)>. 
 
 iii 
 
 _-IJ 
 
/ ,.'■ 
 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 # 
 
 £ 
 
 
 t 
 
 ♦$ 
 
 .5 
 
 
 \ 
 
 # 
 
 IE 
 3 
 
 
 X 
 
 ^ 
 
 (U 
 
 is 
 
 
 
 '^^ 
 
 Ic 
 
 
 
 ^ H» 
 
 Qu 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 ^v . 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 M- 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 0) 
 
 c 
 
 
 
 ; i 
 
 
 ** o 
 
 bO 
 
 
 
 •** S 
 
 < 
 
 1 
 
 
 1^ g 
 
 "55 
 
 3 
 
 ■ 1 
 
 
 a s 
 
 1 
 
 CO 
 
 'vision 
 
 ction 
 
 umber 
 
 
 ^ Pk 
 
 >J 
 
 q ^ ^ 
 
 
 ■v^ 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 Ck 
 
 2- 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 -o 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 c 
 
 
 
 >* 
 
 a> 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 #) 
 
 d: 
 
 
 1 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 SCO 
 

 ^a^TV^^ par, 
 
 c^ 
 
 
^^n^/r'fyrU^ 
 
 
THE ^'Jy^)Y6^'^2Q 
 
 BAPTISM 
 
 ♦ OF 
 
 INFANTS, 
 
 REASONABLE SERVICE; 
 
 Founded upon Scripture, and undoubted 
 Apostolic Tradition: 
 
 In which 
 
 Its Moral Purposes and Use in Religion 
 are (hewn. 
 
 Suffer the little Children to come unto met and forbid them not ; 
 for of fuch is the kingdom of God. Mark x. 14, 
 
 — ^^——i— —————— li—*———^— ——— I —■———% 
 
 The Second Edition. 
 
 /^ 
 
 mgmm 
 
 '/ux.hc4^c<A 
 
 /k./oc<yqooc{j — 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 Printed and Sold by J. Waugh, at the Turk's Head 
 in Lombard-Street ; and A, TozER, in Exeter. 
 
 "MDCCUll. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 H E undue and fuperftitioUi 
 ftrefs, which has been laid up* 
 on Baptising Infants, by 
 fome ill inrtrudled Ghriftians ; 
 has, doubtlefs, been the chief 
 occafion of its being treated 
 with fuch iinreafonable oppofition by others. 
 
 When we hear Aiiftin^ Fulgentius^ Gregory 
 ■ — and many others of great name, arnongfl: 
 thofe called the holy fathers^ with folemnity 
 pronouncing—^** T^bat Injants can have no faU 
 ** vation^ if they die without BaptifmJ*-^^'' That 
 *' we miijt hold for certain a?2d undoubted that 
 they are ignis eterni fempiterno fupplicio 
 pun lend i to be tormented with the everlajiing 
 *' punijhnent of eternal fire r — '^ And^ intermi- 
 nabilia gehennae fuftinere fupplicia, ubi dia- 
 bolus, &c. That they fufer the endlefs tor-^ 
 ments of hell^ where the devil with his angeh 
 
 u 
 
 (C 
 
 cc 
 
 «c 
 
 A 2 
 
 •« 
 
 are 
 
iv PREFACE. 
 
 " are to bum for evermore T — Again, " A^ 
 ^^ the u N B A F Ti s E D Inf AN T cannot go into 
 <* thekmgdom of heaven, you mufl acknowledge 
 *' he will be in everlafiing fire!' — Finally, *' If 
 *^ Infants have not had the facr anient of falva- 
 " tion (i.e. B^i^Xiivn) for their deliverance fi'om 
 " original fin, thef pafs into perpetual torments!' 
 — When we hear, I fay, this ceremony of 
 baptifmalwater fexalted into an affair of fuch 
 infinite importance, the mind is naturally 
 (hocked : it rifes with indignation againft the 
 monftrous abfurdity and even impiety of fuch 
 tenets; and (which is but too common to hu- 
 man nature) the tranfports of zeal hurry it 
 into the oppofite extreme : to depreciate and 
 run down, a rite (o unduely magnified : and, 
 whilft pulling it from the high rank it had 
 ufurped in religion, to caft it quite out 3 and 
 to allow it no ufe nor place in it at all. 
 
 The middle-way betwixt thefe two extremes^ 
 is that which is here chofen. It can with no 
 reafon be imagined, that a God of infinite 
 mercy, who hateth nothing that he hath made^ 
 will permit the having, or the wanting, the 
 ceremony of baptifrnaUwater , to determine 
 finally and irrevocably the everlafting ftate of 
 a dying Infant : or, that for the negled: of 
 this ceremonial wafing, (which yet the In- 
 fant could in no wife help) it iliall be doomed 
 to everlafting torments amongft devils and 
 apoftate fpirits, This be far from the almighty 
 Judge] 
 
 The 
 
PREFACE. V 
 
 The Baptifm that faves (a) (or, that at all 
 profits any, whether Infant or adult) is not 
 the external waping^ but the anfwer of a good 
 confcience -, or the pious and devout fentiments 
 with which that ceremony is performed. In 
 perfons adti/t 3 the religious and fincere affec- 
 tions with which they confecrate them/elves to 
 God : and in Infants 5 the unfeigned piety 5 
 the gratitude and the faith, with which their 
 parents devote them to him. The meer cere- 
 mony of applying water is comparatively of 
 little moment. 
 
 But, that the Baptifm of Infants is a rite 
 ordained of God, and a rite of great advantage 
 and ufe in Religion, the following treatife, it 
 is hoped, will (how. In which it isconfider- 
 ed, rather as a {landing token^ than as a proper 
 injlriiment or mean^ of God's mercy and grace 
 to us ; a perpetual memorial inftituted in the 
 church, figntfying to believers God*s readinefs 
 to pour down his fpirit upon them, and his 
 hleffing upon their offspring ; not properly a 
 canal (as fome affed to talk) by which thefe 
 are conveyed to us. 
 
 The argument from antiquity or apojlolic 
 tradition^ has not, perhaps, been often pre- 
 fented to the public, in fo contracted and clear 
 2l light as its importance deferves. It is, prin- 
 cipally for the fake of this ; and to reprefent 
 the moral purpofes of Infant-Baptifm, that the 
 enfuing trail appears. 
 
 If 
 
 (a) i Pet. iii. 2i. 
 
vi P R E F A C E.^ 
 
 If fentiment?, on the future flate of ^'7;;^ 
 Infants, may here be thought by fome, too 
 freely expreffed ; they may, — it is hoped, bs 
 admitted as conjeBures at leaft, upon an inte- 
 reding fubjedl ; upon which however the Bap- 
 tifm of Infants has no effential dependance^ 
 that refting fecurely upon other confiderations, 
 whatever force be allow^ed to thefe. 
 
 The author delights not in controverfie, nor 
 intends to engage in any, on the fubjed of 
 thefe papers; having feldom feen good arifing 
 from altercations of this kind. But the light 
 in which the argument is here fet having been 
 approved by fevera), to whofe judgment he 
 owes great defference, it is here prefented to 
 publick view. As far as it fpeaks truths may 
 the God of truth fucceed it ! To his tavour 
 it is commended : and to the attentive perufal 
 of the candid and fmcere. 
 
 THE 
 
THE 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 THE INTRODUCTION, Being a 
 general View of the feveral Bifpenfations of 
 Religion with Refpe5l to Infants. pag. i. 
 
 ARGUMENT I. Under feveral Propofiiions. 
 
 pag. 15. 
 
 ARGUMENT II. From the Abrahamic 
 Covenant and Seed. P^g* ^ 7* 
 
 ARG U M ENT III. From the Comnniflion. 
 Mat, xxviii. 19. pag. 20. 
 
 ARGUMENT IV. Evident and clear Con- 
 fequences from feveral. other Faff ages of Scripture* 
 
 pag. 24. 
 
 ARGUMENT V. From Apoftolic Tradition. 
 
 pag. 32. 
 
 The Religious and Moral Furpofes of Infant- Baptifm, 
 
 pag. 50. 
 
 THE 
 
Publijhed by the fame Author, 
 
 DIPPING 
 
 Not the only 
 
 Scriptural and Primitive Manner 
 
 o F 
 
 BAPTIZING: 
 
 And fuppofing it were, yet a ftria adherence to it not 
 obligatory on us. 
 
 In the Prefs and fpeedily will be publijhed^ 
 A 
 
 DEFENCE 
 
 O F 
 Infant Baptifm, in point of Antiquity ; 
 
 Againft the 
 Exceptions of Dr. John Gill, and others. 
 
THE 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 A general view of the federal difpen-^ 
 fations of 7^eligion with refpeSl to 
 Infants. 
 
 ROM the cxa'cleft obfcrvatlon?, 
 it appears, that of thofe who 
 arc born into the world, fcarce 
 a third part attain to tht^ age 
 even of one year. Thoujands of 
 Infants every day languilli 
 under grievous diitempers ; are 
 tortured, convulfed, and in piteous agonies give 
 up the ghoft. — This, at firfl:, feems a very firange 
 difpenfation *, hardly reconcileable with the wif- 
 dom and juftice^ much lefs with the goodnefs and 
 mercy o^ God, It is fcarce polTible not to afl< — • 
 how comes it to pafs, that millions of bar ni lefs 
 babes, in whofe frame is difplayed fuch infinite 
 fkill ; who are formed with capacities of fuch exalt- 
 ed attainments, both intelieclual and moral ; with 
 capacities of an happinefs ever- growings and ever^ 
 lajiing, in the knowledge,, imitation, and. enjoy. 
 
 B menc 
 
2 The IntrodiiBion, 
 
 merit of God. — ^How comes it to pafs, that they 
 only thus glance upon the coafts of life ; are jult 
 brought into the world with exquifite pains, moan 
 away a few weeks of mifery and difeafe upon it, 
 and then in terrible convulfions, fall viflims to 
 death! What light has God caft upon this dark 
 jcene of his providence ? Has he left it quite cover- 
 ed with Impenetrable clouds ? And, where the in- 
 tereft and comfort of fo great a part of his intelU- 
 gent creation are deeply concerned, has he given no 
 intimations which may be a folid ground of hope? 
 It can never be fuppofed. 
 
 There ;xxt four difpenfations^ under which Reli- 
 gion has principally fubfifted fince the fall^ viz. 
 the difpenfation of the Light of Nature^ the jlbra- 
 hamic^ the Mofaic^ and the Chrifiian. Now, each 
 of thefe Q.-^^^ fome light upon this awful fcene, and 
 ^'^mxvix^tx^ fome hope as to fuffering and dying Infants, 
 Let it then be enquired 
 
 First. What judgment doth Reason, or the 
 Light of NatUYe^ pafs upon their cafe ? There are 
 but two ways, in which Reason can account for 
 this proceed ure of providence, viz, by fuppofing 
 thefc fuffering 7;z/^7J/j to have exiiled \n fome former 
 ilate -, or that they will exift \n fome future. 
 
 Some have imagined, that they have edified and 
 mifhchdved' in a former ilate of being •, and that 
 their fufferings in the prefent^ are a corre6lion or 
 punifiiment for evils done there. This the Platonic 
 philofophy taught: and it feems to have been an 
 opii.ion not uncommon amongft thtjews^ in the 
 days of our Saviour. Concerning the man that 
 was born blind, (he difciples, therefore, afk him — 
 r,2aficr who did Jin -, this man^ or his parents ; that he 
 u.as torn blnid (a) : But this praexiflence of Infants, 
 being a matter of ahfolute uncertainty \ unfupported 
 by any foiid or probable grounds \ Reason de- 
 rives 
 (a) John ix. 2. 
 
The IntroduBlon. 3 
 
 rives its principal (iitisfadion, from the fuppofition 
 of their exigence in a fiau after death, ^here^ the 
 Almighty Rector can give them pleafures and 
 entertainments abundantly to counterbalance the 
 fufferings of their prefent (late. 
 
 This is what Reason, I fay, furmifes and hopes% 
 but cannot certainly conclude. It wants fome Re- 
 velation, fome promije from God, to give fla- 
 bility and vigor to thefe 'wavering hopes. And un- 
 der all the cof Aids and pains which he ^t^tis his 
 dying child fufFer, the pious parent has nothing, 
 from the Light of Nature^ whereon to trufl, but the 
 uncovenanted goodnefs and mercy ofGoD. Now, 
 were it not, in thefe circumftances, a mofl defireabk 
 things that God would give us fome revelation or 
 promife concerning our Infants ? Some covenant to 
 afllire us, that they are the objects of his favour 
 and peculiar regard •, and that as they fuffer and 
 die in this world, fo they fhall be raifed again to 
 life and happinefs in the other ? Was not, I afk, 
 {omti\JLc\i covenant^ revelation^ or promife, concern- 
 ing our Infants, what nature greatly wanted, 
 wiihed for and defired ; and, if God fhould be 
 pleafed to grant it, ought it not to be highly valu- 
 ed^ and moll thankfully received (b) ? Behold ! 
 B 2 Se. 
 
 (b) There is a very rational and juji fenfe, in which Go^ 
 may be faid to efiablijh his co^vsnant ^coith Infants. For the 
 icripture exprefsly Jais, Gen, ix. 9, 10, 12, 13. that he efici- 
 hlijhed hii co'vetiant, even, <with the cattle and the fon.vl ^ io- 
 kmnly engaging no more to dro^jjn them by a food. Is there 
 any thing y?^^^^^, then, cr unreajonahle, in God's eftablifiiing 
 his covenant <with Infants ; folemniy engaging to pour his f fir it 
 and blejjing on them ? Or, that the evils they fufFer in confe- 
 quence oi Adam's fm, fliall be removed and amply recompenled 
 through the righteoafnefs of Chriji ? Moll: fureiy not at a!I. — • 
 
 Bat, if there is a rational 2in6 jufi fenfe, jn which God may 
 ejlahlijh his conjenant 'with Infants ; there is the higheil rea- 
 Ion to prefume that he adualiy has done it, and that they ar£ 
 
 taken 
 
4 ^be IntroduSiion. 
 
 Secondly, nis w^ fee done, in the Abra- 
 HAMic difpenfation. For as God's covenant- 
 tranfadions with Abraham were the foundation, or 
 charter of \\\t churchy which, in after ages, he in- 
 tended to gather, and to ere6l amor.gil men : fo- 
 he, here, gives pious parents an exprefs frcniife and 
 revelaticn concerning their Infants. He pro- 
 mi fes to be A God to Abraham^ audio his feed •, and 
 takes his Infants into covenant, together with 
 himftlf\ commanding the Token of the coven cM to 
 be folemnly affixed to them^ as a Randing teflimony 
 or Jjgn that Jehovah was their God. Stt Gen. 
 xvii. 7, 8, lo, II, 12, 14. God faid, / "izill 
 'efiahliff} my covenant between me^ and thee (Abraham) 
 end thy feed after thee^ in their generations i to he a 
 God to thee., and to thy feed after thee — and I will be 
 THEIR God.. This is my covenant which ye fJoall 
 keep — every man-child among yoUy that is eight days 
 eld., fhall be circumcifed. The umircumcifed man-child 
 ihall be cut off from his people. Circumciiion then, 
 by God's cxprefs command, was afiixed to Abra- 
 ^vw's Infants, and to /^^ Infants of alifuch as 
 believed in the God o^ Abraham, as a top: en of 
 his covenant '^ which covenant was, that Jehovah 
 would be their God. 
 
