* 
 
 
 WW^^\-^^ 
 
 
 &^^''""^l*"^3 
 
 *' .j^^B 
 
 P^ ^*''' 
 
 ' ^^ 
 
 »"~\ 
 
 
 j^_»;--. ,- ^^. , ^' ; 
 
 M 
 
 ^y-\-'^j^ 
 
 %• 
 
 
 T^ 
 
 T)6333e 
 
 V 
 
 
 1^ \ 
 
 .0, 
 
 
s 
 
 & 
 
 
*\ 
 
 I 
 
 « 
 
y» 
 
* \ 
 
¥ • 
 
T HE 
 
 Examining Quaker^ 
 EXAMINED. 
 
 O R, A 
 
 Farther Vindication 
 
 WATER-BAPTISM; 
 
 B Y T H E 
 
 DoBrine and PraBice 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Inspired Apostles, 
 
 And from the Testimonies of 
 
 Several of the Moft Eminent Authors^ of 
 
 the People call'd CLUAKERS. 
 
 Being an ANSWER to 
 
 JOSE PH BES SE's Examination^ of r 
 Dilcourfe on Water-Baptifm. 
 
 WHEREIN 
 
 That Author's Arguments, are fairly Anfwer'd; 
 and his Contradidions, both to Himfelf^ and hi3 
 Frienas are made Manifefl:.— — 
 
 I Their. V. 21. Proz'c all things : hold f aft that 
 
 "which is good, 
 Jud. i. 3. — " — Earneflly emit end for the faith 
 
 "ivhich ivas once deliver d unto the flints. 
 
 Bv Dan I E lH) o B E t. 
 
 Canterbury, Printed for the Aurhor, and Sold by 
 him ia Crcinbrooli, ?.nd J.Ahree at the Printing-Office. 
 
 M D ;■ r X '. V , i price Nine-PenceJ 
 

 THE °^<»rT. ^ 
 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 Christian Reader, 
 
 JF the Author y to which this is an Anfwer^ had 
 07ily look'd down on 77ie with Contempt^— ^ I 
 might have held my Peace : but^ as he hath 
 treated me, in ^Reviling ^«^ Calumnous manner \ 
 and not only fo^ but what is worjl of all^ hath en^ 
 deavoured, to render the Ordinance of Water- 
 Baptifm contemptible, or as a 7nean u7iworthy 
 Thing ; no more to be regarded now^ than a Jewilh 
 Ceremony ; 7 fay, from theje Co7ifi derations^ I 
 thought niyfelf C07icerned, once 77iore^ to appear i7i 
 Print 5 and in particular y to vindicate the Au- 
 thority for the PraUice of Water-Baptifm ; as 
 co72tained in the New-Teftament. And that 
 agai7ifi the open Atte7nptSy <9/'Jofeph BefTe to i7iva'^ 
 lidate it, 
 
 1 allow ^ with the above-77ientioned Author^ Tfjat 
 *^ Truth delights in Peace, and to fpread herfelf 
 " in a loving and familiar, rather than a polemick 
 *^ or controverfial Manner ; but wh^ miftakea 
 ^' Men do publickly oppofe her, a juft Defence is 
 *' neceflary, to fhevv them their Error, and pre- 
 f^ yent the fpreading it." See the Preface to a 
 
 A 2 D^ 
 
k PREFACE. 
 
 Defence o/^Ciualverifm, J^y Jofeph Befle. IJ^\\ I 
 
 allow the above ^^ and triijl^ that as I eft e em 
 
 Water-Baptifm, to be a Gofpel Ordinance ; / 
 hope, that I have endeavoured to fpread it in no 
 other JVayo And as I conclude^ Jofeph Beffe, to 
 
 be a miftaken Man^ who has pnblickly oppofed^ 
 
 " ■ ' ' ■ / think a Jiift Defence is necelTary, to fhew 
 him, and his Friends their Error ; and alfo, to 
 prevent (what in 7ne lieth) the fpreading of it. 
 
 And it^s very jlrange to me^ that my Opponent^ 
 •who profeJJ'es z'/j^Chriftian Name, Jljould apparent^ 
 h\ go on, and forget^ that Charity, which is a 
 Precept Jo eJJ'ential to that Holy Religion. A?idy 
 that he has Jo done, I truft will appear^ to every 
 impartial Reader, that Jl^all attend him with me^ 
 through his Treatife. 
 
 Th^ Reader may alfo take Notice, that the Au^ 
 ihors which I have cited., in the following Pages, 
 are ally except one^ Jiich as were, and are acknow-- 
 icdgcd ^Quakers. And this hne, who I itnderjland 
 was not Jo calfd, is William Dell : Tet, he was 
 tne.-^ that was the Jame with Z/;^ Quakers, in his 
 fudgment and Writings, with reJpeB to the Point 
 ifjiaptijm^ as will hereafter appear. 
 
 Ngw^ my Reafon for making iife of fuch Au- 
 thors, isy the Knowledge and Experience I have^ 
 that the Quakers pretend, that the Scriptures, are 
 f fcaled Book, <-^t Jiich as have not a Meafure of 
 the fame spirit ^ by ivhich they were given forth, ^-^ 
 
PREFACE. V 
 
 And forafmuch^ as they alfo conclude^ that their 
 Friends, efpecially the moji eminent of them^ were^ 
 and are^ led by what they efteem to be the Good 
 
 Spirit. 1 J^yy from theje Cofifiderations^ I 
 
 t bought y that the making Ufe ^their own Authors, 
 might be a Means ^ to gain their ferious Attention ; 
 
 in order ^ that they might come to fee the 
 
 miftakenPath, which they have been led into^ 
 andfo might at lajl^ by Divine AiGftance, cojne to 
 know and receive ^ the Truth as it is in Jejiis : 
 even, that Water- Baptifm, was comprifed in the 
 Doctrine; as well as pradifed, by the inlpired 
 Apoftles of Chrift. 
 
 // may indeed^ feem Jlrange, that Ifiould make 
 Choice of the Authors arnongjl the Quakers ; in 
 order, to manifefi the Quakers great Miftakes; 
 Yet fo it is; and it may be obferved, that 
 God by his over-ruling Providetice^ does often, fo 
 erder T^hings^ that the very Oppofers, of his Caufe, 
 and Truth, are found to do thatj which ^ injlead 
 of beijig againji it^ is, what does tend to dif cover 
 and confirm it. And this, I trufi will appear ^ to 
 be the very Cafe, from the Pafj'ages of the Jaid 
 Authors cited^ in the following Sheets. 
 
 And here, I alfo think proper^ to acquaint iny 
 'Readers^ that when Jofeph Beffe'i Exami?iation, 
 &c. of my Difcourfe on Water-B^ptifm, fir/i came 
 to my Handy I was not at Liberty to give fo full 
 fin Anfwer to it^ as I thought his Piece required : 
 \4nd therefore I only publijhed An Occafional Let- 
 
vi PREFACE. 
 
 ter, &c. in order to detedl the unkind Spirit y 
 
 that appeared^ andfome of the Self^ContradiBions, 
 
 that were contained therein, together 
 
 'with the Falihoods declared^ and fuggelied by that 
 Author ; on which he grounded his invidious Infi- 
 nuations, and Slanders : Ajid this I did^ that I 
 might fomewhat check, a kind ^Triumph, which 
 appeared, 
 
 I wQuld^ farther inform my Readers^ that in 
 the above - mentioned Letter, there are feveral 
 T^hings takeji Notice of that are ojnitted in this : 
 And in particular^ the Quaker's Certificate ; fgn*d 
 by four of their OWN Friends. There is alfo, 
 a counter Certificate of mine^ fs^^^^ h P^^fins of 
 ieveral Denominations. Which Certificate^ relates 
 to the Occafwn of this Controverfy : And is there- 
 fore 'jery proper^ to be read by all^ that would 
 kfiow fomething of the Ground of it, 
 
 I know^ many are apt to decry Controverfy ; as 
 
 Thomas Lancafter, an eminent Quaker, well ob- 
 
 ferveSy *' as if it was not poffible to glean any 
 
 " good Thing out of it.'* But he goes on^ and 
 
 {mjwersy in the Words of a worthy Author, who 
 
 f^y^^ 
 
 " It is not the Difference, but the Manner of 
 Handling and Debating that is the Scandal j I 
 fee no Way left but that either all muft agree 
 in Judgment, or all muft equally confcnt to 
 be filcnti or one Side only muft fpeak; or 
 
 <^ there 
 
PREFACE. vii 
 
 <* there muft be Debates and Controverfies. But 
 " in my Opinion, if we behave ourfelves as be- 
 *' comes Ghriftians in the Management of them, 
 '^ this is our only Care in fuch Cafes, nay, I have 
 '* often thought that this would make even Con- 
 ^^ troverfy itfelf a Glory to Chriftianity." ^ee 
 'Preface to Tho. Lancafter'i True Spiritual Bap- 
 tifm, £?r. 
 
 NoWy herein 1 ^uery well agree with Tho. Lan- 
 cafter, and his Author j and co?2clude, thatj it is 
 not the Difference, but the Manner of handling 
 
 and Debating that is the Scandal. ^W, it 
 
 appears to me^ that //'Jofeph Beffe, had^ paid a 
 proper Regard to this^ his Cenfures would have 
 been lefs rigid ; and his Arguments (as he fays) 
 more convincing. Andy I think I have juji Caufe 
 to fay of hiniy as he does in his Preface to the Vicar 
 o/'Great Paxton, only changing the refleBing Terms^ 
 
 that he " was under no NeceJJity of ftigma- 
 
 tizingme with the odiousNames of^ Ambitious, 
 Infolent Boafter, — Arrogant and Prefump- 
 tuous, — ^' fnce all the ufefil T^ruth his Book 
 *^ contains^ might have been communicated to the 
 *^ World without them^' However ^ notwithjiand- 
 ing all this, 1 heartily wijh him^ and all his Friends, 
 well y both in this Life and that which is to come ; 
 andjlmdd be glad to hear^ that the Veil, which 
 feems to be upon their Minds, may he removed : 
 that fo, they may come clearly to fee the Truth, as 
 contained and exhibited^ in the Doctrine — of the 
 commiflioned; and infpired Apojlks ofChriJl, 
 
 And 
 
 (C 
 
viu 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 And nowy friendly Reader, / defire thee to pe* 
 rufe the following Sheets cooly ; conjider them im- 
 partially ; and judge with Deliberation^ a?td Can* 
 dour*, which is all I requeji of thee. 
 
 Daniel Dobel. 
 
 T H » 
 
( 9) ^ -V ;^ 
 
 THE ^^>> ^//-r • ;^ 
 
 AS Water- BaptiTm, is an Ex tfmal Ordinance -^--^ 
 and a Debnce begun, becvvsen Jofepb Bejle and I3 
 ic may be very proper to obfcrve, wherein i: 
 will appear (a: leafl to me) that Jofcvb Beffe and his 
 Frismisy and I agree, with refpedl to what is a fufficien: 
 Warrant or jluthonty^ for the Obfrrjarcc of an Extcrr.al 
 Ordinance^ under tne Golocl Dilpenlation ^ that fo, we 
 m-jy not argue with each orher in the Dark, in this ini- 
 portar\c Affair. 
 
 And in order hereto, I ihall take Notice of HIS 
 Words in his Examinatlory &:c. Page 8. where hc^ 
 ipeaking with regard to his Friends—who preached a: 
 the Funeral of the late Jo.^;;^/j/wJf/-, fays, *' He was a: 
 '' that Time ailembled v;i.rh his Friends for the Per- 
 '^ formance ot Religious Worfhip ^ which yJ^ cf fi 
 '^^ ajllmblirgy he — acknowledges to be an External Ordi- 
 *^ nance to L'J ohferved under the Goftel Bif^ey:faiionP And 
 then adds, — " That the Quakers known Pra£lice is 
 
 '' fuch.'^ -Now, by th^ y^llf of foJlTemilingy I think^ 
 
 ifs evident he means, aljemhlivg together for Congngatlc-' 
 ml IVor/hipj and this is what I fiippofe, he, as "well as 
 his FfiendSy own to be an External Qrdinarxe to be ob- 
 icrved by Chriifians-,-^ — and agreeable hereto, he fay .'-'j 
 
 as above, *' the Quakers known Pradice -is fuch *, "-^^ = 
 
 and therefore, it's buc-reaicnable to conclude, that they 
 think, they have iulHcient Warrant for the Obfervance 
 of that External OrdlnayKe. And this !s what I ihall no'? 
 *ili[|>u^ \ for I bgli^ne it's a ChriftiLin's Duty lb to da. 
 
( 10 ) 
 
 Bnt then, I obferve, that tliey have tio Precept, or 
 Command from Chrift's own Words, for luch a Prac- 
 tice *, for tho' our Lord fays, Mat. xviii. 20. For where 
 two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in 
 the midft of them j yet, this is no Command for the Con- 
 tinuance of thtAB of fa ajfembling as abovemencioned, 
 Noc, but that I own yljjembly IFor/hip-^w^s the Cuftom 
 of the Jews, and that it was aHo the Pra£lice, of the 
 Primitive Church of Chrlft ^ who I conclude, received 
 this External Ordinance from the Do&ine or Praftice of 
 the imm.ediate Apoffles of our Lord. For I can't fup- 
 pofe, that the firft Churches, (nor yet the Quakers) 
 pruLliied it, by Vertue of its being o. Jcwi/Jo Cuftom : But 
 I rather conclude, that the j4lit of fo afjemhlingy was 
 efteemed by Chriilians then, and alfb now, to be an 
 External Ordinance ^ and to be obferved as fuch, un- 
 der this Difpenfation, by the Authority aforefaid, 
 "viz,, the Do^lrine or Pra^Ice of the infpred Apofties, 
 according 10 J[is xx. 7. Heh, x. 25. in which lail, we 
 have the Advice of the Apoftle, to the Beh'evers, that 
 they would, notforfake the alJemblingofthemfelvcs together, 
 as was the manner of fome. — And this well agrees with 
 Jofeph BejiVs Words, in his Anlwer to the f^icar of Great 
 Faxtony-^\n reference to the abovementioned Text, Hcb, 
 :c. 25. See Defence oi Quale rifm^ p. 252, 253, where 
 lays he, *^ As then the ajfembling ourfe'.z'cs together is a 
 ** general Command, a general Obedience mufl be 
 ^' yielded thereto:'' And fays JR. Barclay, Apology p^ 
 :?59. *^ —the Author to the Hebrews doth precilely 
 " prohibit the Kegleft 0^ this Duty,~~//c&. x. 25, 25." 
 Add to this the VVords of Mv. IV. Pen, v. 2. p. 479. 
 fpeaking vvith refpea to the Quakers obferving thQ Firjl 
 Day for alfembiing together, lays, " 'Tis well known, 
 *' that in what Country fcever they I've, they follow 
 *•■ the Pracrice of the J^ojlles in alTembling together on 
 *« the Firfl Day of the Week : They do it'' (fays he) 
 *^ confiantly i^nd rcvawtly'^ 
 
 KoWj 
 
(I,) 
 
 Now, I think it's evident from hence, that the 
 Quakers^ as well as I, conclude, that the Do£lrine or 
 Pra£lice of the infpired Apoftles, is a fufficienc Autho- 
 rity, for the Al} of afftmhling together tor Religious 
 Worfhip •, and tor the Obiervation of the FirftJDay ofths 
 Wtch for fo doing. 
 
 Now, this^t? of ajfemhlirg together for Religious Wor- 
 fhip, Jofcph Beffe owns, that the Quakers acknowledge to 
 be an External Ordinance^ to be ohfervi'd under this Dif^en^ 
 fation. 
 
 So that, here we do very well agree. And this is 
 what I thought proper in the fird Place to obferve ^ 
 becaufe,^it's a Conccjjlon of his^ by which, it will ap- 
 pear, that, as Heater- Baptfm^ is an External Ordinance,^ 
 as v;ell as i\\QAct offo ajjembling ^ It's evident on his own 
 TrincipleSy that Water-Baptifm is alfo to be ohfcrved un- 
 der this Dilpen fation*, forafmuch, as this was — taught 
 and pracliied by the infpired Apoftles. For, if their 
 V-jtlnnQ and Pradice, be a fufiicicnt Authority, tor the 
 Continuance and Practice, of one External Ordinance^ I 
 think itmuffc and will be acknowledged to be lb, in ano« 
 ther, by every impartial confidcrate Reader, 
 
 Now, what Jofeph Beffe fays, with regard to AiTcmbly- 
 Worfhip, '* as then the affemhlirig owjllvcs together is a 
 ** general CemmarJ, a general Obedience MUST be yielded 
 " thereto.'' 
 
 So lay I, that, as Water-Baptifm is a general Com- 
 mand, a general Obedience ouglit in like Manner to be 
 yielded to it. For as it's acknowledged, t\\^t EJeh. x. 
 25. contains a general Exhortation to continue the 
 ajjembling of Chriftians together,— fo it's likewilc evJ= 
 dent, that ^^5 ii. 38. contains a general Doclrinc for 
 Water-Baptif^n'-t fo^^j ^^i^h the inlpired Apoille, Ecfent, 
 -^nd he baptifed every one of you in the name of Jefus Chrifi.— 
 
 And the Baptifm here mentioned, i? owned by that 
 tminent Quaker^ J. Pike^ in his Treatife of Baptilin— 
 p. 107. to be Water-Baptifm. So that, if chefe Things 
 V;cre duly confidcred, by the OiMlf/-;, 1 nm ready to 
 
 B 2 " ' c( 
 
 .KJU' 
 
( 12 ) 
 rcnclude, thai Z-?\4'i would break forth, with refpcct to 
 Water 'Ba^tifms^ bcini^ an External Ordin{;)';cc^ oi" the Gof- 
 tel Church, However, it's evident, it has as great Au- 
 thority, if not a r,reater, than, lor the Aci offo ajftm^ 
 k/>^5— -on the Firjl Day^—vihidi IF. P. Uys they con-r 
 paritly obfervc ivith Krarcrce, 
 
 1 fliall next cake Notice, of Jofcph Bejfe's Inconfiilencv, 
 witii refpcft to the Uie of Vufcriptural Terms \ which he 
 io much exclaims at?,ainrt in others, when at the fame 
 .Time, he is fo remarkably full of luch 7^rw5 him(elf. 
 
 Sec his Fiece called an Examinatioyj^ (5cc. p- i 5. where 
 |ie is taking; Notice ot my making uie ot the Terms, 
 Mcral^ and PofttivCy with regard to Duties, lays, " Thefe 
 ^' Terms of Difitnbion he found not in the New-lkjlament ^ 
 ** they are cither of h's own Coining, or borrowed of other 
 ^^ Men, Had the Diflincfton itfdf been a Doflriyie ofCbrif 
 " ti.anit)'y he mi^ght haue exprefjedit in plain Scripture IVords. 
 - which are ci'cr fidfidcnt for that Purpofc ; but his a Sifn 
 ^* that forward Men are obtruding upon others iheir own 
 ^' Erroneous Notions/'— — 
 
 Thus, hc;e we may fee. that even while 3ofeph is ex- 
 claiminu: aciainfl: them, and fi'iinifvinG; that theUle thereof 
 ha had$!gn ; yct^, as it were in the (limie Breach, he makes 
 \\^c of liich Terms himfelf ! And but a little before, ia 
 t\\^ fnr:e Page, he has thefe Tern:s -^Vniverfal Charity, 
 of which he alfo (ays, — '' the Gofpel of Chrill exhibits/^ 
 ^T— ^So, that jvB: before and while he inveighs againft 
 mfcriptv.ral Ttrms.^ he is fruitful in the Ufc of them. 
 
 Again, J^xajn', p. 21. where he inflnLiates,^ that I 
 m?idG ufe of the Term Ordinary^ as well as the Terra 
 Extraordinary, with re!peft to the different Gifts of the 
 spirit of God \ he goes on 'laying, *' Nor are the 
 ^^ Tcrm.s Ordinary ?cad E::traordinary to be found ia 
 Holy Writ, for whKhKcafon they may be juftly laid 
 afidcj as mcer Inventions of miilaken Men, to cxprcf^ 
 their narrow Conceptions of the pouring forth of the 
 Splvit of Qod, which is OMNIPOT.PNT, UNI-^ 
 ^ VmSAU andi UNUNITED/' 
 
 «c 
 
 ^' t 
 
( 13) 
 
 But, what an nnaccouncable Author is this! that 
 can't refrain from being full of Vnfcriptural Ttrms, no, 
 not while he is correcting others, for the Ufe of them I 
 And indeed when I read his Works, it appears, that he 
 hath been long accuftomed to the PraSice ot it ^ as is 
 plain from his Anfvver to Patrick Smithy printed, in the 
 Year 1732. See Defence of Quahrifn-^ which doth alfb 
 abound with fuch Terms j and in particular with thole 
 very Tcrnis he hath been carpirg at above. See i^e^t. 4. 
 p. (52. where fays he — " We do afToi-t that the Ordi- 
 " nary Inlpirations, Illuminations, and Affiftances of 
 " the Spirit, are of the fame Kind with the EX- 
 
 '' TRAORDIN-4RY." And p. 20. ot the fame 
 
 Book, he finds Fault with the Vtcar for ufing the fame 
 Terms ^ when indeed, i believe I might cite near half 
 the Pages, in iiis Anfwer to tlie Vicar, where he or his 
 Friends, whofe V/ords he has cited, hath ufed Vnfcrip^ 
 tural Terms : (o iikevvife the fame in his Exa?ninaPior!^ 
 Sec. Neither can 1 find one Author among the Quahvs 
 that has wrote of Baptifn-^^nd the Sy.pper, — ■ but what 
 have crowded in Vnfcyjptwal Terms -^ nay, many of 
 them, abound therewith. So that what can be con- 
 cluded lels, jfjofevh BcjTe will allow his own Way of 
 arguing, but, that he, and the reil of the Writers 
 amoncft the Quakers, have combined together, to ob^ 
 iriidc their own erroneous Notions on Mankind. 
 
 And, his frequent Praclice, of ufing Vnfcriptural- 
 Terms, and inveighing againit it in others, — makes me 
 conclude, that our Lord's Advice is very proper to be 
 given him. Mat. vii. 5, 4, 5. — Fiifp caft cut the beam out 
 of thine own eye ^ and then (halt thou fee clearly to cafl out 
 the 'mate out of thy brother^ s eye. And, if we m.ay judge 
 of his End, in ufing fuch Terms, by what he/^r^f^c/ry is 
 the Df//^w of others, in To doing, it v;ill then follow, 
 that, his End in adapting fuch Phrafcs \n his Work, is 
 to hep -his- Readers ignorant afhii Meaning'. 5ee Exam, 
 
 ■ - ' -- I 
 
( H) 
 
 I could obierve much more of this Nature ^ tho% 
 here we have Jofeph Bejjsy abundantly, inconfiftent, and 
 contrary to himfclf! But yet, once more p. ii. of 
 iny Difcourfe on IVater-Baptifmy where, I was Ipeaking 
 with regard to the Accomplifliment, of the Prophejy of 
 Jodj as mentioned ^(?5 ii.. i5, 17. I l^iy, " And this 
 " is the Thing promifed by our Lord in the Text, even 
 <' the EXTRAORDINARY Gift of the Spirit of 
 
 •^ God." hi Anfwer to which, Jofeph BcJJhy in his 
 
 Exam. &c, p. 21. — fays, '^ Nor are the Terms Ordi- 
 ** nary and Extraordinary to be found in Holy Writ^ for 
 ^^ which Reafon they may be juflly laid afide, as meer 
 *^ /wz/e^/f/owi of miftaken Men."— - 
 
 —But firft, how comes Joftph EcJJe to croud in the 
 Term Ordinary y and thereby irifinuate, as tho' it was 
 mine ? wlien I have not there ufed it ^ Is this a A<fark of 
 a fair Writer? is this doing as he would be done by ? 
 Bath he forgot that he ulcd that Term himfelf, with 
 regard to the Gifts of the Spirit, as p. 62, to the Ficar? 
 where, lays hc, — I^^i? do ajfcrt, that the ORDINARY 
 Ir.fpirationSy &c. Bur, here by the Way, 1 mufl ob- 
 ierve to Jofeph^ — that he is under a Miflake, in faying 
 the Term Ordiiiary^ is not to be found in Holy Writ ^ 
 2Aid if he pleafes to look Ez,eh xvi, 27. he may fee that 
 the Term Ordinary ^ is there to be found j and himfelf 
 to be a miftaken Man. 
 
 And, fecondly, as to the 7erm, Extraordinary^ Imiift 
 take the Freedom to tell him, that tho' I find it not in 
 Elcly IVrity yet, I find it ufed by himfch^, in his Anfwer 
 to the near J p. 41. and that with regard to the very 
 lame Tcx^ A "cs ii 1 5, 17.. about which, he fo much 
 cenfiires me for ufing of it. His Words are, ^^ which 
 *^ pouri}^^ forth of the Spirit^ was^ in an EXTRAORDI- 
 *^ NARY Manner y upon thejpojlks and others at the Day 
 " of Perdecofty 
 
 Now, what lefs than this, can be obferved, from his 
 own Way of Arguing, fince he ufes thofe Terms him- 
 felf, — thaHj th'afhe'is a Fa/iV.wr^ o'i thz m^er Inveniiojii 
 
 cf 
 
(»5) 
 
 ofmiftden Men f Therefore, thou art ir.excufihlr^ O Jo- i 
 feph, — in this thy 'judgment on me ^ for thou hath often done 
 the fame thy fclf. And therefore, whether he deferves 
 Commendation^ or Blame for his Labour, I iliall leave his 
 Friends to judge. 
 
 And, as to his reviling^ taunting^ and unkind Lan- 
 guage, which he hath lo treely bellowed on me, in his 
 Exam. I fliall here, give a Place to fome of it ^ that lo 
 his Friends may lee, with what an unchriflan Spirit he 
 compoled his P/'ece, when he had not the leall Provoca- 
 tion, from me fb to do. It's true, I publilhed a Dif- 
 cOLirfe on Water Baptifm-^ but then, I no where therein 
 made ufe of reviling Words*, nay, I was io far from it, 
 that it was quite the contrary ^ for therein I fignified, 
 that the Quahrs were fuch, v^hom I v: as far from cen- 
 furing, — as p. 1 8. of that Difcourfe. And farther, with 
 relped to this, leveral of them, have fignified to me, 
 that I had therein, treated them in a kind and friendly 
 
 Manner. -And, I could with Truth, fay much more 
 
 of this Kature ^ but as to this, I rather chufe Silence, 
 
 And, as to what is contained in the Preface to my 
 Difcourfe on IVater-Baptifm ^ I am confcious to myfelf, 
 that I have not faid any thing, but what is Truth. And 
 in particular, when p. 7. I declare, my real Concern for the 
 religious Welfare of the People call'd Quakers ly which De- 
 claration of mine, he would fain infinuate, was only 
 Hypocrify^ for, fays he, Exam, p. 13. with refpe^t ta 
 my Concern, tor the religious Welfare Oi tliQ QtiaherSy 
 he, « THINKS TO BE BUT WORDS/' and p. 41. 
 he reprefcnts me, as a deceitful Ferfon.''- 
 
 Now, as thefe ReHeLlions, relate to my own perlonai ^ 
 Character, I chufe to anfvver, in the Words of his own 
 Friendy John Pay, of Tenter den in Kcnt^ who is one of the ^ 
 C/^fe/ among "the":^^m*5 in our Parts, with whom I have 
 always found a kind ^n^ friendly Reception, which has 
 been carried on between us for many Years, with a red" 
 procal Intimacy and Friendfhip, who, in a Letter to me, 
 dated the 2Qth of the ^fe^ Month, 1744, (which was 
 
(' .6 ) 
 
 fincQ this Debate began) among other Things, he {ays 
 as follows : 
 
 " Eftee?ned Friend Daniel Dobel, Havinf very feriou/ly 
 *' conftdered the Controverfy^ that happened of late between 
 
 ** thyfeljy and fome of my Friends^ and the Carriage 
 
 ** that hath always appeared in thee to US, -doth demon- 
 ** flrate, that it proceeded from a Heart and Mind that ii 
 ** truly honeft and fincere •, and this Carriage to uSy will 
 ^^ be and hath been always acknowledged by us^ with due 
 
 *' Refpe[l at all Ttmes^ He concludes iaying, " / hope 
 
 *^ thefe Lines may have fome Influence over thy Mind, to 
 '^ lay down thy Pen, and fo to unite in that Love and Re- 
 *' fpe^l, that hath always been fettled between us^ is the 
 *' true iVifh and fincere Deftre, of thy loving Friend and well 
 ^' Wijher to thee and all thine^ John Pay." 
 
 ^ow, v^hoie Words are moil to be credited, v/hether 
 Jofeph BejTe\ to whom I am a Stranger, — or his Friend, 
 v/ho haih had a particular Acquaintance with me for 
 many Years, I leave my Readers to judge. 
 
 Befides, how contrary are the above Infinuations of 
 my Opponent, to the true Spirit of that Chrijlian Charity, 
 which the Apoftle fpeaks of, j Cor. xiii 5. that he fays, 
 is not eafily provoked J nor thinhth no Evil'^ and not only 
 fo, but it's even contrary to Jofeph'^s own Declaration ^ 
 jfee Defence oi Quake rifm, p. 71. where lays he, ^' 'tis 
 *^ our Bufmefs to defend the Truth without Breach of Charity.''^ 
 —But, 1 think he was very much wide from his Bufi- 
 nels, when he penn'd the above, and tollowing unkind 
 Infinuations J and harflj reviling Reflexions -^ 8S Preface, p. 
 3. of his Exam. &c, where, tho* I believe, he haih 
 Tcry httle, if any perlbnal Knowledge ot me, yet there 
 he rep re fen ts m.e as a-Perfon, *' full of rny' felf And p. 
 6. that what 1 had done, in' pubhfhing niy Difcourie 
 proceeded from AMBITION.— — -P. 11." that I am a 
 Talkative : when I quellion, v»'hether he ever faw me^ 
 however, I am certain, we never had Converllition to- 
 gether. So, that it's plain, he does not pay much Re- 
 gard r^ ^''^'. :■:" ^. bv his Read'i^'O t^ /.ik up a 
 
(17) 
 
 Reproach. P. 13. Le would fain Pxiake me out an /fr/^-* 
 
 lent BoaJIer -J only becaufe I /aid I chalk::ged allthe Qv.a^^ 
 hers \ and this 1 had noc dene, had not his Friend \\\ P. 
 
 challenged before, the fame Day, all the World.- 
 
 And Vvhen I came to him in the Evening, and accepted 
 of his Challenge, he declined the Ar|.unnent. Seethe 
 Preface to my Difcourfe of Water-Bapifm, and my Occa- 
 fjoml Letter J p. 10. and who, if any wa.^, guilty of Info- 
 lent Bocijliyg^ 1 leave tlie World to judi^e, whether ic was 
 I, who challenged all the Qtia\ers\ or his Friend^ who 
 challenged all the leaned Rabbia on Eaytb^ and the tin- 
 learned IVorkl '^ when he himfelf, is an unlearned Man. 
 Again, p. j6, ii, 23, 27, 29, 30, 52, 34, 38, 40, and 
 44. in thefe (everal Pages, Jofeph Bclfe, would ftigmatiz.e 
 me with being a Sermon-P/r iter ', vihlch, I luppofe, he 
 thinks to be a Cri?}ie. However, be that as ic will, he 
 does not know that I have wrote more than one. Bc- 
 fides, I have declared, and he muft know it, that to write 
 Sermons is not my Cudom. Kow^ whether he can clear 
 himielf from being guilty of reviling, I leave to be con- 
 fidered. If I had not fct my Name to my Diicourfe, 
 he might have had icmiC Pretence for calling — Names ^ 
 but as 1 have, it fhew:^, that fuch Procedure came not 
 from the hefl of Spirits, And, from the fame unkind 
 Spirit he infers, that I am arrogant and prefumptuous ^ 
 Nay, that I have ajJiUTied to m)ftl} a Toxccr to fet afide thz 
 Gofpel Duty of Convtrfton of the Heart. — Exam, p 30. 
 And all this, only becaufe 1 conclude, that the Word 
 Baptiuedj mentioned ^ijj ii. $8. doth intend Water-Bap^ 
 tifm :, and that 'tis not the fame with the Word Con- 
 verfiTA^ contained Chap, iii* 19. I fay, for this, I am 
 reprefented as above ! Dut whether he has kept dole 
 to his Biiftnef here, — without Breach of Charity^ I leave 
 to the Judgment ot all. 1 could mention more Fruits of 
 the lame ur:^fiind Spirit.^ but chuf^ to forbear. And in- 
 deed, I was not a little furprized to hnd it as above ^ 
 
 knowing, I had not given any jufc Occafion. And, I 
 
 was fex^icme Time at a Lofs, what Ule or End Hich 
 
 G re- 
 
( i8 ) . 
 
 yrjding ^n^ har/J) Language could anfwer, till at lafl, 
 leading Jofeph Bcfje's Defence of Qv.akmfm^ p. \, where 
 he takes Kotice oi' the unhnd Reflexions of the Ficar'y 
 ilxySj '' Har/Jj Terms, by raifitig terrible Ideas in the Imagi- 
 '' nation , ?na)> probably pepoffefs weak Readers in Favour of 
 *' one Side ^ I fay, till 1 read this, I was at a Lois, what 
 Uib luch Trcarmenn might anlwer •, but now, I find, 
 that according to him, it lerves — to frepojfefs weak Read- 
 ers in Favour of om Side. And here 1 Ihall conclude this 
 in the Words ofjofcph Befft to the Ficar^ p. 31^. only 
 changing the reflecting Terms, that, he might have for- 
 horn his Retleclions, of — Ambition^ — Infolent Boafiingy — 
 Arrogant, and Prefumptuousy—Scc. '^ had he not thought 
 '■' thofe Bi^ghears r.cceffary to fright Men from difcerning his 
 ** Lack of Argument!'^ And Exa?n. Tp. 6. Jofeph Be] fe is 
 ipcaking with regard to my pubHlhing my Dilcourle on 
 VVater-Baptifrn, fliys, *^ theOccafion he affigns forpublijh* 
 *^ ing his Difcourfe- is alfo feigned, fome Part of his Ma^ 
 *^ nufhript having been fcen long before that Occafion 
 «' happened,'' — viz. (the Burial of John Blundel late of 
 Cranbrook) — Kow, as to this, of my Manufcript having 
 been iccn long before, — I declare, is notorioufly falfe ^ for 
 none of it was wrote till afterwards. So that, the un- 
 wind Ufe he makes of it, is built on an Vntruth^-^SzQ 
 more as to this, in my Occafional Letter, p. 7, 8. 
 
 I will now go on to confider Jofeph Bejje''s Anfwers to 
 v/nac 1 have offered, fi'om feveral Texts in the Mw 
 Tcflamerit^ in order to fhew that VVater-Baptifm is an 
 Ordinance of the Gofpsl Church *, and fliali begin, ac- 
 cording i\s Jofeph Bejfe has inierted from my Preface, p. 
 5, 6, vvhere I told his Friend, in Converfiition, ** That 
 ^' it was very evident, that the Apoftle, who was then 
 *^' under the immediate Influence of the Spirit of God, 
 '' did in that PalTage recommend to the Heart-pricked 
 *^ Jcws^ two Duties, viz. Repentance and Baptiftn, and 
 ^^ annexed two Promlies as Encouragements to en- 
 <^ gage them to the Praclice tliereof ^ which were, the 
 *« ilemiirion of Sin, and the Gift of the Holy Ghort:^ 
 
 " and 
 
.(19) 
 
 *' and that the Baptifm there recommended bv the 
 *' Spirit of God, was diflinguifh'd from the Baptifin oi 
 ** Gift of the Holy Ghoft ^ and that therefore it. 'vV:{>; 
 *' the Baptifm of Water, there intended, ylcls ii. 30.'' 
 To which Joftf,j EeJJe by way of Anfwer, fliys, " The 
 ** Words of that Text are, " Then Fcter fuid unto then:, 
 *' recent and he haptiz.ed every 0',ie of you in the name of 
 *' Jefus Chrifty for the rcmijfion offir.s^ and ye fljall receive 
 *' the g'ift of the Holy Ghof. This Text (fays he) m.akes 
 t' no Mention at all of Water, nor does the Context: 
 ** necefTarily infer it. The Word, Repent^ denotes a 
 *' Sorrow of Hearty and the Words, he baptiz^ed^ MAY 
 " denote the purifying or cleaniing of the Heart, where- 
 *' by it is effedually converted or turned to the Lord : 
 '' Islow thofe who are thus purified or cicanicd, and 
 *' their Hearts elYe^luady converted or turned to the 
 *' Lord, are fitly prepared and qualified to receive the 
 *' Gift of the HoJyGhcft. And to put this Matter ouc 
 *' of all Doubt, the fame Apoflle Feter m the next 
 ** Chapter, ver. 19. thus explains his own Meaning, 
 ** fliying there, Repent ye therejore and he converted^ that 
 ** your fins may he hlottcd cutj when the times of refrefhing 
 ** jhall come fro:n the pre fence of the Lord* And what are 
 *' the Times of Refre/hing but the Times of Rccclz'lrjr th^ 
 " Gift of the Holy Spirit? hi a Word, thefc' two 
 '' Texts vary in Terms, but have one and the flime 
 " Meaning. Let therefore the ApcdJcs own Ccnflruc- 
 '* tion of the Words, be baptized, take Place, and in- 
 '* fl:ead thereoi read, he converted^ as in the parallel 
 *' Text is exprclTed, and (fays he) the Relators Tri^ 
 ** umph upon this Text will be found of no Force." 
 
 Anfwer. Here, I can't but cbferve, what a Harmo- 
 ny and LikeneTs, appears between Jofph Befc^ and his 
 Friend R. ClarldfCy in the foregoing Paragraph. Sec the 
 Life and Podhumous Works of 7?. Carldge, p. 35S. 
 where, you will find, the (am.e for Subilance, — only, i 
 think Jofiph Befie feems fomewhat to flag^ at his very 
 O'-^^: ±'^' in the fird Sentence to tb? v'/'rd- of the 
 
(20) 
 
 Tcxty he indeed fpeaks out with fbme Courngc; having 
 Jhith of his Side *, but in the fecond, there is a mani- 
 fefl Abatement', for lays he in the fird, " The Word 
 *' Ecpcity denotes a Sorrow of Heart*/' bu: when he 
 comes to ipeak to the Words he baptiz^ed, he appears 
 fomewhat fliinf, for then it is " — the Words, be hap- 
 *' tidied, MAY DENOTE the purifying, or cleanfing 
 *' of the Heart.'' 
 
 Inow, fuppofe I Ihoiild fay, in Oppofition to this, 
 that,— k hanl^d^ MAY KOT DV.KOTa,— -what 
 wonderful jflroni; Arguing' here would be. — But rohat 
 would fuch /I-^^uirji prove ? — Indeed, it appears to me, that 
 if- Jofeph Ecfle, had not: read his FrkyJ Claridge on this 
 Texr, he would have had, buc very little to have iaid 
 to ir*5 However, either by tlie Help of his tricnd's Book^ 
 or a tood rviCmcry, — he has we (ec, brought forth 
 lomeL-'i.inji;, and by a little Addition, and changing a 
 lew I'erms^ has in Ibmc Meafure faved himfelf, from be- 
 ing; guilty of Flagiarihny viz. ikallng other Mens Works- 
 Bat, after he has fiid, that, " The W^ords, he haptiz^cd^ 
 ^ MAY denore the purifying or cleaning of the Heart, 
 ^- whereby it is cfreclually converted or turned to the 
 • ^ Lord,'- he uoes on, faying, ^' ]^^ow thofe who are 
 ** thus purihcd or clcarjfed, and their Hearts efre£l;i.ially 
 ^'- converted and turned to the Lofd^ are fitly prepared 
 ^* and qualified to receive the Gift of the Holy Ghoil/* 
 
 ^^'here, by receivinp^ thiC Gift of tlic Holy Ghofl:, 
 ^icfcph BcfTe I think vvill not deny, but that it intends, 
 being baptized with the Holy Ghfl. So it's alio plain, 
 that by tliole Words, he haptiudy the Apoflle, accord- 
 iino; to him, did not intend, the B.iptifm of the fMy 
 fhoff^ for fays he, '* thofe vvho are THUS purified, 
 *' — and their Hearts cffcCfually eonvcrtcd or turved to the 
 '' I.o^d; are fitly PRE? AKED-^to receive the Gift of the 
 ^' Holy Ghofly \\z. are fiily PREPARED, to receive 
 
 Spiritr.al Baptilm. -So tliat, it appears from [To^/dpFs 
 
 Pwn Word^, that the Terms, he h.ipti<cd, does notfig- 
 fif^ ifpiu^'B^'^^i^y: biit, rather Ibmcthingj which ac- 
 
 cCfd« 
 
C 21 ) 
 
 cording to him, is preparatory to it. Now then, what 
 Baptifm can be thought: to be intended, in the Text.^ if 
 it be not IVater Baptifm f And indeed, this mofl plainly 
 appears, from the Apoftle's Words, for fays he, tofnch 
 
 who was pricked in their Hearty and applied themfelves to 
 the yipoftles, faying, A fen and Brethren y what pjall rve do t 
 Then Peter (as the Mouth of the reft of the Apoftles) 
 [aid unto thenty Repent, and he baptiz^ed every one of you in the 
 name ofjefus Chrift, for the remiffion of fins, and ye fhall 
 receive the gift of the Holy Ghofl. 
 
