.v-'-A t\. L T B R A^ R ^^ Theological Seminary. PRINCETON, N. J. Case ^~^^ hL ^ Division Shdf^ / 9^.Q^..7 Sec^ioM ^ 600A: No. A DONATION ^C^, <^. X? v(>!2r^^ £>.-^. iififctibcl) fif i ,/. /. 4. c. 15. ^he Children of the Faithful are not baptiz-ed for that Reafon, that they may then firfi- be made Children of God^ &C. But rather they are therefore received by that folemn Sign into the Ojurch^ becaufe they did be-- fore belong to the Body ofChrifi^ by virtue of the Pro' mife. The Church of England^ in the Catechifm, makes the Catecliuraen fay, Inmy Baptifm^ wherein I was made a Member of Chrifi^ a Child of God, &c. A like Difpute might be raifed about the Efficacy of Sealing a Deed of Land. One may fay, it is the Sealing that conveys the Right to the Land : ano- ther, it is not that, but the Will of the Donor. Both will agree, that it is not the Parchment, Wax, &c. but the Will of the Donor folemnly fig- nified by thofe Tokens. Bifhop StilUngfleet does well obferve, in the Place I there quoted ^ Vnreafonabh- mfs of Separation^ Tart. 3. SeEi. 36. That the Church of England by requiring Sponfors, does not exclude any 'title to Baptifm, which the Child has by the Right (if the Parents. But he fhews at the fame Place, that if the Parents be fuppofed to have no Right ; yet upon the Sponfion of Godfathers, the Church has Right to adminilter Baptifm to Infants (which Mr. Bernard, as we (hall fee prefently, owns to be the Scnfe of other Proteftant Churches) and that thofe who think themfelves bound to baptize Chil- dren, o^ly by virtue of their Parent's Right, -will run Hijiory of hfa^tt-Baptifm, 1 1 rua into many perplexing Scruples, of which Mr. Bernard will give me occafion lo fpeak by and by. As for the Aflurance which they exprefs, that where Baptifm cannot be had, God will in mercy make up the Defeft, and take the fmcere Will of the Parent for the Deed : No Proteftant, that I know of, will difpute againft them, but have hopes of the fame. But this is by extraordinary Mercy, and (hould have no EfTed to alter the Offices of the Church vifible; which cannot properly (in an Of- fice for Burial, or any other Occalion) call a Per- fon one of her Members, till he has been regular- ly received as fuch, by the ordinary way of God's Appointment. At p. 572, where Ihadfaid, that all the ancient Chriftians (without the exception of one Man) do underftand that Rule of our Saviour, Johniii. 5. to mean Baptifm ^ and that I believed Calvin to be the firft Man that ever denied it fo to be meant : Mr. Bernard not willing to let Calvinh Name pafs, without pleading fomething for him, makes this Reflexion •, " It mufl; neverthelefs be own'd, that " there are confiderable Difficulties in this Expli- " cation of that Paflage given by the Ancients, and f which our Author takes to be the true one. It is " hard for any one to think, that none of aP this " Difcourfe of Jefus Chrifi to Nicodemus is to be ^' underftoodof the true [^or, proper, wm^^/f] Re- *' generation : Which Baptifm cannot confer of it f' felf ^ at leaft, unlefs one would fay, that all Infants ** that are baptiied, are aQually regenerate." Mr. Bernard feems here not to have a right Con- ception of the meaning of thefe ancient Chriftians. They did not think, that the outward Part of Bap- tifm was all that 'Jefus Chrifi underftood or meant by this Difcourfe ^ but that he comprehended ia thefe Words, born of Water and of the Spirit^ both fhe outward Part, the VVater, c^f. andalfothe in- ward ii A Defence of the ward Part, that Operation of the holy Spirit, by which the baptized Perfon is, by God's Mercy, and his gracious Covenant, received into a new Spiri- tual State, tranflated out of the State of Nature (to which a Curfe is due) into the State of Grace and Mercy in Jefus Chrifi : Or, (as Calvin s Words are) renewed and brought to a State of Salvation. St- Aujiin., in the Words which I cited, Van. i. Ciaf. XV. Selt. 9. Ihews, how he and the Ancients underflood the Regeneration or new Birth of an In- fant in Baptifm, as meant by our Saviour, in the plaineft Words poflible. Aqua exhibens forinjecus Sacr amentum gratia.^ & fftritus operans intrinfecm bene- Return gratia^ folvens vinculum culpa^ Scc Thefe ta- ken together, he means, do regenerate the Infant. And is not this a happy and dcfirable Regenerati- on for the Infant ? Is not the Spiritual State of the Child, by this merciful Method of God's appoint- ment, fo altered for the better, that he may well be faid to be born anew, and entered into a new State ? When he was by Nature born in Sin, in a State of Spiritual Pollution, fubjed: to God's Wrath, &c. are not the Pardon of that Sin or Pollution, the Re- leafe of the old Bond, the Admittance into a new Covenant, the'Adoption into God's Family, to be Partaker of Chrift's Purchafc, &c. fufficient to de- nominate a veritable Regeneration ? But Mr. Bernard fays, Baptifm cannot confer this of it felf. Not the Water of it felf, for certain. BuC the Water, and the Grace or Mercy of God, ap- plied to the Perfon by the holy Spirit (whofe good Offices, Chrifi has promifed fliall accompany his Ordinances) can. But then it will follow, he fays, that all haptiz.ed Infants are aUually regenerate. In this Senfe of the Word ^entered into a nert> Spiritual State^ which is the old Senfe of if] they are •, and they have ^onligned to them, the Promi- fes Hiftory of Infmt-Baptifm. i^ fes of fuch Affiftances of God's Spirit, as they fhall from time to time be capable of. And in that State they continue for ever, if they themifelves do not by adtual Wicked nefs break, forfeit, and difan- nui the gracious Covenant into which they are then entered. Mr. Bernard argues, that if our Saviour had meant no more than this •, "that would have been to no purpofe^ which he [peaks of the uiBion of the Spirit upon the Heart of thofe who are regenerated^ and which he compares to the Wind, &c. That Grace of the Spirit, which we have menti- oned, is given both in the Cafe of the Adult, and alfo of Infants. There are fome other Graces of the fame Spirit, which are given peculiarly to the Adult in their Baptifm *, as a prefent converting the Heart, enlightning the Mind, comforting the Soul, &c. When we maintain, that this Difcourfe of our Saviour concerning Baptifm, and the Rege- neration of the Perfon, is applicable to Infants; we do not think that it relates to them only. On the Contrary, in this and moil other Texts, where our Saviour or the Apoftles do fpeak of Baptifm, though their Words do comprehend and reach to the Cafe of Infants ^ yet they fcem to have a more efpecial Eye to the Cafe ot the adult Perfons of that time. Inafmuch as ('though both were to be done) the Baptizing of the Adult, and the convert- ing and fitting them for it, was the firft and chief Thing which the Apoftles had at that time to do. Now our Saviour's general Words fborn of Wa- ter and of the Spirit] do comprehend both thefe gracious Effeds of God's Spirit, adapted to the leveral Subjecfls according to their refpedtive Ca- pacities. And whereas Mr. Bernard brings in, as an Obje- ftion againft this, thofe other Words of our Savi- our there j That which is born of the Flefl:, is Flefij ; and 14 A Defence of the and that which is horn of the Spirit^ is Spirit, St. Au* fiins Explication of that Place, which I recited, is natural and plain ; as it is applied by him to In- fants (as well as adult Perfons) baptized : For In- fants are born in a State of Corruption and Guilt, (which is called, bom of the Flejli) but in Baptifni born again by the Spirit to a State of Grace, and Fa- vour, and Bleffing. Unlefs Mr. Bernard will deny, that the Spirit of God, belide his Office of convert- ing the Heart in the Adult, does alio in the Cafe of baptized Infants, apply to them the Pardon of original Sin, the favour of being received in- to the Chriftian Covenant, configning to them fuch Grace as Ihall affift them as they come to Years, d^r. Which I fhewed (in this very Chapter, on which we are treating) that the Antipxdobaptifts them- felves do allow to be done in the Cafe of all In- fants, baptized or not, which, dying in Infancy, arefaved. And no Chriftian, I think, will ven- ture to fay, that any Infant can go to Heaven without this Application of the Merits of Chrift to him. Therefore that which Mr. Bernard fays next, XThe Authority of the Fathers of the Churchy is of no Force againji an Explication founded upon what goes bc" fore, and what follows^ in the Context^ and vpon the Rules of the befi Critics^ raifes no Objeftion again ft this Explication of the Fathers, which is agreeable to the Words, both of the Text and Context. On the Contrary, I am glad to hear him fay this. For if no fuch Privilege be to be allowed to the Fathers^ it will follow a fortiori, that much lefs is the Authority of one Man, Calvin (though he be for the General, a good Expofitorj of Force againft an Explication of this Text, which is both natural in it felf, and was ever accounted fo by allChriftians, without Exception, for 14 or 1500 Years, and is accounted fo ftill by molt Chriltians. And 1 think, . ' the Hijiory of Infant-B'aptifm. \e the Difdain, with which all Chriftians do receive that Explication of the Quakers^ whereby they evade the Force of fuch Texts as concern- the other Sacrament, and do by the Words, Bread^ Wine^ Eatings Drinking, &c. force themfeives to mean fome other myftical Thing •, (hoiild make one have the lefs regard to Calvin $ way of interpreting this Text, which is fo very like it, who will have no material Water to be meant in this Text ♦, as they, no material i?rf 4^ in the other. For the Apoftlc's Words, T^e Bread which we break, is the Communion •/ the Body of Chrifi, &c. do not more plainly ex- prefs the external, as well as internal Part of that Sacrament, than our Saviour's Words, bom of Water and of the Spirit, do of this. Efpecially if they be compared with other like Texts, as Tit. iii. 5. The wafhing of Regeneration, and renewing of the holy Spi- rit, &c. To fay, that thefe do not mean Baptifm, is as great a Paradox, as to fay, that the other do not mean the Lord's- Supper; And at this rate of altering Words, or expounding away the plain Senieof them, any Texts of Scripture whatever may be eluded. Mr. Bernard grants however, that " Our Saviour ** does in thefe Words make an Allvfion to Ba.p- " tifm ', to that Baptifm with Water, which had " been in ufe among the Jews, and which John Bap- *' tifi adminiftred to the Jews themfeives." But furely, our Saviour's affirming in fo folemn a manner, verily, verily, &c. that without it, none Ihall enter into the Kingdom of God , fhould be taken for more than an Allufion. He adds, that " Jefus Chrifi did mean neverthe- ** lefs, the proper Regeneration, wl^ch conlilts ifl *' the Converfion of the Heart." The Queftion here between him and us, is, whe* thef no Regeneration, which is not accompanied with prefent adtual Converfion of the Heart, can be t6 a Defence of the be called i^ropr Regeneration? I think it may btf foked thus^ As the Command of Circumcifion^ which was given in general (both to Infants, and to fuch adult Perfons as had not yet received it) carried with it an Injunftion of prefent adual Cir- cumcllion ot the Heart to the adult Receiver of itj but not to the Infant Receiver •, and yet was pr^- pr Circumcifion to both of them t SoBaptifm car- ries along with it a prefent adtual Converfton of Heart in the adult Receiver, but not in the Infant Re- ceiver ^ and yet is proper Regeneration to both of them. If Calvin and fome late Writers will give the Name of projier, or, veritable, only to that to which they (without the Confent of Antiquity or the greatelt part of Chriftiansj have appropriated the Word •, it is but a Difpute of Words. At p- 575. He asks, " Whether I, who would *' have Men have fo great Refped for the Fathers, *' can fhew any plain Place of Scripture which may *' fupport that Opinion, concerning a middle State ^' (in which unbaptized Infants will be) which I '' had (hewn to be held by fome of them ?" Now I never pretended to that, nor to give any Determination at all to that Qiieftion j but fhcw'd it to be a Thing in which half the Church was of one Opinion (viz.. the Greek Church) and half of the other. Only I gave a Reafon from what our Saviour fays, Luke xii. 48. that if they do mifs of Heaven, and be under feme degree of Condemna- tion ; it is to be hoped, that it will be (as St. -4«- ' ftin faysj a very gentle one. At p. 580. Mr. Bernard is more angry with me* I had faid, Part. 1. Chap. vi. SeB. 10. that fome mo- dern Calvifiifisj, would eftablifh a Rule (which I there fhewed to be contrary to the Praftice of the Chriftians) in the baptizing of Children ; that none are to be baptized but the Children of Parents actu- ally godly and religious : And that Bilhop Stilling^ feet Hiftory of Infa-^t-BAptifm* l^ fleet had fully fhewn the Abfurdity and Inconfiflcn- cy of this Opinion ; and how they can never, in ma- ny Cafes that may be put, come to a Refolution, what Children they may baptize, and what not. For which, 1 quoted his VnreafonahUnefs of Separati" en, Pan 3. SeB. 36. Mr. Bernard fays, " He will not ftand to recite " that Part of the Chapter, becaufe it will dediffi- " cult to do it without angring l^checqing] me, who *' do fet out as abfurd, the Dodtrine of fome whom " I call Calvinifis : And that he would not be ex- " pofed to the Tentation of returning Injury for *' Injury Qor Reproach]. That he believes I do " not underftand their Tenet. That they do not *' refufe Baptifm to all the Children even of Infidels. " They give it to all fuch as the Parents do aban- ^' don, or whofe Education they will .leave to Chri- *' ftians. That in Holland they baptize Infants *' found in the Streets, tho' there may be among f' them fome born of Jewijh or Heathen Parents. If Mr. Bernard had read the Difcourfe of Bifliop StilUngfleet which I there cite \ he would have feea that the Bifhop there fpeaks only of fome Separa- tifts in our Nation, who do make that one Part of their quarrel with our Church •, the giving Baptifm to the Children of ungodly Parents, (which yet our Church does not without fufficient Sponfions) and that he does not meddle with the Pradice of any foreign Churches. Neither did I mean any Thing of what I faid there in reference to them ^ but only to thofe who trouble our People here by their unchriftian Schifms and Cavils ; fecking about for any handle to draw the People from our Commu- nion, and ufing this for one : For which, as it fecnis, the foreign Churches give 'em no Occafion or En- couragement. For if thofe Churches which Mr. 5fr- nard fpeaks of, do as he fays, I do not fee but that they do as the Antients did, and as the CI u ch of Q England I S A Defence of the England does. For neither they, nor we, would baptize any Children of Infidels, but fuch as fome Chriftian had the Power or PofTelTion of, and did promife for their Chriftian Education or Inftrudi- on. So that Things being rightly underftood, here was no occafion of checking either him, or me, or the Biftop, if living. _ P. 585. Whereas I had noted (or rather had cited Mr. Rujfen as notingj the way of the Englijh Antipjedobaptifts receiving the Sacrament (which he affirms to be^ fitting at a common Table, and handing the Elements one to another, as Ihewing (outwardly at leaft) lefs devotion than moft other Chriftians Ihew ; Mv. Bernard fays, "-It is certain, *' this is the moft antient manner of receiving that *' Sacrament^ for it was fo, that Jefus Chrifi cele- " brated it with his Apoftles," fuch as learned Men have proved that the Jews and firft Chriftians did fet apart for Holinefs. He fhould have taken notice, that, it was not at a common Table, but in an vTzpZov. Nor did the Apoftles hand it to one another ^ but Chrift gave it to them. He fays, " As this way of receiving is generally '*• enough ufed in Holland'^ Mr. ^T^// certainly will *' not blame me for my Refied^ion," I am eafy •, provided he will not blame me for applying the Words of Chrift, John iii. 5. to Baptifm -, which the Church of England (as well as the antient Church) does, in her Office for Baptifm fo apply ^ nor for feying, that an Infant, when baptiz'd,is Regenerate : Which ftie fays in the fame Office. Nor for my Refleftion on his Saying, that it is not the Sacra* merit of Baptifm which makes us Chriftians. For flic dees ill the Catechifm (befides what I cited before) fay ', that we being by Nature born in Sin, and the Ch Id en of Wrath, are hereby f by Baptifm] made the Children of Grace. And one of the 39 Articles of our Church, is, that by it, as by an Jnftrumont, they that Hifiory of Infmt Baptifm„ 1 9 that receive it rightly^ are grafted into the Church. And fo fay all the ancient Chriftians whom I cited. Particularly St. Chryfofiom. 'OvJ'iU o 4°? B*T']tVfi£t7oj He fays7arther, that " He does not know what *' the Churches of Holland have done to me. But *' it appears by fome Places of my Book, that I " am not very much their Friend." This is faid with Refpea to a Pafiage a little before in the fame Chapter, viz,, part 2. Chap-Yiii- Sect. 5. And forafmuch as others, befide Mi'. Bernard j have animadverted on that Paffage •, I will let it down here at large, as it was in the firft Edition, which Mr. Bernard had (for in the Second it is fomewhat Ihortened) that I may know the Senti- ments of the reft of my Friends, how far I was blameable in it, 1 had fpoke of the Alenonites^ or Minnifis in Holland, how apt they are to divide from one another. And then added. " The Worft is, that not only the Minrnp, but " the Holland People generally have the Humour *' to run into Divifions and Schifms in Religion *' upon almoft any difference of Opinion. There is " not the like of them again in the World for " this Temper. Whereas the great aim and Inte- " reft of Religion is Unity and Communion in the " Worfhip of God, notwithftanding different Sen- " timents in Points not fundamental ; and Schifms *' and Parties are forbidden, as Courfes that will '' certainly ruin it : There is no Sin that thefe Peo- " pie think to be a lefs Sin than Schifm is. They " are generally of a Temper that is commenda- " ble in many other Qualities : But for this Matter '' they are the Subjeft of the Mockery of the Pa- " pifts, and the Grief and Shame of the Prote- " ftants. How far the Minifters there do their " Duty in fhewing the People the Sinfnlnefs of *' Schifm, I know not. Some do think, thjt a C 2 *' Couii- «6 J Defence of ths " Country ^o difpofed, as that, let what Str^ngef *' will, come thither, and bring with him any odd " and fingular Opinion whatfoever ^ he fhall find " there a Church perfectly fitted to his Humour j " has thereby a great Advantage for alluring a *' Concourfe of Men, and promoting Trade. If '' this be allowed, I am afraid it is to little pur- " pofe to preach there againft the Sin of Schifm. " And perhaps the Minifters dare not do it. And in another Chapter, Chaf. xi. SeB. i. fpeak- ing of the fame Thing, viz.. of the Temper of fome Chriftians to fet up a feveral Church for every fe- veral Opinion *, I fubjoined. " This one may call the Holland way of Chrifti- " anity. Not that the States of this Country do, *' I fiippofe, approve of this as befl:, or would have " it fo. But many People there fell into that way. " And they have been imitated by another Nati- " on, and as fome do now fay outdone in it. How- *' ever that be •, it is the raoft contrary to the Na- * " ture and defign of Chriftianity of any Thing that *' could be devifed. For Chrift, as he is but one " Head, never defigned to have any more but \)ne '« Body, &c. , The late Archbifhop of Canterbury told me, that ' a Statef-man of England had faid to him concern- ing thefe Paflages of mine^ How comes a Minifter to meddle with the jijfairs of our Mlies f He did not « tell me who it was. And though 1 could guefs, yet 1 will not. Meddling in State Matters, 1 know, is dangerous. But preaching againft Schifm is preaching a Chriftian Doftrine. Againft fuch a nanifeft Wickednefs, and fo condemned by God's Word, as Divifions in Religion are, I humbly hope, a Minljler may preach or write. And that, whe- ther it be our own Country, or a Neighbour Nation, in which they are ripe. Efpecially if the Example of that Neighbour Nation does, as I faid, infeft and fpread Hi ft or y of If7f4nt'Baptifm, 2t fpread among our People ; and the State of Religi- on among us be the worfe for our imitating them in Matters of Religion. What Mr. Bernard Remarks on thefe Paflages, is at his 592 Page. To fiievv, that they do denounce to the People the Sinfulnefs of Schifm *, he fays, that in the Liturgy of. the Lor£s Suffer^ which is in Vfe in the Walloon Cjurches^ and is the fame with that of the French Churchy they do excommunicate by Name all that make Sedls, and break the Unity of the Church, I hope then, that the People will mind this : And that the Minifters there will apply their Warnings to thofe, whom they think in the Fault, that they do not live and die in a State of Soul, fubjed to Excommunication. If it will be any Satisfaction to Mr. Bernard to have us be as free and ready to acknowledge our own Blemifties, Faults, and Misfortunes, as we are to fpeak of thofe of other Churches and Nations \ v;e rnqft, I think, with Sorrow and Shame confefs, that fince this time of his, and ray writing, there have been publifhed in England more rank Princi- ples of Schifm than ever were in Holland : And that, not in any Conventicle, but openly, avowedly, ia .the Face of the World ; and in fuch Circumftances, as that our main Hope left, under God, is, that the People themfelves, even thofe that were other- wife inclined to Separations, will fee and confider the mifchievous and deftruftive Confequences of them (deftruflive not only of that general Unity which fhould be in the univerfal Church, or any national Church •, but even of the Unity, Society, Order, Government, or Authority at all), and will ftart back from fuch an unskilful Propofal as ys^ould difllpate Members, and diflblve the Communion, not only of any eftablifhed Church, but of any Congre- gation of Ten or fewer Chridians. C s Upo» 22 A Defence of the Upon the whole, I take Mr. Bernard'^ Remarks on my Book to be fuch as become a learned, and alfo a civil and friendly Writer. As for the Diffe- rence of Opinion concerning fome Points of lefs moment in Religion ^ it will always happen. And as a Part of my Book was to fhew, that they ought not to break Communion ^ fo neither ought they to hinder Friendfhip. Efpecially when each does la- bour to defend and maintain the Tenets and Cu- ftonns of that part of the Church, or of that Na- tion, whereof he is by Providence a Member. ' A moderate degree of Zeal in fuch a Cafe is commen- dable •, and a little Excefs of it pardonable : Much more pardonable than in the Cafe of thofe, who fpend their Zeal in oppoiing and quarrelling with the Ufages, Tenets, and Ceremonies of their owa Church and Nation. In the Year 1709. came out a Pamphlet with a Mock-Title : Mr. WalFj Hiflory of hfant-Baptifm Improved. The Author, Mr. Emlin, thought that from one Paragraph in my IntroduUion (wherein I obferved, that the y-jHrj, who gave Baptifmf toPro^ felytes and their Infants, did not ufe it for them- felves, nor for their own Children) he might gain fome Advantage to that which is his, and fome o- ther Sochians Opinion ; that Chriftians might do likewife, i. e. give Baptifm to fuch as are newly converted to Heathenifm, and their Infant Children ; but not ufe it themfelvcs in a Nation where Chri^ ftianity has been for fome time fettled. He obferves in his firft Page, that many others before me have fpoken of this Ufe of Baptifm among the Jews : Which Obfervation renders the Page be- fore (-y/iL. the Title Page) very impertinent. For if the Jevps Cuftom was fuch ^ and many others before me have fpoke of it ; the pretended Confe- quence (or Improvement as he calls it) drawn from thence Hiftory of Infant -Bafitifm. 