 Now, when the iKLMiGHTY covenants and pro- 
 mifes to be the God of thefe Infants., what does it 
 jipply p Undoubtedly fomething great, viz. 
 that he will be, in a peculiar manner, their guardian 
 
 and 
 
 taken into his covenant : for if he gracioui-y condefcended to 
 ejlablijh his co'venant njoith the brute crcatiotiy promifmg no more 
 to delvge than ; and appointed a liandirg take?! or me?norial o\ 
 this covenant, ws;. the bonv in the clouds ; much more, furely, 
 mny we hope, that he hath ejlablijhcd his co^oenant alio <rcvitb 
 1 N F A NTS, promifing to dcUver them from the fatal confequences 
 o? the fall ; and that he has appointed a landing token or f.gn 
 of this covenant, to perpetuate its knowledge and remeinbrange 
 ^« i^^ church. 
 
The IntroduBion. 5 
 
 and henefa5!or -, that he will take them under the 
 efpecial patronage and care of his providence, in- 
 fluences of his fpirir, and miniftration of his an- 
 gels •, and that if they died in their Infant-ftate, 
 before any tranfgreffion had put them out of the 
 covenant, they fhouid certainly be raifed to an 
 happinefs after dtath. — That this was the undoubt- 
 ed import or meaning of this promife, the fcrip- 
 ture hath clearly taught us. — Now that the dead are 
 raifed, Mofcs JJoewed at the hnjh^ when he calleth the 
 Lord^ the God of Abraham afid the God of Ifaac 
 (c) ^c. And again, God is not afhamed to be called 
 THE IR God j for he hath prepared for them a city 
 (d), I. e, an happinefs in fome future ftate. And 
 again, 1 will be his God (e), is explained by, he 
 fhall be my Son : but, whoever is a fon of God, and 
 dies in that relation, will inhWibly be declared or 
 manifejled to be fuch by a glorious refurre^ion. See 
 Rom. viii. 19. Luke xx. 0,6. 
 
 That this token of the Abrahamic covenant^ aflured 
 a refurre5lion to future happinefs to z^ Infant dying 
 under it, may be further proved thus — fuppofe 
 one of Abraham'* s circumcifed Infants lay languifh- 
 ing under tormenting pains, and gave up the 
 ghoft. An infidel (lands by, and feeing /i6^ M ark 
 in its flelh, fcoffingly aiks — what that Mark 
 means ? He is told, it is a Token of the covenant 
 ihto which Jehovah took the child ; and by 
 *ix:hich he folemnly declared, that he received it as 
 i'/j OWN, and engagtd to be //j God. But what 
 gets the child, the Infidel demands, by having Je- 
 povAH for its God ? is he not afhamed to be called 
 
 THE 
 
 (c) Luke XX. 3 7. A flate of aeath, is a flate of punijr:>ment ; 
 God's calling himfelf then, the God of Abraham, when he 
 lay in a Jlate of death, was a clear proof that he would not leave 
 him always to coniinus in it. 
 
 (d) Heb. xi. 16. (e) Rev. xxi. 7. 
 
6 TThe Intrcdu&ion. 
 
 THE God of that emaciated, tortured, breathlefs 
 Infant ? No, it is replied, becaufe he will taije it 
 from the dead^ and give it happinefs in a future ftate. 
 Elfe, indeed, he would k ajhamed to be called the 
 God offuch a babe. But we proceed to con fid cr 
 
 Thirdly. The Mosaic difpenfation \ and the 
 farther ftrength which this gives to thefe rational 
 hopes. Now, here, we fee another Covenant, 
 befides that of circumcifton^ into which Infants 
 were taken, Deur. xxix. lo, ii, 12. I'e fi and this 
 day^ all of you^ before the Lord your God ; your 
 £aptains^ your elders^ your Little-ones, your wives ^ 
 that thou ft)uuldji enter into Gov e n a n t with the 
 Lord thy God : that he may eftablijh thee to day for 
 A People unto hi^nfelf}, and that he may be unto thee 
 A Gi)D, as he hath fworn unto thy fathers ^ to Abra- 
 ham, ^c — So Ezeic. xvi. 20, 21. Moreover^ thou 
 haft taken thy Jons ^ and ihy daughters^ which thou haft 
 born unto me •, and thefe haft thou facrificed unto 
 the Idols : thou haft ftain my Children fe). Thus 
 our Lord himftlf, when an Infant, was brought 
 into the Temple^ as were all the firfl-born Infant- 
 Males, 2ir\6 thtrt folemnly devoted y as Holy, to God. 
 Luke ii. 22, 23. — Hence then, it is moft evident, 
 that the 7^^# Infants, in confcquence of their 
 dedication to God, and admiflion into his covenant^ 
 were in a peculiar manner his-, his property, and 
 his children, in a fcnfe in which the Infants of the 
 idolatrous and uncircumcifed Gentiles were nor. But 
 of thefe, inultitudes, no doubt, died in their Infant 
 ftate. What nov/ might be concluded concerning- 
 the cafe of fuch ? Undoubtedly this : That, as thty 
 died in covenant with God, (by which covenant he 
 
 had 
 
 (e) A child, on the day of its circuinc'tfion^ was wont to be 
 called Chat an, becaufe it was then confidered as efpoufed to 
 God, and united to his people, Vid. Schindler in Verb. Lexic. 
 Pent. pag. 677. 
 
The Introdii6iion. y 
 
 had engaged to take them ^or a people to himfeify to 
 acknowledge them as his children^ and to be to 
 them a-GoD) and as no advantage uov bappinefs was 
 given them in this world, at all anfwerable to thefs 
 characters ; but they miferably languifbed, like all 
 other Infants, and atlaft died under the primitive 
 condemnation or judgment \ it therefore certainly 
 remained, that they will be rai fed again and exift 
 in fome after ftate\ where an happinefs will be given 
 them fuitable to thefe great promifesy and where 
 they will be treated as the people and the children of 
 God. For elfe, God would plainly leem to have 
 broken bis covenant ; and the folemn and grand pro- 
 mife of being a God to fuch an Infant^ and of 
 taking it for his child^ proves a very mean and in- 
 fignificant thing. 
 
 Thefe are the hopes which Reafon furmifes, anQ 
 which the fcveral difpenfations both oi Abraham ^ 
 and of Mofesy ftrongly confirm. We proceed to 
 obferve 
 
 Fourthly. How they are farther brightned 
 by the difpenfation ^ Jesus Christ. As this was 
 to be the laft^ and the mofi perfect difplay of God's 
 mercy to fallen men ; in which the riches of his 
 abounding grace were to be mofi fully revealed ; it 
 can never be imagined to comefhort^ in any points 
 of the two former difpenfations. Did God take the 
 Infants of believers into covenant with himfelf, under 
 Abraham and Mofes \ and command, that as a (land- 
 ing token of it, i\^^ feal of the covenant Ihould be fo- 
 lemnly affixed to. them ; but, under Jesus his Son, 
 has he made no fuch manifeftation of his merciful 
 regard to them \ admitted them vifibly into no co- 
 venant \ nor appointed any token that he receives 
 them as bis childreyi^ and that he will be to them 
 A God ? How utterly unlikely ^ as well as uncomfort- 
 
 abk 
 
8 The IntroduSlion. 
 
 able is the thought. Thanks to his mercy! We canf 
 with good affurance fay, that is not the cafe. — 
 
 No. But when Infants were once brought to our 
 Saviour, to be made 'partakers oi the blefilngsof 
 his kingdom ; he openly and feverely rebuked his Dif- 
 ciples, and was highly difpleafed with them, for en- 
 deavouring to hinder it. He kindly took them into 
 his arms •, laid his hands upon them -, and blefj'ed them \ 
 and COMMANDED that little Children/^^^/^/J 
 he fuffered to come^ i. e. be brought, to him, and not 
 BE FORBIDDEN ; declaring that of fuch is the king- 
 dom of God ff), i,e, thdi t thefe, alfo, have a place 
 in the kingdom of the Meffiahy which was now to 
 be fet up •, and a right to the bleffings which hrm- 
 felf, t\\c promifedKiiiG, was come to beftow. 
 
 At another time, he took a little Child 
 into his arms, and fliewing it to his Difciples, fais, 
 whofoever fhall receive one fuch little Child ^ this Child ^ 
 in my name, receive th me (g). Now the receiving a 
 Child in Ch r ist's N a m e muft mean the confider- 
 ing, or treating, it as fianding in fome peculiar rela- 
 tion /(? Chr 1ST •, as 7« ;tp/r« m belonging to Chrifi •, as 
 being a fubjed of his kingdom, or a part of his flock. 
 That this is what our Lord means by, receivi?ig in 
 •His Name, himfelf has exprefsly fliewn by thus 
 explaining it in this fame difcourfe, becaufe ye belong 
 to Chrift (hj : whofo fhall give you a cup of water to 
 drink, IN MY Name, becaufe ye belong to 
 Christ, verily I fay unto you, i^c. Hence, then 
 it is mort evident, /to Infants may be,- yea are 
 to he, received /?2 CHRibT's Name •, and that by 
 this vv'e are to underftand, receiving them as be- 
 longing or (landing in fofiie peculiar relation, to 
 Christ i but in this peculiar relation to Christ 
 
 aa 
 
 (f) Mat, xix. 14. Ma'-k. .y. 14. Luke xviii. 16. 
 
 (g) Mat. xviii. 5. Mark ix. 37. Lul-e ix. 48. 
 
 (hj Mark ix. 41. 
 
l^he Introdu^fkn, 9 
 
 Ian Infant can no otherwife ftand than by being 
 folemnly devoted to him, and admitted into his king- 
 dom and church. 
 
 And, that Infants were to be admitted into 
 the kingdom of the Messiah, or into that incorpo- 
 rated fociety of which he is the head^ is quite ratio- 
 nal to preiume : for as they flood in ahfoliite need Oi 
 the redemption or grace which Messi ah, the king^ 
 came to bellow on mankind \ and as proviHon was 
 made by the covenant of God for their a^uai re- 
 ceiving it •, fo there was the llrongeft reafon to ex- 
 pe6l, ihiz ihty vjould be folemnly acknowledged, and 
 declared to be a part of that fociety or church which 
 fhould be thus hlefjed and faved by him. In other 
 words, that as they were condemned through the 
 F I RST Adam and treated 2isf.nners •, fo they fnould 
 be^z//??)^^-^ through the second Adam and treat- 
 ed as righteous. But, if th^y were to be treated as 
 righteous^ and to be folemnly declared a part of that 
 fociety, or church, whom Christ came to fave \ 
 they were, then, to be baptized -, for Baptifni was 
 the ceremony in which all, who by God's covenant 
 had a right to fahation, were to be admitted into 
 the church, and folemnly declared to be of the num- 
 ber of /^^y^i;^^. 
 
 That, in the eye of the chriflian Jaw, Infants 
 are aduaily under -xfentence of condemnation and con- 
 fidered asftnners, by being made to fuffer death the 
 punifhment and efFeci; of fin, cannot be denied. 
 By one man fin entered into the world, and death by fin, 
 and fo death faffed upon all, for that (^? ^, ad quod, 
 as far as which) or (per quern through whom) all 
 ire treated as if they had finned (i). Rom. v. 12. 
 
 C • . By 
 
 (i) Iniquity and fin are very frequently ufed in fcripture, 
 wLsre not any real guih or moral turpituds is m ant, but only 
 
 ilia 
 
10 ^he IntroduSlion, 
 
 By one man^s offence judgment came upon all men to 
 condemnation, ver. li. By one man*s offence many were 
 made finners, ver. 19. In Adam all die^ 1 Cor. xv. 
 22. Though Infants are incapable of any moral 
 or proper guilt, yec as in the wife fcheme of God's 
 providence they are at prefent fubjeded to innu- 
 merable pains^ difeafes, and death, the penal efFedla 
 of Sin, through the difobedience of Adam\ they 
 are, agreeably to the ftyle of fcripture, faid to 
 have finned^ and to he made, i.e. treated as, Jin^ 
 nets. 
 
 Now, the fame difcourfe of the Apoftk, which 
 reprefents them as condemned and fuffering through 
 Adam v reprefents them alfo 2i%jujiijied and faved 
 by Jesus Christ. For, as i^y the offence of one 
 (Adam) judgment came upon all men to condemna- 
 Hon •, ev^-n fo by the right eoufnefs of one (Christ) the 
 free gift came upon all men to jufiification of life : for as 
 hy the difobedience of one, many were made finners ; fa 
 by the obedience of one, fhall many be made righteous (k). 
 As much as to fay, the falutary effe^s of the fecond 
 Adam's virtue, are as extensive as the penal ones 
 of the firft Adam's fm : or, as the malignity of that 
 firft offence reached even to Infants, fubjeding 
 them to death •, fo the benefit of Christ's obedi- 
 ence reaches alfo to Infants, juftifying, abfolving, 
 and reftoring them to life. It procures for and 
 gives to them that Spirit ^/ life^ which releafes 
 
 and 
 
 the effeBs or the funtjhment of fin. See Gen. xix. 15. r Sam, 
 xxviii. 10. 2 Kin. vii. 9. Ifa, liii. 6, 1 1, 12. i ?et. ii. 24. 
 2 Cor.v. 21. Heb. ix. 28. And this fuggefts an eajie, and, 
 doubtlefs, the true fenfe of that much controverted text, Pfal. 
 li. 5. I nvas Jhapsn in Iniquity, and in Sin did 7ny mother 
 ccncei've 7ne : alluding to the ^///^r So r rows in which, in 
 confequence of l\iQfrJ} Sin, {Gen. iii. 16,) the woman is ferv- 
 tenced to conceive and to bring forth, 
 (k) Rom. V. iB, i^. 
 
The IntroduBion. il 
 
 and fets them free from the law of fm and death. 
 Now of God's giving, and of men's receiving this 
 life-giving Spirit, the baptifmal water is the ap- 
 pointed token^ or emblem^ in the church. 
 
 This the fcripture plainly intimates, by fayino- 
 Tit. iii. 5. We are saved, by the wajhing of regene- 
 ration (i. e. Baptifm^ the fign) and by the renewing of 
 the Holy Ghost (the thing fignified in that cere- 
 monial wafhing) which he hath fhed {t^ixi^v poured 
 out) upon us abundantly^ through J efus Chrifi our 
 Lord. 
 
 From this difcourfe of the Apoflle {Rom, v.) 
 the following deductions evidently flow. i. That 
 in the conftrudion of the Chriftian Law, Infants 
 are, mod certainly, in a ftate of condemyiaticn^ and 
 are treated z,sfmners. 2. That they are, therefore, 
 capable of juftification or remiffion, and ftand in 
 abfolute need of k \ in as much as, without ir, they 
 mull eternally lie under the fentence of death. 3, As 
 they are capable of this grace, and ftand in abfoluie 
 need of it ; exprefs provifion is made, in the conftitu- 
 tion of the Gospel -Coven ANT, for their being 
 juftified and faved. But 4. All who by the Gofpel- 
 Covenant are entitled zo jufiification^fahation, and 
 life^ are entitled alfo io Baptifm \ for Baptifjn is a 
 rite, inftituted by God, to fignify or betoken that 
 thofe, who are entitled to the blelTings of his co- 
 venant, fliall certainly receive them. 
 