 Kow, from hence I obferve, that tho' this Text^ 
 makes no exprefs Mention of Water, yet, it necelTarily 
 implies it -^ as will hereafter appear. The Word, Re- 
 pert, does not only denote a Sorrow of Heart ; but alio, 
 a fjncere and hearty Amendment of Life \ which is the 
 lame with Converfion, And the Words, be haptiz,eJ, 
 does .fignify, a being dipp'd, or a being baptiz^ed in 
 IVater ^ and that in the Name ofJcfus Chrifl, And, to 
 put this latter out oi ail Doubt, the i^me Apoftle, chap. 
 X. ver. 47, 48. does explain, what it is, to be baptized 
 in the Name of the Lord*, — for thus we read. Can any 
 man forbid WATER, that thefe Jhculd not he baptized, 
 which have received the Holy Ghoft, as well as we f And he 
 (that is the fimeApoftle) commanded them to be bapti:z.ed 
 in the name of the Lord, Now, to be haptiz^ed in the Name 
 of the Lor dy and in the Name cfjefus Chrift, is according 
 to J. Pile, p. 41. one and the iame ^ thereiore from 
 hence we fee, that to be baptized in the Name of Jefiis: 
 Chrifl, or of the Lord, is by tiie Apoflle, to be baptized 
 in IVater. So, that it's plain, that IVater- Baptifn km- 
 
 tended, Jcls ii. 38. Bcfides, the Apoflles does there 
 
 dSCx'mu,v.Uh, thQ Baptif7n fpokcn ot in {\ic Text j from this 
 Baptifm, or rather the Girt of the Holy Ghofl, which lad, 
 is what he annexes, together with Remijfion of Sirs, by 
 Way of Promife : From all which, it's plain, th^tABs 
 31.38. contains two Duties, viz. Repentance,— mid IVa- 
 ter-Bapiifm^ and that two Promifes is annexed, as ahove. 
 CM— » And indeci.. what clle, but Water- Baotifm, c.in 
 
 be 
 
(22) 
 
 be niidcrllood, from Jofeph Bcffe^s own Words to the 
 ficar^ Defence o^ Qtiakcrifm^ p. 296. v;here, with re- 
 gard to ^c75 ii. 58. he fliys, ^^ Peter ADMONISHED 
 *' Ibme adult Peribns who BELIEVED, to be baptized j 
 " and tells rhcra, that the Prornileof the Holy Gboft was 
 
 " to THEM and to their Children." And very 
 
 clear, ?nd agreeable, are the V/ords of that eminent 
 Qualcr Jofeph Pih^ in his Treatife of Baptlfm^ and the • 
 Si/^pcr^ p. TG7 lay?, — " The Qiialilications which ren- 
 *'^der'dany fit Subjeuls o^Watcr-Bapufm^ either under 
 " Joht^ or where the Apoftles and Difciples baptized, 
 " as appeals by plain Scripture^ were their being capable 
 ** of being tau^htj hcUev'ir.gy corfcjjjng, and repenting^ 
 " agreeable to tneleiollowing Texts, Mat. iii. 6". Mark 
 ** i. 4, 5. JBs ii. 3S, 41. Chap. viii. 12, 37, 38. Chap. 
 «^ xviii. S. Bnt (fays he) Infants were not capable of 
 *^ either of thefe Qj.ialilications*, confeqiiently were not 
 " the Snbjea of Water -Baptifm:' Well faid jfo/Z^^/;, — 
 here thou hail got the Truth of thy Side, and argues 
 well. — But, how iTsanifeft is it, that Jofeph Pike does 
 here own yl^s \h 38. to intend V/ateyBaptifm •, and alfo, 
 by his adding in the 4ifi: Verfe, that thQ Jpoftle^ had 
 preached or recommended V/ater-Ecptifm-^ and that 
 many in Obedience to the V/ord Received^ were thus bap- 
 tized : or as the Text reads itver. 41. Then they that 
 
 gladly received HIS WORD, rvere baptised: So that 
 
 it's evident, that both in the 38th, and alfo in the 41(1 
 Verfe, he doth here without any Refcrvc, allow^ that 
 this Text intends Water -Bciptifm. 
 
 And lays J(^fph Befje, the Apoflle admonillicd feme-- 
 to le baptized. Kow to admoi^ifli, is to exhort or ad- 
 vifc-, — which clearly fhews, that the Thing intended 
 v;as a DUTY, as 1 have before in my Argument ob- 
 ferved. So that, what 'jofeph Beffe has offered here, in- 
 ftead of its be'ng againfl tVatcr^Baptifm being intended, 
 in ACts ii. 38. is in Favour of it : And when we add to 
 it, ti^e Judgment of Jofeph Pike, what Oiiahr in the 
 Wcild can (ay Oiight againfc ir ? So that inftead of Jo^ 
 
( 23 ) 
 
 fe^h Beffe^s fl-iewing the Weaknels of my Argument ; and 
 that: PVater-Ba^tifm ib noc intended mAcfs ii. 38. he and 
 his Frmid both concur (tho' its like it was no: defign- 
 ed) to fupport it ! 
 
 And^ as to his laying that the Words he haptizjed, 
 Acls ii. 38. and the Words be converted^ Chap. iii. ip. 
 *' have one and the fame Meaning^ and that it's aParaUely^ 
 I fay, as to this, ifs denied , and he is called upon to 
 prove it. 
 
 And as to his Infinuatlon, that I triumph on A&s ii. 
 38. it does but farther tend, to difcover, what Kind of 
 Spirity he was led by. Let him Ihew, if he can, but; one 
 Exprefljon, in my Argument from ^(f?5 ii. 58. that is of 
 the Kature of Triumph. Let him m.ake it appear, by 
 my Words, that I have faid any Thing from jjjis Texty 
 like k *, which is what he ought at leaft, firft to have 
 done ^ before he had been fo free of his unkind and 
 taunting Reflexions, Rut alas, they that read his Works 
 with regard to Baptifm^ muft content themfelves with 
 fuch Kind of Language^ inftead of real or better Argu- 
 ments. 
 
 And Exam, p. 13. Jofeph Bejfc infinuates, that 1 have 
 endeavoured to ?ni/lead roy Readers '^ and aifo adds, that/ 
 " toward the Conclufion of my Preface have mijied my^ 
 f* felf^ when I call William Dell an eml-nent Quaker^ who 
 " never was one called a Quaker,'''' '^ovi^ as to the firil:, 
 I leave to the Judgment of others i^ but by the Way, 1 
 can't but cbierve, the Uncharitablenels of this Au- 
 thor. 
 
 And, whether William Dell was one called a QjAahr or 
 mty it's plain, he was one in his Principles concerning 
 Baptifm, Kay, it appears to me, if I may regard what 
 he himfelf fays. Preface to the Docirine oj BaptifmSy 
 where his Words are^ ** I fhall (peak much otherwile 
 
 ** than all form.er or latter Writers whatever." And 
 
 p. 21. he does in ElfeLl: own, that he v/as the firft Man 
 that oppojtd VVater-Baptifm : 1 fay, from hence it appears 
 to me, that he was the very Founder of Qiiakerifm \ at: 
 
(24) 
 
 leafl m this Point. However, it's plain that Jofefh 
 Befje owns him, in the Point of Baptifm ; for fays he of 
 Dell, Exam, i^, 14. that ** he became enabled to dif- 
 «* cover the 7'ruth m this POINT, and to explain the 
 *^ Dodrine of Baptifms with a convincing Evidence and 
 ** Clearnefs : thac his Sentiments in this Cale were the 
 ** fame with thole of the Quakers,^' 
 
 And, I could cite feveral other of their Authors, to the 
 fame Purpofe ; and, DeWs DoMne of Baptifms, has been 
 often commended to me, by feveral Q^iakers, as the 
 only PiecCy to let me (as they faid) rigtit in the Point 
 o^ Baptifm; and therefore, I hope it was no great Fault 
 in me, to call him a Qiiaker ^ I finding, he had in a great 
 Meafure got the Principles ^ the' it's like he lived before 
 any Se[I: was called by that Name. 
 
 And p. 14. he is pleafed to cite the Text 1 infilled 
 on, which is Luke xxiv. 49. y4nd behold, I ferd the promife 
 of my Bather upon you : but tarry ye in the city ofjerufalem, 
 until ye he endued with povper from on high. Now, on my 
 making Choice of this Text, he goes on faying, 
 
 '' 'Tis oblervable, that he makes Choice of a Text 
 ** which has not any Relation to his Subje^l, and where- 
 ** in nothing is either mentioned or intended concern- 
 *' ing IVater-Baptifm. His Reafon for that Choice WE 
 <' lee not, unlels perhaps his AMBITION was, that 
 *« the Proof of his Point might not depend on the Text, 
 f^ but on his own Abilities." 
 
 Now, whether Jofeph Bcife, has kept to his Bufinefs 
 here, roithcut Breach of Charity ^ and wiiether, the above, 
 be a Mark of a true Critick, or Cavilhr, 1 leave to the 
 Judgment of aW/oter Men. However, fince he, nor his 
 Friends, can't lee a Ileafon for this my Choice ^ I hope, 
 (if they are not wilfully blind) that I fliall be able, to 
 difcover one to them. 
 
 And, in order fo to do, I oblerve, that this Tc^t, has 
 a manifeft Reference to the promifed Endowment, of the 
 Apoftles, with the Power from on High : which was con- 
 ferred on them at the Day of fcritccolh And is well 
 
 ex- 
 
( 25 ) 
 
 €Kp relied by Jofeph Beffe^ to the Ficar, p. 41. ** WhicH' 
 ^' pouring forth of the Spirit, (fays he) was, in a:x 
 ^' extraordinary Manner, upon the Apoflles and otkrsd.c 
 *' the Day of Fentecofl.'" And in his Exmn, p. 2$. he 
 goes on farther, and fays, " by this Sprit of "Trmh; 
 *5 were the Apoftles endued with Power from on high to 
 *' qualify them for the ' Work vvhereunto they were 
 *' called." And p. 16, ^' That the End and Defign of 
 *.' the Apoftles being endued with Power from, on hi^h^ 
 *' was, that they might be able Afmijlers of the New. 
 
 ". Teftament^ not of the Letter, birt of the Spirit." • 
 
 And, this well agrees, with wha^t I have obferved, p. 
 13, 14, and 15. ot rny Difcourfe of Waier-Bapifm. , 
 Now, as the Apoflles were thus endovred with the 
 Spirit o[ God \ 1 conclude, that they in the Difcharge 
 ot tJieir Miniflrv, v;ere accordingly dilated by the lame. 
 Spirit of TRUTH : So, that .what they recommended. 
 and taught^ might be juftly deemed, and regarded,- as 
 the Mind and Will of God : and as /uch, to be prac4 
 tifed Onder this Difpcnfation. And 1 finding, that they 
 taught and recommended Water-Baptifm^ 1 concluded, tnad^ 
 Luke xxiv. 47. was a very proper Text^ to (hew, that 
 Water- Bapti I'm ^ was cOmpriled in the Doclrine of TRULY 
 infpired Perlons. And therefore, in order to fliew this 
 to others, I traced the Do.llrine and Pra^'Hce, of the en- 
 dowed Apoflles:;, as recorded in the^c?^: and trufi, E 
 have plainly dilcovered, that IVater-Baptifmy was con^" 
 tained in the Doclrine^-they preached. And therefore^ 
 as I had a View to this, 1 thought this Text^- was a pro- 
 per one,' to lead Perfons on, thac fb they might clearly 
 lee, on what a lolid Foundation Water- Baptifm ftands 5 
 even, that it was contained in, and held forth by the 
 fare Mini (ify^ and Do£lrine ot the Gofpel, as deliveredl^ 
 by divinely infpired APen, 
 
 Kovv, tho' this Te^f,- makes no exprefs MentionTof 
 Water-Bf^ptifii '^ yer,. as it: has RelaticHy to th'dt divir.c 
 power ^ the ykofdts received ^ by the Giridane^, Aurhoricy.^; 
 i^rid Dirctlion of whiclT,- they among Oeher Things^ 
 
 B*' i-e::c|v-7 
 
(26) 
 
 fireached the Db^lrine of Water-Baptifm \ I fay, the 
 Confi'deration of this, hath a manifefl Tendency, ta 
 Ihew, by \^h-^\t Authority^ the Apoftles preached and 
 propagated, that Doctrine : even, that their Ali/Jion^ 
 arj Authority was of God. And therefore, it appears to 
 me, that Luke xxiv. 47. is not an improper fext^ to 
 ground fuch a Diicourfe on. 
 
 Befides, I have found by hct^p Experkmsy that when 
 H pleafed Gody of his tnfmite Goodnefsy to dilcover to me 
 the Authority for Water-Baptifrny in this Light-^ it had a 
 great and powerful Tendency, to remove thofe Doubts, 
 which formerly were railed in me ^ by my frequent Con- 
 Verfation with the Quakers, (For which bleffedy Difiovery 
 of the Truth, I defire to be for ever thankful) And not 
 only lo, but, 1 have often fince found, when this Con^ 
 'trover fy hath been urged on me *, that, the vindicating 
 Water 'E'aptlfm, on this Gofpel Foundatm^ hath, by the 
 Bledlng of God *, had, in fome good Degree, a^ manifeft 
 Effeft, to flop the Mouths 0^ Gain fay ers. 
 
 And therefore, whatever Jofeph BejJ'e and his Friends 
 rmy think ^ I conckide, that I had fufficient, and good 
 Ileafon ^ for my making Choice, of this PalTcige, to 
 ground a Diicourfe of Water -Baptlfm on. I could add- 
 more, but I hope, that what 1 have laid, may be fuffi- 
 cient, to (atisfy his, and his Friends Curiofity^ with re- 
 ipeel to my Realbn, in this Point. 
 
 I fhall next go on, to take Notice of that, which 
 more nearly concerns the Point in Debate*, namely, to 
 infert the Texts by me cited, in the Dlfcourle of Water- 
 JBaptlfm, &c. and alfo the Subftance of whatJ offered 
 therefrom: And then fliall, in like Manner, give a 
 Place to what Jo,/fp/j Bcfje hath faid by Way of Anfwsr ; 
 together, with fome Remarks — I iliall make thereon. 
 
 1 having^ in the 12th, 13th, and 14th Pages of my 
 
 Difcourfe o? Water-Baptlfm^ took Notice of the Accom- 
 plifhment, of the Piomife of the Holy Ghofl on the 
 ApoftleSj-^at the Day of Pcr.tccol}^ A£ls ii.--and of Be- 
 m-'o preaching by the divine I-iifiuevx^ of the Splrlt.-^i 
 
 ^ro-- 
 
(27) 
 
 proceeded to take Notice of the 3 8th Verfe ^ where Peter 
 fays, Repent, and he baptized every one of you in the name of 
 ^efus Chrijly for the remi/fwn of fins ^ and ye fijall receive the 
 gift of the Holy Ghoft. I then went on to obferve, " That 
 ^* tho' this Sermon was, perhaps, as moving, and as 
 *^ powerful as any, yet, it's evident, that the Apoflle's 
 " Preaching did not baptize the Heart-prick'd Jews •, tho' 
 *' it had the good Effcd to prepare many ot them for 
 " if, which when he favv, he advifed them to it, 
 " From hence I obierve, thai preaching the Gofpcl, is 
 " not baptizing : tho' fome do fo argue and fay. that it^s 
 '* (0 meant in the CommifTion of our Lord, (a) But 
 " it's not my Intention now to run far, into this Con- 
 *^ troverfy, but principally to fliew that Water-Eaptifin 
 " is a Gofpel Ordinance. And I conceive, that a right; 
 *' Underftanding of this PafTage, will— give Light into 
 " this Controverfy •, forafmiuch as none can deny, but 
 " that the Apoftle, was then under the Influence o^ the' 
 " Spirit*, which was beftowed on him, not for his own 
 ** Sake only ^ but chiefly, that others thereby, through 
 " him, might be inftructed into the Knowledge of the 
 " Will of God*, and their Duty in Obedience to him, 
 *' under this Difpenfation. 
 
 *^ And farther, let it be obferved. That in this En- 
 *^ quiry of the Heart-prjck'd Jews, there is not the leaft 
 ** Intimation , that they applied themfelves to the Jlpoftlcs 
 *' with Minds prepolfeffed, as was the Cafe of iomc 
 ** believing Jews \ (b) but they addrefTed themfelves to 
 *' them, with Hearts wholly given up to attend their 
 " Advice and Inttru^lions ^ fo that there is no Realbn 
 *^ to imagine, that the yfpo/r/e, from, any Apprehcnfion of 
 " TVeaknefs^ or Fondnefs, in them to any Thing, (ns- 
 ^^ lome pretend it was) did give Advice, different from 
 '^ what he would otherwife have done -^ torafmuch p.s 
 
 D 2 *' theiG 
 
 in) Robert Barkclay o« Bapfmandthe Snpper^ p- >S. Anu I. a' 
 fon onBa^lfm, p. -i, 3-. Mar, xxviu- :r.. 
 '{b) AQsxxi. 23, 24., 
 
( i8 ,) 
 
 ^^ there was not the leaft Colour or Appearance of any 
 ^^ k\chFondYi€[s in thern'^ but, that they ware fuch, as 
 ^^ fincerely made a free Application to the Apoftles, in 
 '.^' that great and important Enquiry, What /hall we dof 
 '^' So that we may jultly conclude, that what the Apoftle 
 *' recommended to them, was from thep^re Dilates of 
 ^^ the Spirit of God -^ as that which was the Duty of Per-- 
 *•' ions to practice, and obfervc, that would rightly 
 " embrace Chriftianity. 
 
 " I then went on to confiderthe Words of the Apoflle, 
 ■,^' which runs thus*, Then Peter faid ur.to them, Re^ent^ 
 '*^ and he baftiud every ore of yvii in the itame of Jefus 
 *' Chrift., for the remiffion of ftns^ and ye po^ll receive the 
 T fjfi of the PJoIy Ghoft. (a) 
 
 ^' From hence it's evident, that the infpired Jpojlk^ 
 ^^ doth point out or recommend to the Heart-p-ick'^d 
 '^^ Jcm^ two Duties *, and to engage them to practice 
 '" accordingly, annexes two encouraging Confiderations, 
 '^* or PromHes ^ chat is the Remiffjon of Sinsy and the Gift 
 ■■*^ of the Holy Ghofl- : which are two of the principal 
 ^' BlefTlngsof the Gofpel.— The lirft of which Duties that 
 V the Apoftle direcled to, was Repentance ^ which im- 
 ^' plies a Conviction of Soul, accompanied with SorroW 
 '^^ for what a Perfon hath done amifs*, and a fincere 
 ?' Amendment for the future. The fecond Duty was, 
 •^' That they would be baptized^ in the Name of Jefus 
 *^ Cbrijl. Which Baptifm, recommended to, is, iirf- 
 ^^ undoubtedly, to be underftood, The Baprilm of 
 *' Water*, foraimuch as it wars a Duty injoined'^ and is 
 ^' what the Apoftle doth diflingui/h, from the BaptiGn 
 ^' of the Spirit , or Gift of the Holy Ghoft : for this is 
 *^ v>'hat he adds by Way ot Promilc. From hence it 
 ^^ is undeniably evident, that the Baptifm here intended, 
 *^ was that with ll^iter \ and therefore an Ordinance to 
 '-• be inbmittcd to, by fuch as would embrace Chrifti- 
 «^ anity : it being what God, by the Apoftle, did Ipe- 
 -* c\a\^ ref]ui;:e :, ancl that upQn their bpir^g jm-mecjiatdy 
 •' -■■■^^ ,:v . ' ' • ' :' r-f^ . -"■ -'f V«^ 
 
 (.?; Aasiie 38. 
 
(29) 
 
 *'^ endued with Power from on High. Nay, it's what God, 
 •*' by his Spirit, enjoined mth Repentance-^ and there- 
 '' fore, who dares to feparatc or make it void? I (ay, 
 *' what Man hath Power to fet afide that which God 
 ** (by his Spirit, after onr Lord's Afcenfion) hath 
 ** joined together ^ and recommended to the Practice 
 .^ of fuch as would be his Diiciples and Followers ? 
 *' But if thofe Things which are thus taught by the 
 '^ Spirit of God, are not to be accounted Gofpel Duties ; 
 *^ I would fain know what we are fo to efleem ? and by 
 ^' what we may judge with more Safety, tlian by the 
 " Direction of the Spirit of Truth F which, by the 
 " Apoftle, advifed to the Baptifm of Water \ and afTured 
 *^ them of the Baptifm of the HolyGhofl : and on which 
 '* Doftrinc and Practice the Church o^Jerufalem was 
 " planted. And to be baptized in the Name of Jefus 
 ** Chrift, doth fignify a Beh'ef in him and his Autho- 
 ^^ rity; and a yielding Obedience thereto in his Ordi- 
 *' nance, calling on his Name^ thereby profefOng to be 
 ** a Difciple and Follower ofChrifl. From all which, 
 *' it doth appear, that Water- Baptifm^ is an Ordinance 
 ^^ of Chrifl^ forafmuch, as it was that, which the 
 *' Apoflle, by the immediate Influence of the Spirit^ 
 ^^ dire61:ed the Heart p-icVd Jews unto *, as their Duty to 
 ^^ obey : and that to be done in the Name of Jefus 
 ^' Chrifl, And, indeed, one would think that this 
 '* PafTage is fo dillinft and clear, that it might be fuf- 
 '* ficient to convince any fincere Enquirer^ that Water.- 
 Baptifm is a Gofpel Ordinance. I fay, from hence it 
 is evident, that Water- Baptifm, is an Ordinance of 
 the Gofpel *, feeing the endued Apoflle, required the 
 ^^ Convifts^ to be baptized in the Name ofjefus Chrift : 
 f' and that in order to, or as a Condition of, their re- 
 ** ceiving the Holy Gboft : So that the Baptifm men- 
 f* tioned, cannot mean a Baptifm with the Hely Ghoft ^ 
 -* for that was to follow upon their being baptized*, 
 *^ and therefore it was not the fame with it ^ fo that 
 l^ it's very ^lear^ that the Apoftle, intended Water-Bap- 
 . • ; ^ « tifm. 
 
 cc 
 
 ti 
 
( 3° ) 
 
 ^ tifm. And it is alfo mamfeft, that it was the Duty 
 
 " of the Hcart'frkk^d SoulSy to lubmit thereto, in Obe- 
 ♦' dicncc to the pure Cof^el Miniftry of Jejm Chrift our 
 ♦* Lord, Which accordingly we find many of them 
 •* did ^ and was that Day added to the Church." 
 
 In Anfvver to which, Jofefh BcJJe fays, Exam, p. 29. 
 •' WE Ihall next take Notice of the Texts produced by 
 *' the SermonAVriter, to prove Water-Bapufm a Goffcl 
 ^* Ordinance?'* He then goes on iaying, *• The firft of 
 ** which hA&^s ii. 38. 7hm Peter /^/i unto therrty Repent 
 ^' and be baptized every one of you in the name of' THE 
 " LOKD Jefus Chrifl for the re?m/]ion of fins, and ye Jhall 
 ^ receive the gift of the Holy Ghofl. 
 
 *^ This Text (fays he) as WE have before obferved, 
 
 ** (p. 12.) makes no Mention of Water ^ the Word 
 
 ^^ Baptiz^ed in this Place MAY well denote the cleanl^ 
 
 •^ ing of the Heart, or Converlion of the Sonl to God. 
 
 ** This Interpretation of the Word is (tich as the A- 
 
 *^ pollle Fetcr himlelf hath given it, in a Text exaBly 
 
 *' parallel in the next Chapter, when fpeaking to the 
 
 .*' People in Solomon's Porch, he lays, Repent ye therefore 
 
 ** and be converted, that your fins may be blotted out, when 
 
 *^ the times of refrefhing fJoall come from t^ pre fence of the 
 
 *^ Lord., Acls iii. 19. Wherefore this Author's intrud- 
 
 *' ing Water into a Text, which makes no Mention of 
 
 *^ any, fhews that he is wife beyond what is written, 
 
 <^ and prefers his own Senfe to the Apoftle's hiterpre- 
 
 ** tation, — by vvhich it appears, that the two Duties 
 
 «* recommended to the Heart-pricked 7frr.% were, firfi:, 
 
 «' REPENT AKCE, and lecondly, the Converfion of t\\Q 
 
 *« Heart to God, the Confequcnce of which would be 
 
 ** RemifliOn of Sins and the Gifc of the Holy Ghoft, 
 
 ** or the rffre/?;/^^ of the Holy Spirit, the Comforter 
 
 f* which Chrift had promifed." 
 
 But, here 1 can't well avoid obierving, the Unfair- 
 ncfs of my Opponent; who, tho' he ftiles his Ticce 
 an Exam. &c, yet, has not lb much as inferted the 
 Sum ot what I olferM from this Tcxt-^ altho' this lext is 
 
 V\'haC 
 
(31 ) 
 
 what i moll largely infifted on *, which, is what I thinfc 
 he ought to have done ^ that fo his Headers, might 
 have been able, to have pafTed their Judgment on his 
 Examination, &c. In ihort, it appears to me, that 
 Joftph — had not a good Liking to itv and therefore 
 might think, that it was his wifeft, and fateft Way tor 
 confute it *, while he kept his Readers ignorant what it 
 was. 
 
 Now, here I remark ftrfl, that Jofeph Beffe, does either? 
 contradi£t his Title Page, or el(e, applies to himfdfy the 
 plural Number ; for fays he as above, "WE /hall next 
 *' take Notice of rheTexti produced by the Sermon-Writer?^-^ 
 But with regard to the Author, as in the Title Page^ \t 
 is, *^ By ONE of the People called Quakers:^ I fay, it's 
 plain he contradi£ls himfelf *, and this farther ap- 
 pears p. 40. ^' WE (fays he) apprehend that the Obler- 
 '' vations we have made." — So alio p. 41, 44. And, 
 this is yet more clear, if, his fir fly thirds fourth, and fifth 
 Pages be obferved*, in which he as Author of the Exatru 
 &c. often makes Ufe of the lingular Number *, as, onc^ 
 
 /, my, 7nir.e. Now theie are only proper to or of a 
 
 fingle Perfon •, and from thence, I think it's but realbn- 
 able to conclude, that Jofeph Beffe was THE Author of 
 the Examinationy &c. and it this be the Cafe, it plainl;^ 
 fhews, when I obferve, th?ft he often fays, WE, I izy 
 it fhews, according to his Friend R. Barclay, Apdlogy^ p. 
 359. that Jofeph Befie, Is puff' d up with a VAIN Opiniors 
 of himfelf'^ and that his giving the plural to himfelf, 
 proceeds from a high and proud Mind, p. 361. And it we 
 may judge, according to our Saviour's Rule, who fays^ 
 that a Iree is known by his Fruit *, it appears by reading 
 Jofeph Beffe's Exam. &c. that R, Barclay hath at this 
 Time hit the Mark. I had not made a Remark on this, 
 had it not been the profefs'd religious Principles of the 
 Quakers, to declare againll the Ule of a plural Phrale, 
 to or of a fingle Perfon. 
 
 Secondly, but, how comes it to pal?, that "jofeph^-- 
 rk^s takes the Liberty ^toaddthcWor-d^^ 'tHE LORD, 
 
 10 
 
(32 ) 
 
 to the facred Texty Afts li. 38. doth he not believe, that 
 the Apoflle peter, was filled with the Holy Ghofi •, and that 
 he f^ake as the Sprit gave him Utterance : Does he think, 
 that he hath a greater Gift of the Sprit^ than Tcter f and 
 that thereby, he could mendy iLXidh^A Authority ^ to add ^ 
 to the Words of the infpired ApoHle ? Is not this being 
 ivife above what is written f may I not juftly apply to 
 him, his own Words to the Vicar y that *' the im- 
 " piofin^ thofe Words is an Addition to the Texty and 
 ** altogether unnecefTary, unlefs Men are minded to, 
 5' EXALT THEMSELVES, by preferring their own 
 ^* Mode of Exprejfton to fuch as the Holy Ghofi has 
 ^* thought fit to ule, p. 181." 
 
 Thirdly, as to his faying that A[ls \\. 58. and Chap, 
 iii. 19. 2LXQ exactly par aUely and in particular, the Word,- 
 Baptizedy and Convertedy 1 fay, as before tor this, ic's 
 DENIED. And till thefe his Pre rrrifes, are proved to 
 be trucy his 'Inference therefrom can be of no Weight, 
 Befides,- let it be remembred, as before obferved, that 
 his Friend J. Pike allows ^(??j ii. 380 to intend Water-Bap^ 
 tifm. And very exprefs, are the Words ofTho.Ellmod. 
 m his Sacred Hiftoryy p. 502. v;ho fays, " That the 
 ^^ Baptifm here mentioned, was the Baptifm o^Johny--' 
 *' may be gathered from the Term of it. Repentance 
 *• and RemiJJion of Sins, exactly agreeing with the Terms 
 
 ** of John's Baptifm^ Marl i. 4." Now, as Jofcph 
 
 Beffcy and. the Quakers^ eAlovJj John's Baptifm, to be iVa^ 
 tcr-BaptifWy it is evident, that Tho Ellwood concludes v 
 that, the Baptilm here intended, is Water -Baptifm, 
 And indeed, it appears to me, that the Perforiy whom 
 IV, Pen, ver. i. p. 894. fliles *' that Man of God and 
 «'<= PRINCE in Ifrael— George Fo^,*'— I ' fliy, it appears 
 to me, that HE docs alfo allow the fame : For he ha- 
 ving cited, Luke xxiv. 47. ACls ii. 38. — Alls xxvi. 20. 
 goes on faying, '^ Now here ye may fee, that Pcopte 
 *' muft repenti before they do believe, and are hap:iz.ed\ and 
 " before they receive theiu^^)/^/;^/^,''— From hence, 
 1 think ic'£ evident, that this Great MaHyG, Fox, had 
 
particular Reference to ^r/i ii. 38. and alfb that ffd 
 does plainly diftinguiih with the Apoflie, the Baptijm 
 ipoken of, from the Gift ot the Holy Ghoft : for thisurii 
 6( his Words, in fhort, I think may fairly be thus ex- 
 prefTed \ that People miift repent^ before they-^are baplzedy 
 avid before they receive the Holy Ghojl, Kow, what can be 
 
 well plainer, than^- that George by the Baptifm Ipoken 
 
 of, r.nderrtoodone Thing ^ and by receiving- the Gijt oj the 
 Holy Ghojl another : and therefore, with his Friends Jo- 
 f^ph Pikcj and Tho. Elwood^ that it's Water- Baptifm ther^ 
 intended. And fnrely, if Jofeph Befje^ would ferioiiflt 
 confider, what his Friends^ Pihj and Elwood^ and thac 
 MAN OF GOD, ami PRIKCE in ISRAEL has Caid-, 
 he will (one would think) no longer oppofe in this 
 Point; efpecially, if he has any Value, or Regard, for 
 the Words or Judgment, of thefe his ancient^ eminent^, 
 and ask fuppofts, divinely infpired Friends, 
 
 And, as to his pretending that the Apoftle, ^3s lu 38." 
 did not intend IVater-Baptifmy becaufe Water is noc 
 exprefs^d, and, that fo to underfland it, is a heirg rvijd 
 beyond what is written j I (^y as to this, it is lo very 
 trifl'ng, and ridiculous, that it deferves no Anfwer : 
 However, being willing to remove all his Scruples and 
 Doubts, I Ihall anfwer, in the Words of his own 
 Friend J> Pike, p. 10 r. where (ays he, " fome havj 
 «-< been fo VOID of CHARITY, as to infinuate, thaC 
 *• WE denied thofe Texts in the AcJsy where Baptifm is 
 " mentioned, to mean IVdter, where IVatcr is not Ute-^ 
 ** rally named :, which (fays he)' is' realty a GREAT, 
 «' UNTRUTH/' Compare, this with p. 8% 8rV 
 Si. where he plainly owns.^J?i ii. 3''8. to intend Water^ 
 Ba[tifr,u 
 
 And it's very like, that on the iatiie Account, Joftph 
 Bcife^ m his Anfwer to the l^tcar, p. 2 87. does dcny^ 
 that the Words oi Ananias to Paul^ did relate to, ot 
 y^.is mtQud^donFater-Bitptifm •, 1 fiy, it's like he deniefi 
 r: becaule Water is not mentioned, u^c75 ix, 17^18* 
 and Chap. xxii. j(5. in wliich lail, the Apoftk declares 
 
 F. moro 
 
C 34 ) 
 
 morecxpreflyjWhat^w^m^ihadfaldto him as hinted afi 
 Chap. ix. 1 7, 1 8. which Words are. And now, why tanieft 
 thouf Arife and he baptizjed^ and wajh away thy ftm^ 
 calling on the name of the Lord. Now, tho' Water is not 
 here expreffedy yet, that Ananias intended Water-Baptifm^ 
 is fully declared by J. Pike^ p. go. where he, (peaking 
 with Reference to this Text, fays," - — - *' As VVater- 
 ** Baptifm was then in Pradice, and had been retained 
 ** under the Difpenfation of John the Baptifi, as were 
 '' many other legal Things*, (o Ananias ADVISEI> 
 ** Paul to be baptized therewith."-- 
 
 From all which, I think it's but natural to inquire, 
 what is become, of the fo much talked of Vnity^ and 
 dner.efs^ ot the Quakers I But more of this in its Place. 
 . . And, from hence it's alfo evident, that Jojeph Bejje^s 
 P^.ule, for judging when a Text is to be underftood, to 
 relate to Water- Baptifm, fails him*, forafmuch, as this 
 Text according to his priendy Ism^mt o^ Water- Baptifm-^ 
 and yet, Water is not cxprefTed. And, it's very like, 
 Jpfeph might have forgot, that he himfelf and his 
 FriendSy explain the Baptifm mentioned, Ephef iv. 5. to 
 mean Spirit Baptijm^ altho' it's not there fo exprelfed ; 
 And yet, if fo to underfland it, is to be wife beyond what 
 is written *, who fo wile in this Relpeft, as he and his 
 friends f 
 
 And p. 30. ^^tzrjofeph — has been fpeaking as before 
 is obierved, he goes on, faying, ** SQ€m^ th.'^t Remilfion 
 *' of Sim andthe.Gift of the Holy Chofty are not the Confe- 
 *' quence of Water- Baptifin, 'tis evident that Water-Bap- 
 ^^ fifm was not the Baptifm enjoined in this 73^^.'* 
 But, can any Perlon befides himfelf, fee any Argument 
 in this? for tho' Remijfwn of Sins, and the Gift of the 
 fjoly Ghoft are not THE Confequence of Water- Baptifm^ 
 does that prove, thzt Water- Baptifm was not enjoined in 
 the 7ext. And, is there not a great Difference, between 
 THE, Confequence of any Thing, and a Promiie, be- 
 ing annexed to it? as it is in this Text, to all tha(^ 
 rej^ent and are baptizjed.-^^^^^Ahd is To/p/>fe Z?f(7? -fo blind, 
 
 0t^ 
 
(35) 
 
 as mt to fee through this ? or does he think that others 
 are fo ? However, he goes on,—*' From what hath 
 *' been fa id, WE apprehend it will dearly appear, that 
 •* this Author (meaning me) has no fufficient Warrant 
 *' from Alls ii. 38. to lay, that the Apoftle advifed to 
 ** the Baptifm of Water •, nor any Authority from thence 
 *' to conclude, that Water-Baptlfin is a Gof^el Ordi- 
 
 !* ftance.^' 
 
 Anf. What Jofe^h — may think a fufficient Warrant, 
 I know not ; but this I know, that it appears fo to me ^ 
 and according to his Friends as before cited ^ the Apoftle 
 did there advife to the Baptifin of Water : And, as he 
 was direfted in his Doftrine by the Spirit of God, I 
 think, it may be juftly concKided, that, what the 
 Apoftle, in the Difcharge of his Gofpel Minijlryy there 
 recommended ^ ought to be conftderedy and regarded, as 
 an Ordinance thereof. He proceeds, p. 3J. and fays, 
 ** The Drift and Tendency of the Miniftry of the 
 *' Apoftles was to publifli to all Mankind RemiJJlon of 
 J« Sins thro' Repentance and FAITH in Jefns Chriil." 
 
 Now as to this, I fhall not difpute with him. But 
 he goes on and fays, '* What they (meaning the A- 
 *< pofles) declare to be the Confequcnce of FAITH, 
 *' this Author attributes to Water-Baptifm." 
 
 Anf. But with v/hat Face, ^ofeph — could tell the 
 World fo \ I know not \ for certain I am, that in this, 
 he was not dilated by the Spirit ot Truth % fince I have 
 no where attributed Rcmijfion of Sins, to be the Confcquence 
 of IVater-Baptifm y which is what he does plainly here 
 declare *, and therefore, until he can make this appear 
 to be true ^ Falfhood lyeth at his Door. 
 
 And farther, as I have no where fo declared, neither 
 do I believe, Remijfwn of Sins to be THE Conlequence of 
 Water-Baptifm. And this, is what he could not (I 
 "think) but know ; forafmuch, as he has, p. 10. of his 
 Exam. drc. inferted my Anfwer to his Friend's Qiieftion, 
 whicn was to this Effeft ; *' Whether J'erforis mi^ht na 
 
 E 2. *^ r-'^i^-^r 
 
( 3^D 
 
 f^ come UYidcr IVater-BafUfWy ami other External Formt^ 
 J* ami yet he in a bad State ? " 
 
 To which, I anlwered to this Purpole, that, ** 1 di4 
 f' think, that there was many that pailed under the 
 ?' Externals of Religion^ and yet were in a very bad Con- 
 f* dition: and 1 initanced the Cafe o[ Simon Magus'' — 
 
 ;Now, frpm henc2 ic'*s evidtnt, that I am tar from 
 concluding, thiit RemiJJion of Sins ^ is THE Conlequence 
 pi Water-Bapifm. And, this I fay again, Joft^h — could 
 hot but know, forafmuch, as he has given the above 
 PafTage, a Place in his Exam. &c. And therefore, it^s 
 mnaccountable to me, how he could take the Liberty^ 
 thus /^//^j; to represent 7ne to the World* But^ tho'I 
 do not believe, RewJJfion of Sins ^ to be THE Conle- 
 quence of Watcr-Ba^'lifm-^ yet, I conclude with the 
 j^poflle, that thole Viho-^repnt^ and he baptiwd, (in 
 Water,) in the Name of Jejus Chrill *, fliall, through the 
 Mercy of God, in Chrift, receive the Remijfion of Sins ^ 
 ^— as^i(^3 ii. 38. and, y;hat the Apoftle by theDi&ates of 
 the Holy Spirit, hath thus joined together ^ the Quahr^ 
 iia'ife no Authority, to i'eparate, or put afiinder. 
 • An], fr.rther, as I have not attributed Remijfion of 
 fps to be THE Conlequence of Watey-Baptifrnj his In- 
 finuatioji, or rather Declaration, on that Account f, mu{]: 
 tirife from his own imagination •,— and, I think he might 
 have deferred anlwering,-^until, at leaft, he had heard 
 me on that Head. But, his Forwardnefs on this Ac- 
 count,— -makes it very juft, to apply the Proverb to him, 
 '^^e that anfrvcreth c master before he heareth ity it is folly 
 {Old Jhame unto him, Prov. xviii. 13. And therefore, 1 
 'advife him when he writes again, to keep tncre clofe to 
 Ifis ^lipnefs •,-:^to learn to be confiltent with himlelf '; 
 find' to pay a better Regard to the judgment of his 
 trii^nds. r ' - ,■ ' 
 
 / Kqw, ^'V'hat mighty Feats Jofcph-^^-^lms done by his ^yz^ 
 tcp'd^d Examination y &c. in fliewing the Wcaknels, or 
 Invalidity of my Argumcutj fvora Jlcfs ii. 38. fox IVatc-]^' 
 
 * -*- ^ •/ ' ■ ^ ^ ' ^ '' ■ ■ ^ ■ ' rSp--- 
 
(37) 
 
 Bdptiftny I leave, to the Confideration of the impartial 
 Reader, 
 
 The next Text I took Notice of, in order to {hew, 
 that Water-Baptifm is an Ordinance of the Gofpel 
 Church*, vJ2LsA^s \iii. 5, 12, 14, 15, i(5, and 17. and 
 from hence 1 obferved, p. 20, 21. of mine on IVater- 
 Baptifm \ that, •' We are told by the facred Hiftcriany 
 « « that Philip went down to the City of Samaria^ and preached 
 ** Chrift unto them \ that is, he not only fhewed Ghrifl 
 ,?' to be the Mefliah and Sen of God •-, but he alio 
 f' preached the Things concerning the Kingdom of God j and 
 ♦* the Name of Jefus Chrijl. Whereby the Kingdom of 
 *' Gody I humbly conceive, is meant the Gofpel Difpen- 
 ** ration ; and by the Things which concerned that King* 
 *' domy the Duties of Chriftianity •, which when the 
 ^^ Samaritans believed, they were in Obedience thereto, 
 ** baptized both Men and Women, (a) Which Bap- 
 f* tifm, is evident from the Text^ to be the Baptifm of 
 '* Water ^ and alio one of thofe Things which Philip 
 ** preached as appertaining to the Kingdom of God ; which 
 ♦' the Samaritans were obedient to 5 and on the Account 
 ** of which (amongft other Things at leaft) they were 
 *' laid to have received the Word of God : (b) and yet 
 '•* were not baptized with the Holy Ghoil •, tho' they 
 " had, in Obedience to the WORD, been baptized in 
 " the Name of the Lord Jefus. (c) Would to God, that 
 *' all who deny the Pra^lice of this Ordinance, would 
 •' ferioufly confider of this • I fay, that they would 
 *^ confider, that the Believers at Samaria in Conformity 
 ** to Philip^s preaching the Things concerning the Kingdom 
 ** ofGody were baptized in Water ^ in the Name of the 
 J* Lord Jefus:' 
 
 In Anlwer to which fays Jofcph Beffe^ p. 31. " The 
 f * next Text which he produces in Proof chat Water- 
 ** Baptifm is an Ordmar^ce ofChriJly h Acts viii. 12. when 
 it they (the Samaritans) bsUsvul Philip, preaching the 
 
 ** Things 
 
 (^) Arts vili. 1^; 0; Arcs nil 14. (c) Ver. 15, i5. 
 
(38) 
 
 f^ Things coYicennng the Kingdom of God^ and the Name of 
 f^ Jefus Chrifi, they were baptiz,ed both Men and Women. 
 *' This Baptifm (fays he, p. 21.) is evident from the 
 *' Text to be the Baptifm of Water. Now fnppofe 
 *^ that be granted him, yet it is as evident from the 
 " Context, that the Baptiim there fpoken of was not 
 *' attended either wi:h Remijfion of Sins, or the Gift of 
 *' the Holy Ghoftj and confequcntly was not the true 
 ** Chrijlian Baptifm:' 
 
 jdnf. Now, here 1 obferve, firft, that Jofeph — does 
 not pretend to deny Jils viii. 12. to ijitend Water-Bap- 
 tifm \ for fays he, vvith refpe^t to this Text^ ** Nom 
 ^' f^PP^fi ^^^^^ ^^ g^^f^^^d him:' — But how much more 
 honeft, and honourable^ would it have been, for him, freely 
 to have own'd it ^ fince he don't pretend to deny it : Is 
 ■It not therefore plain, that he is willing to hide, or 
 perplex the Truth ? 
 