27 thence fhould be called an Improvement of that Cu- ftom, or of the Books of thofe that fpoke of it firft, rather than of mine, which fpoke of it laft : So that he afts unkindly to fay, that my Book gave him the juft occafion he fpeaks of. And I had rather it fhould be taken from any Body than from me : Since I judge it fuch an Improvement as all other Errors are ^ a falfe and heretical Confequcnce pretended to be drawn from Premifes which are true. His main and only Argument is, that llnceour Saviour gave his Commiftion to his Apoftles (of carrying Baptifm, together with the preaching of the Gofpel, among all Nations) in fuch ftiort Words •, they muft do with Baptifm, as had been always done in their Nation, except fuch Circumftances wherein he has given any particular Order for Al- teration. And therefore that as the Jews baptiz'd any new converted Profelyte, and fuch Children as he brought with him, but none of the Pofterity of them : And as the Nation it felf of the Jews was at firft all baptized in Mofes's Time, Men, Women, and Children •, but none of their pofteri- ty afterward: So the Apoftles, and fucceeding Chriftians, ftiould give the Ghriftian Baptifm to all new Converts, and to their Infants : But in fuc- ceeding Generations, a Family or a Nation, where* in the Chriftian Religion has been for fome time owned and profefled, need not baptize their Chil- dren at all, neither in Infancy nor afterward : But the Chriftian Baptifm may wholly ceafe in fuch a Nation (as the Mofa'icd Baptifm did among the Jews^ till there was fet up a new Baptifm in the Nature of Chrift; except when any Heathen Con- vert comes over to Chriftianity. And he is pofitive, that Chrift in his Gofpel, has not given any Rule for Alteration in this Matter, or any Command which can oblige the Pofterity of C 4 ^^^^ 24 -^ Defence of the baptized Parents to receive Baptifm •, but fays, P. 8. They are accounted as already baptiz.ed^ or clear? fed, in their Varents Baptifm : And in the next Page he hugs that odd Saying of Mr. Lock *, They are born Mem- hers of the Chriflian Church. VVhich whether it were meant to promote this Tenet, I know not. He has brought nothing new to confirm this /w- provement unknown to Chriftians, till vented by Socinus about 1 50 Years ago : Nor has faid in effeft any Thing more than I in my IntroduElion^ SeB. 3. mentioned as pleaded by the Socinians. So I need only refer to what I briefly faid there to obviate their Plea. I obferved there, after having fet forth the Jews way of managing Baptifm, that ^twas our Saviour rvhofi'fi ordered by himfelf and by his Forerunner^ that every particular Terfon, Jew or Gentile, or of what Parents foever born, muft be born again of Watery Johniii. 3, 5. He fays P. 10. Thefe Words of our Saviour can only relate to fuch as were converted from Infidelity. Nor could Nicodemus be fuppofed to have vnderjiood them ctherwife \ fince with the Jews, only fuch we) e SuhjeEls of Baptifm. Such a Skill in expounding Scripture is to be piti- ed. Our Saviour's Words are, All that do enter in- to the Kingdom of Heaven muft be fo born again. Is this, only thofe that are converted from Infi- delity? But Nicodemus knew of no other that were to be baptized. Then Mr. Emlin would have Nicodemus underhand our Saviour's Words thus j All that you know are to be baptiz'd. Whereas our Saviour in- forms Nicodemus oi what he knew not before, that all muft be baptized. And he adds, v. 7. Te muft be born again. Which ye being fpoken to a Jetf^ includes thofe of that Nation, as well as the Hea- thens, who, Nicodemus knew mult be fo borji. Our Hifiory of InfAnt-Baptifm. 2^ Our Saviour's next Words (which I alfo cited a little after on the fame occafion, JntroduEi. §. 5.) make it yet plainer. That which is born of the 'FleJJy^ (which I there paraphrased*, whether of a Jewijh or Gentile^ baptiz'd or unbapti^i'd Parent) is Flejh ', and mult be horn again. Mr. Emlin takes no notice of this. How he and the Socinians underftand the Point of original Sin, or our natural Generation in a corrupt: State, 1 know not. But the Catholic Church has always underftood this natural Corruption to attend all that are born, not only of unbaptiz'd, or impi- ous, but alfo of baptiz'd and godly Parents. I do Part I. Cha^. xix. §. 18. cite St. JufiinMvglng the ?> Mr. Bfnlin ventures farther into Ecdefiaflic Hi- itory ; and demands, how early Inftances I or any other can give of the Baptifm of any Perfon born of Chriftians. To which I anfwer. All the Proof and Evidence that I or any other have given of Infant- Baptifm in thofe antient times, is, of the Baptifm of Children born of Chriftians. For wherever thole Antients do Ipeak of Infants baptized ; they mean Infants of Chriftians. IrerKHus^ TertulUan, Origen^Cy- prian, &c. for what they fay of Infants, do mean thefe. For the cafe of baptizing the Infants of any Heathen, happened either never at all, or fo feldom, as not to be brought to account. It could never be but when a Chriftian happened to have the Cuftody of a Heathen's Child. At that time the Heathens might, if they pleafed, takeaway from the Chrifti- ans their Children : But not the Chriftians from them. Mr. Emlin feems to be aware of this : And therefore ftrikes in here with the Antipaedobaptifts 5 and fays, that I have given no Inftances at all that are early enough. He makes feme difpute about Tertullian \ none againft Iremus, or Origen^ and ex- prefly yields St. Cyprian, I fhall not ftand (now in my prefent Difcourfe with him) to vindicate the for- mer Evidences. But only note thefe few things. Tertulliariy who difliked the baptizing the Chil- dren of Chriftians »« Infancy, unlefs in danger of Death, is politive in this •, that they ftiould however be baptized, when they come to underftanding ,'" '' Let them come to Chrift when they are grown *' up 5 let them come when they underftand; when *' they are inftrufted whither it is that they come: " Let them be made Chriftians when they can know *' Chrift, c^c." as I quoted him (and this by the way, jfhews he did not count them Chriftians^ till bapti- zed) And at another Place which I cited from him, fays, Ail Believers from thenceforward •, Qi. e. from Chrift's time] wtre f;a^fiz,ed. And t^herefore the P Fro:i i^^ ^A Defence of the Progeny of Chriftians, as well as converted Hea- thens. And Juflin Martyr^ born in the Apoftle's time, having fet forth the manner of the Chriftians re- ceiving the holy Communion, adds, Jpl. i. pro^e ji- nem. This eating and drinking is called the Eucharift ; of which it is not lawful for any to partake ^ hut one that believes the 'things taught by us to be true \ and has been jvafied with that Laver which is for the Remijfion of Sins, and for Regeneration. Thefe were, many of them, the defcendants of Chriftians, and muft have been baptized: For elfe, Jufiin fays, they could not re- ceive the Eucharift ^ fo that Mr. £w//Vs Q_ueftion at the end of his Treatife, '' Whether a Perfon " may communicate at the LordVTable, who is *' born in Chrifiianity (fo he words it •, he fhould *' have faid in Chrifiendom) of baptized parents, but has not himfelf been baptized in Perfon," (which Queftion, he fays, may be determined by what he has there faid) has been from the beginning already determined againft him. For Jufrin fays, None mvji fart ah but baptized Terfons. Not now to mention Mr. IVhiflons Scripture: Which both exprefly charges Chriftians to baptize their Infants : And at another Place, forbids any unbaptized Perfon to commu- nicate at the Lord's-Table, on pain of eternal Dam' nation. But I have been too long in refuting fo ill- grounded and exploded an Error. I had faid in my htroduBiony that all Children ad- mitted into Covenant were wont to have fome Badge or Sign of fuch Admiflion. Some had Cir*- cumcifion, Baptifm, and Sacrifice. The Female Children of Profelytes, Baptifm and Sacrifice. The Female Children of natural Jews had at leaft, a Sa- crifice offered for them. This laft Mr. £mlin de- nies : faying. It is not true, and (being a great Judge^ gives his Warrant, that though I have confidently affirmed it^ I cannot prove it. lean prove that ic is Hijlory of Infant Bapifm, 3 5 is the Interpretation of Scripture, and of the Books of the Jewijl} Writers, given by far better judges than himfelf. I had it from the Learned Dr. AlUxy who being kindly pleafed to make fome Notes, on what I had in the JmroduBlon written concerning the Jewijh Cuftoms, added this; and could, I make no doubt, have given proofs. However, I my felf had in my Book, Parti. Chaf.Y.% i. quoted Ori- gen affirming a Sacrifice to be offered for every In- fant ; and referring to that Text, Levit. xii. 8. A pair of Turtle Doves ^ or two young Pigeons : One for a fin Offering, the other for a burnt Offering. Where he adds. For what Sin is this one Pigeon offered ? Can the Child that is new-born have committed any Sin? Hean- fwers, It has even then Sin, S^c. and proceeds to fpeak of the Chriftian Baptifm of Infants as ordered by the Apoftles for that Reafon among others. And Mr. Emlin cannot efcape, as the Antipaedobaptifts do, by denying the Book, when they cannot recon- cile their Praftice to it. For befides that, Sayings to this Purpofe do fo often occur in his tranflated Works, that they cannot be all thought to be in- terpolated •, his Greek Works have the like. One whereof t there §. 7. recited out of the 7th Book contra Celf. Where he tells Celfus ^ The Prophets \jor Books of the Jewiflj Law J do order a Sin Offering to be offered >y -w^ rcoy a^i yiyiuvntAvav, «$■ « ner.QctpZy ^ d(/.ct{jU(. Where a.f]i ycyiWi^Avcov, is fo exaftly the fame Phrafe with Rufinus^s nuper editus parvulus^ that there is little doubt but that it was the fame Word which is fo tranflated in that Homily on the Ro- mans. And when the blelTed Virgin at her Purifi- cation made this Offering, Luh ii. 24. It is expref- fed V. 27. that Simeon came in when the Parents brought in the Child Jefus to do for him after theCu' (lorn of the Law. From which (and perhaps other Proofs) learned Men do conceive the Offering to have been for the Child then born •, or partly for D 2 the 5 6 'A Defence of the the Woman and partly for the Child. And though this was a Child that could need no Siri'Ojfering v yet ir pleafed God, that in this, and in Circumci- iion and Baptifm, there Ihould be in his Cafe fulfilled all the Righteoufnefs of the Law. And though this was the Cafe of a Male Child, the Law Levit.M.^ makes this Obligation equal on the Birth of a Male or Female Child. Mr. Emlin^ if he meet with a thing which he does not underftand, (hould not prefently conclude ; It is not true, or, that no Bo- dy can prove it. He fays, p. 12. that there is as plain Teftimony from St. Cyprian, that it was c«- fiomary to give the Eucharifi to Infants (and he fpeaks as one that means mere Infants, or the youngeft Infants) as there is for baptiz^ing them. And, that he does not fee a^y better Autority from Antiquity for one than the other. Now though / think this is noC . true-, and, that he cannot prove it*, I will not be pofitive, till I fee whether he can or not. There is the more need he Ihould, if he can *, becaufe two that have written fince him, Mr.Gfi/t, and Mr. Whif- ton, have followed him in that Affirmation: And what he has fpoken doubtfully, they have faid pofi- tively. Since they all three have writtefl againft my Book ^ they ought in all reafon to have refuted the Inftances that I there Part. IL Chap. ix. §• 1 5. i <^, 1 7- give of the great difference between the Evidence from Antiquity which is brought for Infants Bap- tifm, and which is brought for their receiving the other Sacrament, before they had fo fecurely affirm- ed it to be alike. And it happens well, that I did there put in a Caveat againft allowing any Evi- dence for the later from Clem. Confiitutions : And alfo that I (hewed the Miftake of thofe who have faid (as Mr. Emlin does here) that St. Aujiin pre- tended that the later (the Dodlrine of giving the Communion to Infants) is an Apofiolie Tradition^ as well as the former. As Htflory of Injant-Baptifm. ^j As to the Gonfequence for baptizing Chriftians Children, to enter them into Covenant, taken from the circumcifing of the Children of the ^^fipj, which was for the fame purpofe^ Mr. Emlin allows thac St. Paul does fpeak of Baptifm as being to Chrifti- ans inftead of Circumcifion j and that St. PauCs Words Col.il. ii. 12. are fo underftood (being a fairer Difputant than Mr. Gale^ who will not owa that Senfe of the Words, tho' it be very plain) but yet Mr. Emlin fays, It does not follow that the SubjeBs of each mvfi be the fame: and inftances ia the Females. I anfwer •, It does follow that they Ihould be the fame, except where the Gofpel Rules do diredt an Alteration. But St. Paul difcourfing of Baptifm, C7^/. iii. 27, 28. fays, that in refpedt of it there is neither Jew nor Greek ; there is neither Male nor Female, &c, i. e. there is no difference betweea them. As for the reft of his Remarks j that I have gi- ven too difrefpe^tful a Cenfure on Grotius •, I have fpoke my Mind before : And do here add, that Tliat is nothing to him, nor to his Caufe. That I have ufed Expreffions too Iharp againft the Socinians (which, I fancy, gave occafion to his Writing a« gainft me) It is becaufe I take that Opinion to be, not like theirs who differ from us in fmaller Mat- ters \ but fo diredly contrary to an infinite Number of plain Declarations of Scripture concerning our blelTed Saviour, that it deferves abhorrence, and has been in all Ages abhorred by all Chriftians, DOt only Catholics^ but Ariansy and even Emomi* tins. I fhall not ftand to anfwer any of his weak Ar- guments for it ^ favethat he takes more Advantage than there is any good Ground for, from the Words of the Latin and EngUflj Tranflations of Col. i. 1 5. where Chrift is in thofe Languages ftyl'd PrimogC' nitus omnis Cr(atur<^. The Firfi-born of every Creature : D 3 Or ^S A Defence of the Or, as he chufes to render it •, Tk Vlr^ begotten of the Creation. The Senfe of which Words, and Con- fequence from them, he (lily infinuates to be, that Chrift has no other Nature than ^ created one. The Greek Words themfelvesdo not give any fuch Occa- lion. For 'Trpuji'loKOi ':rd.<7m KJio-ica was always undcr- ftood by the Greeks (who bed knew the Emphafis of their own Language^ even by the Arians^ to iignify, not Firfi-born of the Creatures^ fo as to in- clude him among them ^ but Genitus ante ovmem Cre^ aturam: Begotten before all the Creation. And it waS this very Phrafe of the Apoftle, CoL'i. 15. which they in almoft all their Creeds paraphrafed by thofe Words, Begotten before all Worlds. Evfebius at the Council of Nice recites the Creed of his Church, which gives firft the Apoltle's own VJox<\^^'7r^uro]oMv '7ra,(rm y^icT'-af J and immediately fubjoins by way of Explication, Te) 'rrebflav liiccvuv \k Ta ©£» Uccjfipi yzyiv nyucvov^ begotten of God the Father before all Worlds^ for Ages]. And fo it is in the ConftantinofoUtan Creed, the Arian Creed at Antioch, and in Arius\ own Creed. Which is much more unexceptionable, than to fay, Firfi'born of every Creature. Mr. Emlin feems at the End of his Book to be felicitous, where, or in what Church, be and his Partners in this Opinion (hall be admitted to re- ceive the Communion, without believing the Divi- nity of Chrift, and without being baptized. He fays/?. i5. that I, no queftion, take care to have no Socinian Commvnicants in my PariJIh I am glad he has that Opinion of me. And p. 18. He is angry with me for faying, as I do at the end of Chap. 9. of the 2d Part. Among all the Abfurdities that ever roe re held, none ever maintained that any Perfonjhould partake of the Communion before he was baptiTLed. I quoted ju(t now Jufiin Martyr faying the fame. But if the Church of England will not, he (hould not, methinks, defpair of finding fome that will re* Ceivc Hifiory of Infunt-Baptifm. ^g celve them. For we have of late in England great ftore of Churches •, and in the Shops of Religion, great ftore of new Suits ^ that a Man mult have ve- ry ill Luck whom none of them will fit. As the Courfe of Trade for Religions now goes •, If he can't fit himfelf in EngUndy I queftion whether he can be fitted in HolUnd with any Church \ as the Word Church is taken for a Society, or Body, confifting of Paftors and People. But there is lately fet up in -fw^/^ff^ another Notio^n, fitter for this Purpofe than any that has yet been broached in Holland it felf. That the Church of Chrifl: is not a Society, or a Body that requires any Union, or Coherence, or Government. It is only the Number, fmall or great, differ fed or united of Perfons that adhere to King Jefus. And the lefs regard they have to any Spiri- tual Governors, Minifters, Rule or Order j and the more clofe and immediate this Adhefion is to Chrifl, the better. So that our Author, if he can find no Minifter of Chrilt that will give him the Communion, nor any one that will receive it with him ; may take it himfelf alone, by virtue of that clofe and immediate dependance upon Ch^rift. This anfwers the Wiflies of all Heterodox and felf-opinionated Men by one Pofition. And as the Flatterers of the Terfian King, though they could not find any Law for this or that luftful Courfe which he followed \ yet found one that was worth them all ; that a King of ?erfia might do what he pleafcd i £o though there be no incouragement in Scripture for Sociniamfm, omiffion of Baptifm, &Co This lays open a Gap for all at once, that every Man may be of what Religion he pleafes, and in- terpret Scripture as he thinks fit, without any con- troul from any Church, or any Governors, any Ar^ tides, Canons, or Cenfures thereof: Or from the received Dodtrines and Interpretation of any anti- D 4 §nt '40 A Defence of the cnt Chriflians or Fathers, thofe xocaI Men in feveral Ages, This Polition, I confefs, feems a defperate one for a Man to venture his Soul upon : Becaufe though according to it Chrift has not any Kingdom, nor does interpofe in this World •, yet the Kingdom of the other World to which we muft come, is all his ; and he has declared, that we fhall be judged there at the laft Day by the Word which he has given us here^ and a great part of that Word is, that we ftiould in this World hear the Churchy and obey them that have by his appointment the Rule over us. • Mr. Whipn was not the next that wrote againft sny Book. Mr. Gale wrote before them. But be- caufe I have a Mind to difpatch at once, what I have to anfwer to all fuch of my Antagonifts as have written in the way of Civility, Candor, Modefly, and Argument, before I enter on anfwer- ing Mr. Gale's Reflexions, which are made up of Declamation, infulting. Reproaches and Untruths j 1 fhall next take a Ihort view of what Mr. Whifton has obferved concerning it. And it need be but a fhort one •, for it is little that he has faid. The Account that he has given of the Reafons of the Change of his Opinion about Infant-Baptifm, feems to have been written in as much hafte, as the Change it felf was made. I am concerned only in that Part of it, where he pretends to Ihew, that in the Paflages of the Fathers, which I produced concern- ing the Baptifm of Infants, the Word Infants may be underftood of Children old enough to have been catechized, and capable of Baptifm upon their own Profeflion, an4 Faith of the Chriftian Religion. And firlt, as to the Faffage of IrenAus^ U 2. c. 39. where Infants are reckoned among thofe of the fe- f Cr^l A^es \Jnfms and little ones^ ^nd Children, and Xouthfy Jiijtory of Jftfant-Baptifml 4^ Youths, And elder Terfons'] which are by Chrifl rege^ nerated unto God : He had before, p. 7. granted it to be undeniable that the Word Regeneration is ge- nerally, if not conftantly, ufed with relation to Baptifmd Regeneration. And it is indeed, as he fays, a Thing undeniable by any modeft Arguer. Neither does he, like Mr. Gale^ fly to that pitiful Subter- fuge, of denying the PalTage to be genuin. He grants the Place to fpeak of the Bapifm of Infants. But fays, " Iren&us does fo often after this FafTage expref- *' ly reckon Thirty Years of Age, the beginning " of Touth \ and Forty of elder Jge, and by con- *' fequence muft allow Infancy to reach to Ten, that *' this Teftimony only (hews that fuch Children as *' he calls Infants were then commonly by Ten Years ^' old regenerated inBaptifm." Nowfuppofing thatin /r^» ** God-, Infants, and little ones, and Children: " therefore he went thro* the feveral Ages j for /»- ^^ fants being made an Infant j fan'difying Infants, *' To little ones he was made a little one j fan(ftifying f thofe of that Age, ^c." Now does Mr. Whiflon think that Irenaus meant that Chrift, by going thro' the feveral Steps of hu- man Life, did fanUify Infants only in the laft Step of their Infancy ? He ufes the Terms of Chrift's going through, faving ■ and fan^ifying the Ages and ihe Perfons, and of the Perfons being by him rege^ nerated^ in the fame Latitude and Exent. Every Age by the likenefs it has to the feveral Ages which he for our fakes took upon him to go through. Was Chriil made an Infant only in that Senfe of the Word, whereby it fignifies one of Ten Years? Was lie not alfo made an, Infant in the common accepta- tion of it •, fo as to go through all the Steps of Infan- cy ? Did he come to fave and fan^ijy only the Teuth Year of Infancy *, that That only fhould be by him regenerated unto God ? And whereas Mr. Whifion here grants, that this Teftimony of h-enms (hews, that Children were then commonly by Ten Tears old regenerated by Baptifm ', but thinks that this was upon their own Profeffionand Faith : And to that purpofe extols the Care of Chri- llian Parents in thofe Days to give their Children early Inflrudion; fo that great part of the Chil- dren might be baptized at that Age upon their own Faith. The Experience of the whole World Ihews the contrary of this, in refpeft to the generality, or any confiderable Number of Children : For tho' Children do in thefe late Ages arrive to a Matu- rity of Senfe and Capacities, rather fooner than they did in former Ages-, yet there are none, or no confiderable Number of Children that would be fit at that Age to receive adult Baptifm. We Hijlory of hfapit-Bapiifm, '45 We find it to be fo in the examining, preparing, and catechizing of Children in order to their being confirmed by the Bifhop; That Office is, God be thanked, us'd with more Care and Frequency than formerly. But the Bifhops find a Neceflity of gi- ving Direftions that none be admitted under Ele- ven (as fome do order, or Twelve or Thirteen as others) except fome particular Children of extra- ordinary forwardnefs. And (as 1 (hewed in the JntroduUloii) the Rules of the Jews in receiving the Children of any Profelyte to Baptifm, was, if they were Males, and under the Age of Thirteen Years and a Day •, or Females under Twelve Years and a Day, to baptize them as Infants ^ becaufe fuch an one was not yet the Son of uiffenty i. e. not capable to give afient for himfelf. And indeed we find few that are capable to be confirmed fo loon as Eleven or Twelve. They may be able to repete the Words of a Catechifm, or fummary of the Faith ^ and to make the Anfwers to Queftions put to them, with a ready and pregnant Forwardnefs. And fond Pa- rents that are conceited of their Children's Capa- cities, are fometimes importunate, and proud of the Credit, to have them admitted to the Ordinance. But they really do their Children a Prejudice, in making them receive it fo young *, when it has lit- tle Ef&dt on their Confciences 5 and thereby dif- abling them from ever receiving it afterward ; which might elfe have been done to great fpiritual Benefit, being received with a due degree offerious Confide- ration. A Child of that Age may have Memory and Words ready *, but feldom can have due Senfc and Confcience of the Weight and Concern of the Thing to his Soul. It muft be noted, that frenaus does not herefpeak of the Cafe of fome particular Child,* who by fome extraordinary forwardnefs was baptized in Infancy ; but mentioning Infants generally and indefinitely, fpeaks 44 -^ Defence of the ipeaks of them as ordinarily regenerated or bapti- zed ; lb that Mr. Whifim is forced by the Tenor of the Argument to grant, that at that time Chil- dren were commonly by Ten Years old baptized j which Tenor of the Argument Mr. Gale not per- ceiving, brings in at his p. 503, a Story o^ fame that he has known admitted to Baptifm at about Fourteen : and heard fame much younger. Which is impertinent and to no purpofe here, to explain the Senfe of Jrenaus, who fpeaks of the general Cafe of Infants baptized. But I hope to make it appear in my Anfwer to Mr. Gale, that we have no reafon to fuppofe, that Irenaus ufed the Word in any other Senfe than all People do. Mr. Gale had invented this Notion of Infant Boys of Ten Years, to evade this Place in Irenaus. He was not fo abfurd as to pretend that the Sayings of Tertulllan, Origen, &ic. could be fo evaded. Becaufe they (bciide the Word Infants) do exprefs fuch Cir- cumftances as do denote mere Infants in the com- mon Senfe of the Word. But Mr. Whifton having this hint given, fell fo in love with it, as to venture (againft common Senfe) to apply it to the Paffages of other Fathers which I had cited; who do as plainly defcribe the Infants they fpeak of, to be Children newly born, or not yet come to the ufe of Reafon, as it is poflible in Words to defcribe them. The Quotations out of TertulUnn^ he recites juft as I had done ; at p. 36. 