 The Baptifm of Infant Sy viewed in this light, is a 
 very rational inftitution. The great Parent of 
 mankind having, in ihfjjifdom of \\\^ providence^ 
 fubjeded fo va(t a part of the race to miieries and 
 pains through no default of their own ; it was quite 
 reafonable to believe, that his mercy would appoint 
 them fome teftimony of his favour, fome monument 
 or pledge that he had not abandoned this noble part ' 
 of his creation to the ruin and death under which 
 C % they 
 
12 The IntroduSion, 
 
 they were fallen. That, as they continually fuf- 
 fered the vi/thk tokens of his difpleafure in a variety 
 of tormenting agonies *, fo, he v/ould gracioudy 
 ordain them alfo fome vi/ible token of his good-will, 
 fome perpetual and (landing fign^ of his ftill ac- 
 counting them HIS children^ and that they wer-e 
 yet the objecLsof his tender and parental regard. It 
 was perfedly juO, I fay, and reafonabie to ima- 
 gine, that the great Parent of thefe tortured and 
 iuifering innocents, whenever he erecled a church 
 upon earth, would appoint fome {uch Jlanding token 
 of his mercy and favour to them. Now this, we 
 il~^, he did under the two formier difpenfations, 
 ()c;th of Abraham and of Mofes : and great confo- 
 .lau'on ir, doubtlef, gave their pious parents under 
 thefe difpenfations, when they law them languifli- 
 ing in exrrem.e pains and giving up the ghoft, to re- 
 Piedt upon the folemn token by which the Aluiguty 
 had accepted them as his children, and had promif- 
 ed to be their Govi. But, can it ever be conceiv- 
 ed, that the difpenfation of Jesus Christ is de^ 
 fcolivc in this important point! That it, herein, 
 comes behind, and is inferior to both the former! 
 That it has no fuch /landing token of God's mercy 
 to condemned Infants, nor any rite by which he 
 viffoly admits them now, as he formerly did, into 
 his family or church! — Is he a God in covenant to 
 the Abrahamic, and to the Jeivijh Infants only, 
 and not to Christian Infants alfo? With great 
 aiTurance we can fiy, to Chrifiian Infants alfo (1). 
 
 And 
 
 • (■) Vv'e :Tre rjot to imagine, \.\\M all Infants rying fuch, but 
 thoie {•>[ heiicverSy or ail which die unbaptized, will be annihi- 
 i^ud'cv never rife again : but the fupcrior advantage to betie-vers 
 Infant?, above others, i«, i. That with refped to theje, God 
 has been p eafed to lay hinifelf under a more p.irticular co'vhiant 
 ot pronfe cf a rcfancvlion tea future happinefs ; whereas tiie 
 
 Other 
 
Ihe IntrodiiBion, 13 
 
 Anu as it thus evidently appears, that, in the 
 original conftrudion and frame of his church, pro- 
 vifion was made that the Infants of God's people 
 Ihould be admitted into his covenant. So, it may 
 be added— that fuch 2. folemn dedication^ as is made 
 in Baptifm, of an Infant by its parents to God 
 the Su PRE AM Parent, feems to be a moft natural 
 and rational fervice : a fervice which a pious mind 
 can fcarce pofTibly forbear. Having received fo 
 great a gift and truft from the almighty Jovereign^ 
 how natural and proper is it, that foon upon its 
 birth, and while a fenfe of the obligation is yet 
 warm upon the heart, he fhould make fome [olemn 
 acknowledgment that he has received it from God ; 
 fliould openly devote it to him, and lay himfelf un- 
 der a y2?^f^^ vcuo to educate it religioufly, and bring 
 it up in his fear 1 Is not this, evidently, a becom- 
 ing 
 
 other arc left more to his uncovenanied mercy. And 2. Their 
 circumftances in a future f^ate may agreeably to all the moral 
 perfections of God, be fuppofed more happy and ad-uantageous 
 than theirs who were never thus folemnly devoted to him. It 
 being an evident and important part of the fcheme of God's 
 moral government, that great bleffings and favours (hall be 
 conferred upon fome^ in confequence and as a reward of the 
 earneft and fmcere prayers and piety of others. 
 
 All rational creatures, there is reafon to believe, are, fome 
 where or other, placed in a Itate of difcipline or probation ; be- 
 fore they pafs into a (late oi Jixed and unalterable blifs. Hea- 
 njen itfelf was, if it be not at prefent, 3.J}ate of trial to Angels. 
 Infants dying fuch, therefore, there is ground to prefume, pafs 
 into fuch aftate. Now, as in our prefent _/?«/^ of trials fome 
 are placed in circumftances far more advantageous and favourable 
 than others : fo, probably, is it in the ilate to which dyitzg In- 
 fants pafs. Abraham''^ polterity were put in circumllances more 
 favourable, for attaining <virfue diud happinefs^ than other na- 
 tions of the earth, on account of t\iQ\x fat her'* s piety. The 
 fame may be juftly hoped as to the dying infants of good men ; 
 who, according to God's command, have hczn folc??inly deniotcd 
 jto him, whom he hath acknowledged for his children^ and to 
 whom he hath, by a facred coyenantj promifed to be a God. 
 
I'he IntrodiiBion, 14 
 
 ing temper and oMion^ upon receiving fuch a truft ? 
 Would it not naturally have a good influence on 
 the condud of the parent, with regard to his child ; 
 difpofing him either to refignit more chearfully, if 
 taken from him by death •, or to train it up more 
 religioufly if its life be continued ? And might it 
 not be hoped, chat God would gracioufly accept 
 and reward the piety of fuch a parent, with pecu- 
 liar Uefjhigs onfuchachild? 
 
 But, from this general view of the feveral difpen- 
 fations of religion with refped to Infants^ from 
 v^hich their right to Baptifin may be (trongly pre- 
 ftmeti — We proceed farther to ellablifli it by clear 
 and direct proofs. 
 
 ARGUMENT 
 
ARGUMENT I. 
 
 The jirjl argument fhall be prefented 
 under the following propojitions. 
 
 T is an inconteftible facf^ that the 
 Infants of believers^ were, in for- 
 mer difpenfations or ages of the 
 church, taken together with their 
 parents into covenant with God ; and 
 had, by his exprefs command, a facrament or rite 
 given them, ^s a token that Jehovah was their 
 God *, and that in confequence hereof; he counted 
 ihem for h is children^ and as (landing in a peculiar 
 r^/^//^« to himfelf. Gen.xvii. 7, 10, u, 12. Deut, 
 xxix. 10, II, 12. Ezek. xvi. 20, 21. See thefe 
 fcriptures already cited, pag. 4, 6. 
 
 II. When thefe Infants of believers were thus 
 taken into covenant, it was certainly, a great 
 Privilege, a favour or grant moft thankfully to 
 be received. 
 
 For, by this token, the most high obliged 
 himfelf and covenanted to be the God of that 
 Infant, And what that implies, fee before ex- 
 plained, pag. 4, 5. Now 
 
 III. If this great Privilege was onct granted 
 by God to his church, it is ;i privilege still fulh^ 
 
V', 
 
 i6 TZy Moral Parpofes and Uie 
 
 fifling^ and is now in aUaal 2.Vid^ full loxzt^ if it has 
 not been revoked. But 
 
 IV. This privilege or grant has never heen 
 REVOKED. No fuch revocatiofi^ nor any (hadow 
 of it, appears in the whole book of God. There- 
 fore 
 
 V. The Infants of helievers having stilL a 
 right to their antient unrepealed privilege^ of 
 being admitted with their parents into covenant 
 with God, and of having its token appHed to them ; 
 it hence neceffarily follows, that they have right 
 to Chrifiian Bciptifm -, for Baptiftn is now the only 
 appointed token or ceremony of admifilon. 
 
 Thefe propofitions, it is humbly apprehended, 
 amount to a demonftration of the point in debate. 
 Which of them can be denied ? Will any man fay. 
 I. That the Infant of believers^ in the former ages 
 of the church, were not taken, with their parents 
 into covenant with God*, had not, by his exprefs 
 command, z,facrament or rite given them in token 
 that Jehovah was their God *, and that, in con- 
 fequence of this, they were not confidered and 
 treated as being in a peculiar manner his ? This no 
 man will affirm^ Will it then be faid, 2. That 
 this^ though it was granted to the Infants of good 
 men of old, was really no privilege nor favour to 
 them ? Neither durft any man afiert this. Can it; 
 be urged then, 3. That this privilege, though 
 granted «3«//V»//)'. to. the church, and enjoyed by ic 
 many, ages^ does not, now, continue to it \ nor 
 ought, now, to be enjoyed by it \ though it be at 
 the fame time acknowledged not to have been re-^ 
 pealed? Abfurd to imagine ! Will it be faid then, 
 4. That this amitnt privilege or grant has, indeed, 
 been repealed? Let //^^Repeai. be ihevvn, and 
 
 the 
 
in Religion ^Infant Baptifm. ly 
 
 the point (hall be given up. There appears no fuch 
 Repeal, nor any thing like it, in the whole fa- 
 cred fcriptures : on the contrary, there appear 
 many things, as will prefently be feen, abundant- 
 ly to confirm this invaluable privilege •, and to 
 ftrengthen and enlarge it. And, indeed, it were the 
 height o'i ahfurdity to imagine, that Jesus Christ 
 came to cut JJjort the privileges of the church, in 
 any fingle point ; and to caft the children of believers 
 out of God's covenant, who before were taken in- 
 to it. — 
 
 It being impoffible to deny, then, that the In- 
 fants of believers have still a right to their an- 
 tient UNREPEALED privilege^ of being admitted 
 with their parents into God's covenant^ and of 
 having its token applied to them.— The confe- 
 quence is inevitable. — That they have then a right 
 to Baptifm, the appointed token of God's covcnd^nx^ 
 and the only initiatory rite by which perfons are now 
 admitted into it. 
 
 The point is farther proved thus. 
 
 ARGUMENT IL 
 
 From //^^ Abrahamic Covenant. 
 
 nrUE covenant which God made with Abraham^ 
 and with his Seed, Gen. xvii. (into which his 
 Infants were taken, together with himfef, by the 
 rite of circumtifio'tf.) That covenant ^ 1 fay, is the 
 t'ery same which we are now under, even the 
 chriftian or gofpel covenant ; and Abraham, in that 
 tranfadion, acled and is confidered under the cha- 
 rader of our Father, the Father of us believing 
 Gentiles: the original grants, therefore, and pri- 
 
 D vilege$ 
 
i8 I'he Moral Purpofes and We 
 
 vileges of that covenant muft necefTarily belong to 
 us, believing Gentiles^ his Seed.— Now ic was an 
 indifputable grant or privilege of that covenant^ that 
 Infants fhould be received, together with their 
 parents, into it ; and folcmnly pafs under its fa- 
 trament or [eal This grant, therefore, or privi- 
 lege, in behalf of ^?4r Infants, we, believing Gen- 
 tiles^ may now confidently claim. 
 
 That WE, believing Gentiles^ are //^^ Seed really 
 included and intended in that covenant -, and that 
 Abraham^ in that tranfadtion, was confidered as 
 OUR Fa T H e r — -is a point adtually, and moft clear- 
 ly, determined by 6"/. FauL For in two feveral 
 epiftles {Rom. iv. and Galat, iii.) where he is ex- 
 plaining the nature and extent of the chrijiian or 
 gofpel covenant^ he quotes this covenant made with 
 Abraham {Gen. xvii.) refers to it, and reafons from 
 it, and fetches arguments thence to prove, that 
 Believers from among the Gentiles diX^^ under 
 the chrijiian difpenfation, to bt fellow-heirs with the 
 Jews^ and are the real Seed o^ Abraham intend- 
 ed in that covenant. See Rom. iv. 9. — particular- 
 ly ver. 16, 17. Therefore it (i.e. the bleflednefs, 
 or juftification, of the Abrahamic covenant) is of 
 Faith, that it might be by grace \ to the end the 
 Promise might be fure to Ahh the Seed ; not to 
 that only which is of the Law, but to that alfo which 
 is of the ¥ AIT n of Abraham^ who is the Fathe r 
 OF us ALL, (i.e. of believing Gentiles as well as 
 Jews^) as it is written (Gen. xvii. 5.) / have made 
 thee a Father of mat^y Nations. 
 
 Exprefsly to the fame purpofe, the Apoflle alfo 
 affures us, Galat. iii. 7. That they who are of 
 Faith (Believers) the fame are tus. Children 
 c/ Abraham. And ver. 29. j/'jy^ ^r^ Christ's 
 (i.e. Believers) //^^;2^r^j'^ Abraham's Seed, and 
 heirs according to the pronnfe. And again ver 1 6, 1 7- 
 
 that 
 
in Religion cflnhni Baptifin, 19 
 
 that to Abraham^ and to his Seed, were the promifes 
 made-^ (which Seed he proves to be all true be:- 
 Uevers^ taken in a colledlive fenfe as the body of 
 Chrift ; and adds) -, now this I fc^^ that the cove- 
 nant which was confirmed before of Gon in Chr ist ; 
 («? xp/roi/ refpedting Chrift^ or true believers) the 
 LaWj which was 430 years after cannot disan- 
 nul, that it fhould make the Promise cf no Ef- 
 fect. — Now that the promifes^ or covenant^ hepe re- 
 ferred to, which the Apofile affirms to be still in 
 force ^ and not to be difannulled, muft be, and is 
 this covenant^ (Gen. xvii.) into which Infants 
 were taken by a vifible rite^ is moft evident-, be- 
 caufe, this is the only covenant^ in which God 
 ev€r made and confirmed promifes to Abraham and 
 TO bis feed. ' 
 
 Seeing,, then, it is inconteftable — that we ^(?- 
 lieving Gentiles^ are the Seed intended in that co- 
 venant', it follows, that we have an undoubted right 
 to ALL its privileges and grants j confequently, to 
 the admiffwn of ^z^r Infants into it; and confe- 
 quently, to their paiTing under its token or Jign. 
 
 This token oxfign was originally circumcifwn : but 
 when God fent his fon into the world further to ex- 
 plain and confirm this covenant^ and to publilh it 
 to all nations^ he was pleafed to alter its token, or 
 initiating rite, from circumcifion loBaptifm: partly, 
 perhaps, as circumcifwn was a painful and bloody 
 rite, and obnoxious to great reproach and con* 
 tempt amongft the Gentiles \ but, principally, be- 
 caufe bothfexes were now to be ^like vifibly received 
 into the covenant-, and under tliis new difpenfation 
 of it, there was to be neither male nor female, Galat, 
 iii. 28. (m). 
 
 D 2 Thus 
 
 (ra) That circu7ncifwn is abolifhed, is acknowledged by all ; 
 but the Abrahamic covenant illll fubufting, and being no other 
 
 than 
 
20 ^he Moral Purpofes and Ufe 
 
 Thus then (lands the argument, in fhort — // zve 
 are Christ's (Believers) then are we Abraham's 
 Seed, (Gal. iii. 29.) but, if we are Abraham*s 
 Seed, we have then a right to all the grants and 
 privileges of that covenant which God made with 
 Abraham^ and with his Seed: but the Admis- 
 sion of his Infants, together with himfelf^ was 
 an indifputable grant or privilege of that covenant : 
 therefore, as it was given to Abraham our Father, 
 it muft ncceflarily remain and endure to us his 
 Seed (n). 
 
 ARGUMENT IIL 
 F?^om the Commission. 
 
 A Third argument for admitting Infants to Bap- 
 iifm^ may be drawn— from the fenfe in which 
 /^^ Apostles, when fent forth to baptife, would 
 naturally and even necejfarily underfland their com- 
 mijjlon. Go teach (/v.ctQjtTft/crals difciple or profe- 
 
 lyte) 
 
 than the gofpcl covenant, and of this goffel covenant it being 
 acknowledged that Baptifm is now the appointed token or f,gtj ; 
 it hence evidently follows, that Baptifm now fucceeds in the 
 Toom of circiimcifion. Accordingly it is called the chrijlian 
 circumcifion, ov circumcijion of Chriji. Col. ii. Ii» 12. 
 