 Secondly, how can he tell, that the Baptifm there fpolen 
 ofy was not attended with RemiJJion of Sins ? Does the 
 Spirit in him, tell him fo ? it it does, I fear it's a falfe 
 one ; for tho' Simons Sins were not •, yet, there is great 
 Reafon to think, that the others. Sins were remitted •, 
 who had receivedy and obeyed the Word, pnached by Philip j 
 as that they were thought, proper Perlons, by the 
 Apoftles ; to pray to God for ^ that as they had re^ 
 ceived the Word'-) th?y might alio receive, the HoIyGhoft, 
 And it's evident, that God owned them in an extraordinary 
 Manner ; by his bedowing it fb on them. Which, 
 when it's confidered, I think it's moft reaionable to 
 conclude, that they were not in Simon^s Condition, viz. 
 in the Gall of Bitter ncfs^ and in the Bond of Iniquity *, but, 
 rather Hich, whofe Sins were remitted j and they in the 
 divine Favour. 
 
 But Jofeph — proceeds, faying^ " The Cafe of the 
 
 *' — Samaritans fhews, how little they were benefited by 
 
 .** Water- Baptifm^ which, tho' faid to be in the Name of 
 
 ** the Lord jefus, was not accompanied with th^ Gift of 
 
 [[ the Holy Ghoft." >= ' ' ' 
 
 Kow 
 
(39) 
 
 :^0W in Anfwer to this, I fay, that, from his own 
 Words, it's evident, that as IVater^BaptiJnij was (ad- 
 miriiftred) " in the Name of the Lord Jefus'' it's plain, 
 that iVater-Baptifm was an Ordinance of the Lord Jefus : 
 tho' it was diitin^l:, from the Gift of the Holy Ghofi. 
 And it's being fo, makes it no lefs true, that it is Chrift's 
 own Baptifm. 
 
 However, he goes on, and fays, " 'Tis plain^' 
 
 *^ that the formal Adnainiflration of that Ceremony 
 *^ availeth little-^ and that Men may pafs under that 
 " Ceremony without being baptized with the Baptifm of 
 " Chriji:' 
 
 Anf But, let fofeph — fliew if he can, that becaufe 
 fbme were baptized with Water, and did not immediately 
 thereupon, receive the Gift of the Holy Ghoft \ that there- 
 fore, it will follow, that Water -Baptifm, is not the Bap- 
 iifm oftijrift. And until he hath done this, his frequent 
 talking in that Strain, is tneerly trifling \ and may be 
 juflly deemed Sophijlry. 
 
 And to what Purpofe, he talks fb much of Simon, I 
 fee not v except, it be to Ihew, that M-^ater-Baptifm, is 
 not an Ordinance of Chrift j BECAUSE, fuch wicked 
 Perfons as Simon, might be in the Prattice of it ^ and 
 yet not be benefited by it. I fay^ unlels, this be his End, 
 I can't fee why he fb infifts on the Cafe of Simon ^ and 
 argues on that Account, that Water-Baptifm is not aa 
 
 Ordinance of Chrift.'- Some of his Words are, p. 31. 
 
 " The Cafe of SlNiO^— plainly fjjews^ that Water -Bapti fin 
 *' is not the Baptifm of Chrift."' 
 
 Now fiTppofe I fliould in another Cafe, argue in like 
 Manner, That as Jofeph Befje, owns that the A^ of af* 
 femhling together for religious Worfliip, is an Externat 
 Ordinance to be ohftrved under ^ the Gofpel Difpenfation^ as 
 Exam, p, 8. will it follow, that becaufe too many join 
 in the^<^ of affemhlingy together for religious IVorfhip^'- 
 and yet remain with Simon in the Gall of Bitternefs^ and 
 in the Bond of Iniquity ^ I fliy, will it follow from thence,, 
 that tl;e ^^ offo affemhlirig^-^is to be hid afide 3 and' 
 
( 40 ) 
 
 not confidered, as an External Ordinance °^ to be praffifed 
 under this Dilpenf ation ! 
 
 Again, had. Jofeph — lived under the former Dif^enfati- 
 tnj in which Was injoin'd many Ritei and Qremonks \ and 
 he had obferved lome to be very flriB m the Perform- 
 ance of thole Externals^' — would he have took upon hira- 
 felf, to have argued, that thofe i^itej— were not injoin^i 
 ed by divine Authority ^ becaule, there were (ome that 
 obferved them j and yet, were wichd and ungodly Per- 
 ibns ! And farther, would it have followed, that be- 
 caule Ibme Jem were not benefited which did oblerve 
 thole Ceremonies^ whole Hearts were not right with God\ 
 that therefore, others, who came to thofe Services with 
 well-prepared Minds, and did anlwer to the Requiring! 
 of God therein, would not be proftted^ by their lincere 
 Obedience to him ! Mow, tho' too many, may come 
 to Water- Baptifm like Simon, with unprepared Hearts, and 
 go away like him unprofited -^ yet it no Way appears 
 from thence, that thofe who came to Water -Baptifni 
 with Hearts well difpoled to God, by F^/tFand Repen- 
 tancefhall not be profited thereby^ as it's one Part oF 
 their Duty in Obedience to him. 
 
 So alfo, with Regard to J jjemhly Wor/hip'^ tho' too 
 many may come to the puhlick Worfliip of God, like a$ 
 5/wo;^,-^and go av;ay like him unprofited,-— yer, it will 
 not follow from thence, that thofe who attend the — - 
 Worfhip of God as they ought to do, fliall not be profited 
 thereby .--—ISIow, itjofcph's thus arguing againft the 
 Continuance of Water- Ba^ti fin ^ be good -^—the fame of 
 Courie will follow, Vt/ith relpecl to Jjjemhly IVorfljip \ viz. 
 
 it ought alfo to be laid afide.- But as Jofeph — thinks 
 
 t]\c Quakrs have lufficient Authority, for the Continu- 
 ance of the ^i? offo ajjemhliiig together '^-—^o^ in like 
 Manner it's evident, that there is the fame Authority 
 for the Continuance, of Water- Baptifn-^ — even, the Doc^ 
 trine, and Pradice, of tlie commijfwned^ and infpired 
 ^■>cjlks of Chri(l. 
 
 He, 
 
(4i5 
 
 He, yet goes on, p. 31, 32. " It were (fays he) id 
 " be wiihed that all who praftice IVater-Baptifm would 
 ^^ ferioufly confider ot this ^ I lay, that they would 
 *' ferioully confider that the Samaritans^ notwithftand- 
 *' ing their outward AlTent to the Doctrine ot ThlUpi 
 *' and their being outwardly baptized with WaUy^ were 
 *' not e deemed as perfed: Converts to Chriftianity, till they 
 " Were afterward baptiz>cd with the Chrifiian Baptifm by 
 *^ the Miniftration of Peter and John^ who, ver. 17. 
 " laid their Hands on them, and they received the Holy 
 
 'J Ghofi:' 
 
 Anf I find that "Jofeph^ is not only uncharitable in 
 his Opinion of ?w^, but alio, I think, of thQ Samaritans -j 
 for what lefs by his Expreffions, does he infinuate, than 
 that they were H)ipocrites to Philip •, by his talking of 
 their OUTWARD Ajfent^ to the Doarine of Philip: Does 
 not fuch a Way of fpeaking, fjgnifie, as tho' he did not 
 conclude, that the Samaritans did inwardly, or from the 
 Heart, aflent to, or obey Philip's Doftrine j when they, 
 were baptiz^td in Water ? 
 
 And, where does this Author, find this DiJlinBion^ 
 in thcMn? Teftament, ofperfc^ Converts to Ghriftianity^ 
 elpecially, fuch as are difiinguifiied, from thole thac 
 have received the Word oj God •, as thefe Samaritans had 
 done? 
 
 However, it's plain as above, that according to Jofeph^ 
 the Samaritans did not only give their — AfTent to the 
 Do(}rine of Philips but hearing of him preach, believed^ 
 and were haptiz^ed in Water. From hence it's evident, 
 that Water 'Baptifm was contained in the Do£lrine which 
 Philip preached; and, was alfo one of thole Tk>^5 that: 
 concerned the Kingdom of God ; and the Name of Jefus 
 
 Chrift. -And conlequentjy, was an Ordinance ot the 
 
 Gofpel Church, 
 
 And farther, as it was adminiflred in the Name of 
 Jefus Chrift \ by the infpred Servant; of God v it fhews, 
 that, that Baptifm, was the Baptifen of Chrift. Therefcreg 
 I take the Liberty to fay a8^ainj--Would to God, thac 
 
 ^ ^ thcr, 
 
(42) 
 
 the Quahrs, who deny the Pradlice of this Ordinance, 
 would ferionfly confider of this ^ I fay, that they would 
 confider, That the Believers at Samaria, in Conformity 
 to Philip^s preaching, the "things concerning the Kingdom of 
 Cody were hapt}z,ed in Water ^ m the Name of the Lord 
 Jefus. That fo, they might by the Blefling of God, 
 come to fee the TRUTH : and be obedient to ic. 
 
 Now, from the Whole, of what hath been faidfrom 
 'J{}swnui2y — 14, 15, 16. I trnft, that notwithftand- 
 ing, what Jofeph Bejfe hath produced, in his Exam, Sec. 
 yet, the Argument for Water-Baptifmy — remains un- 
 touched : Nay, not only ib ^ but when his weak Exami^ 
 fiationj is confidered^ together, with th^ facred Text^ 
 it's abundantly more confpcuous or plain. 
 
 I next went on, in my Dilcourle of Water-Bap" 
 tifm^ to obferve, p. 21, 22. " That I was inform* 
 *' edy that the Word IN, (a) the Name in this Text, 
 ** is, in the Greek or Original, INTO, as well as ia 
 *^ the Commtffion of onr Lord, (h) where, on the 
 " Account of which, Mr. Barclay and Dell declare, 
 *' (c) That Water is not intended, but the Baptifm of 
 *' the Spirit^ and therefore read or explain it thus; 
 *' Go ' teach all Nations, and, by the Mini fir ation of the 
 ** Spirit^ baptize or dip thern into the Name^ &c. That is, 
 *^ fay they, into the Power and Fcrtue of God. But let it 
 *' be obferved, That this is none of the Spirit's Dialed ^ 
 '* in the Scriptures •, that is, that the Apoftles were 
 •* commanded to baptize Perfbns into the Power and f^er- 
 *« tue of God. Neither is the Phrafe Baptiz^ingy fo to be 
 «' und^rftood j when ic is mentioned, as that which was 
 *' pra£lifed or to be performed by the Apoftles ; as is 
 " thjs Cafe in the Commi/fwn : and therefore fiich a 
 *^ Comment is not to be received. Befides, if the Word 
 " INTO makes fiich a mighty Difference in the Com^ 
 " mijjion, to what it would if it was only to be con- 
 ** fider'd as our Tranflation renders it, that is, IN, and 
 
 " that 
 
 (a) AiU viil' l^^ (h^ Mat. xxylii. ip. (c) Dell <>« B/ipfm, p. joi 
 
(43,. 
 
 " that wherever it's INTO, in the Original, it mufl be 
 •' read and nnderftood according to Mr. Dell^ that when 
 " Perfbns are ordered, or faid to be baptized INTO 
 ^^ the Name of any, that the Meaning is, That they 
 ** are baptized into their Power and Vertue : I fay, it lo, 
 ** what confufed Work iliall we make of this Scripture, 
 ** which then would run thus *, Who when they were come 
 *' down, prayed for them^ that they might receive the Holy 
 *' Ghojl. For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only 
 *^ they were baptiz^ed into the Power and Fertue of the Lord 
 *^ Jefus. (a) For then it will follow, That Perfons may 
 *^ be baptized into the Power and Feytue ofChrift, and yet 
 '^ not be baptiz,edmth the Spirit or Holy Ghojl, So that 
 *^ the natural Confequencc of their Notion of the 
 *' Word INTO, doth, at lead, very much perplex, if 
 *^ not deftroy their own Doftrine. Which I humbly 
 ** intreat thofe People ferioufly to confider of ; that lo 
 *' they may come to fee their Miflake , and the Truth as 
 [' it is in Jefus:' 
 
 In Anfwer to which Jo/e]?/;— fays. Exam. p. 32, 33.^ 
 *^ Tho' his Information, as to the Samcnefs of the 
 *' Grech Word in this Text, may be true *, yet his own 
 ** Allertion refpe£ling Barclay and Delly is not fo : For 
 *^ altho' thofe Authors do declare, that in Mat. xxviii. 
 *' 19. Water is not intehded, but the Baptifm of the 
 ** Spirit, yet 'tis not barely on the Account of the \Vord, 
 ** IntOy that they fo declare : But 'tis on the Account 
 *^ of the Nature of Chrifi's Baptifm^ which Chrift him- 
 ** felf diflinguiflies from thQ Baptifin of Water '^ and be- 
 " caufe that v;hen Chrift had fo clearly diflinguifhed 
 *' between John's Baptifm of Water and his own Baptifm 
 *' of the Spirit, it mufl be abflird to fiippofe that his 
 *' CommKTIon iliould relate to Water- Baptifm, which 
 *' was that of John, And that Water-Baptifm was 
 *' not intended in Chrifl'^s Commi/fion to his Difclples, is 
 l^ apparent by their being commanded to wait for 
 
 F z [' PovkIk 
 
 W A£ls Vili. 1 5", J^i 
 
V 44 ) 
 
 ti^ Power from on h\gK*r> execute it : For this Author 
 '* has acknowledged, p. ii. that JVater-Baptifm is in 
 " Man^s Power only to admimjler. What Need then 
 *' conid there be for their waiting to be endued with 
 *-^ Power from on high, to qualify them to bapttz.e with 
 *^ ihch a Baptifm as was before in their own Power to 
 " adminifter ?" 
 
 Now, here I obferve, that Jofeph does in effecl: own 
 the Samenefs of the Greek Word, (Into) in this Text^ 
 With thdit Mat, xxviii. 19. I alio take 3S2otice, that he 
 declares, my JJJertion relpeOiing Barclay and DeU^ is not 
 trucy when I laid, that on the Account of the Greek 
 Word INTO, Mat. xxviii. 19. they declare, that Water 
 js rot intended in the Co?nmlJJiony hut the Baptifm of the. 
 
 Spirit \ but, who is nigheft the Truth in this, I truft 
 
 ■will appear anon, by thole Authors own Words. But 
 firfl, where have I faid, that "'tis barely on the Account 
 of the Word Into ? this is plainly an Evafton of my 
 Words ^ in order to put on a Colour of Advantage ! 
 but Jofeph, this unfliir Way of Proceeding, ihall not 
 fcreen thee. However, I obferve, by his faying that hi^ 
 
 not barely, that, he allows, it v;as on that Account, 
 
 in fome Meafure *, lo that what I have laid in this Cafe, 
 is Trtithj by his own Words , notwithftanding what he 
 fays to the contrary. 
 
 And with Regard to R. Barclay in this Point, thus he 
 fpeaks, Apology , p. 294. *• Secondly as to what Chrift 
 *' Tnth, in commanding them to be baptized inthe Nairn 
 •■*' of the father. Son and Spirit. I confefs (fays he) that 
 
 f' ftates the Difference, and it is great j- FOR the 
 
 ^' Gri^ek is (-----) that is, INTO the A^^we. Now 
 ** the Name of the Lord is often taken in Scripture for 
 
 *' fomcthing elle, than a Sound of Words,- even for 
 
 ^^ his Vcrtue and Tower,'''' ^ — He goes on largely, in or^ 
 ider to Ihew, that, on the Account of its being Irdo^ in 
 the ponmiijfiony the Baptifm there Ipoken ot is net 
 'fVater- Baptifm, but a being baptized, INTO the Fertue 
 ^nd Power of Cod. 
 
 And 
 
( 45 ) - 
 
 And Dell, m his Doftrme o^Baptifms^ p. 30. fays,— 
 '^ Go teach all Nations^ and by the Miniftracion of the 
 *^ Spirit^ — dip them INTO the Name of God the Father^ 
 ** Son ard Sprit '^ and ]>hOTE, that he faith not here, 
 
 *^ ( ) in the l>^ame. But INTO the Name of the 
 
 *' Father, ^b^c, and by the Name ofGod, is meant the 
 *' Fower and Fertue of God, or God himlelf ^ SO that 
 *^ the Sence lies thus, *' Teach the Nations, and bap- 
 ** tize them INTO the Name, &c." 
 
 Now, whether I have wronged thef e Authors, I leave 
 to the Judgment of the Reader. For, I think it's very 
 plain, that it is on the Account of the Greek Word /nto^ 
 — that Barclay and Dell^ would fain exclude Water from 
 being intended in the CommiJJion of our Lord. And, 
 that the Quakers in common, would exclude Water out 
 of this Text^ on Account of the Greek Word INTO, is 
 i think, well known to many, that have had Conver-- 
 lation with them. That, when any have gone about 
 to prove, from Mat, y.^\m. 19, 20. thsit Water- Baptifm, 
 is the Baptilm that Chrift gave his Apoftles in Coimmf^ 
 fion \ the Quakers commonly, will very pertly reply, and 
 lay, that's not lb, FOR the Greek Word is IntOy &c. 
 
 From all which, I think it's very manifeft, that, thefe 
 'Authors^ and the Quaker s^ would on Account of the 
 Creei^j-— exclude Water out- of our Lord's CommilJlon, So, 
 that the confufed Work and Perplexity^ which I ob- 
 ferved as above, is a juft Remark ^ and worthy the 
 ferious Refleciion of the Quakers. 
 
 And iarthei-, 1 obferve he fays, — *^ that Water-Bap- 
 ** tifin was not intended in Chrifl's Commiffion to his 
 *^ Difciples, is apparent by their being commanded to 
 l^ wait for Tovoer from on high to execute it." 
 
 But this I take the Liberty to deny, and ktjofiph 
 produce the Text if he can, wherein it's expreiTed, or 
 declared, that the Difciples were to wait at Jerufalem for 
 Fower, to execute y or admmlRQiL Spirit Baptif7n ^ and until 
 he can do this, I fhall not take his hare Say-fb, to be 
 authcntick;«--elpecially, as the New Tellamcnt intl- 
 
 mates 
 
(46> 
 
 mates what it was, that they were to execute, by tliat 
 Power, they were to wait for^ and mentions nothing of 
 their being impowered to baptize with the Spirit, For 
 that was the peculiar Gift of Gody and was the iiibjed 
 Matter the Apoftles prayed to God for ^ that the Be- 
 lievers at Samaria, might receive. J^s viii. 15. — And 
 it's plain, that it was iorPowery to execute the Work of 
 the Mini fry ^ that they were to wait for, at Jcrufalem ., 
 that fo they might be well accompliflied, to preach the 
 Gofpel '^ or to be Witneffes unto Chrift, both in "Jerufalem^ 
 and in Samaria^ and unto the uttermoft Parts of the Earth. 
 A^ts i. 5, — 8. which they were compleatly qualified to 
 do ^ when on the Day of Penticofl^ they received Power ^ 
 or the Gift of Tongues, — Ads ii. — and this was the 
 Power they waited for^ that (b they might be qualified, 
 according to Chrift's Commiffon, to teach all Nations \ 
 and preach the Golpel intelligibly, to the different Lan- 
 guages of the World.- 
 
 He proceeds, and cites a Sentence of mine, *^ that 
 ** Water-Baptifm is in A<fan^s Power only to adminifler?^ 
 And then goes on laying, '^ What Keed then, could 
 " there be for their waiting to be endued with Power 
 *^ from on high, to qualify them to baptiz^e with fuch a 
 •^ Baptifm as was before in their own Power to ad- 
 *^ minifter ? ' 
 
 Kow with Refpe^: to the firfl, I would ask Jofeph 
 Beffe^ whether it's in Man's Power to baptize with the 
 Spirit? which ifnot; then what I have faid, as above, 
 mud be allowed for Truth. And agreeable hereto, fays 
 the enlightened Mr. Bell, (as Jofcph is pleafed to call 
 him) p. 18. — " the Creature could but baptize with the 
 
 ^^ Creature *," and I hope Jofeph will not deny, what 
 
 this his enlightened Fr/>;7^ hath faid. 
 
 A.nd as to the (econd, I lay, I do not conclude, that 
 the Difciples were to wait at Jerufakm, for any new, or 
 additional bodily Strength • but as before obferved, for 
 the inward Endowment of the Soul *, — together, with 
 Power or Authority, to go out into the NatioViS of the 
 
 World, 
 
(47) 
 
 World, to preach the Gofpel ^ and baptiz^e, fuch as ihould 
 receive their Doctrine ^ which large, and extended Au- 
 thority, they had not before. 
 
 P. 33. He adds, " Thole Authors, who probably 
 *' were as learned as this Writer's Informer, were noc 
 ** ignorant, that the fame Greek Word may be render- 
 *^ ed in or into^ alfo to^ for^ hy^ at, &c. according as the 
 *' Scope and Purport of the Text in which it is uled 
 *^ may require. And accordingly, they having proved 
 *' that Mat. xxviii. 19. muft be underllood of the £ap» 
 ** tifm of the Spirit; they fliew that the Greek Word in 
 " that Text ought to be rendered into^ but they na 
 *^ where fay, that wherever the fame Word occurs *' in the 
 '^ Orifir-aly it mufi be under flood the fame Way." That 
 ** is only an imaginary Confequence of this Sermon^ 
 <« Writer''^ own drawing, which he introduces with an 
 " IF So, p. 22. and which indeed is NOT So. Let 
 *^ him again conluit his Informer, and if he underflands 
 " the Original, he will probably fatisfy him, that the 
 ** fame Particle in the Greek Tongue may have a dif- 
 *' ferent Conftruclion in different Texts, agreeable to 
 *^ the Diverfity of the Subjed treated on. The Igno- 
 ** ranee of which has led this Author to conceive a Ne- 
 '* ceflity of fuch a Method of Tranflation as neither is 
 f' nor ought to be pra£li(cd." 
 
 To which I fay, It's allowed, that the Greek Word may 
 be render'd/;^, or Into^ — according to the Scope and Pur- 
 port of the Text. — But, I deny, that thofe Authors have 
 proved that Mat. xxviii. 19. tnuft he imderftood of the 
 Baptifm of the Spirit. However, if they had fo done be- 
 fore him, it's but an eafy Task, for Jofephy to do fo 
 likewife ; for he feems to have a mighty Knack of ufing 
 the Works of others, made ready to hif Hand, 
 
 But farther, I cbferve,, that he here cites m.e partially ^ 
 and thereupon mifreprefents me as ufing the Word, 
 H^^c7'ez;er without Limitation *, as tho' I had faid, that 
 WHEREVER the fame Word (viz. Into) occurs in the 
 
 Original, it muft be under flood the fame Way\ whea 
 
 it's 
 
(48) 
 
 it's undeniably plain, that I reflri£led thofe Terms^ to 
 fiich PafTages ot Scripture v rvhcre Perfom are ordered^ or 
 
 [aid to he baptiud INTO the Name of any^ lo that 
 
 Jofeph'^s Infmuation, is very ufijuft. And, tho' I do not 
 imderftand Greek j yet, I can difcern, when I am well^ or 
 ill treated. 
 
 But, this is not the firft Time, that he has endeavour'd 
 faljly, to reprefent my Words ^ a Specimen of it appears 
 in his 1 6th Page, where he would inlinuate, as tho' I 
 had faid, that Ibmething might ^' be Mans Duty, which 
 " is not difcoverahle to his Reafon to hefo,'^ And this he 
 would fain make appear j becaule, in mine on Water- 
 Baptifm, p. 9. fpeaking of Water- Baptifmy I faid, " the 
 '^ Knowledge of which, to be a Duty under this Dif- 
 
 *^ penfation, depends on the New Tejlame-r.ti it being 
 
 *^ not to be known by the Light of Nature, or Reafon 
 ** of Mankind j but from the DoO:rine and Pradice of 
 
 *^ Chrifl, and hisinfpiredApoftles." Now, whether 
 
 the above Iniinuacinn be jufly or very unjufi^ I leave to 
 the impartial Reader. For it's very plain, that I was 
 there oblerving, that tho' Water- Baptifm's being a Duty, 
 could not be known by the Light of Nature, or Reafon of 
 Mankind J yet, I there obferved, that it was diicover- 
 able to his Reafon, to be a Duty •, and that by the 
 Do^rinCy ^nd Pra^ice ofChrift \ and his infpired Apoftles. 
 And yet, this is what "jofei^h v^'ould very fain ^ and, hath 
 took Pains to reprefent me as denying ! O, Jofeph, may- 
 eft thou not juflly I?/z(/7j, and hQ afJjamed^ ofthefethy 
 Aftions ! does that5p/nf, thou pretends to ht guided by, 
 lead thee to this ? Remember, fuch Anions proceed not 
 from the good Spirit, And I think, it's not at all 
 amils, to advife him, before he writes again on religious 
 Subjecls •, to go to the School o{ common Civility ! 
 
 The next PafTage I proceed to, p. 22, 23. was that 
 o[ Philip's being fent to meet tliQ Ethiopian Eunuch^ Afts 
 viii. — where we have an Account ot the Succefs of Phi^ 
 lip's Journey, and the Convcrfmn^ of the Eunuch to Chrifl 
 
 tianity ; on which Paflage 1 obferved, — That "We 
 
 ~ " find 
 
( 49 ) 
 
 ** find that the Spirit bid Philip £0 rear arid join hlmfcif 
 t' to the Chariot J which he diligencly obeyed*, and was 
 »'• loon bid by the Eunuchy to come and fit with him *, 
 *' which accordingly he did *, and there he had a good 
 *' Opportunity to preach Chrifl to him ^ as he had done 
 ** before to the S^,umritam\ and with the hke Eiiect ^ 
 ** forwc read, That as they went on their Way^ they came 
 *^ imto a certain Water : and the Eunuch faid^ See here is 
 *' IVater j what doth hinder me to he baptized <^ And Fhili]^ 
 ** [aid J if thou believe ft with all thine He art j thou mayeft, 
 '* Jnd he anjwered and [aid ^ I bdie-ve that Jefus Chrifl is 
 *' the Son of God. And then > we find, he commanded the 
 " Chariot to ftand ftill : and they both went down into the 
 *' Water y both Philip and the Eunuch-^ and he baptized him. 
 ** Ca) From hence it's very natural to obferve, firl't, 
 ** That Philip had not only been preaching Chrifl to 
 ** be the ti'uc MJfiah ^ but had alfo laid before the Eunuch 
 ** thofe Things that concerned his Kingdom. Secondly, 
 '* That the Confequence o^Ph'dlfs thus preaching, was 
 ** the £j^Kr/c /;'s prop 3 fing, and being accordingly, baptized 
 ** in Water. Thirdly, That ad this was carried on and 
 ** conduiled by thQ Angel dind Spirit of God ; and ended 
 *^ in the Joy and Rejoicing of 'the Eunuch. Fourthly, 
 *' That Faithy or Believing in Chrifl, is a necefTary 
 " Quah'fication for the Subje^s otMAxter-Baptifm ; which 
 ** fnews. That the Baptifhi is an Ordinance ot Chriil ^ 
 '^ fince it's the Believers in him, only are the proper 
 *' Subjefts of it: For if it had not been an Ordinance 
 ** of Chrifl, Faith m a dead and rifen Jefus (I think) 
 '* would not have been required of Perfons in order to 
 '^ it : and therefore, it's evident to be an Ordinance of 
 ** Chrifl." 
 
 In Anfvver to which, Jofph^ by his Exam. &c. has 
 produced a wonderful Paragraph indeed', not only for 
 ics Length, (which makes it "proper to divide it) but 
 much more lb, by the flirprizing Contents thereof : 
 
 G which 
 
(50) 
 
 which runs thus, p. 34. " The next Text produced by 
 " this Sermon-Writer^ is ^[^s viii. 32, 33. relating the 
 •* Paffage of Philip's baptizing the Ethiopian Eunuch. 
 ** From which PafTage it were more eafy to demon- 
 ** ftrate, that IVater-Baptifm was a Jervifh Rite^ than it 
 ** is an Ordinance of the GofpeL The Text itlelf clearly 
 *' fliews that this Baptifin was adminiftred at the In- 
 «' ftance and Reqneft of the Eunuch, who was a Gentile-^ 
 ** and the firfl Convert to Chriftianity from among the 
 «' Gentiles, that we read of. He probably knowing 
 *' Water-Baptifm to be a Rite or Ceremony ufed in order 
 " to an Admidion into the Jewiflj Church, within the 
 *« Limits of which all the Chriftians at that Time feem 
 «« to have been included, might defire to be To baptized : 
 ** And for the fame Realbn Philip, being hirafelf a 
 *« Member of the Jewifh Church, might adminifter that 
 «< Ceremony to gratify the Requeft of his new Convert, 
 «t For it doth not appear that there was at that Time 
 " any Cloriftian Church wholly diffcintt or feparate from 
 •' the jewifli. So that Philip'^s adminiftring to the Eu- 
 ** fiuch at his Requefl an ufiial Jewi/Jj Ceremony, in or- 
 ** der to his AdmiflTion into that Church of which Philip 
 *' himfelf and all other Chriftians ac that Time were 
 ** Members, doth in no wife prove Water- B apt ifm to be 
 *f an Ordinance of Chrift'' 
 
 j4nf. As, I have but a little before, adviled him to 
 learn Common Civility ; fo here I think I may juftly cau- 
 tion him, to read the A&s of the Apofcles with more 
 Care ?inA Attention ; than, it appears, he hath heretofore 
 done : For if he was not a Stranger to th2.tf acred Book, 
 how could he lay, that, — '* it doth not appear that 
 «' there was at THAT TIME any Chriftian Church 
 ** rvholly diftinB ox feparate from the Jewifjj,^' 
 
 But in order that 1 may convince him of his Error *, I 
 fhall have Recourfe to the v^(?s of the Apoilles^ from 
 whence, I trufl: it viA] appear, that there was at that 
 Time a Chriftian Church, wholly diftin^ or feparate from the 
 Jewifh'^ before the Eumich was baptiz^id,' But firft, I 
 
 think 
 
(50 
 
 think it proper, to inferc K. Eardafs Definition of a 
 Churchy that lo it may be kaown what the Quakers con- 
 clude a Church to be. Jpology^ p. i8r . '' The Church 
 •* being no other Thing, (fays he) but the Society^ Ga- 
 *' thering, or Company of fuch as God hath called out of 
 *' the Worldy and worldly Spirit y to walk in his LIGHT and 
 5* Life:' 
 
 Now, were not the Apolllcs — (Iich a Society y or Com- 
 pany *, did they not gather or ajjemble together *, as j4{its L 
 4, 13, 14. where the ApoflJes are named, and thQ facred 
 Hijlorian goes on faying, Thefe all continued with one AC" 
 cord in Prayer and Supplication^ with the Worneny and Mary 
 the Mother of Jefus^ and with his Brethren. And in the 
 next Ferfe we are told, that. The Number of the Names 
 together were about an Hundred and Twenty, And this — 
 Company^ was that ^oc/^f/, which is called the CHURCH, 
 to which there was lome daily added y asfhould befaved. 
 A^ts ii. 47. 
 
 Now, was not this Company^ — wholly diftin^andfpa- 
 rated, from the Church, and Worihip of thej^ir^f had 
 they not feparated themfelves from the untoward Men of 
 that Generation, who denied Chrifl: ? were, they not fuchy 
 as God, had called out of the World ', to Walk in his Light ? 
 And were not they fuch, as continued ft edf aft in theJpoftles 
 BoCtrine and Fdlowfhip, and in breaking of Bread, and in 
 Prayers ? And therefore were not they then in a proper 
 Senfe, the Chriftian Church ? And was not this before 
 Philip baptized the Eunuch ? And agreeable hereto, it's 
 faid thtApoftles went to their own Company. Acts iv. 23. 
 And this Company is called the Churchy A^b v. 11. And 
 this was the Chriftian Church, v^hich Multitudes of the 
 Jewifh Church came to^ and joiaed thcmfcives with, ver^ 
 •14. And, has Joftph Bejfe, fo devoted himfelf, to the 
 reading o^ h\s Fnends Books, as to ncgleO:, or at leaft, 
 to be fo unmindful^ of what he reads'in thtNewTefta- 
 menty as NOT to know, that there was any Chrifiian 
 Church -J properly diftinfl from the 7(?2P/}'Z» Church'-) till after 
 the Baptilm of tlio, Funuch ! Did h-e never read //^v 
 
 G 2 viii. 1- 
 
<50 
 
 viii. I. hovv, thit S'tul was conienting to the peath of 
 Stephen, and that at that TIME thtre wan a great TcrfecuH- 
 on afainfl the CHURCH xvhkh was at Jcrufakm ? — ■ — is 
 any Thing plainer than this, in all the New^Teftament ? 
 Ko wonder, that Jofi^h can't find a fnfficient Authority 
 there, [ox IVater-Baptifm '. when he can't find, that there 
 wa"s a Clmftian Cmarh, wholly diftinB or Jepara!e frojn the 
 JewffJj Church ^ 'till atter the Eumch's Baptifm ! 
 
 But, perhaps He may not fo ir.uch regard the facred 
 Hlftoriaviy as he may his Friend Elmod's iacred Hiilory ^ 
 and theiefore, I will cice fome Paffages from thence, to 
 convince him of hisMiitake. P. '^I'^.onJds 5. he fays, 
 *^ The Chrijlian Church was by this Tim.e grown ibme- 
 *' whd.t bulky, by the plentiful Acceffion of Converts to 
 *' ic." P. 5 24. he t;ikes Notice of the " Care and 
 ** Service .of providing MecefTiries, and of d^ftributing 
 ^* them to the whole Community*'^' P. 526. he fpeaks of 
 a private Aft of the Churchy and p. 534. on AUs ii. 3. 
 he fa) s, (peaking ot Saidy " that he made Havock oi 
 *' the CHURCH : not only molefting them in theic 
 '' PUBLICK MEETINGS, bi^t even following them 
 *'• Home, and entering into every Houlc, haled out 
 '*' both Men and Women, and committed them to 
 '' Prifon." 
 
 K0W3 can any Thing be wtll plainer, than, that there 
 was at that Time, a Chrijlian Churchy wholly diilinft, — 
 from the JcwifJo r is it not evident from the Chriftians 
 providing for the M^a-its of the Peer, that was amongft 
 them *, and from their making a private Acl:, viz. chuf- 
 ing Deacons, for the Well-being ot the Society '^ andalfo 
 from their being pcj-Jlciitcd by the Jcwi/h Church : And 
 
 laflly, by their adhering to the Jpoflles VocJrire. 
 
 And, CMOi Jofeph Beffe ihew, that the Quakrs Church, is 
 jnovv^ more wholly d/jlind:^ — from the Eflabli/]?ed Church of 
 Er gland f than was the Chriftian Church then, from the 
 "Jsvrifh,^^. — From what has been laid, 1 think it muil 
 ,'<^PP^'.rp very weak in Jofeph^ nay ridiculous, for him to 
 talk cf Thiiip's admitting the Eunuch into the Jcwi/h 
 
 Church *, 
 
(53) 
 
 Church \ by that Baptifm, ot which Fakh in Chrlfl, was 
 ^ nece^ary Qualification ! as^^?5 viii. 37. — And farther, 
 as there was a Chriftian Church diftinft, from the Jewifh-^ 
 and Philip did by the Rite of Water- Baptifm, admit the 
 Eunuch into the Society, of Chriftians, or into the Chrif- 
 tian Church J it's evident, that, that Baptifm is an Ordi- 
 name of Chrifl, 
 
 Again, is it not very ftrange, that HE ihould alfo 
 call Thilip then, a Member of the Jewifo Church ; when 
 that Church, on account of his departing from it, per- 
 fecuted him ^ and when Fhilip was engaged, in bringing 
 as many Converts from thQ Jewi/h, to thQ Chrifian Church 
 as pofllble he could 1 
 
 I had not, been thus large on this, had ic not been a 
 String, which Jofeph is very ape, to harp upon. 
 
 But, from hence we may fee, what AbHirdities thefe 
 Men run into ^ as well as Contradictions, one to another 5 
 notwithftanding their high Pretentions, to be led by the 
 Spirit of God. But, let Jofeph and all the Quakers know ; 
 that God is not the Author of inch Confufton ^ but of Peace. 
 
 And, farther, I obferve, he pretends that IVater-Bap- 
 tifin^ was, " a Rite or Ceremony ufed by the Jews in order to 
 ** anJdmiJfion into thejewl/h Church.'' 
 
 Now, by Water-Baptifm here, if he means any Thing 
 to his Purpofe, he mud intend, th^Lt Baptifm which John 
 adminillred^ or that which the Apoftles pradiled; 
 
 both which I deny, was in Ufe before John.' And 
 
 agreeable hereto are the Words of the enlightened Dell, in 
 his Doclrine ot Baptidns, p. 13. v\?here (ayshe, ^^ — the 
 " Baptifm of John was brought in befides the Rites and 
 *' Manner of the Law, and fo was a Sign of a greac 
 **^ Change to follow." — And p. i 3, 14. he lays, — '• John 
 " was the Author or FiRbT Minifler of a NEW and 
 
 **' unwonted Baptifm.'' P. 6, ipeaking of John and his 
 
 Office, iays, *^ he begins to ihew the Difference from 
 
 " thence, becaufe the NEWNESS of his i?ti;'.^//m was 
 
 •*^ thQ Occafion of the Peoples conceiving, that he was 
 
 ^^ the M:///^^'/"— -And with thi,s agree the Words 
 
 cf 
 
(54) 
 
 of IF. Petty ver. 2. p. 832. " The A^^oMc Fetcr (fayi 
 " he) did but contmue a Praaice, INTRODUCED 
 ** by "John^ no<: eafiiy left among a ceremonious People." 
 
 -]SoW5 trom hence it's evident, if we are to pay 
 
 Ke^j;ard to thefe Authors, viz. 1)^//, and Pe;^, that the 
 -Baptifm pra'^liled by Jobn^ and ihQjpoftks^ was not a 
 Jervi/h Ceremony ^ but a BapCifm introduccdy or brought 
 in. by John'^ and was a Kfrr, and unwonted Baptifm, 
 And theretbre, as Jofiph owns it to be a Rite of ^^- 
 miffion, — it's evident, it was not into the Jevolfh^ but in- 
 to the Chrijlian Church : and of Courfe an Ordinance 
 thereof. 
 
 And, it's to be oblerved, that, fuppofing the Jews 
 had a Rite of Wajhing^ or Baptiz,ing, — in Ufe among 
 them, for the admitting Profelytes^ and their Children, 
 into their Church '^ and likewile o^ Children of the 
 
 Gentiles found*, 1 lay, fuppofe it were lb, yet, that 
 
 Wafhing^ was only to fuch as above-, — and was not, 
 pratViied to the Dcfcendents of the Jnvs. But it's evi- 
 dent, that the Bapti fin o^ John, and of tliQ Apofiles, was 
 praftifed to th^Jervs themfelvcs\ as well as to the Gen^ 
 tiles 'j and therefore, ic's raanifefl:, that that Baptifm, 
 was different, or, another Thing, than the fuppoled 
 Baptifm, or w't fling of the Jcrvs. For, as Baptifm was 
 practifed by John y it was in thQ Belief of the Mejfiah to 
 come ; ylch xix. 3, 4. And as it was adminiftred by the 
 Apoftles, it was an initial Rite, into the Chriftian 
 Church ^ and Faith h Chrift as already come,— was a 
 necelTary Qiialification for that Ordinance. 
 
 Now, as Philip had preached Chrift to the Eunuch, and 
 the Eunuch thereupon propofed to be baptizedy 1 think, 
 it's but very natural to conclude, that Philip in preach- 
 ing to hi?7i JcfuSy did preach Baptifm to the Eunuch ^ 
 and that thereupon, thQEmmchy as a.profelyte to Chrifli-!' 
 anity, cries out. See here is Water ^ what doth hinder me to 
 he baptized? And Philip f aid ^ If thou believe ft with all thine 
 Heart., thou may eft, And he anfwcred and faid, I believe 
 that Jcfus Chrift is the Son of God. Thus WC find, that 
 
 Faith 
 
(55) 
 
 Faith in Chrifty was a Frerequifite to IVater-Baptjfm : and 
 alfo, on thac Confeflion of Fahh^ they went down into 
 the Water, both Philip and the Eunuch, and he baptized him, 
 AO:s viii. 35, 3(^5 37, 38. — And therefore, I think, it's 
 far from a fo/cedy nay, it's but a very natural Confim^i- 
 on, to conclude, that as Philip had been preaching to 
 the Eunuchy he had in his Do£i:rine, not only preached 
 concerning the Perfon of our Lord \ but alio, had laid 
 before him thofe Things which did concern his Kingdom z 
 For we find, not only that the Eunuch, came to believe 
 Chrifl to be the Son of God j but alfo made this Confcjfion 
 of Faithy in Chrifty in ORDER for Permiflion to be 
 baptiz^ed. And therefore, nothing can well be plainer, 
 than that Philipy had preached Water-Baptifniy to the 
 Eumck But, my Antagonift, goes on multiplying Words, 
 tho' to little Furpofe^ for unlefs, he can (contrary to 
 the exprefs Words of the Text^) fhew, that this was 
 not Water^Baptifm ^ and that Faith in Chrifty was not 
 required of the Eunuch, as a previous Qiialiii cation for 
 IT, all that he has farther faid on this, is but meer 
 trillings and nothing to his Purpoie. 
 
 However, I will take Notice of fome Things farther, 
 in this remarkable Paragraph \ he fays, — ^' the Conie- 
 " quence of Philip'.s preaching was the Eunuch's believ- 
 *^ ing in Jefus whom Philip had preached unto him : 
 " His being baptiz^cd in Water was purely at his own Re- 
 *' queft." 
 
 But, how does Jofeph know, that it was purely, at the 
 Eunucus Requeft ^ that Philip baptizjcd him in Water? 
 can he certainly tell, that Philip did not preach it to him f 
 If he cannot, it's groundlels tor him^ to lay, that the 
 EunucFs being baptiz.ed in Watery was purely at his own 
 Pvequefl.- 
 
 And, how came ^ofeph to know, that it was the 
 Confequence of Philip's Preaching, that the £«K«c/;came 
 to believe in Jefns,'--hi\t as he finds it recorded? and 
 therefore, it being alfo recorded, that the Eumich^s 
 B.ipiifm toliow'd Philip'* s Pre achin^^ we 21127 ]ikewif&con- 
 
 clude^ 
 
(56) 
 
 dude, k was contained in his Do^rlne .- ElpecialJy, when 
 we confider, that Faith in Chrifty was required of the 
 Eunuch^ as a previous Q.uaIification, in order to his Ad- 
 miflion to that Baptifm, For if he had n^t believed on 
 the Lord JefuSy with all his Heart *, it's plain, he had not 
 been admitted to that Ordinance. 
 
 He proceeds faying, " the Text makes no mention 
 ** that the ^«f^d or Spirit of God gave any Direftions 
 *^ concerning the baptizing the Eunuch with Water." 
 
 Now, by this Jojeph would fain inlinuate, that Philip 
 had faid nothing to the Eunuch concerning Water^Bap- 
 tifm. 
 