37, 38. Now the Infants that "fertullian fpeaks of (whom there was then a Cuftom to baptize •, but he would have had it omit- ted, except in danger of Death) were Infants in our Senfe of the Word. For he fpeaks of them as fuch, as when they were brought to Baptifm, did not un- derftand rohither it was that they came \ did not knom Chrifi •, where guiltlefs Age had no need^ as he thought, ad Romanes. Lib. 5. He recites the later Part of thisout of my Tranflation •, but leaves out the Beginning. Which (to fhew Mr. Whifton's Readers, how he deals with them and with me) I mult here recite. " In the Law it is commanded, that a Sacrifice *' be offered for every Child that is born: A pair of " Turtle Doves, or two young Pigeons •, of which *' one for a Sin Offering, the other for a Burnt Of- *' fering. For what Sin is this one Pigeon offered ? " Could the Child new-born \jjuper editus farvulus2 " have committed any Sin ?" He anfwers, " It has *' even then Sin, d-c." After which follows, that which Mr. Whifton fets down, of the Apoftle*s or- dering Baptifm even to Infants ; as knowing that there is in all Perfons the natural Pollution of Sin, which mult be done away by Water and the Spirit. I would willingly (if the Reader will confent to it) impute this way of quoting, not to Infincerity, but to the hafte in which Mr. Whiflon wrote this little Piece. If he will have Patience to read it over again-, he will fee that the Infants Or/jf^fpeaks of, are hifants new born. I gave 4^ -^ Defence of the I gave an Inftance before, in anfwering Mr. Em" Ih, that in other Books of Origen the Greek Words, which are there preferved, have the fame Argument, and the fame Phrafe \iifji yzyimiApoi^ which St. Hi- erom and Rvfnm do here tranflate , nvper editi far- vuli, concerning newjborn Infants not being clean from Sin. And indeed Mr. Whlfien does not infifl: on the Exception, that thefe Books are but Tran- llations by the two faid Men. He gives his Judg- ment concerning them, that tho' they are of lefs Autority than thofe tliat remain in Greek, yet he thinks we may allow them in the main to be genuine, (,which is fairer than M.x.Gale^ who fhuflles off the Argument, as if fo many feveral Places in feveral Books, by feveral Tranflators could all be interpo- lated) But he adds. That this Account of Origeny where he fpeaks of fuch Infants baptized, as didnot want it for the Pardon of aUual Sins done at Tears of difcretion, is near to his own Account, or his Senfe of the Word. If fo, if a new-born Infant, fucb as is fpoken of in Levity 12. be near in the fame Cafe as one that is to be baptized upon bis own Faith ^ or if a Youth that is not of Years of difcretion to have a^ual Sins imputed to him, be of difcretion to be baptized upon his own Repentance, Mr. Whifton need never fear the reconciling of any Thing to any Thing. Therefore in the next Words, being confcious, I fuppofe, that this would appear inconfiftent, he adds further. Though if it implies more^ (i. e. if Ori- gen mult be underitood of mere Infants) it will only jhew how early this Corruption of Chriftian Baptifm bc" gan to creep into the Church of Alexandria, as well as we have feen Cfrom Tertullian, I fuppofe, he means] it began to creep into that of Africa •, and no more. He here yields up the Times of TertulUan and Cyprian for the Churches of Africa. And in a man- ner yields the Time of Origen for the Church of AUx- Hijtorfvf Jnfant-Bapifm, 4^ 'Altxandria. And at p. 42. having owned Infant- Baptifm ufed at Alexandria in the Time of D/^- mns^ he adds, Pojfibly — -^evenintheDays o/Origea as we have already obferved. ' It were better for the Antipsedobaptifts at orice to yield, that it began in the-ApoItle's trine ^ arid' help all by ftyling it, as Mr. Whifton here does, a Corruption creeping in: This would ft ve a great d-eal dfTain- Struggle. And it fee rti's probable, that the7 mnft at laft come to this. Mr. Whifton (who is much more converfant in the Books of thofe Times than any of them) gives up the Times of TertulH' nn and Origen (within 160 Years of the Apoftles} as xjfing this corrupt Pra^ice (as he calls it) of bap- tizing mere, or new-born Infants ; and cannot de- ny that Irenxus himfelf (born in, or very near, the Apoftle's Times) fpeaks of /^/^w^j baptized •, faving himfelf only upon Mr. Galeh device of another Senfe of the Word Infant as ufed by Iremzm ; which I think by and by to evince to Mr. G ale ^ or at leaft to any impartialReader, to be a groundlefs No- ^ tion. ^ And yet this fame Mr. Whifton, who not long ago in his Efay on the Revelations had fpoken of the Times, not only of St. Cyprian^ but 200 Years low- er down, as continuing in Chriftian Purity, and being above the date of Antichriflian Corruptions; fo that what Doftrinesand Pradicesof the Church we find to have been then generally received, we may depend upon^ as found (among which he reckons by Name the Divinity of chrift, and the Baptifm of Infants^ having fince fallen firlt from the Belief 01^ one of thefe, and now of the other, tells us,/r. 45. that the Baptifm of Infants f meaning Infants in the common Senfe of the Word] is one of thefe Pra- ftices, Doi^rines, and Cuftoms, xohich appear to have begun in the Weft, near Rome, and particularly it% Africa j and are to he looked upon as part of the RO" man. \Z A Defence of the man, Weftern, or Antichriflian Corruptions : And ta be accordingly rejected by every Chriflian. As on one Side by yielding the Times of TertuU lian and Cyprian ffor thofe he means by the Evi- dence of the African Churches Corruption) and in a manner giving up Origen and the Church of Alex- andria (as I fhewed before^ he leaves but a very fmall Space after the Apoftles for the Antipasdo- baptifts to pretend any Claim to ; fo on the other Side by calling thefe Dodrines and Praftices of the Church (and feme other from which he has revolt- ed) Romifli and Antichriflian Corruptions, and ye& owning them to have taken Place fo early ^ he gives a fcandalous Encouragement to the Deifts and Ene- mies of Chriftianity. By confeffing it to have been generally corrupted in its Dodrines fo far up, he gives them a Handle to fay ^ It was never otherwife. Thefe do apparently hug and value him and other Heterodox Men, for fuch Sayings as thefe. What- ever ferves to weaken the Credit, or the Autori- ty of Chrift's Church, helps forward the Deligns which they are now carrying on. But to make Origen an Evidence only for the Church of Alexandria^ is a great overfight in the Hiftory of his Life. He was indeed born there ; and if his Father held the fame Dodrine (as we have not the leaft Reafon to queftionj baptized there. Eighty five Yearsafterthe Apoftles. But of the time of his mature Age and Writing, the leaft Part was fpent there. He converfed at times in almoft: all the noted Churches in the World •, and his Te- ftimony is an Evidence for them all. The Cenfure of the Churches of Africa^ as hold- ing Antichriflian Corruptions, for their being in the Wefl^ and near Rome^ is yet more abfurd and unhi- ftorical. It is a known Thing, and obferved by almoft every Body, that no Church in the World did more vigoroufly oppofe the firft Encroachments ' ~ ' of Hiflory of hifant-Bafttfm, 4^ of the Bifhops of Rome^ than that of Carthage^ and the xtS^ o'i Africa. But the Times we are now up- on, were long before thofe Encroachments and Cor* ruptions. Several of the BiQiopsof A'o?;;^ about the Time of St. Cyprian patiently and humbly fuffeied Death for their Religion, as he himfelf alfo did. And as to the Points he here calls Corruptions, the Roman, and African, and all other Churches in the World were then unanimous. As for the following Quotations all edged by me, which he fays, at p. 41. he will run over, and fhew, that even the 4.th Century was not unanimous for baptizing Infants in the common Senfe of the Word \ he runs fo haftily and heedlefly, that it is not worth the while to follow him. The Council of Neo Cafarea affords, he fays, no Argument for Infant-Baptifm. All that I pretended was, that it affords noneforor againft it •, and tolhew that Grotim perverted the true Senfe and Meaning of the Words of it, when he pretended an Argu» ment from them againfl it. Mr. Whifion only re- cites the Words \ takes no notice of what I had faid to clear the Senfe of them ^ and though he does not offer to aflirm, yet he poorly infinuates to the ignorant Reader that Conclufion from them againft Infant Baptifm, which ought to be taken for a miftaken one, till fome Body has pretended 'to de» fend it. He obferves, that I own that Gregory Naz.ianzett ikems not to have been baptized in Infancy, thonah his Father was a Bifhop: Which is very carelefs- ly exprefled. That he was not baptized in Infancy^ does not feem, but is certain •, neither in our Senfe of the Word, nor in his. Whether his Father was a Chrift-ian (for there is no pretence that he was a Bi- fhop) at the timeof his Birth, is a greater Quefti-* on than I at firft thought : The Reafons that make it doubtful, I gave above to Mr. Bemard. It is how- E €Yet ^o A Defence of the ever but a fingle Man's Faft, differing from a Cuftont and Praftice of the Church, which is fully and plain- ly proved for thofe Times. This catching at Twigs one would bear with in Mr. Whifton. But as for that Paflage in this GregO' r/s Sermon, where he fet the feveral Degrees of Punifhment to thofe that have died unbaptized ; which he makes to be thus; Cf^^me wholly fcorned it. Whofe Punifhment will be the greateft. Some mifs of it by Procraftination ^ who deferve not quite fo bad. Some have it not in their Tower to re* ceive it tx, \tah kv J^uva,[j.ii t» Jli^A^Q'ctt^ either becaufe of their Infancy perhaps^ or by reafon of fame Accident ut- terly involuntary. Which laft Sort will neither be glorified nor punifhed^as being without the Seal, but not through their own Fault, {ov Wickednefs.j For thisPafTage, I fay, after Grotius had picked ouc thofe Words by themfelves \loave it not in their Tow- er to receive it becaufe of their Infancy^ and had fet them among the Arguments againft Infant-Baptifm j and after that I had, by reciting the whole Place, plainly (hewn that dealing of Grotius to be either foul and Impofturous, or at leaft, a grofs Miltake, or Heedlefsnefs, either in taking the Quotation at fecond hand, or in not reading the whole Place ; or, as Mr. Bernard gueffes, writing in too much hafte. After all this, for Mr. Whiflon to put this again upon his Reader (whom he mufb think a very ignorant one) as if it were meant by St. Gregory againft Infant-Baptifm (when he plainly ufes it as a Reafon for the Parents to give it, left the Child lofe all Reward) And to fet it down jult as Gro^ tius had done [_yet he fpeaks of fotne that hr.ve it not in their Tower (or are not capable^ to receive Baptifm on account of their Infancy~\ Thus to quote a Scrap, of a Sentence to a Purpofe direftly contrary to the Im- port that it carries in the Sentence, and which it had been plainly fiievvn to carry, is, I cannot help fay- Hiftory of Infant -B^iftiftn, ^i faying, in him (whatever it might be in Grotlus) a Prevarication, which I thought no Writer pretend- ing to Sincerity, would have been guilty of. And whereas 6'r. 46". (what one cannot read without Pity) AIL modern Ways of it (he means, both of Posdobaptifts, and, as he had faid in thefame Paragraph, Antipedobaptifts) are very imperfeEh^and ought to be reduced to the original Standard /«r^f Conftitutions immediately. He is in great lialtCjand 'NOvXd have us change our Religion, Church, and Canon of Scripture, as faft as he has done. At the Time of his writing this little Piece 1712* he was a Convert to Antipxdobaptifm, but of a ve- ry fmall ftanding^ and yet was even then become as great a Proficient in his Zeal agaiiift the Dodrine of Infant-Baptifm, as thofe of Munfter\ fo as to impute it to the Devil. For at p. 44. he concludes thus, InJIwrt^ this corrupt VraU ice came in, &c. till at laji, Sec. it came to be applied to Babes of Ihree Months^ or T'hree Days, ^c. fo fuccefsful was the Devil and his Agents in corrupting, &c. Does heconfider whom he gives up (I mean, offuch as he himfelfowns tohave praftifed Infant-Baptifm ; not to fay any thing now of the Apoflles -, but St. Cyprian, St. Auflin, &c. and the Church of their times) as Agents for the Devil f Thofe that 1 have hitherto been fpeaking to, have concerned themfelves with my Book but briefly and occafionaljy. But Mr. Gale in 1711. wrote pro- feffedly againfl: it. And though thegreatefl: Part of bis Book be cither of perfonal Matters, feme about my Life, Temper, Aftions, &c. not relating to the Caufe, and fome about my way of writing when it is too long, ortoofhort, or too cenforious; or catch- ing at here and there a Paflage of my Book, which he thought might be reprefented fo as to put me out E 3 of ^4 A Defence of the of Favor with the Antipsedobaptifls fas are his two firft Chapters, which he calls my CharaUer) or elfe on another Subjed, viz^. not the Age or "Time of receiving Baptifm, but the way oi adminiftring it^ with which 1 had meddled very little (as are his three nextj yet he gave to the whole the Title of Reflections on my Book. And though he go no farther in any methodical way of anfwering, than to the IntroduCiion^ and Five firit Chapters of my Book (not nigh one tenth Part of it) which Anfwer begins at his Ninth Chapter (and he has but Thirteen in all) yet it has gone a- mong the Men of his Party as an Anfwer to it. He deals not much with Argument (which the others have chiefly aimed at) but writes in a way of declamingand flourifh, and much addided to re- proaching, taking a Pride in fhewing how eafily and how naturally he can exprefs a Contempt of his Adverfary, or of any Reafon or Argument. He writes in a Style indeed fufficiently fluent, and with a good Stock of Philological Learning j but does not keep very clofe to the Rules of Candor, Modefty, or Truth ^ but delights in vaunting, in- fulting, flighting, and laying odious and falfe Im- putations, not on me only, but on the Clergy of England in general, and indeed our whole Church ; as that was a Time in which fome People found their Advantage by railing fuch Slanders. His Talent in ^^?^mc (which is not inconfidera* hie) he ufes to falfe colouring, and gaining his Point (as he calls itj by wrelted Reprefentations of Things and Paffages. Of his Impertinencies (to name but one Sort of them) an unparalleled Inftance is, his picking up Stories of Things faid or done by me before he was born*, and naming the People (whofe Names one would never have thought to have feen in Print) Nothing, thanks be to God, of which one need be alhamed« Hifiory of Infant Baptifm, 5 5 afhamed. But it is a great Shame to fee fuch im- pertinent Stuff brought into a Controverfy of Re- ligion. Of his Vntrmhs, I would before-hand in- ftance in one flagrant and manifefl: one, (which, as I fhall (hew, he has affirmed above Twenty times over) his Saying, that I have in my Book yielded and owned, that there is no Scripture Proof for In- fant-Baptifm ; though near half his Book be fpent in refuting, (as well as he can) thofe Proofs which I brought from Scripture. The Province which I had undertaken, was the Hiftory of the Times near following ; but I did not altogether olhit thofe of Scripture. If I had followed my own Inclinations, or the Advice of fome of my Friends, in drawing up an Anfwer to him ^ I fhould have made it fhorter by half than it is, and taken notice only of thofe few Reflexions of his, that feemed to be of moment to the main Point. The Tyranny of Cuftom obliges me, not only to take more Pains than I needed, by the dry Work of following him k^ xS^o.*?, and anfwering to many Things that are impertinent to the Caufc, or of fmall Weight in it : But alfo, when I have done it, to make an excufe to any ju- dicious Reader why I did it. Such an one will pardon me, if he confider, that fome captious and litigious Men would otherwife have been apt to fay, that I had pafled over the mate- rial Objeciion. To fpare the Time of thofe who are choice of it, (though 1 had not liberty to fpare my own) I mult advertife them, that there is hardly any thing in Mr. Gale's firft Six Chapters, or in my Anfwer to them, that is very material to the Point of Infant- Baptifm. And it will be no great lofs to ftepover them. A Vein of boafting and magnifying his own Per- formance runs through all his Book. With that ?4 H 5 6 'A Defence of the he continues his Work, and with tliat he ends ; and contrary to Horacis Rule (who fays of a vaunting Prefaccr *, Ovid dlgnum tantoforet hie Promijfor triata ^) with that he begins. For in an Advertlfement prefixed to his Book, having taken notice that feveral great and worthy Men (whom he names too) had given a favorable Character of my Book, he fays, that he publifhed thefe his Refledions, To inform the Publick^ &cc and to let thofe learned Gentlemen know, that they had been too hafly in their 'Judgments *, and that this Hi- fi ory is not by far what they take it to be. Is not this Youth a likely Man, think you, to be able to in- .form their Judgment of any confiderable Thing ? I fet down this as a Specimen of the Arrogance you are to expe 19. They, like all the other boafied clear Proofs, happen to be fpurious. Has not this Man a good Forehead ? P. 20. Hijiory of hfar?t'Baptifm. 6^ P. 10. — 23. Having for a little while confined himfelf to cite Paflages picked np here and there out of my Book, where he could not impute (that is, he fhould not have imputed) to me more than my Words would bear ; he here runs out into a freer way of giving the Character of my Temper in wri- ting, without referring to any particular Place ^ and tells the Men of his Opinion that I indufirioufy tale all octafons to blacken them ; and many more fuch malicious and falfe ExprelUons he ufes, for which I think to call him to account by and by. He fets himfelf here to give a Character of a flanderous Wri- ter, and (whether he had a Glafs before him I know notj hedefcribes it very lively ^ and then fays, that if he can form any Judgment^ I have too near approach- ed this Method. Then he fays, his Reader will be furprized at fo fevere a Charge from him, who has always fo much talked' of Charity. If he have any Reader that formerly had any Opinion of his Cha- rity, or Juftice, or Truth either ; this Surprize mult indeed be expeded. How does he take it off? He aflures the Reader once again in Words, that he is a Man whom you mvfi not upbraid with violating even the firiBefi: Rules of Charity^ P. 23. — 27. He takes upon him to cenfure my way of writing, that I often run out into too large Di- greflions. What is that to him, or to the Caufe ? That may be an unskilfulnefs in writing ; but his Bufinefs was to prove what he had faid laft, that I indvflrioufly took ail Occafions to blacken the Antip^do' baptifis. He fays, 1 thought by thofe Digreflions to ferve Oflentation, to difplay my Reading, to fljew Abi- lities, and fuch prattle. That, Sir, is the Temper of Boys and young Men : People under the Infir- mities of Age are feldom inclined to that Vanity. If I had aimed at that, I'll tell you, Mr. Gale, what I would have done. I would have put at the End of my Book a Catalogue of the Authors cited, &c. And if ^4 -^ Defefice of the if I had mentioned any of the School-Books, Horaeeli Juvenal^ Ovid, lerencCy &:c. I would fet down pompoufly the Editions of them. And if I had ci- ted fuch a Book, for example, as Dr. Graheh IrenAtu^ it fhould have been fet down four times over. Once under J^ twice under (7, once under F. And fo ie Ckrc'i Patres ji^oftoUc. nine or ten Times. p. 27, What he fays here of my reflefting on Mr. Ste/jfiet, looks as if he could not apprehend the Senfe of what he reads. I did not fpeak of his citing fo largely Mr. Bojfuet (now Bifliop ofMeaux) as a Digreflion from the Subjed •, but as giving too much regard to what a Papifi; fays in a Caufe wherein they do generally fpeak for their Intereft againft their Confcience. And for what I fay of the Vein of fine Language^ Mr. Gale is the firft Rea- der that could, and will be the laft that can miflake my Words fo far as to fay, 1 impute to Mv.Stennet the Vanity of fhewing that. All that I faid, was that harangue of Mr. Boffuet had a Vein of fine Lan- guage ^ for which, perhaps he might prize it, and count it worth a Recital. p. 28. 4^44] Here he brings a long Charge a- ^ainft me for my Style •, that it has been too cenfo- rious and Iharp againfc fome learned and great Men that are PtEdobaptifts •, concerning which, having already faid what I thought needful, and taken to my felf the blame due to me from them, I need add here no more than to ask him again-, what is this to him or to the Caufe ? If I, being but a mean Perfon, have been too prefuming- and arrogant to- ward greater Men, forgetting the refpeft due to their Charafter, 1 have been ferved juft in my kind. For I alfo have lived to have a Youth, (without any Refped to my Age, or to the Office that I bear in the Church (though unworthy) or to the Church in which it is born, or to the Opinion of great Men therein (who have taken my mean Endeavours in good H'tfiory of Infant 'BApifml 6c good Part) treat me very dirtily. But is this the beft Service he can do to his Caufe? If he has beea iinployed by the Antipiedobaptifts in the Defence of their Opinions •, may tliey not fay to him, Tou defend Grotius, Mr. le Clerc, Chryfoftom, and this or that Father-, or Bifljop^ who are no Friends of ours • hut when wi/l you remember w? Among the Poets he quotes to no purpofe, he (hould have thought of that Scrap of Martial^ De trtbus cape His. He talks of another Man that fs to anfwer my Book j I hope that other will keep clofe to the main Subjeft of it •, for this Man has meddled with every thing elfe, and has often reached for Cavils where no occalion was given. I mentioned the Name of ArchbifhopT/7/tff/o« twice in my Book. la one of them it is written Archbifliop as it (hould be; in the other, hiihop Ti/lotfon. This our Author calls quarrelling with that prelate ; and fets it fo ia his Table ofContens. Does not any Man in hafty writing or fpeaking, fay often *, Bilhop Vjher •, Bi- fhop Laud^^c without any Intention of difrefpedt ? Are thefe Things Matter for a Book ? Concerning fome of the others he makes my Words worfe than they are. I faid that Greg. Naz.. probably gave his Opinion of deferring a Child's Baptifm (if he were well) till Three Years, in fome compliance with his Father's Practice. He makes me reprcfent the Son, perfwading Men againfi his Confcience^&iC. he makes me call St. Chryfofiom, a Leaden-headed Logician. 1 only faid of one Argu- ment of his, that it was ( though G olden-mouth' d Oratory) but Leaden-headed Logic. There is a great difference between thefe two Sayings. And even that was altered in the Second Edition ; of which it was unfair in Mr. Gale to take no notice. He fays, P. 30.3 *' That! make the Gregoryh lingular ia "^^ the PradHce of defending Baptifm for fome time ; ' F ~ ~ and 66 A Defence of the ^' and yet a few Lines after do confefs 'twas very " common at that time"] 'tis hard to find a Rea- der Eyes^ and as hard to keep this Man from ca- villing at what he fees to be otherwife than he re- prefents. I faid, the Gregorys were lingular in pradti- fing or advifing the delay of a Child's Baptifm till Two or Three Years, as by Principle. Of the many that I fpeak of afterward, mj Words are, that they delayed and put it off foviething longer than ordina" ry^ not out of Principle, that fo they ought to do ; but out of Negligence and a Procrafiination which they them- felves ownedto be blameahle. Is there any contradi- dioninthis? And yet he brings the fame again. P' 41. P. 38.] He would have it to be a Contradidion^ that I fay,- part. I. Chap. 11. that Grotias went about to difprove Infant-Baptifm from a Paflage in Greg. Naz. Orat. 40. and yet do Tart. II. Chap. 2. repete his Words, that all that he had brought u of no Force to prove that Infant-Baptifm ^jould be denied., but only tofloevp the Liberty., Antiquity^ and difference of the Cvflo7n. Now both of thefe are confiftent enough. For Grotius does (as is common) produce the Ar- guments, or Quotations on both Sides (thofe that make for and thofe that make agai77ft it) by them- felves. And among the latter he has brought a Scrap of that 40th Oration of Gregory (wjiich in reality is all ftrong and pofitive/c?r Infant-Baptifm) among the Arguments againfi it. And though he having pre- tended to weigh the Arguments on both Sides, does at lafl: fplit the Matter in difpute, judging it to be indifferent ^ yet Hill the Arguments on one Side ta- ken by themfelves, are brought to difprove it, as the others are to prow it. And my blame of his Con- duft, is that he fet this Quotation on one Side, which fhould have ftood on the other. And Mr. Gale^s Excufe that he makes for him, p. 40. makes the Mat- ter worfeo For he fays, ^^ Gregory might intend " fuck Hiftory of InfAnt-Bd^tifm, 6^ « fuch Children mifled of Baptifm thro' their Pa- ** rent's Fault." (and fo, I fay, he certainly did) Does this excufe Grotim for putting fuch a Quotation among thofe that makeagainft Infant- Baptifm? Or does ic not ra^ther aggravate his Miftake ? For theCriticifm he talks of, and for which he tells you he looked into his Di(f^ionary, p. 41. \hAve- it not in their Power to receive it~\ as I faid, or \jire not in a Capacity to receive it~] as he fays ; it is not worth the difcufling : BeeaufeMr. G^/^ himfelf has not the Confidence (tho' he have a good one) to fay that Gregory means any other incapacity than this; That They in their Infancy cannot procure themfelves to be baptized, and mult be without Baptifm unkfs their Parents help them to it •, and fo it is not their own but their Parents Fault if they mifs of it •, and therefore he thinks their Punilhment will be only f£na damni. P. 42.;] The Cafe is the fame as to the Contradifti- on, that he would here find in what I fay of the Words of the 6th Canon of the Council of Neoc^fa- rea-^ m which Grotius, thefirftofall Men, found an Argument againft Infant-Baptifm. He curtails my Words to make them apipear contradidory. 