 (n) Infants are not baptifed as being themselves the Seed 
 ef Abraham ; bat as b^ing the Children^ or Property, of thofe 
 who are the Seed o/Jhraham, For as Ahraham\ Faith brought 
 not himfsifoVi\y^ but his bifavts together with him, into the 
 Covenant of God: So the P'aith of /Jhraham's Seed {Edkvers) 
 jjrtngs not t.bemfelves only, but their Infants together with 
 Uiem, into the same Co^venant : elfe the Co'X'^?/^^/ would not 
 be eltablifhcd in the fame manner to his Seed, as it was to 
 Abraham himfelf; which yet is plainly promifed, Gen. xviL 
 7> io» »». 
 
}n Religion of Infant Baptifm.^ 2> 
 
 lyte) ALL Nations baptizing them (o). It 
 is now enquired, in what fenfe they would under- 
 fiand this commijfion? Whether, as authorizing them 
 to baptife only the believing aduU : or, to give this 
 token of God's covenant alfo to the Infants of 
 fuch believers ? The commijfion is delivered in fuch 
 general terms as not certainly to determine this. If 
 any part of it can be faid to exclude Infants, it mufl: 
 be the word teach (p). But fuppofe it had been 
 faid — go teachy profelyte, all nations circumci- 
 sing them. — Would not the Apojiles^ without any 
 farther warrant, have naturally and juftly thought, 
 that upon profelyting the Gentile parent and circum- 
 cifing him, his Infants alfo were to be circum- 
 cifed ? Or, if a divine command had been given 
 to the twelve patriarchs of old, to go into Egypt ^ 
 .Arabia^ &c. and teach them the God of Abra- 
 ham, circumcifing them. — Would they not, mufl they 
 not, have underftood it as authorizing them to 
 perform this ceremony, not upon the parent only, 
 but alfo upon the Infants of fuch as believed in 
 the God of Abraham ? Without all queftion they 
 would. 
 
 Hence then it is plain, that the word, teach^ 
 (difciple or profelyte) concludes nothing, certainly^ 
 againft Infants being admitted^ with their believ- 
 ing parents, into God's covenant by Baptifm. 
 But, if the word, teach., does not neceflarily ex- 
 clude Infants -, let us fee, whether there are not 
 fuch circumfiances attending this commiiTion, as 
 v^'ould naturally and even neceflarily lead the Apof 
 
 ties 
 
 (o) Mat. xxviii. 19. 
 
 (p) The word rendered teach [ij.(ihwiivGd^i) in the 19th verfe, 
 is not the fame with that in the next verfe, teaching them to 
 ohjer've all things — [S' i^ ciL<ry.Qv[i() but is of a more large and 
 comprehenfive fignification, an4 is better rendered to profelyte or 
 dijciph. 
 
a.2 ne Moral Purpofes and Ufe 
 
 ties to apprehend Infants to be aBmlly inclu- 
 ded therein. 
 
 Now, here let it be confidered — who the per- 
 fons were, to whom the commiffton was given ? They 
 were Jews ; meUy who had been educated in the 
 knowledge of that covenant, which God had made 
 with Abraham and their fathers -, and who knew it 
 to be STILL in force.— Men^ who had feen, thac 
 in all covenant-tranfadions, betwixt God and his 
 churchy the Infants of believers had always been 
 admitted, together v;ith their parent Sy and paffed 
 under the fame initiating rite, — Men^ who appre- 
 hended this their admiffion to be a great privilege or 
 favour to them ; and knew, or were to be foon in- 
 formed, that the Gentiles {all nations) were now to 
 betaken into d, joint-participation of all the privi- 
 leges of the Jewijh church j to be grafted into the 
 fame olive-tree •, and to be joint-heirs with them of 
 all their religious immunities or grants. — They, 
 moreover, knew it to be the conftant^ immemorial 
 praflice of the church, that when any Gentile was 
 kiught (profelyted to the worfhip of the God of 
 Ifrael) himfelf was baptifcdy and all his Infants were 
 baptifed with him, and thefe Infants were called 
 profdytes. Further, they were men extremely^^^- 
 J?«j and tenacious of their antient rites. — They had 
 ktii alfo, under their law^ by God's exprefs com- 
 mand, children of a month old and upwards enrolled 
 in the temple regifter •, and entered, as minifters 
 to Aaron, as doing the fervice of the tabernacle ^ and 
 as keeping the charge of the fan^fuary (p). — They had 
 been, often, witnejjes to the kind regard their 
 rnader had fhewn to little children ; and had been 
 once feverely rebuked by hiin for hindering their 
 
 being 
 
 (p) Numb. iii. 6, 7, 8, 28. And claimed by Gop as his 
 Servants. Levit. xxv. 41, 42. 
 
in ileligion g/" Infant Baptlfm. 23 
 
 being brought to receive his benediflion ; and faw 
 him laying his hands on them ^ and folemnly declaring 
 them to be fubje5is of his kingdom. — Further, they 
 knew that Baptifm was appointed as a token from 
 God of the remiffwn of fin, or q{ jufiification \ and 
 that Infants were in the eye of the chriilian law 
 treated as finners, and under a fntence of condemna- 
 tion. — Finally: they knew that Christ came, not 
 to leffen or abridge the privileges of God's church 
 (of which this admiffon o{ Infants was confelTedly 
 one) but to heighten and to enlarge them. — Let thefe 
 fcveral circumfiances be impartially weighed, and 
 then let any man fay — whether, as the commiffwh 
 will admit of a favourable and a large fenfe, fo as 
 to include Infants, the apoftles would not naturally, 
 and even neceffarily^ fuppofe them comprehended 
 therein ? And whether, there was not a moil 
 ftrong, and mofl: manifeft K^^^/y, if Christ in- 
 tended that Infants (hould not be included in it, 
 that he fhould have exprefsly excepted them ? 
 
 The conmiffion viewed in this., which is its proper 
 and true light, is fo far from concluding any thing 
 againfi the baptizing Infants, that it Rrongly fa- 
 vours and fupports it. For fince, it is delivered 
 in fuch general terms as to be capable of admitting 
 Infants ; and fince, from the above circumfiances, 
 the apoftles would naturally and unavoidably un- 
 derftand it as intending their adm.iffion\ it follows, 
 that our Lord's //^«cf, as to thefe, is a Arong and 
 moft manifeft prefumption in their favour ; and 
 that his not excluding, or excepting, them from the 
 chriftian covenant, is, in all equitable conftruclion, 
 a permiffion or order that they fhould be adnntted in- 
 to it. 
 
 ARGU- 
 
24 ^^^ Moral Purpofes and Ufe 
 
 ARGUMENT IV. 
 
 Shall be drawn ^ from the evident and 
 CLEAR Consequences of other pajfages 
 of Scripture. 
 
 I. TN Rom, xi. the Apojlle^ difcourfing of the ex- 
 A clufion of a chief part of the Jews from the 
 vijible church of God, and the reception of theGen- 
 tiles in their ftead j fpeaks of it under this figure, 
 ver. 17. And if fome of the branches (the Jews) be 
 broken off, and thou (a Gentile) being a wild olive- tree, 
 werU grafted in amcngft them, and with them par- 
 takejl of the root and fatnefs of the olive tree 5 boaji 
 not, ^c. Here let it be noted, i. The olive-tree^ 
 is the Ab RAHAM I c covenant or church j from which, 
 the unbelieving Jews are call out-, and into which^ 
 the believing Gentiles are taken in their ftead. 2. The 
 root and fatnefs of tTiis olive-tree, of which the in- 
 grafted branches partake, are the religious privileges 
 or grants, belonging to that covenant or church. 
 Now 3. It was a very valuable and indifputable pri- 
 vilege of that covenant, that the faith of a parent 
 grafted his children, together Vv^ith himfelf into that 
 olive-tree, i. e. admitted them into the church, or 
 into a covenant-relation to God. Therefore 4. The 
 unbelieving Jsw being cut off from this root, and 
 the believing Gentile fucceeding, and being 
 grafted into his room, and partaking y^/>/^ with 
 the natural branches of all their church-privileges, 
 immunities, and grants, he mult undoubtedly par- 
 take of THIS privilege too. 
 
 What 
 
in Religion ^Infant Baptifm. a j 
 
 What part of this argument can poffibly be de- 
 hied ? Will it be faid — -that the faith of a parent 
 did not graft his Children, together with him- 
 Jelf^ into the vifible churchy before the coming of 
 Christ ? No — Or, that this v/as not a privilege f 
 No — Can it be urged then, that believing Gen- 
 tiles are not now taken in to be Xvyaoivom t;;^ 
 p/^H? Joint-Partakers of the root {r\ i.e. of 
 the church-privileges and grants which the imk^ 
 lieving Jew hath loft ? This were highly abfurd : 
 for they are exprefsly declared, by the apofile (s), 
 to be Si;>)c;v«povo«o/ Fellow-Heirs ; ^vcauixa. "^f 
 
 the same BodY; and %viiy.s7oyiOi m? STrcc-yyiXiA^ 
 
 Joint-Fart AKBVLs of the premi/e. 
 
 The argument, then, moft clearly and ftrongly 
 concludes for the vi/Me admijion of the Infants of 
 Mm;^^ Gentiles, together with themfelves, in- 
 to the covenant and church of God. Is he the 
 God of the Jews only ? Is he not alfo of the Gen- 
 tiles ? yf God, in the fame manner, in the fame 
 latitude and extent, to us, as he was to them? 
 Y^s ; he is, undoubtedly, thus a God to believing 
 Gentil£s alfo. Accordingly Ifaiab, fpeaking of 
 the Chriflian difpenfation, or the (late or the church 
 under /^^ Messiah, fais, that not o\-\\y believers 
 fhould be efteemed the feed of the hkffed of the Lord, 
 (or the blejed fe^d of the Lord) but alfo, their 
 Ofspring together with them (t). 
 
 11. From ou; Saviour'' s own words, Mark x. 14," 
 Suffer the little Children to come unto me and 
 forbid them not, for of fiich is the kingdom of Gov, 
 And John iii. 5. Except any one (T/?) is born of wa- 
 ter and of the fpiril, he cannot enter into the kingdofft 
 of God. From thefe two paliages, Lfay, put to- 
 E gether^ 
 
 (r) Rom. xi, 17. (3) Eph. iii. 6. (t) Ifa. Ixv. 23, 
 
26 The Moral Purpofes and Ufe 
 
 gether, the right of Infants to Baptifm may be alfo 
 clearly inferred. For in one^ they are declared 
 aclually to/^^T'^^/)/^^^ in God's kingdom or church ; 
 and yet into this kingdom or church, the other^ as 
 exprefsly fays, none can he admitted without being 
 haptifed. 
 
 The kin^^dom ^/God, in the gofpel, denotes, ei- 
 ther the vif.bk c\\mc\\ on earth % or the invifible ons 
 in heaven. Anfwerable to thefe, there is a two- 
 fold regeneration^ namely, a being horn again of 
 water {i.e. baptifed, which is therefore called the 
 waffoing of regeneration^ Tit. iii. 5.) which admits 
 into the iiifihle church \ at^d, a being horn again of 
 the fpirit Ccalled the renewing of the Holy Ghoft^) 
 which admits into the invifihle. Now, in which 
 foever of thefe fenfes the expr^flion is here taken, 
 it ftrongly concludes for the Baptifm ^Infants. 
 For 
 
 1. If, h^ \\\t kingdom of Qqt) ., be meant the i;/- 
 fihle church on earth \ our Lord, by faying of fuch 
 is the kingdom^ declares that Infants are to be con- 
 fidered as having a place in this kingdom, i, e. as 
 being members of that body, fociety^ or churchy 
 which he, as Messiah, came to rule and to fave. 
 Bur, if they are to be Confidered as a part of this 
 kingdor,?, or vi/Ihle church, they are, then, to he hap- 
 tifed^ or horn again of water, for this is the only ap- 
 pointed rite of entering into it. Or 
 
 2. l^^, by the kingdom of God, we underftand 
 ihft invij^ble church in heaven 5 into that Infants 
 cannot enter, except they are horn again of the fpirit, 
 i.e. regenerated, quickened, and raifed from the 
 dead (u). Bur, ii they are capable and proper 
 
 fub- 
 
 (\y) A refiirre8ion from the dead is frequently fpokcn of in 
 fcripture as a being horn again, or a regeneration. Vid. Rom. 
 }. 4. Luke XX. 36. Mat. xix. 28.. Acts xiii. 33. Rom. viii, 
 29. Col. i. 18. Heb. i. 
 
in Religion ^j/' Infant Baptifnir 27 
 
 fubje6l3 of a regeneration by the Spirit, they mult 
 be alfo of Bapttfm j for the baptifmal water is no- 
 thing elfe but the appointed token or emblem of this 
 regenerating 7^/W/. Seeing then, that God grants 
 them the thing ftgnified^ viz. the renewing of the 
 Holy Ghoji ♦, it can never be thought his will, that 
 the ftgn or token be denied them, viz. the wajhing 
 of regeneration^ orBaptifm. 
 
 The argument, then, isconclufive, in whatever 
 fenfe we take, the kingdom ofGoT>. For our Lord 
 having, in one place, declared that the little 
 Ch I l d r e n fhsiidd he brought to him^ becaufe of svcn 
 is the K1NGD0JSI-: and in another, that except any 
 one is born of water ^ baptifed, he cannot enter ints 
 this Kingdom — it moft evidently follows — thac 
 Infants are capable of being born again of water^ or 
 baptifed ; becaufe, elfe, they could not enter into 
 this kingdom, into v/hich our Lord here exprefsly 
 declares, they do enter ^ and are admitted (w). 
 
 It cannot be here faid — that the words of such 
 — are to be underftood, not of Infants in years^ 
 but of perfons of a childlike and humble difpofttion, 
 Becaufe, this would reprefent our Lord's conduct 
 as extremely abfurd. For, why (bould he be very 
 angry with his difciples, for forbidding Infants in 
 years to be brought to him, becaufe of grown per- 
 
 E 2 [ens 
 
 (w) The words, John iii, 5. thus interpreted, are a very 
 pertinent and jull rebuke of Nicodemus''s cowardice. It is as 
 though our Lord had faid — " Except you have the courage to 
 ** profefs openly my religion, fignified by your fubmiffion to 
 '* the ceremony of Bapttfm^ you cannot be a member of my 
 ** 'Vtfthle church on earth : and, notwithflinding your defcejtt 
 *' from Abraham, if you are not born of an higher principle, 
 *• even cf the fpirity or Holy GhoJi i your mind will be never 
 ** raifed to that flate of purity and moral rectitude, nor your 
 ** body to ihsit incorruptibility, fpirituality and life, which is 
 ** necelTary to your admiiiion into my inij'tjible kingdom in 
 *• heaven." 
 
J^S ' ^he Moral Purpofes and Ufe 
 
 Jons of an humble difpofition his kingdom confift- 
 ed ? There is no juft connexion betwixt his great 
 difpleafure at them for keeping Infants from him ^ 
 and his giving, as the reafon of it, that to quite 
 ■'■different juhjct'ls^ meek and humble perfons, his 
 kingdom belonged. According to this interpre- 
 tation, our Lord might rationally have done the 
 fame, had lambs or doves been going to be pre fenc- 
 ed to him \ he might have been very angry with 
 thcic v/ho fhould have/??/^/^ them, and have faid— 
 Juffcr them to he brought^ for of such, i. e. of per- 
 fons of a tpeek and harrnlefs temper, is the kingdom 
 of God (x). 
 