 But, if this be of any Weight, it will alfo follow, 
 that Thilip had not faid any Thing to the Eunuch con- 
 cerning Chrifl • for the Text^ makes no mention, that the. 
 jingel or Spirit of Gody gave any DireBiom concerning that 
 ineither. 
 
 But,' we find, that Thilip did preach Chrifl^ and that 
 the Eife£t thereof, was, that the Eunuch came to be- 
 lieve in Chrift ^ and thereupon, according to his Eaith 
 in Chrifi^ was baptiz^ed. 
 
 And when ^(f?5 viii. 5, iz., 14, 15, and 16. — is com- 
 pared with Veries 35, 3^, 37, and 38. — we may have 2 
 good Idea, or Conception of Philip's — Baptifm. For, 
 frfty we find, before he baptiz^eth^ he preaches Chrifl Je- 
 fus. Secondlyy when thofe to whom he preached did 
 believe, or receive his DoOirine, he then admitted them 
 to Baptifm. Thirdly, we find, that in order to admi- 
 nifler this Baptifm, he goes down into the Water \ with 
 the Perfon to be haptiz^ed. And that this Baptifm was 
 admj'nifter'd, in the Name of the Lord Jefus. 
 
 Now, can Jojeph Beffe prove, that the Jews, in order 
 to make Profelytes to their Religion and Church j did firit 
 ;;re^c^ C/;n/f.— And when this their Doctrine was re- 
 ceived, did, with their Proftlyte go down into the Wa- 
 ter ; and there dip or haptiz^e them^ in the Name of the 
 I^ord Jcfus. Which if he cannot do, his pretending p. 
 34.— that the Baptifm which Philip admin illercd to the 
 
 Eunuch^ 
 
( 57 ) 
 Eunt/xh^ was an ufiial Jemjh Ctremory^ is no leis cJiajjj 
 downright Sophiflry. But by this, we may plainly le^Cj 
 what pitiful Shifts, Men are drove to, that would e^i- 
 elude ^Vatcr-Ba^tij'm, from appertaining to the Gofpel of 
 Chrip 
 
 1 will now proceed, to what (eems to be his grand 
 Argument :i in which 1 Hippofe, he thinks, he has giv€,a 
 a Reafon, for excluding, Water-Baptifm I His VVorwls 
 are, p. 35, 95. " 'Twas Caule to the Eunuch of R^- 
 ** joycing that he was by Water- Bnptifm become a Me.m- 
 " ber of thQ Jerri f^o Church as other Chriftians then 
 "' were, FOR the TEMPLE and Worfliip ofthQjt^s 
 '' .was STILL in being.'' 
 
 ^w/ That tht Eunuch's believing in Chrift^ was Mat- 
 ter to him o^ I^c joycing^ is allowed*, bur, that th^ Eunuch 
 was by this Baptifrriy become a A-Iembcr of the Jtrvijh 
 Chunhy is denied *, and Jofeph mnft give Ibme better Ar- 
 gument tor it, than yet he hath done, before that vvjU 
 be admitted. For, tho' it's owned, that the TQmpk 
 and Worfiip of the Jejvs was then in being -^ yet, that will 
 not prove, that Philip the Chriflian Aiinifler^ did by th^ic 
 B^pufm^ introduce, or initiate the Eunuch a Member into 
 the ycwi/Jj Church ! when at the dime Time, there w^,?, 
 and had for fome Time been, a Chrifiian Church. Is th's 
 a Specimen^ of the ^reat Abilities of Jofcph JSeJJe f that I 
 have ib much heard ol ! 
 
 Docs he fuppofe, that the Jervs^ would have perfe- 
 cutcd Fbilip, it Philipj was thus employ 'd, in bringing 
 Afcmbers ro their Church^ O! what Confufion, and 
 Perplexities attend, when Men mifs the Tr^ff/?*., and Sy'^ 
 about to let up, or endeavour to muintain falfe Doc- 
 trines ! 
 
 But, c^n any befides y^/V-^^-^Tee the Jpiinef^, ofth^3 
 Inference ^ that hecaufe the lemple and WorPiip of ih-z 
 JevDs was then in beinij, that therefore it will appear^ 
 that the Eunuch^ b'v Philip's baptizing lutx)^ iJecaise u 
 Me7nh.er of cbc 'Tci^vifi Church ! " 
 
 H For^ 
 
(53) 
 
 For, after this Rate, there was none admitted, nay, 
 no Chriflian Churchy tor any to be admitted into, till 
 after the Dellruftion of the Temple ; and End of the 
 '^Jemjh frorfhip! which, according to Ellmod's Sacred 
 Hiilory, p. 565. was ^hout forty Tears after Chrift, 
 
 Again, how wrong is it for him thus to fuggeft ; 
 that the Eunuchh — Rejoyeirgy was alfo, on account that 
 he was by Water- Baptifm^ made 2l Member of xh^Jcwiflj 
 Church \ when, according to his FRIEND Tho, EUwood, 
 — ^^ he HAD been baptiz^ed^ or wa/hed in Water when 
 ** he was profelyted to the Jewi/lj Religion." Sacred Hif 
 tory, vol. iii. p. $41. So that, this could be no Caufe 
 for him to rejoyce, if, he by Thlliph adminiftring Wa^ 
 ter-Baptifm to him, was made a Mtmher of the Jewijh 
 Church'^ fincc, according to Tho. Ellxvoody he was by 
 Baptiferiy or Wajhing^ made a Member of that Church be- 
 fore. From hence, I think it's evident, that the 
 Ground of the Eunuch's Rejoycing, was not only, be- 
 caufCj that he by Pbilifs preaching came to believe in 
 Chrift *, but alfb, becaufe that he by IVater-Baptifmy was 
 then initiated into the Chrifiian Church, 
 
 Now, can any that reads, and gives Credit to the 
 JtJs of the Apoftle?, receive Jofeph's-^Dod:nn^ for 
 Truth? for, according thereto, the y^pofilesy and the 
 Difcipksj that were betore the Deftruftion of the Tern- 
 pie •, were notwithftanding, their being baptized with 
 the Spirit, as well as with IVater -, yet xMembers of the 
 Jemjh Church ! From hence, agreeable to Z;/;?;, I think 
 it will follow *, that thole Jcvrsy who we have an Ac- 
 count, were according to kis Friends baptized with IVatcr^ 
 
 AQs ii. were by that Baptifm initiated into the Jervi/h 
 
 Church ; ot which they were Members before! And, that 
 when it's faid, that the Lord added to the Cfjurch daily fucb 
 as Jhould befavedy A61s ii. 47. that, they were added to 
 that ChuYchy which they were Members of before ! So 
 when it's faid that there was a great Perfecution againft 
 the Church which was at Jerujalem, A6ls viii. i. can it be 
 fuppofed that the Jev^i/Jj Churchy ptrlccuted it's drrn 
 
 Mem* 
 
(59) 
 
 Members ! And thus 1 might ^o on *, but I chiile to 
 
 forbear *, hoping that on due Confideration, Jofi^h may 
 come to fee his ERROR •/ and find that there was a 
 Chriftian Church properly fo*, not only before the De- 
 ftruftion ot the Temple^— -hut alfo, before Philif baptized 
 the EuKUcb : And, that it's in vain, for him to endea- 
 vour to exclude Water- B.iptifm from the Chriftian Church ; 
 by a wcali Pretence, that there was no fiich Churchy while 
 the Jervi/h Temple and IVor/Joip continued ! 
 
 He ftill goes on, p. ^6. Hiying, — " To affert that 
 *^ IVater-Baptifm is an Ordinmce of Chrifl, is to afcribe 
 *^ to him at one and the Hime Time two Baptifms^ one 
 " of the Spirit^ and the other oi Water ^ in Contradi^lion 
 *^ to the exprefs Diftindion of our Saviour himfelf re- 
 '^ hearled by Teter^ and to the Teftimony of the Apoftle, 
 '*^ One Lordy or.e Faith y ore Baptifrriy Eph. iv. 5." 
 
 In Anfwer to which, I fay, That, I do venture, to 
 afcribe to Our Lord, tw5 Baptifms, one of Water ^ and 
 the other of the Spirit *, and can't as yet fee, any Ab- 
 furdity to follow, lor ! chink two different Things, may 
 be diftinguifhed one from the other, and yet both ot 
 them remain. And it's a very ftrange Argument to me, 
 that, becaufe two Things are not one, and are to bs 
 confidered as diilinfl: ^ that therefore, one is to be 
 deemed ViUll or mid \ or, that becaufe our Lord, and 
 Teter^ did not join Water ^ and Spirit, Baptifm^ lb together*, 
 as to make thofe tvco ore \ but kept up a Diftinclion, 
 that therefore, Water- Baptif-m is cealed! 
 
 Farther, is the afcrihirg to our Lord two continuing 
 Baptifms, a Conrradi^lon, to our Lord's exprefs Difti re- 
 tion ? when it's plain, that the Ttxt only relates to the 
 Difference, between the two Baptifnn •, and does not 
 give the lead Intimation, that one was to remain, and 
 the other ceafe. S^c Jets xi. 15, 16. And as I hc£an 
 to fpeaky the holy Ghoft fell on them, as on us at the begin- 
 ving. Then remembred J the word of the Lord^ how thai he 
 [aid, John indeed baptiz^ed with water '-, but ye fhall he hap^ 
 ifz.ed with the Holy Ghoft. I (ay, is the afcribiv^ to our 
 
 H 2 lord 
 
C6o) 
 
 Mrd. two Baptifms, a Contradiclion to t!iis hi^ cxprels 
 'bijlhi[}ioYi ^ i["it be, lee "joftph ihew ic. For will ic fol- 
 low, tiiat; becaufe our Lord has dilUnguilhed between 
 tlie tvjoBaptifms'^ that therefore to alciibe two Baptifms 
 id him is a Cohtradidion ? Is, this Ar^,umenc conclu- 
 ilve ? does this, carry ielf Evidence, or CoiiviO:ioii 
 iilofig. wich it ? where is the Contradiclion, in afcrtbing 
 two Bapufms to our Lordj when, our Lor ^i in dillinguiih- 
 ing on them *, excluded none ? It" indeed, our Lord in 
 diilinguiihing them, had given hicimation, that IVa- 
 ter-Baptrfm was to be laid alide, when Spirit- B aft ifm took 
 Place '^ then, to have alcribed to our Lord thcle two, 
 as continuing Baptifms \ wou'd have been a Contradicti- 
 on. But fince our Lord has not given any llich hicima- 
 tipn; nor yet the Apoflle, the Contrad'Uiion,^ is mani- 
 felily, in Joft^h Bcfjc, 
 
 , Af^ain, had he jived under the former DifpenQtion, 
 when there Was an outward Circumcifton injoineil •, and 
 an inward; G>a#wc//;o^? required •, and had heard the 
 fropUts diitinguiihj between the outward, and inward 
 Circ'jjncifion'^ — would, he have inferred from thence, that 
 i.h*t ouiw.nd Circumcifion Was ceafed? certainly no : And 
 i! he would not •, how can he think, that it's a juft In- 
 forence;, to conclude^ from our l.ordh and ihQ yJpoftlc^s 
 iJifti-rcJioif^ between the two Baptifms ^ that cherefore^ 
 ope of them is to be laid afide ? 
 
 Again, tho' the Prophets o[ old, did teach, that the 
 invv.ird Circmncifioy^, — was the main or principal Things 
 "--ytr^ they no where tauglit, nor encouraged the Feo- 
 |3.'e to negle^^l: tlie outivard CircMncifton, Kow, tho' it's 
 ciJiowed, that the ir^vard or Jpiritual BaptifTn^ be the Main 
 or Principal^ ye:, neither our Lcrd^ nor his Apoftku 
 h/ever taught, nor encouraged aoy^ to neglecl, or omic 
 rhe outward Baptifm ot Water, And until Jofcph cm 
 fbevVj that our Lord or his yjpopc^ by diflinguiihing bc- 
 r*vren th:e tWD Baptifms, did exclude One •, or that they 
 tan^bt Ptifons to ncglevl — Water^Baptifm-^ Water- Bap-, 
 t'iffH -Wili rcijiain .an miciatino, O.u'napce^ or Ducy 
 
 undo: 
 
(6i ) 
 
 under this Dirpenfation ; as well as Spint Baptifniy ac- 
 cording CO God's good PlealLire, a Priviledge. 
 
 But, in order to prove, that there is but ONE Bap^ 
 tifm to continue, under this Dilpendition, I oblerve, lie 
 produces the Words of the Apoftle Pauly O'/ie Lord, one 
 Fiiith^ one Baptifm, Eph. iv. 5. From which Words I 
 luppofe, he concludes, that there is hut or.e Baptijm^ 
 now to continue , and that is Spirit Baptiftn. 1 mighc 
 here indeed, go on to confider, what Baptifm it is that 
 the Apoftle does here intend ^ Bu: as 1 acknowledge a 
 Spiritual Baptifm, — it's not fo material. 
 
 The inain Thing between us, is, whether there is now 
 but or.e Baptifm in all ^ and whether this Text proves 
 it. 
 
 The enlightened Bell, in his DoCnine of Baptlfms, p. 37,, 
 is pleafed to add the Word BUT, to the facred Text ^ 
 in order to exclude all Baptlfms, ilive Spiritual Baptifm. 
 So hkewife, J. Plhy p. 25. who with regard to this 
 Text fays, exprefly, '' there ts BUT ONE Baptifm:'^ 
 And fo fays R, Barclay, p. 280. Now, luppole it were 
 allowed, that this Text intends Spirit Baptifm^ ^ and the 
 Term BUT was annexed thereto •, yet, then I can't fee, 
 that it v;ouId aniwer the Quakers Purpofe ^ /. c, to ex- 
 elude all other Baptlfms. 
 
 For, it would only then prove, that there is but one 
 Spirit Baptifm : which is not denied: and yet then, there 
 would be two B^iptifms *, behde Water-Baptifm : for the 
 Baptljfn of SufftrlngSj will more or lefs, attend all that 
 will live Godly In Chrlft Jefus ^ which, is what I think the 
 Quakers will not deny. But, I think, it's very unjufti- 
 fia.ble, for thefe u4uthors^ to pretend to add the Terr^i 
 BUT, to the facred Tf'jv^.* And it fhevvs in them, a 
 Defire, of being wife above n^hat Is written. 
 
 And, as the New Ttjlament^ fpeaks of feveral different 
 Baptifms\ it's very flrange arguing to me, that whea 
 the Jpoftle is only ccncerncd, to mention ONE of 
 them\ it ihould from thence be inferred, that all oiher 
 Baptifms, are ;;:.';/ and void ! 
 
 (0) Tho I allow, thjt properly /peaking, there is but one Baptilm j 
 i«: then, that is ^ater. Baptifm: For, if we have Regard to f^^ Ecymology 
 of, or Meaning oj the Word, Baptize, it doth, according to R. Barclay, as 
 P ^99- fig^'^fi^y ^° plunge and dip In — Water. Therefore, -when the 
 JVard Baptifm, — is ufed, or applied to ayiy Thing elfe ; id's to be underjhody, 
 in a figurativs Senfe; and the Baptifm intended, bnt a figurative, or 
 metaphorical Qtie, The Confequsfn? of whlchf thi Quakers, muld do mil to drH^U^^d 
 
( ^= ) 
 
 Again, I oblerve that the Quahrs themfelves allow, 
 that,'' there are feveral Bjptifms, even befides that with 
 Watery as IV. Peyi, v. 2. p. 9O4. his Words are, fpeaking 
 
 with regard to the CnmmiJJiojt ; thai:, '^ un'efs there 
 
 '* were no other B^iptiftn than that of M^'ater^ AS 
 '' THERE ARE SEVERAL, it mnft at leaft be al- 
 *^ lowed to be a Quefiioti^ what BApufm Chrid meant in 
 
 " that Commijflon.'''^ Now from hence it's evident, 
 
 that }K PeyiyOwns there are more Baptiftns th^n ojcf, and ' 
 therefore, if it fliould be allowed, that Eph. iv. 5. be 
 meant of Sph-it Biptifm-^ yer, that would no Way 
 prove, that Water- Boptifm^ is cealed. Bcfidcs, we find, 
 that under the DIRECTION, of the Apoftle St.P.iw/, 
 the Dilciples at Fphefiii^who^ tho' they had been bap- 
 tjzfd according to John^ yet, — they were again bapUz^ed 
 in IVater, And this i;»ft Baptikxi, was adminitlred, in 
 the Name of the Lord Jtfw. Ads. xix. 5. which Te^jct, R. 
 Barclay, in his Jtp'dogy^ p. 295. cites, among other 
 Ttocts^ as that which vddtQs to Water- B.iptifm : which 
 PafTige of Barclay^s I IhUi hereafter, take more particu- 
 lar Kotice of. But, from hence it's plain, tiiat the 
 Apoftie P^iJ, who, as a Steward of the Gofpel of Chrijl \ 
 had a particular Regard to Water- Baptifju'^ as was man-- 
 feft, by his C\re to inilrud thofe Efhefuvis ^ whofe 
 Underftanding he found was fomewhat ihort, in that as 
 well as in other Things *, and therefore, he farther in- 
 lormed them*, wliich, when he had (0 done, they were, 
 according to Ba-clay^ baptized again in Water •, and that 
 in the Name of the Lord J^fus. And thus was the Church 
 at Ephefusy fettled in tl^e true Order of the 6*0^^67 ^in the 
 fomto{ Water- B:^pt!fm: as well, as in that of the Bap- 
 tifm of the Spirit. So that, from hence it's evident, that 
 the Apoille owned two Briptlfms: and that with re(pe£b 
 to both, he was very careful, to let the Difciplcs at Ephe^ 
 fus right. And therefore, when the Apoftles fpeaks, 
 '£/>kiv'. 5. of or.eBap'ifyn^ it can't befuppofed, that he there 
 excludes that of Heater '^ nor yet, that he there teaches, 
 there h BTJT OKE B.'p'-jfm which belongs to the 
 
 Cof 
 
(63) 
 
 Cofpd of Chrijl : fince it's lo manifefl, that he did exhi^ 
 bit CO them, the Do[lrm of Bctpufms, even, that of 
 Water '^ and alio, that of the Holy Chojl: Afts xix. i, 2, 
 5, 4, and 5. Which well agrees, with the Words of the 
 Apoftle, when he is concerned to (peak, of the Frir>cipks 
 of the Docirim of Chrijl \ mentions, that of Baptijms^ 
 inthepktral, Btb. vi. i, 2. ot which, more in another 
 Place. 
 
 And, for the Quahn to talk fb much as they do, of^ 
 THE ONE BAPTISM, and of Chrifi's orvn Bapttfn , 
 as tlio' there was no other Baptifm, than Spirit Baptifm -, 
 fhews but the Height of Bigotifm^ or hliiid Zeal ^ for a 
 Notion; for which they have no juft Grounds: Foraf^ 
 much, as there are no inch Sentemes^ in all the NewTejla- 
 msnt\ and from whence it's evident, and alfb trora the 
 Quakers oven Writirgs^ that, there are more Baptifms than 
 OYie ! From hence it appears, how ridiculous^ and incor.-- 
 fjftent it i?, for the Quakers, to argue lo very much, as 
 they often do, in their Writings i that there is now, but 
 one B.iptifrn. 
 
 Joftph^voce^ds^ fiying, " The Apoftle Pefer's com- 
 ** manding thofe Gentiles to be baptized with Water, ap- 
 " pears to us of no more Force than his not only com- 
 *^ manding, but compelling the Gentiles to live as do tbs 
 " Jews. Gal.ii. 14." 
 
 But in Anfwer to this, I oblerve, that when the 
 Apoftle Paul, faw or knew that his Brother Peter^ dero- 
 gated, or walked not according to the Truth oftheGofpel'^— 
 he gave Peter a kind of Rcpwnand ^f^yivig^ — why compcUtff 
 thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews f But we do noc 
 find, that Paul ever blamed Peter lor commanding any to 
 be baptized in IVater. It's therefore, at leail, a ftrong 
 Prefumption \ that he approved of what Peter had done 
 on that Account: and that it was according to the 
 Truth of the GofpeL And if with this, we coniider the 
 Care Paul took, with the Dijciples at Fphfus^ to fee 
 them right in this Point*, and never blamed any fo? 
 preaching, and pra^ifing IVatcr-Baptifin -^ but on thz 
 
 con- 
 
<64) 
 
 contrary, didja hapize iomQh\m(kK'^ it's man 1 fed:, he 
 concluded that :hac Baptifm, was according to the Gof- 
 pd of Chrift. 
 
 Jofefhy yet goes on, faying, — ^' This Manner of 
 ** nrging the Praiflice of: the Apoiiles, who were Jews, 
 '' as a Proot that WHATEVER they did was an Or- 
 •' dinance of Chrift, and obliging to all jCfer//^i^w5, has a 
 " Tendency to re-eft ablilh the Ceremonks of the Mo- 
 " fakk Law:' 
 
 Now, with re/pe^l to this, if any have fo done ^ I 
 am fomewhat of his Mind:— —But, can he find, that 
 I, ever fo argued*, or indeed, any one elfe ? Is not 
 this a fophiftkal Suggeflion •, thus to inftnmte ? as tho^ I 
 had argued, that WHATEVER theApoftles did, ms 
 an Ordinance ofChrift \ and obliging to all Chriftians ! If, 
 I have any where fo done, let him produce it: but it 
 not \ what good End could he have fo to infert it ? If, 
 he can't maintain his Argument, without fuch Fallacy:, 
 it would be much more honourable for him to coniefs 
 it^ and acknowledge to the 7ruth, 
 
 Befidcs, it's manitcft that the Apoflle circumciied 
 Timothy^ and did fbme other Things, purely q\m ot Con- 
 delcention to the Jews, as Jcfs xvi. 3. and xxi. 21, 22, 
 23 — the firft of which, Jofeph Bejje e:5^prefiy ov^ns, p. 
 281. to the Fkar, was done in Condefcention, — And 
 agreeable to this, are the Words of the Text relating to 
 PauPs circumcifing Timothy y A^s xvi. 3. Him would Paid 
 have to go forth with him, and tooh^ and circumcifcd him^ 
 
 hecaufe of the Jews which were in thofe quarters. Now, 
 
 can Jofeph iliew one Text^ wherein it will appear, that 
 the Apoftles praulifed Water-Baptifmy in Condefcention 
 to the Jews *, as is the above concerning Circiimcifion ? 
 which \i he cannot do -^ how trifling is it, for him to 
 lay, as he does to the Vicar^ p. 281. ** WHY MIGHT 
 *^ NOT they (i. e. thejpoftles) alio baptize wich Water 
 " on the fame Confideration." 
 
 In Anfvvcr to which, I r»y, that they could not, 
 (properly (peaking) fo do *, becaufe, as JVatcr-Baptifm 
 
 VVaS 
 
(65) 
 was contained in the Botirive thQy preached t, it could not 
 be a Folntoi^ Condefcentiony in them to pra^ice it. And 
 here, I can't but take Notice aifo, of his WHY MIGHT 
 MOT;, as well as his MAY DENOTE-, which I ob^ 
 ferved before. But am at a Lofs to know, what fnch 
 ExpreHlons proves nnlefs they prove his VVant bt real 
 Argument. For it's meer trifling to argue, that be- 
 caufe theApoftle circumcifed,— that therefore, there is 
 the fame Argument for the Pra^lice of Circwncifton ^ as 
 there is for Watey-Baptifm : v/hen it's manifeft, that the 
 Apoftle declares againft the Pradlce of Circumcifion^ 
 GaL V. 3. and that when he circumcifed Timothy, it was 
 purely out of Condefccntkn to the 'yews^ Acls xvi. 3. But: 
 with refpeO: to Water-Baptlfm^ it's plain, that both 
 Taiily and Pcf/?r, preached it^ as well as pra^lifed it. 
 ^as ii. 38. Chap, xviii. 8. And in particular, Paul was 
 careful to fet ilich right, in the Knowledge, and Practice, 
 of Water- Ba^tifm^ as were ignorant of the true DoCtrlne 
 concerning it. Acls y>\yL. i, 2, 3, 4, and 5. And the 
 Apoftle alfb ranks in Water- B apt i fin ^ as one of the Vrm- 
 ciples of the Dcclrine of'Chriji. Heb. vi. i, 2. But it's 
 not fo, with re(pe£l to Circumcifion,'^ 
 
 And farther, with regard to the Pra£l:ice of /^F^fer- 
 Baptifm ^ it's no where laid that it was done hecaufe of 
 the Jem. But it was. that which was contained in the 
 Do^rine, the Jpopes preached '^ as well as pra^lifed : and 
 Va'ith in Chrijlj was a '.leceffary QuaUfication to fit Men for 
 it. All which confidcred together, makes it plain, thac 
 tho'' Faul Circumcifed Timothy^^-y^ij that affords no Ar^ 
 gument for the Continuance thereof. When, as above, 
 it's evident, that there is Argum.ent (iifficient, to fhew^ 
 that Watcr-Baptifnjy was to be continued in the Gofpel 
 Church :— it being one of the foundation Principles of tks 
 i)ocJyi}:£ ofChrift, 
 
 But, how comes it to p.ifs, that Jofeph does not here 
 take any particular Notice, of what t offer'd from A{}s 
 X. 47, 48. as contained, in the 23d and 24th Pages of 
 ni'nc, 0:1 Watc'--Bat'if'.-ij\ as well as he has of the other 
 
 I Paili^gcs 
 
cc 
 
 (66) 
 
 I'airagcs I infilled on? did ic noc fiilt, the Purpofe of his 
 Argnmcnt Co to do ? or, does he chink ic noc worthy of 
 an Anfvver ? However, be thac as it will, 1 Hiall give it 
 a Place here. Where fpeaking of the A p oft le Peter, I 
 fay^ — <« We have an Account of his preaching the 
 *•* Gofpd to the Gentiles '•, and that while ''" fpake, the Holy 
 " Choji fell on all thein which heard the lVord\ fo that they 
 [pake With Tongues^ and magnified God, Whereupoil 
 ^* Perer fiiid, Can any A4an forbid Water ^ that the fe fhould 
 *' not he baptiz^ed, which have received the Holy Ghofl as well 
 *^ as we? {a) Which is as tho' the Apoftle hadfaid, 
 '' fbrafmuch as God hath given thefe, who 2iXt GentileSy 
 '^ the lih Gifts as he did unto us^ who believed in the Lord \ 
 '' it's evident, that the BlefUngs of the Go[pel is not 
 '' conlined to the Houle of //r^d", but defignedof God 
 '^' to all Nations,- And fince he hath thus difcovered his 
 " Approbation of them •, there is no Occafion to exa- 
 ^' mine them in particular concerning their Faith ^ nor 
 *' Doubt to be made of their being qualified for Ad- 
 ^^ mittance into tlie Golpel Church, by the initial Or- 
 *' dinance of Baptiim: and therefore, can any Man for- 
 '' bid Watery that thefe JJjould not be baptized^ which have 
 " received the Holy Ghofl as well' as we ? No, certainly, 
 *^ none*, therefore we find he commanded them to be bap- 
 '' tiz.ed in the Name of the Lord. And let ic be obfervcd, 
 *' That here is noc the leaft Appearance, that thele 
 ** Gentile Converts, were baptized with Water, out of 
 '^ any Condefcention to the Humours or Weaknefs of 
 *' any : and alfo, That there is a vafl Difference be- 
 ^f tween a bare Complying or Condefcention, and a 
 <' COMMAlsDlNG l^erfons, to be baptized in the 
 ^^ Name of the Lord- And, furely, none can Well con- 
 *^ elude, that the Apoille, who Was under the imme- 
 •^^ diatc Infpiration of the Spirit; would do, or have 
 ^' any Tiling done, in the Name cf the Lord, in that 
 *^ ioienin Manner, vAikli did not belong to his Doc 
 
 '* tiiae« 
 
(67) 
 " trine. From nil which ic doth abundantly appear, 
 ** ThatWater-Baptifm is an Ordinance of Chiill. Ana 
 ^' how can any think Lhemfelvcs above ic , when the 
 *^ infpired Apoflle, cojumanded luca who had received 
 '* the miraculous Gi:ts, to liibmic thcmfeh'es to ic ? 
 " And now, Sir?, judge which is Tifefl:^ whether to 
 ^' receive St. Pdfr's Dodrine, while under tlie p:culiar 
 *' Government of the Spirit ^ or thofe who pretend to 
 ** a Lifht withi}7^ and oppofe this Dodrine and Praclice. 
 ** Not that I would be underftood, to jud^.e or c:niurs 
 *' any for acting according to the pi^lates of their own 
 " Minds; tho' 1 fear too niaoy do nor apply, and 
 *^ attend To impirtiaily to the Means oi Grace as th?y 
 " ought to do " 
 
 Now, with re-fpeft to whnt I have above obierved ', I 
 find no direft Anfwer : but it I go back 13 Pages of his, 
 I find there he has faid fometning to the Texf^ and 
 therefore, I will here take Notice of it. He there 
 fpeaking with regard, to the Gift of the Hnly Qhofl on 
 Cormlus arid his Com^any^ ^^ys, " T. his clearly denotes 
 " that the Baptiim of the Hjly Ghoft was that which ac- 
 *^ companied the Preach'ng of Peter, and no: IValeY" 
 " Baptifm." 
 
 Now, tho' the Gift of the Holy Ghofl, did, acco^n- 
 pany Feter\ Preaching:, yet, his Prcachipg did NOT" 
 GIVE, the Holy Ghoft. Tho' I conclude, it was a. 
 Means to prepare them, for the Reception of it. But, 
 it's one Thing to prepare, or qualify to receive a G/ft^ 
 and another, to bellow it. And ic's very plain, v^hca 
 Feter comes to rehearfe the Matter, as chap. >ii. he- 
 does not in the leaft, attribute ic to the Po-ivcr of h:.i 
 Treachi)ig'^ but intirely to the Gift of Cod ^ as ver. i-:. 
 where (ays he, Forafmuch then as God gave ther>i the lib: 
 gift as he did unto us^ who Idieved o'>i the Lof-djcjus Chrjff ^ 
 what was ] that I could with fi and God? From whic!) 
 Words of the Apoflle, wirh the foregoing, it's pl.in^ 
 that he had not anv fuch Ni^ucn, :\s the Quakers ha^ c. 
 of haptiung by Prcachivg^ For when he L. •;>",-- //"^^Vr 
 
 i 2 rv^. 
 
(68) 
 
 vcas I that I could withjland God!' it's evident, that it was 
 Parcot the Defence vvhich he made, againft thole which 
 contended with him, in regard to his Condu^l: ; the whole 
 Event of which, he afcribes to God. I fay, it's mani- 
 tefl, that Peter did not know any Thing of baptiung by 
 Preaching : For if he had expected or known any Thing 
 of baptizing with the Holy Ghojl, by preaching the Gofpely 
 how could he fay in his own Defence,— [Fkif was I that 
 I could withjland God .? 
 
 But Jofeph goes on, fignifying, that the adminiftering 
 Water 'Ba'ptifm to Cormlus^ and them with him, was hut a 
 prudential Circt'jnjlancc, in order to admit them into the 
 Jewifi Church. 
 
 Now as I have fufficiently fpoken to the Subftance 
 of this-, when I took Notice of the Eunuch's Baptifm, I 
 think 2:'s but to Httle Purpole to repeat it again : for, I 
 conclude, it will from thence plainly appear, that Per- 
 fons by receiving H'^ater- Baptifm as pra^liled by the 
 >\p"illes, did not become Akmbers ot the Jcwi/Jjy but of 
 the Chriflian Church. 
 
 The next PafTigc I infifled on, v;as, AUs xix. i, 2, 5, 
 4, 5.— from which I obierved, p. 24, 25. — ^' That the 
 *' Apolfle Paul found at Fphefus Tome of John's Difciples, 
 *' who had not jo imich as HEARD whether there was any 
 '' HOLY GHOST, (a) they being inch as had only 
 *' been baptized according to John's Baptifm, that is, in 
 .** the Belief of a Chrijl to comc\ when it's plain, the Dil- 
 *' ciple5 of Jcfus believed in Chrift as already come, and 
 ^' were hapti:ctd into th^t Faith ; which, when the Apolllc 
 '^ held fet thefe right in the Knowledge of, they were 
 *' then hapti;icd in the Name of the Lord Jefus. (b) After 
 ^' wiiich we read, that when the Apoflle had laid his 
 '' PJands on them, the Holy Chofl came on them \ and they 
 " fpah with Tongues ard prophefied \ which Hill proves 
 ^^ that If^ater-Baptifm is a Gofpel Ordinance : Foraf- 
 ^^ much as the fc were thea haptiz.cd in the Name of ths 
 
 " Lord 
 
<c 
 
 (69) 
 
 Lord Jefusy who before was baptized according to 
 Johns Baptifm ^ and yec was noc baptized with the 
 Holy Ghoft, 'till after they had been baptized in the 
 Name of the Lord : which baptizing in the Name oftljs 
 Lord, always (ignifies, that the baptized Perfon was 
 baptiz^ed in the Faith of Chrift ah'eady come ^ which 
 ^' John's Difciples Was not. And herein John% and 
 Chrift' s, Baptifm with Water differ, even in Point of 
 Qiialification ^ as well as in it's being adminiftred in 
 the Name of the Father y and ofthcSon^ and of the Holy 
 Ghoft : (^) or in the Name of the Lord Jefus : (b) 
 *^ which latter I take to be only a fhorter Way of 
 ^' fpeaking. (c) 
 
 In Anlwer to which Jofeph fays, p. 37, 38. " He yet 
 " produces another Texr, viz. ^(^5xix. i, 2, 3, 4, 5 6. 
 which relates, that Paul came to Ephelus, and finding 
 certain Difciples, he faid unto thcm^ Have ye received the 
 Holy Ghoft ftnce ye believed ? And they faid unto him, 
 ^' IVe have not fo much as heard whether there he any Holy 
 *" Ghoft. And he faid unto them, unto what then were ye 
 *' haptiz^ed f And they faid, Vnto John'^ Baptifyn, Then 
 *^ faid Paul, John verily baptised with the Baptifm of Re^ 
 *^ pentancCj fciying unto the People, that they fjjould believe 
 on him, which fJjould come after him, that is on Chrift Je- 
 fus. When they heard this, they were haptiz^ed in the Name 
 of the Lord Jefus, And when Paul had laid his Hands up- 
 on them, the Holy Ghoft came on them, and they fpa\e 
 with Tongues and propheftcd. This Text which plainly 
 fliews the Invalidity of Water- Baptifm^ and in what a 
 State of Ig^norance Men m.ay be notwithftanding their 
 " having fubmicced to that Ceremony, is by him pro- 
 *' duced to prove, chat the Apoftle fattl did again bap- 
 " tize thofe Perfons with Water; altho' the Text does 
 *^ not fiy fo, nor indeed is it probable that the Apoftic 
 l^ lliould rcbapti^e ihein with the Baptiira of Water, 
 
 ^' which 
 
 (.'?; Mf.t. xxvlil. 19. (y) A£^sv;ii. i6. (c) Agreeable to 
 
 Aas ii. 3S. and vili. i5. 
 
 iC 
 
(7°) 
 
 ^^ which they had already .ev^perlenced to be fo ineffec- 
 *' tual. Thefe Words, tJjeyrvcrc baptizfd tn the Name of 
 *^ the Lordjcfus^ feem in this Place to denote the Baptifm 
 '' of the Holy Ghojly and to be fo explained by the next 
 *^ Words, viz. And when Paul had laid his Hamls upon 
 ^^ them, the Holy Ghoft came on thetn. So that this Text 
 *^ which he produces to prove Water -Baptifm a Gofpel 
 *^ Ordinance, is fo far from anlwering his Purpofe, th^t 
 *"^ it doth not prove the Apoflle's adminiftring to thole 
 " Perfons any Water-Baptilhi at all. Wherefore this 
 *^ Author acts moll fyepojlcroujly m pretending, p- 25. 
 '' to fliew wherein '' John\ and CHRISTs Bapcifm 
 " with Water differed." while yet he hath not made 
 *' appear that CHRIST did ^vti' baptiz^e with Water, or 
 '^ commidion his Diiciples ^o to do. And altho' it ap- 
 " pears and may be granted him, that Paul in ibme 
 *^ few Inftances did adminifter IVater-Eaptifmy yet we 
 " have his own exprefs Teftimony that Chyijl fent him 
 *' fiot on that ErranJ. i Cor. i. 17.'' 
 
 But, whether J^fip^y by his Examination, lias rendered 
 ray Argmr.cn t invalid i-— I leave to the Judgment of my 
 Reader. And as it's my Turn now to cxamir.e his, I 
 fhall take the Liberty, to be fomev>/hat large.—- 
 
 And Firfj I obferve he fays, " This Text — plainly 
 '* fliews the Invalidity of Water -B apt fm, and in what a 
 •' Stare of Ignorance Men may be notwithilanding their 
 '•' having fubmitted to that Ceremony." — In anfwer to 
 which 1 fay, that as to this, I am fomevvliHt of his 
 Mind, zn;^. that thofe which knew orly the Baptifm of 
 fohn, miglit be in a State of Tgnoyance^ tho' they fub- 
 mitted thereto-, lince, fuch were baptized in the Faith 
 of a Chrifl to come-^ (as is plain from the Text) and not 
 in the F.iith of Chrifl as already come \ or, not in the Name 
 of the Lord Jefus. 
 
 Sc'condlyy 1 obferve, that he friys, ^' Thefe Words, 
 ^' theyiveyc haptiz.ed in the Name of the LordJefuSy feem in 
 ^^ this Place to denote the n.tptifjn of tht Holy Ghofl.'' 
 *"' — And f:) iikev^'iie^ he tells u^ p. 25.—** that the 
 
(7» ) 
 
 ^^ Baptifm in the Name of the Lord Jefus here Ipokeii oi^ 
 
 " was that of the Holy Ghoft'' 
 
 Now, the Baptifm of the Holy Ghoft, I think all the 
 Q^mkers, would tain have be, that Baptifm intended by 
 our Lord in the CommiJJlon, Which if fo, then it will 
 follow, that Perfons being baptized in the Name of the 
 Lord JefuSy were baptiz^ed according to Chrift's Commiffioiu 
 And therefore, 'tis to no Purpofe for Jojeph Beffe^ nor 
 his Friends, ever to argue more, that the PafTages re- 
 corded of Perfons being haptiz,cd in the Name of the Lvrd^ 
 or, in the Name of the Lord Jtfy.s \ or, in the Nmte of 
 Jefiis Chrijl '^ as mentioned in the ></c75 ^ were not 
 baptiz^ed according to Chrift's Commijfion : and Jofepb 
 
 my Antagonift, would have thQ Baptifm mentioned y^(7i 
 xix 5. — to be the Baptifm of the Holy Ghojl ^ and as the 
 Quahers all pretend, that to be the Baptifriy intended in 
 the Commijfon^ it's manifeil, even from JofepFs and his 
 Friend's Words, that the Apollles in adminiftering Bap^ 
 tifm, in the Name of the Lord Jefiis^ adminifter'd that 
 Baptifm^ contained, in our Lord's Cmimiffion, Mat. xxviii. 
 19. And therefore, how triflings and inconfiftent is ir, 
 for the Quakers^ at other Times, to pretend: that, when 
 Perfons are exhorted to, or, are faid to be bapti^ied in the 
 Na?ne of the Lord Jefus *, — that the ^.'rff//;;nn tended, was 
 KOT, according to Corifl's Commijfion \ when, it fo evi- 
 dently appears, trom mv Opponent's, and his Friend's 
 Words. -^ — 
 
 And, from hence it's alfo manifefl, agreeable as I ob- 
 ferved from this Text^ that baptiz,ing in the Name of the 
 Lordjifus'y is only a flmter Way of (peaking; or, is 
 put for, — baptizing in the N^ame of the Father, and of the 
 Son^ and of the Hoiy Ghoft. Mat. xxviii. 19. And agree- 
 able hereto fays Tho. Lane after, in his True Spiritual Bap- 
 tifm^ &c. p. 37. ** though it is true that rce do not find 
 ^ th^m {rh^x is the Apoflle?) haptizjng in the — ex- 
 
 *^ Vre;l 
 
(70 
 
 " ^refs NAME of the Holy-Ghofl ^ yet, WE pre/ume, that 
 ** doth not argue there was no fuch Thing.^^ Now, fince 
 our NOT finding, that the Apoftles baptized in the ex- 
 prefs Words of the Commi/fion -^ doth not argue but what 
 they did fo baptize^ and fince according to JofephBep, 
 -^bapttung in the Name of the Lord Jefus,^-Wc\s baptU.hig 
 according to Chrifi^s Commi/fion : it follows, that the Bap- 
 tifm which the infpired Apoflles, adminiftred, as men- 
 tioned in the JBs, was the Baptifm^ intended in the 
 Comminition of our Lord. 
 
 Now, if I can make it appear, that the Baptifm which 
 the Apoftles exhorted to, and adminifter'd, m the Name 
 of the Lord, — was that o^ Water '^ it then, will be mani- 
 feft, according to the above,— that, it's Water-Baptifm 
 intended in Chrift^s Commifp^on. And this, I doubt not 
 but to do, and that by the NervTeJlament ^ and from the 
 formentioned Authors. See firfl, 7 ho. Elhvood^s Sacred Hif 
 tory, p. 503. where fpeaking with refpeftto the Apoftle's 
 Words, ^^s ii. 38. Repenty and be baptiz,ed every one of 
 you in the Name of Jefus Cfer//^,— he fays,—*' That the 
 
 ^^ Baptifm here mentioned, was the Baptifm ofjohn,^'' 
 
 Now, by this it's plain, he means IVater-Baptifn, — And 
 Jofeph Pikey p. 107. as before cited, is very exprefs and 
 clear, that this Baptifm is the Baptifm of Water. Now, 
 from thefe QuakerSy it's evident, that the Baptifm men- 
 tioned in tliis Text, is KOT tliQ Baptifm of tliQ Holy 
 Ghofl'^ but that of Water, And indeed, this is moft 
 evident from the Text ^ where, the Apoflle makes a . 
 manifeft Diftin^iony between the Baptifm in the Name of 
 yefus Chrifty and the Gift of the Holy Ghoft. So that from 
 hence, according to the aforementioned ylutho-rs, as con- 
 fidered together, it's plain ; not only, that the Baptifm 
 mentioned ^(^-5 ii. 38. is Water-Baptjfm y but alfo, that 
 it's Water- Baptifm, intended in Chrift's Commiffwn. 
 
