap. pars ii. thes. viii. p. 433. 
 
 t Obs. Sac. l.ii. c. vi. § 9. 
 
 X Right Use of the Fathers, book i. chap. iv. p. 40, 41. Vid. 
 ejusdem Disputat. de Cult. Relig. Objecto, l.i. c. viii. p. 49. 
 
 § Hist. Ec.cles. Writ. cent. iii. p. 100; see cent. iv. p. 4 ; cent. v. 
 p. 108. 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CENTURY. 389 
 
 translate from Eusebius what Eusebius never wrote." * 
 
 Mr. Twells: "We are not sure that Origen ever 
 
 really spake of Hermas's Pastor, as of a writing inspired 
 by God. For this saying is extant only in his Com- 
 mentary on the Romans, the Greek of which is lost, 
 and the Latin a miserable version, in which the original 
 is mterpolated as well as contracted by Rufinus the in- 
 terpreter." ^ Mr. Peirce: "As for what our author 
 
 [Dr. Nichols] refers to in Origen, we cannot tell whether 
 
 it be Origen's or Rufinus's testimony.":]: Quenste- 
 
 dius : " Rufinus translated many of Origen's books, but 
 in translating (as he himself acknowledges in his pre- 
 faces, and for which Jerome reproves him,) he has used 
 so great a liberty, that he retrenched, added, and altered 
 whatever he considered as deserving to be cashiered, 
 added, or changed : so that the reader is frequently 
 
 uncertain whether he read Origen or Rufinus." § 
 
 Huetius, when speaking of Origen's remains in ge- 
 neral, has the following remark : " They are very im- 
 perfect and much abused, or else changed and de- 
 formed by abominable translations. "|| Rivetus, when 
 
 speaking of a certain work that goes under the name 
 of Origen, says : " Concerning the Homihes on various 
 passages in the Gospel according to Matthew, it appears 
 to Erasmus, that they are not Origen's ; but were pen- 
 ned by some Latin author, the remains of which have 
 
 been impudently corrupted by Rufinus."^ Once 
 
 more : Chamier says, " All the learned know, that Ru- 
 finus used but little integrity in translating authors."** 
 
 * Enquiry into Reject. Christ. Miracles^ p. 209. 
 
 f Critical Exam, of New Text and Version^ part iii. p. 81. 
 
 X Vindicat. of Dissent, part iii. p. 240. 
 
 § Dialog, de Patriis lUust, Doct. Script. Virorum, p. 632. 
 
 II In Dr. Gale's Reflect, p. 522. % Critici Sacri, 1. ii. 
 
 c. xiii. p. 205. * * Panstrat. t. iv. 1. vii. c. ix. § 30. Vid. torn. i. 
 
 1. iv c. viii. §2; tom.ii. l.xx. c. v. §14. See also Mr. Clarkson 
 on Liturgies, p. 141. J. Fabricii Hist. Biblioth. Fabrician. tom.i. 
 p. 85, 86. Venemse Hist. Eccles, secul. iii, § 3. Bp. Bull's Def. Fid. 
 
390 NO EVIDENCE OF PyEDOBAPTISM 
 
 Such, in the opinion of the best judges, being the 
 character of Origen's translators, we have sufficient rea- 
 son to except against all testimonies produced from the 
 ancient versions of his writings, in favour of P^edobap- 
 tism. And, indeed, were there not a great poverty of 
 evidence in support of that practice, for about two hun- 
 dred and fifty years, it is hardly to be supposed that our 
 Brethren would ever subpoena witnesses, whose veracity 
 is thus impeached, in order to prove any part of their 
 hypothesis. We have reason also to wonder at the in- 
 advertency of Dr. Addington, who, speaking of Rufmus, 
 tells us that he " lived in the third century;" and that 
 his " knmvkdge or integrity have never been 
 DOUBTED."* Palpable, gross mistakes ! 
 
 There is, ho\vever, one passage in the Greek of Ori- 
 gen, sometimes quoted by our opponents; and it is this, 
 as produced and rendered by Dr. Wall. *' One may 
 enquire. When it is that the angels here spoken of are 
 set over those little ones, showed, or signified, by 
 our Saviour? Whether they take the care and manage- 
 ment of them from the time when they, by the washing 
 of regeneration, whereby they were new born, do ' as 
 new born babes desire the sincere milk of the 
 WORD,' and are no longer subject to any evil power? 
 Or from their birth, accordins; to the foreknowledge of 
 God, and his predestinating of them?" and so on.f 
 That the persons here intended by Origen, were not in- 
 fants in a literal sense, but such as were iieidij born 
 again, is plain from his describing them in the language 
 of inspiration, as "desiring the sincere milk of the word." 
 Dr. W^all, therefore, might well acknowledge, that the 
 
 Nic. sect. ii. cap. ix. Chemnitii Exam. Concil. Trident, p. 629, 630. 
 Mr. Altham, Preserv. against Popery, title i. p. 190. Abp. Wake, 
 Preservative against Popery, title iv. p. 197. Di". Doddridge's Lec- 
 tures, |). 519. ]Mr. Jones's Catholic Doct. of Trinity, chap. i. § xiv. 
 p. 9. Hist, of Popery, vol. ii. p. 147. 
 
 * C hrislinn Min. Reasons, p. 163. f Hist. Inf Bap. part i. p. 33. 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CENTURY. 391 
 
 latter part of the passage does " very much puzzle the 
 cause," for which Psedobaptists produce the quotation; 
 " and make it doubtful whether Origen be to be there 
 understood, of infants in age, or of such Christian men 
 as are endued with the innocence and simplicity of in- 
 fants."* If, indeed, the language of this learned an- 
 cient had been, as it is partially represented by Sir Peter 
 King, of which Dr. Wall intimates his disapprobation ;t 
 or if the representation of it which Dr. Addington has 
 lately given, had been candid and fair, J it would have 
 been clearly in favour of Pgedobaptism. But as neither 
 of these is the case, we may venture to affirm, that no sub- 
 stantial evidence for infant baptism from the works of 
 Origen has been yet produced; and that there is no proof 
 of its being a common practice, for two centuries and a 
 half after the Christian a^ra commenced. To indulge con- 
 jectures of its being far more ancient, is to imitate the 
 conduct of Bellarmine, who says, concerning another 
 affair; "Although there is no express testimony amongst 
 the ancients, to prove, that they at any time offered 
 sacrifice without some one or more communicating with 
 the priests ; yet it may be gathered by conjecture'"' \ 
 
 I will conclude this reflection with some remarks 
 on the following extract from Dr. Doddridge. " Ter- 
 tullian is known to have declared against infant baptism, 
 except in case of danger. Gregory Nazianzen advises 
 to defer it till three years old. Basil blames his audi- 
 tors for delaying it, which implies, there were then many 
 unbaptized persons among them ; but these might not, 
 perhaps, have been the children of Christian parents. . . . 
 It is indeed surprising, that nothing more express is to 
 be met with in antiquity upon this subject; but it is to 
 be remembered, that when infant baptism is first appa- 
 rently mentioned, we read of no remonstrance made 
 
 * Hist. Inf. Bap, part i, p. S"?, 33. f Enquiry into Constitut. 
 
 of Prim. Church, part ii. p. 46. % Christ. Min. Reas. p. 162. 
 
 § In Popery Confuted by Papists, p. 81. 
 
392 NO EVIDENCE OF P^DOBAPTISM 
 
 against it as an innovation."* Surprising indeed! had 
 it been the appointment of Christ, the practice of the 
 apostles, and a constant custom in the Christian church; 
 all which the doctrine of P^edobaptism now supposes. 
 On this occasion our opposers may well wonder, and 
 have reason to be disgusted with their own h^^pothesis. 
 Dr. Doddridge, however, wishes to persuade us, that 
 P£edobaptism was an apostolic practice; because " we 
 read of no remonstrance made against it as an innovation," 
 when it is first plainly mentioned. Rut is not TertuUian 
 the first author who apparently mentions infant baptism? 
 and uas not he, by the doctor's own confession, against 
 it ? But supposiug we had not read of the least remon- 
 strance against Pasdobaptism, when it was first men- 
 tioned, what then; That it was practised from the be- 
 ginning? by no means. For if so, infant communion 
 must be received as of divine appointment; because we 
 read of no remonstrance being made against it as an 
 innovation, when first apparently mentioned by Cyprian. 
 See Chap. V. — Nay, were there not man}^ innovations 
 in the second and third centuries, against which we read 
 of no remonstrance being made at their first appear- 
 ance? Were the reason assigned by this respectable au- 
 thor for the primitive antiquity of infant baptism, to be 
 admitted by Protestants, the Papists would ask no more 
 to justify a great number of their superstitions. It is 
 indeed one of their arguments in favour of antiscriptural 
 customs; for thus they reason, in defence of communion 
 in one kind. " Seeing men, tenacious of religion, are 
 easily disturbed by an alteration of things pertaining to 
 it; if through a course of twelve hundred years the holy 
 supper had been administered in the church under both 
 kinds, without its being declared lawful to communicate 
 under one only; immediately, upon this custom being 
 changed, the greatest disturbances and disputes would 
 have arisen in the church about the alteration. Con- 
 
 * Lectures, p. 522. 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CEIS'TURY. 393 
 
 cerning which, whereas in history there is no mention, 
 we receive it as an undoubted conjecture, that the prac- 
 tice was never considered as ?iew, but ahvays used from 
 the beginning, and fixed in the minds of believers as 
 lawful."* — To which the learned Chamier answers: 
 " Disturbances are excited about such alterations, either 
 when they are made, or afterwards. That all changes 
 in jeligious affairs excite commotions when they are 
 made, may be safely denied. For long before the advent 
 of Christ many changes were made in the Jewish reli- 
 gion — and yet without any tumult."'f — The argument 
 of Dr. Doddridge is also used by our English Conform- 
 ists in favour of Episcopacy, Thus, for instance, Mr. 
 Reeves: " I would ask a conscientious Dissenter, 
 whether in his heart he can believe that the primitive 
 saints and martyrs would invade the Episcopal power of 
 their own heads?. . . .And if they did, whether it was 
 possible for the invaders to prevail in so short a time over 
 Christendom, and without opposition, or one word of 
 complaint from the degraded presbyters against the usurp- 
 ing prelates? For usurpations of this sacred kind, we 
 know with a witness, never come in without remarkable 
 clamours and convulsions; are seldom perfectly forgotten, 
 and the revolution skinned over without a scar. That 
 bishops, therefore, should obtain wherever the gospel did, 
 so soon and with such universal silence, cannot be ac- 
 counted for any other way, than that the gospel and the 
 episcopate came in upon the same divine title.":): — I will 
 here add the following short quotation from Chilling- 
 worth: "If any man ask, How could it [corruption in 
 the church of Rome] become universal in so short a 
 time? Let him tell me how the — communicating of in- 
 fants became so universal, and then he shall acknow- 
 ledge, what was done in some, was possible in others." § 
 
 * Salmero, apud Chaniieruin, Panstrat, torn, iv, 1. ix. c. iv. § 18. 
 t Ibid. § 10. X Apologies, vol.i. Preface, p. 31, 32, 
 
 § Relig. of Protestants, part i. chap. v. § 91. 
 
394 NO EVIDENCE OF P^DOBAPTISM 
 
 So happily have these Pasdobaptists answered Dr. Dod- 
 dridge, and secured our inference against the exceptions 
 of Protestant opposers, whether they be EpiscopaUans 
 or Nonconformists ! 
 
 Reflect. V. As it appears, from this and the preced- 
 ing chapter, that the New Testament contains neither ex- 
 press precept for, nor plain example of infant baptism, and 
 that no substantial evidence can be produced from ecclesi- 
 astical authors, of its being a prevailing custom, till about 
 the middle of the third century; we may with great pro- 
 priety (iniitatis mutandis) adopt and apply to Peedobap- 
 tism, the reasonings of Protestants against the peculiari- 
 ties of Popery. The following may serve as a specimen. 
 Turrettin, when opposing the superstitious appendages of 
 baptism, as practised in the Papal communion, argues 
 not only from the silence of scripture, but also from that 
 " of the most ancient Christian writers. Because, in the 
 genuine books of undoubted and pure antiquity, nothing 
 occurs relating to those things. .. .Whence," he adds, 
 " there is no reason for us to imagine that the}' were 
 used in those first times. Nay, a solid argument is 
 thence drawn, that no such things were then practised : 
 because it cannot be doubted, had they been then in use, 
 but the fathers would have mentioned them; like as, in 
 the following ages, they were not silent about things that 
 were frequently added to the legitimate and apostolic rite 
 of baptism."* — Mr. Neal, when opposing the supremacy 
 of the Roman pontiff, says ; " Had our Lord appointed 
 a vicar-general on earth, we might expect to meet, not 
 only with his name in scripture, but with the time and 
 manner of his instalment, and with the deed of convey- 
 ance to his successors, in the most plain and significant 
 words ; or, at least, that it should be read in every page 
 of antiquity. But if the most ancient fathers of the 
 church consent in any thing, it is in a general silence 
 about this matter. The whole stress of the evidence is. 
 
 Institut. loc.xix. q. xviii. § 6. 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CENTURY. 395 
 
 therefore, laid upon — obscure and metaphorical passages 
 of scripture. ... If we lay these things together, and con- 
 sider the silence of the scripture records and genuine 
 remains of antiquity, about a supreme visible head,- — it 
 will am.ount to a demonstration, that the hierarchy of 
 
 the church of Rome is built upon the sand."* Dr. 
 