1 faid. The Words of the Canon are, ai to the Main of the Dc termination^ applicable to either of the Senfes there re- cited, viz,, (as I-there explain it) The Bifliops, whe- ther they had held /or ov again]} Infant-Baptifm wou'd have determined that the Woman might be haptiz.ed. But whereas from a Phrafe in the lait Claufe Grotim would draw an Argument that they held it unlaw- ful to baptize an Infant, as having no choice of Will," I (hewed the Propriety of the Phraft to be fuch as gives no ground to that Interpretation of it. Kow this Man, leaving out the diftindtion I plainly expreffed {of the Main of the Determination, and of the Profne- ty 'f Phrafe in the laft Claufe) reprefents me, both here sad over again afterward, as co;itradiding my felf. F % And 68 A Defence of the And he fpeaks of my faftnhg vpon Grotius foul deal^ ing in the Matter^ which 1 did not do in this Matter of his Cricicifm ; but in his mifieprefenting the Words of Balfamon \ of which Mr. Gale fpeaks next, f' 43- ■ P, 43.;] I did indeed fay, " I would fet down Bal- *' y^wflw's Words at large that the Reader might fee " if he can acquit that great Man, viz.. Grotim of *' the Crime of Prevarication." And I do (till que- ftion whether he can. Far when Balfamon fays, that the Child in the Womb cannot be baptized, nor ac- counted as baptized, by his Mother's Baptifm ^ for this Reafon among others, becavfe at Baptifm every pne^s own Profejfion [pv Promife] is necejfary ^ and an 'Embryo {^or Child unborn] cannot make that necejfary Profejfion \ and he adds in almofl: the next Words ^ uin Embryo cannot have Sfonfors\ but Infants {^meaning whenthey are born into the World] do promife by fheir Sponfors^ and being baptiz-ed, &c. For Grotim to fet down among his Arguments againfl: Infant- Bap- tifm, the former Part of his Paragraph, and omit the later, whether it were Prevarication, or a ve- ry great overfight in not reading the whole Place, let the Reader judge. Which foeveritwas, it was not fo bold as Mr. GaWi Attempt on the fame Place is fnor did Groti/ts, or any Man of liberal Education, ever venture on fuchaone.) For he, when he comes here p. 44, to account for thefe later Words, puts this (hamelefs Affront upon his Reader, to fay, " Balfamon., or perhaps fome Body elfe has fubjoin- *' ed fome Words, which allow Children may be " brought to Baptifiii by Sponfors." This out does Danvers:, for he, when he rejefted, as fpurious, a Quotation which he did not like, rejected it all ; All the Book, Chapter, Epillle, &c. But here is a Defender of a Caufe in a new fafhioned way. He v;ill take one Part of a Paragraph (which by it felf may Hifiory of Infrnt-Ba^tifm. 6q may be drawn to his Opinion^ to be the Author's own i and if the other Part explain the Author's Meaning, will throw it away. As for the (hiiffle that he makes about the Word KctjctTiBivlat^ he mufl; look into his Didionary again* For when, fpeaking of the baptizing of Infants, an Author fays, that the Infants Y^M'ihvlAt by their Sfort" fors\ it can fignify nothing but do fromife^ or do confent. And trvy)ca]ct]idiiAcf.i does commonly fignify Confent \ as 2 Cor. vi. 1 5. And Origen. Comm. injoann. />. 115. fin a Difcourfeof which M.r.Cak f. 377. quotes a Part) ctjyKalcf!^iQi[/.ivoi Jiietlvs ata'Tcvi^ £^'^*^£ Confent by their Silence. But Zonaras^ he thinks Hill, was an Antipaedob^ip-' tift. Zonaras writes juft as Balfamon does m that former Part (as to the Niceties Mr. Gale employs about the Tranflation of their Words, 'tis true, what hegueffes, thati had only the Latin of their Comments before me ^ he had th^ Greek ; but I find the Senfe to be fo perfeftly the fame as to any thing that may affedt our Subjedf, that I will not enter in- to any fuch trifling Difpute \ let the Reader take his Tranflation or mine, I am content) their Words are on the fameCanon, they were of the fame Church, and wrote in the fame Age, the 12th Century : So that when they do both fpeak of the Promile or Profeflion made by every one at his Baptifm; and one of them explains what is meant by that, t/jzl. the Profeflion which Infants make by their Sponfbrs, we cannot doubt but that is the Meaning of the other alfo. Efpecially when we know that that Church at that time did without any Controulhold Infant- Baptifm to be necefliary . If Balfamon^ or Zo- naroi (who had, as Mr. G^/ff obferves, each of them great Places and Offices) had been of another Opi- nion, it had not been fafe for them to publifh it. Cotjftantim^U was not as Holland and England arc now, F 3 where 70 A Defence of the where any one may preach or write any new or heterodox Thing that comes in their Mind. p. 45.] To what 1 urge (that Telaghs and St. Ju- fliriy who miift have heard of this Council, do declare that they never read or heard of any Chriftians that were againft Infant-Baptifm) Mr. Gale^ according to a particular way that he has, of giving a Man the Lye in other Words, when there is no Occafion for it, fays, I Ihould not have faid as I did, hut which had been truer^ ^c Pelagius's Words in the Place I refer to, are, Me» Jlandcr me as if I denied the Sacrament of Baftifm to Infants^ or did promife^ See Which is a Thin^ that J never heardj no not even any wicked Heretic fay. For who is there fo ignorant of that which is read in the Goffel, &:c. And for St. Aufiins Words, ]s\x.GaU ow ns that they are, that he never heard of any that denied that Baptifm was given for remifiion of Sins, And if he look into the Place again, he will find that St. Auftin is there fpeaking of the Cafe of Infants^ and that the Remiffion. of Sins he fpeaks of, is the Remifiion of original Sin. For fo are the Words; When I was at. Carthage, / heard a curfory Difcourfe of fotne People, who faid, that Infants are not bapti- zed for that Reafony that they may receive Remijfion of Sins \ but that, &c. / was flartled at the Novelty, 5^C. This is in the fame Paragraph where the Words are 9 / do not remember that J ever heard any other thing from any Chriflians, 5cc. / do not remember that I ever read otherwife in any Writer^ he. And the very Ti- tle of the Book is, Of the Guilt and Forgivenefs of Sins^ and Baptifm of Infants. Would any Man, pretend- ing to Decency, except Mr. Gale, give a Man the Lye, for faying, that thefe Men do declare, that they ne- ver read or heard of any Chriftians that denied that Infants were to be baptiz'd ? P. 45 3 From a faying of BiliM, which I pro- duce, he thinks I am hard put to it, when I profcfs my Hiflory of InfAnt-Baftifml q I my felf to believe that that was not his fettled Opinion.'} If I had been hard put to it, had it not been eafy for me to omit the mention of it ? Did ever any one in this Controverfy produce this Place before me? Mr. Gale, I believe can't tell. But fomc other Antipjedobaptifts do know, that in this, and feve- ral other Inftances I have out of Authors antient and modern brought fome PalTages, making againft In- fant-Baptifm, which had not been obferved before by any Managers of that Caufe ^ and that this, which I met with by chance in Bilius, is one of them. It had been fafe and eafy to have left it out. But I think ftill, what I faid there to be true \ that it is not likely that this was Biliush fettled Opinion : He being an Abbot of the Church of Rome. Let thofe that have leifure, fearch his Works, if they pleafe. I count it not worth fo much Pains. The other two Inftances that he gives there, need no other Anfwer, but that any one read his Book and mine. P. 4^. 47.3 He fays, I infinuate, '' that they coun- *' tenance at leaft, and have among them fome who " deny the human Nature of our Lord Chrift, &c, '* He protefts," He don't know fo much as a fingle Man, ei-c. and that '' fuch an one can be no Chri- ftian] What I faid was, Some of them (but I think it is but few in England j do hold the Error which has of old been attributed to the j^ntipadobaptifls of Germany, and is faid to be ftill held by the Minnifts in Holland 9 that Chrift took not Flefh of the Firgin Mary, &c. I do there urge againft this Opinion this Conle- quence ^ that then Chrift is not properly Man % as not being made of a Woman,- nor of the Seed of David. How far the Minnifts^ or others of that Opinion, do own this Con fequence, 1 know not. As for the Opinion it felf, I faid, there were but few in Eng' land of it •, and I believe he will not maintain the Contrary, but that there are, qj lately have been, F 4 fomc- 72 A Defence of the fome. And how far he does by thefe Words deny the Dutch Antipxdobaptifts to be Chriftians, let him confider. And let the Reader judge what occafion there is for that Charge of Spltefulnefs which he brings againft me here^ or for that which he begins his next Chapter, faying •, What can he more unfair than to reprefent and judge of a whole Body of Men by the odd fngular Opinions of a few Men in it ? It is un- fair to do fo ^ and it is not true to fay, I did fo. I faid, there were but few among them of this Opi- nion. C H A P. 11. ^' 5*^- ^^-IT TERE having vented his Spleen up- X J. on Bifhop Bramhall (as if it were a Herefy to aflert the real prefence ^ or as if the Con- feffion of Faith of lOO Churches of the Antipaedo- baptifts did own and declare that worthy receivers do really and indeed receive and feed upon Chrift crucified) and upon Mr. Dodwell and Bilhop Vfier^ he enlarges his Foam againft the prefent Clergy, which they that love to hear fiich Language may. p. 52] He owns, there are perhaps among the Antipaedobaptiftsyowe ill-meaning People'^a.nd I think, he has convinced every Body, that there is one at leaft. p. 53.']] Speaking of my mifchievous Inpnuatiom, he inftances in my fiily excufe for Mr. Baxter. If the Reader turn to it ('tis in Part II. Chap. 9. §. 3. of my B(;':k) he will fee no harm or mifchief meant to any Body in it. Nor in what I fay of the Anti- •^TAohdi^X\^'S,maintaininff their Poor liberally (which is PartU. Chap. 2. §. 6.) for which 1 fay there, 71^9' are particularly commended. He does not let his Reader know where rhefe Sayings of mine are^ but^ to prove the Mifchief of them, recites a Saying of mine, abov9 Hiftory of hfant-Baptifm. 75 above 300 Pages from either of them, where I am fpeaking of Separaters in general ^ and applies ic to the Antipaedobaptifts, of whom I had no thought at that Place. P. $').'} He ufes more foul Language than ordina- ry. That the Things 1 fay of the Antipaedobap- tifts, are fo mtoriovjly falfe, that he admires any Mariy efpecially of my Order^ could, &c. Here a Reader would expedt fome great falfhood of mine. All that he inftances in, in this. Firfl he enlarges on this Topic, how black Heretical a Tenet Socinianifm is with mofi People (but he does not here fay much of his own diflike of it) and then adds, that I fay ^ 7hey have many Socinians among them. That S true, (fave that he leaves out the Word vnderhand\ my Word is, underhand Socinians) he adds, infinuating as if we countenanced them. That is falfe. For Ifaythedired contrary • as will appear prefently. But here he brings over again, what hehadfaid/?.47. (to which I anfwered juft now) and quotes fome Words of mine at a very diftant Place from the other, which any one that will turn to the Place will fee, are not fpoken of the Antipaedobaptifts in general, or the Socinians 'm general i but only of thofe that to their Socinianifm, or Denial ofChrift's Divinity, do add a Denial that he took Flefli of the Virgin Mary, of whom I fay there are but few in England. P. $6.'] He fays, I accufe the Antipaedobaptifts of holding thofe very Opinions, which I at another Place (which he there recites) do own they endea- vour to root out, meaning Socinianifm. Now I ne- ver accufe them any farther than by faying, They have many underhand Socinians among them. And at the other Place, Socinians they have fome, that creep in among them. And is not this (if he had recited my Words true) confiftent with the other, that they that profefs it openly are rejeBed from their Communion. So that the Crime of falfe Accufation returns on bim- 74 -^ Defence of the felf. He knows well enough that their own Mem- bers, thofe of the general Jljfembly, and thofe of the general j^ffociation have refleded on each other on account of the Socinian Tenets, at a much higher rate than I have done. Ibid.'} Pelagianifm, atid the holding the Mortality of the Soul^ are very faljly imputed'] If he mean imputed to all of them ^ 'tis falfe to fay, I imputed thefe Te- nets to them. If he mean, to any of them^ he will ijot have the Face to d^ny, that fome Parties of |;hem do deny original Sin, and fome do hold a Sleep of the Soul till the Refurredion. Mortality of the Soul, is his own Word. p. 57.] Here is the firft; Place where our Author begins to argue ^ fo that the Reader might hope that he had done with his Perfonal Cavils and Re- proaches: But if he hopefo, he will afterward find bimfelf miftaken. From hence to p. 88. he labours to overthrow the Argument of my laft Chapter ; which I confefs, I valued the moft of any •, becaufe it tends j:o Peace and Unity. I endeavoured to fhew, that which way of Bap- tifm foever be the fitteft, yet the difference between the prefent contending Parties, being not a funda- mental one, is not of that Moment, as to juftify their Separation, and renouncing one another's Commu- nion. He makes thefe Exceptions againft the Plea that I here ule. I. Hr/?, That I did not give a Definition of Schifnt^ or of fuch Separation as is Jinful. One that writes a brief Diffwafive from Drunkennefs, Adultery, or any other Sin, does not ufually enter into a methodi- cal Treatife of the Definition of thofe Sins -, becaufe he reckons them commonly known, and fo did f. Yet I fhewed from St. Paul\ Difcourfe, Rom. xiv. and part of XV. that he earnellly commands Chriftians to receive one another, and not to feparate for diffe- reaces in Opinion or Pradtice, which are not fuch where- Hijiory of Infant" Baptifm. 75 wherein the Kingdom of God does confift ; or, which are not (as I there exprefled it) fundamental. And a plain Confeqiience of that, is, That to feparate from an eftablilhed Church for differences that arc not fo, is ajinful Separation, or Schifm. But he complains that I did not give a Catalogue of Fundamentals. That, I hope, was not, nor ever will be expeded of me. But I endeavoured to fhew that the difference between the Pxdobaptifts and Antipasdobaptifts is not fuch. I mentioned there the fevere Law of the Gofpel againfl Separations, Uiviiions^&c. And whereas the Gofpel it felf makes fome Exceptions to that general Law ^ I having ob- fcrved, that fome Exceptions, particularly menti- oned in a Law, do ftrengthen that Law in all Ca- fes not excepted, proceeded to recite four Inftances of excepted Cafes ^ and that they were all that I could find in Scripture: And that he that feparates from any Church upon any Ground except one of thofe Four, ought to be fure that he find his Ground in Scripture. To all which this wretched Anfwerer of a Book fays nothing *, and if he could have faid any thing to Purpofe, it had been more material than any Thing he has faid. I recited alfo the Acknowledgments of feveral Pa^dobapifts and Antipaedobaptifts, that this Dif- ference is not fundamental *, and for the Antipaedo- baptifts, the publick Confeflion of ido Churches of them. He anfwers not a Word, but in effedt con- demns their Opinion. p. 58.] He fets his own Talent in Logic to work.' He defines Schifm. He makes the gefius of it to be, the occafioning of Schifm. One is bad enough, and the other very bad. But as Rebellion, and the giving occaflon to Rebellion, are two Thines : fo it is in Schifm. P. 51.3 He defines Fundamentals. They are fuch 'Things as arc plainly ncceffary •, which is juft as much 3? 'J 6 j4 Defence of the as to lay, Ai are plainly rundamental. This is the Maa that Dr. Whitby calls, The very learned Mr. Gale. ?. 59.3 He fays. That as the Proteftants fepara- ted from the Church of Romey fo if any Church do degenerate into danger oui Errors and Corruptions^ &C. Ihould he not here have reftrained the Signification of that general Word, dangerous^ to the more limi- ted Senfe of Fundamental, as I had exprefTed it ; or, £rrors in Points plainly necejfary, as he himfelf fet- , ties it. Secondly^ Kq anfwers, p, 61. That befide thofe Things that are fundamental or necellary to the Con- llituting a true Chrifiian, fome other Things are ne- ceJIary to the conftituting of a Church. As that it have the Ecclefiaftical Offices performed by Mi- Eillers lawfully called to preach, give the Sacra- ments^ &c. I do not difallow of the Diftindion. But who could have thou2;ht it to be of any ufe here to the Antipsedobaptifts ? Had ever any of them, before this Man, the Forehead to deny that the Church of England has Ecclefiaftical Officers to this Purpofe ? He {ays, . p. 813 We don t ajfert p> much 'y yet to fome it miH^ it may be J feem a. little probable, that jhe may perhaps l\tve no BifnopSy Presbyters^ &c. no larcfuL Ordinal ti4)ns. 3 He does not pretend to find any Fault in the Man- ner or Circumftances of the Ordinations in the Church of England •, nor to urge or fhew any Fault in the derivation of the Minifterial Authority by Siiccefiion from the Apollles. And it had been in- deed ftark madnefs for one who can give no Ac- count at all, by whom, or by what Hands the Pow- er or Commiffion of their Elders is derived from, to tquch on that Point. On the Contrary, he would have it believed, that neither they, nor we do count that Hifiory of Infant-Bd^tifm. jy that necelTary , or of any ufe. For at p. 64. be fpeaks of thofe whom he calls the more judicious Pan of the Church of England, as having given up the Chimera of art uninterrupted SucceJfiSn. It he and thofe judici- ous Men conferred Notes ^ they fhould have bid hirri fay, Will quickly give it up •, and not have fufFered him topafsfor the firft Preacher of that Dodtrine. Thejr Ihouid have reckoned that honour to themfelvcS; Now he is Leader, and they tamely follow him. But as to his Argument here, fince he does not lay the Blame on the manner of the Ordinations :i 'tis plain that all the Meaning he has in faying, we have perhaps no Bifhops, no Presbyters, &c. is, that they have never been baptized •, and therefore can- not ordain, or be ordained. So that after a long talk about the Difference between fundamental to a Verfon^s being a Chriftian-, and fundamental to a Churchy the Qiieltion returns to juft no more than it was ; Whether the Age or Manner of receiving Baptifm be fundamental to a Perfon. For if it be not, he brings no new Reafon of its being fundamental to a Church. When he boafls, p. 78. 79. that all the Reafori^ I bring for the Antipasdobaptifts joining in Commu- nion with other Chriftians in all things that they can, " are fu^ciently anfwered^ by the the foregoing Di- fiintlion between Fundamentals of Religion, and Fun- damentals to the Conftitution of a true Chriftian Church." And fays of the Age or Time of recei- ving Baptifm ; 'Tis a Fundamental with us in the Con^itution of a Ojurch : The Diftinftion here is of no ufe. For thefe Circumftances of Baptifm can be fundamental to a Church no farther than they are fundamental for of the Eflence] to each particular Man's Baptifm. If the Baptifm he received in In- fancy is fufRcient to denominate him a Chriftian ; it puts him in a Capacity (if nothing elfe hinder) of receiving Orders. And if Mr. C?^/ff cannot truly fay ^8 A Defence of the fay in the Name of the Antipsedobaptifts in gene- ral \ Thefe Circumftances are fundamental with vs td the being of a Chriftian (as he cannot^ for they deny them to be fo) Then neither is it true which he fays in their Names j They are a Fundamental with us in the Conftitution of a Church. And indeed here he deduces all theReafon ofovlt^ being no Church from our having no Baptifm. For ha- ving premifed " Perhaps fome may carry this fo far^ as *' to ejuefiion whether fuch a Congregation is a vifible *' Church. For if, as I mil prove hereafter., her Qhe *' Church of England^s"] Baptifm is not true j that is^ *' if fl}e have no Baptifm^ &c." then he deduces what I recited, of W having no Bijlwps, &c. And p. 82. fets forth my Perfwafion to the Antipjedobaptifts to join the Church, as abfurd -^ telling vs we ought to unite with Verfons we are perfwaded are not baptized. Which outrage of defiance is, what none, or but few, of the Antipxdobaptifts befide himfelf, are guilty of. If a Toleration be a good Thing, we fee what raif- chievous Effeds are produced by the Abufe of it in the Minds, and by the Mouths and Pens of proud and arrogant Men. The Church and Nation of England has fo long tolerated thefe Congregations with their Leaders (under the Notion of weak, mif- led, fchifmatical, improperly ordained •, but yet ftill well-meaning, quiet, and modefl Men ^ fuch as would be glad and content with their own Liberty, and would not affront the eftablifhed Church and Government) fo long, I fay, till at lafl (he her felf has no Bifhops, Presbyters, &c. is no Church, and her People no Chriftians. If fuch Antipjedobaptifts, or other Diflenters, as are really modefl: Men, ever have the Toleration taken from them by that Pow- er which lately allowed it them ; they will have Kea- fon to thank thefe few Men of Fury and Impudence, who do render it intolerable by their flying in the Face of the eftablifhed Church and Religion. Bol- land Hiftory cf Infant-Baptifm. yg land is the noted Place for Toleration j and yet this would not have been born with there. 3. A 'Third Plea that he ufes, is, that a Church may be right in all Fundamentals, and yet it does not follow that 'tis a Duty to join or communicate with her. For fome of the DifTenters in E»gland^ and (as I, he fays, have granted) the Antipaedobap- tifts particularly, are right in Fundamentals \ and yet the Members of the Eftablifhed Church do not think themfelves bound to join them. This Man anfwers a Chapter, and has not read it. I did in that Chapter, §.5. give Four Inftances, wherein the Scripture forbids us to join any Chrifti- ans that are in any of thofe Cafes. The Second is, falfe Dodrine in Fundamentals. And the Fourth is this. If a Church be Schifmatical^ i.e. in a State cf itnjufiifiable Dtvifio7i or Separation from another Churchy from which flie has withdrawn her felf. For which I cite there, Rom. xvi. 17. where the Apollle com- mands us to avoid fuch. This anfwers all the trifling which here, f.66^&c. take up feveral Pages, pre- tending to fhew that my Argument of Agreement in Fundamentals, would as foon make it necelTary for the eftablifhed Churches to join thofe that have feparated from them, as for the Separaters to return to the eftablifhed Churches. p. <^9.] He at laft allows fome little Difiirence between the Plea of the Church of England, and that of the DifTenters j in that the former is eftablified by the Civil Authority of the Land. This fort of Mea never make any thing of Bcclefaftic Autority ^ but do, as St. P^r^r fays, 2d Ep. ii. 10. and St.Jude ^'. 