 Secondly y it's plain from A^s viii. 14, 15. that the 
 ^Baptifm which the Samaritans were baptiz.cd with, in the 
 Name of the Lord "Jefus y v;as Water- Baptifm: For faith 
 the Text^^ with regard to the Gift of the Holy Ghojl y—as 
 
 ya 
 
(73) 
 
 yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized 
 in the Name of the Lord Jefus. From vhherice it's itio'ft 
 evident, that the Biptifm which the Samaritans were 
 baptiz^ed with, was that oHVater. And, as it was inths 
 Name of the Lord Jefus ^ it was, according to what I 
 have before obferved ; — the Baptifm given in CommijftCh^ 
 by our Xor^^ Mat. xxviii. 19. Arid this will appear, 
 yet more clear ^ if wc confider, that the Words IN the 
 Name^-^m this Text^ is in the Greeky INTO the Nam^ ^ 
 as well as in Our Lord's Cotnmijfion : which ftews the 
 Agreeablenefs, of the twoT'^xf;^ and alfo, that to bap- 
 ii::.e into the Name J — xvithlVater^ is to baptiz^e by the Au- 
 thority, and into the Faith, — of God the Father^ and of the 
 Sony and of the Holy Ghoft, And, tho' it's not fo ex- 
 fyejjed ; yet, according to Tho. Lancafer^ it does not argue^ 
 but that fo it was.— — 
 
 Thirdly^ the fame may be argued from Peter^Sj corti-* 
 manding Cornelius^ and his Company, to be baptiz.ed m 
 Water 'y Ads x. 47, 48". forafinuch, as he commanded 
 ihcm to be baptiz.ed in the Name cf the Lord. Which, as 
 I obferved before-, Tike owns is the fame , as to be bap- 
 tized, in the Name oj the Lord Jefus '^ as in y^(?5 xix. 5. 
 which Jofeph Beffe^ as before obferved, explains to be 
 the lame Baptifm^ as he concludes, is to be underflood 
 in the Commi/fion : bo, that it's but a juft Inference^ to 
 infer^ that forafhiuch as he declares, xh2X xht Bapifn 
 in the Name of the Lord Jefus, Afrs xix. 5. is the Baptifm ^ 
 W'hich Joftph and his Friends, V7ou]d fain have be the 
 B.ipt'fn intended in Cbrif's Cormnilfon* I fay, it's but a 
 a juft, or natural Inference frorn his Words, that the 
 Baptifmin the Name of the Lord Jef/.s^ Acts xix. j. is the 
 fame, according to him, as in the CommiJJjon of Chrift. 
 Which Baptifm, Atls xix. 5. according ro^^rc^y,^ rs, tor 
 be underftood Water-Bapufn -, and therefore, from thefe 
 Jiithors Conceffions v it's evident, rhaC it's \Vater-Ba^^ 
 tilhi intended in our Lord's Commilfion^ Mat. xXviii. jp, 
 bo th;»r i think, I may very juftly here fay, fts in t\\t 
 
(74) 
 
 Preface V that the very Oppofers ofGod^s Caufcy and Truth, 
 are found to do thaty xvhtchy injlead of being againjlit, is, 
 what does abundantly tend to difcover and confirm it /- — 
 
 And fourthly ^th2it Water- E apt jfm is mi^ndQd Ad s yily:, 5. 
 when the Difciples at Ephefus were faid to be hapttz^ed in 
 the Name of the Lord JefuSy is clear ^ becaufe it is diftin" 
 guifhed from the Baptifmy or Gift of the Holy Chofl^ m 
 the very PafTage itlelf^ which runs thus, ver. 5, 6. 
 When they heard this^ they were baptized in the Name of the 
 Lord Jefus. 
 
 And when Paul had laid his Hands upon them, the Holy 
 Choft came on thetriy and they fpake with Tongues^ and pro^ 
 phefied. 
 
 And, of the fame Mind was that great and learned 
 Quaker y R. Barclay , as appears in his Apology, p. 295. 
 where he is taking Notice of the PalTages in the Ads, 
 which relate to the Adminiftration of Water-Baptifm \ 
 cites as follows: Ads ii. 41.— viii. I2, 13, 38. — ix. iS. 
 — X. 48. — xvi. 15. — xviii. 8. — viii. 16. and laftly^^f?^ 
 xix. 5. 
 
 Now, here I obferve, that all thole Texts in the Ads^ 
 which I have argued, intend Water -Baptifm , are ALL 
 of them allow'd fo to do \ by this Author, And not 
 only fb, but alio, that Taul by Ananias was fb haptizjed : 
 which Jofeph BeJJey would do well to think of ^ and com- 
 pare, with his Anfu'er to the Ficnr, p. 287. And 
 
 farther, here I find that BarcL-'y dWows Ads xviii. 8. to 
 intend Water-Baptifm ^ where we have an Account of the 
 Succels of St. Tau?s Miniflry at Corinth ; and are told, 
 th<ity'^manyoftheCo)'inthiansVLE.hK\^Gy believed, and 
 were baptized. But to return j it's evident from thr 
 above Citation, that Robert Barclay ^ip^lks Ads xh. 5. 
 to Water-Baptifm J which, when confider'd with the 
 facrcd Text ^ one would think, might be enough to con- 
 vince ya/ef/; Beffe ^ that Paul either did baptize, or, that 
 he had the Difciples at Ephefus y bai4ized, again with 
 IVater, And therefore it's plain, thaty as they had be- 
 fore, according to John^ been baptized in the Belief oi 
 
 Chriji 
 
(75) 
 
 Chrift to come ; fb then by Faul, or at leaft by his Di^ 
 reftion, they were again baptiz^edy with Water , in the 
 Name of the Lordjefus ^ or in tht Faith of Chrifl ; as then 
 already come. So that here is a manifeft Difference, 
 between John's, and Ckrift's Baptifm with Water ^ even in 
 Point of Qualification ^ as well as in its being adminiftred, 
 
 in the Name of the Lord Jefus. 
 
 And, it is manifeft, that Jofeph Beffe, doth oppole^ 
 or contradict, his Friend, Barclay, with refpeft to the 
 Senfe ofyl^s xix. 5. for it's plain, that Barclay, would 
 have this Text underftood ot fVater- Baptifm : but ^ofefh^ 
 in his£jc^^, p. 25, 38.. will have it be thQ Baptifm of 
 thQ Holy Ghofl. Now, how unaccountable is it, that the 
 Quakers^ who pretend that the Light, in them ^ is a Mea- 
 fure of that Spirit by which the Scriptures were given 
 forth : when they fo palpably, or plainly contradi^ each 
 other 'j even, in thefe Things j which, undoubtedly, they 
 had thought deliberately upon 1 But, as R, Barclay ^ 
 (I fuppofe) will be allow'd, to be one of the mojl emi- 
 nent among the Quakers j ib alfo, his apology by them, 
 the moft compleateft Syftem of Divinity ^ as is evident 
 from an Mvcrtijementy inferted at the End of Ben. Mar- 
 tini Philological Library, done by the Defire or Direclion. 
 of the Quakers, And therefore, ought not Jofeph Beffe 
 to fubmit to the Judgment, of his learned ^nd judicious 
 Fricndy R. Barclay *, and according to him receive for 
 Truth, that the Difciples at Ephefus were again baptized 
 in Water : and that this laft Baptifen *, was in the Name 
 of the Lord Jefus : Which Baptifmy fays Tho. Ellrccod, in 
 his Sacred Hiftory, p. 614. was, INTO the Name of the 
 Lordjefus. iSJow, as this Text, A£ls xix. 5. accor- 
 ding to Barclay, relates to the baptizing the Ephefans 
 with U^ater *, and that by the Apoftle Paul, or as afore-' 
 faid, by hisDire£lion:— And, as this B.-z/'f/Zw according 
 to EUwood, was, INTO the Nam of the Lord Jefus \ it (hew- 
 eth, not only the Agreeablenefs thereof to the Cor,> 
 ?ni^lJion of Chrifl, Mac. xxviii. 19. but from hence, it's 
 alfo very evident^ that St. Paul underftood that Com- 
 
(76) 
 
 tni/pony to intend Water-Enpifm : and that he accord'^ 
 itigly, as above, lb haptiz^ed them. And therefore, who 
 h^s a£led moii prepofieronffy (as he phrafes it, vi^. difor- 
 derly) in this Gale i 1 leave to the Confideration of the 
 Reader. 
 
 He goes on, and concludes his Paragraph, faying, 
 
 ^* AJtho' it appears and may be granted that Paul 
 
 *^ in foine few Inftances did adminifter Water -Bdptifm^ 
 '^ yet we have his own exprefs Teftimony that Chrijl; 
 *^ fent him not on that Errard, i Cor. i. 17.*' 
 
 jinfwsr. I fuppofe by thcfe Words, Jofeph Beffe would 
 fcave it be received for Tmth, that Paul had no Coimmf- 
 -fion to haptix^e with Water: and alfo, that thole v;hich he 
 did fo baptizes J v*^ere baptiz^sd in Condelcention to the 
 Jeivs'j as he would fain inlinuate to the F/c^r, p. 281. 
 3>Jow, that Paul's baptiung with IVater^ was not a Point 
 p^ Condefccntion-^ — but that he therein, aQed by diviriC 
 Authority, or CommdJion, I truft will appear, in the foU 
 Rowing Lines. 
 
 And firft, I think, it's an allow'd Principle^ that all 
 flich Texts of Scripture^ as feem to clafli with other 
 FalTages, ought to be confidcred with them of like 
 Import ', and alio with luch Texts^ which they at 
 
 leaft feem to oppole. But, before I proceed, I think 
 
 proper to insert the Text under Debate*, i Ccr.'u 17. 
 where lays the Apoftle, For Chrifl fent me not to bap^ 
 
 tixjt^ but to preach the Go/pel. Which Words of the 
 
 Apofcle, I conceive are ipoken in a comparative Sence, 
 as thus, That Chrififtnt him NOT chiefly to baptiz.e, but 
 pnncipally tp preach the Gofpel — — Now of the like Im- 
 port to this, are t^Q Words of our Lord, Johi xii- 44. 
 *^Hc that belicveth on ;7;c, believe th KOT on mc^ BUT 
 on him thit fer.t me/ 
 
 '■ 3^Vhich is' as tho' Chrifl fiad faid, He that believeth on 
 mt, believeth not only on me ^ hut aljo on htm that fent me, 
 Ag;ain, John vi. 27. Labour J^OT for the Meat that 
 periftictby BUT for thzt jrhich 'erdureth to eternal iJfe- 
 /Wij^'-h IVord's of our Lord, I think the' Qiukys'ml] 
 
 allow. 
 
( 77 ) 
 
 aBow, are to be underftood comparatively ^ viz. Labour not 
 chiefly, for the Meat that per ifhethy hut principally for that 
 which endureth to eternal Life, 
 
 Now, from hence it's plain, that in fuch Texts as 
 thefe, — the Term NOT, is to be underftood, as a Term 
 of DiflinBioYi i and not of Exclufiort, For, if we were 
 to nnderftand it here, as a Term of Exclufion *, then it 
 would not be a Duty for the Difciples of Chrijf:^ to labour 
 for their daily Food. But then, this would be con- 
 trary to the Doctrine of the Apoftle Paul, who fays,— 
 This we command yoUy that if any would not work neither 
 
 fhould he eat. So in like Manner, I think it's plain, 
 
 in thefe Words of the Apoflle ; that the Word, NOT, 
 is only as a comparative Term of Diftin^Iiony and not of 
 Exclufion. And as fuch, the Text does only teach, that 
 kvj2iS Paul's main or c/;;>f Bufinefs, as an APOSTLE^ 
 to peach the Gofiel, for which, he was in an extraordi- 
 i^^r> Manner qualified of God. So that he could fay, 
 — in nothing am I behind the very chiefejl of the Apofiles.^^ 
 2 Cor. xii. 1 1. 
 
 Now, from the above Paffages, and from many 
 more that might be cited, it's plain, that the Term 
 NOT, is often to be underftood by Way of DiftinBion. 
 And, that it's a Term of Diflin^ion, in i Cor. i. ij. and 
 not of Exclufion \ will appear, from the Confideration 
 of feveral Paffages of the New Teftament^ with which 
 the latter Sence, would clafh with or oppole. 
 
 And firjly I fhall take Notice of fome Part of the 
 Account, we have of the Converfion of Saul *, who af- 
 terwards was called the Apoftle Paul \ to whom Ananias^ 
 
 a Diiciple, and Servant of God, was fent , faying, 
 
 Brother Sauly the Lord (even Jefus that appeared unto thee in 
 the way as thnu camefl) hath fent we, that thou mightefi re- 
 ceive thy fight, and he filled with the Holy Ghofl. — The God 
 of ourfathrs hath chcfen thee, that thou fimldeft know his 
 wiUy and fee that juft Ore,andfhouldeft hear the voice of his 
 7nouth. For thou fi: alt be his witnefs urito all men^ of what 
 thou hafr fien arid heard. And r.ow why tarricjl thou ? arife^ 
 
 and 
 
( 78 ) 
 
 mtd be haptitcti, and ivafi away thy finSy calUvtg m the 
 Tiawe of the Lord. And immediately there fell from his eyes 
 as it had been fcales \ and he received fight forthwith, and 
 arofcy a-rid was baptizjed. Acls ix. 17, 18. and chap. xxii. 
 
 14» ^S> ^^' 
 
 < Now, from hence I obferve, firft, that Jnanias, was 
 
 lent, to Saul with a Meiiage from our Lord: For fays 
 fee, — Jefus that appeared unto thee in the way as thou come fb 
 hath fent me, — Secondly y that Saul was to be taught the 
 Will of Godj — by Ananias^ as appears, from thele 
 
 Verfes, compared with Chap, ix- 6. — and xxii. 10. ^ 
 
 Thirdly^ that, one Part of the MefTage of the Lord^ by 
 Ananias, to Sauly was, to let him know, that he fhould 
 hear his Name before the Gentiles^ and Kings, and the doiU 
 dren ofjfrael : And alfo, that he Ihould be a Witnefs unt^o 
 
 aU Men. Fourthly ^ that another Part of the Meflage 
 
 v;as, Ayid now, why tarriefl thou? arife, and be haptiz^ed^ 
 and vpafh away thy fins, calling on the Name of the Lord. 
 
 '. Fifthly, I oblerve, that in Obedience to the divine 
 
 IVilly Saul arofe, and was baptiz.ed \ which Baptifm is plain 
 irom the Texts, to be the Baptifm of Water : elle, for 
 what Reaion, iliould Ananias fay, And now, why tarriefi 
 
 thou? arifcj and be baptiz^ed. And agreeable thereto, 
 
 we are told, that he arofe and was baptiz^cd. And ac- 
 cordingly, R, Barclay ranks in this Text Ad:s ix. iS. 
 among others, which he concludes relates to Water-Bap* 
 iiftn ; as is before cited : and as may be feen in his Apo- 
 logy, p. 295. So likewife jf. P/^f, p. 90. where (peak- 
 ing of Water- Baptifm, fiiys, '^ 'Ananias advifed 
 
 Taul to be baptized therewith. Sixthly, I oblerve 
 
 from the Whole ^ that when Taul was thus called of 
 God, to erabrace Cbriftianity *, he was among other 
 Things in a particular Manner, not only put in Mind of 
 Water- BaptifWy but as it were, roufcd up by Ananias to 
 the Praftice ot it *, which plainly ihcws, that it was not 
 jtn indifferent Thing, but, a Matter of Concern and 
 Pu.ty *, ac he was become a BcUn'^r in Chrijl. 
 
 Kow, 
 
( 79 ) 
 
 Kow, after all this, can any reafonable Perfon cori^ 
 elude, that the Apoftle would c^/'/c/^/wz (cisj. Bejjt phrajts 
 it) the Praftice of IVater-Baptifm : or, that any caii 
 once fuppofe, that the Apoftle, i Cor. i. 17. is to be 
 nnderftood, to declare, that he had no Concern or Bu- 
 fincfs, to baptiz^e with Water! when it was that, which 
 he was not only recommended to, but even urged, by 
 Ananias^ a fpecial Meffenger of God-, to the Pradice of. 
 And, can it be thought, that Paul, as a M'mifter ia 
 propagating the Gofpel^ had another, or different, Doc- 
 
 ■ trine to preach, relating to Baptifm^ than, what Ananias^ 
 had exhibited, and pre(\ed upon him, on his embracing 
 Chriftianity? which, when it's coniider'd, I think, it's 
 moil realonable to conclude, that the Term NOT, i Cor. 
 i. 17. is only to be underftood, as a T^rm of DiftinUioVy 
 as before :, and not of Exclufwn, Again, when it's con- 
 fider'd, as is before obferved, what Care, the Apoftlc, 
 as a Steward of the Gofpel, took, with the Difcipks at 
 Ephefus^ to indruO:, and let the Epheftam right, in the 
 Ordinance of Water -Baptifm j can it be once imagined, 
 that he afterward relinquiflied, what he had been lb 
 earneftly ftirr'd up to *, and had fhewn, fuch Care and 
 Zeal for ? No, the Apoflle was not, fuch an undeady 
 Perfon : but was one fet for the Dcfer,ce of the Gofptl of 
 Chrift *, whofe WaySy he taught every where in every 
 Churchy I Cor. iv. 17. And therefore for the Quakers 
 
 ' to luppole, that the Apoftle dropt Water- Baptifm, or laid 
 it aftde, is not only, very inconfulent with his Condud, 
 — but is a very great Reflexion on his Chara£ler \ as a 
 Servant^ and Steward ofckrift. And, as Jofeph Beffe, does 
 in effeft own, that the Baptifn intended in A^s xix. 5. 
 was the fame, as he concludes is in the Comrnijfion \ and 
 as ACls MIX. 5. relates to Water -Eaptifntj as is before ob- 
 ferved ; and fmce we find, that the Apoille concerned 
 himfelf therein*, we may juftly conclude, he had a 
 Trufl: that Way *, and in the faithful Dilcharge thereof, 
 acled by Vertue of, or according to, his Lord's Comntf^ 
 
 fioiu So that, groundlefs is the Notm of the Quakers ^ who 
 
 in^ia- 
 
(8o) 
 
 imagine, that the Apoftle ia this POINT, praftileJ 
 Water- Baptifiriy only in Condefcention ^ and that he had 
 no Commiffion, or Charge that Way. 
 
 And farther, when the Apoftle laid, — Chrift fent him 
 mtto baptize, — I Cor. i. 17. it's not to be underftood, 
 as tho* he had no Concern or Commljjion fo to do. And 
 this, I truft will farther appear, on the Confideration of 
 fome of the foregoing Verles j where the Apoftle takes 
 Notice, ot the unhappy Contentions that were among the 
 Corinthians i-^^s ver. 11, 12. and lays he ver. 13,14, 15. 
 Is Chrift divided ? was Paul crucified for you ? or were ye hap- 
 tiz^ed in the name of Paul f I thank Cody that I ha^ttud 
 none of you, but Crifpus and Gaius : Left any fhould fay^ that 
 J had baptiz^ed in mine own name. Now, in the 13th 
 Vcrfe it's plain, that the Apoftle by way of Appeal, 
 mixed with a kind of Reproof , interrogates with the Co- 
 rinthian Chriftians, on the Unreafonablenefs of their Di- 
 vifions'^ in that they divided into Parties or Se^ls, — fay- 
 ing, Is Chrift divided ? was Paul crucified for you? or were 
 you baptiz^ed in the name of Paul f As tho' the Apoftle 
 had faid, hor9 ft range is it^ that you fhould thus go into— 
 Parties ; does Chrift's Religion contain different, and contrary 
 DoflrineSy that you thus divide f is not his Religion one ? wa^ 
 Paul or any of your Minifters crucified for you ? that there is 
 fuch crying up one above another f or was any of you baptiz^cd 
 in the Name of Paul ? was, ye not all baptiud in the Name 
 ofChrifi ? how is it then'-, that you thus run into fuch Divi - 
 
 ftont?-^ And this, is very plain to be the Scnle 
 
 of St. Paul And withrefpeil: to Baptifm, his Argument 
 to Vnity, on that Account, confifts ; in that they were 
 not baptiz.ed in the Name of any of their Adinifters, but all 
 of them in the Name of Chrift. — Which Baptifm, I think 
 is allowed by all the Quakers,— to be Water- Baptifm, 
 And as the Apoftle declares^ that he baptiz^ed fome of 
 tlteie Corinthians^ it's but reaibnable from his own 
 Words to conclude, that he baptiz.ed them in the Name 
 efChnft. Ar/eeable^ as were the Epheftans while under 
 hh Direction and G^re> Alhy^\)L. 5'. baptiz^ed in the Nam(^ 
 
(8i ) 
 
 of the Lord Jtfus: Which Baptifm R. B.ircUy owris to l^^ 
 IVater-Ba^Ujm^ mdjo/eph Bdje does in effect declare, as 
 hach been before obierved, that the Baptifm meation, 
 ed ^^s xix. 5. is the lame as in the Com7niJfion\ it there- 
 fore is evident, not only as it appears from the New Tt^/J.i- 
 7nent^ but alfb, from the Words of ^. Barclay and jofefb 
 Beffsy when compar'd and confidered, that theApcftla 
 Pauly baptized with Water, both at Ephefus and Cmnthy 
 according to Chri ft' s Commijfion. And, this I think, will 
 ahb, plainly appear, from the Palfage itlelf. For> 
 can any Perfon on due Confideration, fuppofe, that the 
 Apoftle would afterwards take fuch Care, to fst the 
 Difiiples ^tEphefus right, — as well as before at Or/?jf/7, to 
 pradice Water- Baptifm in that reUgiaus ?indfohjmt Man- 
 ner, as in the Name of his Lord und Alafler'^ if, he. had 
 not a divine Commijfion^ and Authority fo to do. From 
 all which, 1 think it abundantly appears, if we will 
 allow, St. Paul to be confident with himlelf, when he 
 hySy-^Chrift fent we r.ot to baptize^ but to preach the Go fpel : 
 I lay, it's evident that the Word NOT in this Text is 
 to be underftood as a comparative Term o^DiftinBio-fi^ and 
 not oi Exclufion : agreeable to the Words of the Lord 
 by the Prophet \ For 1 defired Mercy and NOT Sacrifice : 
 and the Knowledge of God, MORE than Burnt Offerings* 
 Hofea vi. 6. 
 
 Again, as the CommLfion of our Lord, was given ta 
 his Apoflles, by which they were commanded to |?rc^c/j 
 the Golpel, ALark xvi. 15. — the Doftrines of which^ are. 
 Faith inChrifty Repentance, Baptifm^ — Remijfion of Sins, and 
 the Promife, of the Holy Gkoft : I fay, thele are feme 
 of the great Doctrines of the Gofpel •, which, we *ind the 
 Apoftle Pder, ftanding up WITH the ELEVEN^ did 
 by the divine Lnfltttnce ot the 5p:V/t,— preach to the MuU 
 titude, at the Day otPenticoft. Ails, ii. — 38. which Bap^ 
 tjfrn here mentioned, both Tho. Ellrvoodj and R. Barclay^ 
 as before cited, own to be lVater-B:iptifn. So that, ac- 
 cording, to the Text, and th^k J:<t'.o:-s-, ic's eviden^^ 
 
(SO 
 
 that Water iapiffrjy was compnled in that Gofpel, which 
 the commiflioned Apoftles ot Chriil did preach. 
 
 And as the Apoftle Pauly was alfo Jent to preach the 
 fame Gofpel, as were the other Apoftles, in which was 
 contained the Do£lrine of Water- BapUfniy it's plain, that 
 Water-Baptifm^ was comprifed in that Commiffioriy which 
 he as an Apoftle, 2indMmfter of Chrift^ had likewife re- 
 ceived. And, agreeable hereto, ic's manifeft, th^t Paul 
 both preachedy and pra^lifed Water- Baptifm. For thus 
 We read, u4Bs xviii. 8. ^nd Crifpus the chief ruler of the 
 fynagoguey believed on the Lord with all his houfe : avid 
 many of the Corinthians^ hearings believed^ and were bap- 
 fizzed. 
 
 From hence, it's evident, that — the Corinthians'^ 
 HEARING Paul preach, belie^yed'^ and according to his 
 Do6trine, were baptiz^ed'-) which Baptifm is own'd by 
 ilarclay^ in his Apology, p* 295. and by J. Pike, p. 107. 
 to be Water-Baptifm \ and the Quakers in general, ac- 
 hnovvledge thziPaul bapttz^ed Crifpus y and fbme others of 
 the CorinthianSy with PT^^er, agreeable to i Cor. i. 14, 16^ 
 So that it's plain, Paul did not only praftice, but alfo, 
 preach Water- Baptif 772. From hence, it's manifeft, that 
 Water-Baptifm was contained in that Gojpe!^ which Chrifi 
 fent the Apoftle to preach *, and this confidered, with the 
 foregoing, make it abundantly clear, that this Baptifm 
 was contained in the Commiflion, Paul received. 
 
 Again, fuppofe it was allow'd, that ftri«0:ly (peaking, 
 the Apoftle was not fent to baptiz.e^-^yQt^ forafmiich, as 
 Water-Baptifm, was contained in the DoBrine which lie 
 predched^ ic's evident, that that B.tptifn belonged to the 
 Gofpel Church, I lay, that if the above Suppofition was 
 allowed, yet then, it would be far from anf.vering the 
 Qiiahrs Purpofe. For, it would only fliew, that as 
 God had called, and in an extraordinary Manner, fur= 
 nifiied the Apoftle, by the Gifts of his Spirit, for the 
 Mimfvy of the rrV^-,—that his main ox principal Bufi- 
 nels, was to attend thereto ; and as an Inftrument in the 
 Hand of God, to prepare Peifon.'^, by Faith and Fcpen^ 
 
 t^ircCy 
 
(83) 
 
 tance^ that fb, they may be mete for Water- B.iptifnt,^^ 
 agreeable to the Tenor^ of our Lord's Commijfiony as re- 
 corded Mat, xxviii. ip, 20. Mark xvi. 15, i5. and 
 Luke xxiv. 47, According to which the Apojlks^ and 
 Difciplcs of Chrlfl went forth, and])rf^ck^ the Doiirrine 
 
 of Faithy Repentance^ and IVater-Baptifm.-^ From all 
 
 which, it's abundantly manifeft, that the Term NOT, 
 I Cor* i. 17. is only a Term of Diftin^lmi, and not of 
 Exclufion, And, the moft that the Quakers can poffibly 
 make of it, is, that, Chrijl did not abfolutely eyijoin the 
 jipoftle^ always to adminifler IVater-Baptifm with his own 
 Hands^ — hut^ that he could jujlifiahly^ leave that to others^ as 
 he faw mete, or as Occafion required \ as indeed, it's plain, 
 that St. Paul did. 
 
 And when the Apoftlelays, I thank God, that Ihaptizjed 
 none of you, hut Crifpus andGaius: Left any fhould jay, that 
 J had baptiz.ed in mine' own Name, jlnd I baptiz.ed alfo the 
 houfhold of Stephanas : befides, I knew not whether I baptiz,ed 
 any other '^ it can't be fuppoled, that the Ground, of 
 Paul's Thanks to God, was, that no more than Crifpus^ 
 Gaius, and the Houfiold of Stephanas, were baptiz,ed ^ for 
 it's plain, that MAKY of the Corinthians hearings believed 
 and were baptized. A^lsxviii. 8.' 
 
 But, what was the Ground or Argument, of his be- 
 ing ^/^^, or giving Thanks to God'^ appears, plain from 
 his own Words *, That he himfelf had baptiz^ed no'morc 
 of THEM :, for adds the Apollle, Leaft any/Jjould fay, 
 that I baptized in mine own Name : When, if he had 
 baptized many of them, it's very like, the Contentious at 
 Corinth, would have thus reproached the Apoftle^ but 
 as God, in his Providence had ordered it othervvile, he 
 was glad, and gave Thanks to God *, that the captious 
 Party, could have no Pretence on that Account. 
 
 And, as he had not baptized any in his own Name^ it 
 plainly intimates ^ that thofe which he did baptize, he 
 baptized in thQ Name of Chrift\ agreeable to JBs :^\z\. 5. 
 f^s before obferved. And, f.nce here is no Intimation, 
 that the ^pojV.e was any w-iy diiTatisfied^ 0: uneai/; with 
 
 L 2 i^- 
 
(84) 
 
 jr^rpeft to his having adminiltered Watcr-Baptifm \ his 
 thanking Gody as above,— is no Argnment agninft Wattr- 
 ^(tptifm : IQeither, docs ic prove that the Apoftle bad 
 HOC a Commijfwn (o to do. But, as it is To plain, that; 
 he baptized in the Name of Chrift^—it's but realbnabie 
 to eonciude, that Wcittr-Ea^tifm was included, in that 
 Gommiflion, which he received. 
 
 I next Went on in my Dilcourfe, p. 15. to cbferve 
 that " Thd Author to th^HchrewSy when fpeaking of 
 ** th^ firft aiid imtial Points of the Chriftian Religion, 
 *^ or Frincipks of the DoBrms of Chrift^ mentions the 
 *^ pofirine of Bdptifmi in the Plural *, on which Place 
 ^* Alf. Dell, that eminent Quaker^ in his Piecey entitled, 
 *^ The DoBrlne of BaptifmSj laith, (a) Whence I perceived y 
 ** thdt In the primitive Churchy they had the Doclrine of Eap^ 
 ^'^ tifms in the plural Numkr'^ One of which he goes on 
 and intimates, " was the Baptifm 0^ Water ^ the other 
 *^ that of the Spirit \ and agreeable hereto, faith ano- 
 *^ ther Author, (h) fpeaking on the fame PalTage, who 
 f^ ?}\^o brings in Vafor, on the lame Text, faying, Here 
 ** the plural Numher jhews forth the outward and inward 
 *^ Bapufra. 
 
 In Anrwer to which Joftph Befey (ays p. 3S. '' The 
 !^^ Sermon-Writer's Attempt is, p. 25. tovvrefl the 
 ^^ Words of William Dell, (whom he mif-calls erninent 
 f ' Quaker) who fays, '^ that in the Primitive Church 
 ** they had the Doclrine ot Baptiims in the plural 
 ^' Kumber,'' ^iid of Thomas LarvfoPy who fi^ys, ^' Here 
 *^ the plural Number ihews forth the outward and inward 
 *' Baptifm," " to a Sence direQly contrary to that of thole 
 .*,* Authors, who plainly ihew 'from Holy Scripture, that 
 ** the putjvard Eaptifm or Baptifm with Water, was the 
 *' Baptifro of yo/;;;, notofCHRiST^ and that the ?'?;- 
 f"- xpdrd fuptifm or Baptifm of the Spirit y was the Baptifm 
 f*- of CHRIST, not of John: And that the inward Bap- 
 
 (^) F. -5; r. C») Tho, Tawfon, in his Trcatife of Bap« 
 
 ti fills, ^: (j\ I 
 
 ' " T ; I n:i V TT *-; ' '*! 
 
"^ tifin or Baptifm of the Spirit, is the one and on/y 
 ** Baptifm abiding in Force under the Golpel Difpen- 
 «' ration." 
 
 Kow, in Anfwer to this I fay, that as to my mif- 
 calling W. Dell when 1 called him a Quaker ^ as it's what 
 I have anlwer'd to before *, lo likewife ot the one Bap- 
 tifm, and therefore I ihall not take ISIotice of it here 
 again. The main Thing here, is, whether I can clear 
 myfelt from the Charge which Jofeph Bejfe has laid 
 againft me ^ of rvrejling the Words of Dell, and Lavofon^ 
 to aSence dire^ly contrary to that of thofe Authors \ when, 
 they were fpeaking with refpeO: to the Principles of the 
 Dohrine of Chrift^ mentioned //<?^. vi. 12. '^ Whence 
 *' (fays Dell) I perceived, that in the primitwe Churchy 
 ^^ they had the Doftrine of Baptifms in the plural 
 " Number." One of which, as I have faid above, he 
 
 goes on and intimates was the Baptifm of Water,- 
 
 Now, if he has not fo done, then I am to hlame for 
 what I have inlerted : But if it fhould appear to be a 
 Truths then it will be manifeft that Jofeph is a falfe Ac- 
 cufer. And, in order to bring this to a /^/r Trial, I will 
 cite the Words ot Dell Ibmewhat more at large, p. 4, 5. 
 of his Do&-rine of Baptifms ^ where ipeaking with regard 
 to his Search after Truths lays -^ 
 
 " Kow, in this Inquiry from the Word, I met with 
 *' that Heh, vi. 2. where the Apoftle fpeaking of ibme 
 " of the firft and initial Points of CHRISTIAN RE- 
 *^ LIGION, names— the Doclrinc of Baptifms \ whence 
 *^ 1 perceived that in the Primitive Church they had the 
 ^^ Doftrine of Baptifms in the plural Number ', and there- 
 *' fore did apply myfelf to icarch from the Word what 
 *' thefe Baptifms might be, and fo met with the 
 ** Eaptift's own Do<^l:rin^3 touching Baptifms^ mentioned 
 *^ Mat. iii. Marl i.'^--«»- 
 
 Now, as it's my Right, to fl^nd np for, and to clear 
 -myfelf, from this Accnfarion and Charge ^ 1 obferve, 
 •that when Ddl iay^, h^e *' met with the BaptijVs own 
 l^ DoBnne, toivching BapiifmSj mentioned Mat. iii. 
 
 ** Mark 
 
(86) 
 
 '* Mark i.'' it's evident, that it was IVater- Baptifm, as 
 well as Spirit B^tptifntf which Dell intended^ and this 
 plainly appears, from the Chapters cited, which relate 
 to John's baptizing the People, and our Lord in the River 
 
 Jordan. So that it's manifeft I have not wrefted Delias 
 
 Words to a Senle contrary to that which he intended', 
 and this 1 freely leave co the Judgment of my Reader. 
 
 Aad as to Larvjoyj^ thus fays he, p. 9, 10, — ** In 
 *' Heb. vi. 2. the Apoftle fpeaking of fome of the initial 
 ** Points of the true Religioriy makes mention of the Doc- 
 *^ trine of Baptifms ^ not Baptifm, but Baptifms^ in the 
 *' plural Number: and that thefe are 5o/?w's mthWater^ 
 ** and Chrijl^'s with the Spirity may be proved by a fruit- 
 *' ful and plentiful Harveft of Teftimonies." 
 
 From hence, I think it's plain, that Lavofon is fpeak- 
 ing here of the Baptifm of Water, and that of the Spirit^ 
 both which he declares, the Apoftle fpeaks of Heh. 
 vi. 2. And I can't but obierve, that both DeU^ and 
 Lawfon, own, that Water- Baptifm, was, according to the 
 Apoftle, an initial Point of the Chriftian or true Religion, 
 Kow, as Jofepb Bejfe calls Bell an enlightened Man^ and 
 one that was ^' enabled to dilcover the TRUTH in 
 
 *' this Pointy with a convincing Evidence and Clear- 
 
 *' nefs;" 2ind Law f on y being a Perfon of Z^^m;^^ ; 
 
 I can't but admire, that Jofej)h fliould thus oppofe his 
 Friends, and the Truth^ m this Point : and not receive 
 IVater- Baptifm, according to the ^j?o/r/f, iindikw, to be 
 an Initial of Chriflian Religion ^ and a Principle of the Doc^ 
 trine of Chrift. 
 
 If indeed, Dell and Lanfony have any wliere in their 
 Writings contradicled this; that no way proves, that 
 what 1 had laid was falie : but only ihews their own 
 Inconfiftency y and as fuch, the more like my Anta- 
 gonift. 
 
 And, Larvfony p. 13. brings in " Pafoy paraphrafing 
 *' on Heb. vi. 2. of the Dodrine of Baptifms, faid, Here 
 *' the plural Number iliews forth the outward and in- 
 '^^ vnrd Br^ntilm.'' 
 
 Now, 
 
(87) 
 
 Now, let Jofi}h ihew if lie can, that 1 have mejled 
 the Sence of thefe Authors •,— -which if he cannot do, 
 I charge him with falfe Accufation ^ notwithftanding his 
 dogmatical AlTertion : For it's evident, that, DeJl^ Larvfon, 
 and his Author allow Heb. vi. 2, to intend Water-Bap* 
 tlfm\ as well as that of the 5p/Vi^ 
 
 And it's plain, that the two former do not only al- 
 low it fo to be, but alfo, that Water^BaptiJm — was an 
 initial Toint of the Chrifltan RtUgion, And fince it was (b 
 then, it mull remain the lame ftill, unlefs^o/e^b or his 
 Friends^ — can produce another Gofpd or divine Authority, 
 by which it is declared, mill or void. 
 
 Bur, p. 39. of his Exam. I find that Jofeph Bejje, with 
 refpeft to Heb. \l 2. fays,—'' the Doftrine of Baptifms^ 
 ** which in thQ primitive Church was efteemed a Principle 
 " of Chriflianity and tending to Per/e(7foM, was th2Ltvery 
 *' Do[irine which John the Baptifi^ and Our Saviour him- 
 ^* felf, had taught refpe^ling Baptifm, Mat. iii. AO:s i. 5. 
 *^ where they make a moll plain Di{lin8:ion and Separa- 
 *' tion between Water-Eaptifm and the Baptifm with 
 « Holy-Ghoji:' 
 
 But, in Anfwer to this, I fay, that tho' I can't ad- 
 mit 7q,/^;)/j's Senfe of the Words " Do^rine of Baptifinsy* 
 yet, if I fhould for the prelent allow, that the diftin^ 
 guifhing between the two BaptifmSy was, that which 
 was intended by the DoClrine thereof^ yet then, thac 
 would not in the lead affe£l me, or my Argument for 
 Water- Baptifm \ forafmuch, as I believe, and freely ac- 
 knowledge thele two Bapufms, And 1 think, Jofeph may 
 ealily dillinguilh (if his Judgment is not more than a 
 little clouded) between IVater mdSpirit-Baptifm^ with« 
 out flippofing, Water-Baptifm to be null or void* 
 
 And, tho' Our Saviour has, Ad^s i. 5. moffc plainly 
 diftiyjguiPjed y—bct^x^n Water-Baptifm^ and the Baptifm 
 of tYiC IIoly-Ghofty yet, 1 obfcrve, thac there is a great 
 Difference between a DifiinCiiony and an Abrogation^ or 
 Etpealing. — And the diftinguifloing between the two 
 Bfptiims. contains no Argiur.enc tha" one of them i^,- 
 
(88> 
 
 difammlledj as I have before largely obfervedj p. 59.^0. 
 But before I leave this, I can't but take Notice, of the 
 wonderful Inference that Jofeph — has drawn in his Anfwcr 
 to the Ftcar, p. 278. where fpeaking with regard to the 
 Words of our Lord, ylds i. j. For John truly baptiz.ed 
 with Water \ hut ye Jhall be baptiz.ed with the Holy Ghojl, not 
 tnany days hence : Says, ^' This is the trueDo&rine of Bap- 
 *' ttfms, Johnh with Water, Chrifi's with the Holy Ghoft.'* 
 He then infers, faying, " If then this Da&-rine be ONE 
 ** of the Principles of the Do&rine ofChrifiy His manifefi 
 ** that his Baptifm is to he retained, and John's laid a^ 
 " fide:' 
 
 What, this Jofeph Beffe may be in feme Cafes, I 
 Icnow not ^ but it appears to me, that he had no juft 
 Caufe to refied: on others for their Incapacity \ — unlefs, 
 he had difcovered greater Abilities him(elf. For, how 
 wea\y as well as unnatural is the above Conclufion *, when 
 it's plain, that the Text does only diflinguifh between the 
 two Baptifms ^ and contains not the leaft Intimation, 
 that any one o^them was to ceafe. If indeed, our Lord 
 had when he diftinguiihed them, declared Water-Bap- 
 tilm to be nuU ^ — then I allow it ought to be laid aiide. 
 But, as he was difcourfingof the two Baptifms^ and men-'^ 
 tioned not the leali o^Watcr-Baptifrns, being laid afide ; 
 — it's certainly, rather an Argument, that Water-Bap- 
 tifm was to continue. 
 
 And, as Water-Baptlfm is contained mth^ Principles 
 of the BoBrine of Chnfi^ and what was the repeated 
 JDo&rine, and Pra[iice ot the Truly infpired Apoflles^ and 
 that in the Name cf their Lord and Mafter; I think 
 nothing is more clear^ or explanatory ^ than that Water" 
 Baptifm, Wds the Baptiim, intended in our Lord's Com- 
 mflfion, For^ no Iboner were the Apoftles — endowed 
 with the Pomr from on High, whereby they were ca- 
 pable to Ipeak with other Tongues^ — but we find that 
 Peter flood up WITH the ELEVEN, (as being the 
 Mouth for them) and preached up Jefus Chrift^ Repentar^ce^ 
 'm-1 IVat^r'-Baftiffiu^^^ And thus rhey wen: on; gathering, 
 
 and 
 
(89 
 
 ind fettling the churches, on the Principles of the i)oSrini 
 ofChrijl, 
 
 So that here I fhall venture to add, as in p. 25, i6y 
 and 27. of my Difcoiirre on IVater-Baptifniy that, '' fince 
 ^' the outrvardy as well as the inward Baptifin, was that 
 " which they had in the Primitive Church, ^ndynsis one of 
 " the/mri^/Po/?7^nhereirtto, maylnotcallon theQ.UA- 
 " KERS, to jiiftify their pretended £«Jr^>7ce into CferZ/i's 
 " Church without IT? and alio to Ihew, by what^t^- 
 ** thority they not only negleft it themfelves, but en-. 
 *^ courage and teach others ib to do; when it fb plainly 
 *' appears to be a Co/pel Ordinance, not only from the 
 ^' BbovQ -/iuthor's Conce/flons^ that it was one of the Initial 
 *^ Points into the Chriftiany or true Religion '^ but alfo, as 
 " k moft principally appears lb to be, from the Doc- 
 " trine and Pra^ice of the inffired Apo files *, Who we are 
 *^ certain had the Spirit of TYUth^ by which they were 
 *' led, not only to recommend, but alfb to pra£iice Water- 
 '' Baptifm ; and to rank it in with the other Principles y of 
 '^* the DoBrine of thrift, (a) And^ indeed, it is Matter 
 " of Admiration tome, that Perfons fliould conclude 
 ** otherwilc ; efpecially, when I confider, that our Lord 
 ^^ himfelf was thus baptized , and, by his Difciples 
 " pradiled Water- Baptifm : For we are told by the la- 
 *^ cred Record, That, Jfter thefe Things came Jefus and 
 *^ his difciples into the land ofjudeaj and there he tarried 
 *' with themy and baptiz.ed. (b) And they came unto John^ 
 '^ and faid unto hiniy Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond 
 " Jordany to whom thou beareft witnefs, behold, the fame 
 " bdptiz,ethy and all men come to him, (c) Which was 
 ** certainly thQ Baptifm oi Water: For the Holy Ghoft was 
 *' not then given, 'becaufe that Jefus was not then glorified* 
 " (d) And, he alfo gave a Baptifm. in Com.mijfion to his 
 *' Apoftles, a little before his Afcenfton ; who well knew 
 " their Lord's Intention therein -j and accordingly, when 
 
 M " they, 
 
 (.1) Heb vl. 1,2. (h) John in. 22. fc) Ver. 2^. that is, hy ihi 
 ^'g(ncy of hif ^2^lih, (V' jfohn yii. 39^ 
 
i9o) 
 
 **. they wefe endued vpith the Tower from on Hlgh^ did 
 *' preach the Gof^ely taught and pra^ifedy among other 
 'f Things, the Baftifen with IVater ^ the Confideratiort 
 *' of which, 1 think, is the heft Way, to come at the 
 " Knowledge of our Saviours Mind, in his Commijjlon y 
 " even to obierve HIS, and the Dolirine and Pra^ice of 
 *' his immediate j4poftles *, which they performed in his 
 ** Name: And this Method I take to bcfafer^ than to 
 *' truft to the Pretenlions or iVbtio«5 of any, who can- 
 ^^ not ihew, fo good Evidence as the Apoftles did -^ that 
 •* they have received, and are led by the Sfirit of Truth .• 
 *^ And therefore, whatfoever any may fiy, by way of 
 " oppofing the Practice of Water-Baplfm y it is not to 
 *' be efteemed or regarded as of equal Authority, to the 
 *' DoBrim and Prailice oi the infpired Apoftles^ who 
 *' taught, and pra^lifed Water-Baptifmf and are never 
 *' in the Scripturey laid to have haptiz^ed any other Way : 
 '* So that, 1 think, we may juftly conclude, that the 
 *^ Apoftles did thus underftand their Lord in his Cow- 
 *' 772iJJion •, and in Obedience thereto, when they were 
 *' baptiz^ed with the Spirit^ went forth, preached^ zndprac- 
 " tifed accordingly, the Baptifm of Water ; and with this 
 '* beginning Principle was the firft Chriftidn Churches ga- 
 *' thered." 
 