 Harris: " There is scarce any thing in which the church 
 of Rome puts in a stronger claim, or makes a louder 
 boast, than the sense of antiquity and the judgment of 
 the ancient fathers ; though in points peculiar to Popery, 
 and in which they differ from the Protestants, scarce any 
 
 thing is less fair, or more unjust. "f Dr. Hughes : 
 
 " If antiquity be of any consequence in determining 
 matters of religion, the earliest must be the best; and 
 this is clearly against the church of Rome, in the affair 
 
 now before us.":j: Bp. Burnet: " The silence of the 
 
 first and purest ages, about these things which are con- 
 troverted among us, is evidence enough that they were 
 not known to them ; especially, since in their Apologies, 
 which they wrote to the heathens for their religion and 
 worship, wherein they give an abstract of their doctrines, 
 and a rubric of their worship, they never once mention 
 these great evils for which we now accuse that [Romish] 
 
 church." § Mr. Bingham : " The silence of all ancient 
 
 authors is good evidence in this case; [that is, the religi- 
 ous use of images.] .... Of images or pictures there is not 
 a syllable ; which is at least a good negative argument, 
 
 that there was no such thing in their churches." || 
 
 Dr. Owen: " No instance can be given, or hath been, 
 for the space of two hundred years, or until the end of 
 the second century, of any one person who had the care 
 of more churches than one committed unto him, or did 
 
 * Serm, at Salters' Hall, on Suprem. of Bishop of Rome, p. 9, 30. 
 
 f Do. at Do. on Transubstan. p. 31. 
 
 X Do. at Do. on Venerat. of Saints, p, 30, 31, 
 
 § Preserv, against Popery, title i. p. 125. 
 
 II Orig. Eccles, b. viii. chap. viii. § 6. 
 
396 NO EVIDENCE OF P^DOBAPTISM 
 
 take the charge of them upon himself."* Dr. Good- 
 man : " For about two hundred years we find not one word 
 of this kind of confession which we enquire for . ... If this 
 business had been of such consequence as is pretended, 
 it is strange that those holy men, Ignatius, Clemens, and 
 Justin Martyr, should not have any mention of it."f 
 
 Ottius: '^As they [the primitive Christians] had no 
 
 temples, no altars, so neither had they any incense; 
 which is inferred from the silence of those tim.es. I do 
 not mean a kind of uncertain silence, on which no argu- 
 ment can be formed ; but such as, in cases to be disputed, 
 may serve for a substantial reason.":}; 
 
 Again : Our learned opposers have taught us to 
 consider ecclesiastical terms and religious rites, which 
 are not found in scripture, as coming into use about the 
 time when they are first mentioned by one or another of 
 the ancient writers. Is our enquiry, for example. In 
 what age baptism obtained the name of a sacrament? 
 Gomarus replies, Tertullian is the first who gives it that 
 appellatinn.§ — Is it the consecration of baptismal waterl 
 Tertullian is the most ancient author produced that men- 
 tions it. II — Is it concerning the time when, in reference 
 to baptism, the use of sponsors commenced ? Deylin- 
 gius and others assure us, Tertullian is the first who 
 says any thing of it.^ — Is it the imposH'wn of hands, as 
 an attendant on the administration of baptism ? Mr. 
 Peirce tells us, Tertullian is " the most ancient author 
 who mentions that rite. , . .We make no doubt it began 
 about the time of Tertullian, and was at first annexed to 
 baptism."*"* — Is it that unction which was used in the 
 
 * Enquiry into Orig. Nat. of Churches, Preface, p. 24. 
 •\ Preserv. against Popery, title viii. p. 10. 
 J Biblioth. Bremens. class, ii. p. 539. 
 § Opera, disputat. xxxi. § 3. 
 II Bingham's Orig. Eccles. b. xi. chap. x. § 1. 
 ^ De Prudent. Pastoral, par. iii. c, iii, § 29. Dissent. Gent, 
 Letters, lett. ii. 
 
 ** Vindication of Dissenters, part iii. p. 172, 1/5. 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CENTURY. 397 
 
 ancient rite of confirmation? Mr, Bingham answers, 
 " There being no author before Tertullian who mentions 
 the material unction, as used in confirmation, it is most 
 probable it was a ceremony first begun about his time, 
 to represent the unction of the Holy Ghost."* Thus 
 also Quenstedius : " That before the time of Tertullian 
 this rite was not used in the church appears from hence, 
 neither Justin Martyr, nor any other author of a former 
 age, makes mention of it. Tertullian first of all, there- 
 fore, speaks of the unction." f — Is it the custom of 
 making prayers and oblations for the dead ? Chemnitius 
 replies, " Tertullian is the first of the fathers who men- 
 tions it." J — Is it the white garment usually worn for a 
 iew days, while recent from the baptismal font ? Quen- 
 stedius tells us, "that none of the fathers who flourished 
 in the three first centuries make mention of it. . . .The 
 custom, therefore, seems to have been introduced in the 
 fourth century." § — Is it the custom of those that were 
 newly baptized carrying lighted tapers in their hands, 
 when going to public worship ? Quenstedius informs 
 us, that " Justin Martyr, in his Second Apology, and 
 Tertullian, De Baptismo, make no mention of any such 
 thing, though they very accurately describe the baptismal 
 rites; "II and therefore it must be considered as of a 
 later date. — Once more : Is it that prostitution of a 
 sacred rite, the baptizing of bells? Mr. Bingham replies, 
 " The first notice we have of this is in the capitulars of 
 Charles the Great, where it is only mentioned to be 
 censured."^ 
 
 The substance of this reasoning may be thus ex- 
 pressed, and applied to our present purpose. Infant 
 
 * Orig. Eccles. b. xii. chap. iii. § 2. 
 
 t Antiq. Bib. p. 338. % Exam. Concil, Trident, p. 536. 
 
 § Ut supra, p. 343. || Ibid. p. 344. 
 
 5f Orig. Eccles. b. xi. chap. iv. § 2. Vid. Vander Waeyen, 
 (Varia Sacra, p. 616,) who considers some of these rites as having 
 an earlier date, and as being derived from the Pagans. 
 
398 NO EVIDENCE OF P.EDOBAPTISM 
 
 baptism, for which our Brethren contend, is not men- 
 tioned in scripture. They are obhged, therefore, to lay 
 the whole stress of their argument on obscure passages 
 of sacred writ. But had the matter in dispute been 
 appointed by Jesus Christ, and practised by the apostles, 
 there is reason to think the writers of the New Testa- 
 ment would have recorded it in a clear and explicit 
 manner; consequently, it is unreasonable to believe 
 and practise any such thing. — Again : The earliest 
 Christian antiquity must be the best. But Pasdobap- 
 tism does not occur in the genuine writings of the 
 highest and purest antiquity. It cannot be doubted, 
 however, that if it had been practised in those times, the 
 fathers would have mentioned it, as well as other things 
 of much less importance. We have, therefore, abundant 
 reason to conclude, that those ancient authors knew 
 nothing of it. — Once more : Learned men in general 
 conclude, that the commencement of any practice in the 
 Christian church is to be fixed about the time of its 
 being first mentioned by ancient writers. But the prac- 
 tice of infant baptism is not mentioned by any eccle- 
 siastical author before TertuUian ; and even by him, like 
 the baptism of bells, in the capitulars of Charles the 
 Great, it is mentioned with a mark of censure ; though 
 he informs us of several unscriptural rites annexed to 
 baptism, without the least sign of disapprobation. 
 
 That we are able to plead something more than the 
 mere silence of primitive fathers, will appear, I think, 
 from the following paragraphs. The learned Basnage, 
 when proving against Baronius, that unction and the 
 imposition of hands were not connected with baptism 
 in primitive times, produces a passage from Justin 
 Martyr, which I will here give a little more at large, in 
 the translation of Mr. Reeves : " I shall now lay before 
 you, (says Justin to the Roman emperor) the manner of 
 dedicating ourselves to God, through Christ, upon our 
 conversion ; for should I omit this I might seem not to 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CENTURY, 399 
 
 deal sincerely in this account of the Christian religion. 
 As many, therefore, as are persuaded and believe that the 
 things taught and said by us are true, and moreover take 
 upon them to live accordingly, are taught to pray, and 
 ask of God with fasting the forgiveness of their former 
 sins ; we praying together, and fasting for and with 
 them ; and then, and not till then, they are brought to a 
 place of water, and there regenerated, after the same 
 manner with ourselves ; for they are washed in the 
 name of God the Father and Lord of all, and of our 
 Saviour Jesus Christ . . . .The reason of this we have 
 from the apostles ; for having nothing to do in our first 
 birth, but being begotten by necessity, or without our 
 own consent, and trained up also in vicious customs and 
 company, to the end therefore we might continue no 
 longer the children of necessity and ignorance, but of 
 freedom and knowledge, and obtain remission of our 
 past sins by virtue of this water, the penitent, who now 
 makes his second birth an act of his own choice, has 
 called over hkn the name of God the Father, and Lord 
 of all things .... And moreover the person baptized and 
 illuminated, is baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, and 
 in the name of the Holy Ghost."* — Upon this passage 
 Basnage, among other things, observes : " That the 
 apologist plainly mentions the ceremonies of the church, 
 without circumlocution or ambiguity. Dissimulation 
 was not then used by Christians. Unless, therefore, we 
 w^ould represent Justin as telling the emperor a false- 
 hood, it must be confessed, that unction and the impo- 
 sition of hands were not yet annexed to baptism, nor 
 used upon baptized persons. For it was the custom to 
 unite without delay the baptismal water and the chrism, 
 from the time of the latter being brought into the church 
 .... Either, therefore, having cast off all sincerity, he 
 concealed in silence confirmation, or confirmation was 
 not at all used ; the latter of which, as more probable, 
 
 * Apologies, vol. i. p. 104 — 108. 
 
400 NO EVIDENCE OF P^DOBAPTISM 
 
 we prefer, lest the holy martyr should lie under a 
 charge of perfidy. This argument is of so much force 
 with me, that I think the patrons of confirmation cannot 
 possibly answer it."* He proceeds on the same prin- 
 ciple, in order to prove, that various orders of eccle- 
 siastics in the Papal communion had no existence 
 among the primitive Christians. For having produced 
 a passage from Clemens Rom.anus, who speaks of the 
 apostles as "preaching through countries and cities, and 
 appointing bishops and deacons ; " he adds, " If, in the 
 age of Clement, subdeacons, chanters, door-keepers, and 
 exorcists had been appointed to those offices which their 
 names import ; what was the reason of Clement's men- 
 tioning none but bishops and deacons?" f — Again, with 
 reference to the office of a subdeacon, he says : "It was 
 not known before the third century. Cyprian honoured 
 that confessor of Christ, Optatus, with the new title of 
 a subdeacon. . . .Let us hear TertuUian in his book, De 
 Baptismo. The high-pfiest has the right of administer- 
 ing baptism ; then the elder, and also the deacon. Why 
 does the ancient author stop here ? Does not authority 
 to administer baptism belong to the subdeacon, when 
 the elder and the deacon are absent ? Seeing, therefore, 
 the name of a subdeacon first came into use after the 
 death of TertuUian, we justly infer that the office of sub- 
 deacon was unknown to the church for upwards of two 
 hundred years." J — Now, if these principles and this 
 course of arguing be pertinent and conclusive, in oppo- 
 sition to such particulars in the church of Rome as are 
 not mentioned in the scripture, nor in primitive anti- 
 quity ; what reason can be assigned why they should 
 not have equal force against infant baptism ? For it is 
 manifest, that all their force arises, not from an applica- 
 tion of them to the religious customs of a particular 
 people ; but from those religious customs not being 
 
 * Exercitat. Hist. Crit. p. 76, 77. f Ibid. p. 608. 
 
 + Ibid. p. 642. 
 
Before the second or third century. 401 
 
 mentioned in the divine word, nor in the genuine writings 
 of the most ancient ecclesiastical authors. 
 
 With regard to the passage produced from Justin, 
 Dr. Wall acknowledges, that it is not directly in favour 
 of infant baptism; though he is of opinion the famous 
 apologist says nothing inconsistent with the practice of 
 it in those times.* But if the silence of our venerable 
 martyr, concerning unction and the imposition of hands, 
 would have impeached his integrity, had those rites been 
 then used, as Mr. Basnage justly pleads ; much more 
 would his entire omission of infants, as partakers of 
 baptism, have inferred the same reflection upon him, 
 had Paedobaptism been then practised. " If," as Dr. 
 Gale observes, " he was so cautious not to seem unfair, 
 in hiding any thing from the powers before whom he 
 pleaded ; it is strange he should entirely omit, without 
 the least intimation, so important an article as the cus- 
 tom of baptizing infants, if it had been practised at that 
 time. The heathens were apt enough to charge the 
 Christians with using infants very barbarously; it con- 
 cerned St. Justin, therefore, not to give any umbrage by 
 seeming to avoid the mentioning of them. So careful 
 an apologist would certainly have taken occasion to 
 mention them, and describe the Christians' treatment of 
 them very exactly, in order to remove all suspicions 
 from the emperor's mind. When they were reported to 
 murder infants, or make some impious use of their 
 blood, what could possibly fortify the suspicion more, 
 than that so great a man as Justin should, in a public 
 and formal apology, decline saying any thing at all of 
 what they did to them? It was altogether necessary, 
 therefore, for St. Justin, at least to have taken some no- 
 tice of infants, if they had used any ceremony about 
 them .... But, supposing he had not, must he therefore 
 describe baptism in such a manner as cannot be at all 
 applicable to the case of infants, as he has done? This 
 
 * Hist. Inf. Bap. part i. chap.ii. § 5. 
 VOL. I, 2d. 
 