10. defpife that Government or Dominion (in which Prefumption they have been lately hardened by Do- dtrines preached where they ought not) therefore he mentions only the Civil: And to that he attri- butes very little. He fays in the next Page, " If i* there is no other Reafon^-^he Crime can be very lit^ th So A Defence of the He J if at all^ lefs in the latter than in the forrhery \, e, in the Church than in the Diflenters. This is What many of them think j but this Man fpeaks it out, direftly a2;ainft the Scripture, which lays a great Strefs on our Obedience to Governours. And he forgets all the other Differences : As, that the faid Church had been eftablifhed long before their Ways were thought on. She did not come from thenij but they from her. For the Antipxdobap- tifts ; I had (hewed in that Chapter, and in Chap. 8- that their eldefl; feparate Churches in England were not yet of the Age of a Man, viz.. 70 Years. Be- Udes that in cafe there was as yet no eftablifhed Church \ but it were now to be eftablifhed by ma- jority of Voices (which in fuch a Cafe of Agreement in Fundamentals, and diff'erence in lefTer Opinions would be neceflary for avoiding Schifm) even fo, he may be fure it would not be Antip^dobaptifts ; nor is there, nor ever was, a National Church of that Opinion in the World. Thefe and other Things, which fhew on which Side the Guilt of Schifm lies, he omits-, and fpeaks only of the Civil Power. And that, as it may feem, only that it might caft a flur upon it, and Ihew how little he regarded it. Whereas he urges here, that I " muft take this '' along with me as the Confequence ^ that if any *■'• of the DifTenting Parties fhould become the Nati- '^ onal Church by the Civil Power •, they would have " a Right to the fame Privileges And that the '* fame may be as juftiy claimed by the Churches of " Scotland^ Vnited Provinces, Prujfia, Sweden, Den- *' mark, &c." He knows, that 1 tor my part, have taken that Confequence along with me, and yielded to it thus far -, that in all fuch Countries, an In- 'habitaht is to hold Communion in all Things that he can, provided there be no Idolatry, falfe Do- 'ftriae in the Fundamentals, &c. nor no wicked Thing Hifiory of Infmt-'iiapttfm, gl Thing required of him to profefs or practice. As for what he urges of EngUjh Churches built abroad^ meaning, I fuppofe, Rotterdam ; It may be, 'tis for the \Jk of fuch as underftand not Dutch \ or Forty- other Reafons unknown to me. He would have me anfwer for Tome great Men in England^ that refufed Communion at Charenton. I know not their Cafe, nor their Reafons j and fo cannot either cenfureor juftify their Aftions. Save that, I think I have heard or read, that the noble Lord Clarendon (whom he mentions for one) did it, becaufe there they held Correfpondence with, and adhered to, and juftified the Rebels in England. Which, if fo, was doubtlefs a good Reafon. For as I (in the Chapter which Mr. Gale is here anfwering) did allow at §. 5. thaC Jf a Church teach Doctrines incouraging any Wickednefs^ as Fornication^ &:c. It is a juft Caufe to fhnn her Communion ^ under that, &c. any one would mean Rebellion for one. Which God preferve any Church hereabouts from teaching. Some that call them*- felves of our Church, have made a fcandalous Be- ginning. And which is worfe, have gone about l6 juftify it from thofe very Places of God's Word, which affign Damnation to it. P. 7 1 .] He takes Refuge under the Plea of cccafio* val inftead of co;?/?^;/^ Communion •, which Plea was much in vogue among the fhifting Place-hunters at the Time of his Writing ^ but now every Body is afhamed of it. And the Antipsedobaptifts general- ly, (as well as the honeft Men among other Diflen- ters) did fcorn it then. So that his pleading for it was not for their ufe ; but ftiews the Strength of his Stomach to digeft any Doftrine that is for conveni- ence. That's his Word, communicate together aspould feem convenient^ lege, for holding a Place. Then for Five P^es he anfwers by recriminating. That if the Diflenters are to blame in feparatiog for Things not fundamental ^ j et the Church is like- G wif^ 82 A Defence of the wife to blame for impoling them •, llnce they prove an Occafion for the others feparating. How far fome Churches may be to blame on this Account, I know- not. The Church of England impofes the leaft in order to Lay Communion, of any Church, I think, m the World. Nothing but the Profeffions of Bap- tifm, and theCatechifm j as! in that Chapter fhew- ed. And for Ceremonies in Prayer, &c. There have often been broad Intimations given to the Diflen- ters, that if they could agree on what would fatis- iy them °, the Church would receive any reafonable Propofals. But what can fatisfy fo difagreeing Parties? At the End of this Anfwer, p. 75. he has forgot the Cafe we are fpeaking of. He fays. If the Church by arbitrary Impojitions break in on Fundamental Lawj, &c. which is contrary to the Hypothefis; for we are fpeaking only of Men, or Societies, agreeing m Fundamentals. P- j'jy&c.'] He recites how 1 argue upon a Sup- pofition that the Antipasdobaptifts are in the right in their Opinion ^ and yet ought not to feparate. Which Argument he reprefents abfurd, and makes k £0, by altering the Suppofition orCaie that I put;. I put no other Cafe but this •, Suppofe they are in the right in thinking their way of baptizing by dip- ping at adult Age, to be the better or more fitting way, I did (as plainly as a Man can'fpeak)diltinguifh be- tween two forts of them. As §. 7. " Some Men of " that way do think, that all fuch as have no other ** Baptifm but what was given in Infancy and by *' Affudon, are no Chriftians — ^ 1 hope there are " not many fuch. And Mr. Stennet reckons it a *^ Slander on the Jntifadobapifts^ &c." And fuch I there advife to read what I had written before, §. 6» to prove that the Point in debate between the Paedo- baptifts and Antipacdobaptift^is not a fundamen- tal Article. And there 1 had owned, that if it he^ they tnufi indeed feparate in their Comnfvnion , and the Guilt Hiflory of Infmt-Ba^tifm, S| CuUt will lie on tbofe that are in an Error- But had ihewn that the far greater part of them are of the other Sort, or of the other Opinion, viz.. that it is not a fundamental Difference^ but though they think their way ot baptizing the more regular and fitting, do yet allow that Men baptized in Infancy are Chriftians. And I pleaded, that thefe, fuppofing that they were in the right in that Opi- nion, that their way of baptizing were the fitteft, and though they continued in that Opinion, and did not baptize their Children in Infancy, yet ought to hold Communion with other Chriftians in other Things. Now Mr. (jrf/ff here owns plainly, of which of the faid two Sortshehimfelf is, (of the worit for cer- tain, if one be worfe than another) viz,, that his O- pinion {ox Notion^ as he calls it) is, that none areChri- ftians (he calls it, true Members of the Chriftian Church) but themfelves •, (the very thing which Mr. Stennet difclaims with abhorrence) and fpeaks as if I had put the Cafe that thofe of his Notion were in the right, and yet ought to come to the Communion of the Church. If he had not minded what I faid, he takes me for an Idiot. And if he had, he does wilfully pervert my Words. Our Author^ fays he, fuppofes us in the right in all this- He arguei on a Supposition that we are in the right. Whom does he mean by m and xoe^ I meant only the charita- ble Sort (who take us to be Chriftians, and we them) that they fhould communicate in Prayers and the other Sacrament, even putting the Cafe they were in the right in refufing to bring their own Children to Baptifm in Infancy. As for the other un- charitable Sort, I queftion whether they are fit to com- municate any where. For whatever becomes of the Qiieftion, whether he that is not dipped be no Chri- ftian j 'tis out of queftion, that he that in his debates about dipping or pouring has loft Charity^ is none. G 2, Bus 84 A Defence of the But as I faid before, 1 hope there are not many of them fuch. This poor Blunder or Fallacy he brings, I think. Ten times in his Book, and builds his Demonftrations upon it-, and defires his Friend, always to remember it, " All that 1 fay is to proceed on that Suppftion •, none are baptiz,ed hut Believers dip' fed (which you remember^ Sir^ Mr, Wall always^up- fofeiy^ I never fuppofed any fuch Thing. Nor could any underfland me fo, but fome grofs, or malici- ous, perverter of Words, Some other Sophiftical Turns he gives to the Phrafes as he goes along in this Argument^ which every one that is exercifed in arguing fees as foon as he reads them. For the Sake of the Unskil- ful they may be briefly noted. P. 78. Not of the Ejfencey but wholly indiff'erent~\ It does not follow that a Circumftance which is not of the ElTence, is therefore wholly indifferent. Dip- ping, may be more fitting than pouring, and yet not abfolutely neceflary, or of the Eflence. V. 79. Alterations change the Thing"} Alterations in Circumftances do not change the Eflence. p. 80. A SubjcSt and a A/ode is necejfary *, therefore the true Subject^ a Believer, and the true Mode, Dip- ping, is necejfary to true Baptifm'] There is a Diftindi-' on known to every Body that Itudies Logic, between tKwff MetaphyHcally, and Eflentially, and true Mo- rally. An honelt Man is the only true Man mo- rally ^ but every Man is a true Man metaphyfical- ly, /. €. he is truly a Man. Sp for Churches \ one may be much better ordered, or truer; another faulty, and yet, if not corrupted in Fundamentals, is a true Church, or truly a Church. So for the Modes of Baptifm, or of receiving the other Sacra- ment :; one may be fitter: and yet the other does not ceafe to be true \ and the Baptifm or Lord's- Supper fo given or taken, to be true Baptifm or Com- Hiftory of Inf ant-Bap /fm] 85 Communion. This other poor Fallacy alfo runs through all his Book. As at y. 66. True Churchy &c. Ibid. He brings the Definition of a Church from our 19th Article. Wherein the Sacraments are duly adminlfired'} And though he recite, yet does not fuf- iiciently mind the laft Words •, Jn all things that of neceffity are recjuifite to the fame. Elfe, any diffe- rence of Mode in adminiftring either of the Sacra- ments, in any two Churches, would make one of them to be no true Church. And fo in the next Words, Baptifm duly performed. That which is per- formed in a way, which is not the moft decent or fitting of all, may yet be duly performed in all Things that of neceffity are requifite, P. Si. 2 He quotes lertullian, de Bapt. c. 15. Sap- tifmum^ cum rite non habeant^ fine dubio non habent. They who are not duly baptizSd^ are certainly not bap- tiz.ed~\ no Man of tolerable Sincerity, or Reputati- on for it, would have brought that Saying of Ter- tullian to the Purpofe that he here does. TertuRian is there fpeaking of the Baptifm of fuch Heretics, as do not baptize in the Name of the Trinity, nor believe it. His Words are, Non idem Deus e (I nobis ^' illis *, nec unus Chrijlniy id efi, idem • ideo^j'^ nee bap' tifmm unus^ quia non idem ^ quem cum rite non habe- ant, fine dubio non habent. They and we have heithcr the fame God^ nor the fame Chrifl ^ and fo not the fame Baptifm \ vohich fince they have not aright, they have it not at all. To quote a Scrap of this, and apply it to thofe that do, both of them, ufe the Chriftian Baptifm, differing only in Mode or Time, is the Pro- perty of one who aims, not to inform his Readers, but to blind them. P. 82. Baptifm in general, without fome particular Modes or other^ cannot be conceived or adrntnifired.'^ True. But fome Modes or Circumftances are ab- folutely determined, and exprefly enjoined by our Saviour-, as that it fliould be wkhlVater^ and ia G 3 tha 8^ A Defence of the the Form appointed. And yet fome other Circum- ftances as of the Age, and of the wafliing either of the whole Body, or part, may be not abfolutely limited. P. 83. Jf only that Form is true -^ which our Saviour prefcribes *, then only thofe Subjects and that Mode are (awful which hs fpecifics'} If our Saviour had fo fpe- cified the Subject and Mode of Baptifm, as to have faid exprefly, Baptize only the Adult^ and only by dip- ping in like manner as he fpecifies the Form in which we are to baptize : The one had been as neceflary as the other. Jbidr\ In Jlwrt, we refufe to Communicate with the Church of England, for the fame Reafon that ^e refufes to communicate with Perfonsjhe cannot efleem baptiz.dr\ This is indeed (hort, full and open. But then it is a defperate uncharitable Tenet. Like to that of the Donatifls and Papifts : None faved, no Chrifti- ans, but themfelves. What a poor price of our Saviour's Blood does this Man fet forth ? None baptized in his Name for many Hundred Years, hut a few of the Albigenfes at the Year 1 100. and a few ftragling People in Holland and England fince I $22. Even thofe in Holland are moft:, or many, pf them cut offi For they do commonly ufe Affu-" fion. He in this point forfakes moft of thofe of his own Communion. For they own it not to be a Fundamental, as I fhewed. The Governors when they tolerated thefe Men, little thought they fhould come to be cenfured, as unbaptized. p. 85. The Church has no Power over thofe that with- 4'raw from her Communion'] fhe has Power to declare them excommunicated and fo leave them under the Confequences of that Sentence, when they do in effeft excommunicate themfelves by withdrawing from her Communion. Or elfe all thofe Canons for excommunicating Schifmatics that would not return to the Unity of the Church (whereof there are ma- ny Hi II cry of Infant -Ba^tifm, 87 ni in general Concils) were made to no purpofe. Hofe he would make me a Criminal (for he is now returned to his Vein of pcrfonal Reproaches) be- caufe I inlinuated, he fays, that the AU of Tolerati' ' on does not Qhe makes it, cannot'} tie vp the Oourches Hands from any Proceedings of that Nature^ viz. of prefenting to the Spiritual Court, and excommuni- cating thofe that are obftinate i^ but does only fet afide temporal Punifhments. The Common Law- yers are the belt Judges of the Senfe of the Aft. As for my Opinion, it is the fame as it was. And as I there cited Bilhop StilUngfleet, that it is a fun- damental Right of any Church to exclude out of it felfj fuch as by the Laws of a Chrifiian Society are fit to he .fliut out : So I do here cite a greater Author, who Rom.xvi. ij. commands that f/3(?/^ that caufe Divi' Jions he marked and avoided. Which the Church may now command to be done. He does not indeed fay any Thing of their Lofs of Money, or Goods, d'c. neither did I. P. 85. He repeats again what he had faid, p. 9. that Thirty or Forty Years ago, I or the Church- wardens did prefent one Katherin Hall, and one Jofeph Brown Antipiedobaptifts, who continuing ob- ftinate, were excommunicated. Does he think that in Forty Years Time there has not been occaiion to prefent feveral ? Some for Schifm, feme for For- nication, ere Some of whom were excommunicated, fomedid Pennance, &c. Why has he not picked up all their Names and publifhed their Excommunica- tions to the World ? He fays, I afterward asked Pardon of the later of thefe two. I remember fomething of it : One part of the Prefentment was, that he refufed to repair a Chancel that belonged to the Houfe he lived in ; and I queftioned after- ward, whether the Repairs Ihould lie on him or his Landlord, and in that Doubt asked his Pardon, Are not thefe memorable Things to be printed in a G 4 Bool; 58 A Defence of the Book of Controverfy on a Queflion of Religion ? And for which he (hould write in the Contents of his Book CMr. W^^// a Friend to Perfecution in Re- ligion^l and Ihould run on to the end of the Chap- ter with an impertinent Harangue about the Britifi Government, Trench Dragoons, ^uda4 and Pilate; and how clofe it touches him [^poor Man]] to fee one whofe FunBion is to ferve at .the Jtltar^ &c. of a Com' fleUion fo repugnant to Meelnefs, &c. ? Whereas I meddled not with any of the temporal Punifhments which any of them fuffered (as the Law then was) by Fines, Forfeitures, &c, and prefented DifTenters no otherwife than thofe of our own Perfwafion, who fcandaloufly abfented themfelves from Pray- ers and Sacraments, that they might be required cither to join duly in them, or elfe be autoritatively cut off from them, and avoided; which is a Thing that all who read the Scripture, do know ought to be done in any well ordered Church ; and which the Antipsdobaptifts themfelves, not regarding the Aft of Toleration, do toward fuch as are (as they call it) diforderly. But all this Perfonal Blackniog which has run thro' thefe two Chapters, feems plainly to be only for fear left thofe of that Perfwafion (hould read what I have written for that ufe, without Preju- dice. Which if they will do, I am not unwilling they Ihould read his Book after it j and fee in which of the Two are the Signs of that fly Ma- lice and HypDcrify, n'hich he would affix on C H A Pj Hifiory of hfant-Baftifm. 89 CHAP. III. AS the Two firft Chapters have had very little in them about the Caufe, but a great deal about me, which concerns not the Reader -, they being, as he calls them, my CharaBer (a pretty Sub- ject for a Book of Controveffy •, and he a fitting Perfon to write Mens Charaders) So this Third concerns neither me, nor the Caufe, or Matter of my Book. What I had written was on the Que- ftion whether Infants are to be baptized, or have been in Chrill's Church ufually baptized. He brings in here Three large Chapters Cor Letters as he calls them) about another Matter, viz.. about the way of baptizing, whether by dipping or pouring; with which I had meddled as little as poflible. I had in- deed toward the later end of my Work (where I mention the feveral Tenets of the EngUjli Antipae- dobaptifls) put in obiter a few Words (not Two Pages in all) of the Anfwers which they that ufc Perfufion,do give to the Arguments which the others do bring for an abfolute neceflity of Immerfion ; granting at the fame time, that That, where it may be fafely vfed^ is the moji fitting manner ; . and plead- ing at another Place, as well as I could, for the re- trieving of the Ufe of it according to the Rubric of the Church. Here he, though he calls his Book Reflexions on mine^ poftponing what he had to fay about Infant- Baptifm, which was the Subjecfi: of mine, to nigh the middle of his Book, falls into a long Difcourle about dipping in Baptifm. I make no doubt but that he, or fome Body elfe, had before coUefted theft Oblervations and Criticifms in fome Advcrfaria, or Common- Place-Book. But what makes him call them Refieftions on my Hiftory ? Or what makes ^iqi crowd in my Name here and there into them ? Was g6 ui Defence of the Was that dealing honeftly with thofe of his Party, to whom he had, I fuppofe, promifed to write a- gainf! my Book? ■ , Yet all that do content themfelves with pouring or fpriukling in Baptifm, have reafon to thank him .for his long DigvciTion about dipping and pouring. Becaufe he has in it laid (and according to his way of proving, proved) fuch Things as being laid to- gether, do fully yield up to them the Caufe for which he contends \ as 1 fiiall fliew prefently. He begins P. 91, 92. With a Sort of SyHogifm, in which he triumphs, indeed a very tranfparent Paralogifm. The Subflance ot it, This, , ' *' Adult Baptifm, and that by dipping is deliver- *' ed in Scripture plainly and clearly. Infant-Bap* ^' tifra, and by Affliiion, but ohfcurely^ if at all. *' Therefore we do what the Scriptures exprcjly teach, " while tbey do, at heft, but what is very obfcurefy " taught. So our Cafe is fecure, and far the moft '^ eligible. This Argument runs upon a Suppofition that is not true in Faft, viz.. as if the Psedobaptifls did difcard or difallow of, the baptizing of adult Per- fons, or of dipping in Baptifm; and did let up AfTiifion in oppofition to dipping ; and did count an adult Perfon fuperannuated for Baptifm. And at this rate Mr. (?^/^ talks in many Places, as at p. 239. boldly fuhflituting it Cli^f^nt-Baptifm^ in the Place of what our Lord did ordain \viz., adult Baptifm] BuC the Pasdobaptifts do own and pradice the baptizing of adult Perfons, whenever they meet with any that have not been already baptized \ and the dipping of them if they be able to bear it \ and do fee the Examples of this, clearly and frequently delivered in Scripture. They practice therefore that which he calls deaf from Scripture. But they practice the other too, as being Hiftory of Infrnt-'Ba^tifm, ^i being fufficiently fhewn from Scripture to bcGoH's Will ; though in Words not fo clear and expiefs. So that his Argument runs jufl: as this would do. Giving the Lord's-Supper to Men is commjnded in Scripture plainly and exprejly. Giving it to Wo- men but ohfcurely. Therefore they that fhould give it only to Men^ and refufe it to Women would aiX molt fecurely. Whereas the Conlequence is \ 1 hey that give it to Men, are certainly in the right, fo far as they go \ but yet they would do ill in refufing it to Women. And fo they that give Baptifm to adult Perfons not already baptized *, and dip them, if they arc able to bear it, do well (provided they that give it be Perfons lawfully called and ordained to the Of- fice of baptizing \ which I don't lee how any among the prefent Antipasdobaptifts are) but they do ill in refufing it to Infants alfo; and thatby Affufion, if they are not able to bear dipping. A Servant imployedin his Mailer's Bufinefs mult do his Mailer's Will in all Things which he under- ftands to be really meant and intended by him; though fome of the Things be more plainly expreG- fed than others of them, which he knows by the Na- ture of the Thing, and by good Confequence from his Mailer's Words, to be his true meaning. Any one fees this Authors Argument to be of no force, unlefs we who give Baptifm to Infants, did refufe it to adult Perfons. And^ indeed arguing is not his Talent. He tries at critical Learning. He pretends to wonder at me for offering to give ^ to the Word, baptiz^ing^ the Signification of Waflj^ ' ing \ and for faying that it does not neceflarily in- clude dipping in its Signification ; but is in Scripture taken for walhing in general •,' fuch as may be done either by dipping, or pouring or rubbing Water on the Thing waihed. And he fo fpeaks as it 1 were fin- 92 A Defence of the fiugular in, or the firft Broacher of this Notion of the Word; wliich would be jufl: Reafon to like it the lefs. But all Pasdobaptifts that I know of, fay the fame. 'Twere frivolous to quote many. Chemni- tins. Examen.Concil. Fid. Part. 11. Can. S- brings in feme Papifts, in their Plea for the Romijh Alterati- ons, arguing that the Church has Power to alter even the Sacraments in the Subftantial Parts •, that Chrift commanded abfolutely to dip-, and that the Word Baptize does abfolutely fignify fo. He anfwers, *'- If the Word Ba.7rji('-tv did fignify {^/impHciter^ ** abfolutely, or neccflarily] to dip ; no Man might, *' or could have changed the Cuftom. But Paul an *' Interpreter moH certainly to be depended on, *' tells us, that to haptiz,e^ is to clean fe by the wafj- ** ing oj Water. Eph. v. Tit. iii. A^s il. which is done ** by any Sortof wafhing." P. 94. j Mr. Gale undertakes to make it appear plainly, that the Word does neceflarily include dip- ping in its fignification, and never denotes any Thing lefs. To this Purpofe he makes a tedious Recital of Sixty or Seventy Places ', moft of them out of the Greek Poets that never heard of any Sacrament. And at lalt, to one's great Amaze- ment, there is not one quarter of the Places that have the Word BAJi^a or any other derivative of it, in them. Inllead of that, they have the Word BciTrJo, a Word never ufed in Scripture with any relation to Baptifm, and fo nothing to this Purpofe. Of the reft, which have the Word B«t7r7t^«, it is in fomeofthem ufed for fuch wafhing as is by dip- ping, or putting the Thing fpoken of, all over in- to the Water •, and in fome of them, not. Which comes up to all that I had fiid, that the Word, to baptiz.e^ has, befide the Signification immergoy that of lavo in general. For his difappointing the Reader by bringing Citations of Bi-jla inftead of BATfli'C,^)^ he makes an ApQ: Hlftory of Infmt'Bapifml 9^ Apology 100 Pages afterwards [p. 217.'] That they are Synonymous •■, and having no Proof of it (as 'tis impoflible he (hould) he fays that / dofeem to allow them to he foj hecaufe J argue ^romifcmvjly from both of them. I had in my firft Edition jufl mentioned, in Six: or Seven Lines, Two Places out of the O/^-Ti?/?