 And^ as to JofepFs pre tending, 4), 5^,40. that Water-- 
 Baptifm is a Jcwi/h Ohfcrvation or Rite^ — and alfo that 
 the Apoflle '' calVd it a Carnal -Ordinance^ and only 
 *' impofed until the Time of Reformation y' I fay, as to this,,. 
 it's utterly denied ^ and let Jofcph prove if he can, that 
 the BAPTISM^ preached and pra^Iifed by the Apoftles,. 
 was a Jewi/h Ohftrvc^tiony — or, that it was any of thofe 
 Carnal Ordinances^ intended by the Apoftle, Heh, ix. ic» 
 and until he has done this, his bays Affertiony will be but 
 of httle Weight '^ efpecially, as there is no great Reafoii 
 to conclude, tliat he was dictated in his Writings, by 
 that Spirit y by which the Scriptures was given forth. 
 Foralmuch, as his Writings abound with Calumny^ 
 KcvliiniJy and Inconftjicncy with iCjeIf-~-BefideS;, ^. 
 
( 90 
 
 Ten^ Vol. ii. p. 832. /peaking of IVater-BaptifWy calls k 
 ** a Practice introduced by John ^" — and enlightened Dell^ 
 fays, p. 13, 14. " John was the Author or FIRST 
 " Miniftcr of a KEW and unwonted Baptifm-," — and in 
 p. 6, he fignifies, that: it was the Newnefs of John's Bap- 
 tifm, that raifed the ExpeCtattbn of the People^ — and it's 
 evident, that the Baptifin thefe Authors there intend, 
 is Water-Baptifrn \ But how that can be a Jem(\^ Rite^ I 
 fee not, fince, it was a newy and unwonted Baptilm, inr 
 traduced by John. 
 
 Again, as W^ater-Baptifm is by the Apoftle, included 
 in the Privciples of the Do^rine ofChnftjCm it be thought, 
 that he would call it afterwards in the fame Eplftle^ a 
 Carnal Ordinance ^ (as J. Bejfe phrales it) and only irn- 
 pofed until the Time of Reformation f when, the Time of 
 Reformation, h<(\ long commenced j before the Apoflle 
 wrote that Epijlky m which he includes Water-Baptifn 
 in the Principles ofChrift's Do^rine ! 
 
 And, p. 27, 28. of mine on Water-Baptifm^ I wentoti 
 by way of Application, exhorting, that Chriflians would 
 be careful that they were not toffed to and fro, and car- 
 ried about by every Wind of Bo&rinc^ — that they would 
 endeavour to ground themfelves in the Truth, by a 
 thorough Acquaintance with the facred Oracles of the 
 Clrnftian Religion^ joined with fin cere Prayer to Almighty God^ 
 for the kind Influences of his Spirit ^ that fo they might be 
 enabled, not only to vindicate the Truth, but be alio/wr- 
 fiifhed for every gcod Word and Work ', that they would 
 not reft on zIiq Externals of Religion, but have regard to 
 the Life and Power of Godlinefs'^-^ohfQrvm^, that if Bap- 
 tifm,— was not attended with a religious Life, it would 
 avail the Soul no more, than the Externals under the 
 Law, did the JewSy when they were not accompanied 
 with a fuItableDifpofition of Mind, and a holy Life. 
 
 Laftly, I conclude, faying, " jet us always remem- 
 " ber the Words o^ the Apoflle Peter, who, when he is 
 *^ fpeaking of Perfons being faved in IVoaF: Jirk, huh, 
 f The like figure where unto^ even baptifm, doth alfo n^w fa7jc 
 
(90 
 
 '^ US (not the putting axvay the filth oftheflefh^ hut the an^ 
 ^* fiver of a good confckfjce towards God) by the YefurreCtion 
 ^' ofJefiisChrifl. (a) In which Words the Apoftle doth 
 ^* diftinguilh between the A^ of this Golpel, and fign- 
 *' rative Baptilm, which, he faith, doth novo fave us, (that 
 *' is a Way or Means) and the Principle from whence 
 ** that and all jifi^s of Obedience to God ought to fpring-, 
 ** fhewing that the fauhig Nature oi this Baptifrriy doth 
 ** not confift in the bare A£l of wafhing the Body with 
 ^' Water ^ but as that religious yl[i is done in Obedience 
 ^' to God, and flows from, and is attended with, the 
 " Anfwer of a good Confcience towards him therein : 
 ^^ And wherefoever this is the Cafe, they may have a 
 *^ well-grounded Hope of Salvation, by the RefurreBion of 
 ^' Jeflis Chrift') v^hich God of his Mercy grant we may 
 ^J all enjoy, through Jefus Chrift our Lqrd." 
 
 Now, in reply to this laft, Jofeph has inferted, a long 
 Paragraph from E. Barclay's Apology, p. 419, 420, 42 1, 
 in which Pages, Barclay has at large given his Interpre- 
 tation of the above-menticn'd Text, i Pet, iii. 2 r. which, 
 on perufal, does not appear to be v/orthy any particu- 
 lar Anfwer^ and 1 can't but admire, that yo/E]?/; ihould 
 give it a Place in his Exam, forafmuch as Barclay^ has 
 therein made Ufe of feveral unfcripturanerms, v/hich ac- 
 <:ording to Jofeph, is a Sign that Barclay was obtruding upon 
 pthers hi^orvn cryGneous Notions^-^^ScQ Exam. 15, 16. 
 So that I think, he ha^ given his Friend's^ Interpretation, 
 
 a home StroaL Again, where do we read in tlie 
 
 Scriptures, of the Fire of God-s Judgment burning up the un- 
 righteous Nature : which, I take the Liberty to tell him, 
 as he doth the f^car m a like Gale, p. 30. that thele 
 f^ l^rds he never found together in holy Writ.'' — And when 
 1 confider, how captious J of eph — is with his Opponents, 
 ! can't but admire, that he and his Friends^ Ihould lo 
 often make Ule of un fcriptural Phrafes, in religious Af-* 
 id'n's ', and of their carping^ or finding Fault with others, 
 lor ib doing. And what can be thought lels^ than that 
 
 they 
 
(93) 
 
 they, would fain appropriate to themfelves a Right fo to 
 do ^ and at the fame Time, take the Liberty to cenfure 
 others for the fame Practice ; not regarding the Apoftle's 
 Words, Rom» ii. i. 
 
 And farther, Barclay tells thofe that conclude Water-- 
 Baptifm to be intended in this Text^ that " they will not 
 ^* lay, that all that have it, are faved by Water-Baptifm ^ 
 " which (fays he) they OUGHT to fay, if they will 
 *^ underftand by Baptifm (by which the Apoftle laith^ 
 y we are faved) Water-Baptifm." 
 
 Jnf But, why OUGHT thofe, that think it's Water'^ 
 Baptifm to fay ^ that all that have it are faved by ity any MORE 
 than Barclay^ who concluded it to intend Spirit Baptifm^2ini 
 yet plainly fuppofeth, that fome might mifcarry, notwith- 
 ftanding, they might be baptiz^ed with it ^ for lays he, 
 « — Many, by theConfeffion of all, are baptiz^ed with Water^ 
 *' that are not faved i But this Confequence (he fays) holds 
 " MOST true J if it be under flood as we doy of the Baptifm 
 *' of the Spirit yftnce fione can have this Anfwer of a good Con^ 
 *' fcience^ ^>?t^-ABlDING in ity not be faved by it.''* 
 
 Now, from Barclays own Words it's plain, that tho' 
 Perfons may be baptized with the Spirit^ yet, that fome 
 of them might not ht faved ; which, is evidently im- 
 plied, from his faying, that it — *' holds mofl true ^^^ and 
 of their '' abiding in it ^" which Expreflions of his 
 plainly fuppofe, that it's not always true^ tho' it may 
 be, moflly true^ and alfo, that if Perlbns do not abide in 
 it (viz. a good Confcience) they will not ht faved by Spirit 
 Baptifm, Therefore, I fay, I would fain know, why 
 they that hold this Text relates to Hfater-Baptifm^ 
 OUGHT to fay, that all that have it, are faved by it y 
 any MORE, than the Quahrs, who pretend it's Spirit 
 Baptifm \ when it's plain as above, that Barclay allows, 
 that fome fo baptized may not hzfaved^ and that their 
 Salvation is conditional, viz.> their having the Anfwer of 
 ^ good Confcier.cc, and abiding in /Yi'—and yet but a little 
 before, he lays,—" feeing we are faved by this Bapti/m, 
 II as ALL thofe that were in the Ark were faved by Wa^ 
 
 *^ ter\ 
 
(94) 
 
 *^ ter\ it would (fays he) then follow, that ALL thofe 
 5' that have this Baptifnty are faved by it." 
 
 Thus, it may be feen, how perpkxt and confufed— 
 Perfons are, when they are about to obtrude their oxvn 
 erroneous Notions. 
 
 For, at one Time, according to Barclay^ the Salvar 
 Hon of this Baptifm is conditional'^ at another Time, it's 
 fure or certain^ " as all thofe that were in the Ark were faved 
 by Water j" which, according to the facred Record^ was 
 every Soul Thus, I fay, it may be clearly feen, how 
 inconftftenty and confufed Men are, when they are about 
 to pervert the facred Text -^ and would fain exclude, M^a- 
 ter-Baptifm, from the Goffel ofchrijl ^ m which, it's held 
 forth, lo confpicmusy and plain. And indeed, I know of 
 no Seh of profejjed Chriflians^ that are more confufed^ or 
 dividedy in any one Pointy than are the Quakers in this 
 o^ Baptifm 'f notwithftanding, their /;/^ib Pretentions, to 
 Onenefs o^ Mind, and Judgment: as may be obferved, 
 from the foregoing PafTages ^ and from what will here- 
 after follow. 
 
 But firfb, fee Examination^ p. 17. where Jofeph BeJJe 
 lays, " The Variety of Opinions both about the Mode 
 *' and Subjects of M^ater- Baptifm y fufficiently fhews, that 
 ** it is not a Do^lrrine clearly revealed, much lefs a 
 « Chriflian Duty." 
 
 In Anfvver to v^hich, I fay, that if the Variety of 
 Opinions about IVater-Baptiftfiy do fufficiently fliew, that 
 it is not a Do&rine clearly revealedy much leis a Chriflian 
 Duty: 1 fay, that if it be fo \ then, I think, it will alfb 
 follow, that if there be the like Variety of Opinions 
 (which there is, and that amongfl the Quakers them- 
 lelves) about the Baptifm which they fo much talk of, 
 and pretend to, it will then^ in like Manner, according 
 to h]m J fufficiently fhcrv^ that THEIR Notions ot Spirit 
 Baptifm IS not clearly revealedy much lefs a Chriflian Boc^ 
 vine. 
 
 1 might here firfl:, go on to enquire, whether JofcpFs 
 above QoKclufion^ be j'^iil, from the FrcmJf'^s'^ but, as I 
 
 can't 
 
* ( 95 ) 
 
 c?n't oblerve, he hath much Regard to that, I (hatt 
 proceed by Way ot Retortion •, viz. returning the like 
 Argument, — that fo he and his Friends may confider, 
 whether they iijce to take, what they are lb forward to 
 give : and not only fo, but, that they may come to fee 
 how perfkxt^ and confufe^ they are, with refpeft to Bap^ 
 tifm\ notwithftanding,.they pretend fo much toVnity 
 of Sprit^ and Onenefs of Mind and Judgment •, even, lo 
 as to be all of one Mnd^ and all freaky write and witnefs 
 the fame Things — chat they 'are in ail their Ways^ Doc^ 
 trine and TraBice hut as one Man : — See James Jackfon^s 
 flrong Man artn^d, &c. p. 14. 1 fay, that notwithftand- 
 ing all thefe great Pretentions^ to Vnity^ arid Onenefs^ I 
 hope they may be brought to iee, that quite the con-, 
 trary, is the Truth of their Caie^ forafmuch, as it: 
 is really lb : as I trufl will appear, from the following 
 Quotations. 
 
 And firfl, with regard to the Commencement ^ of Sprit 
 i^aptifmy the enlightened De/i, in his Doclrine of Bap- 
 tifms, p. 8, 9. fays, " The Scripture faith, that Chrifi's 
 '* Baptifm was to follow John's^ and did not accompany 
 *' it at the fame Time, for Mat, iii. John faith, — / do 
 *^ haptiz^e you with Water^ hut he that comes after 7ney i, e. 
 *' in order of Time, — he SHALL baptize you. — Luke iii, 
 " —Which Places (fays he) plainly declare Chrifrs 
 " Baftifm did not go along with John^s^ but was to follow 
 " it ^ and that he was to baptize with the Spirit^ after 
 ^' John's Watcr-Baptifm had had it's fr-U Courfe^ to wit, 
 '' WHEN he was rifcn from the Veady and alcended 
 '• into Heaven." And Ipeaking in reference to^(^i; 
 1.4, ^.— fays, " Uaptifm with the Spirit vid^s NOT ful- 
 ^* filled, hut w^s/hortly to be fulfilled, as appears, -^^s 
 «* i. 4. 5."— and this was lulfilled at the Day of Pente- 
 c« coft'' — —P. 22,23, he plainly intimates/ that Spirit; 
 Baptilm began not till after the Afcenfton of Chrift. — 
 From hence it's evident, thatDe// concluded Spirit Bap- 
 tifin did not heginj till after our Lord's Afcenfion, ox 
 till the Day 6i: Fcn'jrof^ Afls :i — So Iike\^ife Lawfon^ 
 
 on 
 
(96) 
 
 on Baptifm,p. i o, i 1,40. where (ays he,— " after Chrift'^ 
 «* Alcenfion, Chrift's Baptifm fce^^;^."— And p. 45. to 
 the fame Purpofe. See alio p. 45, 52, 54. And j^. 
 Barclay^ Apology, p. 282. fpeaking in reference to j4&s 
 i. 4, 5. and of the Apoftles being baptited with Water', 
 fays, — " although they were formerly baptized with 
 <* the Baptifm of Water y yet NOT with that of Chrifl 
 " which they were to be baptizjed with;" So likewife, 
 Jofiah Martin's Appendix to the Great Cafe o^Tythes, p. 
 175. But Tho, Lancafter^ that late and noted Author, 
 m his True Spiritual Baptifm, &c. p. 69. fays,—" WE 
 *' in our Turn (fays he) do infift; upon it, that the puri- 
 ** fying Operation of the holy Spirit was, in the Days of 
 *^ Chrift's vifihle Jppearance, Baptifm with the Holy Ghoft, 
 •* as Well as after his Suffering, Relurreftion, and Afcen- 
 *^ (ion,"— he goes on feveral Pages to the fame Pur- 
 pofe, and p. 73. ha boldly lays, — " that the Believers 
 *' in Chrift were baptiz^edrnth the Holy Ghofi BEFORE 
 «' the Day of Pencicoft as well as after''' 
 
 !Now, from hence it's evident, that, Dell, Lawfovi^ 
 Barclay, and Martin, conclude, that what the New Tejla- 
 ment calls thg Baptifm of the Holy Ghoft, or that of the 
 Spirit, did ^OT comrienct till Pe;^tico/^ ; and that the 
 Dilciples Was NOT fo baptized, till that Tims. But, 
 Lancafter declares cjuite the contrary, as above. 
 
 Secondly, Tho. Lancafter, p. 23. fpeaking of the Com- 
 inijfion, lays, '* — Name or Tower, — are fynonymous, and 
 therefore the CommiJftOn, WE prelume is literal, not 
 
 " figurative''- So again, p. 25- and adds,— *^' neither 
 
 ^^ can what is literal he figurative to." — P. 41. he (peaks 
 expreOy to the fame Purpofe.- But, fays Joftah Mar- 
 tin, in his Appendix to the great Cafe of Tythes, p. 179. 
 that, ^^ it evidently appears by two of the Evangelifls, 
 « that Chrifl us'd the Word Baptifm in his laft Dif- 
 " coarfe, not in a liter alStn{t ot^ Water- Baptifm, but in 
 " z figurative Senfe, to denote the Power and Operation 
 
 *' of the Spirit." P. 180.— 'Tis (fays he) more 
 
 *' likely, that the ApoHlc? and Dikiples took thofe 
 
 " f ! Word?^ 
 
( 99 ) 
 
 ^' Word;?, not in a literal but figurative Sence, to dt^ 
 
 *^ note the Baptifm and Poirfr of the Spirit, ^^ 
 
 Thus, it's plain, that Lancafier, will have the Com- 
 mifton be underftood, to be liitral-^ not figurative. But 
 Martin^ he will have it quite the reverfe, viz., not in a 
 //f^r^/, but in a figurative Sence. 
 
 Thirdly^ Jofiah Martin, in the above-mentioned Book^' 
 p. 159. Ipeaking of the Sentiment of his Friends the 
 Quahrs, lays, " By the Baptifm of the Spirit, they urt- 
 *' derfland a wafhing, or purifying, of the Soul front 
 " evil Thoughts and vile Affeftions." — And faysjofepb 
 Befie, in his Arifwer to the Vicar, p. 280. — ^^ the pro- 
 ^' per Go/pel Senfe of Baptifm, is the wafhing or purifying 
 ** of the Heart, the mrging of the Confidence front dead 
 " Worhr 
 
 But, (ays, th^t Great Man of God and Prince in Ifraet^ 
 GEORGE FOX, (as William Pen is pleafed to call him) 
 in his Journal, p. 570. " that People muft repent 
 *' BEFORE they do believe^ and are haptiz^ed, and before 
 *^ they receive the Holy Ghoft,— they — muft be turned 
 " from Darknefs to the Light ofChrifl, ^nd from the Power 
 *^ of SMn unto God, BEFORE they do receive his holy 
 " Spirit, and Gofpel of Life and Salvation.'' 
 
 And IV. Wilkinfon, in his Anfwer to Jofiph Jenh^ 
 p. 39. lays,—" If 1 ihould endeavour to prove thac 
 '* any were baptiz^ed with the Holy Ghoft^ BEFORE their 
 ^^ Sins were wafi:^cd away, I fliouid argue againft my own 
 ^^ Judgment." 
 
 Here likewife, is a manifeft DifTerence, in that Mar-- 
 tin, and BtlJe, own and declare, that Spirit Baptifm, is a 
 wafjjlng and purifyirg of the Soul, from evil Thoughts,- 
 and vile Affe^lions •, and is thcpurging of the Confcience 
 from dead Works. But, Fox, and IVilkinfon, lay, that 
 Perlbns muft FIRST be turned from Darknefs to the Light 
 of Chrift, and from the Power of Satan unto God, — and 
 have their Sins wafhed away, BEFORE tliey receive tho 
 Holy Chr;}^ or Spint Baptifm, So tliar, what one calls 
 
( 98 ) 
 
 Spirit Baptifm^ muft take Place, before, what the other 
 calls fb, can be received. 
 
 And, I might thus go on, and obierve much more of 
 the lame Nature ; but here is enough, to fhew, that 
 Jofeph Befcy had no great Reafbn to argue, that becaufe 
 there is a Variety of Opinions about Water-Baptifm, that 
 therefore " it is not a DoBrine clearly revealed, much lefs 
 ** a Chriftian^s Duty?^ I fay, he had not much Reafon 
 fo to do, unlefs, he, and his Friends, in the Toint of 
 Baptifnty had been more unanimous themfelves : For not- 
 withftanding what J. Jadfon, was pleafed to fay, yet 
 it's evident, that the Quakers, are far from being ALL 
 of one Mind and Judgment ^ that they do not fpeak, write, 
 nor yet witnefs, the lame Thing ^ — tho' they pretend fo 
 to do ! 
 
 And, this will yet farther appear, by obferving their 
 Judgments, on lome particular Texts o^ Scripture-^ and 
 firfl, of the Co?nmi£ion, which Lancafter, (as before 
 obferved) underftands in a literal Sence, but Martin, in 
 a figurative Sence. 
 
 And, the Baptifm mentioned JBs ii. 38. Jofeph Bejje, 
 denies to be If^ater-Baptifrn'^'md fignifies, that it intends 
 THE — Converfion of the Soul to God. Exam, p. 1 2, 29, 30. 
 in which laft Page, he is very exprels, faying, ** 'tis 
 '^ evident that IVater^ Baptifm was KOT the Baptifm 
 '^ enjoined in this Te.xf." 
 
 But, Barclay y Apology, p. 295, and Pihe, on Baptifm, 
 p. 107. likewife, Tho. Ellwood, m his iacred Hlftory, 
 p. 502. thefe Quakers all allowed A[I:s ii. 38. to relate 
 to Water-Baptifm. And, the lail of thefe Authors, calls 
 it 'John's, Baptifm. 
 
 And farther, the like may be oblerved with relpeO: 
 to th^ Baptifm ok Paul, mentioned ^(^s ix. 17, 18. and 
 xxii. 16'. which Jofeph BejJe, will have be '* meant qf 
 *' hapti:iLing with the Holy Ghoft.'" p. 287- to the Fkar. 
 But, J. Tike^ declares it to be Water- Baptifm, as p. 90, 
 and exprefly lays *' ^^namas advifcd Paul to be baptiz.ed 
 
 ** therewith^' 
 
 Again, 
 
(.99) 
 
 Again, yofephBeJfe in his Exam. p. 25, 38. explains 
 j4{i^s xix. 5. to intend, the Baptifm of the Holy Ghofl. 
 But, Barclay^ in his Apology, p. 295. ranks it in among 
 other Texts^ as that which relates to Water- Baptifm, 
 And thus, 1 might farther go on, fhewing the Divifion^ 
 and apparent Contradi&ion^ there is among the Quakers j 
 and in particular, between Jofeph Beffe^ and his Friends : 
 So that, if what Tho, Lancajler^ fpeaking of the holy 
 Scriptures be true, who lays, p. 79- " wor doth the holy 
 *^ Spirit in this our Day reveal any Thing contradictory to 
 *' them\'^ I fay, if this be true, (which 1 think none will 
 deny) it's evident, that either Jofeph Befe^ or his Friends^ 
 was not in thefe things, led by the holy Spirit^ forafmuch 
 as they are in their declared Sentiments, lo dire^lly op- 
 pofite, to one another. 
 
 Laftly, I can't but obferve, that Jofeph Bejje, m his 
 Exam, &c. does often reprefent, IVater-Baptifm^ but as 
 a Carnal Ordinance^ and a Jewifj Rite or Ceremony^ there- 
 by infinuating, that it's a lifelefs Form^ and an empty 
 Shadow^ — when his Friend James Naylor^ in his Viece 
 called Milk for Babes ^ &c. p. 14. ipeaking of entering 
 
 into the Kingdom of Heaven^ fays, " ONLY he that 
 
 " hath been faithful in the Baptifm ofjohn^ to fulfil all 
 " Eighteoufnejs, Ihall receive Povrer to prefs into the 
 " Kingdom.'^' — and in his Love to the Loft ^ &c. p. 53, 
 Ipeaking of the Apoftles baptidng with IVater fays,- 
 •' Neither did they lay it upon all, as of ahfolute Neceffi- 
 " tyy but as they law it ufefiil , and could forbear, in 
 l[ cafe IT was idolized^' 
 
 Now, it's plain, i^ Nayloy^s Words are to be regard- 
 ed*, that the infpiredApoftks^ did hy H^'ater- Baptifm hov^- 
 ever upon fbme, as of ahfolute Necejfity^"- tho' chey could 
 forbear, in cafe it was idoliz^ed : which alfo, I think fair- 
 ly implies^ that where the Apofiles, did not fee it ido^ 
 liz^edj they could not forbear, but laid it on Perions, 
 m of abjolute Neccjrtty^ nay, and as above, according to 
 Nailory Faithfulnefs. in the Baptifm of "John, (which was 
 Water- Baptifm, a^" ws'l as in other Things ^ is mrefJarv: 
 
 N 2 " ' " m 
 
( 100 ) 
 
 in order to enter into the Kimdom of Heaven I But, how 
 here to reconcile Jofefhy and James, 1 leave.- 
 
 However, if againft this Inference, it Ihould be objec* 
 ted, that James Nuylor, did not fo intend it, and that 
 another Sence may be gathered from other Parts of his 
 iWork^-^-I anfwer,*That whether he fo intended it^ or 
 not, it's plain, that the above Inference, is a rnoft natural 
 and mjlrained Sence of his Words: And if he has laid 
 any thing cllewhere, which contradids this, ic fheweth, 
 that he was not always dilated by the Spirit ofjruth-^ 
 or, that he was a carelels Writer^ and alio, that it's the 
 mor^ like, the Quakers Scheme, in the Point oi' Ba^^ 
 tifm-j which is, as hath been obferved, muchconfujedy 
 gnd contrddiBory, 
 
 Thus, I have in all Plainnefs, gone through what I at 
 prefent defign \ and truil that 1 have anfwer'd to the title 
 Page, viz. have vindicated Water- Ba^tifm, by the Do&rine^ 
 and Practice of the infpircd Jpojlles -^ and from the Tejlimo- 
 ries, of feveral of the rnoft eminent Authors, of the People 
 C2\VdiQiiahrs\ — whofe Words (viz^.xht Qtiakers) I have 
 made life of in order to gain their Attentions; well 
 knowings they pay a high Regard to xh^K Writings \ and 
 1 hope, that if they will read impartially, they may (or 
 ^t leail Ibme of them) come to fee, noc only, the /k- 
 conftfter.cy of their Scheme, in this FOIISIT \ but alfo, 
 that Water-^aptifm is an Ordinance of the Gof^el Church. 
 
 To conclude, / heartily xpiflo, that the Quakers, who 
 pretend (b much to a divine fuptr natural Light ^— would 
 ierioully confider, that, thele afore-mentioned /wcoi^/J/fw- 
 cies, and ContradiBiors, with refpecl: to the Ba^tijm. of 
 IVatcr'^ and that of the Spirit, are not of God ^— and there-* 
 fore^ that either Jofeph Bcfe, or his Friends, were in their 
 Writings, led by the Sprit of Error : Forafmuch, as they 
 therein do manifeilly, not only contradict one another ^ 
 but alio the Scriptures of Truth. 
 
 And, I alfp defire, that they would duly refle£l, on 
 
 Y^]\?x R. Barclay, in his Apolo^^y, printed in the Year 
 
 ?^tS, P' Si. ftcaking concernipg tlie Scriftuycs laith, 
 
 ^ • • ' • '' Ws 
 
( loi ) 
 
 " We do look upon THEM as the OKLY fit outward 
 *' j^W^e of Controverfies among ChrijlianSy and that what- 
 " foever Do^irine is contrary unto their Tejlimony, may 
 
 *' jiiftly be reje£led as falfe. We (hall alio be very 
 
 ** willing (fays he) to admit it, as a po/^t/z/e certain ^^xzm, 
 *' That whatfoever any do^ pretending to the Spirit, which is 
 " contrary to the Scriptures ^ be accounted and reckoned a De- 
 " lufion of the Devii:' 
 
 I lay, I defire they would reflet, and confideryer/ot^,'?/, 
 on thefe Things ;> — for the above-mentioned Contra- 
 di3ions, are FACTS j which cannot be denied. And, 
 I intreat them, that they would tor the future, be more 
 careful, leaffc they ihould be found, to father their own 
 contradi^ory Notions, upon the unerring Spirit of God. 
 
 If againft what I have offered, Joftph Beffe fhould have 
 ought to fay, — I truft, that I fhall not be unwilling to 
 attend thereto *, whether, it be from the Pre/}, or other- 
 wife. And tho' he hath with refpe^l to this Controverfy, 
 reprefented me in his Exam, p. 41. as a PerfonyWhom hs 
 and his Friends, ' ' ejleem altogether U77qualified for that Pur- 
 <« pofe : " 
 
 Yet, I would not have him fuppofe, that I am thus to 
 be frighten'd,— from endeavouring, to defend th^Trutb, 
 according to the Abilities received : But am willing, as 
 Occalion may require, farther to enter the Lift with 
 him, in this Affiir ^ concluding,— that it's not impof- 
 fible for fuch, who may be — efteemedweal andfocUJh, to 
 confound the conceited, and imaginary Wi]}, For, as 
 ^ofeph Eejjc himfelt fays,— fo I believe, that,—'' Men 
 " of Learning, are but Men^ and as fuhjeB toBror as other s^, 
 *' it may happen, and has often bappersdy that they may ml]" 
 ^* ap^ly thetr Talents in defending tl.eir own Miftahs^ and 
 ^^ fo difJjonoi^r themfelves,^' — Which to me>appears to be 
 Jofeph^s Cafe, An Infbance of which, in the Room of 
 many more, — is, in that Jofeph denies the Ba^tifm mtn- 
 tionedy^^5 ii. 38. to intend Water-Baptilm^ and infinu- 
 ates, Exam, p. 30. that fo to underfland it, is Arrogancyy 
 znd Prefumption -^ and not only fb^ buc is ?ArQ ajjumi'ng 
 
 a 
 
( io:i ) 
 
 rt T'orver to jet ande the Gof^cl Duty ofConverfion of the Hearty 
 —when his OWN Friends, Barclay^ Fikc^ and Ellwoody 
 as is before ilicwn, ovvn'd, and declared, that it is 
 IVater-Baptifin tiiere inrcnded : and therefore, if fo to 
 imderftimd it, is alfwning the above-mentioned Power, 
 — and is An'OgaViCy^ and Prefumption *, who more djjum^ 
 iv^g^ — arrogant^ and prcfujnptuouSy than were thefc, his 
 three Friends ? But, as thefe three Quahrs^ were all 
 tmirevitj and two of them learned Perfons*, 1 fay, if their 
 Judgments are to be regarded, — then it's evident, that, 
 tho' Joftph, is a Perfon of /.e^r;izV^ * yet it's plain, that 
 he is as fubjc3 to Error as others *, and alfb, that it has fo 
 happened^ that he mifappUes his Talents^ in defending his 
 own Aftfakes. — Which, whether it: be to his Honour ^ or 
 Di/Jdor,oury 1 leave for him to confider. 
 
 And, as he ends his Preface, to his Edinhurgh Anta- 
 g^nifc, fo with little Variation, will I here conclude this, 
 -—that, '* / have adz>cntur''d to oppofe my Thoughts to htSy 
 * * not without Hope^ that the fuperior Force of Scripture and 
 ^^ EcafoYiy both which I thijtk to he on my Side, 7) i ay gradually 
 '' dilpd the Mifls o/ Enthwfiafm, and illmmnate the Afinds 
 ^"^ of lome to the Acknowledgment and Obedience of the 
 
 '' rruth:' 
 
 H 
 
 P S T S C R I P T. 
 
 Avinp, lome Room left, anJ beinp; wiiHno;, to be as 
 uletul as polijble •, I ihall fill up ciiis Page, in fuch 
 a Manner, as I hope, will in ibmewhat anfwer chat End. 
 
 Jofeph Bejfe in his Lk fence of Qu.akcYifm^ p. 268. cites 
 liis Frtcnd R* Claridge^ ^'^ying, " John's Baptijm was with 
 '' Watery and was a Type or Figure. Chnfl's Baptifrn is 
 *' with the Holy Ghofl^ and is the Antitype or Thing figur''d.^'' 
 
 And, I find the Qtiakers in general allow, that Watcr^ 
 Bo.pttfni^ was in Force throughout John's Miniftry^ (as 
 tUey are plea fed to phrafs it) or according to many 01 
 thyuiy 'ciil Penticojh 
 
 ^^0W, 
 
( X23 ) 
 
 Kow, that they may come to fee the ahfurd Confe-. 
 qucnce of their Notions *, or the CoYifufion^ and Inconfif" 
 teyicy^ there is among them\ I defire it may be obferved, 
 that J?. Be^e in his Examination of a late Findication^ &c. 
 p. 47. argues, that Chrifi baptized with the Spirity be- 
 fore, or at Icaft, from the Time of his being baptiz.€d 
 of John, and for Proof, cites the Words of John to our 
 Lord, Mat. iii. 14. — / had need to be baptiz^ed of thce^-^ 
 and alio, John i. 33. And to the fame Purpole, (peaks 
 The, Lancafter, p. 69. 73. So that according to thefe 
 Quakers^ it's evident, that Water -Eaptifmy v^hich thev 
 call the Tyfe-^ was in Force, together with Spirit- Baptifm'^ 
 which by them^ is alfo call'd, the jintitype : The abiurd 
 Confequence of which, according to R Claridge^ as 
 cited by J. Beffey m his Defence of Q^uahrifm^ p. is-j. is, 
 
 '^ fo /e^ t^/> the firfi Tabernacle again with it's Figures^ 
 
 *^ and to juftify the Jtm in their Meats and Drinks, and 
 ** divers Waliiings."— 
 
 Now, the only Way that I know of, for the Qualers 
 to clear themfelves, from this Abftirdicy, — is, for them 
 openly to renounce their Notion^ odVater-Baptifm, being 
 a Type or Figure of' Spirit Baptifin ^ and alio, to acknow- 
 ledge, that both Baptifms may without 2iny Jb/urdity^ at. 
 leaft on that Account, be in Force together. Which, if 
 duly confider'd, I hope may, by the Bleffing 01 God^ be a 
 pnparatory Means, to their Reception of the TRUTH. 
 
 D.D. 
 FINIS. 
 
 ERRATA. 
 
 IN Page 12, Line 2, for Water-Baptifms, read, Water-Baptifm. 
 p. 19, 1. 27, for Apoftles, read, Apoftle's. p. 21, ]. ;^i. for 
 Apoftles, read, Apoftle. 1. ^z, for, this Baprifm, read, the Bap« 
 tifm. p. 23, ]. 3?, for p. 21, read, p. 25. p. 32. 1. 31, for Ver, 
 read. Vol. p. 52, 1. i^, for AOsii.3, read, Afts vlli. 3, p. ?j., 
 ]. I, for Ver. read, Vol. p. 62, 1 35", for ApoftJes, read Apoi^ie. 
 p. 67, 1. 20, for Corneks, read, Cornelitis. And fo p. 68, J. ir, 
 p. 72, I. 10, fo<r Comrnhi't'ton, read, CovtmiJJicn. p. 83, 1. i, for 
 may, read, mighr ; and for mere, read meer. And 1, 13, f,: 
 m-ne. read. rne«C> p. 87? ^ -o. ifter vvlrh, a Id, cue. 
 
The following Treatifes are wrote by the Author Daniel 
 Do BEL, and fold at his Houfe in Cranbrook j and at the 
 Printing Office in Canterbury. 
 
 I. qr^HE Seventh-Day SABBATH not Obligatorj^ on Chrlf- 
 I tians. In Five Pares. Together with a particular Exa- 
 mination of fome Paflages in a Book, entitled, Tloe Mcient and 
 Homurahle Way. And fome Remarks of a Piece, entitled, the 
 Seventh-Day Sabbath farther Vindicated. And another entitled, y^Sf«w^ 
 Defence. 
 
 II. An APPENDIX, containing Answers to Objections^, 
 and likewife an Examination of Mr. Elwall's Chief Argument 
 for the Continuation of the Seventh-Day Sabbath. Alfo, a particular 
 Vindication of Christians obfervlng the Flrjl Day for Publick 
 miJjfembly Worjhlp, And that from the Ne w Te s T a m e n t , and 
 the following Aitiqti'ties oi the Church. 
 
 in. The PLEA for Infants Baptifm, IMPLEADED: or, 
 REMARKS on a Piece, intitled, J PLEA fir INFANTS : or, 
 
 The Scripture DoBrine of Wa ter Baptism Stated. 
 
 IV. INFANTS Sprinkling, an Unfcriptural Dcflrine ; or, 
 A Defence of fome former Remarks on a Piece entitled ^ Plea 
 for Infants — Baptifm : And an Answer to a late Pamphlet, 
 caird, A farther DEFENCE— Wherein the Author's Self-contra- 
 diftlon, Fallacy, and Inconclufivenefs, is made manifeft ; toge- 
 ther with the Weaknefs of his Argument for Infant-Baptifm ; 
 and in particular, that from the Miracles of Chrift. — -The Com- 
 midion of Chrift the Authority for Chriillan Baptifm, — Infants 
 excluded, by Order of the Commiflion, — Adult Baptizers Senfe 
 of Rom, vi. 3, 4. Col. ii. 12. ftill wtable by them. To which is 
 added, fome farther Remarks on the Plea. — -And on the Defence 
 thereof ; and in particular, on the Author's Argument for In- 
 fants being the proper Subje£ls of Baptifm, on account of Chrift's 
 walhing his Difclples Feet ; they being ignorant of His Defign 
 and Intention therein — With Reflexions thereon, and Applica- 
 tion thereof, to the Author of x.\\Q,Plea. 
 
 V. Watfr Baptism an Ordinance of the Gofpel-Church, 
 manifelled, by the Doftrine and Praftice of the infpired Apoftles. 
 In a SERMON, preached on the Words of our Lord, Luke xxiv. 
 4.9. Now publiflied, and humbly ofFer'd, to the ferious Confi- 
 deration oi xhz ReligiouT People, calPd Quakers. To which is 
 added, an Occafional PREFACE to the Reader. 
 
 VI. An Occasional Letter, ofFer'd to the ferious Confi- 
 deration of the People calPd Quakers, and in particular to Mr. 
 Joseph B^sse, who calls hiinfeif One of them. 
 
Primitive Chriftianity 
 
 PROPOUNDED: 
 
 OR, AN 
 
 ESSAY 
 
 To REVIVE the 
 
 Antient MODE or MANNER 
 O F 
 
 PREACHING the GOSPEL. 
 
 liuniibly offered to the Confideration of all profefled 
 Chriftians ; but more efpecialiy to the People 
 called Baptists. A 
 
 ■ - -> /, — ^ ^ 
 
 Prote all Things : Holdfaji that ^which is gcod. i Theff. v. 21, 
 
 5o [peak ye, and fo do, as they that Jh all le judged by the Lan>j of 
 Liberty. James ii. 12. 
 
 :" — 7"~ ~ 
 
 By DyDOB EL, at Cranhrook in Kent, 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 ^Printed for Joseph Edwards, and fold by him at Chiphead, and 
 by J. VVaugh and W. Fenner in Lombard-Street; S. 
 Crouder and H. Wgodgate in Pafer-nc/ter-Roav ; Mef- 
 fieurs William and John Flacton Bookfellers in C«;/- 
 terbury; V/iLLiAM Merger at Maidjione •, Jacob Dob el at' 
 Headcm-n-, and by the Author at Cr^»^;wi. ^lyS' 
 

[ ili ] 
 
 Christian Reader, 
 
 IT appears very ftrange to me, that amongft 
 the many Books which daily come from the 
 Prefs, very few, if any, has appeared in 
 Favour of the primitive Mode of preaching the 
 Gcfpehy when with refpedl to other Parts of 
 Chriftianity, there hath not wanted Advocates 
 to (land up for t\\Q primitive PraBice, and to de- 
 ted and oppofe Corruptions of every kind: I fay 
 it is ftrange to me, efpecially when I confider, 
 that the Ordinance oi preaching the Gofpel is as 
 folemn^ weighty y and ufeful an Appointment^ as 
 any injoined or authorifed by our Lord j and 
 therefore I think ought as ftridlly, and as rehgi- 
 oufly to be obferved, as any other Inftitutioa of 
 His. 
 
 I have indeed lately feen a Fiece^ intituled, 
 "Reading no preaching ; wherein the Author hath 
 done confiderable Service in deteding the ?nodern 
 Innovation \ but then it appears to me, that he 
 mi [lakes the true Gofpel Scheme of preaching the 
 Word; forafmuch as he faith, *' A Perfon who 
 " cannot regularly, judicioufly, and pioufly 
 A 2 ** fpeak 
 
[ iv ] 
 
 ^' ipeak for Half an Hour, ought never, in my 
 
 '^ Opinion, ta preach." But herein I muft 
 
 take the Liberty to differ from him, and do con- 
 clude, that a Perfon who can tlms fpeak for a 
 quarter of an Hour, may, and ought fo to do, 
 that fo he xnzy fulfil the Miniftry which he hath 
 received in the Lord. And this Procedure is 
 agreeable to the different Degree of Abilities 
 beftowed on different Perfons, and alfo to the 
 Sermons recorded in Holy Writ, 
 
 There are likewife others, v/ho give fome 
 {hort Hints with refpedl to their Sentiments 
 in this Cafej but what may be the Caufe that 
 they only do fo, I can't well account for, ex- 
 cept Jt be, that they fear Cbriftians will not 
 bear to be told plainly; or if they fhould do fo, 
 they might then perhaps condemn their own 
 Pradtice. However, be that as it will, I have, 
 in the following Pages, been open and free ; 
 and as it is become a ferious Point with me, 
 I defire the Reader to perufe it with Care and 
 Attention, jorned with Charity, and if it fhould 
 appear to him that I am in an Error, I defire 
 that the fame may, in a friendly Manner^ be 
 communicated to me 5 for I have no defire to 
 htfingular for the fake of Singularity, but fliould 
 much rather it were otherwife, and that I could 
 concur with the many, provided it was in a 
 Caufe that is juftifiable. 
 