402 NO EVIDENCE OF P.^UOBAPTISM 
 
 would have been directly deceiving the emperor, who 
 certainly understood St. JuBtin's account to be full and 
 true of baptism in general, and never imagined the 
 Christians baptized otherwise. Had there been such a 
 thing as infant baptism at that time, how easy had it 
 been for St. Justin, and how necessary, to have said, 
 Not only they who are persuaded and do believe, and so 
 on ; but also to have added, together ivith their infant 
 children, are baptized. .... Nothing can be plainer than 
 that the new birth [of which Justin speaks,] together 
 with the remission of sins to be obtained by water, is 
 here said to depend, not upon any necessity, or the^ill 
 of another, as our being born into this world did ; but, 
 on the contrary, on our own wills, or free choice and 
 knowledge. For the opposition lies here : We were at 
 first generated without our knowledge, or choice ; but 
 we must be regenerated, and obtain the remission of our 
 sins by water, with our knowledge and choice. And 
 this shows that infants, who are not capable of that 
 knowledge and choice, are consequently not capable of 
 this baptism : if they are to be baptized, it must be with- 
 out their choice, as much as their first generation Mas; 
 which destroys St. Justin's opposition, and therefore 
 must be thought inconsistent with his notion of the 
 matter."* 
 
 Should any be disposed to answer with Bellarmine, 
 in a similar case ; " Things that are generally known, 
 and daily practised, do not use to be written :" we reply 
 with Dr. Clagett, " But if this will do, it is impossible 
 these men should ever be convinced. For when we 
 charge them with innovation in any matters of doctrine 
 and practice, if they can show that those things are 
 written in the ancients, we are certainly gone that way; 
 for this proves that to be well known, and commonly 
 practised in the primitive times, which we pretend was 
 but of yesterday. But if we can show that they were 
 * Reflections on Dr, Wall's Hist. Iivf, Bap. lett. xii. p. 454 — 457- 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CENTURV. 403 
 
 not written, we get nothing by it at all ; for it seems the 
 reason they were not written is, because they were gene- 
 rally known and daily practised."* 
 
 I will conclude this reflection with the following 
 quotation from Dr. Clagett : " The profound silence of 
 the first three ages — as to the worship of the blessed 
 Virgin and the saints — should be enough to determine 
 the point in question. And this silence is not only di- 
 rectly confessed by some of our adversaries, but as 
 effectually confessed by the rest, that labour to find 
 some hints of these practices in these primitive fathers; 
 but by such interpretations and consequences, that it is 
 almost as great a shame to confute, as to make them. 
 Now the silence of these fathers ought not be rejected, 
 as an incompetent proof, because it is but a negative. 
 For since we pretend that these practices are innovations, 
 and were never heard of in the ancient church ; it is not 
 reasonable to demand a better proof of it, than that in 
 their books, some of which give large and particular ac- 
 counts of their worship, and of their doctrines concern- 
 ing worship, we can no where meet with the least inti- 
 mation or footstep of them. Would our adversaries 
 have us bring express testimonies out of the fathers 
 against these things, as if they wrote and disputed by 
 the Spirit of prophecy, against those corruptions that 
 should arise several ages after they were dead ? .... To 
 demand more than their perpetual silence in these cases, 
 is unreasonable; because no satisfactory account can be 
 given of it, but this, That the wot^ship we speak of was 
 indeed no part of their religion. Had it been some in- 
 different rite or ceremony that we contend about, this 
 argument, from the silence of the fathers, against its an- 
 tiquity, might with some colour be rejected; because it 
 were unreasonable to expect, that they should take no- 
 tice in their writings of every custom, of how little mo- 
 ment soever: and yet we find, that in matters even of 
 
 * Preservative against Popery, title vii. p. 85. 
 S D 2 
 
404 NO EVIDENCE OF P^DOBAPTISM 
 
 this slight nature, in comparison, they have not been 
 wanting to give us very much information. But it is 
 altogether incredible, that so notable and famous a part 
 of the worship of Christians, as that which is now given 
 to the blessed virgin, and to the saints, should not be 
 mentioned by any one of them, if it had been the custom 
 of those times .... We have seen that in these latter ages 
 the doctrine of her [the virgin Mary's] worship, is grown 
 to be no mean part of the body of divinity with the 
 doctors of the Roman church. There is no end cf wri- 
 ting books in her honour, and to excite and direct devo- 
 tion to her. . . .One would, therefore, expect to find all 
 things full of veneration and addresses to the blessed 
 virgin, in the writings of the primitive fathers ; that is, to 
 meet with it at every turn — but if you look for any 
 such thing, I will be bold to say you will lose your la- 
 bour. . . .1 know not how the fathers can be excused, 
 but that the scriptures speak as sparingly of her as 
 they."* — The intelligent reader will easily perceive that 
 this will apply with peculiar force, mutatis mutandis, to 
 the case before us. 
 
 Reflect. VI. Though the practice of infant baptism 
 did prevail in the latter part of the third century, yet 
 learned Paedobaptists themselves inform us, that many 
 eminent persons descended from Christian parents, in 
 following times, were not baptized till they arrived at 
 the age of maturity. Bp. Taylor says : " The wisest of 
 our fathers in Christ did not come unto baptism, until 
 they were come^ to a strong and confirmed wit and age 
 . . . .There is no pretence of tradition, that the church 
 in all ages did baptize all the infants of Christian parents. 
 It is more certain that they did not do it always, than 
 that they did it in the first age. St. Ambrose, St. Hie- 
 rom, and St. Austin, were born of Christian parents, 
 and yet not baptized until the full age of a man, and 
 
 * Preserv. against Popery, title vi. p. 192, 193, 194. 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OH THIRD CENTURY. 405 
 
 more."* Daill^ bears the following testimony : "In 
 
 ancient times they often deferred the baptizing both of 
 infants and of other people, as appears by the history of 
 the emperors, Constantine the Great, of Constantius, 
 of Theodosius, of Valentinian, and of Gratian, in St. 
 Ambrose ; and also by the orations and homilies of Gre- 
 gory Nazianzen, and of St. Basil, upon this subject. 
 And some of the fathers too have been of opinion, that 
 it is fit it should be deferred ; as, namely, TertulHan, as 
 we have formerly noted of him."t The famous Aus- 
 tin, in his Confessions, having said; " I was then signed 
 with the sign of his [Christ's] cross, and was seasoned 
 with his salt, so soon as I came out of my mother's 
 womb, who greatly trusted in thee;" his translator. Dr. 
 W. Watts, has the following note upon it: "This was 
 the practice of the primitive times ; by which religious 
 parents devoted their children unto Christ, long before 
 their baptism, which in those days was deferred till they 
 were able to answer for themselves.'" \ — Gregory Nazi- 
 anzen, born in the year three hundred and eighteen, 
 whose parents were Christians, and his father a bishop, 
 was not baptized till about thirty years of age:§ and 
 Chrysostom also, born of Christian parents in the year 
 three hundred and forty seven, was not baptized till 
 near twenty-one years of age.|| See the immediately 
 following chapter. No. 1. — Now, if the parents of these 
 Christian fathers and Cgesars, though professing them- 
 selves the disciples of Christ, did not baptize their infant 
 offspring, we may justly presume, whatever might be 
 the reasons of their conduct, that many others in those 
 times were influenced by the same reasons, and acted a 
 similar part. 
 
 * In Dr. Wall's Hist. Inf. Bap. part ii, chap, ii. § 10. 
 f Right Use of the Fathers, book ii. chap, vi, p. 149. 
 X Austin's Confessions, book i. chap.xi. p. 17, 1650. 
 § Dupin, cent. iv. p. 159. Gen. Biog. Diet. art. Greg. Naz. 
 II GrotiuSj apud Poli Synops. ad Mat. xix. 14. Dupin's Eccles. 
 Hist, cent.v, p, 6, 7- 
 
406 NO EVIDENCE OF P.EDOBAPTISM 
 
 The language of Boniface, bishop of Thessalonica, 
 in a letter to Austin, is far from expressing a warm re- 
 gard, either for infant baptism, or the business of spon- 
 sors. " Suppose I set before you an infant," says he to 
 Austin, "and ask you, Whether, when lie grows up, he 
 ivill be a chaste person ? or. Whether he will be a thief? 
 You doubtless will answer, I do not know. And, Whe- 
 ther he, in that infant age, have any thought, good, or 
 evil? You will still say, I do not know. If then you 
 dare not assert any thing concerning his future conduct, 
 or his present thoughts, what is the reason that, when 
 they are presented for baptism, their parents, as sponsors 
 for them, answer and say ; They do that, of which their 
 infant age is not able to think; or, if it can, it is a pro- 
 found secret? For we ask those by whom they are pre- 
 sented, and say; Does he believe in God? (which ques- 
 tion concerns that a^e which is ig-norant whether there 
 be a God.) They answer. He does believe. And so 
 likewise an answer is returned to all the rest. Whence 
 I wonder that parents in these affairs answer so confi- 
 dently for the child, that he does so many good things, 
 which at the time of his baptism the administrator de- 
 mands ! And yet, were I at that very time to ask ; Will 
 this baptized child, when grown to maturity, be chaste ? 
 or. Will he not be a thief? I know not m hether any one 
 would venture to answer. He will, or. He will not, be 
 the one or the other ; as they answer without hesitation, 
 He believes in God — He turns to God''* — Hence it ap- 
 pears, that in the time of Austin a profession of faith 
 was always required, prior to the administration of bap- 
 tism, agreeably to the primitive pattern ; f that when an 
 infant was presented for baptism, this profession was 
 made by proxy, as it is now in the church of Rome, and 
 in the church of England ; that Boniface considered 
 this vicarious profession, as a bold, unwarrantable, ab- 
 surd procedure, as it undoubtedly is; and, consequently, 
 
 * Augustini Einstola ad Bonifacium, epist, xxiii, f Acts viii. 37. 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CENTURY. 407 
 
 that he was far from being, like Austin, a sanguine ad- 
 mirer of Paedobaptism ; there being, as Dr. Wall ob- 
 serves, " no time or age of the church, in which there is 
 any appearance that infants were ordinarily baptized, 
 without sponsors or godfathers,"* to make that vicarious 
 profession, against which Boniface with so much reason 
 and force objects. 
 
 To these difficulties the celebrated bishop of Hippo, 
 among other trifling and impertinent things, replies : 
 " As the sacrament of Christ's body is, after a certain 
 fashion, Christ's body ; and the sacrament of Christ's 
 blood, is his blood ; so the sacrament of faith, is faith ; 
 and to believe, is nothing else but to have faith. And 
 so when an infant, that has not yet the faculty of faith, 
 is said to believe, he is said to have faith, because of 
 the sacrament of faith ; and to turn to God, because of 
 the sacrament of conversion ; because that answer be- 
 longs to the celebration of the sacrament. . . .An infant, 
 though he be not yet constituted a believer, by that 
 faith which consists in the will of believers, yet he is by 
 the sacrament of that faith : for, as he is said to be- 
 lieve, so he is called a believer ; not from his having the 
 thing itself in his mind, but from his receiving the sacra- 
 ment of it. And when a person begins to have a sense 
 of things, he does not repeat that sacrament, but he un- 
 derstands the force of it, and by consent of will squares 
 himself to the true meaning of it. And till he can do 
 this, the sacrament will avail to his preservation against 
 all contrary powers; and so far it will avail, that, if he 
 depart this life before the use of reason, he will, by this 
 Christian remedy of the sacrament itself, (the charity of 
 the church recommending him) be made free from that 
 condemnation which, by one man, entered into the 
 world. He that does not believe this, and thinks it 
 cannot be done, is indeed an infidel, though he have the 
 sacrament of faith ; and that infant is much better, who, 
 
 * Hist. Inf. Bap. p. 477. 
 
408 NO EVIDENCE OF P^EDOBAPTISM 
 
 though he have not faith in his mind, yet puts no bar of 
 a contrary mind against it, and so receives the sacra- 
 ment to his soul's health."* — Such is the solution given 
 by Austin, which the celebrated Chamier justly pro- 
 nounces yrig-^V/.f How far any of those who now ad- 
 minister baptism on the creed of a proxy, whether latent 
 in the parent, or avowed by the sponsor, may approve 
 of his reasoning, I cannot pretend to say ; but I think it 
 is plain, that the New Testament is equally silent about 
 a vicarious faith, and a vicarious baptism. - He, there- 
 fore, who admits the former, could not consistently op- 
 pose the latter, were any to plead for it. 
 
 The very learned and famous Daille, when animad- 
 verting on this passage of Austin, says ; " Whether 
 these things satisfied Boniface, I know not. To me, I 
 confess, they seem strange. How can the infant offered 
 to baptism, be truly said, therefore, to have faith, be- 
 cause he has the sacrament of faith, i. e. baptism, at 
 the time when he has not yet received baptism? nay, 
 who is for no other reason asked the question, than that 
 he may obtain baptism, which as yet he wants ? As 
 though none ought to be baptized who does not believe. 
 An infant is presented to the minister to be baptized: 
 the minister, as though he thought it unlawful to bap- 
 tize even an infant, except he believes, demands, and, 
 which aggravates the absurdity, he demands of the infant 
 himself, whether he believes? tacitly implying, he may 
 not baptize him unless he does so. Here the godfather, 
 that the infant may be capable of baptism, answers as 
 his surety, that he believes. When Boniface was in 
 doubt, how the godfather could truly and certainly affirm 
 this; Austin answers, he could, though the infant had 
 not yet faith; because, when he says he believes, he 
 only means, he has the sacrament of faith. Is* not this 
 a brave solution of the difficulty? But I say the infant 
 
 * 111 Dr. Wall, ut supra^ p. 115. 
 ■\ Panstrat. torn, iv. 1. v. c. xv. § 22. 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRC CENTURY. 409 
 
 has not what you call the sacrament of faith ; nor, if he 
 had, would there be any occasion to offer him to you to 
 be baptized : and therefore, in that very sense Austin 
 puts upon the answer, the godfather lies when he says, 
 the infant believes, i. e. has the sacrament of faith."* 
 
 Whether the form of proceeding in the administration 
 of baptism to infants, according to the English Liturgy, 
 do not deserve a similar censure, let my reader judge by 
 the following extract from Mr. Peirce. " The priest thus 
 speaks unto the godfathers and godmothers : ' Where- 
 fore this infant must also faithfully for his par^t, promise 
 by you that are his sureties, (until he come of age to take 
 it upon himself) that he will renounce the devil and all 
 his works, and constantly believe God's holy word, 
 and obediently keep his commandments. I demand, 
 therefore; Dost thou, in the name of this child, re- 
 nounce the devil and all his works, the vain pomp and 
 glory of the^world?' and so on. 'I renounce them all.' 
 'Dost thou believe in God the Father almighty?' and 
 so on. ' All this I steadfastly believe.' ' Wilt thou be 
 baptized 'in \h\?> faith?' 'So is my desire.' ^ Wilt thou 
 then obediently keep God's holy will and command- 
 ments, and walk in the same all the days of thy hfe?' 
 ' I will.' Who now is so blind as not to see, the minis- 
 ter all along asks the infants themselves these questions? 
 Of whom else can he ask, whether he will be baptized ? 
 or who else can answer, / will? For the godfathers 
 and godmothers have been baptized themselves long be- 
 fore. It is plain then the godfathers are not properly 
 asked these questions, and that they answer them for 
 no other reason, but because the infants are not able to 
 speak for themselves. Which to many seems absurd 
 and childish, and unworthy of the gravity of a Chris- 
 tian assembly, and the solemnity of the ordinance 
 of baptism. Hereto we may add the words of the 
 
 * In Mr. Peirce's Vindicat. of Dissenters, part iii. p. 169, 170. 
 