^^^^?, Dan> iv. 33. and Levit. xiv. 6. in which the Seventy have ufed Bct^7« in the Senfe (as I then took it) not of dipping, but only of wetting. Not taking how- ever Bd-Trla and BcfTTJi^^a to be Synonymous 5 but meaning thus • that if BaV7« it felf did fometimes iignify only wetting, or a partial wafhing ; much more might BctTrTi^a (wich is but a diminutive of it) be fo ufed. But I was quickly informed of my Mi- ftake in the Senfe of the later of thofe Texts : And in my Second Edition left them both out; and ia a Paper which i publifhedfor iheUfeof thofe that had bought the Firft Edition, owned my Reafon for fo doing. And all this feveral Years before Mr. Gale publifhed his. And there can be little doubt but he bad feen it. Men that are any thing verfed in the ingenuous way of writing Controverfies, will judge how poor a Thing it is in him to fpend feveral Pages (as he does in the next Chapter, p. 137.) in an operofe Proof of a Thing which 1 had, fo long before he or any Adverfary appeared, owned in a few Lines. That thefe two Words are Synony- mous he mull have fome better Proof *, for I ne- ver took them to be fo, nor ever heard of any one that did. His Friend, whom he there perfwades to take no Exception at his ufing them fo^ had need to be a very good natured Man. It is needlefs to fpend Time in making fuch Ex- ceptions as might be made to the particular Quo- tations that compofe the reft of this Chapter. I Ihall only make thefe Three Obfervations about them in general. ^4 -^ Defence of the I. Firfl-t That he being ftifF ia maintaining that -RATT^'i^a does always necefTarily contain in its Sig- nification, dipping \ and being oftentimes troubled how to adapt the Notion of dipping to feme even of thefe Pafiages here produced by himfelf •, is for- ced to enlarge the Senfe of that Word to as great a Latitude as the P^dobaptifts ordinarily do give to the Word Wajhing : And does lay down Rules by which the pouring of a fmall quantity of Water on the Face (or indeed any other Part) of the bapti- zed Perfon is juftified, as true Baptifra ; and prov'd by his Principles to be dipping the Perfon. And fo he has (as I faid) yielded up the Caufe (for which he contends in this and the following Chapters) to thofe who adminifter Baptifm by pouring. For herein this Chapter, at P, 1T7.3 Having cited a Relation of Arijiotle concerning a certain Sea-Coaft, which at low Wa- ter is not haptiz^ed (that is Ariftotle's Word) but when the Tydc comes in, is under Water; and ha- ving obferved, as an Objedion againft himfelf, that 'Bct-rTi^k&ctt is here ufed to fignify, the Land's being nader Water by the Water's coming in upon it, and not by its being put into the Water; he folves it *' thus Befides^ the Word Bi*x7i^«y perhaps, does not '^ fo necejfarily exprefs the A^ion of puting under Water ^ " as in general J a Thing^s being in that Condition^ no *' matter how it comes Jo \ whether it is put into thg *' Water^ or the Water comes over it.^^ And he fpeaks much to the fame Purpofe in the next Chapter, f. 143. about the Dew in which Nebuchadnez,z,ar was (as he would have it called) dipped. And though in the Cafe of AriflotWs ufe of the Word, he puts in here the Word perhaps ; the Thing is certainly true, Ba-rTi^a does always fignify to dip. For there is nothing furer than that the Shoai-Coaft was not puC «very Tyde into the Water, but the Water came over it. P. 138.3 Hijlory of Infant-Baptifm. 95 P. 138*.] Where to an Argument of mine he anfwers thus-, " The moft he can infer from it is *' only that it does not always nece fTarily mean, to " dip all over."- And a little after, " We '' readily grant that there may be fuch Circum- '* fiances in fome Cafes, which necefTirily and ma- " nifeftly fhew, the Thing fpoken of is not faid to '* be dipped all over \ but it does not therefore " follow, that the Word in that Place does noC '* Irgnify to dip. And I believe Mr. Wall will al- '' low his Pen is dipped in the Ink, though it is " not daubed all over, or totally immers'd. So '' that after all he fays, it ftill remains that the '^ Word does (ignify to dip.^* And after fomc farther talk, in the next Page, p. 139. ** The ut- " molt, I fay, that could be inferred from this " Paflage, is only that the Word does not always *' neceflarily imply a total Immerfion, or dipping *' the whole Thing fpoken of all over ^ which i " readily allow." CMark that] and a little after " Thus, to ufe the familiar Inllance I mentioned be- *' fore, we fay, Dip the Pen: Meaning only the " Nib of it, which we really dip into the Ink. Tho* " the whole Pen is not dipped all over ^ yet the Part *' particularly referred to is. And the Pen may be " truly faid to be dipped, according to that known '* Rule ^ What is true of any one Part^ may he faid of '* the Whole complexly^ tho' not of every Part of the " Whole feparately."" QThefe's a learned Maxim of the private Academies.]! He maintains the fame Thing, p. 145. concern- ing the Hyffop that was to be dipped. " The Word " is Bct4=/, and plainly fignifies to dip ; though 'twas ** not dipped all over, d-c." Now to apply this to the Queftion, the Antipaedo- baptifts on the one Side, and the Church of England, or other Proteftant Church, on the other Side, about the manner of baptizing. Ar4i' ^5 A Defence of the uintip^d.^ We mufl; not hold Communion with you •, becaufe you are not truly baptized, in that you do not dip the Perfon whom you pretend to give Baptifm to. Whereas Ba^tifm is dipping j and to baptiz.e fignifies to dip. Churchman.2 We dip all fuch as do own them- felves, or are by their Parents owned, to have Strength to bear it. On others we pour Water in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And that is baptizing, for if you will have the Word) dipping. For your own Mr. Gale teaches that a Thing or Perfon is baptized, or dip' ped if it be under Water *, No Matter how it comes fo •, whether it be put into the Water ^ or the Water comes over it, p. ii-j. 143. jintlpad.'} This might be granted, if you did pour on Water enough to cover the Perfon's Body, But a Man or a Child can't be faid to be baptized,, covered or dipped with a handful of Water pour'd on the Face. Churchman.'} Yes he may. For the fame Mr. Gale does readily allow, and readily grant to US, and does teach you, that the Word baptize, or dip, does not always necejfarily imply a total Immerfion, or dipping the whole Thing fpoken of ^ all over. And he exemplifies this by a Pen dipped in the Ink. If only the Nib of it be put in the Ink, thi Pen, he fays, may be truly faid to be dipped. And gives a general Rule for it. What is true of any Part^ &:c. p. 138. 139, 140. Antipdidr\ Well, But ftill Ur.Gale ftands fteady to that •, that to baptize is to dip ; and by a vafl Number of Quotations, with his Explanations of them, maintains his Point for the Word dip. And {ays, p. 168. If the Word does but fignify to dip , I ask no more. Let it relate to the whole Body, or a Part of it only\ either way I gain my Point. The like he fays, p. 172. '77; all we ask. Church' Hifioryo} Infant-Baftifml gy Churchman.^ True, But he could not apply the Word dip to his own Quotations, without yielding up the Thing it felf, which you and all Men have been ufed to mean by dipping. He has kept the Word ; but has granted away the Thing. If that which he allows, be dippifjg ; the Controverfy is at an End. Indeed thefe Principles of Mr. Gale will ferve to juftify, not only thofe that obferve the Rules of the Church of England^ and do pour Water on fuch as cannot bear putting into it^ but even the molt diforderly Baptizers of all •, Whom I confefs I know not how to juftify by any other. Tfcofe, I mean,' who affefting to ufe as little Water as poflible, do purpofely throw no more than a Sprinkle or Drop of Water on the Face of a Child. The Scripture will never juftify thefe, nor the antient Church, nor the Rubric of the Church of England (for that re- quires pouring in the weakeft Child's Cafe) nothing but either the Direiflory, or Mr. Calebs Criticifms. For even by a Sprinkle or Drop fonle Part is un- der Water ; and then the whole Man is under Wa- ter by his known Rule ^ IVhat is true of any one Part^ &c. And if the Tip of a Finger, or a Nib of a fen, be dipp'd, the Man or the Pen is dipped. • Whereas a truer Notion is, that Ba-tIj^w may be used wherever the EngUjh Word, wajh^ may be u- fed 'y but a Perfon can hardly be faid to be wajhed by a Sprinkle or Drop, or by dipping a Tip of a Finger •, or a Pen by its Nip dipped. 2. Secondly J I cannot but obferve the prepofterous Way, which the Antipaedobaptifts take in filling feveral Pages with Quotations out of fecular Au- thors, where the Word BcfTrjii^a is taken for fuch waftiing as is by dipping the Thing waftied into Water, (which is the only aim of this long Chap- ter, and part of ^he following) There are none of ' " H tht 98 -^ Defence of the the Piedobaptifts but what do grant and own at the firft Word, that it is often ufed in that Senfe. And I think moft of us do own that it is oftner found ufed fo, than in any other Senfe of wafliing; that way of wafhing being ufed in the Cafe of moft Things that happen to be fpoke of. Now when a Debate ftands fo •, that both Sides do agree, that in fecular Books a Word is often ufed for wafhing by dippings and there is no Queftion made of that : But the only Queftion between them is this, That one Side affirms (but the other denies) that it is foraetimesufed for other ways of wafhing, as pouring, or rubbing Water, d"c. (to lump the Mat- ter by guefs • fay, 3000 Times it be found ufed /or this Way ^ and 1000 Times for the other Ways) What an idle Thing it is, for thefe Deniers to bring Inflances of that which is confelfed by both Sides, inftead of overthrowing or confuting the Inflances brought by the others for thofe other ways ? Thus they do in the Cafe of the Word fj.ABifjivc^, to difciplcy or make, or efjter Difciples. No Mor- tal denies, but that Word comes in ufe oftner in the Cafe of fuch Difciples as are adually taught, or do begin to learn, at the very time of their en- tring, .or firft being called, or made Difciples. The only Queftion is, whether that Word may not pro- perly be ufed, or be not fometimes ufed, tor fucli entring, or calling Perfons into Difciplefhip as is in prder to their being taught hereafter. And yet Mr. 6"^/^ in the following Chapters fpends 50 Pages in giving Inftances where it includes prefent teaching-, which any one would have granted him. And fo here he has brought about Fourteen Inftan- ces of the Word ?,ci7r7i'C,a (befide near half a hun- dred of another Word nothing to the Purpofe) in moft of which (but not all) it is ufed for fuch wafhing as muft have been performed by dipping. Kone ever denied Shat 'tis often fo ufed ^ nor would ^ i Hifiory of Infant-Baptifm. pp would I AtiLiY to any Difputant that it is for the moji fart fo ufed. His Task had been to fhew that it is never ufed for waftiing in thofe other Senfes. Not that 1 would put it upon him to prove a Ne- gative abfoiutely. But he fhould have confuted or anfwered thofe Inf^ances to which I there referred the Reader, viz.. in Mr. Wdker'^s Do^rwe of Bap^ tifm, Heat/>. 130. recites ray Words, where I fay, ••* Mr. Walker has largely (hewn ixom.' Greek Au- " thors, Lexicographers, and Critics, that befide *' the Signification, immergo^ they give it that of *' lavo in general." And fubjoins in his own next Words; '"'• Where ai you fee ^ Sir^ I have fully baffled '^ ali that is alledged from any Vajfages in the Greci- •' an Writers'' If he mean this baffling only of the Places here alledged by himfelf • It is a mock Fight. But if he mean it of thofe in Mr. Walkers Book ; I declare in good earneft, I think this the moft fhamelefs Saying that ever I read in the Book of any Man of tolerable Repute. I verily believe that he never read (or perhaps never faw j the Book : And that any one that reads it, will guefs thefame^ And if he have, it is fo much the worfe. One Thing indeed this Chapter is good for. It has helped him to more Authors to fill up his Table of Authors^ than perhaps any Three other. So ma- ny Greek and Latin Poets, with their Editions, Lori" donj 1700. as if they were not common in every School-Boys Hand. And fo for Milton, Dryden^ Cbut Hudibras is by fome Chance miffing) as if they alfo could teach us any Thing about Baptifm or Religion. 3. Thirdly, Thtve isone Thing in this Chapter which' I cannot obferve without fome Difdain. The whole Rhapfody of Quotations in it is nothing to me, nor £0 my Book. It mult probably have been fome Colleftion made before. And to make it look as fomewhat relating to me, he has in many places. H 2 of loo A Defence of the of it crowded in my Name. But he has in molt of them engaged me in fuch Boyifh Difputes, that I am afhamed to have my Name feen in them. To give an Inftance. At p. 112. he recites out of Ari- fiofhanes in his PJay called, The Parliament of Women, a Talk about wajhing of WOol. Bcl7r%(ri : Where firft he makes the Argument run on my Side, and lays. No doubt ^ if Mr. Wall knows of this Place^ he thinks it mightily for his Purpofe ; and efpecially if he has but founds &c. And fo goes on for half a Page. This will pleaff Mr. Wall. He will infifl vpon this. But when he has at lalt learned out of Homer ^ Suidasy Thavorinus, and Two or Three more, (what any old Woman could have told him) that Wool is com* monly put into the Water to be walhed : Then he triumphs over me again, and fays. This can be of no life to Mr. Wall, vnlefs to convince him^ &c. Where- as the whole Criticifm (and indeed the whole Chap- ter) do convince me of nothing, but of this, That the Author of it has mifpent a great deal of Time ; the whole being of no other nfe than to fliew, that the Word does fometimes fignify fuch wafhing as is by dipping •, which no Body ever doubted of. 4. FowrfWy, 1 will make one Obfervation, abetter natur'done^ tending to the Commendation of him, and of the Antlpaidobaptifts \ of them, for their Generofity, and being pleafed, and of him for his abundant Juftice. It is to be noted, that this Chap- ter was publifhed a good while before the refl, as a Specimen of what the Book fhould be. They feeme.d very well pleafed, and much taken with it, and encouraged him to go forward. Which was an Initance of very good Nature •, fince it is fo little to the Purpofe, that if one were to expofe him among judicious Men, one would defire them to read this Chapter. But he is to be commended for doing them more than Joftice, and making the Goods to be delivered better than the Sample. For the f Hifiory of Infant-Baftifin', i o i the following Chapters are really fomething more to the Purpofe, and of a better Strain. Always except the Vlth and the IXth. In one of which he brings againft fome Paflages in my Book an Accu- fation fo palpably falfe, that every Reader muft cry Shame on him. In the other he brings (not trifling Arguments out of Poets and Plays, but) the moft loathfome and execrable Blafphemies out of fome Jewifj Libels, without any Relation to the Queftion, without any Occalion given, without any Advantage to his Argument, without any Caufe that can com- penfate for the Mifchief of publilhing fuch Scandals, except a Pride which he may have in giving his Ad- mirers to underftand that he is Mafter of that Sort of Reading. CHAP. IV. WHAT I have already faid of the Significa- tion of the Word Bct7rTi(a makes it need- lefs to fay any Thing to what he produces here from Two Lexicons, and from Fojfivs^ Cdfaubon^ Grotiusy Pctavius, and Stennet. He would prove from them that its proper and genuine Senfe is immergo. At /?. 142. He ftyles it, the primary and general Senfe. If he mean by thefe Epithets only that it is the molt vfual and ordinary Senfe, in. which it is taken; I grant it. And his Authors prQye*'ho more. Con- ftantincy he fays, almofl always renders it fo. 'Tis but almofi. Stevens never fails, &c. till in another Period, b:c. The reft who arc^Pxdobaptifts, con* fefs no more than that is the nioft ufual Senfe. And Mr. Stennet has done what he himfelf has here done, given ufual Inftances where it is taken fo, without pretending to overthrow the Inftances produced by Mr. IValker and others, where it is ufed for wafhing only fome Part of the Body or Thing fpoken of. H 3 " In 't(b2 J. Defence of the la fhort, it is to no purpofe for them to fay any more of this Matter, till they have anfwered to thofe Inftances in Mr. Walker\ DoUrine of Baptifm. If they exped'that we fhould write them over a- gain in Anfwer to every new Book of theirs v it is an unreafonable Demand ^ fince there they ftand ready for any one's Examination \ and I referred them to them. And it is alike unreafonable toex- peft, that without their overthrowing the Evidence of thofe there brought, we fhould fpend Time in looking out others^ and read Books to fo poor a Purpofe as is the Search of a Word. However, becaufe Mr. Gale is fo pofitive, and ventures his Reputation on it, faying here, f. 137. (and to the fame Purpofe, at feveral other Places, over and over) that the Word is never vfed to fignify pouring, but always dipping •, I will endeavour to prick this Bladder "of Confidence^ and name him a Place that fhall affeifl the Reputation, not only of his Skill, but of his Veracity, and omitting thofi in Mr. Walker (which would be too Voluminous) and any other which I cannot be fure hehas feeo, mention one which he muft have feen (for he quotes a part of the Sentence in which it is, in his Tenth Letter, or Chapter, /?. 377.) I do in my Anfwer to that Chapter and Page recite it at large (as per- haps he would have done, if it had not been for the Shame to have it compared with what he fays here, for the Word is ufed hy Origen for the Adion of haptialNg the Sacrifice and Wood, which incontefta- bly was only pouring Water on themj the Reader may fbay till he comes to the Place^ or turn to it beforehand. P. 1 35.^ He is angry that I palled over this Mat- ter in fo few Words (whereas he has fpent more Pages on it than I did Lines) and thinks it a Sign that lam under fome Apprehcnfions that I am not. ia the right. And I on the contrary think a Man's ufing Hiftory of Infant Baptifm, 105 udng a great many Words, efpecially when he fays nothing new in them, a Sign of fuch Apprehenfi- on. To any other Man my Reafon of faying fo lit- tle of the manner of baptizing fhould be^ becaufe it was none of my Subjea. To Mr. Gale^ how doss he know but that I had fome Intimation that he had lying by him, along Colledion about thatDifpute, which if 1 meddled with it) he would publifh as Reflections on me, and make the Antipsedobap- tifts believe it was written in Aflfwer to me, and exped that 1 fhould reply to it. To avoid that Trouble, I faid as little as poflibleon that Mattery fo little as would have prevented the Occafion with any other Man ^ but he was refolved to publifh his Lucubrations, and abfurdly put my Name in the Frontifpiece of them. He comes at lafl, P. 137.] TotheUfeof the Word in Scripture (which I had faid was chiefly to be regarded) he mentions Twenty Five Inftances, which he will give out of the Old-Tefiamem and ylpocrypha •, and at lalh there are but Four (Two of the Septuagint, and Two in the Apocrypha) that have the Word in them. All the reft are of BcLttJcj. Of thefe Two of the Septuagint, one Ifa. xxi. 4. is a Figurative Expref- fion ^ and fo nothing to the Purpofe. He thinks (and truly enough) that m Body will -urge that Place^ agaifjfi him. So there is but one. 2 Kings v. Naa" ma?i\ wafhing himfelf in Jordan. Which wafhing is expreffed there Four Times. Once in the Com- mand. Once in Naaman's Refufal •, once in his Ser- vant's Intreaty •, and once in his aftual Obeying. In the three firft it is A8'«, in the laft ba'ttJiC^- A Sign that thofe Words are ufed fynonymoully and promifcuoufly. And Naamans Body does not feem to have been leprous all over (that we need fuppofe him to have gone all over into the Water) but fonie one Place of it. For what he had expe(^ed of the Prophet, was, that he fhould hive firicken his G 4 Hmd 104 ji Defence of the Hand over the Place, and recovered the Leper^ V. II. Of the Two in the j4pocrypha^ one is Judith's being waflied (or as the Word in the Greek'iSj bap- tized) in, or at a Spring to make herfelf more ac- ceptable to Holophernes, Chap. 13.7. Which whe- ther it were by dipping her felf QNote, that it was in the Camp •, for fo are the Words ; ad fontem iU lum aqua in cafiris. And it appears from Chap. 7. that the Springs were efpecially guarded with Sol- diers] or only wafhing her Hands, Feet, &c. we cannot know. The other is a Place of which Mr. Gale tells a lamentable Story how it affrighted him for a while. It relates to the wafhing that was to be ufedbyone that was unclean by touching a dead Body. Syra- cides^ Eccluf. xxiv. 25. Ba.'/ji^ofy.'.voi &5 vzKp'Sy &c.He that is waflied from j^or, after the touching^] of a dead Body, and toucheth it again \ what availeth his wafliing? Mr. Gale having obferved from Numb. xix. 18 and other Places, that fuch a Perfon was to have the Water of Purification fprinkled on him on the Third Day and on the Seventh Day, had thought that the Word B£t7r7/C^/^«»'<'f related to that fprinh- ling '^ and fays, he remembers the Time when he thought this a very formidable Infiance. He recovered fome degree of hope when he obferved that the unclean Perfon was (as he thinks) required, befide the fprinkling, to have another waftiing. He goes a great way about to prove this, partly from Scrip- ture, partly from the Cuftoms of the Mahometans^ and of the Babylonians ; and exprelTes a prophanc Doubt, Cwhether the Jews borrowed it from the Babylonians, or they from the Jews) and makes an imperfeft proof of it at the laft. If there were any fuch other wafhing ; there is no doubt but the Word ta.'7f\t^'oiMiv«i refers to both. But Hifiory of Infant-Ba^tijm, 105 But why did the appearance that the Word might fignify fpr ink ling with Water look fo formidable to Mr. Gale ? All the Tendency that it had, was to have convinced him that he muft acknowledge his Chrifti- an Neighbours, who had received this Sacrament by fprinkling or perfufion, to be baptized Perfons as well as himfelf i and fo the Separation between them mult not have continued. All the Separaters, who are of a fincere and charitable Principle, do own it to be a defirable Thing, that all Chriftians were of one Body and Communion •, and that if they could be fatisfied in Confcience that it were lawful for them to join with the Church, they Ihould count it a great Happinefs fo to do. But any appearance of fuch Satisfaction or Convidion is to Mr. Cale^ it feems, a very formidable Thing. Such Expreffions ftarting from a Man before he is aware, do give the trueft Indications of his inward Aims and Fears. 1 had mentioned at the later end of my Book, a fort of People, whoi^ffp their Confciences (as Beggars da their Sores') raw and unhealed on Purpofe* The Readers of this Exprefllon of his, will be apt to make the Application. Thefe Four are all thelnftances where the Word B^T]i<^:c. to fetch in Stories of Dew •, all to no pur- poTe ^ fince tlie Words are ^ rTn j\p'o'//H, to be rendered not oft^ but up to the Wrifl (and that indeed is what many learned Men of late have thought to be the Meaning of the Word) or up to the Elbow^ ({ox which he quotes fome few) this he concludes mufi imply dipping. 'Twas but to fay fo pofitively, and in ftiort ^ for Proof or Reafon for fuch Con- clufion there is none ^ fince every Body knows he can with Water poured or running from a Cock wafti his Hands up to the Wrift without dipping them. 1 had faid at that Place, that Dr. Pocock had largely proved out of Maimonides and other Rab- bies, that this wafliing of Hands before Meals, ufed by the Jem., was by Water running or pour- ed out of a VelTel or little Cittern or poured by fome Servant for that purpofe. 'Twas ill For- tune that I mentioned this. For it has brought upon Maimgnides^ and the Rabbies, and Dr. Tocock tOOj ^lo A Defence of the too, a great d^al pf Anger from our Author, ivho tjiinks himielf no mean Judge. . Dr. Pocock^ he fays, W4S 'a learned (jentleman^ &c. But re ally ^ Sir^ Ijhould haV'C honoured his Parts and Learning much more^ if he had trufied lefs to thofe fanciful Authors the Rak% hies J &c. Tis pity the Dodor could not forefee this, for furely he would have altered the Courft of his Studies. Maimonldes^ he fays, was one of the greatefi and mofi judicious among the Rabbies ^ but a true Rabbi notvpithjlanding^ and perfectly befotted^ 6cc. As for the other Rabbies he will fay more of them at another Place. Now allowing that thefe Rabbies are fanciful and abfurd Reafoners (which is indeed their Charafter with Men of another Size of Judg- ment than our Author, and with all Men) and that one would not depend upon them for any Matter of Moment ^ yet can he think that they are not capable of telling what is their own Cu- ftom in wafliing their Hands ? That Explication of 'TTvyy.n in. St. Marc (to fignify vp to the Perek or. Wrifi) was never thought of by learned Men till they learned from the Rabbies that Cuftom of wafli- ing their Hands in fome Cafes. For the Word has naturally no fuch Import. Shall we in our Explications of a Word in Scripture borrow the Notion from a Cuftom of theirs, and yet not be- lieve that they had fuch a Cuftom ? Or ftiall we believe them when they fay they waflied to the Wrift, and yet think that they themfelves cannot tell how they do it *, by dipping the Hand, or pouring Water on it ? He makes a greater Matter of the Difference be- tween BitTTJi^i^cti and x'-?vi-7rjiiv^ and cannot fee that in this very place. Marc. vi'i. 23. as alfo in the Pa- rallel Place, Mat. XV. 2, and 20. (which fpeak of the waftiing before Meals) the Word is x-f'^'^'^-'^* For it is x-f^^^^ dvi'Trron , and vitttovtai T6tV %«p*?