 Finaljxy: let it be added— that as our LoRp 
 took ihefe Infants into his arms^ laid his hands upon 
 andhkffcd them\ it hence appears — that Infants are 
 CAPABLE of the divine influence, beneditUon, aqd 
 the operations of the holy Spirit. Now what 
 are thefe, but the very things principally intended 
 to be reprcfented by the bapiifmal ivater ? Though 
 pur Lord did noc pour water on them, putting up 
 a prayer for th;;m ; he perforaied a religious cere- 
 inony on them equally folemn, and of miich^ (per- 
 haps, exa5!ly) the fame purport ; he laid his hands 
 tipon them^ and prayed \ v/hich was an ad of religious 
 wcrfhip hardly at all difFering from baptifing them 
 with water. Yea, it was a tar o^r^^/^r thing for the 
 favior of the world to take up Infants in his arm? 
 and folemnly to blefs them, than for any minifter 
 now to baptife them v-ziih water in his name. Fur- 
 ther 
 
 III. It is alfo very worthy to be obferved— that 
 the Cbriftian difpenfation, as well as the JewiJ}\ 
 
 makes 
 
 , (x) Dr, Gale, therefore, ingenuoufly owns, that this fajptge 
 is to be undcillood of hijants in years, Refledidns, &c. p^g. 
 
in Religion o/' Infant Baptifm, 29 
 
 makes an evident dijlin^ion betwixt the children of 
 believers and the children of Infidels, 
 
 Several of the Corinthian converts having unbe- 
 lieving yoke-fellows, doubted of the lawfulnels 
 of cohabiting with them ; and feemed to think 
 themfelves obliged to feparate\ left the offspring of 
 fuch unequal marriages (hould be deemed impure 
 and unmeet to be taken into covenant with God. 
 This their doubt feemed to be juft, and to carry 
 in it great weight ; being grounded on the known 
 tondudt of Ezray and the fewifh elders^ in a pa- 
 rallel cafe. Seefer^x. i, 2, 3. But the apofik 
 refolves it, by telling them — that the unbelieving 
 yokefellow was fo far fan^ified by (or to^ or lecaufe 
 of) the believing^ as that their children which would 
 otherwije be unclean, are now holy (yj. Here 
 then we fee a moft clear and evident diflin^Uon made 
 betwixt the children of believers and the children of 
 infidels : the one are unclean, i. e, do not ftand 
 in any vifible covenant relation to Jehovah, and 
 the other are holy, i. e. in the fame fenfe holy, as 
 the Jews were an holy nation, taken into a peculiar 
 relation to God (z). 
 
 Thefe feveral fcriptures being impartially weigh- 
 ed, the propriety and fitnefs of bringing children to 
 Baptifm Teems to be eftablifhed beyond all rational 
 doubt. As a conclufion of this argument I beg 
 leave to afk — Muft not the Christian difpenfa- 
 tion be allowed, in all things, to have the preference^ 
 and to be better than /i?^ Jewish ? But, if it ex- 
 cludes our Infants from the covenant of Goo, 
 
 and 
 
 (y) I Cor. vii. 14. 
 
 (z) This feiuirrient, of aninfanfs //oJ/Vy}, on account of its 
 Jolemn dedication to God, was perfectly fcriptaral and rational ; 
 as well as quite fuitabie to the cuflom and language of thofe 
 tinies. As appears UomLuke\\. zzy 23. where it is faid, that, 
 according to the {landing ufage, they brought the Infant Jesijs 
 to tht 7eP7*'Ie ; to present him to the Lord : Js it is ivr it- 
 ten in tht Law, Enjerj frji born male Jh all be hgly to the Lord. 
 
30 7h Moral Purpofes mid Ufe 
 
 and from Handing in ?iny federal relation to heaven ; 
 then here is one, and that a very important and 
 conficierable inftance in which it is vaftly inferior. 
 Now, had this really been the cafe, how mighty 
 and juft a prejudice would it have raifed in th^Jews 
 againft Christianity ! What complaints and ob- 
 je5iions (houid we, doubtlefs, have heard them 
 making againft this new difpenfation, as cafting 
 their Children out of God's Covenant, and 
 putting them upon a level with thofe of Infidels and 
 Pagans! But, as amongft their many and loud 
 cavils at the religion of Christ, and the continued 
 oppofitions and reproaches of the JttdaizerSy we 
 find not the lead fhadow of a complaint of this kind, 
 it may with great afTurancc be concluded, there 
 was no fach occafion given; but that Christi- 
 anity, as it found, fo it continued and confirm- 
 ed, the Infants of good meii m the covenant of 
 God. 
 
 Having proceeded thus far in the argument ; 
 I beg leave here to recapitulate, and fum up the 
 force of what has been offered, in the following 
 queries 5 which will foon lead a fair eftquirer to an 
 eajie ifTue of the debate. 
 
 Query I. Are not Infants^ in the eye or con- 
 ftrudion of the Chriftian law, under a fentence of 
 condemnation^ and treated as /inner s? 
 
 Query II. Are they not, confequently, in the 
 eye of that law, capable 0^ juflification and of being 
 treated as righteous ? 
 
 Query III. If, then, they are capable of juft in- 
 cation and remifllon, is it not moft highly reafon- 
 able and even neceffary to fuppofe that the Chrhs- 
 tian law, which is a manifeftation of God's 
 richefc mercy to mankind, has made provijion for 
 it, and given fome token of it ? 
 
 Query 
 
'in Religion 5/^ Infant Baptifm, 3^ 
 
 Query IV. Were not the Infants of believers 
 taken into covenant with God ; and did they not 
 ftand in a more immediate relation to him, than, the 
 Infants of unbelieving Canaanites^ Moahites^ &c. 
 both under the Ahrahamic and Mcfaic difpenfations? 
 — And was not this a peculiar honour 2ind advantage 
 to thefe Infants ? 
 
 Query V. Are not the Infants of us, Chriftians^ 
 as capable of this favour, viz. of being taken vifibly 
 into God's covenant^ as their (the Ifraelites) Infants 
 were : but if ours are not ; is not, here an im- 
 portant circumftance in which both the Ahrahamic 
 and Mofaic difpenfations were more favourable to 
 mankind, and manifefted greater Grace than 
 the difpenfation of Jesus Christ ? — But can this 
 pofTibly be? 
 
 Query VI. Are not the Infants of Christians 
 (who are now an holy prieflhood^ and who fucceed 
 to all the privileges of the Jewifh church) are not, 
 I fay, their \nhv\t^ as capable t« iua9«T£usc&«/ of be- 
 ing difcipled', as the Infants of the Jewifh prieflhood 
 v/ere, of being enrolled in the temple regifter, and 
 entered as minifters to Aaron^ and as (^\jxo(.a<Toni<i ra.( 
 (pvXoiKdLi Tav etyicov keeping the charge of the fantluary fa) : 
 and are not Infants as capable, under the Chrijlian 
 covenant, of being baptiled as they were of cir- 
 cumcifion both under i\\t Abrahamic and Mofaic? 
 
 Let the fcripiurcs^ then, interpret themfelvesj 
 and one part of the divine difpenfation be fuffered 
 to explain the other (of which other ^ it was intend- 
 ed to be a figure or type) and we ihall find it per- 
 fedly agreeable, to the analogy and fiile of fcrip- 
 ture, as v/ell as to the reafon of things, xk\2Xlnfants 
 Ihould be admitted as members of the Chrifiian 
 church, and are therefore included in the commif- 
 /ton to baptife. 
 
 ARGU- 
 
 . :) Vid. Numb. iii. 6, 7, 8, 28^^ 
 
32 The Moral Purpofes ajtd Uie 
 
 ARGUMENT V. 
 From Apostolic Tradition^ 
 
 TH E Bapttfm of infants was the uHdcuh ted prac- 
 tice of the Chriiiiiin church, in its pureft and 
 firjt ages ; the ages immtdiateiy facceeding the 
 jlpofiles y who could not buc know what the Apos- 
 tolic doolrine and practice was as to this matter. 
 
 This, I apprehend, to be an argument of great 
 weight. For the enquiry being about a Fact, 
 which could not but be publickly and ptrfeSlly knowni 
 and not pofTible to be miflaken^ in the ages imme- 
 diately fucceeding the Apofiles ; the fenfc of thofe 
 ageSy concerning thisfaSfy muft needs be of great 
 moment in deciding the point. — Whether the 
 Apostles and Evangelists formed the frfl 
 churches, throughout the whole world, upon the 
 plan of Infant-Baptism ; or not ; that is to 
 fay, whether they admitted Infants^ together with 
 their believing parents, into the church by Baptifm ; 
 or did NOT fo admit them, was afa^ of fuch na- 
 ture as could not but be evident, and indubilaMy 
 known, to all the Chriftians of the Jirji age. Nor 
 was it, humanly fpeaking, pofTible that the Apos- 
 TOLic praBice in this point fhould be xjn r ver- 
 sa lly departed from, difufed and thrown out, in 
 {o floor t a jpace of time, as we fhall prefently f6e the 
 Bf^ptifm d?/" Infants to have universally pre- 
 vailed. To prepare the way to this proof, I beg 
 leave to premifc thefe two things. 
 
 i. to 
 
in Religion ^Infant Baptifdi. 33 
 
 1. To weaken the teftimony of the antient wri- 
 ters 2ind fathers upon this point, fome have obje(5t- 
 ed the many foolilh and abfurd opinions and inter- 
 pretations of fcriptufe with which their writino-s 
 abound. But this is extrennely weak. For they 
 are not here appealed to as reafoners^ or interpreters^ 
 but only as hiftorians or witnejfes to a public ^tei/>7^ 
 Fact. 
 
 2. If any think it (Irange, that we have no more 
 exprefs teftimonies ro this practice of the church, 
 in tht^'mmgs^o'i the fe fathers^ Jet him ro confider, 
 —That the far greater part of their writings are 
 loft 5 and that it is but Httle more than their names 
 and a few pieces of their works, efpecially as to 
 the firji age^ that are tranfmitted down to us, — 
 And ajfoj that the Baptifm of Infants being then 
 univerfally praSiifed^ and no doubts or difpute hav- 
 ing ever been moved about it \ and it being like- 
 wife the conftant ever-prevailing cuftoni of all the 
 enemies 01 Chriftianity^ hoih Jews and Pagans^ to 
 admit Infants to a participation of their religious 
 ceremonies and rites together with their parents. 
 Thefe things confidered, it will not appear ftrange 
 that this point Is fo rarely touched on in the wri- 
 tings of thofe times. There are a thoufand religi- 
 ous books written in the prefent age, in which the 
 leaft hint is not to be found about haptifing of In- 
 fants^ though the point has now been fo long and 
 fo 'warmly controverted amongft us : much lefs^ 
 then, (hould one expe6t to find any thing but a 
 few alliifions and hints as to this matter, in the books 
 of thofe early times. 
 
 This btiing premifed, we proceed to the tefii- 
 monies, Th^firfi Ihall be from' 
 
 J u s T I N M A R T y R i who wrote about forty years 
 after tht Apoftolic age. He fays " kv,/ -sr^AAoi tus? 
 
 ** i!j.A7vM<jAv 760 xp'S"«'" — '' Several perfo7is among 
 " F *« «c 
 
34 72=^ Moral Purpofes and Ufs 
 
 " us^ holh men and women ^ of fixty or /evenly yca^s 
 *' oldy who were profelyted^ or made di/ciples, io 
 *' Christ />, or from ^ their infamy do continue un- 
 " corrupt {-d).'* Now, profelyted /<? Christ from 
 their infancy^ they could not be, without being, 
 from their infancy, confidered and treated as pro- 
 felytes /<? Christ; that is, without being from 
 their infancy baptifed. — For whofoever 5^.a9HTiu9>iJi^» 
 •T<y ^p/rw were difcipled or profelyted to Chr isT, were 
 by his exprefs order. Mat. xxviii.. 19; to be baptifed, 
 ]^ ott fevcnty )ears from Justin carries us back, 
 almoii, into ihe middle of the Apostolic age, 
 
 Irenes us, who wrote 2ho\xx. ftxty feven year s af- 
 ter the Apoftles ; and was born, it is faid, fome 
 years before the death of 5/. John^ fays concerning 
 Crhist. — '' Omnes cnim venit per femetipfum 
 *' falvare •, omnes inquam, qui pereum renafcun- 
 '^ tur in Deum, Infantes & parvulos & pueros 
 .*' & juvenes (b)."— " ^hat he came to fave all per- 
 *' fons by himfelf\ all^ I mean ^ who b) him are rege- 
 ** ncratedy i. e. baptifed, unto God, Infants and 
 * ' litt/e 072es^ and youths and elder perfons.*'' — That the 
 word renafcor^ regenerated^ in the writings of thef^ 
 ancients, particularly of Iremftts^ is moft familiarly 
 ui'i;d to f]gni(ie, baptifed^ fee from a vafl variety ot 
 inllances proved, beyond all doubt, in Dr. IVaWs 
 hijhry of ^Infant Baptifm. Vol. 1. Chap. Jii. § 2, ^, 
 and Defence pag. 318, 324. — And that by In- 
 fants, are here meant, Children^ before they 
 come to the ufecf reafon, is evident, not only as 
 ihefe muft neccflarily be included in the all whon^ 
 he came to fave •, but alfo becaufe, after he had 
 mentioned Infants and others regenerated^ he runs 
 over die feveral ranks ot age again -, but with thi^ 
 remarkable difference, that whereas he mentions 
 
 the 
 
 va) Juft. Martyr. Apof. ii. 
 
 (b) Iren^us adv. Hseres lib. iil. cap. 39. 
 
in Religion oflnhni Baptifm. 35 
 
 the benefit (^ Ch r ist's example^ as what was to be 
 taken by each of the other ranks^ viz. the parvuiiy 
 the juvenes and the feniores^ he fais no fuch thing 
 concerning the Infantes Infants; for this reafon, no 
 doubt ; viz. that theje only., of all the mentioned 
 ranks, were incapable of this benefit. 
 
 Tertulhan, who flourirtied about an /^ft«- 
 dred years after the Apoftles, is the only perfon, 
 among the antients, who advifes to defer the Bap- 
 tifm of Infants, except in cafes of necefjity or in dan- 
 ger of death. But his advifing to defer h^ except 
 in cafes of neceffity, is an inconteftibie proof that 
 the haptifing of Infants was the praElife of thofe times. 
 And as he appears to be quite ftngular in this his 
 advice ; fo, that he was extremely izhimftcal and 
 abfurd in his opinions on this, as well as feveral other 
 points of religion, all who have read his works 
 perfedly well know. For, upon the fame grounds 
 on which he recommends the deferring the Baptifm 
 of Infants^ he advifes alfo — *' That unmarried per- 
 " fons fhould be kept off from this facr amenta who art 
 *' likely to come into temptation \ as well thofe who ne* 
 *' verwere married^ as thofe in widowhood \ until they 
 *' either marry ^ or be confirmed in continence, ney _ 
 *' who underftand the weight of Baptifm will rather 
 *' dread the receiving of it, than the delaying of it (c)." 
 
 This is Tertullian's reafoning upon the 
 point i but we have nothing to do with that\ all 
 we cite him for is a voucher to an antient fa£i^ to 
 prove that in his days Infants were baptifed. To this 
 fad he bears inconteftibie witnefs. His faying — 
 " Itaque pro cujufque perfonjE conditione, i^c. 
 *' Therefore according to every ones condition^ difpofition 
 '^ and alfo age^ the delaying of Baptifm is more proft- 
 " table \ efpe daily in the cafe of children:'''' and his 
 F 2 afking 
 
 f€) Tert. de Baptifmo, cap. 1 8. 
 
|6 l^he Moral Purpofes and Ufe' 
 
 diking — *' Qi?'*^ ftdinat innocens aetas ad remifll- 
 ^' onem peccatorum ? Quid enim necefle eft, fi 
 *' non tarn necefid fponlbres euam periculo in- 
 *' geri.*' — " Why does that innocent age make fuch 
 ♦' hafte to the remiffwn of fins ^ i.e. to the laver of 
 *' Baptifm ? IVhat occafion is there ^ except in cafes 
 ^' of necejjily, that the fponfors or godfathers, he 
 *' brought into danger [d) ?" Thefe queOions plainly 
 prove the baptiftng of Infants to have been the 
 pradice of his days. 
 