410 NO EVIDENCE OF P^DOBAPTISM 
 
 Catechism : * Why then are infants baptized, when, by- 
 reason of their tender age, they cannot perform [repent- 
 ance and faith?] Because they promise them both by 
 their sureties,' and so on." He adds ; " And truly they 
 seem by this method to betray the cause of infants 
 to the Anabaptists. For if an express and actual pro- 
 fession of repentance and faith is necessarily to be re- 
 quired of every one before he is baptized, infant bap- 
 tism can never be defended ; since a vicarious profession 
 is not founded upon any text in the whole Bible."* — To 
 the latter part of this quotation a Conformist might re- 
 ply: "We acknowledge. Sir, that there is an air of 
 puerility attending those questions and answers which 
 you have recited; but notwithstanding this we insist, 
 that there is a more plain reference to primitive practice 
 than can be perceived in your mode of proceeding.']' In 
 the administration of baptism according to our Liturgy, 
 a profession of repentance and faith makes a signal ap- 
 pearance ; not so in your procedure. We baptize on 
 the professed faith of sponsors ; you, on the presumed 
 faith of parents. Show us your warrant for baptizing 
 a child on the latter^ and you shall not wait long for 
 ours on behalf of the former. Produce your text from 
 the Bible for baptizing one or another, without a per- 
 sonal profession made by the subject; and you shall 
 soon have ours for administering baptism upon the de- 
 clared creed of proxy. 
 
 Once more: Cattenburgh informs us, that in the 
 former part of the sixth century many opposed infant 
 baptism. J — The Petrobrussians in the twelfth century 
 maintained, as Venema shows, "That Pajdobaptism 
 cannot save infants, nor the faith of another be profit- 
 able to them :"§ and Mosheim assures us, that " Peter 
 
 * Vindicat. of Dissent, partiii. p, 166, 167. 
 -}• Matt. iii. 6— lOj Acts viii. 36, 37; 1 Pet.iii, 21. 
 I Spicileg. Theol. Christ. 1. iv, c.lxiv. sect. ii. § 4, 
 § Hist. Eccles. torn. vi. p. 129. 
 
BEFORE THE SECOND OR THIRD CENTURY. 411 
 
 de Bruys, who made the most laudable attempts to re- 
 form the abuses and to remove the superstitions that dis- 
 figured the beautiful simplicity of the gospel," — insisted, 
 " That no persons whatever were to be baptized before 
 
 they came to the full use of their reason."* Hence 
 
 J. A. Fabricius calls the Petrobrussians, "the Anabap- 
 tists of that age."'!' — In the same century, according to 
 Venema, there was another sect of professing Christians, 
 denominated Publicans, who asserted, "That infants are 
 not to be baptized, till they arrive at years of under- 
 standing." The same historian mentions another de- 
 nomination of Christians in that age, called Arnoldists; 
 who, he says, " considered Paedobaptism in a different 
 light from that of the Romish church — Concernino; which 
 sect, Bernard exclaims, Utinam tarn sauce esset doctrincE^ 
 quam districtcE vUcb/"^ — I will conclude this chapter 
 with the following concession of a Roman Catholic 
 writer, the principle of which will here apply. " No 
 true believer now doubts of purgatory; whereof, not- 
 withstanding, among the ancients there is very little or 
 no mention at all."^ 
 
 * Eccles, Hist, cent.xii. part. ii. chap.v, §7. 
 
 t Bibliographia Antiq. p. 388. Hamb. 1716. 
 
 X Ut supra, p. 130, 131, 132. See Dupin, cent. xii. p. 88. 89. 
 
 § In Morning Exercise against Popery, p. 251. 
 
412 GROUNDS OF P^UOBAPTISrM, 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 The high Opinion of the Fathers, concerning the Utilitif 
 of Baptism, and the Grounds on which they proceeded 
 in administering that Ordinance to Infants, when 
 P<2dobaptisni became a prevailiiig Practice. 
 
 ViTRiNGA. — ^"The ancient Christian church, from 
 the highest antiquity after the apostolic times, appears 
 generally to have thought, that baptism is absolutely 
 necessary for all that would be saved by the grace of 
 Jesus Christ. It was therefore customary in the an- 
 cient church, if infants were greatly afflicted and in dan- 
 ger of death ; or if parents were affected with a singu- 
 lar concern about the salvation of their children, to 
 present their infants, or children in their minority, to 
 the bishop to be baptized. But if these reasons did not 
 urge them, they thought it better, and more for the in- 
 terest of minors, that their baptism should be deferred 
 till they arrived at a more advanced age; which custom 
 was not yet abolished in the time of Austin, though he 
 vehemently urged the necessity of baptism, while with 
 all his might he defended the doctrines of grace against 
 Pelagius." Observat. Sac. tom. i. 1. ii. c. vi. § y. 
 
 2. Venema. — " The ancients connected a regene- 
 rating power, and a communication of the Spirit, with 
 baptism. Justin Martyr (Apol. ii. 79,) asserts it in ex- 
 press words; and to baptism he applies that saying of 
 our Lord, ' Except a man be born of water and of the 
 Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.' Be- 
 sides, (Contra Tryph. p. 231,) he asserts, ' that baptism 
 only can cleanse and purify a penitent;' where it is also 
 called, ' the water of life'. . . .Irenaeus (Advers. Haeres. 
 iii. 17,) says, ' That Christ gave to his disciples the power 
 of regenerating to God, when he sent them to baptize.' 
 
AS PRACTISED BY THE ANCIENTS. 413 
 
 And Clemens Alexandrinus (Paedag. i. 6,) says; ' Being 
 dipped, or baptized, we are illuminated; being illumi- 
 nated, we are adopted for sons; being adopted, we are 
 perfected; being perfected, we are rendered immortal: 
 whence baptism is called grace, illumination, and the 
 perfect laver,' which words he there explains. — The 
 doctrine of Tertullian is of a similar kind. Thus he 
 speaks, (De P^nit. c. vi.) ' A divine benefit, that is, 
 the abolition of offences, is ascertained to those that are 
 about to enter the water;' yet only in respect of such as 
 repent. In his book concerning baptism, he explains 
 his opinion more at large, and there attributes to the 
 water, by an union with the divine virtue, a sanctifying 
 power. . . .That baptism is connected with the remission 
 of antecedent sins, and confers a sanctifying power on 
 the person baptized, is the undoubted opinion of Cyprian, 
 which he every where inculcates, so that there is hardly 
 any need to produce the particular passages. In his 
 first epistle to Donatus he declares, that before his con- 
 version it seemed impossible to him, 'that a person should 
 all on a sudden put off sin, in the laver of the salutary 
 water,' which he himself had experienced; saying, 
 ' Afterward, by the help of the generating water, the spots 
 of the former time are cleansed away ; a serene and a 
 pure light from above, infuses itself into the peaceful 
 breast; afterward a second birth, the Spirit being drawn 
 from heaven, restored me into a new man.' — In his 
 Ixiii'^ epistle, to Caecilius, he expressly says, ' By bap- 
 tism the Holy Spirit is received,' In his Ixx**" epistle, to 
 Januarius, he says, ' It is necessary, therefore, that the 
 water should be first purified and sanctified by the priest, 
 that he may be able, by the baptism which he adminis- 
 ters, to wash away the sins of a man who is baptized;' 
 where also many other things of a similar kind occur. 
 In his Ixxi^* epistle, to Quintus, he says; 'There is one 
 water in the holy church, which maketh sheep.' In his 
 Ixxii'^ epistle, to Stephanus, he apphes what our Lord 
 
414 GROUNDS OF P^DOBAPTISM, 
 
 says (John iii.) concerning the necessity of regeneration, 
 to baptism. In his Ixxiii*^ epistle, to Jubaianus, these 
 remarkable words occur: ' Thence begins the origin of all 
 faith, the saving entrance to a hope of eternal life, and 
 a divine grant to purify and quicken the servants of 
 God :' soon after he also attributes the remission of sin, 
 and sanctification, to baptism, and applies to it John 
 iii. 5. In his Ixxiv'*" epistle, to Pompeius, he says, ' We 
 are born, in Christ, by the laver of generation. Water 
 only cannot purge away sins and sanctify a man, unless 
 it have also the Holy Spirit. It is baptism, in which 
 the old man dies and the new man is born.' Firmili- 
 anus also, in the Ixxv**" epistle, to Cyprian, among the 
 effects of baptism, particularly mentions, ' washing away 
 the filth of the old man, forgiving of old sins, that were 
 deserving of death ; making persons, by a heavenly rege- 
 neration, the sons of God; and a restoration to life 
 eternal, by the sanctification of the divine laver'.... 
 Gregory Nazianzen declares, (Orat. xl. p. 653,) That 
 they who die unbaptized, without their own fault, go 
 neither to heaven nor hell ; but, if they have lived piously, 
 to a middle place." Hist. Eccles. torn. iii. secul. ii. 
 § 124; sec. iii. §61; tom.iv. sec. iv. § 115. 
 
 3. Salmasius. — " An opinion prevailed, that no one 
 could be saved without being baptized; and for that 
 reason the custom arose of baptizing infants." Epist. 
 ad Justum Pacium, apud Van Dale Hist. Baptism. 
 
 4. Hospinianus. — " Austin, when writing against the 
 Pelagians, too inconsiderately consigns over the infants 
 of Christians to damnation that died without baptism. 
 There is nothing that he more zealously urges, nor any 
 thing on which he more firmly depends, than those 
 words of Christ, ' Except a man be born of water and 
 of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.'" 
 Hist. Sacram. 1. ii. c. ii. p. 52. 
 
 5. Suicerus. — " We cannot deny, that many of the 
 ancients maintained the absolute necessity of baptism. 
 
AS PRACTISED BY THE ANCIENTS. 415 
 
 Chrysostom says, ' It is impossible, without baptism, to 
 obtain the kingdom:' and soon after, ' It is impossible 
 to be saved without it'. . . .This opinion concerning the 
 absolute necessity of baptism, arose from a wrong un- 
 derstanding of our Lord's words; 'Except a man be 
 born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the 
 kingdom of heaven ' . . . . Chrysostom again says, ' If an 
 infant die without baptism, through the negligence of the 
 presbyter, wo to that presbyter ! but if, through the 
 negligence of the parents, wo to the parents of that in- 
 fant!'" Thesaur. Eccles. tom. i. p. 3, 650. 
 
 6. Episcopius. — " Paedobaptism was not accounted 
 a necessary rite, till it was determined so to be in the 
 Milevitan Council, held in the year four hundred and 
 eighteen." Institut. Theol. 1. iv. c. xiv. 
 
 7. Dr. Owen. — " Most of the ancients concluded, that 
 it [baptism] was no less necessary unto salvation than faith 
 or repentance itself." On Justification, chap. ii. p. 173. 
 
 8. Dr. Wall. — " If we except Tertullian — Vincen- 
 tius [A. D. 419] is the first man upon record that ever 
 said, that children might be saved without baptism; if 
 by being saved, we mean going to heaven; for that 
 many before him thought they would be in a state with- 
 out punishment, I have showed before .... All the an- 
 cient Christians, without the exception of one man, 
 do understand the rule of our Saviour, (John iii. 5,) 
 ' Verily, verily, I say unto you. Except a man be born of 
 water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom 
 of God,' of baptism. I had occasion in the first Part to 
 bring a great many instances of their sayings, where all 
 that mention that text, from Justin Martyr down to St. 
 Austin, do so apply it ; and many more might be 
 brought. Neither did I ever see it otherwise applied in 
 any ancient writer. I believe Calvin was the first that 
 ever denied this place to mean baptism." Hist, of 
 Inf. Bap. parti, chap. xx. p. 232, 9>33; part ii. chap. vi. 
 p. 354. 
 
416 GROUNDS OF P^DOBAPTISM, 
 
 REFLECTIONS. 
 