« where they fpeak of the fame walhiflg before Meals^ whiell Hijlory of Ifffant-Baptifm, 1 1 1 which St. Luke defcribes by i^AWi^ti. AndBr.Pd^ cock both fays hixnfelf, and quotes Bez,x faying the fame, that BaTrrli^i^at here in St. Luke means the fame as Kiz^ai and x.^pi'iVrs/f, to wajh, or^ to wajh the Hands. And that, fince that warning of the Hands might be done either by putting them in the tVater^ or by pouring Water on them ; there is there in the Text of St. Lukel^ a Word ufed s/BetTTTicS^n rvhich comprehends both the one and the other of thofe Ways, He fays at lafl: P. 158. That I have abiifed Dr. Tocock in my Quotation of his Words : Yet he does not deny the Words which I cited, to be as I cited them \ nor that he does in a great part of that long Chapter fhew at large from the Rabbies, that this pouring of Water was the 'Jews ordinary way of wafhing their Hands : But onlyj that he obferves (as he does indeed) that a fevo might, if he pleafed, inftead of pouring on Water, put his Hands into the Water ; and that 'tis likely enough that fome of them did : And that the Word Bct^T/Xsca:t/ does comprehend both of thefe Ways. For., fays the Doftor, though 'Ba.'7niC,iSrAi does indeed efpecially, {j^rxQ\^Vit~\ fuit to that wajhing which is by ■ Immerfion j yet that it does not necejfarily mean that, nor is ufed only for that^ I think is plain from that which we read in Luc. xi. 38. T'he Pharifee marvelled that »' 'u^Zrov i^aTTTiSv. Not. Adifcell, c. 9. p. 39^]. This Qiiotation which he brings to confront that which I brought, is one that I might have well added to mine. For it ftiews the Doctor's Senfe molt plainly, both concerning the Matter in ge- neral (that to baptise does not necefTarily fignify to dip) and alfo its Aceptation in this particular Jext. But of thefe laft Words of his, wherein he ap- peals to this Text, Mr. Gale fays, 'T« a downright begging of the Queflion^ to in^ance in the very Cafe difputf^ r 1 2 A Defence of the Mfputed. (Oh ! the Man's Logic) as if Df. Pokoci had wrote that Book in a Difputc between himfelf and Mr. Gale (who was not then born) about the Mean- ing of that Word in that Text. Whereas he brings it in as a plain Text, to explain another, on which he had been difcourfing. Mr. Gale has the Courage thus to conclude thh Debate concerning Dr. Pocock^s Opinion, at P. l6i. It may be fairly gathered from the DoBor^i Words^ that in Luc. xi. 38. and Marcvii. 4. BATrriifgcS-*/ does naturally and principally fignfy to wajh the Hands hy dipping'^ which is all I defire , &c. Now whoevef Ihall read the Dodor's Words (even as they ftand in Mr. (? ^0 f'^^ Do^rines the Commandments of Men. For laying afide the Cortimandment of Cod^ ye hold the Tr4' dition of Men ; as the Baptifms of PotSy and Cups j and many other fuch like Things ye do. What God com-] manded at the Place cited by M^r.Gale^ Levit. xi. 32.' Was only in Cafe of any VefFel that happened to be tender any legal Defilement by the Carcafe of a 1 14 A Defeme of the Moufe, or any other unclean Creature falling in it. And that, if it were of Wood, Raiment, Skin, or Sack, was to be put into the Water •, if it were Earthen, to be broken •, if it were of Brafs, or any other Metal that would abide the Fire, they were fas is ordered. Numb. xxxi. 23.) to make it go through the Fire, and fprinkle on it the Water of Separation. So that Brazen or Silver VefTels, Pots or Cups, were not commanded in the Law to be put into Water at all. And confequently Mr. Gale argues againft himfelf, if he apply this legal Puri- fication of them (which had no other ufe of Water but fprinkling) to that vihkh St. Marc calls the bap- tizing of them. But befides. This is not the Cafe our Saviour fpeaks of. Does Mr. Gale think that he would have blamed the Pharifees or Scribes for doing any Thing of this, which In fuch a Cafe of Unclean- Befs was commanded by God ? The Wafhings or Baptifms, here fpoken of, were fuch as had been devifed by the Jews themfelvcs, to be ufed, with- out the Cafe of legal Uncleannefs, as often (as it feems by the Context^ as thofe Pots, Veflels, or Tables were ufed at any Meal. At which Times tliey were much more careful to have the outfide of the Cups clean, than they were of the Infide j as our Saviour told the Pharifeey at whofe Dinner he fate, and who marvelled at hisOmiffion of Bap- tifm or Wafhing. So different are the Cafes, that are fpoken of in Leviticus^ from that here fpoken of by St. Marc. And yet Mr. Gale^ applying them to this, urges that he has tka exprefs Word of God for it. He quotes here,]?. 153. a few Words in my Book,! juft at the fame rate, and with fome mifapplica^| tion, that he does the Scripture. He fays of me,; He allows that the Jews did immerfe the Thing wi ferjon to he wajhf^ There are indeed thofc Wordsi Hiflory of Infmt-BAjtUfm. 115 at the Place he quotes, exprefTing in fhort what was more fully fpoken of in my Imrodullion^ §. 7- Who- ever reads thofe Places will fee, that the Cafe there fpoken of, is, that of any Verfoti or 'Thing which was by the Jews Law to have a Tevillah or folerhn wajhing^ their Cuflom was to do it three Times over. What is that Cafe of a VefTel which by God's Law was to be put into the Water, to this fuperftitious waihing of VelTels or Tables before Meals ? There is riot a more palpable Proof of the In- flncferity of any Writer, than when he quotes fome Words of Scripture, or of any Author to one •Senfe, which if one turn to the Place, do theye plainly appear to be meant in another Senfe. AS for my Words, it is no great Matter. But God's Word is not to be fo ufed ; nor ever is, unlefs by Men that write for a Side, or for fome wicked Purpofe. I mentioned another Inftance in the fame Text of St. Marc^ where he fays, of the Pharifees and all the Jews •, When they come from Market , except they be lraptiz,edy they eat not. Where common Senfe teaches us to underftand it (as our Tranflators do exprefs it) except they wajh, they eat not. For it is| unconceivable, and an impradicable Thing for Men that live near a Market, and have frequent occafi- ons to go in and out, efpecially Servants and Offi-^ cers of the Market, who muft go into it feveral times in a Day, to undrefs and dip themfelves as often as they eat. So that St. Marc fpeaking of this baptizing as tfed by all the Jews^ does plainly ufe the Word for fuch wafliing as is without dipping. And the J^wi themfelves, who uftd thefe walhings, do not pre- tend that they ufed in this Cafe any other but fucli walhings as are without dipping;*, for which I quo- ted D'c.Pocotk. Moft of Mr. C7ci7f\u^ which though it be rendered, and do fignify to dip ^ yet not in the Senfe that the Antipjedobaptifts underftand dip- ping, viz.. to immerge the Thing fpoken of all over. For the whole Hand was not dipped. Now this Mr. Gale grants, and fays, The Quefii- en is not about the Whole ^ or a Part of the SuhjeB \ but whether the Greek Word fignifies only to dip: And concludes, if it be true that Ba7r]i^t» does only figni' fy to dip \ ^tis all we ask and our prefent Dif- pute is at an end. He Ihould have minded that the Word he fpeaks of, is not in the Text : But another Word which is generally by the EngUjh rendered to dip ; whereas B*TT»(^« is never in Ihe New-Tefiament fo rendered by them. Yet for the Word battV^co it felf, if the Difpute will end upon its being granted always to fignify to dip in Mr. GaWs Senfe of the Word dip \ I fee nothing to the Contrary but it may end prefently. He yields his word D//?, to mean the very lame Thing (neither more nor lefs than) we mean by our word Wa^. (as I Ihewed before in my Anfwer to his Third Chapter) The fame Definition will ferve both for wajhing and for dipping in his Senfe. It is an ^application of Water to the SubjeEi^ or feme part of it. All that I fear, is, that the Antip is ufed , he brings Three of them. The others, where ^ef^n-i^a is ufed, fhall, he fays, be taken notice of by and by. But before he comes to them, he fays here at P. 182. In the mean time you fee^ Sir, — — / have faid enough now to fatisfy any Man in the World that the Word liA7rri(a does always, without Exception^ fignify only to dip.) Then I would, if 1 were as he, never bring the Places at all, for when they come, they are not half fo flrong as is this Conclufioa ta- ken beforehand. What he brings is this, Origen fomewhere fpeaks of Men -fero tm< KaKUs atcTcL^'.^A'TrJia-i/ivav, baptiz.ed Cor, as this Author ren- ders it, given »/>3 to Wickfdnefs, Ceml 12 8 Jl Defence of the Clem. Alex, of fome, who through Drunkennefs are ^A'/ji^o{jiivoi \ii uTTvoVf baptiz^ed into Jleep ^ he renders it^ Mpped injleep. And at another place ^ Strom Chap. 3. f. 47^. We CChriftians] who formerly lived in the/e £wicked Courfes] cC'^iKao-ctuzba., have been wajljed. But thofe who wa(h themfelves d^oKioirn in intemperance, *K, a-u(ppo(XvviJi hi 'oropvilctv ^a.7ff\i^'6a-t^ do from a Stat€i of Temperance wajh themfelves in Fornication. He fays, dip into Fornication ; though K'au ufed twice in the fame Sentence, and by himfelf rendered, wafh^ fliould have direfted him by the Likenefs of the Phrafe, and by the Apodofis, to have rendered the la ft Claufe fo too. An Antipxdobaptift who fhould read this Col- iedion, would be difcouraged \ and think there are no Places to be found, where ^ctrri^a is ufed for proper dipping ; fince this poor Author can find no better than thefe. But 'tis pretty to obferve^ that he does bring at laft a Paflage of Gregory Thau- maturgpi^Sj where !^a,iTriC,oyi.zvoi is really taken for a Man in the Water funk, tor finking^ and fo is for his Turn, if he had known how to tranflate it. Gregory fpeaks, it feems, of fome Body, who akkoi^ cfiynv %t What is this, but flraiuing at a Knat, and fwal- lowing a Camel ? Our Saviour has exprefly com- manded every one that would be faved, to be bap- tized ; and every one that enters into the King- dom of Heaven, muft-, h€ fays, be born again of Water, &c. Now (hall any arrogant Mortal deter- mine that this need not be ? And in Cafes of Ne- ceflity, where the Perfon caanot have it in that way that he thinks the fitteft, not let him have it at all ? God Almighty in the Time of Mofes de- termined otherwife in the Cafe of the Palfovcr. And ^0 i-)^vSiVTetii( x^»poc rtva. yivi^cti. It was not lawjul that any one^ who by Reafon of Sicknefs xoai baptiz.ed in his Bed hy Perfufofij jhould be taken into any Office of the Clergy. He might have feen this to be their Reafon by what himfelf cites of the Hiftory of Novatus writ- ten by Cornelius (if he had underftood, or would l?ave rightly applied the Words) Cornelia there gives an Account to Fahitts, how this Novatm had been a Heathen \ and that the Occafion of his believing was, his being poflefled with a Devil for a long Time; in which he being fomething helped by the Exorcifms []or Prayers] of fome Chriflian Prieffs, would be baptized before he died. And having gone on to tell what Sort of Chriflian he made in jils ConvctTation afterward, atrickifh, jugling,and for- 1 5 8 A Defence of the forfworn Fellow, &c. and afterward returning to fpeak of his Baptifm, which he took in that Fright of approaching Death, and had fo abufed afterward, he fays. He received it by yljfufon in his Bed, as he lay, Viyi %f it xiyuv roizrov iiKtxpiycii. If it be fit to fay^ that fuch a one as he received it at all. Where the Strefs of Corneliuses Doubt or Queftion concerning his Baptifm is plainly grounded on the ill Temper of the Man's Heart, and his receiving it by Fright and Neceffity, and his ill Life afterward j and not on the Manner of waihing. I gave here the Inftance of St. Laurence out of Wal. Strabo, baptizing with a Pitcher of Water ia a Cafe of Neceflity ; and of BafUides out of £«/>- bins. To which he lays nothing. Neither did I fay that Novatian's Cafe is the earlieft (as hefalfe- ly quotes my Words) but that Text and the reft there given are fome of the earlieft. P. 209. He brings in Confiantin^s Baptifm to no manner of Purpofe. For though he fays of his own Head that Eufehim afRrrps, that he was not hapiz.ed in his Bed, but as was ufual^ in the Church called, Martyrium Chrifti, in the ordinary way ; There is nothing of that Matter faid in Eufebim. Only that he went to the Suburbs of Nicomedia, called together the Bifhops, defired of them Baptifm. *0/ 3 Tat vay.ifiet TiXtvriiy C^c. And they ferforming the Ceremonies, put in Execution the Divine Ordinance, and made hint Partaker, &c. oVst p;^p» ^qo. 232. All the Clertry. .their free ajfent -up- on Oath.2 This happens to Men that will talk con- fidently of Things they underftand not. The Cler- gy do fubfcribe the Articles \ but not at their Or-; dination, nor upon Oath. The Exception that he here makes againft mine, or their, adhering to the Doftrine of them, is too apparently frivolous (being founded on his foregoing Untruth) to need any notice. P. 235.3 He feems here to be writing {or 2 Placed I thought that fome of them had gratified him for his Pains ^ that he needed not to bring in any By-aims into a Book of Controverfy. But how if that great Man fhould read his Second Chapter, ;>. 81. 82, ^c. where he would underftand himfelf to be (as Mr. Gale pronounces the Verdidl upon us all) no true Member of a Chriftian Church j not bapti' z.ed i one with whom it is not fit to have any Commu» nion, &c. ?. 239. Speaking of the Subjefts of Baptifm. And thofe you have already feen, Sir^ Mr. Wall himfelf al- lows to be the Adult only-, as far as the Scriptures can M 4 g^ i68 A Defence of the go to inform us of the Matter^ This is one of tbe Twenty I fpoke of. But tell me, Mr. Gale^ did your Sir give his Nod to this too ? I can hard- ly think it of him. If he did, 'tis like Pleader, like Judge. This Calumny (flnce he flands in it thus) and fome of his others, are of fuch Moment, and are fuch direft falfhoods, that it may be needful for nie to do as Mr. IVills did againft Mr. Danvers, viz. to put in an j4ppeal againft him to his own Bre- thren. And I do in good earneft defire any of the Antipsedobaptifts, who are Lovers of Truth, and do fcorn to have their Caufe defended by bafe Methods and Untruths in Matter of Faft, to ex- amine, and give their Opinion concerning this Con- dudt of his. What I have to fay to the Body of them, or any other Reader, may, if he pleafes, pafsover, as a Thing not concerning him. I defire them to try, and judge, and declare, whether he has not done an open Injury to me, and the Truth, and indeed to the Credit of their Caufe, by this Falfhood of which 1 have been fpeak- j ing •, and (becaufe I would not incumber them with an Inquiry into all his Mifreprefentations) by two more. What he affirms pofitively, over and over, thro' this Chapter Qthat I do confefs, or own, or allow, or grant, that Infant-Baptifm cannot be proved from Scriptuu-]] I charge upon him as a Falfhood. Let the Places of my Book which he quotes, or any other that he can find to prove this my Conceffion (as he calls it) be confidered and canvafled. Pleafe to obferve. Gentlemen, that the Verdid or Judg- ment to be given in this Cafe, is not, whether there be, or be not, in your Opinion Proof from Scrip- ture for it. But whether I have faid or.granted that there is none. And if I have not, you fee where thi Falfhood relts. •M Of ^ Hifiory of Infant-BAptiJw, 169 Of the other two Things, One is, where he lays, "That I do indufiriovjly take all Occajions to blachn the Anti^adobaftifls^ and render them the Objects of Refent' Mem and Contempt : and a great many other odious Charges to the fame Purpofc (his Way being, as,> I faid, where a Thing is untrue, to repete it over and over) Thefe are to be feen in his 20, 21, and 22 Pages. And again at p. 46. where he refers to a Page of mine^ which Page if any one read, I defire them to mind whether I fay any Thing of Countenancing \ and whether I do not fay. There are but few of them in England, that hold that Error. And again, at p. 50. where he fpeaks of me as reprefent- ing and judging of the whole Body by the fingular Opi- nions of a few particular Men in it -^ which I did not do. And again, at p. 55. that I load them withfome of the mofi infamous and hated OpinionSy and injdan- ces that of the Socimans-, and fays, / in/inuate as if they countenanced fuch. Whereas I neither fay, nor infinuate any fuch Thing; but do fay the direft Contrary (and he had feen it, and quotes Part of it] that they that profefs it openly are rejeEied from their Communion *, I begin that Paragraph thus ; So- cinians they have fame that creep in among them ; and end it as he fays, and had in my Second Edition, />. 449. mentioned a Decree or Refolution of their General Body for that Purpofe. If any Antipaedobaptift will mind what Exprelfi- ons, I ufe, when I fpeak of the General Body of 'em (as in thofe Places of the Second Part of my Book, which in the Firft Edition are />. 215.279, 280, 288,402,403,404,415. In the Second Edi- tion they are p. 430. 453, 454, 450, 549, 550, 55i» 554i 5<^i-) He will fee how falfly Mr. Gale reprefents the Charader that I give of them. And in reading that Second Edition every Body will ob- ferve that what I could learn concerning their fe- ver al Tenets, by Difcourfe with Mr. Stcrmet (who gave ijo A Defence of the gave me better Information than I could getelfc- where) I have carefully and candidly inferted it. For when my Second Edition was in the Prefs \ a good while before that Chapter concerning the frefent State and Tenets of the Englifh Antipaedobap- tifts was printed off, I wrote to him, being thea unknown to me by Face, to this Purpofe ^ That however different our Opinions were concerning what ought to be held or praSifed, yet that in an Hiftoricd Account of what they do aliually hold or pradife, I was defirous to be informed By thera- felves^ and accordingly defired him to read that Chapter, and give me his Obfervations on it. But before he could well anfwer, I having Occa- fion to go to London^ called on him. He received me very kindly^ acknowledged that I had treated the Antipiedobaptifts more civilly than had beea ufual ; faid that he had not yet written any Thing of what I had defired *, but that if 1 would take Pen and Ink •, he woujd, as he read the feveral Pa- ragraphs, tell me what he thought might be ad- ded or altered ; which I might fet down in fhort Notes. I did fb. He did not pretend, as this Man does, that I had faid any Thing falfe of their Te- nets, but in many Places where I had faid that Some of them hold fo and fo •, he told me, Theje were hut feWy and thofe of leafi Repute^ that held fo. I in- ferted in the feveral Paragraphs the Notes 1 had ta- ken from his Mouth, as may be feen in the Second Edition. As at p. 432. j4.>7d I have received of Ute a credible Account ^^c. p. 435* / am told by one that jhould know, &c. ^A^hat I fay, p. 435. I think it is but few in England, ©-(:. Hands as it did. He made no Exception or Addition to that, p. 445. lam lately af- fured by a Man of chief Note, &c. p. 447. But this Account of Danwers^^cC' And another like Note at the Foot of that Page. p. 451, 452. There is a more exaiSi Account of the OiEce of Teachers, Alef fengers^ Hpfiory of Infant-BApifm. 171 fengers, ReprefentativeSj than I had had before. And what he could tell me, that tended to the clearing of Hicks, I added as a P. S. Pa^e 431. Now what I defire in Juftice, is, That fuch foul Words as Mr. Gale ufes againft me on this Point (as where he fays, p. 55. Jf indeed the Things he taxes us with J were true, &c. Bt4t they are fo notorioujly falfe^ that I admire any Man efpecially of Mr. Wall'j Or- der^ &:c. may be examined *, and he required to fhew the Falfhood, or elfe to take the Guilt, and Shame, and Imputation of it to himfelf And thaft to that Purpofe, what I have faid above, in Anfwer to his Firft aud Second Chapters, viz.. to his 20, 21, 22, and 46,47, and 55, 56 Pages, may be confider- ed. And that they try whether they can fair- ly bring off this Defender of their Caule from the Imputation of ufing bafe Means to do it j and if not, confider how far they will approve of him. 1 fuppofe he fpread this Charader of me, on purpofe to keep the Antipaedobaptifts from giving any impartial regard to what I fdid, or produced from Antiquity, (for no Man hears willingly one that hates and belyes him) But I hope they will fearch carefully where the Lie is to be fixed. The Other is, That which I mentioned above in my Anfwer to his long Difcourfe from p. 77. to f. 84. where he reprefents theSenfe of my \A''ords in a manner fo grofs and abfurd, as to make it as bad as his other Way of talfifying Words. In my Dijfwajive from Separation. Tart II. Chap, iij I have argued, that Chriftians, whofe Opinions do not differ in Fundamentals^ ought not for other Dif- ferences to feparate or renounce Communion with one another (owning at the fame Time that they that differ in Fundamentals muft feparate) I gave there feveral Reafons why the Difference between Psedobaptifts and Antipcdobaptifts fhould not be accounted a Fundamental one. From the Scripture. From 172 ji Defence of the From the Creeds. From the Cafe of TertulHan^ and Creg. Naz.. From the declared Senfeof many ofthe moft noted Men both of the one and the other Side of this QiieftioH, particularly of Mr. Tombs^ Mr. Sten- net, and of thofe 100 Churches of Antipsedobap- tifts whofe Confejfion is publifhed 1699. and ano- ther 170 1. With thefe I there argue, that they ought by their Principle to hold Communion with the Church of the Place where they live, in Pray- ers and in the other Sacrament, even on Suppofi- tion that their Opinion be right, that giving Baptifm to the Adult only, is the fitted; •, and though they continue in that Pradtice themfelves. My Reafon is, becaufe the Difference is confefTed by them not to be Fundamental, And this wretched Perverter of my Words declaring himfelf for the other ««- charitable Opinion, fays. We (meaning himfelf, and I know not who elfe) do hold it to be Fundamental^ and that none but Perfons dipped at their adult Age, are true Members of the Chriflian Church ; and that none elfe are baptiz^ed. And Mr. Wall fuppofes us in the right in all this \ and yet would have us unite with Perfons, we are perfwaded are not baptiz.ed^p.2l. and p. 80. fays of me, that 1 always proceed on this Suppofition. I had indeed faid that there were fome few fuch uncharitable Men among them, who fay (much as the Donatifl-s did, and Papifis do) that none are Chriftians but themfelves. But any one that reads the Place will fee, that it is with the other (the main Body of them) that I there argue, that they ought (even fuppofing their Way of Baptifm be in it lelf better) to join with the Church in other Duties. Let the Men to whofe Honefty I appeal, judge if this be not a bafe Abufe of my Words. The other Slander he repeted about Twenty Times : This I think about Ten. Let them fay whether fuch trick- ing Hifiory of Infmt'Baptifml 175 ing Impofture be to be ufed in Arguments for Reli- gious Matters. Worfe than this. He at p. 80. calls it my Con» cejfion. I never made a Conceflion that the other, the charitable Sort, are in the right in their Opini- on ; but only a Suppofition or putting the Cafe that they were {b. All this while, though he pretend to anfwer that Chapter of mine : he takes not a Word of notice of what I there produce from the Confeffion of the 100 Churches, and from Mr.Tomhs, and Mr. Sten- net declaiming the Contrary to what he here de- clares to be the Senfe of the Antipjedobaptifts. I believe indeed he does not like them. But I won- der that Saying of Mr. Stennet [Tie Reproach which Mr. RufTen ai^s on them Qhe Antipaedobaptifts] mz.. "that they judge none of the true Church but thofe of their own Way~\ did not fly in his Face and daunt him, while he was fetting me forth as a Reproacher of them : For by Mr. Stennet^ Account, 'tis he, and not I, that cafts a Reproach upon them. I fhall never forget what Mr. Stennet told me (which I recite. Second Edition p. 447) that the Country where J live J is full of fuch of them as are of the leafi Re^ pute. For I fee that the Antipsedobaptifts in many other Parts of England do fpeak and argue much more like Chriftians than this Man. Thefe Three Inftances of his Condud I do lay before the Antipaedobaptifts, for their Approba- tion or difapproving : And 1 think it concerns the Credit of their Caufe, and the Reputation of their Sincerity, to declare one or the other of them. And when their Hands are in, and his Book is before them •, It will, I know, be much expefted of them to declare their Sentiment concerning Mr. Gdeh Notion of dipping : Whether a Thing or