 D. D. 
 
Primitive Chriftiamty 
 
 PROPOUNDED, &>€. 
 
 K i\. T preaching the Gofpel is an Ordi- 
 nance of Chrifl, I prefume no Chrifli- 
 an will deny -, and I think that a right 
 Adrriniftration thereof ought as ftrid- 
 Jy to be regarded as any other Ap- 
 pointment of his : For as Preaching is the ordinary 
 Way appointed by God for the Propagation of 
 the Gofpel, the Conviction of Sinners, and the Efta- 
 bUfnment of Saints, I think we may, and ought to 
 conckide, that Preaching is the mod fuitable and 
 proper Method to anfwer thofe great and impor- 
 tant Ends •, and therefore I fay, a ilrict Regard 
 to the Original Plan^ or 'Manner of Performance 
 of this Duty, ought as ftridly as polTible to be 
 adhered to, as any other Ordinance of our Lord. 
 Therefore to alter, or change the Manner of 
 Adminiftration of this Service, from the primitive 
 Mode, is, fo far as the Alteration extends, a 
 fetting up the Inventions of Men inftead of the 
 
 Gofpel 
 
( 6 ) 
 Gofpel of Chrifl, which no Plea or Pretence 
 whatfoever can juftify ; for what can juftify the in- 
 troducing a modern Invention of adminiilring a fa- 
 cred and divine Ordinance ? 
 
 And in this Cafe I think every Minifter^ nay, 
 every Chriftian^ ought to be very far from counte- 
 nancing fuch a Procedure -, on the contrary, his Duty 
 to God, and his i^llegiance to Chrift, ihouid oblige 
 him to bear a faithful Teftimony againft any Inno- 
 vations in this Point, as well as againft any Corrup- 
 tions in another; and if we are not uniform, how 
 can we argue with any profefTed Chriftians for a 
 right and due Manner of adminiflring any other Or- 
 dinance,while we ourfelves are corrupt in this? For I 
 htWtVQ^^sMr.G.Killingzvorthi'^iiih^ that '' Nothing 
 '' done as an A61 of Religion can be acceptable to 
 " God, but what is done according to his Appoint- 
 " ment ;" Supplement P. 19. which, if true, as I 
 think it is, lliews ihe great Importance and Regard 
 that Chriftians (liould have to a due and right M2»- 
 ;zfrof adminiilring the Word. 
 
 Having thus laid before you fomewhat of the 
 Importance of the Ordinance of Preachings and of 
 being uniform and confiftent Chriftians, I will go 
 on and fhew wherein it appears that Reading is 
 not Preachings both according to the Nature of 
 Things, and from the Old and New Tefiarnent^ and 
 therefore, confequently, is nothing lefs than an In- 
 vention of Men, and, as fuch, is an Innovation 
 and Corruption of thaty^^rrt'^ and divine Ordinance 
 of Chrift. 
 
 And firft as to Readings PFilfons in his Chrift"ian 
 Dio^ionary, tells us, that to read^ is " to recite di- 
 " ftindly the Syllables and Words of Scripture." 
 Again, " Reading is nothing elfe but fuch a Recital 
 '' and fpeaking forth the Letters and Syllables** 
 
 And 
 
( 7 ) 
 And Byche fays, to read is " to exprefs in proper 
 " Words any Things Matter, or Difcourfe that is 
 " written^ engraved, or printed :'' And farther, that 
 *' a Reader is any one that reads either his own or 
 *' another's Works." — —And agreeable to this we 
 are told, that Mofes took the Book of the Covenant y 
 and read in the Audience of all the People^ not preach- 
 ed to all the People ; no. And again, Neh. viii. 8, 
 So they read in the -Book of the Law of God dijiinBly^ 
 'and gave the Serif e^ and caufed them to tinderjland the 
 Reading. From hence it is evident, that Reading is 
 here dillinguifhed from giving the Senfe, or Preach- 
 mg', for it was the written Law that was read, but 
 the Sen fe thereof they gave according to their Abi- 
 lities, endeavouring th-ereby to make the People 
 
 iinderficind the Meaning. Again, Lukeiv, i6, 
 
 2 1. it is faid that our Lord "juent into the Syna- 
 gogue on the Sabbath Day^ and flood up for to read\ 
 and there was delivered unto him the Book of the Prophet 
 Efaias., and he read therein^ as ver. i8, 19. but ver, 
 21, 22. we are told that he began to fay unto them^ 
 ms Bay is this Scripture fulfilled in your Ears, And 
 all bare him witnefs^ and wondered at the gracious 
 Wo) ds whichproceeded out of his Mouth. Here likewife 
 Reading and Preaching is mentioned as two diflindt 
 Exerc fes : In the firft our Lord exprefle.d the writ- 
 ten Words of the Prophet ^ but the gracious Words 
 which proceeded out of his Mouth., was the unwritten 
 Senfe, or Application of the Prophet'' s Doftrine to 
 the People : So that from hence it is evident, as one 
 obferves, that Reading and Preaching are two diffe- 
 rent Exercifes ; " for Reading (fays he) is perform- 
 " ed by Importation of a Flux of Images in the 
 
 *^ Mind, by the Ufe of the Eyes on Charac- 
 
 '' ters^ whereby certain Ideas are conceived or 
 t^ formed there, and expreiTed by the Tongue.'* 
 
 And 
 
( 8 ) 
 
 And againft this I fuppofe none will objecl", but 
 allow, that Reading proceeds from the Senfes being 
 immediately exercifed on fome outward or external 
 Things, which Things are the Source of that im- 
 mediate Exercife : And this I think is plain to 
 every one, boih from the Nature of Things, 
 and from the conftant Ufe of the Word, in the Old 
 and New Teftament, that it would be trifling far- 
 ther to enlarge on this Head ; fo that for a Perfon 
 to read what himself or another hath wrote^ is 
 therein not a Preacher^ but a Reader, 
 
 But then, fecondly, to preachy or Preaching, 
 when ufed with refped to the Miniilration of the 
 Gofpel, are fynonymous, or one with teaching^fpeak- 
 ing and propbecying^ as i Cor, xiv. 3, ^c. and thefe, 
 and the like Expreffions in Holy Writ, convey a 
 quite different Idea from Reading -, for v/hen the for- 
 mer "Terms are literally ufed in Scripture, they are 
 never to be underfl:ood to intend Reading, but al- 
 ways figniFy a different Mode or Manner of deliver- 
 ing the Will of God : And this is plain from the 
 Nature of the Exercife itfeif \ for Preaching, in the 
 New Tejiament Senfe, is always to be underflood a 
 Perfon uttering Words according to his Ability, or 
 as his Judgment regulates the Matter in his Mind 
 which he is delivering, agreeable as our Lord 
 faith, Out of the Abundance of the Heart the Mouth 
 fpeaketh. Mat. xii. ^4. And this Way oi /peaking 
 or preaching to Perfons from the Abundance oj the 
 Heart, or Store of the Mind, according to theOcca- 
 fion, and prefent Frame of the Soul, is the natural 
 Mode, or Way of Addrcfs to Mankind, which God 
 hath implanted in our very Make and Conflitution, 
 when Pleading is but an improper, or artificial one. 
 And agreeable to the former, we find our Lord 
 commanded his Difciples to preach the Gofpel to every 
 
 Creature^ 
 
( 9 ) 
 
 Creature^ or to teach all Nations ; and accordingly 
 they went on, beginning at Jerufakm : Thus St, 
 Peter preached on the Day of Pentecojly as A5fs ii. 
 and likewife Philips we are told, went down to the 
 City of Samaria, and preached Chrifi unto them, A5ls 
 viii. 5. which is explained Verfe the 12th, by Phi- 
 lifs preaching the '■Things concerning the Kingdom of 
 Cod, and the Name of Jeftis Chrifi, as he did to the 
 
 Eunuch^ when he opened his Mouth, and preached 
 
 to him Jefus : And in like manner did the Apoftle 
 Paul, A5ls xvii. 2,3. And herein they followed the 
 Example of their Lord, of whom it is faid, that he 
 went throughout every City and Village, preaching and 
 fhewing the glad Tidings of the Kingdom of God, Luke 
 viii. I. I fay herein they followed their Mafter; 
 but fure none will fuppofe that either of them pulled 
 Notes out of their Pockets, and read to the People, 
 but rather that they preached Chrifi and his Kingdom^ 
 according to their Abilities and Gifts received,which 
 Gifts received were for the Work of the Miniflry^ 
 and for the edifying of the Body of Chrifi -, and being 
 thus qualified and furniflied of God, it was their 
 incumbent Duty to take heed thereto, that they did 
 fulfil the Minifiry which they had received in the Lord, 
 even as good Stewards of the manifold Grace of God. 
 
 Again, Preaching, ^c. is a publifhing, by intel- 
 ligible Words, thofe religious Sentiments, or Ideas, 
 which, agreeable to the Occaiion, does arife in the 
 Mind, by the Exercife of the Faculties of the Soul, 
 and the Gift of God, and are ranged in Order, or 
 regulated by the Judgment of him that fpeaketh ; 
 fo that as a certain Auihor faith. Preaching is done 
 " by Exportation of a Train of Ideas, picked up by the 
 *' Judgment immediately from the whole SouL'^ 
 Which Ideas do not arife from a View of Charac- 
 ters, but flow from an internal Caufe, as the 
 
 B Spring 
 
( 10 ) 
 
 Spring or Source of that immediate Exercife : 
 And hence it is evident that Reading and Preaching 
 are two different Kind of Exercifes, and doalfo con- 
 vey two diflindl Ideas, proceeding from two dif- 
 ferent Caufes, viz. ont external, tht oxhtx internal-, 
 which may alfo be fomewhat farther illuftrated, by 
 viewing in our Minds the different Employment 
 that there is in inditing and writing a Letter, to what 
 there is in tranfcribing only. 
 
 And here I will give a Place to the Words ofl'bo, 
 Grantbam,when he fays, " He then that ftudies to — 
 *' Preach rightly doth labour only to have a due un- 
 *' derltanding of the Will of God, and of the Nature 
 *' of that Service ; to have a gracious Senfe thereof 
 " upon his Heart ; to exprefs faithfully the — Mind 
 " of God to the People ; to fuit the Matter — to the 
 " People's Capacity in Language and Order moft fit 
 *' for Edification, and to leave the Enlargement in the 
 *' Duty to the immediate Afliftance of God's Spi- 
 *' rit, which is given to his Minifters to help their 
 " Infirmities ; and they have alfo the Holy Scrip- 
 *' tures, which doth furni/h them thoroughly to every 
 " good Work," Book II. P. 80. And again, in 
 the fame Page, he declares. That, '' to compofe 
 *' Sermons in writing, and fo read them to the 
 *' People, is not Preaching, and therefore not to be 
 *' ufed by the Minifter of Chrift under the Notion 
 ** of that Service." And herein ouv worthy Friend 
 hath fully exprefled my Sentiment in this Point ; 
 all which appears to me to be agreeable to the New 
 J'eftament, and the Practice of the primitive Churchy 
 and alfo to Dyche, in his EngUJh Dicflionary, who 
 fays, " A i^^-^^^^r is any one who r^^ij either his own, 
 *' or another's Works :" And to/F/7/2?«,wholikewife 
 tells us, Reading is IMPROPERLY called Preaching; 
 and therefore to pretend and argue that Reading vs 
 
 Preaching 
 
r II ) 
 
 Preaching In the proper and Gofpel Senfe, is to en- 
 deavour to blend and confound together as one, 
 what God in his Word and Nature hath made two ; 
 and as Reading is not Preachings and as Preaching 
 is an Ordinance of God, to fubltitute Reading in 
 the Room or Stead of Preaching is manifeftly to 
 change or make void God's own Ordinance, and 
 to eftabUfh and fet up the Cujiom and Tradition of 
 Men in its ftead, which aJl profefTed Minifters of 
 the Gofpel would do well to confider : For (hould 
 they be asked another Day, by what Authority, or 
 on what Account they did thefe Things, can it be 
 fuppofed it would be fufficient to plead Cuftom, 
 and the pleafing of a polite Age ? no certainly, that 
 will not excufe \ for to fuppofe this, or the like will 
 do, is to argue, that the Appointments of Chrift may 
 be altered and difpenfed with to pleafe the Humours 
 of Men, and if this be once admitted, we may foon 
 bid adieu to revealed Religion, or Chriftianity 
 itfelf. 
 
 And farther,as Preaching is an Ordinance of God, 
 it is but reafonable to conclude that he will afford 
 fufficient Means to furnifh fuch as he fliall fee 
 meet to employ in that Work ; for to fuppofe 
 otherwife would refle6l on theWifdom and Goodnefs 
 of God : And though Perfons may not in this Age 
 of Chriftianity have fo large a Gift in fome refpeds 
 for the Work of the Minifiry\ as the ApoRles had, 
 yet I think we may fafely conclude, that as the Work 
 of the Minifiry is to continue, as well as other Or- 
 dinances, as Mat. xxviii. 19, 20. Almighty God, 
 who is the fame yefterday, to-day, and forever, 
 will not fail of his Promife made to the Church by 
 his Son, of being with them to the End of the Worlds 
 or for ever, ^ohn xiv. 16. even o{ giving Gifts to 
 Men^ for tht perfe^ing of the Saints^ and d\'[oforthe 
 
 B 2 JVork 
 
( 12 ) 
 
 Work of the Miniftry ; and therefore if thefe Gifts 
 are not fo vifible as we could widi for or expedl, I 
 conclude that the Caufe is not in God, but in pro- 
 fefTed Chrifti.ins, in that there is not in them that 
 earned Defire and waiting on God (or themj as there 
 ought to be, agreeable to MaL ix. 28. neither doth 
 there appear fuch a fuitable Difpofition of Mind in 
 the Minifiers nor People to depend and reft fatisiied 
 on the Gift God is pleafed to beftow ; but there 
 feems rather to be a kind of Diftruft and Diflike ; 
 Diftruft in the Minifters, as though the Gift of God 
 was not ft( fit i en t ', and Didike in private Chriftians, 
 that they are not fatisfied with the plain, fimple 
 preaching the Gofpel, but look more at what is call- 
 ed Order, fine Language, Method and Style, than at 
 the plain Go(pc\-Afethod of adminiftring the Word^ 
 in whom the Prophecy of the Apoftle in part is ful- 
 filled, when he lays, the Time ijoill ccme when they 
 
 will heap to themfehes Teachers, having itching EarSy 
 and thele, faid St, Paul, fhall turn away their Ears 
 
 from the Truths which likewile in fome Meafure 
 
 is come to pafs in our Days, in that Error called 
 Catholick Communion, which of late hath been pub- 
 lickly pleaded for, and that by an eminent reading 
 Preacher (if that can poffibly be) who argues for 
 univ erf al Communion of all profefied Chriftians, whe- 
 ther truly baptized or not, tho' he allows none were 
 admitted to Communion in the primitive Church, but 
 fuch as had been regularly baptized : And indeed I 
 do not fee what fliould hinder him, and fuch as he, 
 from receiving a written form of Prayer, nay of not 
 embracing the greateu Part of the eftabliftied Litur- 
 gy ', for the fame Argument in kind, that is 
 
 made ufe of to juftify one, is equally fufficient to 
 juftify the other ; for there is no Precept nor Pre- 
 cedent for either, (fave our Lord's Prayer) in all the 
 
 New 
 
( 13 ) 
 New Tedament, and therefore as there is no divine 
 Warrant for it, it flands entirely on human Appro- 
 bation, and becomes feafible by Cuflom : And by 
 the fame Authority we may gradually introduce 
 many errors of the Church of Rome ; for what 
 fhould hinder v;hen VvC are not for fticking clofe to 
 the Rule of God's PFord^hut do in fome Things take 
 the Liberty to deviate therefrom ; I fay, what 
 Ihould hinder us from giving into many other Cor- 
 ruptions, whenever they attain amongft Men the 
 Name of good Order, honourable, &c, or that may 
 be approved and agreeable to the Tafte oi the poIitCy 
 and the unthinking Fart of Mankind. 
 
 Again, as it was by the Gifts of Nature^ and of 
 Grace^ that Perfons v/ere qualified for preaching in 
 iht primitive Time ^ fo I humbly conceive it ought 
 ftill to be carried on according to the Abilities God 
 doth give, in the Ufe of the outward Means of his 
 Grace afforded, viz. "^the Scriptures of the Pro- 
 phets, and the New Tefbament, which by Minifiiers 
 is to be read, and carefully meditated and fiiidied^ 
 that fo they may, by the Gifts received, have the 
 Dodlrine of Chrift: dwell richly in them, and thereby 
 be able, as Occafion may require, to preach the 
 Word both to the Church and World, building up 
 the Believers in the Faith, and enlightening dark 
 Minds, to the Glory of God, and the good of Souls. 
 And as one obferves, This Gift is fometimes conferred 
 on fuch who otherwife, than in the minijtring of the 
 tVord, have no Capacity more than others \ 7iay, come 
 far fhort in their Abilities in other Refpe5is than many 
 of their Brethren, who, notwithftanding^their fupe- 
 rior Abilities, have not that publick Spirit, Enlargcdnefs 
 of Heart, and Utterance^ which is neceffary for a Mini- 
 fier of the GofpeL 
 
 And 
 
( 14 ) 
 
 And I may alfo farther add, that it hath fome- 
 times pleafed God in his Wifdom and Goodnefs to 
 qualify poor labouring Men, and fuch who were, 
 and fome who are deilitute of human Learning, to 
 be very ufeful in the minifterial Employment j 
 fo that according to Sl Paul^God therein manifefled 
 his Wifdom and Power; and agreeable to the 
 Prophet, that Out of the Mouths of Babes and Suck- 
 lings God ordaineth Strength. From all which I con- 
 clude, agreeable as before obferved, that Minifters 
 fhould preach according to their Gifts and Ability 
 received \ and in order ufefully fo to do, it is meet 
 that they apply themfelves, in the Exercife of their 
 G///, to the Study of the Doolrtne of Chrijl and his 
 Apftles ', endeavouring and praying that they may 
 have a due underftanding of the Will of God there- 
 in, and may be capable to exprefs the fame accord- 
 ing to the Enlargement of their Hearts in the Time 
 of Adion, as may be to the Inftruclion^ Edification^ 
 Exhortation^ and Comfort of fhem that attend their 
 Miniftrations. And this agrees with Bifhop Burnet^ 
 who fays, " If a Man can carry on this Method, 
 " and by much Meditation and Prayer draw down 
 *' divine Influences, which are always to he expe£fed^ 
 " when a Man puts himfelf in the Way of them, 
 '* and prepares himfelf for them, he will always 
 *' feel that while he is mufmg^ a Fire is kindled W\i\nn 
 *' him, and then hev/ill fpeak with Authority, and 
 *' without Conftraint; his Thoughts will be true, 
 *' and his ExprefTions free and eafy." See Pafloral 
 CarCy P. 112. 
 
 And this agrees with the Words of an emi- 
 nent Authdff when fpeaking of the minifVerial 
 Work, fays, that " there is certainly a far 
 *' greater Grace and EfRcacy in Sermons, when 
 " expreffed as of the Ability which God giveth, 
 " than when they are faid or read only ; and 
 
 " the 
 
( 15 ) 
 *' the chief Reafon (Jays he) is becaufe one is 
 •* God's Ordinance, the other but Man's Tradi- 
 *' tion •," and I may add, is but of a late Invention, 
 it not being known to the primitive Church : Nay, 
 faith an Author, " there is no Denomination of 
 *' Clergy^ Greek or Latin^ Papift or Proleftant, m 
 " any Nation (England excepted) that gives into 
 " this unprecedented Method of reading their Dif- 
 ** courfes to the People for Preaching." And is it 
 not very ftrange that we, who profefs to make the 
 Scriptures our Rule, not only of Faith, but alfo of 
 Pradice, fhould in this Cafe run fo counter to them ? 
 and (hall we, who as a People declare, when arguing 
 againft Infa?tt Sprinklings that nothing is to be al- 
 lowed in the Worlhip and Service of God but what 
 we have a divine Warrant for, I fay, fhall we who 
 thus declare, in this folemn and important Service 
 of God, depart from this Rule, and the Practice of 
 the primitive Church, and give into, nay, plead for 
 the late 'Tradition of Men ! Are we in this confiflent 
 with ourfelves ? With what Face can we argue againft 
 Infant-Baptifm, fo called, while we ourfelves are 
 fetting afide, or changing another Ordinance of 
 Chrift contained in his Commiflion ? Can we ever 
 hope or exped that our Argument, grounded on 
 the New Teftament, for Believer's Baptifm by dip' 
 pings v^'i^l he of any Force to them while we in an- 
 other important Point, are departing from the Gof- 
 pel Mode. 
 
 And I cannot conceive how Perfons in our Days 
 can fatisfy themfelves with Readingm^tzA o^ Preach- 
 ings when it is without any divine Authority ; for 
 the New Teftament no where mentions it, nor alludes 
 to any fuch Praflice \ and the Pradtice of the Apoftles 
 and primitive Churchy in executing this Part of the 
 Commijfions Ihev/s how they underftood it, not by 
 
 Reading 
 
( i6 ) 
 
 Reading, but by Preachings and that according to 
 the Gift of Gods -nd the Abihty received. And I 
 think we that profefs to flick clofe to the Rule of 
 God's Word, Ihouid not make any Alterations in 
 the Conllitucion and Settlement of Chrift's King- 
 dom, nor in any one Cafe invade his royal Preroga- 
 tive, in fetting up our own Inventions in Oppofition 
 to his Precepts •, for this of Reading inftead o\ Preach- 
 ing is as great an Alteration as can well be made in the 
 pradical Part of this Ordinance. And, fays 'T-^^.GV^^- 
 tham^ " To fiudy eitherPr^jy^r or Sermon^ and to com- 
 *^ pofe them in writing, and fo read them to the Peo- 
 *' pie, is neither Prayer nor Preachings and therefore 
 " not to be ufed by the Minifiers of Chrift, under the 
 *' Notion of thefe Services." — And I find a learn- 
 ed Author, agreeable to this, faith, " It hath often 
 ** fallen out that God having regarded the Simpli- 
 ^' city of the Preacher hath fallen in upon his Heart 
 *' by the AfTiftance of his Spirit, and thereby hath 
 *' led him to fpeak things which he had not pre- 
 ♦* meditated, and what Ibmetiaies perhaps he ne- 
 " ver had thought of before, and (fays he) thefe 
 *' unpremeditated, tho' lively Exhoriations, have 
 *' proved more beneficial, both to himfelf and 
 ** his Hearers, than all his premeditated Dif- 
 " courfe." But tho' I give this a Place here, I 
 would not have any fuppofe that I am againfl Me- 
 ditation and Study ; for I believe it is a Minifter^s 
 Duty fo to do, according to Pauls 2 'Timothys ii. 15. 
 yet I believe the Preacher lays himfelf much more 
 in the Way to receive Afliflance from God, in his 
 Preachings than the Reader : For, as a certain Au- 
 thor obferves, with refpedl to the reading Method, 
 that /'/ is in foM to fays Lord hitherto fhalt thou come^ 
 and no farther \ here [hall thy Directions be flayed \ 
 but this is to be underftood of fuch only as write 
 
 all 
 
f I? ) 
 
 all they deliver \ for it is certain that thofe who 
 write only the Heads of what they would offer, and 
 leave the Enlargement thereon to the Time of Ac- 
 tion, do lay themfelves fomewhat open to that Af- 
 fiflance which, as a Minifler of Chrift, he hath 
 Reafon to hope for and exped:, though that Method 
 is without any Scripture Precept or Precedent. 
 
 And George Hammond^ who in his Days was a 
 Perfon of note amongft the Churches, fpeaking of 
 the true Miniftry^ fays, " They are not only fent 
 " by Jefus Chrift to preach, but a.\{o gifted by him, 
 *' whereby they are enabled to preach at all times, 
 
 " injlant in Seafon^ and out of Seafon^ and receive 
 
 *^ not their Minijiry of Man , or from Man^ but 
 
 *' receive it as a free Gift," Eph. iii. 8. And again, 
 ^' God (fays he) gives gifts to Men of the leaft ac- 
 ** count, that perfons may not afcribe Praife to 
 " the Creature, as to his Wifdom or Learning, 
 '' 6r fuch like Things, but may attribute Praife 
 " only to God the Creator ; for the lefs flefhly 
 *' Parts, or human Wifdom, is feen in the Crea- 
 " ture, the more the Gift of God \s magnified." 
 
 Likewife Dr. JVatts^ who, though he allowed the 
 ufe of Notes, yet was intirely againft Minifters 
 confining themfelves thereto -, and to this Purpofe 
 he fpeaks excellently well in his Humble Attempt^ 
 Pages 75) 7^5 77. " Speak (fays he) to your 
 " Hearers with Freedom ; not as if you wereread- 
 " ing or repeating your LeiTon to them, but as a 
 " Man fent to teach and perfuade them to Faith 
 *' and Holinefs. Deliver your Difcourfes to the 
 " People like a Man that is talking to them in good 
 *'} ear^ieft about their mod important Concerns, 
 
 *' like a MefTenger fent from Heaven, who 
 
 " would fain fave Sinners from Hell, and allure 
 *' Souls to God and Happinefs. Do not indulge 
 
 C that 
 
( i8 ) 
 
 «' that lazy Way of Reading, as a School-Boy 
 
 " does an Oration out of Livy or Cicero" And 
 again, " do not impofe upon yourfelves juft fuch 
 '' a Number of precompofed Words and Lines to 
 *' be delivered in an Hour, without daring to fpeak 
 *' a warm Sentiment that comes frefh upon the 
 *' Mind. Why may we not hope for fome Uvely 
 *« Turns of Thought, fome new pious Sentiments 
 
 " which may llrike Light and Heat ? In the 
 
 " Zeal of your Miniftrations, why may you not 
 *' expert fome bright, and warm, and pathetick 
 *' Forms of Argument and Perfuafion to offer 
 
 *' themfelves to your Lips? Have you not often 
 
 *' found fuch an enlargement of Thought, fuch 
 " a Variety of Sentiment, and Freedom of Speech, 
 *' in common Converfation, upon an important 
 '* Subjedt, beyond what you were apprifed of be- 
 *' fore hand ? And why fhould you forbid yourfelf 
 *' this natural Advantage in the Pulpit, and in the 
 " Fervour offacred Miniftrations, where alfo you 
 *' have more Reafon to hope for divine Aflift- 
 « ' ance ? 
 
 ^' Befides, for us who are Proteftant Diflentcrs, 
 *' and confine ourfelves to no fet Forms o^ Prayer, 
 " it feems more unreafonable to confine our Lips 
 
 *' conflantly to the Words written in our Pa- 
 
 *' pers in the work of Preaching. Do we plead fo 
 ** earneftly for the Liberty of Prayer, and yet ne- 
 ** ver give our Spirits a Liberty to exprefs their 
 ** warm, lively, and affectionate Thoughts, in 
 *' miniftring the Gofpel of Chrift under the Hopes 
 
 *' of his Affiftance ? As there has been many a 
 
 *' fervent and devout Petition offered to God in 
 *^ our AddrefTes to him, which has not been thought 
 *' of before, fo many a Sentence that was never 
 " written has been delivered in our Addreffes to 
 
 " the 
 
( 19 ) 
 
 *' the People with glorious Succefs •, it has come 
 *' more immediately and \juarm jrom the Hearty and 
 *' may have been bleiTed of God to fave a Soul." 
 And this is agreeable to the Words of the Marquis 
 of Halifa^^ as cited by this Author, Page i6i, 162. 
 where he likens Bjc ding-Preachers to Statues^ or 
 
 Men of Straw in the Pulpit : But this I chufe to 
 
 pafs over, and do conclude with Dr. PFatts, that 
 there is as much reafon to write our Prayers as our 
 Sermons : For, agreeable to the Wife Man's Cauti- 
 on, v/e (hould not i^e rajh 'xith cur Mouthy nor hafiy 
 with our Lips to utter any thing before., or to God \ 
 but for Miniilers to fhew greater Care how they 
 exprefs themfelves to Men, than to their Maker, I 
 think is paying that Deference to their Fellow-Crea- 
 ture which is due to God the Creator : And againft 
 this of writing, and reading Sermons, inilead of 
 f reaching them, I fliall here give a Place to the 
 Words of Francifcus Lambertus, in his Trad 5th of 
 Prophecy, Chap. iii. who fays, " Where are they 
 " now, that glory in their Inventions, who fay, 
 *' a brave Invention ! This they call Invention 
 " which themfelves have made up, but what have 
 *' the Faithful to do with fuch Inventions ? Beware 
 " (faith he) that thou determine not precifely to 
 
 *' fpeak what before thou hail meditated -, for 
 
 " though it may be lawful to determine the Text, 
 *' which thou wouldefi expound, yet not the \_pre- 
 " cife'] Interpretation, k-ft, if thou fo doft, thou 
 ** take from the Holy Spirit that which is his, to- 
 
 " wit, to dired: thy fpeach, but above all things 
 
 *« be careful thou follow not the Manner of Hypo- 
 *' crites, who have written almofl Word by Word 
 " what they are to fay, as if they were to repeat 
 
 " fome Verfes upon a Theatre, and afterwards 
 
 " pray the Lord to dire5i their Tongue -, and yet at 
 C 2 « the 
 
( 20 ) 
 
 *' the fame time are determined to fay nothing but 
 •' what they have written." He goes on, faying, 
 ** O unhappy kind of Prophets, which depend not 
 *' upon God, but upon their own Writings." And, 
 whatever may be thought of the above, the Prac- 
 tice of many Minijiers in our Days is too much 
 like it ; and it would be more agreeable for them, in 
 their Prayer before Sermon, to pray that God would 
 continue to them their Healthy Eye-fight^ and the 
 Ufe of their Tongue \ then to pray that God would 
 give them a Word\ that he would dire6l their 
 Hearts^ and enable them to fpeak the Truth as it is 
 in Jefus^ or as the Oracles of God fpeaketh, ^c. I 
 fay, the former would be more agreeable for a 
 Reading Preacher^ though fomething like the latter 
 is often the cafe, which appears to me nothing lefs 
 than great Impertinence to the Almighty, and is 
 near a- kin to Mockery. 
 
 But why do I cite Authors againft this Reading 
 Method^ Since the New Teftament is wholly filent 
 . on this Head ; for I do conclude with Br, Hughes^ 
 in his Sermon againft Popery, Page 37. " That 
 " nothing muft be allowed in God's Worfliip, but 
 <« what we have his Warrant for; and again, that 
 *« the very Silence of the Scripture is enough to 
 ** condemn it :" And with Dr. Gale, " That it is 
 *' not an indifferent Matter whether we obey God 
 *' and Chrift or not, and perform divine Service 
 " according to his Will and Appointment." And 
 in Vol. II. Page 155, " Affure (fays he) yourfelves 
 *< it is not an indifferent and trifling Matter, whe- 
 *' ther, AND HOW we perform the feveral Parts of 
 ** our Duty : He has given us a plain Rule, and 
 *' expeds we Ihould yield an undifputed and unli- 
 *' mited Obedience to all his Commands, and all 
 ** the feveral Particulars, and each Circum- 
 
 *' STANCE 
 
( 21 ) 
 
 ** STANCE therein exprefled or included. And 
 
 " if we do any thing which is not commanded, that 
 " can have no more Force or value than our own 
 " Power and Authority can give it; and fo indeed 
 ^' it may greatly pleafe ourfelves^ while it is highly 
 *' difpleafing, and an Abomination to the Lord." 
 All this, and m.uch more of the fame Nature, may 
 very well be applied to the Cafe in hand; and as 
 this Pra6tice of Reading is intirely unfcriptural, how 
 can any ProUjlaniCbriftim openly countenance it,and 
 give publick Sandion to the Performance thereof, 
 when his own Confcience muft, I think, if he will but 
 confider, aflure him that it is no other than a mere 
 human Device^ whereby that of Chrift's Appoint- 
 ment is fub verted .^ 
 
 And do we not as a People refufe to kneel at the 
 Communion, and that becaufe we do not find any 
 fuch Pofture pradifed by Chrifi: nor his Apo- 
 ftles ; but that they fat at the Lord's Supper ; and 
 hence we conclude fitting to be the proper Pof- 
 ture for that Service, and alfo the only one that can 
 be juftified from the New Te (lament, and therefore 
 on this Account we obferve it, or pradlife accor- 
 dingly, and for Perfons to tell us, that the Pofture 
 of Kneeling is but a Circumfiance^ lam apt to think 
 is fuch an Argument that would weigh but very 
 little with us, and that becaufe we profefs to pay a 
 itrici: Regard to the Precedents o^ tht New Tefiament'y 
 and this is agreeable to Dr. Gale, as before, with 
 refpedt to any Ordinance of Chrift, that we ougbi 
 to yield an undifputed Obedience to each Circumftance 
 therein exprejfed or included. And now, let us apply 
 this to the Cafe in hand, and I doubt not but it 
 will foon appear, that the ^\jh?C\\.ux\ngReadtng in the 
 room and ftead of Preachings is fuch a Circumfiance 
 which makes as great, if not a greater Alteration 
 
 in 
 
( " ) 
 
 in the Ordinance of Preachings as that of kneeling 
 inflead o^fJting at the Holy Communion -, and, if 
 io, then, if we would be confident with ourfelves, 
 we ought to avoid one, as well as the other. 
 
 And again, when we are arguing againft mixed 
 Communion^ do we not argue from the Silence of the 
 New Teftament, that is to fay, becaufe there is no 
 Precept nor Precedent therein to ground fuch a Prac- 
 tice upon ; and alfo becaufe ail the Initances therein 
 of Perfons communicating are of fuch who previ- 
 oufly had been baptized ; and therefore as it is an 
 unfcriptural Pra6lice we juftly conclude, and treat 
 it as an Innovation on Chriftianity. And juft the 
 fame is the Cafe before us, the New Teftament is in- 
 tirely filcnt concerning any fuch Practice, and all the 
 Inilances therein of adminidring the Word is by 
 Preachings and therefore to introduce Reading in- 
 ftead of Preachings is to innovate or corrupt 
 that Part of the Ccmmijfion of our Lord, and this 
 hath a Tendency to leflen the whole Authority 
 of the Doftrine of Chrift , for agreeable to Mr. 
 Killingworths fo 1 believe, that " not any one Part 
 " of Chriftianity, as the Religion of Chrift Je- 
 " fus, can be at all binding upon us, whilft fome 
 *' other Parts of it, depending upon the fame 
 *' Authority, are not fo.*' And again, " That a 
 *« Compliance with the Prejudices of others muft 
 " of neceflity create Indifferency to Chrift, and the 
 ** whole of his Inftitution :" And therefore as this 
 is of fuch evil Tendency, and doth open a Door to 
 the Enemies of Chrift, and his Caufe, let us fee the 
 Importance of remaining inflexible, and of watch- 
 ing the Approaches of Innovation, and that of every 
 Kind ', and as occafion may require, contend earneft- 
 ly for the Faith ^ in every Part thereof, "^hich was 
 once delivered to the Saints. 
 
 But 
 
( n ) 
 
 But perhaps againft this Method of Preaching that 
 I have been arguing for, it may be faid, that it is 
 nothing elfe but Enthiifmfm^ &l\ To which I fay, 
 that I find ftiis Term Enthuftafm is very differently 
 underftood, fometimes in a good Senfe, and at other 
 times in a bad one -, in a good Senfe, when it is 
 fpoken of the Prophets and Servants of God, be- 
 ing infpired^ or moved by the Holy Ghojl, or fo filled 
 with the Spirit of God, as to fpeak in a prophetick 
 Strain : As Bailey in his Dictionary fays, " It is an 
 " Infpiration, whether real or imaginary :" And 
 JVhiteJield^ in his Sermon on J^^;/ vii. '^j^ 38. Page 
 9th, fays, " Every Chriflian, in the proper Senfe 
 " of the Word, muil be an Enthiifiafi ; that is, 
 
 *' muft be infpiredof God." -I fuppole he means 
 
 that he muft have the S-pirit of God m him : and if 
 this Senfe of the Word be admitted, then 1 do rea- 
 dily allow that fome degree of Enthuftafm is neccf- 
 fary for a Minifter of the Gofpei. See alfo Charac- 
 terifticks, Vol. I. Page p^t^. Vol III. Mifcel. 2. 
 Chap. I. 
 
 But I obferve, that the Term, Enthuftafm^ in 
 common, is applied to Perfons who ftrongly fancy 
 to have divine Revelations, and thereby propagate 
 fome monftrous and ablbrd Notions in Religi- 
 on, profecuting their Fancies in a wild unrea- 
 finable Way and Manner, that is inconfiflent to 
 Nature and divine Revelation ; and this is agree- 
 able to Byche in his Di6lionary. 
 
 Now \{ Enthuftafm is to be taken in this lafl Senfe, 
 then I anfwer, firft, that for a Man whofe Mind is 
 by Meditation and Study, well ftored with the Chrif- 
 tian Doctrine, and fuired by the Gift^ of Nature and 
 of Grace, agreeable as before exprelTed ; I fay, for 
 fuch a one ufefully to ad minifter the Word without 
 reading it, is not inconfiflent to Reafon \ but it is 
 
 rather 
 
f 24 ) 
 
 rather agreeable to it, or it is but reafonable to ex- 
 pert, that fuch a Perfon will be capable fo to do : 
 And hence it is plain, that my Scheme is not taint- 
 ed with this unreafonable Senfe, or ^Part of £«- 
 ihujiafm, 
 
 Andfeccndly^ As it is by Meditation and Study 
 on the Chriftian Revelation, joined with fincere 
 Prayer^ that a Minifter's Mind becomes well fur- 
 nifhed for preaching uhe Gofpel, and according to 
 the Ability received, he is concerned to deliver the 
 fame, agreeable to the beft of his Judgment and 
 Under (landing, and this by preaching according to 
 the Prad;ice of the primitive Church : And as a Mi - 
 nifter pays fuch Regard to the Chriftian Revelation^ 
 and truly adminifters the Word agreeable to the 
 Mode or Manner therein laid down ; I fay while this 
 is the Cafe, for any to ftigmatize his Preaching with 
 this Enthufiafm^ is not only very groundlefs, but 
 alfo unjuft : Nay, if any of the two deferve to 
 be called Enthufiafm^ according to the latter Senfe, 
 then I think it is the reading Method -, for Preach- 
 ing is certainly the moft natural Way of addrefs to 
 Mankind, and therefore mod confidant to R afon^ 
 and is alfo moft agreeable to the Scriptures: So that 
 if either be Enthufiafm^ or a groundle/s Fancy, it is 
 the Reading- Met bod, and that becaufe it is moft un* 
 natural, as well as alrogether unjcriptu al 
 
 And farther, I would ask, whether for a ConfeU 
 lor, or a Lawyer that is well turnifhed with the 
 Knowledge of the Law, and is qualified with natu- 
 ral Gifts to plead in Court ; I fay 1 would ask whe- 
 ther it is Enthufiafm in him to plead his Client* s 
 Caufe without Notes ? Certainly 1 think none will 
 conclude it is •, and therefore why (hould it be deem- 
 ed Enthufiafm, for a Mintftcr to preach to his Audi- 
 tory the great Concerns and Duties of Religion,whQ 
 
 Oike 
 
( 25 ) 
 
 (like the Lawyer) hath made Religion the chief 
 Matter of his Meditation and Study. Indeed it is 
 very flrange and furprifing to nrse, that Enthufiafm^ 
 as a Term of Reproach, fhould be thrown out more 
 on Minijlers that preach without Notes, than on 
 any other publick Speaker, when they deHver them- 
 felves in the fame Way and Manner that Minifters 
 ought to do. 
 
 Again, fome object againft this Preaching-mt- 
 thod, becaufe they fuppofe it has a Tendency to 
 hinder the Minifter's Improvement, and to make 
 him idle^ and unconcerned about his pubhck Mi- 
 nittrations, and alfo to caufe him to fpeak at ran- 
 dom, ^c. 
 
 To which I anfwer, that the contrary to this in 
 general I believe is the Truth*j for when a Readings 
 Minifler hath taken upon him the work a Year or 
 two, and comes to have a good Stock of Sermons by 
 him, if he is not ftrongly inclined lo Meditation^ Stu^ 
 dy^ and Compofing^ ^c. he will, I am apt to think, 
 find himfelf under fuch a Temptation to Indo- 
 lence, that 'tis mofi: likely to prevail on him fo 
 far to content himfelf v;ith his Store^ as but rarely 
 to give himfelf the Trouble to make a new Ser- 
 mon ; and this I have often heard mentioned as 
 the Cafe of not a few of the Reading-Preachers ^^ and 
 if this Suppofition be true, as I fear too often it 
 is, what great Inrprcvement is it likely that fuch 
 a Minifler will make in his miniftrations ? And 
 as to the Preachers fpeaking at random^ by which I 
 underftand his fpeaking without any care or Defign, 
 I fay as to fuch a Cafe, it is what I very much dif- 
 approve of, and truft that there is not many In- 
 ftances of this kind to be found : But fuppofe there 
 are a few, that will not in the lead juftify the Rea- 
 ding'Meihgd^ but only make it plain, that fuch Mi- 
 
 D nijlers 
 
( 26 ) 
 
 nijlers are negligent, and take not that Care and 
 Pains they ought to do. And here I would ask, 
 whether all thofe Readers Sermons are coherent, 
 and will bear Examination ? Nay, whether the 
 Works of many learned Perfons on religiousSubjeds, 
 will bear a fbridt Scrutiny : Agreeable as a certain Bi- 
 fhop, when taking notice ot Perfons finding fault 
 with fome Inaccuracy in a Difcourfe, fays, " They, 
 " muft have narrow Souls, who can think fuch 
 " little Efcapes worth any one's notice •, for there 
 " is abundance of thefe to be met with in the beft 
 " Originals." But farther, fome do objedb that 
 what 1 plead for is ^akerijm^ &c. 
 
 To which I anfwer, firft, that I am ready to think 
 fuch as make ufe of this as an Objedion, are not ve- 
 ry well acquainted with the fakers Sentiments on 
 this Point : But fuppofe they are, and the Mini/" 
 try I contend for was wholly like theirs, would it 
 therefore follow that it is to be rejeded ? Muft we 
 deny the Being of God, becaufe the ^mkers believe 
 there is one i 
 
 However, though I differ from them in my Sen- 
 timent, relating to the Gofpel-Miniftry, yet I freely 
 own, that the vifible Mode^ or Manner of their pub- 
 lick Miniftrations are as much, if not more agree- 
 able to the New Teftament, and Pradice ot the 
 primitive Churchy than the Method of many Mini- 
 Hers, in the feveral Denominations of profefTed Chri- 
 flians amongft us. 
 