 Reflect. I. Though it is manifest from the conces- 
 sions and assertions of learned Paedobaptists in the 
 preceding chapter, that there is no evidence of infant 
 baptism before the time of Tertullian, by whom it was 
 opposed ; yet from these quotations it plainly appears, 
 that both he and others before him spake of baptism in 
 such a manner, as had a natural tendency to introduce 
 and promote Pasdobaptism. When Justin, for instance, 
 had learned to call baptism the ivater of life, and to in- 
 terpret John iii. 5, as relating to that institution ; when 
 Clement of Alexandria had ascribed to it an illummating 
 power, and connected adoption, perfection, and immor- 
 tality with it ; and when TertulHan had pronounced it 
 a divine blessing, which ascertains the abolition of sin, 
 and is attended with a sanctifying energy; it is no 
 wonder, that in the time of Cyprian it should be thought 
 necessary for infants to be baptized, and that Peedobap- 
 tism should become a prevailing practice. The language 
 of this venerable African is like that of Rupert, in the 
 twelfth century, who says : " Baptism is therefore called 
 tinctio, in Latin, because a man when baptized is, by 
 the Spirit of grace, altered for the better, and is rendered 
 very different from what he was before. He was a son 
 of death and of perdition ; he is made a child of life and 
 of acquisition. He was a son of hell ; he is made an 
 heir of God's kingdom. He was an enemy of God ; he 
 is reconciled and made a child of God."* A pernicious 
 opinion this, by whomsoever espoused ! The language 
 of Cyprian, and of others in following times, concerning 
 the energy of baptismal water, administered occasion 
 for the apostate Julian to reproach the Christians, with 
 reference to the solemn rite.f 
 
 It is worthy of observation, that while Cyprian stands 
 
 * Apud Magdeburg. Centur. cent. xii. p. 25"2. 
 
 t Vid. Biblioth Bremens. class, i. fascic. iii. p. 243. 
 
AS PRACTISED BY THE ANCIENTS. 417 
 
 forth as the first patron of infant sprinkling, he appears 
 also as giving the sanction of his authority in favour of 
 holy water; asserting the necessity of having the bap- 
 tismal element consecrated by a priest, in order to render 
 it more effectual for the washing away of sin. See 
 No. 2.* — Austin and others, we find, in the following 
 times, proceeded a step farther than Cyprian ; and, not 
 contented with asserting at an CAtravagant rate the utility 
 of baptism, boldly maintained its absolute necessity : 
 consigning over to eternal ruin all such infants as died 
 without it. See No. 4, 5. — Now as both Cyprian and 
 Austin were x4.frican bishops, there is reason to conclude 
 with Grotius, " That anciently the baptism of infants 
 was much more common in Africa than in Asia, or 
 elsewhere; and with a greater opinion of its necessity, "f 
 So fond of baptism were the superstitious Africans, that, 
 as Deylingius informs us, they frequently baptized the 
 dead.J 
 
 Reflect. II. From the quotations before us it plainly 
 appears, that the baptism of infants was introduced and 
 prevailed, on the supposition of its being a necessary 
 mean of human happiness ; and that this weak surmise 
 was founded on a mistake of our Lord's meaning, in 
 John iii. 5. See No. 2, 5, 6, 7, 8. — ^In like manner a 
 misunderstanding of John vi. 53, produced infant com- 
 munion ; as we shall see in its proper place. — It is 
 worthy of remark, as Mr. Richards observes, that "those 
 words of our Lord were the principal texts that could be 
 thought of for some time, as proper to urge in their 
 
 * Vid. Quenstedium, Antiq. Bib. pars. i. cap, iv. sect. ii. num.i. 
 § 13. The present form of consecrating baptismal water in the 
 Church of England is as follows : " Almighty everliving God .... 
 regard, we beseech thee, the supplications of thy congregation ; 
 sanctify this water to the mystical washing away of sin; and grant 
 that this child, now to be baptized therein, may receive the fulness 
 of thy grace," — and so on. Public Baptism of Infants. 
 
 f Apud Poli Synops. ad Mat. xix, 14. 
 
 % De Prudent. Pastoral, pars iii. c. iii. § 16, 
 VOL. I. 2 E * 
 
418- GROUNDS OF P/EDOB APTISM, 
 
 favour. How vastly are the times altered since ! What 
 heaps of texts the modern advocates for these customs 
 are able to quote in support of them, which the ancients 
 could never think of; while those which the latter 
 thought the most favourable to their cause, are now- 
 deemed little, or nothing at all to the purpose ! What- 
 ever others may think of this circumstance, I must 
 confess that I cannot help looking upon it as rather 
 unfavourable to the cause of the usages in question ; for 
 had they been really commanded in scripture, one cannot 
 conceive why the ancients should not have been as well 
 acquainted with those commands as the moderns ; espe- 
 cially, as they must have been equally interested, and in 
 all probability took no less pains to find them out. But 
 by viewing both the customs as corruptions of Chris- 
 tianity, the circumstance at once ceases to be myste- 
 rious ; as it is well known that the ordinances of [men] 
 are capable of improvement; which is by no means the 
 case with those of Jesus Christ."* 
 
 In regard to John iii. 5, it may be observed, that had 
 our divine Teacher, when he declared it absolutely neces- 
 sary to be " born of water and of the Spirit," intended the 
 ordinance of baptism by the term water ; then indeed 
 the necessity of that institution would have unavoidably 
 followed, as being placed on a level with the renewing 
 agency of the Holy Spirit. But were that the sense of 
 our Lord, it would inevitably follow, that a positive rite 
 is of equal necessity with the renovating influence of the 
 Holy Spirit; that the salvation of infants, in many cases, 
 is rendered impossible, because numbers of them are no 
 sooner born than they expire ; that the eternal happiness 
 of all who die in their infancy must depend, not only on 
 the devout care of their parents, but also on the presence 
 and pious benevolence of administrators ; that all the 
 dying infants of Jews, of Mohammedans, and of Pagans, 
 are involved in final ruin ; and, that multitudes of adults 
 
 * History of Antichrist, p. SI. 
 
AS PRACTISED BY THE ANCIENTS. 419 
 
 must also perish, merely for the want of baptism. But 
 who can imagine that the Lord should place our im- 
 mortal interests on such a footing, as neither tends to 
 illustrate the grace of God, nor to promote the comfort 
 of man, — on such a footing as is quite inimical to the 
 spirit of that maxim, by grace ye are saved; and 
 has no aptitude to excite virtuous tempers in the human 
 heart ? A sentiment of this kind is chiefly adapted to 
 enhance the importance of the clerical character, and to 
 make mankind consider themselves as under infinite ob- 
 ligations to a professional order of their fellow mortals, 
 for an interest in everlasting blessedness. — Remark- 
 ably strong is the following language of Mr. Arch. Hall 
 respecting this particular : " We might well say. Wo to 
 the earth! if it were in the power of a selfish and 
 peevish order of men, to dispose of happiness and damn- 
 ation according to their humour."* We may, therefore, 
 safely conclude, that the term water, in our Lord's con- 
 verse with Nicodemus, does not signify baptism ; and 
 consequently whatever its meaning be, the emphatical 
 passage neither enjoins nor encourages the administration 
 of baptism to infants. Hence it appears, that the main 
 foundation of Paedobaptism among the ancients was a 
 great mistake ; and as such it has long been deserted by 
 the generality of Calvinistic Psedobaptists. 
 
 Reflect. IIL That my reader may see in what an 
 important point of light baptism is considered by the 
 generality of modern Paedobaptists, and to convince him 
 that it is with an ill grace any of them charge us with laying 
 an unwarrantable stress upon it, the following extracts are 
 produced, partly from public formulas of doctrine and 
 worship, and partly from the writings of individuals. 
 Thus then the church of Rome, when speaking by the 
 Council of Trent. " If any one shall say that baptism 
 
 * Gospel Worship, vol. i. p. 288, See Mr. Bradbury's Duty 
 and Doct. of Bap. p. 19, 20. 
 
 2 E g 
 
420 GROUNDS OF P^DOBAPTISM, 
 
 is — not necessary to salvation, let him be accursed .... 
 Sin, whether contracted by birth from our first parents, 
 or committed of ourselves, — by the admirable virtue of 
 this sacrament, is remitted and pardoned .... In bap- 
 tism, not only sins are remitted, but also all the punish- 
 ments of sins and wickedness are graciously pardoned of 
 God .... By virtue of this sacrament, we are not only 
 delivered from those evils which are truly said to be the 
 greatest of all, but also we are enriched w ith the best 
 and most excellent endowments ; for our souls are filled 
 with divine grace, whereby being made just and the 
 children of God, we are trained up to be heirs of eternal 
 salvation also. . . .To this is added a most noble train of 
 all virtues, which, together with grace, is poured of God 
 into the soul. . . .By baptism we are joined and knit to 
 Christ, as members to the head .... By baptism we are 
 signed with a character which can never be blotted out 
 of our soul, . . . Besides the other things which we obtain 
 by baptism, it opens to every one of us the gate of hea- 
 ven, which before, through sin, was shut."* 
 
 Cyril, the patriarch of Constantinople, expresses his 
 own faith, and that of the Greek church, respecting bap- 
 tism, in the follwing manner. " We believe that baptism 
 is a sacrament appointed by the Lord, which except a 
 person receive, he has no communion with Christ; 
 from whose death, burial, and resurrection, proceed all 
 the virtue and efficacy of baptism. We are certain, 
 therefore, that both original and actual sin is forgiven, 
 to 'those who are baptized in the manner which our Lord 
 requires in the gospel ; so that whoever is washed ' in the 
 name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
 Spirit,' is regenerated, cleansed, and justified."')" — Stap- 
 ferus, when speaking of the Greek church, says : " The 
 
 * Concil. Trident, sess. vii. can. v. Catechism of Council of 
 ^>ent, p. 166— 175. 
 
 f Confess. Christ. Fidei, cap, xvi. A. D. 1631, ad calcem 
 Syntag, Confess, Fid. Genev. 16.'')4. 
 
AS PRACTISED BY THE ANCIENTS. 421 
 
 Oriental Christians attributing too much efficacy to rites 
 and ceremonies, it is no wonder if they teach the absolute 
 necessity of baptism ; that without it no one can become 
 a real Christian; and that it cannot be omitted in re- 
 spect of infants without endangering their salvation : so 
 that, a priest being absent, and in case of necessity, 
 baptism may be administered by a layman, or by a 
 woman. For the same reason they also teach, that 
 there is an equal necessity of the Lord's supper; which, 
 therefore, they administer under both species to baptized 
 infants."* 
 
 Let us now examine the Protestant confessions, re- 
 specting this atFair. Thus, then, the Confession of Hel- 
 vetia: " To be baptized in the name of Christ, is to be 
 enrolled, entered, and received into the covenant and 
 family, and so into the inheritance of the sons of God ; 
 yea, and in this life, to be called after the name of God, 
 that is to say, to be called the sons of God, to be purged 
 also from the filthiness of sins, and to be endued with 
 the manifold grace of God, for to lead a new and inno- 
 cent life." Confession of Bohemia: "We believe, 
 
 that whatsoever by baptism — is in the outward ceremony 
 signified and witnessed, all that doth the Lord God per- 
 form inwardly; that is, that he washeth away sin, be- 
 getteth a man again, and bestoweth salvation upon him 
 .... For the bestowing of these excellent fruits was holy 
 baptism given and granted to the church. "^ Confes- 
 sion of Augsburg : " Concerning baptism they teach, 
 that it is necessary to salvation, as a ceremony ordained 
 of Christ ; also, that by baptism the grace of God is 
 offered." — —Confession of Saxony: '■^ I baptize thee; 
 that is, I do witness that, by this dipping, thy sins be 
 washed away, and that thou art now received of the true 
 
 God." Confession of Wittenburg: " We believe and 
 
 confess, that baptism is that sea, into the bottom where- 
 of, as the prophet saith, God doth cast all our sins."" 
 
 * Theolog. Polem. tom.v, p. 82. 
 
422 GROUNDS OF P^DOB A PTISM, 
 
 Confession of Sueveland : " As touching baptism, we 
 confess, that it is the font of regeneration, washeth away 
 sins, and saveth us. But all these things we do so un- 
 derstand, as St. Peter doth interpret them, (1 Pet. iii. 
 
 21.)"* Church of England: " Baptism, wherein I 
 
 was made a member of Christ, the child of God, and 
 an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven. . . .How many 
 sacraments hath Christ ordained in his church ? Two 
 only, as generally necessary to salvation ; that is to say, 
 
 baptism and the supper of the Lord."t Westminster 
 
 Assembly : " Before baptism, the minister is to use some 
 words of instruction,— ^showing, that it is instituted by 
 our Lord Jesus Christ ; that it is a seal of the covenant 
 of grace, of our ingrafting into Christ, and of our union 
 with him, of remission of sins, regeneration, adoption, 
 and life eternal." J — Such is the language of modern 
 Pagdobaptists in their public formulas. 
 
 The following extracts are from the writings of in- 
 dividuals of different communions. Thus that famous 
 reformer, Luther: "There is in the baptism of infants, 
 the beginning of faith and of a divine operation, in a 
 
 manner peculiar to themselves. "§ Gerhardus: "The 
 
 sacrament of baptism does not profit without faith; 
 nevertheless it is the efficacious mean by which God 
 of his grace works faith, regeneration, and salvation in 
 
 the hearts of infants." t| Buddeus : " All men should 
 
 be baptized, who are to be brought to eternal salvation 
 .... No one can be saved except by faith, as our Sa- 
 viour expressly declares. Now seeing infants cannot 
 be brought to faith by the preaching of God's word ; 
 it follows, that it must be effected in another way, 
 namely, by baptism : by which men are born again, 
 and so receive faith, as our Saviour declares. . . .The 
 
 * Harmony of Confessions, sect. xiii. p. 395 — 410. 
 
 f Catechism. | Directory, article Baptism, 
 
 § ,\pufl Venem. Hist. Ecclcs. torn, vii, p. 107'. 
 
 II r.ori Tlunlog toni. iv. Do Hap. § lOh. 
 