 Note. There are fome, who upon very proba-^ 
 ble grounds, underfland thefe parages of Tertul- 
 Uan as relating only to the Baptifm of the Infants of 
 Heathen parents ; whicir when they came into 
 their power by purchafe^ conquef, <^c. the Chrijiians 
 pf thofe times were wont to baptife. And that it 
 is only to delay the baptifing ofjuch Infants as thefe, 
 which Tertullian advifes, there is (Irong reafon to 
 believe. 
 
 Hitherto, we find this point, of Infant Baptifm^ 
 but tranficntly touched on by thefe early 'Writers : 
 there having yet no controijerfte or doubt arifen in the 
 church which might give occafion to their fpeak- 
 ing more exprefsly concerning it. But about this 
 tme^ there arofe lome difpure about Original 
 Sin, or the nature and degree of that pollution 
 with which new-born Infants are tainted. Hence- 
 forward, therefore, we fhall find more dire5i and 
 txprefs palTages relating to their Baptifm. 
 
 Or 1 GEN, about an hundred aiid ten years after 
 the Apoftles, fpeaking of the pollution which 
 cleaves to Infants, fais, — '* Adde his etiam. — Be- 
 '> fides this alfo let it be conftdered % what is the rea- 
 r^ fonj that whereas the Baptijm of the church is given 
 '^ for the, forgivenefs^ Infants alfo by the ufage of 
 ^' the church are baptised: when if there were 
 
 (J) Ibid, 
 
w Religion of Infant Baptifm. 37 
 
 ^' nothing i« Infants which wajtted forgivenefs and 
 " mercy ^ the grace ^/Baptism would be 7ieedlefs to 
 *' them (c)'' 
 
 And again, " Parvuli baptizantur in remifllo- 
 " nem." — " Infants are baptised for the 
 *' reynijjion of fins. Of what Sins ? Or when have they 
 " finned? Or how can any reafon of the laver hold 
 ^' good in their cafe \ but according to that fenfe before 
 " mentioned y none is free from pollution, though 
 " his life be but the length of one day upon the 
 *' earth ? And it is for that reafon^ becauje^ by the 
 *' facr anient of Baptifm the pollution of our birth is ta- 
 *' ken away ^ //^^/ Infants are baptised (f).'* 
 
 In another treatife he fais — '< Pro hoc & eccle- 
 " fia." — " For this alfo it was^ that the church had 
 *' from the Jpoflles a tradition^ or order, to Qivt 
 *' Baptism alfo iol-nYAUT^, For they to whom 
 *' the divine myfleries were committed^ knew that there 
 *' is in all perfons the natural pollution of Sin, which 
 *' mujl be done away by water and the fpirit (g).*' 
 
 There are other pafTages of Origen, full to this 
 point: but thefe, already cited, abundantly prove 
 the Baptifm of Infants to be the (landing cujlom of 
 his days. That they are genuine and authentic, 
 fee clearly (hewn in Dr. ^Fall's Hiflory of Infant Bap- 
 tifm, Vol. I. pag. c,c,. — and defence, pag. 372. 
 
 Note. Or I GEN was born, about eighty five years 
 after the age of the Apoftles -, and if baptifed in In- 
 fancy (as there is no reafon to queftion but he was, 
 his father and grand father having both been Chrif- 
 tians) here is clear proof of \is practice very near the 
 Apofiolic age. Though he refided chiefly at Alex^ 
 andria in Egypt, he had been converfant in almoil 
 ^11 the noted churches of the world. His tefli- 
 
 mony. 
 
 (e) Homil. vili. in Levit Cap. 1 2. (f) Ibid, in Luc. 
 
 (g) Ibid. Commeat. ifiEpifl. Rom. L. 5. 
 
38 The Moral Purpofes and Ufe 
 
 hy, therefore, to the point may juftly be fuppofed 
 to fpeak the fenfe of them all (h). 
 
 We next proceed to Cyprian, who wrote 
 about an hundred and fifty years after the Apoftles ; 
 and gives, if it be poITible, a yet more and indu- 
 bitable teftimony to this fa5i. In his time {Anno 
 JDomini 253) a council of fixty-JIx bifhops being con- 
 vened at Carthage 'f one FtduSy a country bifhop, 
 having entertained fome doubt (not whether In- 
 fants fliould be haptifed at all^ but) whether Baptifm 
 might lawfully be given them, till they were eight 
 days oldy according to the law of circumcifwn ? In 
 anfwer to this doubt, they unanimoufly decreed — 
 " I'hat the baptifm of Infants was not to be deferred till 
 *' the eighth day, ^^ — And after many things fpoken 
 to the point they conclude thus — " Casterum fi 
 «' homines impedire aliquid. But if any thing could 
 << hinder men from Baptifm^ it will be heinous fins^ 
 «' which will debar the adult and mature therefrom, 
 *' And if thofe who have finned extremely ^ yet if after- 
 «' ward they believe ^ are baptifed^ and no man is pro- 
 *' hibited from this grace •, how much more ought not 
 ** AN Infant to be prohibited-, who^ being but 
 ** JUST BORN, is guihy of no fin^ but of original 
 «' which he contra^ ed from Adam. — Wherefore^ 
 «' dearly beloved,, it is our opinion that from Baptifm 
 *' and the grace of God,, who is kind and benign to all, 
 •' none ought to be prohibited by us •, which as it is to 
 ^ be obferved with refpecl to all, fo efpecially with, 
 ^* refpeci to Infants, and thofe who are but 
 
 JUST 
 
 (h) The learned Dr. Gale, who with great acutenefs had 
 difputed the preceeding authorities (but whoie obje6iions have 
 been abundantly ani'wered by Dr. IFall] does not fo much as 
 fretend toconteit thofe which follow, from Cyprian and Jufiin. 
 Thcfe, therefore, being admitted as incontejlihle by our oppo- 
 rents ; we (hall fee prefently, the ilrength with which they 
 conclude in our favour. 
 
/« Religion f/ Infant Baptifdi. 39 
 «« JUST BORN, Vjho deferve our help and the divine 
 " mercy (i).*' 
 
 Hence, then, it inconteftihiy appears, that the 
 Baptifm of Infants wsls the conltant, eftablifhcd 
 practice oi the church at this time: inalmuch, as 
 neither the ferfon who propofed the doubt, nor 
 any one of the/my-fix bifhops who anfwer ir, made 
 the lead qucffion of the Baptifm of Infants, but 
 fpeak of it as a thing univerfally acknowledged and 
 pradifed in the church. 
 
 Now, as this was but an hundred and fifty years 
 after the Apoflles ; and fomc of thefe bifhops may 
 reafonably be fuppofed feventy or eighty years old ; 
 if they were baptifed in their infancy (which can 
 with no reafon be doubted) it carries up the prac- 
 tice to within eighty years of the Apoflles them- 
 felves. And at the time of their infancy, there were^ 
 many alive who were born within the very age ot 
 the Apoflles, and could not but certainly and infaU 
 libly know what the Apostolic pra5lice and ap- 
 pointment was to this matter. 
 
 The Clementine Constitutions (a book 
 thought by fome to be of very great antiquity ; 
 and by all acknowledged to be extant in the fourth 
 or fifth century, and so contain a good account of 
 the antient difcipline and pradice) have this ex- 
 
 prefs admonition '' Bot'TrliffiTi Si vixcov -^ ra. vnTtia,.'*' 
 
 " Jnd BAPTISE YOUR Infants, and bring them 
 «< up in the nurture and admonition of God :" for he 
 fais, " Suffer the little children to come unto me, and 
 '« forbid them not,""* 
 
 There are feveral other teftlmonies, from Cle- 
 mens Alexa7idrinus \ queft. & refpon. apud J^f/?- 
 Martyr ; Greg, JSlazian \ Bajil ; Ambrofe \ Chryfojhm ; 
 and Jerom, moft full to this purpofe, to be fcen m 
 
 (i) Cyprian Epift. ad Fidum. Epift. 64. 
 
40 7he Moral Purpofes and X5k 
 
 Dr. Wall's Hijlory of Infant Baptifm^ too long to b^ 
 here inlerted ; 1 fhall further infill:, only, upon a 
 very remarkable and decifive one, from the writings 
 of AusT i N and Pe l a g i us ; about three hundred 
 and tm years after the Apoftles. I bring it not to 
 provQ Baptifm of In? ANTS to have been the un- 
 doubted, univerfal practice of the church in their days ^ 
 (this would be quite neediefs, after the much ear- 
 lier, and the indifputable evidence already produced 
 from the council at Carthage^ &c.) but, to fhew 
 it to have been the conflant and immemorial pra6licfe 
 from the very beginning of Chriftianity. 
 
 In his con trover fie with Pelagius, about m- 
 ginal fm\ to prove Infants to be tainted with it^ 
 Austin frequently and with great triumph urges 
 their B a P t ism ; demanding — " Why lnfan:s are 
 •' baptifedfor the remiffionoffin^ if they have none ?^* 
 Pelagius feems exceedingly embarraifed by this 
 argument (k) i and every one fees, how much vf. 
 
 concerned 
 
 (k) It IS furprifing, to fee tlie (hifts by w-hich PeU^ias, Ce- 
 iejiius, and their followers, endeavour to evade the force of this 
 argument. Sometimes they acknowledged Infants to have ac- 
 malfin^ and that their peevifhnefs and froward temper is to be 
 confidered as fuch. — Sometimes, they urged, that Infants had 
 pre exijied 5 and it was for fms done in fome former ftate, that 
 they were brought to the baptifmal laver.— Sometimes, they 
 faidj that they were not baptifed for i\iQ. forgive ne/s of Jin -, but 
 that they may be made heirs of the l:i/:gdom .—Scm.QV.n\er,, that 
 they were haptifed for forgi^'enefi ; cot that th^y had any fm, 
 but that the uniformity of the words might be kept : or, be- 
 eaufe they were baptifed into the church, where forgi-veng/s 
 was to be had; and with a facrament, which had the means 
 of forgi'venefs for thofc who wanted it. Vid. tf'alPs hilfory,- 
 Vol. I. pag. 280. 
 
 To fuch extreme difitculties they thought themfelves reduced, 
 to reconcile their opinion with the Baptijm of Infants. But, 
 thcfe had been all inllantly removed, and the battery which fo 
 annoyed them been demoliihed at once, by only denying that 
 Infants were to be baptifed. Yet, fo far are they from this, 
 
 that 
 
z« Religion g/* Infant Baptlfm. 41 
 
 concerned him to deny the Baptifm of Infants^ had 
 there been ?iny foffible ground for it •, and to dp all 
 that in him lay, to invalidate and difprove it. Had 
 it been an innovation^ a departure from the Apos- 
 tolic pra5iice % it is impofTible but fo very learned 
 and acute a perfon as PelagiuSy who lived fo near 
 the Apoftles^ and had been perfonally converfant in 
 fome of the moft noted churches ol Europe^ Afia^ 
 and Africa^ muft have been able to difcover it, and 
 both to have and to give at leafl: fome (Irong fuf- 
 picion of it. But does the very fagacious Pelagius 
 attempt any thing like this ? No : fo far from ir, 
 that fome of his adverfaries having drawn as a con- 
 fequence of his opinion, that Infants are not to he bap- 
 tifed. — He warmly difclaims ir, and with indigna- 
 tion cop plains.--^" Se ab hominibus infamariquod 
 " neget parvulis Baptifmi facramentum. nat he 
 *' had been flanderoifly reprefented by men, as denying' 
 **• the facrament of Baptifm to Infants'' And adds 
 *' Nunquam fe, vel impium aliquem h^ereticum, 
 *' audiffe qui hoc quod propofuic de parvulis di- 
 G " ceret." 
 
 that they feem not to have raifed the leafl: doubt of this kind. 
 Pelagius owns, as above cited. And Celejlius confeffes, tHac 
 Infants are to bebaptifed according to the rule of the univer* 
 SAL church. 
 
 Note. Pelagius and Celejlius were born, one in Britain^ the 
 other in Ireland i they lived a long time in Rome, the then 
 center of the world, and reputed head of the church : they 
 were both, for fome time, at Carthage, in Africa ; then, the 
 one fettled at Jerufaleyn \ the other travelled through ail the 
 noted Greek and "Eajiern churches, in Europe and Ajia, If 
 there had, then, been any church, or number of churches, 
 throughout the whole world, not only" in that, but in the two 
 preceeding ages, who denied the Baptifm of Infants ,\ ic is im- 
 poffible, but thefe two very learned and fagacious perfons niuli 
 have known, or heard of it: and that they would not have 
 failed to take mighty advantage from it, to check the triumphs 
 of their opponents ; and to wreft from them this argument^ dv 
 which, of all others, they were moll grievoull/ preiied. 
 
42 Tlje Moral Purpofes and Ufe 
 
 *' cetet." — *' ^hat he never heard^ no not even any 
 *' impious Heretic^ who would fay that which he had 
 " mentioned^ viz. that unbaptifed Infants are not 
 *' liable to the condemnation of the firft man, and 
 *' that they are not to be cleanfed by the regene- 
 ** ration of Baptifm.'* And then proceeds — '' Quis 
 ** enim ita evangelicse ledionis ignarus ed, ^c. 
 «c p^^ ^j^Q is fo ignorant of that which is read in the 
 *' ^^fp^ ^^ ^ ^^ ^^ot fay boldy to affirm^ but even lightly 
 *' /^ figg^fti or even to imagine fuch a thing ? In a 
 * * word^ who can be fo impious^ as to hinder Infants 
 *' from being baptised and born again /« Christ j 
 *' andfo make them mifs of the kingdom of God ?" 
 
 And having cited thefe words of our Saviour 
 John iii. 5. no one can enter into the kingdom of God, 
 except he is born again of water and of the fpirit, he 
 goes on — " Quis ille tarn impius eft qui cujuflibet 
 *' aetatis parvulo." — " Who is there fo impious as to 
 ' ' refufe /i? ^» In f a n t , of what age foever^ the com- 
 «« mon redemption of mankind (1)." Austin alfo, re- 
 citing the above-mentioned decifion of the council 
 at Carthage^ which determines that Infants are in no 
 wife to be denied Baptifm^ adds, — " Non folum in 
 ** catholica ecclefia, verum etiam in qualibet he- 
 •' refi vel fchifmate conftitutis, non memini me 
 •' aliud legifle." — " That neither from fuch as were 
 *' of the catholic churchy nor of fuch as belonged to any 
 *' fe3i or fchifm^ whatfoever^ he remembered not to 
 •' have read otherwife in any writer (m)." i. c. of any 
 who denied^ that Infants were baptifed upon the ac- 
 count of original fin. *-' This the church has a lways 
 " had^ has al'W ays held (n).'* 
 
 These, now, are the evidence^ on which we reft 
 the Antiquity of this fa5l\ and by which we 
 
 prove 
 
 (1) Auftln. d€ peccato Origen. cap. 17, 18. (m) Ibid, de 
 nat. & gratia, cap. 6. (n) Ibid, Serm. x. de verb. Apoft. 
 
in Religion oflnhnt Baptifm. 43 
 
 ^vovtiht Baptifm of Infants to have been the pra5lice 
 of the Chriflian church, from the very beginning. 
 Jujiin Martyr about/^r/jy years; Ir enaus ^bout /xty- 
 /even ; and Tertul/ian about an hundred years after 
 //^^ Apostles, give plain intimations of its being 
 the Cbrijiian practice in their times. From Origen 
 an hundred and ten years ; and from Cyprian and the 
 fynod o{fixtyfix bifhops, one hundred and^/y years 
 from the above date, we have indifputable proof of 
 its being then the efiahlijhed and fianding ufage of 
 the church. And Aufiin and Pelagius^ about three 
 hundred and ten years after the Apoftles fchough the 
 latter was under the ftrongeft temptation^ and even 
 neceffuy to deny the Baptifm of Infants, had there 
 been any pofTible ground for it) acknowledge, 
 that they never heard, nor read of any, whether true 
 Chriftian, Heretic, ^r Schifmatic, who denied Bap- 
 tifm to Infants, This is the evidence : let us now 
 argue from it. 
 