 But notwithftanding this, yet I believe they are 
 under great Miftakes in their Pretenfions concerning 
 it. However, it is not my Bufinefs now to argue 
 this Point with them, but only to fliew wherein I 
 differ from them herein: And that there is a 
 real difference, is plain to me from my many 
 Years Acquaintance, and free Converfation which 
 
( 27 ) 
 I had with them ; v/herein I often obferved they 
 pleaded for immediate Revelatioyifrojn God; moving 
 them immediately both with refpcvft to the Time 
 when thty ^xt to pray QX preachy and ah'b as to 
 th^ Words of their Exhortations, Prayers, ^c, 
 and that they did not concern themfelves afore- 
 hand, but intirely waited for the imynediate Motion 
 of the Spirit of God to direfl:, and wholly to dic- 
 tate to them in their publick Miniflrations. And 
 this is the Subilance of what I have often heard from 
 their Mouths^ and in Vindication of this they many 
 times cited the Words of our Lord, Mat. x. 20.^ 
 ,where he told his Difciples that the Spirit in the fame 
 
 Hour Jhculd teach them ivbat they Jhotild fay j^ but 
 
 whether this Paflage be judly applicable to Mini- 
 fters now in common, as I have frequently heard 
 them apply it, and as Robert Baxlay does in his 
 Apol. P. 261. I fhall leave to the Confideration of 
 the Reader. 
 
 Secondly^ The above is agreeable to their Writr 
 ings, as Sam. Fifoer^ in his coUeded Labours, Page 
 559. fpeaking of their Minifters, fays, " They are 
 " indeed infpired by the Holy Spirit, whofe Mef- 
 " fages and Miniflrations, whether by Voice or 
 " Writings are fo immediate from the Mouth of the 
 " Lord^ that your not receiving nor fubmitting to 
 " them on that Account, but rejecting — thereof, — 
 *' doth juftify your PredeceiTors in all Ages, who 
 " rejected and flew thofe that fpake to them in the 
 " Name of the Lord." And Robert Barclay in his 
 Apol' Prop. 10. fpeaking of their Miniflry, fays, 
 *' he is led and ordered in his Labour and Work of 
 " the Gofpel, both as to the Place where, as to the 
 " Per fans to whom, and as to the Time wherein he is 
 " to minifter." And Page 238, 242. he there 
 feems to argue, that Minifters are not to preach, 
 D 2 unlcfs 
 
( 28 ) 
 
 ujnlefs they find an abfolute NecefTity laid on them 
 fo to do : Page 246. he pretends Minifters are 
 to abftain from all Motions of their own Mind, 
 even from Thoughts materially good, and thus re- 
 main unconcerned, as well as in Silence, till God 
 fpeaks in them. And R. ClaridgCy in his pofthumous 
 Works, Page 509. fpeaking of Prophets or Mini- 
 fters, fays, they declare ths Mind of God receiv- 
 ed by immediate Revelation. And agreeable to this 
 I might add much moie, but I trull this may be 
 fufficient, to fhew the Senti:T.ents of the ^takers mth 
 refpe6t to the Grounds of their Miniftrations. 
 
 And as I have before intimated, with refpedt to 
 the A/ode or Manner of their preachings that I am 
 near one widi them ; fo the Difierence is not 
 in this, but in the Way by which they pretend to 
 be furnifhed for the Miniftration of the Gofpel. 
 
 Now from the above, it is plain the fakers 
 conclude, that altho' God hath given to Man Rea- 
 fon and Underjianding^ and alfo the Word of his Grace -, 
 yet according to them, there is no neceflity to 
 attend on the external Means of Grace, nor to ex- 
 ercife the rational Faculties ^ in order for a Per- 
 fon's being quaHfied, or furnifhed to adminifter the 
 Word ; but that he is to be entirely paffive in this 
 Cafe, till the Mind of God flows in upon him by 
 immediate Infpiration or Revelation \ and agreeable 
 to this Robert Barclay^ when fpeaking againft Mi- 
 nifters exercifing their own Minds, fays, '' That 
 " he being filent, God may fpeak in him, and the 
 " good Seed may arife, or until Words can be 
 ^' brought forth;" Page 242, 246. So that it ap- 
 pears to me from the whole, that Readings Medita- 
 tion and Study are excluded by them, from being ne- 
 ceflary to qualify Perfons for preaching of the 
 
 Gofpel : 
 
( 29 ) 
 
 Gofpel: And thus the Difference between me and the 
 fakers is evident; I fay from hence it is evident, as I 
 argue that Readings Aleditation^ and the Stitdy of the 
 Scriptures, joined with fincere Prayer, is not to be 
 omitted, but attended to-, whereas they declare they 
 'depend wholly on immediate Revelation: So that the 
 difference bctv/een them and^me in this Point is vtvy 
 great; and therefore I hop>^ all Perlbns v/ill be able 
 for the future, to diftinguilh my Sentim.ent from 
 the fakers in this Cafe. 
 
 And here perhaps it may be expected I fliould 
 declare my Mind v/ith refpeclto a Minifter's fiudy- 
 ing and compofing a Sermon in writing, and get- 
 ting it by Heart, fo as to be able to dehver it 
 Word for V/orJ. 
 
 To which i anfsver, that this Method would be at- 
 tended with a great deal of Labour and Pains, 
 and W'hen all is done there would be found very 
 few capable to attain it ; and the few that were 
 would have fo much to do, that they would hardly 
 have leifure fo mind any thing elfe : BeHdes, ic ap- 
 pears to me very little different from Reading ; be- 
 caufe there would be the fame Confinement to 
 Words, and I can by no means approve of it, fmce 
 it doth not, from any Part of the New T'eftament, 
 appear to be God's Way, and it doth render Part 
 of our Prayers before Senncn worfe than needlefs, 
 ?.nd alio lets afide the Office of the good P^emcmhran' 
 cer as then ufelefs; and I do conclude; with a learned 
 Author, " That a Preacher who doth not get his 
 ^' Sermon by Heart is intirely Mailer of himfelf, 
 " fpeaks in an eafy unaffedled Way, and Things 
 *-' then flow from their proper Source: His Lan- 
 *' guage (fays he) will be lively and moving, and 
 " the Y/armth that animates him will lead him to 
 *' fuch ExprefTions and Figures as he li'ould hardly 
 
 " have 
 
( 3° ) 
 
 ** have found out.by Study.'* And again, " Shall 
 ^' a Minifter be ib jealous of his Reputation, and fond 
 " of VAIN POMP, as not to dare to fpeak to his 
 " People without having learnt his Leflbn by Heart 
 *' like a School-Boy. 
 
 And farther it may be inquired, what I think of 
 ^ """T^ ^ Minifler's compofing aforehand the general Heads 
 in hi^^^^ of his Sermon. A 
 
 To fuch an enquiry I fay, this may be jullinable, 
 or it may not -, juftifiable when fuch compofing 
 flows from the free Didates or Difpofition of his 
 Mind, fo likewife the fame with refpedt to the Ex- 
 ercife of his Thoughts by Way of Enlargement on 
 thofe Heads, provided that he do not in any of 
 thefe, limit and confine himfelf thereto in the Time of 
 ji^ion^ but doth give a Place to thofe Things which 
 may arife or flo-w in with Warmth on his Mind in 
 his Minidration, as fuitable to the Subjecl- matter 
 he is upon : And this agrees with Br. IVatts^whcn 
 he fays, " A Minifter may hope for fom^e frelh, 
 " lively Turns of Thought, fome new pious Senti- 
 *' ments which may ftrike Light and Heat in the 
 *' Zeal of his Minifrrations, mayexpeci; fomt bright, 
 *' warm, and pathetick Forms of Argument and 
 *' Perfuafion, to offer themfelves to his Lips 
 
 *' beyond what he was apprized of before- 
 
 *' hand.'* He then goes on, and concludes it to 
 be fuch an Advantage, which no Minifter fhould 
 deprive himfelf of, in the Fervour of his facred Mi- 
 niftrations, where, Hiys he, they have Reafon to 
 .hope for divine Affijiance. 
 
 And I lliould be glad to know by what New 
 
 Teftament Precept or Precedent it is, that we alloc 
 
 : ' the whole minijlerial Service of a Meeting to ont Per- 
 
 .'-■'"' \ fon i though fometimes it may be very proper i 
 
 but what I mean is, by what Authority it is ftated- 
 
( 31 ) 
 
 iy lb, or as it is now in common. Saint PatiKcij^j 
 Let the Prophets fpeak tzvo or three^ and let the others 
 judge. If any thing he revealed to another that fit teth 
 by^ let the fir ft hold. his Peace, For ye may allprophe" 
 fy one by one^ that all may learn., and all may be com- 
 forted^ I Corinth^ xiv. 29, 30, 31. From hence iG 
 is evident, that the feverai Minifters in the Church 
 of Corinth were to ufs their Gifts ^ fo as might be 
 for Fdification •, and in order thereto they might 
 fpeak two or three ; that is, one after the other, 
 and if while one was preaching any thing fhould be 
 revealed^ or arife in the Mind of another that fets by^ 
 he was to wait till he that was fpeaking had done, 
 and then the other might deliver v/hat he had 
 to fay, and not only fo, but fays the ApolMe to the 
 Minifiers^ Te may all prophecy one by one^ that all 
 may learn^ and that all may be comforted. 
 
 And hence it is evident, that the Minifters whicb 
 did fpeak in a known Tongue., might at one and the 
 fame ^ztim^ preach one alter another ; Nay, Saint 
 Paul feems to recommend it, faying. Let the 
 prophets fpeak two or three., and again, Te may all pro- 
 phecy one by one -, and thus every minifterial Gift be^ 
 flowed on the Church would be improved to the Edi- 
 fication of the whole •, and fo he that had but one 
 Talent might, as he ou^\t., fulfil his Mi niftry in pro- 
 portion as he that had received two ox five \ and this 
 Procedure appears to be confident, and agree- 
 able to the Nature of the Cafe itfelf, as well as to 
 the gracious Defign of God, in beftowing different 
 Degrees of minifterial Gifts on his Church and 
 People, 
 
 But I am entirely at a lofs how this can be duly 
 performed according to the prefent Cuftom, of one 
 Perfon's taking the whole Opportunity : Befides, 
 this is either limiting, or draining the Gift beyond 
 
 its 
 
( 32 ) 
 
 its due Bounds t For, according to the prefent Me- 
 thod, he thiu hath but 07^,e Talent reads as long as he 
 that hath tzvo or f.ve^ and he that hath/vr, accord- 
 ing to the prefent Cufliom, pr-acheth no longer than 
 he that hath but^«f ; But whether this Prarflice be 
 conGilcnt with the different Abilities o^ Miuirrers, I 
 leave to the Confideration of every ferious Chrif- 
 tian. 
 
 And here I would appeal to my Brethren that 
 are Preachers of the Gofpel, whether riiey have not 
 experienced at times a great Difference in themfelves 
 with refped: to a Fitnefs or Unfitnefs for the Work ; 
 and whether when they find an Unfitnefs to attend 
 on this folemn inilitution, it would not be v/ifer 
 to fit down v^ith a few Words to the Purpofe, 
 than to endeavour to ftand the ufual Time ? And 
 whether, on Reflection, we can't call to mind, with 
 refpecl to ourfelves, that we have found juft caufe 
 to have wifhed that the prefent Cuftom had not ob- 
 tained, but that the primitive Practice had continu- 
 ed of feveral Mini tiers occafionaiiy bearing a Part 
 in the miniflerial fervice? And whatever niy Bre- 
 thren may think of n e in refpect to this, I declare 
 I 2Lm ferious^ and that it is a Cafe which hath fcuck 
 clofe to me for niany Years j and if this Gofpel 
 Method was revived among us, that Mlnifters did 
 not pradtife Reading m^t^d. o^ Preachings nor yet 
 /tint and confine themfeives to their Compojures^ but 
 took the Liberty to fpeak from their Fund or 
 Store of divine Things^ agreeable to the pre- 
 fent Frame of their Soul, they, I am perfuaded, 
 would not only fpeak powerfully, but alfo be ca- 
 pable to fuit their Doctrine agreeable to the known 
 State of their Hearers before them, and likewife he 
 qualified to preach on any accidental Occafion which 
 might offer, when the Reader^ and Perfon that con- 
 fines 
 
( 33 ) 
 fines himfelf to his Co?npofure^ is liable to lofe the 
 Opportunity which otherwife he might have had of 
 doing good, in the Exerciie of his minijlerialj^unc- 
 tion. 
 
 And here I will infert a Cafe which gave me an 
 early diflike to the Reading- Method, There was an 
 ancient reading Mini}hi\ vvho was to have taken 
 both Parts of the Day, who began in the Morning 
 as ufual, and proceeded on, not minding the Time, 
 and continued fomething longer than common, fo 
 that he came to the Application before he was 
 aware of it, which when he obferved it fomewhat 
 furprifed him, and this was attended with a little 
 Confufion, becaufe the Sermon was defigned for 
 the whole Day •, however he foon concluded, after 
 which he immediately went and told fome Friends 
 the Cafe, how through earneftnefs he had almoft 
 ended the Difcourfe before he was aware \ and ad- 
 ded, that tho' he had Notes at home, yet his Sight 
 was fo bad, that he did not think proper to venture 
 in the Afternoon, unlefs he had a confiderable Time 
 to perufe them, which the Seafon would not then 
 admit of; and therefore, fays he. Brethren what 
 Jhall we do ? Silence I underfliood took place for a 
 fhort time, after which he faid to this Purpofe : 
 That there was fuch a Friend^ naming of him, is ap- 
 pointed to exercise in the Evenings what ifwejhould 
 call him forth in publick this Afternoon ? and this was 
 approved of; but then the Enquiry was, where 
 they (hould find him ? The Anfwer was, that he 
 was gone home ; fo then it was concluded it would 
 not anfwer any valuable Purpofe to fend after him, 
 as the Time was far fpent, but that they would apply 
 to him, as foon he came for the Afternoon, which 
 was accordingly done ; and as the Cafe was laid 
 before him, he coniplied with the Requeft, and 
 
 E I well 
 
( 34 ) 
 
 I well remember that he took for his Text the 
 Words of the Prophet Nahum^ Chap. i. 6. 
 
 Now this Cafe which I have thus related, as I faid 
 before, gave me an early diflike to the Reading Me- 
 thod^ and that becaufe I plainly faw it was, and might 
 be attended with a great many Difappointnients, 
 which the Preacher is not liable to. 
 
 And I likewife find a Relation in a certain Au- 
 thor, who fpeaks of a Dijfeniing Minifter who hap- 
 pened to leave his Notes at Home •, who, when he 
 came to the Meeting-houfe, milTing his Sermon, 
 whifpered to one to go and fetch it : Accordingly 
 we are told he went and made diligent Search, but 
 could find none-, which, when the Minifter under- 
 flood, it gave him " fome painful Refleclions •,'* 
 and, fays the Author, " he rofe up, and plainly 
 *' told the Congregation the Sermon was loft, and 
 *' therefore they were to have none that Day/* And 
 doubtlefs great was the Confufion of the Minifter, 
 and not lefs the Difappointment of the Society : 
 However, to prevent fuch Accidents for the future, 
 he afTured his People that he would never preach hy 
 Notes again. And here an Application offers itfelf 
 to me, but I chufe to ftop my Pen. 
 
 Once more I find in the Works of another Au- 
 thor, who tells us, that a certain Minifter, account- 
 ed a famous Preacher, who was defired to preach a 
 Funeral Sermon^ whofe Method was to write at large, 
 and get it by rote of Heart \ but the Time allotted 
 was too fliort for that, fo that he could only com- 
 pofe it in writing ; and when the Time came he 
 brought the Sermon with him in his Hand, and fo 
 afcended the Pulpit, and in a little Time addrefled 
 himfelf to the People in the following Words : 
 ** Whatfoever I have been able to gather with the 
 *^ Travel of this Night I bring here written in this 
 
 *« Paper ^ 
 
( 35 ) 
 
 •* Paper^ and befeech you to hear the fam« 
 
 *' with Patience, and pardon my flender Memory :'* 
 He then proceeded ; but the Author tells us, that 
 the " Fafhion of rehearjing with Paper in the Hand 
 ** ^o highly difpleafed the Audience, that fome 
 *' fimled^ while others murmured."^ And thus by 
 this Method of Reading inilead of Preachings the 
 weighty Concerns relating to a Preparation for 
 Death was rendered ufelefs, and in all probability 
 the Minifter had but little Pleafure or Satisfaflioa 
 in his Labour. And here I might go on, not only 
 to take notice of the many difappointments, but 
 alfoof the fatal EfFefts which manifeftly attend the 
 Reading Method^ both as to the Minifters themfelves, 
 and fuch as attend their Miniftrations, and likewife 
 as it doth affeft the Chriflian Caufe in general ; but 
 this is fo manifeft, and what is fo frequently taken 
 notice of, by way of Grief and Complaint, both 
 in Town and Country ^ that the Cafe doth fufficiently 
 declare itfelf. And indeed what otherwife can be 
 expeded, when Men depart from the Way of God, ' 
 and give into the Traditions and Inventions of Men ; 
 but I chufe not here to enlarge, but will go on to 
 anfwer fuch Arguments, which are made ufe of ia 
 favour of the Reading Method, 
 
 Firil Argument, That Minifbers in preaching 
 perfonate God, and therefore ought to be very ex- 
 adt in what they deliver. 
 
 Anfiver, That they do in fome low Senfe perfo- 
 Xiate God is allowed, but then that will not at all 
 tolerate them to go out of God's Way^ but rather 
 contains an Argument that they Ihould (land up 
 according to his Counfel, or plead with Mankind 
 in the Way of his Appointment , And farther, tho* 
 Miniflers ought carefully to deliver themfelves in 
 the bell Manner they can, yet no more i§ required 
 
 E 2 gf 
 
( 30 ) 
 of them than they have Abilities given them to 
 perform ; and if in Sincerity they do the beft they 
 can, declaring the Gofpel in Plainnefs and Simplicity^ 
 though their Service Ihould be attended with fome 
 Imperfedtions, yet no doubt but God will accept of 
 their Labour, to whom as their Mafter they muft 
 ftand or fall. And whatever mean and low Thoughts 
 fome may have of Preachings when compared to 
 Headings and vv^hatever Reflections or Ridicule may 
 be caft on it, yet let us remember that it is God's 
 own Way, and though Men may look on Preach- 
 ing as they did in Saint PauVs Day of Chriftianity 
 in general, which we are told was every where fpoken 
 againfi ; I fay, notwithftanding it fliould fo hap- 
 pen, it would not be amifs to call to mind, that it 
 was by the Foolijhnefs of Preaching that God would 
 favethem that believe. To conclude this, I would ask, 
 whether there is not fometimes Mi flakes in Writ- 
 ings and alfo Blunders made in Reading? And whe- 
 ther an Imperfc6lion in fpeaking off-hand^ doth not 
 as much merit a charitable Thought as in Reading, 
 what with Tim.e and Pains hath been committed to 
 Writing. And agreeable to this fays a learned 
 Bifhop: " SomiC Word that is irregular, or, if you 
 *' will, fome weak or mifapplied ExprefTion that 
 *' may happen to drop in the Warmth of Adiion, 
 " but furely they m.uft have narrow Souls who can 
 «' think fuch little Efcapes worth any one's Notice. 
 *« There is (fays he) Abundance of thefeto be met 
 «' with in the moil excellent Originals. The great- 
 " eft Orators among the Antients negle6led them, 
 «' and if our Views were as noble as theirs, we 
 " fhould not fo much regard thefe Trifles which 
 *' can amufe none but fuch as are not able to dif- 
 *« cern and purfue what is truly great." 
 
 Second 
 
( 37 ) 
 
 Second Jrgumenf, That there is no fuch Thing as 
 Preaching now, it is only recommending Chrifti- 
 anity, ^c. 
 
 In Anfwer to this wonderful and furprifing Ar- 
 gument, which I have heard made ufe of, 1 fay. 
 That whatever is to be underflood by recommend- 
 ing, it is plain that fuch who make ufe of it in fa- 
 vour of their Scheme, do underftand it to be dif- 
 ferent, or another Exercife from Preaching-^ for, 
 fay they, there is no fuch thing as Preaching now. 
 From whence I argue, that if there is no fuch thing 
 as Preaching now, then Preaching is now null and 
 ceafed\ which, if fo, then one Part of our Lord's 
 Commiffwn or Religion is not binding upon us ; the 
 Confequence of which, according to Mr. Killing- 
 worthy is, *' that not any one Part of Chriftianity, 
 *' as the Religion of Chrifl: Jefus, can be at all 
 " binding upon us, whilfb fome other Parts of it, 
 " depending upon the fame Authority, are not fo." 
 Befides, though recommending a lleddy Adherence 
 to Chriftianity is very necefiary to profefied Chrif- 
 tians, yet it doth not follow from thence that the 
 Gofpel is not now to ht^ preached -^ for are there not 
 many Jews^ Deijls^ and a young Generation to be 
 brought over to the Faith of Chrift ? And are they 
 to be denied the ordinary Means appointed by God ? 
 And farther I would ask, whether the Gofpel is not 
 recommended where it is preached ; though according 
 to the above Argument it is not preached where it 
 is recommended ? In Ihort, for any Chrift ian thus to 
 argue, ftiews the Diftrefs they are drove to in defend- 
 ing their Caufe ; or it doth detedl their Attach- 
 ment to primitive Chriftianity, which they profefs 
 to have efpoufed. 
 
 Third Argument, That it oftentimes hath pleafed 
 God to convince Perfons by a Reading Minijiry^ and 
 therefore^——. An/wen 
 
C 33 ) 
 
 'Anfwer^ By the fame Argument we may as well 
 iay afide affemhling ourf elves together for the pub- 
 lic Worfliip of God ; for I beHeve it muir be al- 
 lowed, that fome perfons have been convinced, on- 
 ly by reading the Scriptures themfelves : But fup- 
 pofe the above be granted, that fome Perfons 
 have been convinced by a reading Minijiry -, will 
 that be a fufficient Warrant for Minifters to al- 
 ter or change any of God's Ways ? or, that be- 
 caufe fuch a Method may fometimes meet with 
 SuGcefs will that juflify Men to go on in their own 
 inventions ? Which is to be the Rule to us, God's 
 particular dealing with fome, or his revealed Vv^ill in 
 common ? Befides, it may be a great Difficulty to 
 afcertain, that a Perl on was convinced by a read- 
 ing Miniftry \ fince the Means of Grace, in order for 
 the converfion of Sinners, is not limited to the 
 I^ulpit. 
 
 Fourth Argiment. That reading Sermons hath by 
 length of Time and Cuftom received a kind of Sanc- 
 tion, and is now becom.e mod agreeable to the Mi- 
 nifters and People, 
 
 jinfwer. But will the long {landing of an error 
 inake it Truth ? or can length of tim.e give a pro- 
 per Sait5iion ? If fo, did our worthy Patriots do well 
 in the Reformation, when Popery had then been long 
 fbanding in this Nation ? And would the eftabliHied 
 Church be juilifiable to leave off Sprinkling in Bap- 
 tifm, and praclife Dipping ; fince Sprinkling is of 
 as old a Date as reading Sermons ? And tho' it may 
 be moft agreeable to fome Minifters and People, 
 yet I am fatisfied it is far from being fo to all •, for 
 Bijhop Burnet tells us, that " reading Sermons is pe- 
 *' culiar to this Nation, and is endured in no 
 •' other." Paftoral Care, Chap. lo. P. 205. And 
 fays another Author, " The primitive Fathers knew 
 
 " nothing 
 
( 39 ) 
 
 " nothing of It ; and their Succefibrs in all After- 
 *' ages knew as little of it-, and even in this Age, 
 *' as far as we know, there is no Denomination of 
 " Clergy^ Greek or Latin^ Papiji or Proteftant^ in 
 *' any Nation (England excepted) that give into this 
 *' unprecedented Method of reading thtir Difcourfes 
 " to the People for Preaching.^* So that from 
 hence, together with what we ourfelves may alfo 
 know in this Affair, I think it is evident, that 
 Reading inftead of Preaching is far from being agree- 
 able to all ; but if it was, that would not prove that 
 fuch a Method is juPcifiable, nor well pleafing to 
 God. Befides; if that which at any time, without 
 a NezV'TeJiament Precept or Precedent^ becomes moft 
 agreeable to Minijiers and People ^ muO: be pradifed 
 and retained by Chriftians as Part of the Chriftian 
 Service •, I fay, if fo, I fear we fhould foon find 
 Chriflianity fo metamorphofed, or changed, that if 
 Saint Paul was to come again, he would find Occa* 
 Hon to withftand us to the Face, as he did his 
 Brother Peter^ Gal. ii. 5, 1 1. And would not fuch 
 profefiTed Chriftians fall juftly under his Sentence, 
 mentioned Chap. i. 5, 8, 9. ? And though reading 
 Sermons inftead of preaching them has obtained for 
 fome Time ; yet if we may regard the Autho- 
 rity of Bijhop Burnet^ its Original will not make 
 it valid. For, according to him, it had its Rife 
 but in King Henry the Eighth's Reign, after the 
 Six bloody Articles was agreed upon ; and on ac- 
 count of which both Papift and Proteftant were 
 hanged and burnt in Smithfield^ and none was 
 allowed or fuffered by Authority to preach but 
 fuch as were licenfed •, and they were required 
 to preach agreeable to the Religion then efta- 
 bjifhed. 
 
 But 
 
( 40 ) 
 
 But notvvlthftanding this, we find there were 
 fome of the Ucenfed Preachersy who did in their 
 Preaching oppofe the fame, of which we are told 
 there was great Complaints •, and hence thofe Mini" 
 Jters that did comply vv^ith the Religion then fet up, 
 fearing they might be accufed as well as others, by 
 the Informers then employed, did, to juftify them- 
 felves, write^ and read their Sermons. And this, 
 fo far as I can find, was the Original of the Read- 
 ing Method, which at this Day is fo much in vogue. 
 Fine Authority indeed, for Prcteftant Dijfjenters^ to 
 ground a Mode of adminillring an Ordinance of 
 Chrift upon ! See the Bi(kop*s Abridgment of the Re- 
 formation^ fourth Edition^ Page 234. where agreeable 
 to the above he fays, " A7id thus did this Cujiom be- 
 " o-/;/." And this was in the Year 1542, which, 
 when compared with the Date of Chriilianity, may 
 I think juftly be called a m^odern Invention ^ and 
 therefore it is manifcflthat it falls vaftly Ihort, both 
 in Ajitiqiiity and proper Authority^ to juftify or re- 
 commend the Pradice in the Chriftian church. 
 
 Again, in §ueen Mary's bloody Reign^ in the 
 Year 1555, Orders were fent to the Jufiices to look 
 narrowly to Preachers ; and fecret Spies were em- 
 ployed in every Parifh to give Information, ^c. 
 See the Bifhop*s Hipry, P. 488. And if I may re- 
 gard what another Author fays, there was at that 
 Time fuch Methods taken, and Orders given by 
 the Papifis then in Power, that the Minifters were 
 obliged to write and read iht'ir Sermons, that fo they 
 in Authority m.ight have it in their Power to exa- 
 mine the Do(5lrines preached, and fee how they 
 agreed with the 'Tenets of the Church of Rome. And 
 thus this Pradice took place by popiJJj Influence^ and 
 the Clergy of this Nation have ever fince continued 
 
 ia 
 
( 41 ) 
 
 in the fame Pradlice, from whom the Bfjfentin^ 
 Minifters in all Probability received it ! 
 
 Fifth Argument. That the Memory is apt to ht 
 treacherous, and therefore it is not fafe to commie 
 all to it. 
 
 To this I fay \ that it does not appear necefla- 
 ry to commit every Word to the Memory, and 
 I believe there are but few, if any, pretend fo 
 to do ; nor doth it appear that was the primitive 
 Pradlice ; but rather, as hath been beforc obferved, 
 they preached by the rich Indwelling of the Word of 
 God^ whereby, according to the Abilities received, 
 they were capable ufefully to adm.inifter the fame, 
 agreeable to that Part ot Chriftian Dodrine they 
 were upon; and this Method, I am apt to conclude 
 with a certain Author, " tends more to renew the 
 *' Heart, and reform the Life, than a written for- 
 *' mal Harangue, confifting of fenecal pithy Seti- 
 " tenccs, periodical Flights, numerous fmooth Ca- 
 " dences, pointed Phrales, and picked Words ; tho* 
 *' this indeed may pleafe the Ear, and tickle the 
 '' Fancy ;" but what real Good doth attend fuch a 
 Miniflry may beft be underftood, by refleding on 
 the religious State of fuch Societies, either in City^ 
 or Country^ where this kind of Miniftry hath been 
 long in ufe. 
 
 Sixth Argument, It is lawful, becaufe it is not 
 forbid in the New l^eflament. 
 
 Anfw. If fuch Things, which are not forbid in 
 the New Teflament, are lawful to be joined to the 
 Chriftian Religion, why do we find Fault with Pa* 
 pifls for adding their Ceremonies thereto ? and why 
 do we require of the Pcedo-haptifis plain Scriptwe 
 for Infant- Sprinkling., fince Infant-Sprinkling is 
 not there exprefsly forbidden? Befides^ if ^Ne^ 
 Teflameni Precept, and Precedent, in a particular 
 
 F Service. 
 
( 42 ) 
 
 Service, do imply a Prohibition of any Change of 
 Alteration in that Service •, as I think it doth, then 
 to introduce Reading inftead of Preachings is in fome 
 fenfe forbidden ; and that there is New Tefla- 
 inent Precept and Precedent for Preachings and none 
 for Readings I think all Chriftians miift allow : And 
 it may not be amifs for fuch as make ufe of this 
 Argument, to refled on the Cafe of Nadab and 
 Ahihus Lev. x. i, 2. 
 
 Seventh Argument. That the fame Dodrine, or 
 Gofpel- truths, may be delivered by Readings as by 
 Preaching. 
 
 To which I anfwers that though it may be al- 
 lowed that the fame Do^irines &c. may be deli- 
 vered by Readings as by Preaching ; yet this will not 
 juilify the Ufe of Reading in the room or fcead of 
 Preaching', becaufe it is not the Matter delivered that 
 is the Point in debate; but the Mode, or Manner in 
 which that Dodlrine is to be adminiftred. And as 
 Reading and Preaching are two very different Exer- 
 cifes; and as the latter is the Appointment of Chrifl, 
 and the formers when ufed in its Head, only the In- 
 vention of Men, I think no confiftent Chriflian, that 
 would maintain Obedience to his Lord, can pre- 
 fer Reading to his Gofpel Method of Preaching. And 
 I wifh Chriftians ferioufiy to confider, that the En- 
 couragement o^ Reading, fo far as it prevails, tends 
 to fubvert and root out one of the moft ufeful Ap* 
 pointments contained in the Ccmmiffwn ofChriJl-, and 
 if this Method fhould go on unattack, we may 
 foon exped: to hear of fome other plaufible Altera- 
 tions in the remaining Inftitutions of our Lord : 
 And thus by degrees Chriflianity may intirely be 
 defaced, and the New Tejlarnent no longer regard- 
 ed as the Chriflian Rule of Faith and Practice, but 
 
 the 
 
C 43 ) 
 the flucluating Humour of its profefTed Votaries, 
 chough in the main its real Enemies. 
 
 Eighth Argument, That St. Paul direds or in- 
 joins Reading to the Churches, as Coloff. iv. i6, 17. 
 I 'Theff, V. 27. and therefore 
 
 Anjwer. I allow St. Paul ordered fome of his 
 Epijiles to be 7'ead to the Churches ; and I highly 
 approve, that the Scriptures be read in our Chrifti- 
 an Ajfemhlies. But, I do not find the Apoftle any 
 where ordered his Epiftles to be preached ^ no, 
 but only that they fhould be read to them ; which 
 alfo tends to difcover, or (hew, that Reading and 
 Preaching are two diftindt Exercifes. And I would 
 not have any luppofe, that I am againft Reading in 
 publick Ajferablies', fori Hiould well approve, that reli- 
 gious written Compoiures be occafionally read, and 
 Ihould be glad to fee the Day that our Meffengers^ 
 ,and Brethren of Note, did fend their Letters^ or EpiJ- 
 ties o'i Advice and Exhortation to the Churches -, this, 
 together with a Gofpel-Miniftry^ would look like 
 primitive Chrijlianity indeed : And if thefe Things 
 were revived among us, and the whole adorned with 
 ^ religious Life, our Oppofers could have very lit- 
 tle, if any Advantage againft us. 
 
 Ninth Argument. That Reading and Preaching 
 are fynonymous Terms, and by the New Teflament 
 ufed as fuch. See Acts xv. 21. For Mofes of old Time 
 hath in every City them that preach him^ being read in 
 the Synagogues every Salbath-day^ and therefore, — 
 
 To which I reply.. That when we are told Mo^ 
 fes was preached, — — it is manifeff, that it is to 
 be undcrilood, that the Law of Mofes was read to 
 the People, and then explained ; or the Senfe there- 
 of was given; and this v/as the preachingvVf^j/^j, as is 
 very evident from Neh. viii. 8, So they read in the 
 
 Fa book^ 
 
( 44 ) 
 
 Book^ in the Law of God diftin5il)\ and gave the Senfe^ 
 and caufed them to iinderfiand the Reading, Here we 
 find that the Law was/;;y? read^ and then the Senfe 
 thereof was given j which Senfe of the Law that was 
 given, wdis i\\Q preaching Mofes, mentioned yf(^.rxv. 
 2 1. And hence v/e fee that the Scripture is the beft 
 Expounder of itfelf; For it was not the Reading of 
 the Law that properly ^^^iS preaching Mofes •, but the 
 Method taken, after the Law was read, to make 
 the People underjiand the Reading. And, agreeable 
 to this are the Words of the learned Richard Barnard, 
 in his nefaurus BihUcus^ feu Promptuarium facrumy 
 under the Word read, where, after he hath cited 
 A^s XV. 21. fays, " This Place proveth not that 
 ^' Reading is Preaching ; but that when he (that is, 
 *' Mofes) was read, there were fuch as did preach, 
 " in thj Greek Text {he fays) it is clear -, as alfo the 
 *' Pra6tice fheweth, ^^s xiii. 15." Compare 
 this with L^/i^^ iv. 16,17, ^^» '9» 2^' ^2- and as 
 above, Neh, viii. 8. From all which it ftill appears, 
 th^t Reading and Preaching are not fynonymous 'Terms , 
 but are two diftinfl Exercifes, both in their own 
 Nature, and abundantly manifefl fo to be, from 
 j3ivine Revelation : Yet, I readily acknowledge that 
 JVilfon^ in his Diulionary, calls Reading Preach- 
 ing ', but then, I alfo take Notice, according to 
 him^ that Reading is improperly called Preach- 
 ing-^ and likewife ihzt Preachings according to the 
 proper and Scripture Senfe, is agreeable to what I 
 have before obferved. And as the Learned tell us, 
 that there is -^i primary ^ and 2. fecondary^ or a proper y 
 and an improper Senfe of Words-, fo, according to /F/7- 
 fon, Reading is but an improper Method of preachijig-, 
 and therefore I think it is very plain, that, fpeak- 
 ing according to xht Ability and Store of the Mind, 
 is ngt only the primary ^ or proper Way of Preachings 
 
 buE 
 
( 45 ) 
 
 but alfo, that which in the NewTeftament iscalled 
 fo: And this I fuppofe none will deny ; and I fhould 
 think, that the primary Senfe of the Word, as it is 
 the Gofpel Senfe, ought as much in this Cafe to be 
 regarded, as it is by us in other refpedls •, efpecially 
 as that was the primitive Method. And, do we not 
 thus plead ^ox ih^ primary Senfe of the Word baptize^ 
 which the Learned tell us is to dip -, and this Way 
 we likewife conclude from the New Teftament, was 
 the primitive Practice ♦, and therefore it is we admit 
 of no other, but flridly and religioujly pra6life ac- 
 cordingly : And if we would be confillent with out- 
 felves, and follow the primitive Pra^ice as near as 
 we can, we ought, I fhould think, to regard the 
 primary Manner., or Mode in this, as well as in other 
 Inftitutions of Chriil. And I alfo believe, that every* 
 Gift or Capacity, which God is pleafed to give of 
 publick Ufefulnefs, ought in its proper Place and 
 Time to be improved ; whether it be Prayer^ praif- 
 ing God, reading and preaching the Gofpel ; and that 
 no Talent of pubHck Ufe fhould be hid as in a Nap- 
 kin. For, as every Man hath received the Gift, even 
 fo minifler the fame one to another, as good Stewards 
 of the manifold Grace of God. i Pet, iv. lo. 
 
 But, not farther to enlarge, only I defire that the 
 few following things may be duly confidered : 
 
 Whether preachmg the Gofpel is not an Ordinance 
 ofChrift? 
 
 Whether Reading, and Preaching, are not two dif- 
 ferent Modes or Ways of delivering the Will of 
 God ? 
 
 Whether Minifiers have Authority to change or 
 alter any of the Ordinances of Chrifb, to pleafe them- 
 ielves, or the polite Humors of Men ? 
 
 Whether it is not their Duty, to keep as near to 
 ^he Precepts and Precedents of the Gofpel as poflible ? 
 
 Whether 
 
( 46 ) 
 
 Whether any of the Sermom^ in hcly Record^ were 
 firil delivered to the People by Reading P 
 
 Whether Reading for Preaching is not as great an 
 Alteration, as can well be made in the pradlical Part 
 of this Ordinance ? 
 
 Whether Reading was in zogue, or fubftituted for 
 Preaching till more than a thoufand Years after 
 Chrift ? 
 
 And, laftly^ Whether Minifters, as fuch, will be 
 judged at the great Day by a modern PraSfice^ or by 
 the Gofpel of our Lord ? 
 
 Thefe Things, my Brethren^ appear to me wor- 
 thy our ferious Confideration j and it is not a little 
 fjrprifing, to find fo many profeiled Chriftians ap- 
 prove, nay plead with fo much warmth for a Prac- 
 tice, which hath no Foundation in Nature^ nor 
 precept or Precedent in divine Revelation to fupport 
 it. I fay it is very ilrange ; and the more fo, when 
 J confider, how Chriftians overlook and negleft a 
 clear and exprefs Command of our Lord's, as is that 
 di wafidingFeet^ John xiii. 13, 14, 15. and at the 
 fame Time are io very zealous to bring that into the 
 fublick Service of God, for which there is no divine 
 Warrant : View this Conduct!: in your own Minds ; 
 See whether you can reconcile it with the New Tef- 
 t anient^ and a good Conjcience. Can it be jufiifiable 
 to omit what is fo exprefs and plain, and to intro- 
 duce a Pradice unknown to the frimitive Church ? 
 If there could be any fuch Paffage produced for 
 reading Sermons^ as there is for ijoajhlng Feet^ I con- 
 clude we fhould have heard of it long ago, and it 
 would be efteemed, and that juftly too, a fuffxient 
 Authority to fupport the Practice : But, alas, we 
 find this latter mofl: generally neglefted, when the 
 formicr has a Multitude of AdvocateSj though with- 
 out any divine Warrant. 
 
 Thus 
 
C 47 ) 
 
 Thus, I have freely declared my Sentiment on this 
 important Appointment of Chriil, though I fhould 
 have been glad if fome able and learned Hand had 
 taken this Task on them -, but I having waited near 
 twenty Years, in hopes fome Friend would have ap- 
 peared in behalf of this Part oi primitive Chriftianit)\ 
 when inftead thereof, I found the Advocates for 
 Readings &c. much increafe, and the Error fpread 
 itfelf Yikt 3. Contagion •, fo that it appeared high Time 
 fome Attempt fhould be made to flop its Progrefs ; 
 tho' I believe I fhould not as yet hd.wQ publijhed 
 it, had not feveral Friends^ from different Parts, 
 called on me, and encouraged me fo to do, both 
 by perfonal Application, and Writing: And I have 
 now accordingly fentit abroad into the World, hop- 
 ing it may at leafl excite the baptized Churches to 
 take it into their Confideration, that the Cafe may 
 be duly exam.ined, and that the Pradice which 
 Ihall appear mofl agreeable to the Nezv Teftament- 
 may take place, that fo there may not in this Cafe 
 be fuch Occafion given for Reflexion, that we are 
 an inconfiflent, and a divided People. 
 
 To conclude, I am fully perfuaded, that if the 
 Gofpel'Mode^ or Manner of adminiftring the Word 
 yfas revived, and that due Attendance and Encou- 
 ragement was given to young fober Men, in whom 
 appears fome Hopes of a publick Capacity, we 
 fhould not only fee Religion alive and flourifh, but al- 
 fo have Perfons raifed up, — as would to a good 
 degree, be Minifters to the Churches^ and the Glo- 
 ry of Chrift. For, faid he, Lo, I am ivith yon 
 
 akvay^ even unto the End of the IVorld, Amen. 
 
 ^h& 
 
( 48 ) 
 ^be following Jhould be read after the *, Page i^th. 
 
 POSTSCRIPT. 
 
 For a Preacher^ having no Stock o^ writ ten Sermons 
 to read to his People, is, of courfe, obhged to give 
 himfelf to reading, and the Study of the Scriptures : 
 And as the great Concerns of his Fun5iion^ falls often 
 with weight on his Mind ; this engages him clofely 
 to attend thereto, and in fo doing, he certainly is in 
 the mofl likely Way to gain greater Improvement 
 in ufeful Knowledge, and a more thorough Ac- 
 quaintance with the Gofpel of Chrift ; and this Im- 
 provement which he thus attains, is, in a great Mea- 
 fure, the Effedt of that Application, by which he is 
 furnilhed for his publick Miniflrations. And as he 
 thus gives up himfelf to Meditation and Study, it 
 will not fail (if he have a I'alent for public Ufeful- 
 nefs) to inrich and (tore his Mind with heavenly and 
 divine Things, whereby his profiting may appear to 
 
 So that inilead of its hindering the Minifter^s Im- 
 prcvement, and tending to make bim idle^ it appears 
 quite the Reverfe : Nay, if either of the two tends 
 that Way, it is evidently chargeable on the Read- 
 ing-Method. 
 
 F I N I 
 
'..AM^^f'^^^^^ 
 
 si<>' h^-^-^^"^*^ 
 
 A . 
 
 1 
 

 
 
 
 .^:. .<:« 
 
 ■w 
 
 I: -^ ■:: 
 
 ^r?-^-. 
 ^^;; 
 
 %*^ 
 
 10 
 
 Ji? ,« 
 
 .«