AS PRACTISED BY THE ANCIENTS. 423 
 
 effect of baptism, which has the nature of an end, is, 
 in respect of infants, regeneration. . . .That effect, there- 
 fore, which immediately results from baptism, consists 
 in regeneration, by which faith is produced in infants 
 .... In baptism a divine virtue is connected with the 
 water, and with the action conversant about it; which 
 is in a particular manner to be regarded .... Baptism 
 is not a mere sign and symbol, by which a reception 
 into the covenant of grace is denoted : but by regene- 
 ration, which baptism effects, we are realli/ received 
 into that covenant; and so are made partakers of all 
 the blessings peculiar to it. To which blessings (be- 
 sides remission of sins, or justification, renovation, 
 adoption into the number of God's children, a right 
 to the heavenly inheritance, and a certain hope of 
 eternal life) pertains communion with Christ, and with 
 his mystical body .... Concerning the highest necessity 
 of baptism, the thing itself will not suffer us to doubt; 
 seeing it is expressly asserted, that without it no one 
 
 shall enter the kingdom of heaven, (John iii. 5.)"* 
 
 Deylingius : " Baptism is the sacrament of initiation, 
 and, as it were, the gate of heaven; in which a man is 
 regenerated by the washing of water and the word of 
 God, purged from the guilt of sin, and declared to be 
 an heir of all celestial blessings .... If Christian parents 
 defer the baptism of their infants ; or, seized by the 
 spirit of Anabaptism, or of fanaticism, will not have 
 them baptized at all, — then, by the authority of the 
 consistory, or of the magistrate of the place, the infant 
 must be taken from the parents, and when initiated 
 by baptism returned to them.."')' — Vossius: " In in- 
 fants, upon whom the word has no efficacy, there is 
 room for the sacraments to generate faith in them; 
 without which no one shall see eternal life .... It is 
 manifest, that in baptism we are born again, adopted, 
 
 * Theolog. Dogmat. 1. v. c. i. § 5, 6, 7, 8, 10. 
 f De rrudent. Pastoral, pars, iii, c, iii. § 2, 15. 
 
4^4 GROUNDS OF P.^DDBAPTISM, 
 
 received into the covenant of grace; and upon that 
 receive remission of sins, are renewed by the Holy 
 
 Spirit, and made heirs of the heavenly kingdom." * 
 
 Mr. Isaac Ambrose: "By baptism we are washed, we 
 are sanctified, we are justified, in the name of the Lord 
 
 Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God."t Dr. Fiddes: 
 
 There is no " reason for excluding infants from baptism, 
 as it is a means of reinstating them in the favour of 
 God, or of conveying, in virtue of God's appointment, 
 inward and spiritual grace. . . .Baptism is a means of 
 conveying both pardoning and sanctifying grace, to 
 those who are qualified to receive it as they ought." :|: 
 Mr. Gee: "This sacrament of baptism doth con- 
 fer on the person baptized the grace of remission, of 
 adoption, and sanctification . . . .It is granted, that bap- 
 tism is ordinarily necessary to salvation; that God hath 
 made it the instrument of remission, of regeneration, 
 and of salvation to us."§ Anonymous: "It [bap- 
 tism] was ordained, that the baptized person might by 
 that solemnity pass from a state of nature, wherein he 
 was a child of wrath, into a state of adoption and grace, 
 V, herein he becomes a child of God .... Baptism was 
 instituted for a sign to seal unto baptized persons the 
 pardon of their sins, and to confer upon them a right 
 of inheritance unto everlasting life: but baptism hath 
 this effect upon infants, as well as upon adult persons; 
 for it washes them clean from original, as it doth men 
 and women both from actual and original sin. I say, 
 it washes them clean from original sin, and seals the 
 pardon of it, and the assurance of God's favour unto 
 them." 11 Dr. Waterland : " Baptism alone is suffi- 
 cient to make one a Christian, yea, and to keep him 
 
 * Disputat. de Bap. Disp. deSac. Efficac. § 46,47 ; disput. iv. § 9. 
 
 t Works, p. 196. 
 
 X Theolng. Pract. b. ii part ii. chap. i. p. 178, 181. 
 
 § Preservative against Popery, title vii. p. 20, 33. 
 
 II Cases to Recover Dissenters, \o\. ii. p, 144, 445. 
 
AS PRACTISED BY THE ANCIENTS. 425 
 
 such, even to his life's end; since it imprints an indelible 
 character in such a sense as never to need repeating."* 
 Dr. Whitby : " The end of baptism [is] the re- 
 mission of sins, and the effect of it justification, or the 
 absolution of the baptized person from his past sins."t 
 ■ — ■■ — -Bp. Wilson: "I believe that Jesus Christ is the 
 Son of God. It was upon this declaration of the 
 eunuch, that he was baptized by Philip ; and if he was 
 sincere, (which Philip could not tell, nor pretend to 
 know his heart,) his sins were forgiven by that act of 
 Philip, (Acts xxii. 16.). . . .It would be wicked to say, 
 that the eunuch, by believing in Jesus Christ, would 
 have had his sins forgiven, though he had not been bap- 
 tized.":]: Dr. Featley: " BaTrrw, from whence baptize 
 
 is derived, signifieth as well to di/e, as to dip ; and it 
 may be, the Holy Ghost in the word baptism, hath 
 some reference to that signification, because by baptism 
 we change our hue. For as Varrow reporteth of a 
 river in Bceotia, that the water thereof turneth sheep 
 of a dark or dun colour into white; so the sheep of 
 Christ which are washed in the font of baptism, by 
 virtue of Christ's promise, though before they were of 
 never so dark, sad, or dirty colour, yet in their souls 
 
 become white and pure, and, as it were, new dyed.'^^ • 
 
 The reader will here excuse a remark, by way of query. 
 Would then the doctor have treated the Baptists in such 
 an illiberal manner as he has done, if he had, either by 
 dipping or sprinkling, thoroughly imbibed that excellent 
 dye of which he speaks? Or would his calumniating 
 pen have recorded the following sentence?. "The resort 
 of great multitudes of men and women together in the 
 evening, and going naked into rivers there to be dip- 
 ped and plunged, cannot be done without scandal." || 
 What a pity it is, but the doctor had been soundly 
 
 * Discourse of Fundamentals^ p. 48. 
 
 f Note on Acts viii. 37. % Ibid. Acts viii. 41. 
 
 § Dippers Dipt, p. 41, edit. 7. || Ibid. p.39. 
 
4Q6 GROUNDS OF P.T:D0B A PTI S.AI, 
 
 plunged in Varro's Boeotian river ! It might have ren- 
 dered his mind more white, and his language more 
 fair, and then the Baptists would not have been so dirtily 
 handled by him. IVIr. Obadiah Wills expresses himself 
 thus : " Baptism is God's sheep-??2ark, as Mr. Ford 
 calls it, to distinguish those that are of his fold, from 
 such as graze in the wild common of the world."* It 
 is rather dubious, however, whether the excellent mark 
 will prove permanent; for this writer assures us, that 
 " the covenant of grace is not absolute and saving to 
 all that are once within it."t — Mr. Burkitt also, speak- 
 ing of infants under the notion of lambs, calls baptism 
 " Christ's ear-mark, by which Christ's sheep are dis- 
 tinguished from the devil's goats." J Thus happily have 
 these authors provided for the honour of baptism, when 
 the disciples of Christ are considered under the notion 
 of sheep; for it washes their fleeces and marks their 
 ears. § What Paedobaptists may think of such language, 
 from such pens, I cannot pretend to say ; but there is 
 reason to conclude, that were any of the Baptists to talk 
 at this rate, their conduct would be exploded with the 
 keenest ridicule. 
 
 Remarkable is the language of Dr. Scott, when 
 showing the import of Matt, xxviii. 19- Among other 
 things of a similar kind, he says : " By this commission, 
 Christ's ministers are authorized and constituted the 
 legal proxies of the Holy Trinity, in the stead of those 
 blessed persons, to seal the new covenant with the 
 
 * Inf. Bap. Asserted and Vindicated, p. 273, 
 
 f Ibid. p. 199. X I" Mr. Keach's Rector Rectified, p. 98. 
 
 § Mr. Bingham tells us, from Clemens Alexandrinus, that some 
 of the ancient heretics, " when they had baptized men in water, 
 also made a mark upon their ears with fire ; so joining water bap- 
 tism and, as they imagined, baptism by fire together." Orig. Ec- 
 cles. b.x. chap, ii. §3. — The Jacobites and others of the Oriental 
 Christians make, with a hot iron, the figure of a cross on the fore- 
 heads of persons baptized. Vid. Hoornbeekii Miscel. Sue. 1. i. 
 c.xvii. § 16. Now these arc niark? indeed. 
 
AS PRACTISED BY THE ANCIENTS. 427 
 
 baptismal sign to those whom they baptize ; and thereby 
 legally to oblige the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, to 
 perform the promises of it to all those baptized persons 
 who perform the conditions of it.... When once we 
 have struck covenant with him [God] in baptism, we 
 have him fast obliged to us to perform his part of the 
 covenant, whenever we perform ours."* Pro.vies of the 
 Holy Trinity — Legally oblige the Father, Son, and Holy 
 Spirit — God fast obliged to us. Peter tells us of some 
 who spake "great swelling words of vanity;" and it seems 
 as if the doctor had copied after them. — Mr. George 
 Whitetield, remarking on John iii. 5, asks and answers in 
 the following manner : " Does not this verse urge the 
 absolute necessity of water baptism? Yes, where it 
 may be had; but how God will deal with persons un- 
 baptized we cannot tell."']' — Mr. John Wesley, among 
 various other things of a similar kind, says : " If infants 
 are guilty of original sin, in the ordinary way they can- 
 not be saved, unless this be washed away by baptism." J 
 These extracts bring to remembrance an observation of 
 Buxtorf, relating to the opinion of Jewish rabbles about 
 the efficacy of circumcision. " It is almost incredible," 
 says he, " how highly they extol circumcision ; how ar- 
 rogantly and impiously they are frequently boasting of 
 it; while they despise and condemn us, and all that are 
 uncircumcised. Among innumerable other things they 
 say, ' That circumcision is the cause why God hears 
 their prayers, but overlooks and neglects ours, we being 
 uncircumcised.' "§ A pernicious opinion, doubtless de- 
 serving the keenest censure. Nor was it without reason 
 that Mr. Walter Marshall gave the following caution : 
 *' Beware of making an idol of baptism, and putting it 
 in the place of Christ." || 
 
 * Christian Life, vol. iii. p. 236, 238, Edinb. 1754. 
 
 f Works, vol, iv. p. 355, 356. + Preservative, p. 160. 
 
 § Apud Basnagium, Exercit, Hist, Crit. p. 591, 
 
 II Myst. of Sanctificat. direct, xiii. 
 
428 GROUNDS OF P.EDOBA PTISM, 
 
 The necessity of this caution will farther appear, by 
 the following extracts from Mr. Matthew Henry's Trea- 
 tise on Baptism, lately published. When speaking about 
 the ordinance itself, its obligation, and the privileges of 
 baptized persons, he has the following remarkable words : 
 " Such are the privileges which attend the ordinance, 
 that if our Master had bid us do some great thing, w ould 
 we not have done it, rather than come short of them ? 
 much more when he only saith unto us, wash and be 
 clean; wash and be Christians. . . .The gospel contains, 
 not only a doctrine but a covenant, and by baptism we 
 are brought into that covenant .... Baptism wrests the 
 keys of the heart out of the hands of the strong man 
 armed, that the possession may be surrendered to him 
 whose right it is. . . .The water of baptism is designed 
 for our cleansing from the spots and defilements of the 
 flesh.*.... In baptism our names are engraved upon 
 the breast-plate of this great High Priest. . . .This then is 
 the efficacy of baptism ; it is putting the child's name 
 into the gospel grant. . . .We are baptized into Christ's 
 death ; i. e. God doth in that ordinance, seal, confirm, 
 and make over to us, all the benefits of the death of 
 Christ. . . .Infant baptism speaks an hereditary relation 
 to Cod, that comes to us by descent. . . .Baptism seals 
 the promise of God's being to me a God, and that is 
 greatly encouraging ; but infant baptism increases the 
 encouragement, as it assures me of God being the God 
 of my fathers, and the God of my infancy." f 
 
 * Whether Mr. Henry confines the cleansing efficacy of baptis- 
 mal water to the pollution of actual sin, or whether he considers its 
 admirably purifying virtue as extending to innate depravity also, 
 is not very clear. If he includes both idea«, he attributes more to 
 baptism than Ambrose did ; who represents actual sin as taken 
 away by baptism, but hereditary depravity, by washing of the feet. 
 Apud Venem. Hist. Eccles. tom. iv, p. 122. 
 
 t Treatise on Bap. p. 12, 40, 42, 43, 59, 130, 170, 193, 201. 
 Mr. Bradbury says, That your children shall be sanctified " from 
 their mother's womb, \ipon their being received in this onlinance, is 
 
AS PRACTISED BY THE ANCIENTS. 429 
 
 Such are the language and sentiments of Mr. Henry, 
 respecting the utility of baptism ! Upon which I would 
 here observe, that we should not have been much sur- 
 prised, if after all this he had asserted, with the Council 
 of Trent, that baptism " opens to every one of us the 
 gate of heaven, which before, through sin, was shut;* 
 or if he had maintained, with many of the ancient fathers, 
 and with Mr. Dodwell of late, that it is by baptism the 
 soul is rendered immortal. f But as our Brethren often 
 refer us to the ancient rite of circumcision, and to the 
 writings of the Talmud, for instruction about the proper 
 subjects of baptism; so, who can tell, but the opinion 
 of Jewish rabbles, concerning the utility of circumci- 
 sion, may be of use to direct our enquiries in regard to 
 that of baptism ? and then, perhaps, we may have all 
 Mr. Henry says confirmed in a few words. Well, you 
 have their opinion, as expressed by one of them, in the 
 following extract : " So great is the virtue of the precept 
 concerning circumcision, that no circumcised person goes 
 down to hell or to purgatory.";}: — But what would our 
 opposers have said, had a posthumous work of the late 
 Dr. Gill, for instance, appeared, if it had been fraught 
 with such high-flown expressions as those of Mr. Henry, 
 concerning the vast importance and various utility of 
 baptism? They would have spoken, there is reason to 
 think, in some such manner as this : " The doctor 
 might well plead for his beloved immersion with all his 
 learning and zeal, while he imagined that such were its 
 
 making the blessing of the new covenant come by the will of men, 
 and of the will of the flesh, and not of God, But ' be not deceived; 
 God is not mocked.' Do not think so idly of those favours that 
 . come by his Spirit." Duty and Doctrine of Baptism, p. 19. 
 