 1. All the churches, throughout the whole Chrif- 
 tian world, were in the age of the Apofiles, formed 
 and eftablifhed upon one and the same plan. That 
 is to fay, they all either baptifed Infants; orelfe 
 they ALL rejedted them from Baptifm. What the 
 opinion, and the pradlice, of the Apofiles was in 
 this matter, (who were fent out into all the world 
 to preach and eftablifh churches) muft be perfed- 
 ly, univerfally, infallibly known ; nor could it pof- 
 fibly he mijiaken, by any one fingle church through- 
 out the whole earth, during the Apofilic age. The 
 Corinthians, for inftance, the Galatians, the Theffa" 
 lonians, ^c all perfedly knew, whether Paul and 
 his companions, when they baptifed and formed 
 them into a church, baptifed their Infants alfo ; 
 or elfe rejected them from Baptifm. And 
 
 2. As to the age, immediately following the 
 4poftles\ it is impoflible that they could be ig- 
 
 G 2 mrant 
 
44 ^^^ Moral Purpofes and Ufe 
 
 fiofmi or miftaken as to this fadl. They could hot 
 be in the ledji doubt, how their fathers had receiv- 
 ed and learnt from the Apojiles^ and pradifed as to 
 this matter. For whether Infants were^ or were 
 iioty then baptifed ; was fo notorious and plain a 
 fa6f^ ^ fafl of fo public and confpicuous a nature, 
 as could not poffibly efcape the knowledge of 
 
 iVERY ^AkTICULAR CHRISTIAN, thCH Hving 
 
 updn earth (6). 
 
 Now if ALL, //:?^ churches throughout the world, 
 were really cfiablifbed by thtApoJlks upon the plaa 
 of cnly Adult Bapiifm; and they every where re- 
 je(5led Infants, and forbid them to be baptifed ; 
 it will appear a thing abfoJutely inconceivable^ and 
 even a moral IkpossiBrLrfy, that the Baptifm 
 of Infants fliould fo early, fo widely, fo univerfal- 
 ]y -prevail^ thfb^^ghout the whole world, as we have 
 now feen it to hate done. 
 
 For if the Baptifm of Infants was mt an Apos- 
 tolic inftitiition drid pradice, how mud the per- 
 ibh§, /v^'ho firfi attempted to introduce it, be re- 
 ceived ? Would hot all their neighbour C^r//?kw 
 immediately cry out upon the innovation^ and de- 
 mand, — '« By what authority do you prefume to 
 *« perform this quite new, this unheard of and 
 
 ^'' Jlrange cei-emony of baptifiug ^n Infant !''< 
 
 Supp'oie thehr to have urged, i'n ftip^ot*t of their 
 pradice, th'e fatne "fcriptures with us 5 wbuld it not 
 
 have 
 
 (o) With whatever credulity as to Miracles, faid to be 
 ivrought in rheir day?, thefe earlyuoriten may be charged; it 
 ^annotatall afFcd their ev?dence as to the fad, here, in debate. 
 For, as tjiere was no fwjjihility of their being themfelves deceiv- 
 ed is to this matter ; fo neither could they be under temptation 
 Xofalfifie in their accounts of it. Nor indeed, had the tempta- 
 tion been ever fo llrong, could they have ventured to faljtfie in 
 a faft notorious to all the world j and when every Chrijiitin then 
 living could have flepped forth, and born witnefs to the/^i^W 
 of their account. 
 
hi Religion of\t\hr\% Baptifm, 45 
 
 have prefently been replied upon them with un- 
 anfwerable ftrength? — " Biit did not the 4^^/^j 
 " zn6 firft preachers o{ cW\?i\dih\iY x^ndttildiud the 
 " true fcnfe and force of thefe fcriptures ? Yet not 
 '' one of them all, nor any one of their followers, 
 *' ever baptifed an Infant, as we all perfedly know, 
 " and as you cannot but oWn. Look into all the 
 « churches throughout the whole earth, into Syria^ 
 '^ Palejline^ Egypt^ Greece^ Ilaly^ Africk, Spam, &c. 
 ^' and you will find there never was fuch a thing 
 *' known, nor heard of annongft Chriftians^ as bag-^ 
 *« tifing an Infant." , -''^ 
 
 What ! I greatly wonder, c6Uld the firft bap- 
 iifers of Infants pofTibly reply ? Could they Urge 
 that it was an apofiolic injundion and pra(5lice ? No^: 
 the ze'Wi^Chriftian world would h^^ve rofe up againft 
 them, and born witnefs to the ralihood of fuch ai 
 pretence. Could they hope then to jeftablifh this 
 invention of their own ; yea, Was it vMually eJiabUfhed^ 
 in dired oppofirion to the Apostles authority^ and 
 to their then perfed:ly well-knoWn inflitutiori and 
 pradlice f-^ImpoITible to itii^gine ! 
 
 What then ! I afk again, could xhtfirji baptifers 
 of Infants urge in favour of their pradice ? Or 
 hov7 was it polTible, it Ihould he teceived^ yea /rf- 
 vail, yea fo aniverfally prevail, that the very learned 
 and acute Pelagius about three -hmidred years after, 
 never heard of a church amongfl either Catholics 
 or Heretics, who did not bapitife Infants, if all 
 •the churches in the world were conftituted by the 
 Apoftles upon the diredtly oppofite plan ? Yea, 
 and when the perfons who firft began this pradice 
 could not but own, that the authority and example 
 of ALL the Apoflles, and of all the primitive Chrif 
 iians, and of ALL the churches in the world were 
 abfolutely againft them ? 
 
 Well \ but fuppofe a few perfons were of fo odd 
 a turn of mind, as to run intg this cji^ute novel and 
 
 unheard 
 
46 7he Moral Purpofes and Ufe 
 
 unheard of pradlice, of haptiftng Infants; can it 
 be imagined that whole churches would be led blind- 
 ly away after them ? Or, if whole churches might 
 be thus [educed \ could whole nations be fo too ? 
 Yea, if whole nations might ; can it enter into the 
 heart of any reafonable man, that all the Na- 
 tions of the Chriftian world, both the eaftern and 
 the wejiern churches, in the fpace of about two hun- 
 dred years, univerfally fell in with this antiapojlolic 
 and new-invented rite of worftiip: and fo ftrangely 
 apojiatifed from the primitive and pure dodrine of 
 Christ as to this matter! It were the height of 
 abfurdity even to furmife fuch a thing. 
 
 The extravagance of the fuppofition is moveover, 
 mightily increafed, by remembring — that a vaft 
 number of fe5fs and herefies fprung up, and the 
 Chriftian church was rent into many angry and 
 contending parties, during thefe times (p). In the 
 fecond century, or the age immediately following 
 the apoftles, there were thofe who took their names 
 from CerinthuSy Ebion^ ValentinuSy Carpocrates^ Mar- 
 ciony Montamis ; and the whole church was rent 
 into two furious and angry feds, the eajiern and 
 the wejiern^ by the controverfie about eajler. In 
 the third century there arofe Novatian^ SabeUius^ 
 PaulusSamofatenfjs^ Manes^ i^c, with their followers. 
 In the four thy the MeletianSy Arians, AthanaftanSy ^c. 
 Now thefe feveral inflamed parties^ into which by 
 divine permilTion, the church was then divided, 
 were watchful and fevere fpies upon each others 
 condudl : fo that if any of them had innovated in 
 this matter, of haptifing Infants ^ how readily would 
 the reft have entered their proteft againft it, and 
 exclaimed loudly upon tht innovation P But, it feems, 
 fo far were they from this ; that however mutually 
 
 in- 
 
 (p) No lefs than ninety different herejies are faid to have 
 fprung up in the three firft centuries. 
 
in Religion ^Infant Baptifm. 47 
 
 inflamed and angry as to other points -, yet, laying 
 afide their animofity, they all furprifingly ^^r^^, in 
 the affair of baptifing Infants^ to depart from the 
 apoftolic pradice j and by an unaccountable confede^ 
 racy connive atone another in this dangerous fuper- 
 ftition. — Strange! beyond all belief! Thatamidft 
 their many mutual accufations, reproaches, com- 
 plaints, we meet not, in all antiquity, with one 
 upon this head •, and not a man, Catholic nor He- 
 retic^ dropping a fingle word againft this grofs in- 
 novation ; except, perhaps, TertuUian ; and he not 
 abfolutely, (if at all) cenfuring it; and fupporting 
 his diflike of it, by reafons which are no Itrength, 
 but a difhonour to any caufe. 
 
 For an hundred years after the death of the Apos- 
 TLES, their authority was fufficient, our brethren 
 acknowledge, to keep fuch an innovation from en- 
 tering the church. They therefore ufually place 
 the introdu5iion o^ this practice about the beginning 
 of the third century. But behold 1 in the (hort 
 fpace of about two hundred years more \ without a 
 fingle precept to warrant, or a fingle example to en- 
 courage it, yea with the well-known pradlice of the 
 Apostles themfelves, and o^ all the churches they 
 ever planted throughout the whole world, confef- 
 fedly, openly, diredlly againft it \ under all thefe 
 difadvantages, t\\t Baptifm of Infa7itSy it feems, fo 
 EVERY WHERE prevailed, that upon the face of 
 the whole earth there was not a church found where 
 it was not performed ! — To him that believes this, 
 what can be incredible ! 
 
 Some, perhaps, to evade the force of the fore- 
 going argument, mayobjed — " There have been 
 " other great corruptions, fuch as image-worfljip^ 
 ** tranfubftantiation, ^c, which have alike univerfally 
 *' prevailed in the church." But the anfwer is ex- 
 tremely obvious. I, This is far from being true ; 
 
 nay 
 
48 The Moral Parpofes and Ufe 
 
 nay it Is entirely without foundation. Neither imagc- 
 vvorfhip, nor tranflibftantiation, ever univerfally pre- 
 vailed. The latter has by the greater part of the 
 Chriftian church been in all times rejeded as it is 
 at this day : and though the former^ fince the J'e- 
 ^enth century, has fpread itfelf wide, and too ge- 
 nerally prevailed *, yet it was not without mighty 
 Jlruggles and oppofitions in the church : .numerous 
 fynods of biftiops zealouQy declared againfl: it : fo- 
 lemn decrees of councils^ not in one kingdom or 
 church only, but in diverfe regions of the earth, 
 publickly condemned it : the arm both of civil and 
 military power was ftrenuoufly exerted to eftablifii 
 and fupport it: grievous perfecutiops were raifed 
 . upon its account : and many teftified their abhor- 
 rence of it by bitter fufFerings, and death itfelf. — • 
 And is this a cafe at all parallel to that o^ Infant- Bap- 
 ///;;2,which we have now been cofidering.? The moil: 
 prejudiced judgment muft confefs it is not. Befides 
 2. Had thefc corruptions^ indeed, as univerfally pre- 
 vailed, as Infant' Bapiifm ever did •, yet would this, 
 by no means, have put them upon an equal fooc 
 with that •, or have niade the cafes at all parallel. 
 For, when \.\\t Bifmp of Rome had claimed and was 
 acknowledged to be th^ infallible head^ the fupreme 
 pafior of tht church, the vicar of Curi st, ^c, when 
 emperors and kings took upon them to convene coun- 
 cils, to explain dodrines,. and eilablifh faith by dint 
 of civil authority •, cherifhing and upholding one 
 party by v;orldly honours and preferments •, but 
 terrifying and cruOiing others by banilhment, con- 
 fifcations, imprifonment and death : finally, when 
 the clergy had both the terrors and the riches of this 
 world, much at their difpofal ; and the fpirit of 
 true piet)\ fortitude^ and faith bL^^an to languifli in 
 the church (as it mifcrably languiilied, in t.he 
 times when image-worfhip and trqnjuhjlantiation v/ere 
 
 brought 
 
in Religion ^Infant Baptifnl. Ag 
 
 brought in) 2ir\d z {^\nto^ pride ^vA dominnticn^ of 
 fenfuality and Jloth fprung up in its room. — When 
 this, I fay, was the caft:, fuch an un'rjsrfal departure 
 from the Apoftles dodrine and pradice may ieem 
 eafily to be accounted for, and has nothingin it 
 fo flrange. But^ — when the circumdances of the 
 church were the very reverfc of all this ; harrafied 
 and feverely prefled by perfecutions from wirhout ; 
 fplit into various feds and angry parties within ; 
 deftitute of worldly honours to recommend, and ot 
 worldly terrors to enforce, any dodrine or pradice ; 
 and acknowledging no vifible, fupreme, infdlible 
 head^ as having dominion over its faith \ when this 
 was the cafe (as in the three firft centuries, whea 
 Infant -Baptifm has been fhewn univerfally to prevail, 
 it manifeftly was) every one fees the zvide the vajt 
 difference s and muft confefs the impolTibiiicy o{ fo 
 univerfally corrupting the Apostolic dodrine and 
 pradice of baptifing o^^ l y the Adult, if any fuch 
 there had been; and of foift.ing in, throughout 
 the whole world. Infant- Baptifm in its dead. 
 
 So that, upon the whole, it appears a clear and 
 a very ftrongly attefted fooi. — That the pradice, ot 
 baptifing of I'iitA]^!:^ \v2is primitive and apoftolic ; 
 and that the firfi Chriftian churches were every 
 where formed and eftabliflied upon this fcheme. 
 
 But the Examples of Scripture Baptifm, our 
 brethren are wont to urge, are all on their fide. 
 —This is confidently, indeed, ajGTerted ; but upon 
 a clofer examination will be found a manifefl: mif- 
 take. There being not, in the whole fcripture, 
 ONE fingle inflance of the Baptifm for v^^hich they 
 plead, and which is pradifed amongd: them, viz. 
 thai thofe who are born of ChrijJian parents, are to be 
 fuffered to become adult before they are bap ti fed. — This, 
 it is to be obferved carefully, is the poin: in queltion 
 betv/ixt us. As for the cafe of adult profelytesy or 
 
 H con- 
 
^a 57j^ Moral Purpofes and Ufe 
 
 converts to chriftianity, thefe, we all agree, are not 
 to be bapcifed 'till they ptv^ondiWy profefs faiib. The 
 fcripture inftances therefore of fuch frofelytes^ bap- 
 tifed upon fuch prof^JJion, are of no pertinence nor 
 weight at all in the controverfie before us : for thefe 
 are exadly confonant to our fentimcnts and prac- 
 tice. The only point in debate is — wbai is to he done 
 with the Infants oj thefe profelytes? — Are they to 
 be baptifed with their parents? — Or; are they to 
 be let alone 'till they become adult, and then be 
 baptifed upon their perfonal profeflion ? This latter, 
 our brethren fay ; but have not in the whole fcrip- 
 ture, I again affirm it, one inftance of fuch pradice ; 
 no, nor any (hadow or appearance of it. Their 
 beads, therefore, of fcripture inftances^ precedents^ 
 examples^ are meer found, and nothing elfe. Where- 
 as the inftance of Lydia^ A<5ls xvi. 14, 15. (not to 
 mention Stephanas and \ht jaylor) ftrongly favours 
 our pra(5lice ; whofe faith alone is mentioned, and, 
 immediately it is added, her houfehold were baptifed. 
 
 TChe Religious 6?r Moral purpofes of 
 Infant-Baptfm, 
 
 F it be aflced — what are the moral purpofes of this 
 Baptifm of Infants? or, of what real benefit or 
 life in religion ? It were fufHcient to reply — of the 
 fame benefit and ufe as Infant -circumcijion was •, which 
 is acknowledged to have been injoined by God, and 
 prafnfed by his church, for more than two thoufand 
 years. — But i add ; ic is of great moral benefit ; as 
 It is both a folemn vow or dedication on our part, and 
 a gracious condefcenfion and promife on God's. 
 
 First. Ic is a folemn vow or dedication on our 
 part. For, herein, the religious parent pubhckly 
 
 rccog' 
 
in Religion c/" Infant Baptifm. 51 
 
 tecognifes his own covenant with God : binds him- 
 felf by a facred promife to watch over the immortal 
 foul^ now committed to his charge, and to train it 
 up in a religious manner ; and devotes firfl: himfelfy 
 and then his helplejs Infant^ to the divine patronage 
 and care. By being haptifed into the ^ am ^^ the 
 child is folemnly given up to the dominion and fa- 
 vour, and is received as the peculiar property, the 
 fubjedl and charge, c/z^j^Father, and of the Son, 
 and of the Holy Ghost (qj. And to one who well 
 confiders, into what a world of various difficulties, 
 tem.ptations and fins, his Infants are born ; how 
 every age and path of life is befet with dangers and 
 fnares ; and what confequences, of awful moment, 
 depend upon the manner in which they pafs the pre- 
 fent ftate — to him that confiders this, it cannot but 
 appear an ineftimablc privilege to be permitted to 
 give them up, in this folemn manner, to the gra- 
 cious protedion and condud. of heaven. 
 
 The fentiments of a religious parent, on fuch an 4 y^ 
 occafion, may be thus exprefifed. — " 1 acknow- 
 *' ledge, Almighty Gcd, with the greatet]: thank- 
 ^' fulnefs and joy, thine ahfolute right in me, and 
 ** in all that is mine. This child^ which thou haft 
 *' given me, 1 receive as from thine hand. It is 
 '* thine^ for thou haft formed it, and redeemed it 
 " by the blood of thine only begotten fon. To 
 ** THEE therefore I now folemnly devote and give 
 " it up: to be guarded by thy providence \ miniftred 
 *' to by thine angels -^ influenced by thy Spirit i 
 '^ conduced fafe through the^many dangers and 
 H 2 " evils 
 
 (q) Baptifing in (or into) the name — fignifies, commending 
 {I perfon to the peculiar blejftng and patronage of liim, or them, 
 in whofe»^«^ he is baptifed. Thus, when the form of folejnn 
 benedi£tion is prefcribed, Numh. vi. 23. — T^he Lord hlefs thee, 
 and keep thee, i^c. It is added — And thtyjhall put my Mamb 
 upon the children of Ifrael, and 1 ^^ill blefs them* 
 
52 The Moral Purpofes and Ufe 
 
 <« evils of this prefent world, and to be preferved 
 « to thine everlafling kingdom and glory in the 
 *' other. 
 
 '* For ever blefled be thy name, that as hy one 
 *' man^s offence^ Judgment came upon all to con- 
 <« demmlioJi and death •, €ve?i fo by the righteoiifnefs 
 *« of one ^ the Free Gift comes upon all to juftijica- 
 ^« tion of life. That as the fatal efFe6ts of th^fajl 
 '' Adamh fin extend to our Infant- offsprings fubjed- 
 *^ ing them to pain, to mifery, and death •, fo, the 
 *' falutary tfreds of the fecond Adam's righteouf- 
 ^' nefs extend alfo to thefe^ raifing them to glory, 
 *' to happinefs and life.-— 
 
 " I render unfeigned thanks, that the bleffings 
 
 *'• di redemption and of the covenant of grace ^ reach 
 
 ^' 2.VhK.othem. That thou haft commanded that 
 
 *' little children he brought into thy pre fence ^ to receive 
 
 s^ thy folemn benedidicn, and haft declared them 
 
 *' to belong to thy family and kingdom. That i\it bap- 
 
 ^' tifmal vsater is appointed as a ftanding monument 
 
 *' of thy favour and gracious acceptance of them? 
 
 *' and that by this^^ar^ is reprefented, thy readi- 
 
 *' nefs to four down thy fpirit upon our feed ^ and thy 
 
 *' bleffmg upon our offspring (r).— Lord I believe! 
 
 «' I moft thankfully accept this liberty which is 
 
 . *' given me. I here bring my helplefs Infant, 
 
 *' commending it to God, and the power of his 
 
 *' grace. Oh take it into thy family, and into the 
 
 *' arms of thy love! Pour down thy bleftings on 
 
 " if, and write its mamein the book of life ! May 
 
 *' it h^fan^i fed from, the womb : confcxrated a chcfcn 
 
 '"^ vtffcl, fitted for thyfervice! May thy Spirit 
 
 «' defcend upon, and dwell continually in it, as a 
 
 ^' new principle of life 5 gradually rectifying the 
 
 f diforders of its n:iture -, rooting out the feeds of 
 
 ^' vanity and folly which may fpringup inits heartj 
 
 '.' enlight- 
 (r) Ifaiah xlv. 3. 
 
in Religion ^Infant Baptifm. 53 
 
 «< enlightening its underftanding, ftrengtheningits 
 *' moral powers, purifying and controuling its ap- 
 '^ petices and paffions ; and forming it into a living 
 *' temple and habitation of God! 
 
 " Guard and preferve the life, which thou haft 
 «' thus gracioufly bellowed ! Condu(5t it through 
 «« the dangers of childhood and youth ! Spare it, 
 <' if it be thy will, to be a bleffing to its friends; 
 «« and a burning and (hining light, amidft a dark 
 ** and corrupt world ! As it grows in years, may 
 *' it con tin u ft fly grow in grace, in wifdom, and in 
 *« virtue, -^w^ in favour with God and men! Grant 
 " me, ever to walk before it with a wife and per- 
 «' feci heart : to bring it up in the fear and in the 
 " nurture of the Lord : and fo faithfully to dif- 
 *' charge my duty, in every refped towards it, that 
 " I may at laft meet it with joy at thy kingdom 
 «* and appearance, and with triumph then fay— 
 '' behold me^ and the child which thou haft given me\** 
 
 And as it is thus a folemn vow and dedication on 
 our part : fo it is 
 
 Secondly. A moft gracious condefcenjion and 
 promife on God's. It is a token of his covenant 5 a 
 memorial ovftgn that he gracioufly accepts both the 
 religious parent and his child, and that he will 
 he their God. By this rite he aflures us, that as, 
 in the wifdom of his providence, he treats Infants 
 as finners^ through the tranfgreffion of Jdamy fo» 
 in the riches of his grace, he had opened a foun- 
 tain for their cleanfing : will treat them as righteous 
 through the obedience of Christ : and will give 
 them /6f J Spirit to quicken, regenerate and raife 
 them to life. Of this Spirit the baptifmal water 
 is the appointed emblem ovftgn ; and by command- 
 ing it to be poured on them he virtually fais — 
 
 " Suffer /^^ L I T t L E Ch I L DRE N /i? come unto me^ 
 ^« and forbid them not : for th£se alfo I account as 
 
 *' fub- 
 
54 ^^ Moral Purpofes and Vk 
 
 *' fubjedls of my moral kingdom, arid as a part of 
 <* that church, or chofen fociety^ over whom I will 
 ** exercife a peculiar providence and care. 
 
 " And the chtld^ which the pious parent has thus 
 ^' devoted to me, I deliver back to him again : 
 «' with a folemn charge that he ever, henceforth, 
 *' confider it as my property. Train it up as for my 
 «• ftrvice. Teach it early the principles of Chriftian 
 *« knowledge and virtue. Pray daily with, and for 
 <« it. Set before it a good example : and watch 
 «' over it as one who muft Ihortly give account, to 
 *' ihQ great Jhepherd when he (hall appear. So onljr, 
 *« mayeft thou hope that it will be thy comfort and 
 *' delight in this world -, and thy^'^^', and everlaft- 
 *' ing crown of rejoicings in the other." 
 
 Thefe are feme of the pious fentimentSy which the 
 Baptifm of an Infant naturally fuggefts. Confider- 
 ed in this light, it appears to be of great moral be- 
 nefit: a mod rational and proper fervice, or adt of 
 teligicn. It manifeftly tends to enlarge and to con- 
 firm a Chriftian's faith and hope in God, with re- 
 gard to his helplefs child — to give a clearer and 
 more extenfive view of the great fcheme of redemp^ 
 fton— to render parents xwqxq faithful ^ more diligent^ 
 and ferious in the education of their children ; if 
 Their lives are continued : and if they are taken 
 from them, it affords the nohlt^ fu^port and confo- 
 %tion in their death. 
 
 *' f here beg leave to add — that there is a vafl 
 difference in the genius and temper of children, even 
 in their moft early years, every one fees. What 
 influence the divine Spirit has in forming the 
 (fuman mind, even in its Infant State ; and moulding 
 it into ?L preparation for future ufefulnefs and virtue 
 — We cannot certainly fay. Probably very great: 
 for John, it is fa id, Luke i. 15. was f.lled with ih$ 
 Holy Gno%T from his mother^ s womb. The pro- 
 phet 
 
?» Religion g/" Infant Baptifm, SS 
 
 phet Ifaiahy was called and formed from the womh^ to 
 be a peculiar nieflenger of heaven to inflrud and 
 reclaim the people. Ifa. xlix. i, 2, 5. And of 
 Jeremy it is fa id, before I formed the in the belly 1 
 knew thee : and before thou cdmefl forth out of the 
 womb^ I fan5lified thee^ and ordained thee a prophet 
 unto the nations. Jer. i. 5. 
 
 It is then, a rational ad of worfhip ; for parent?, 
 from the very dawn and firfl beginnings of life, to 
 devote their children to God, and to the peculiar 
 influences of his fpirit. And it is a very merciful 
 and wife appointment, furely, if God has inftitu- 
 ted any rite^ or facrament of religion, in which be- 
 lieving parents are commanded thus to dedicate their 
 Infants to him ; and in which he gives them ^fo- 
 lemn token that he will pour his fpirit and blefiing 
 on them. This is done in Baptifm. The water 
 poured on them, being an apt and proper emblem 
 of his readinefs to hear the prayers of the pious 
 parent, and to give his fpirit to the child — to pre- 
 lide over, and afTift, it's inteJkdlual and moral 
 powers — to form it to a love of virtue — and to fit 
 and pre-difpofc it for ufcfulnefs in future life (s). 
 
 Upon the whole then we conclude — that it be- 
 ing an undoubted Privilege of the Chriftian 
 difpenfation, as it was of both the Abrahamic and 
 Mofaic of old, xhuxh^ Infants of believers (t) fhould 
 
 be 
 
 (s) Mr. Tombs, the learned Ahtipedobaptift, acknowledges 
 t\i2it the grace o/Gon may put Infants mio Chrijiy and unite 
 them to him by his fpirii. Vid. Exatnen. §. lo. Suppofe, fais 
 one, there were a Majlevy who had thefecret oi pre-difpojing the 
 brain in order to future learning, or of giving a principle or , 
 power of future knowledge ; would it not be a very reafonable 
 and defireable thing to put Infants under his management ; and 
 might they not thenceforward be counted fcholars, or di/ciples, 
 to him, though not yet adually taught ? 
 
 (t) 'Qy Infants o/Belienjers, are not to be under flood only 
 their natural of spring ; but any Infants which are their proper- 
 ty. 
 
'56 7he Moral Purpofes and Ufe, &c. 
 
 be taken, together with themfelves, into covenant 
 with God : it becomes us, with great thankful nels, 
 to accept of this favour ; to dedicate our children^ 
 as well as ourjehes^ in this folemn manner to him : 
 and thus publickly to declare — that we, and our 
 Household, will ferve the Lor d. 
 
 ty, or members of their houfehold, orforwhore religious educa- 
 tion they will folemnly undertake. Thus, not only Abraham*^ 
 own children, but all bom in his houfe^ or bought 'with his money , 
 he was commanded to circumcife. Gen. xvii. i 3. So when Ly 
 ditty ihejaylor^ Sind St ephajias were baptifed, it is particularly 
 obferved, that their houfeholds were baptifed with them, found- 
 ling Infants^ therefore, are very rationally brought to Baptijnzt 
 by thofe who will engage folemnly for their Chrijlian education. 
 
 FINIS. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 Additional Notes to the Baptifm of In- 
 fants, (Sc. 
 
 INTRODUC. I'm. i6. from the end- — Add, The /ighf 
 . of nature itfelf feems plainly to have taught this. It was 
 the cullom of the Romans^ on the ninth day from the child's 
 birth (which was called the lujirical, or the day of purification) 
 for its friends and relations to bring it to the temple, and be- 
 fore the altars of the gods ; to recommend it to the protedlion 
 of fome tutelar deity. Middletor^s Life of Cicero. Vol. I. 
 pag. 6. A ceremony of the fame nature alfo was performed 
 amongft the Greeks, 
 
 Under Argument IV. pag. 29. read the note (z) at the bottom, 
 thus, This fentiment of an Infant'' s Holiness, and of the pro- 
 priety and duty of its being brought into the Church of GOD, 
 and there folemnly devoted to him, was quite fcri^tural and ra- 
 tional \ as well as perfedlly agreeable to the appointed cuftoms 
 and forms, and language of thofe times. For, Luke li. 22, 23. 
 'tis faid — They brought the Infant Je'^us to the Temple, to 
 PRE-5ENT HIM TO THE LoRD *. Js it 15 ^written in the 
 lanjo ; E^very firfl horn male fhall he h o l y /<? the Lord. Hence 
 it plainly follows, i. That /^/fl«/J are capab'e of Ho/Zw^// : 
 and that fome were accounted holy (i.e. taken into a more 
 peculiar relation to GOD) whilft others were not. And 
 2. That our Lord h:mi"elf, when an Infant, palled under a 
 Jeered ceremony , of the fame nature with our Infants when we 
 
 bring 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 bring them to be baptifed. The Infant Jesus, like onrsy was 
 brought to the place of worfhip, xh^vc folemnly to he prefented^ 
 or devoted, to the Lord. 
 
 Pag. 41. lin. 3. from the end. To — Denying the Sacrament of 
 Baptifm to Infants, add, and promifng the kingdom of HeU' 
 *ven to any njoithout the redemption of Chriji. 
 
 Pag. 42. lin. 1. Margin. For deNat. i^ Gratia, Leg. de 
 Pec. Merit, 
 
 At the bottom of pag. 46. Subjoin this note. Iraeneus, 
 Epiphaniusy Philaftrius, Aufiin, nnd T^heodoret, it has been 
 juftly obferved, each of them wrote Catalogues of the feveral 
 SeBs and Sorts of Chriftians they had ever heard of ; but none 
 of them mention any that denied Infant Baptifm, except thofe 
 who ^tniGdi all Baptifm. 
 
vf 
 
 n