 * Catechism of the Council of Trent, p, 175. 
 
 f " Many of the primitive fathers in the church explicitly main- 
 tained the natural mortality of the soul, which, according to them, 
 was only exempt from dissolution by baptism." Dr. Blaeklock's 
 Paraclesis, p, 298. 
 
 X Apud Witsium, Miscel. Sac. torn, ii. exercit.xxi. § 9, 
 
430 GROUNDS OF P^DOBAPTISM, 
 
 blessed effects ; for, surely, he never could suppose that 
 a little water was equal to these advantages. It appears, 
 however, that while he bends his force to maintain a 
 darling practice, he grossly intrenches on the honour of 
 divine grace, for which he affected to be thought an 
 able, and a warm defender; that same favourite plung- 
 ing of his being represented by him, as little short of a 
 substitute for electing love, atoning blood, and sanctify- 
 ing influence. For, after having written many a long 
 page against the Arminians, it now appears, that he 
 considered the solemn dipping of a person in water, as 
 putting his name into the gospel grant — as wresting the 
 key of his heart out of the hands of Satan — as put- 
 ting him into the covenant — as writing his name on 
 the breast-plate of our great High Priest — as cleans- 
 ing him from the defilements of the flesh — as making 
 him a Christian — as sealing, confirming, and making 
 over to him, all the benefits of our Lord's death — and, 
 finally, as sealing the promise to him of God being 
 to him a God. Admirable plunging, truly! Who, on 
 such grounds, would not be dipped, aye, and dipped 
 again? Had but the doctor soundly proved all these 
 ipse dixits, we should no longer have objected against 
 immersion, as being either dangerous or indecent; but 
 have cheerfully submitted to it, though in the cold of 
 Russia and in the presence of ten thousand spectators." 
 — Such, I presume, would have been the remarks of our 
 opponents upon it. The reader perceives, however, 
 that it is not Dr. Gill, that it ia not any Baptist, but 
 Mr. Henry, who talks at this wonderful rate. So far, 
 indeed, are the Baptists in general from attributing more 
 efficacy to the divine appointment than their opposers 
 do, that it is manifest, from the preceding quotations, 
 their expectations from it are abundantly less. Nay, 
 the very learned Buddeus, who was a person of immense 
 reading, and well acquainted with their sentiments upon 
 the subject, charges them with greatly depreciating the 
 
AS PRACTISED BY THE ANCIENTS. 431 
 
 ordinance, in point of utility. His language is, " Their 
 principal error consists in considering baptism as a mere 
 s?g?i, or symbol, and not as an efficacious mean^ of ob- 
 taining grace."* 
 
 Though I am far from considering Mr. Henry as 
 avowing the natural consequences of his own positions, 
 and equally far from charging them upon him ; yet I 
 cannot but view the positions themselves as unwarrant- 
 able, extravagant, and of a dangerous tendency. They 
 remind me of the virtues attributed, both by ancients and 
 moderns, to the sign of the cross. Thus, for example, 
 Cyprian : " In this sign of the cross, there is salvation 
 to all who have this mark in their foreheads." t Am- 
 brose: " All prosperity is in one sign of Christ. He 
 that sows in it, shall have a crop of eternal hfe ; he that 
 journies in it, shall arrive at heaven at last."^ — Once 
 more : A Roman Catholic author teaches how the most 
 ignorant persons may become true believers, by making 
 the sign of the cross. "§ — Now^ I feel myself no more dis- 
 posed to believe that baptism is the mean of conveying to 
 infants, or to adults, all those capital blessings of which, 
 among a thousand others, Mr. Henry speaks, than I do 
 to receive this doctrine concerning the sign of the cross; 
 or to adopt the notion of ancient Pagans, when they 
 teach, that the use of salt and water purifies the heart; || 
 or to imagine, with some of the Roman Catholics, that 
 baptized bells have a mighty efficacy to frighten away 
 devils from their vicinity. ^ Yet, calculated as the 
 language and sentiments of Mr. Henry are, to excite in 
 the breasts of ignorant persons a deceitful dependence 
 on the baptismal rite, it is manifest from ecclesiastical 
 records, that things of a similar kind, and often, if pos- 
 
 * Theolog. Dogmat. 1. v, c. i. § 21. 
 
 f In Mr.Polhill's Discourse on Schism, p. 62. % Ibid. 
 
 § In Mr, Clarkson's Pract. Div. of Papists, p. 118 
 
 II See Mr. Weston's Reject, of Christ. Miracles, p. 357. 
 
 ^ In Hist, of Popery, vol. i. p. 255. 
 
432 GROUNDS OF P/EDOBAPTISM, 
 
 sible, more grossly erroneous, have been asserted by 
 Paedobaptists in every age, from the time of Cyprian 
 to the present day. And, indeed, when it is con- 
 sidered, that an unwarrantable opinion about the ne- 
 cessity of baptism, seems to have laid the foundation 
 for baptizing infants, it is no wonder that Paedo- 
 baptists, both ancient and modern, should frequently 
 represent that practice as vastly important. To a dan- 
 gerous mistake of this kind, the espousers of infant bap- 
 tism are apparently more liable, than such as baptize 
 those only who make a profession of repentance and 
 faith ; for no Baptist minister, without notoriously con- 
 fronting the grand principle on which he proceeds in 
 administering the solemn rite, can ever teach that baptism 
 is a mean of producing those great effects which ]\lr. 
 Henry and a thousand others have mentioned. To 
 maintain, with a resolute perseverance, that the laws of 
 Christ relating to a positive institution should be strictly 
 observed, is one thing; to insist upon it, or to insinuate 
 that baptism, to whomsoever administered, is the medium 
 of procuring those blessings to which we advert, is an- 
 other. The former is our indispensable duty; the latter 
 is pregnant with dangerous consequences. 
 
 Reflect. IV. That baptism is of real importance to 
 the church of Christ, and that believers, in a cheerful 
 submission to it, have reason to expect a blessing, we 
 firmly maintain; but that infant baptism is big with 
 much greater advantages than adult baptism, as ]\Ir. 
 Henry insists, we cannot admit. His words are as fol- 
 low : " That which shakes many in the doctrine of infant 
 baptism, is the uselessness (as they apprehend) of the 
 administration, and the mighty advantages which they 
 fancy in adult baptism. But before they conclude thus, 
 they would do well to answer Dr. Ford's proof of this 
 truth. That there is ijiuch more advantage to be made, 
 in order to sanctitication, consolation, and several other 
 ways, of the doctrine and practice of infant baptism, 
 
AS PRACTISED BY THE A XCI ENI'S. 433 
 
 than of that doctrine and practice, which Hmits bap- 
 tism to personal profession at years of discretion."* — 
 Though there are few assertions in this respectable au- 
 thor's treatise, that have less pretence to evidence from 
 scripture than the passage here produced, yet he speaks 
 with an uncommon degree of assurance. This reminds 
 me of what I have somewhere seen remarked concern- 
 ing Bellarmine. That zealous cardinal, it has been ob- 
 served, when he had the least appearance of reason, or 
 of scripture, for what he was going to say, commonly 
 assumed the most confident airs, and was pretty sure to 
 introduce it with a proculdubio.^ Now, though we can- 
 not accept of Mr. Henry's challenge to answer Dr. 
 Ford's arguments in defence of this bold position, because 
 we do not know what they vvere; yet we will suggest a 
 few thoughts against the position itself, and leave the 
 reader to judge. 
 
 What then can be the reason of infant baptism 
 being much more advantageous than adult baptism ? 
 Mr. Baxter himself shall answer for us, by giving a 
 general negative to the bold assertion. " LJpon my 
 first serious study,'' says he, " I presently discerned, that 
 infants vvere not capable of every benefit by baptism, as 
 are the aged.";]] — To be more particular. Is infant bap- 
 tism of greater advantage than that of adults, because it 
 is more solemn ? If we appeal to Dr. Wall, his answer 
 will be; '' The baptism of an infant cannot have all the 
 solemnity, which that of an adult person may have. The 
 previous fasting and prayer, the penitential confessions, 
 the zeal and humility and deep affection of the receiver, 
 may be visible there, which cannot be in the case of an 
 infant."^ — Is it because infants are better capable of 
 reilectino; on the nature, the design, the oblisation of 
 baptism, than adults; or because they are more proper 
 
 * Treatise on Baptisnij p, 179. 
 
 \ Antisozzo, p. 545. % Plain Sciip. Proof, Pref. p. 2. 
 
 § Defence of Hist. Inf. Bap, p. 40i. 
 VOL, I. 2 F 
 
434 GROUNDS OF P^DOBAPTISM, 
 
 subjects of ministerial exhortation ? None will pretend 
 the one or the other. — Peter speaks of baptized per- 
 sons having the answer of a good conscience toicards God ; 
 and Mr. T. Bradbury tells us, " that the benefit which 
 arises from this ordinance is owing to the answer of a 
 good conscience." * Is it, then, because infants have a 
 better conscience, and make a better ansiver, than be- 
 lieving adults? That cannot be; for as the minds of 
 mere infants are not capable of comparing their own 
 conduct with the rule of duty, they have, properly 
 speaking, no conscience at all. Our Brethren, indeed, 
 frequently speak of covena?iting with God in baptism : 
 but mere infants are totally ignorant; and Mr. Baxter 
 tells us, " It is a known rule in law, that consensus non 
 est ignorantisy'\ The language of common sense, as 
 well as of casuists, is; " That infants are not capable of 
 contracting,":}: either with God or man. — Is it because 
 the conscience of a person is more tenderly affected, by 
 considering what was done for him, while incapable of 
 moral agency; than by reflecting on what was done by 
 him and upon him, with the full consent of his will? To 
 suppose any such thing insults the understanding and 
 feelings of mankind. For, as Bp. Sanderson observes, 
 " In personal obligations, no man is bound without his 
 own consent; — and a spiritual obligation, which is in the 
 conscience, must necessarily be personal, as every one's 
 conscience is his own; and such an obligation cannot 
 pass into another person. "§ Children, when arrived at 
 years of discretion, may be told, that they covenanted 
 
 * Duty and Doct. of Bap. p. 9. 
 
 f Disputat. of Right to Sac. p. 9. 
 
 X Dr. Ames, De Conscientia, 1. v.c, xlii. § 2. Li mborch informs 
 us, that Peter Auterius, an eminent minister among the Albigenses, 
 was accused and condemned by the Court of Inquisition, for saying, 
 among other things, " That water baptism performed by the church 
 is of no use to children, because they do not consent} nay, they 
 weep." Hist. Inquisit. 1. i. c. viii. p. 31. 
 
 § De Juramenti Obligatione, prselect. iv, §9. 
 
AS PRACTISED BY THE ANCIENTS. 435 
 
 with God when baptized in their infancy; but as en- 
 gaging to be the Lord's is a personal thing, and as they 
 could have no idea of such transaction at the time of 
 their baptism, so they cannot have any recollection of 
 it: consequently, their consciences cannot feel an obli- 
 gation in that respect, as those of baptized believers 
 may and ought. — The writer of these pages takes it for 
 granted, that the register of a certain parish bears testi- 
 mony to his having had something done for him in his 
 infancy, called baptism, attended with all the formalities 
 of proxies, of thanksgivings for his being then regenerated, 
 and so on; but he knows nothing about it, except by re- 
 port. Nay, though he had no doubts concerning the va- 
 lidity of his infant sprinkling till he was grown up; and, 
 through divine goodness, he had abiding impressions upon 
 his mind, relating to his best interests, from the earliest 
 period of hi '. present remembrance ; yet he does not re- 
 collect a single instance of his conscience feeling itself 
 under any obligation, in virtue of those transactions. He 
 considers it as very strange, and quite unprecedented in 
 the sacred volume, that any one should have a positive 
 rite administered to him according to divine appointment 
 — a rite which must not be repeated ; and that the reci- 
 pient, through the whole of his life, should entirely de- 
 pend upon testimony for all that he knows about the 
 fact. This, it is plain, was not the case of those infants 
 that were circumcised. They had no occasion to enquire 
 of a parent, of any senior, or of a register, whether the 
 sign of circumcision had passed upon them; because, 
 from the earliest dawn of reason, to the latest period of 
 life, the unequivocal mark was retained in their own 
 persons. 
 
 Farther: It is of importance here to observe, what 
 our opposers themselves, I think, will allow^ That the 
 proper standard of usefulness, in regard to any positive 
 rite, is, not our own fancies, or feelings, or reason, but 
 divine revelation; and that even an unscriptural cere- 
 
436 GROUNDS OF P^DOBAPTISM, 
 
 mony may, through the kindness of Providence, become 
 the occasion of spiritual advantage to one or another. 
 For, without intending an invidious comparison, and 
 merely for the sake of argument, it may be asked ; 
 Whether it can be asserted with prudence, that none of 
 the Papal superstitions were ever improved by Provi- 
 dence, as occasions of lasting spiritual benefit to any 
 one? But yet, as Mr. Stoddart observes, " If men act 
 according to their own humours and fancies, and do not 
 keep in the way of obedience, it is presumption to expect 
 God's blessing. ' In vain do they worship me, teach- 
 ing for doctrines the commandments of men.'"* I will 
 add, in the words of that great man, Mr. Jonath. Ed- 
 wards; " Though we are to eye the providence of God, 
 and not disregard his works, yet to interpret them to a 
 sense, or apply them to a use, inconsistent with the scope 
 of the word of God, is a misconstruction and misappli- 
 cation of them. God has not given us his providence, 
 but his word, to be our governing rule. God is sove- 
 reign in his dispensations of providence. He bestowed 
 the blessing on Jacob, even when he had a lie in his 
 mouth: he was pleased to meet with Solomon, and 
 make known himself to him, and bless him in an extra- 
 ordinary manner, while he was worshipping in a high 
 place: he met with Saul, when in a course of violent 
 opposition to him, and out of the way of his duty to the 
 highest degree, going to Damascus to persecute Christ; 
 and even then bestowed the greatest blessing upon him, 
 that perhaps ever was bestowed on a mere man. The 
 conduct of divine Providence, with its reasons, is too 
 little understood by us, to be improved as our rule.''^ 
 Candid and cautious is the following declaration of Dr. 
 Owen: " I do not know how far God may accept of 
 churches in a very corrupt state, and of worship much 
 
 * In Mr, Jonath. Edward's Enciuiry into Qualif. for Commu- 
 nion, p. 117. 
 
 f Ut supra^ p. 131. 
 
AS PPACTISED BY THK AXCIENTS. 43? 
 
 depraved, until they have new means for their reform- 
 ation. Nor will I make any judgment of persons, as 
 unto their eternal condition, who walk in churches so 
 corrupted, and in the performance of worship so de- 
 praved."* Farther: Were the dupes of Papal superstition, 
 or our Brethren of the English Establishment asked, what 
 advantage they have, in comparison with us Dissenters; 
 they, very likely, would answer with Paul in another case, 
 " Much, every way." They would also, no doubt, men- 
 t^'n a variety of particulars, to prove that their forms and 
 rites are far better adapted to exercise devotional dispo- 
 sitions; and so to promote sanctification, consolation, 
 and so on, than those of Dissenters. But would Mr. 
 Henry have considered such pretences as any kind of 
 proof, that those forms and ceremonies are warranted of 
 God? No, he would have been ready to say, " Show 
 us your authority for them in our only rule of religious 
 worship, and then tell us how useful they are." 
 
 These things being observed, we add; If infant bap- 
 tism be so very useful, the apostles must have known it 
 as well, and have esteemed it as highly, as our author 
 himself. But have they acted as if they thus knew and 
 esteemed it? Their immortal writino;s make a consider- 
 able volume ; and in that heavenly volume they have 
 recorded their own faith and their own practice. Con- 
 scious of being amanuenses to the Spirit of wisdom, they 
 intended that sacred book should be considered as a 
 body of doctrine and a complete code of law for the 
 church in every succeeding age. This being the case, it is 
 quite natural to think, that infant baptism should make 
 a capital figure in such a system of theological doctrine, 
 of spiritual privilege, and of religious duty, if they had 
 known and viewed it in that very advantageous point of 
 light which Mr. Henry did. That they expressly men- 
 tion the baptism of adults, is allowed by all ; and that 
 their baptism is represented in the New Testament as 
 * Enquiry into the Orig. of Churches, p. 168. 
 
438 GROUMDS OF P^DOBAPTISM, 
 
 instructive and useful, is denied by few: consequently, 
 if the baptism of infants be much more adapted to pro- 
 mote sanctification and consolation than the baptism of 
 those who profess faith, it is but reasonable to suppose, 
 that the apostles would insist upon it in a degree propor- 
 tional to its greater importance. But is it a fact, that 
 Pasdobaptism itself, and the benefits resulting from it, 
 make such a conspicuous figure in the apostolic writ- 
 ings? That the apostles mention baptism, and inform us 
 of great numbers who were baptized, are facts ; bift 
 where do they mention infant baptism ? That they men- 
 tion the ordinance as containing matter of instruction, 
 motives to holiness, and grounds of exhortation, in refer- 
 ence to baptized believers, is a fact;*' but Mhere is Pasdo- 
 baptism represented by them, as containing any of these 
 things, with regard to children when they grow up? 
 That they mention baptism as affording grounds of re- 
 proof to disorderly professors, is a fact ;f but where do 
 they mention P^edobaptism as ministering reproof to 
 Christian parents for neglecting the education of their 
 children? That they exhort and caution believing pa- 
 rents respecting their children, is a fact; but where do 
 they fetch their motives from infant baptism? That 
 they exhort and charge children to be dutiful to their 
 parents, is also a fact; but where do they remind chil- 
 dren of their filial obligations being enforced by having 
 been baptized in their infancy, or exhort them on that 
 ground? Yet, had Paedobaptism been then practised, 
 and had it been attended with such vast advantages as 
 our author pretends, it might, perhaps, have been as 
 pertinently urged as the latter pari of the fifth command, 
 on account of its being more precisely agreeable to the 
 gospel dispensation.;]; Mr. Henry, it is })lain, did not 
 fail to exhort both parents and children on the ground 
 
 * Rom. vi. 1— 5 ; 1 Cor. i. l'^— 16, and xv. 29 ; Col. ii. 12 ; 
 iPet. iii. 21. 
 
 ■\ 1 Cor. i. 12—16. X St^e Ej)h, vi. I, 2, 3. 
 
AS PRACTISED BY THE ANCIENTS. 439 
 
 of infant baptism. No, he treats it as a capital source 
 of motives, by which to enforce the performance of both 
 parental and fiHal duty, though the apostles have not 
 said a word about it in any of their exhortations. Can- 
 dour forbids my supposing, that he thought himself, 
 either more wise in the choice of his arguments, or more 
 zealous in the application of them to practical purposes, 
 than those ambassadors of Christ: but yet every one 
 ip^y see a remarkable difference between their conduct 
 and his, in this respect; which difference must have had 
 an adequate cause. I cannot help thinking, therefore, 
 that either the inspired writers knew nothing at all of 
 Psedobaptism, or had a very mean opinion of it; for 
 it seems unaccountably strange, that they should all 
 have approved the practice, and yet all agree, on such 
 a variety of occasions, in saying nothing about it. But 
 supposing it was practised by them, and that they con- 
 sidered it as much more advantageous than the baptism 
 of believers, their conduct is yet more amazingly strange; 
 because they expressly apply the latter to practical 
 purposes, though entirely silent about the former: — an 
 example this, which our opponents are not inclined to 
 imitate. Peruse the writings of modern Paidobaptists, 
 and you plainly perceive the advantages resulting from 
 baptism, almost entirely confined to that of infants. Con- 
 sult the apostolic records, and you find them all connected 
 with the baptism of adults. We may now venture 
 an appeal to the reader, whether he would not sus- 
 pect any unknown author of being a Baptist, were he 
 to find him treating on all the various topics lately enu- 
 merated, and yet perceive that he is quite silent about 
 infant baptism? 
 
 The following passages from learned Pasdobaptists, 
 mutatis mutandis, will here apply in all their force. 
 Anonymous: "The signing one's self with the cross 
 hath neither command nor example in scripture, nor 
 
440 GROUNDS OF P^:D0B A PTISM, 
 
 any promise of any special grace or benefit, to be there- 
 upon conferred; therefore, there is no reason to expect 
 any such extraordinary virtues or assistance from using 
 
 the same."* Mr. ChiUingworth : "Give me leave 
 
 to wonder — that so great a part of the New Testament 
 should be employed about antichrist, and so little, and 
 
 indeed none at all, about the vicar of Christ."'!' ■ 
 
 Dr. Cave: "The places [of scripture] usually alleged 
 to make good their claim [of Papal supremacy,] av,? 
 so far-fetched, and so little to their purpose, that 
 they contain alone a strong presumption against 
 them ; and their own authors sometimes speak of them 
 with great distrust. Here, if any where, sure, we 
 may safely argue, without daring to prescribe rules 
 to the most High, That in a matter of so great mo- 
 ment, had it been designed, it would have been most 
 
 explicitly delivered, and solemnly inculcated.":}: 
 
 Bishop Stratford: " Were it so good and profitable 
 to invoke the saints, as the Council of Trent teaches, 
 it is strange that so great a lover of mankind as St. 
 Paul, when he so frequently commands us to pray, and 
 hath left us so many directions concerning prayer, 
 should wholly forget to teach us this lesson. Can it be 
 supposed a worship so pleasing to God, when Crod hath 
 not given us the least intimation in his word that it is 
 so? For that it hath no foundation in scripture we may 
 be assured, when so great a man as cardinal Perron 
 acknowledges, that neither precept nor example is there 
 to be found for it; and when other learned doctors of 
 that church, not only confess the same, but also give us 
 several reasons why no mention is made of it, either in 
 
 the Old or New Testament." § Turrettinus : "The 
 
 invocation of saints has neither precept, nor promise, 
 
 * History of Popery, vcl. i. p. 110. 
 
 t Relig. of Protest, p. 450. 
 
 J Preservative against Popery, title i. p. 137. 
 
 § Preserv. against Popery, title i. p.^8. 
 
AS PRACTISEP BY THE ANCIENTS. 441 
 
 nor example in scripture on which it rests ; and, there- 
 fore, it is no other than vicious and condemnable will- 
 M'orship. The invocation of God is abundantly urged ; but 
 
 the invocation of creatures is no where mentioned."* 
 
 Chemnitius: " There is not in all the holy scripture 
 any passage which teaches the invocation of saints; no 
 command is found that requires departed saints to be 
 invoked; there is no promise that such invocation 
 shall be acceptable to God, and efficacious; that is, 
 heard, so as to obtain grace and assistance; there 
 is no example in scripture of departed saints being in- 
 voked by godly persons ; there is no threatening in 
 scripture, nor any example of punishment, against them 
 
 who do not invocate the saints." f -Once more: 
 
 Archbishop Tillotson says : " Does either our Saviour, 
 or his apostles, in all their particular directions con- 
 cerning prayer — give the least intimation of praying 
 to the virgin Mary, or making use of her mediation? 
 And can any man believe, that if this had been the 
 practice of the church from the beginning, our Saviour 
 and his apostles would have been so silent about so con- 
 siderable a part of religion ? insomuch that, in all the 
 epistles of the apostles, I do not remember that her 
 name is so much as once mentioned. And yet the 
 worship of her is at this day, in the church of Rome, 
 and hath been so for several ages, a main part of their 
 public worship; — in w'hich it is usual with them to say 
 ten Ave Mmies for one Pater Noster ; that is, for one 
 prayer they make to almighty God, they make ten ad- 
 dresses to the blessed virgin .... He that considers this, 
 and had never seen the Bible, would be apt to think, 
 that there had been more said concerning her in scrip- 
 ture, than either concerning God or our blessed Sa- 
 viour; and that the New Testament were full from one 
 end to the other of precepts and exhortations to the 
 
 * Institut. loCi xi. quaest. vii. § Vi. 
 t Exam. Concil Trident;, p. 611. 
 VOL. I. 2 G 
 
44^ GROUNDS OF P^DOBAPTISM, • 
 
 worshipping of her: and yet, when all is done, I chal- 
 lenge any man to show me so much as one sentence 
 in the whole Bible that sounds that way; and there is 
 as little in the Christian writers of the first three hundred 
 years."* — Ten addresses to the virgin Mary for one to 
 the divine Majesty, says our learned author. So we may 
 say, ten, or rather a hundred infants are sprinkled in 
 these kingdoms, for one person that is immersed on a pro- 
 fession of faith; and, to our great discouragement, Mr. 
 Henry tells us, that when an adult is baptized on such 
 profession, it is far from being so advantageous to him, 
 as pouring or sprinkling is to an infant. Now, " he that 
 considers this, and had never seen the Bible, would be 
 apt to think, that there had been more said concerning 
 [Pa?dobapti5m] in scripture, than [about the baptism of 
 adults;] and that the New Testament was full, from 
 one end to the other, of precepts and exhortations to 
 the [practice of infant sprinkling:] and yet when all 
 is done, I challenge any man to show me one sentence 
 in the whole Bible," by which it is either enjoined 
 or exemplified. How much, alas, is our complaint 
 like that of Tillotson, " Ten Ave Maries for one Pater 
 Noster ! " 
 
 Once more: Mr. Peirce and Dr. Priestley tell us, 
 that various and great advantages would probably attend 
 the revival of infant communion among us, and labour 
 to restore the practice in this country from that con- 
 sideration. Were Mr. Henry now living, we might, 
 therefore, venture to return his challenge, by saying; 
 Let him answer the arguments produced by Mr. Peirce 
 in favour of that hypothesis, without subverting his own 
 for the utility of infant baptism : for it is plain to us, 
 that most of the principles on which he proceeds to 
 prove the benefits of P^cdobaptism, would equally apply 
 to infant communion. — In a word; either the baptism of 
 infants has been sadly misrepresented by the generality 
 * Preservative against Popery, title iii. p. ^33. 
 
AS PRACTISED BY THE ANCIENTS. 443 
 
 of those who have pleaded for it, since the time of 
 Cyprian; or it is calculated to do immense mischief to 
 the souls of men, by leading persons to imagine, that 
 they were born again, cleansed from sin, interested in 
 all the benefits of our Lord's death, and made heirs of 
 heaven, by what was done for them while destitute of 
 reason — done for them, in many cases, by ungodly 
 priests and profligate sponsors. For, as Dr. Owen has 
 well observed, the father of lies himself could not easily 
 iVdve invented a more deadly poison for the souls of sin- 
 ners ; as they are taught, by these unscriptural dogmas, 
 to rest satisfied with a supposed regeneration by their 
 baptism.* 
 
 * Theologoumena, 1. vi. c. v. § 3. Brem. 
 
 END OF VOL. I. 
 
 T. Bensley, Printer, 9, Crane-court, Fleet-street. 
 
J