Petfon be dipped ^ if a fmall Part of it (as the Nib of 174 -^ Defence of the of a Pen) be dipped, or covered with Water. A fair ftating of this, and their free declaring their Opinion, may go a great Way toward adjufting and ending many contentious Difputes. The Pa- ges where he treats of this, p. 117, ^c. I noted above. In favor to that Notion of his I would give my humble Advice, that they take this Conli- deration along with them^ that without the Help of it, they will never be able to maintain that the Word bapnae, does always fignify, to dip. P. 239. jifid our Author himfelf has recourfe to it fo frequently} I thought I might have done with that grating Complaint \ but here is another neceflary Occafion given : Another Thing faid of me, that is utterly falfe. For he is here fpeaking of feme who ufe a miferable Cavil, that Chrifi has no where forbidden them to baptiz.e Infants, and therefore they infer they ought to negleB it. He fpends Four or Five Pages in a triflng Manner to expofe this Ca- vil, and exemplifies it by Comparifons ^ Why does not our Author baptiz.e Per fans after they are dead fince the Scripture does not exprefly forbid him ? The Scripture does not fay to the Contrary, but that fuch a Clod in a Field is Adam'j Body. Nor that the Roman is not the only true Catholic Church ', and fuch rambling Impertinencies. But at p. 243. he fays He will give an Infiance fomething nearer to the Matter iti Hand. We are no where forbid to baptiz.e our Cattle^ £elis, fables. But I will give an Inftance nearer yet. We are forbid to .. For this (as faid of me, that I have frequent recourfe to this Argument) is no other. I had argued in my htroduBion to this purpofe ; that there having been hdoxQ Chrifi's and Sl.John'% Time a Cuftom to baptize Infants, we mult not fay that they altered any Thing, or that Chrift bade his Apoflles alter any Thing from the ufual Way, unlefs we had Proof from Scripture that they did fcii Hijlorj of Infmt-Ba^tijml 1-75 fo. And where Chrift ufes general Words, All Na- tions. Every Terfon. We mult not make Exceptions unlefs the Scripture do. And I produced Dr. Light' foot's Words to that Purpofe. But this is nothing like the Cavil that Mr. Gale fpcaks of- but has a dlreO: contrary Tendency. Yet he without any re- gard to Truth, imputes it to me. And goes on with aggravating the Abfurdity of this Cavil (which he feigns me to ufe) till at laft he has heated himfelf to that degree of foul Language as to fay at P. 243. If our Author argues weB, and the Scripture*s Silence be fuffcient Reafon for a Thing \ he ought in Hom nor and Confcience to return to Rome.] Molt young Men that are brought up to Learn- ing, are at the fame Time taught, and inured to Rules of Civility, good Manners, and to forbear- ing of fcurrilous Language. I wonder how Mr. Gait has attained the one of thefe, (for he has indeed a good Faculty of Philological Learning) and yet feems never to have been taught any Thing of the Other. Some of the Country Clownilh Difputants, when they are got on fome Heath or Common, one into one Waggon, and the other into another, to brawl againft one another, before a Rabble, are apt, after fome provoking Language, to fay. Get you gone to Munfter, from -whence you came all of you. And the other to anfwer^ Do you return to Rome. But in a Printed Book of a Learned Man, I have feldom feen fuch Stuff before, as in this, and in the next Paragraph •, Our Author ought to follow his Example, &c. Efpecially if the Occafion was not real, but feigned, as it is here, and no Provocati- on given, as to any given by me, I was fo unfor- tunate, as never to have heard of Mr. Gale before he wrote ^ and for the Antipsdobaptifts in gene- ral, I am confident (and will refer it to any im- partial Reader) that what Mr. Stetjpet obferved ig true ; 1^6 A Defence of the true *, that no Book written in this Difpute has bee"^a freer from any provoking or abufive Expreflions. But he has in this very Chapter forged out of his own Brain feveral Things to fix upon me, and thenpurfues the Confequences of thofe Forgeries with Reproaches, fuch as are never ufed (at leafl: without a preceding Povocation) but by very ill-bred Men. But why does he repete this but Three or Four Times ? For it is as falfeas any of the reft, I will not haftily believe of the Antipsedobap- tifts, many of whom CI have once faid it j and will not yet go from it) are a [oher\ andgrave^ quiet and peaceable Sort of Men *, therefore I will not believe of them, that they perceiving that the Hiftory, which I wrote of Infant-Baptifm did, by all the Teftimonies which are to be found of the antient Chriftians, fhew their Practice and Doftrine to be for it ^ and that the fumming up of the Evidence did turn (whether I would or not) againfl their Tenet ^ and that they were not able to bring any candid Writer that could fairly contradidt, or over- throw the Credit of the Teftimonies produced; did therefore contrive to fet up againft me one of their fierce Creatures to bait me. I rather think they were miftaken in their Man. For they might eafily judge, that the fatisfying the Confcience of a doubting Chriftian (which is all that Controver- fial Books are good for) does not depend upon De- clamation and Harangue; or an aflured and Ma- iter-like Way of Talking ; much lefs upon pick- ing' up Stories, and making Perfonal Refieftions on the Writer \ and lefs yet upon Forgeries, Taunts, and foul-Mouthed Reproaches. Any Hiltory (and mine was nothing elfej can be anfwered no other Way, but by fhewing the Evidence of the Fads or Sayings to be either not true, or not pertinent ; which has been the leaft Part of this Author's Aim. He has ijot pretended or attempted to an* Hifiory of Infant -BA^tifm, jjj anfwer in that Way any more than the Five firit Chapters ; not One Tenth of the whole Evidence ; and we Ihall fee when we come at it, how that is done. CHAP. VIL WH E N I read over the firfl: Ten Pages of this Chapter • I was under feme difficulty in what Method one muft begin an Anfwer to fo long and rambling an Argument, the Force of which does all depend Upon fomething which at p. 250, he fays he will difcover by and by. But when I came to p. 1^6. I was eafed. For there he fays of all before ^ But thefe are Trifles. A morb met" terUl Obje^ion is yet behind. I thought he never fpoke a truer Word •, and fhould have been content to let them pafs as fuch. But they are indeed worfe than Trifles. For he cannot forbear to bring in by Head and Shoulders a malicious Accufation againft King Charles I. at f, 248. that all People thought he gave private Ift- (iru^ions to his Fleet fent to Rochel, that they jhould not ajfifl the Town. And another falfe one againft me- at/). 255. (which I think may be the Fortieth or Fiftieth of that Nature) that I do inftnuate more than once^ that the Commijfion^ Matt, xxviii. 19. relates Y^e-' culiarly (that is, as he prefently after explains his Meaning, only) to the Adult. His Confidence at fome Times is not ftrong enough to affirm that I fay fuch or fuch a Thing (which I wonder at) and then he fays that I inpnuate it. His Evidence againft the blcffed Martyr is one Lm', who, I fuppofe, knew nothing of the Matter^ but only ecchoed what the Rebellious P^rty thca ia England faid, and yet at laft docs not fay near N " vrhj»s fjS J Defence of the what Mr. Gale does. And againfl; me he quotes niy Book, PanU. p. 378, 37V. (in the laft Edition it is ;?. 531.^ which whofoever reads over, be he Pasdobaptift or Antipaedobaptift, and does not fie that I am fo far from faying or infinuating what he fays, that I endeavour to prove the direct contra- ry, (viz,, that Infants are meant as Part ot the Na.- fions) that Man and I fhall never agree about the Senfe of plain Words. His boafting of his Performance, which is not omitted in any Chapter, takes up a good Part of this. He begins it; Ihope^ Sir, I may venture to fay-y. that what was urged in mylafi QThat was where he argued from the Co»cfjpo« which he had forged in my Name, of the Scripture's Silence] amounts to little lefs than a Demonjlration. It does not quite, it feems, amount to a JJemonftratlon. But I can tell him what it amounts to quite. And at />. 249. 'The Steps that I take are eafy and fure, according to the Method in ttje among the Mathematicians^--— And therefore I may well enough call it a Demonjlration. It were really advifeable for him to ftudy fomething of the Mathematics ^ for he could never then al- low himfelf to argue fo loofely as he does. The Demonltration (all of it rhat is pertinent) comes at P. 252, 253, gV The Words of the Commiflion, Teach (fo he tranflates the Word fjiA^tfjzvffctJi') all Na- tions, baptizing them^ &iC. are equally /i;^ of all without Difference or Exception. From whence it fol- lows that the fame Things are to he done to afl •, and tlxat too in the fame Order. Then he infers to this Furpofe^ But the Adult mufl; be taught ^r/? before they be baptized. Therefore Infants muft either be taught firfi (which is impoflible) or elfe noc baptized. This is the Subftance: For it is impof- fible to bring his PcffiQUftratioa into ^ Sy.Ilogifm. And Hiftory of Infant-Baptifmi 179 And it is juft as ftrong as this other would be ; The Commiflion, Baftizing them in the Name &c. Teaching them to obferve hc. runs in the Counter- Order 5 and therefore demonftrates the dired Con- trary. Nay not fo ftrong. For here the Word j\ij\A ^i UZ9 1 So A Defence of the Has he in the midft of his Haughtinefs forgot who he himfelf is^ and that a Redor of Witter^ Jham (which Term he according to the Cuftom of ill-bred Mea of thcfe Times, ufes in Contemptj is a much better Title than any he can pretend to? Or does he think Things are come to that pafs, that the Schifmatics fhall publifh what they pleafe againft the Dodrines of the Church -, and it ihall not be allowed to the Minifters thereof to write the Defence of them from Scripture, without being publicly infulted for fo doing ? Sure that is no part of the Indulgence intended to DifTenters by the prefent Toleration. It was fo perhaps in Oliver CromweWs Time. If he do not know that all others (as well as Mv. Dorrington) have been ufed to prove Infant- Baptifm from Scripture i why have the Antipse. dobaptifts fet up one to write, that has read no- thing of what has been faid before on the Subjeft ? Has not Mr. Baxter^ for one, a large Book •, PWm Scripture Proof for Infants Churchtnemberjliip and Bap- tifm ? Coll. Danvers fpeaks, and I from him, of a Papift, who going to hear a Difputeabout Infant-Bap- tifm, told his Friend :; He was going to hear a Mi' racle^ viz. Infant- B apt ifm proved by Scripture. This has been counted an Inftance of a Shamefter\ Pa- pift mocking the Proteilants. But we fee he is imi- tated. He abufes Mr. Dorrington and me, both in that one Paragraph ^ either of us, 1 fuppofe, old enough to be his Father. Him for undertaking to prove it from Scripture*, and me by repeting again the forementioned vile Slander, that 1 own, &c. At p. 259. begins the long Difpute of above Sixty Pages about the Signification of the Word //tfOwlsuVaJs, Matt, xxviii. 19. Whereas to the Argu- ment for Infant-Baprifm taken from that Text (which is la the £ngUfh\ Co and teach ail Nations^ Hifiory of Infant-Baptifm. iSi hapttz^ftrg them, Scc. teaching them to ebferve, Sec) viz,, that Infants are part of the Nation, and fo to be baptized by this Commifllon, the Antip^do* baptifts do retort, and fay •, Infants are fuch a Part of the Nation, as are not capable of being tau^hf, and fo not to be baptized \ I had anfwered in halt a Page •, That the Word which is tranflated, teach, in the firft of thofe Claufes, has a peculiar Signi- fication in the Original, and is not the fame Word as that which is tranfiated, teach, in the Second ; but fignifies much like what we fay in EngUjh', To enter any one's Name as a Scholar, Difciple, or Pro- fclyte to fnch a Matter, School, or Profeffion. And that the 'Jewih Language, as it does not ad^jit of this Phrafe •, An Infant is taught, or infiruBed ; fo it very well allows of this other ; fuch or fuch an Infant is entered a Difciple^ or made a Profelyte to Itich a Profeffion or Religion. And I inftanced in thofe Children of Profelytes which when they were together with their Parents circumcifed and baptized, the Jem did commonly (as I had Ihew- ed) call y{]rii^ from whence it is immediately derived. 1. UctQiijni is a Difciple. And that [y.ABnjiv6) does accordingly, when it is ufed as a Verb aftive, li- terally and in its immediate Import, Hgni^y to make Difciples •, and when ufed as a Verb Neuter, to he a Difciple ^ and ixa.h'ltvoyia.i to be made a Difciple • is fo plain a Thing, that I will never fpend Time to prove it •, unlefs I were to teach any one the Gram- mar and Analogy of that Language. All that know I know them win, if they be not ftrongly byafled for a Side, prefently own it^ and they tliat do not inuft take Time to learn them. Even thofe that tranflate it, Teach^ have done it only for this Rea- fon, becaufe they obvioufly conceiving that the ma- king Men Difciples is ordinarily done "by teachings have thought that to be the more intelligible Word to ftand in a vulgar Tranllation. Mr. h Clerc, who pretends to no fmall Skill in thefe Niceties, has (as Mr. . .293.) owned this ^ that the f roper Signification of the Word, /wafinjei^s/i'-is, to make Dijciptesy and not, to teach ; thougii he do there add, It is true that Difciples are -not made but by teaching. And Epfco^ius (whom he quotes af- terward, p. 306.) fpeaks to the fame Purpofe. And fo does Limhorch. Nor is it contradided by any that he quotes (as far as I remember) when they fpeak of the proper and grammatical rendring of the Word \ though the Thing it felf which they flip- pofe our Saviour meant to command the Apoftles to do, they do many of them exprefs by the Words, reaching^ inftruBing, &c. but many do keep to the Word it felf, make Difciples^ gather Difciples, Scc. And the Criticifm is not, as Mr. Gale^ p. 288. ex- pounds it, that the Word primarily and immediate^ ly fignifies teachings and confequentially making Dif' ciples'^ but the dired contrary, the immediate Sig- nification is making Dfciples^ and confequentially teachings viz.. in all Cafes where Difciples cannot be made, but by prefent teaching ^ of which more mull: be (aid by and by. 'Tis indeed true, what he there urges, that in the Nature of theThings, teach' ing is in molt Cafes the Caufe^ zn^ being made Dif- ciples., the EfeU ; but in the Grammatical Import of the Words, /(/rtflii14yut9n7«f, i- e. your Teachers. But for a true Conception of the Import of the Word, Difciples *, a Thing much more confiderablc than the Etymology, is toobferve theUfeof it iit the Books of the New-Teftament ; in what Senfe it is' generally taken there. And by a diligent mindingthe Jeveral Places where it occurs, it will api;ear to be. ufed by them in much the fame Senfe as the Word, Chriftians^ is with US. In A5is ix. 25, St. Paul^Cooa after he turned Chriftian himfelf, ajfayed to join him- felf to the Difciples at jerufalem ^ but they were afraid of hint^ and believed not that he was 4 Diiciple. And at Ephefus he finding certain Difciples^ &c. In all which Places we Ihould have (aid Chrijlian^ or Chri- fiians. And what puts it out of Doubt that they ufed thefe Words as Synonymous, is that St. Luc tells us, that thofe wlio had been hitherto called Difciples^ heg§p at Antioch to be be called Qoriftians. j^^s xi. 16' The Difciples werefrjl called Chrillians at Antioch. In the Books of Scripture, even after this, the Writers do feldom ufe the Word Chrijiians. St. Pe- ttr who lived and preached at Antioch j where the Word Hifiory of Jnfmt-Baftifm. i| j Word was firft framed, ufes it once ^ Jf any Mm fuffcr as a Chriftian. And King Jgrippa was almoft perfwaded to be a Chrifiiafj, But our Saviour him- felf was the firft Author o^ the Word in effeft. Thofe who were afterward called Chrifiians, he ftyled yift^ZhrdLf^ belonging to Chrift' And (what is remarr j^able to this Purpofe) he ufes it as equivalent t^ the Word Difciplef. For thajt which St. Mat", thew exprelTes thus, Chap.x.^Z. Whofoever jhall give tit drink unto one of thefe little ones a Cup of cold iVa- ter only hi ovoyut fjuiBid^^ in the Name of a Difciple j or, becaufe they are Difciple s \ St. Marc* ix. 41. has thus, Whofoever Jliall give you a Cup of Water to drink iv 10 ofo{/.ec^i /u», oTi Xf/s-« irg^ in my Name hecaufe you belong to Chrifi : Or, becaufe you are ChrijFs, or Ojriftians. And St. Paul^ who never, as I remember, ufes either the Word fjLctSnjtifj or the Word XfJir/«vof , does frequently ufe the Word Xp/r? av (which had been firft ufed by our Saviour) inftead of them, for any one's being a Chriftian. 2 Cor. x. 7. If any Man trufi to himfelf Xp/r* eiVAt, that he is Chrift's j Let hint of himfelf think this again, that as he is Xf /r» Chrift's, 9ven fo are rot xpirs Chrift's. Where without any deviation from the Senfe it might have been tran- flated, Chrifiian : We are Chrijlians as well as he. And the like. Gal. v. 24. 01 t? Xfir«. They that are Chrifi's *, or, Chriflians. So Gal. iii. 29. I Cor. xv.23. Another Word commonly ufed by him to the fame Purpofe, is, a>/o/, the Saints. Almoft all his Epiftles are fo direded ; ToT? dyhn : To the Saints at fuch or fuch a Place, i. e. the Chriftians there. He chides the Corinthians that they went to Law before th? Unbeliever*, and not before the Saints, the Chrifti- ans. He made a GoUeftion for the poor Saints at Jerufalemy i. e. the Chriftian poor of that Place* And this laft Word is ufed alfo by St. Jude^ and often in the Revelation. Other Words of like Ufe, and to the fame Purpofe, as y^A%\\\it the Difci^les^ ill 1 8 6 A Defeme of the in the New-Teflamenty are, ot "AJ^iK(po,j the Brethren^ it THf ocTa, or, raivjtii r»i ocAk, thofe of that way. u45ts'iK.2. »>. xxii. ^.'-thatis, oi the Chrijtian Way pr Religion. "' ' ' : • Thefe Nanles compared together, do give us fomewhat a clearer" Notion of the Import of the Word, Difciples. Thejr do all terminate in the An- iiochUn Word, (which is now the common Word' to exprefs them all) viz.. Chnftians. And confe- ^ently we do hereby underftand more diftini^ly the Sehfe oi ijA^^'.vuv (or as it is, JdhnU. i. ue(B\)]^i ca-o/a;') to make Difiiple-s. Whatever conftitutes or makes a Perfon ^xp/ral/f*/ to belong to Chrifl:. To be a Chriftian or in St. P^w/'s Word, •rexp/r?,- thrift's, il^'.Kphv, a Brother; aiyicyj a Saint i^ That' makes ot conftitutes him, fxMViv^ a Difciple, in ^he Scripture-Senfe of the Word; And that does the blefied Spirit of God by the Office of an Apo- ille or otl^er Minifter of Chrift, entring, dedicating, and baptizing him with Water in the Name wliich IS by Chrift appointed; by his own Confent and Faith, if he be adult ^ or by the Gonfent and Defire of his Parents, or other Guardians, or Owners •, dedicating him to Chrift ^ if an Infant. So that lyMnJiviiv-, to Difiipk any one, is eqmvalent to our En^lijli Word, Chrifien aiiy one. 1 think that the Antipasdobaptiftsthemfelves will grant that moft of the other Words which are equivalent to that of Difciple, may be applied to Infants. They will not deny that Infants may be- long to ChriJ}', or he, . 263. having fpoken of his Antagonifts (for he has a Scheme in his Head, in which he is a confiderablc Man, and the Catholic Church are his Antagonifts) he fays ; Whereas their Ingenuity, xvho fo irregularly^ &C. arbitrarily pretend, that thefe Words have no Relation to teaching? He lays it pofitively of me, p. 294. that / infer-t Since the Word which fignifies to make Difciples, does not necejfarily include teachings &c. But this is no News with him to fay of me that I fay or infer Things that I never faid or thought. I do think and own that it does connote, or has a Relation to. Teaching, or being taught. For as jxMlrif, difcipulus, and the EngUJh Word Difciple arc derivatives of fjutvQdvta and difco to learn \ lo (what one of his Authors obferves) learning and teaching are, I own, correlatives^ He fays, p. 259. that if it do not include teaching, All his Argument from this Place unavoidably falls to the Ground. So that 1 think, we muft, if it be but for Pitie's Sake, al- low him that \ That it has a Reference to teach- ing. What we pretend to, is, That it does not necef- farily follow from the Signification of the Word, that That learning or teaching muft be at that prefent Time, when one is made, or ftyled, (xaBtfjiif, or fjLttBtijivQi^f. But fometimes it refers to that teach- ing which one baf had a good while before^ and fome- i88 A 'Defence of the ibnaetirmes to that teaching which one is entered, coafigned, and covenanted to have hereafter. I. That Mnetfon mentioned, ABsyitx. 15. is fty- JejJ a Difeifle fliU •, though he may be judged to have learned all that was neceOary long before. And fo USt. Jfl^»himfelf, at a Time wheri all the World |iad aeed to learn of him, viz., in his old Age, when be was the only furviving Apoftlc *, and after he hajd written bis Gofpel. Johmnyihi^. This is the DiR^iple rvko wrote thefe Things^ &c. It would not be proper hre, to fay the Learner. And in many of the Qiiotations brought by Mr. Gale, the Word is ufed for fuch as were not then Learners, but had learn- ed i as Arifiotle, p. 301. and feveral others, p. 302, 594, crc. ^. Of the Word, f/.Mn^^ applied to fuch as had 5^ yet began to learn, but were appointed, dedi- cated, consigned or bound to learn, the Examples in Bjooks cannot be fo frequent*, becaufe it is a Cafe that Writers, holy or prophane, have feldom occafion to fpeak of. I did in thofe few Lines men- tion ibme. As, that the Scripture does include the Children of Chriftians in the Notion of the Word liA^nja), DifcipleSy la thofe Words of St. Petery A^s XV. ro. where he fays of them that would have impofed Circuracifion on the Gentile Chriftians, That they thereby attempted to put a Yoke on the Neck of the Difciptes •, whereas it was the Infants oi thok Chriftians efpecialiy, on *vhom the Weight of this Yoke would have fallen. Mr. Gale, p. 29$. makes an Exception againft this Inftance;^ in which I am pleafed to fee how little he has to fay againft; it ; and fhal] anfwer it, when 1 come to it. I mentioned likewife the Cuftom of the Jems to call the Infant Children of a Profelyte, who were circumcifed and baptized together with their Fa- ther, young Profelytes^ (which, as I ftiewed, is the fapje Thing as to fay, young Difciples) at a Time whea Hiftory of InfanuBApifm, 1 89 when as yet they could not learn or know any Thing •, only they were then dedicated to learn and keep the Covenant of the true God, when they grew up. And I produced the Teftimonies of the Jews themfelves, and of their Mlfnah for Proof of this Cuftom. I quoted alfo Jufiin Martyr ufing the very fame Word that St- Matthew does, li^ABtfjiuBtKrAVy and ap- plying it to Children *, fpeaking of fome old Men of his Time, who ito tfaiiJ\avlfji.etQi(}iv9*f<^ctv ttS Xfi^S^ were made Difciples to Chrifi in ^or, from]| their Child' hood* A very learned Man has been pleafed fince to communicate to me fome Obfervations of his, which prove that the Penmen of Scripture and other Chri- ftian Authors have commonly ufcd the Word to fignify the Reception of any one to the Degree and Number of Di fettles, as preparatory to fubfequent Inftruftion : So as that the Perfon fo received ia order to be taught, was, before the Inftrudion it felf, ftyled a Difciple. As where Eufebius difcourfing of our Lord's Au- tority as a Teacher, fays *, A Teacher frofejfes himfelf ikiifuL in fome Art or Science ^ and his Difciples be* ing de/irous to learn, fubmit themfelves to his Jnftru^ions. "'0, T2 j<) S'iS'dcrKtiV iTTttyyixiAV y.et^fifJta[\U rivof irretyyiK^ S'iS'AvjiaLk(^ ifffo(j-ipi^ov}ii i'7rt]^iTii(nf. Evangel. Demonfi. I, 3. §.7. He ftyles them Difciples before they have yet began to learn. And concerning that Man fpoken of, Lvc* \t, 57. It came to fafs, as they went in the Way, a certain Man f aid unto him \ Lord, I will follow thee whither" foever thou goefi ; The fame Learned Perfon oblervcs that St. Matthew calls this Man, and another, who offered himfelf at the fame time, Difciples. For he C^»l(ff Hififfry of Infant-BA^tifm. igi MdeSy from a Month old and ufwarK, or, Difciple \ each of the Words denotes, a Learner \ only one refers to Se- cular, the other to Spiritual Things to be learned. A Father, or Guardian, or fometimes a Parifh, puts out a Child an Apprentice to a Mafter of any Trade ; He is called, and is, an Apprentice from the Time of his being bound (which may be, and fometimes is, in very tender Years) though he does not yet begin to learn his Trade j but is configned fo to do when capable. A Jew\ Child, from the Time that he was cir- cumcifed, though then but Eight Days old, became a Debtor (as St. Paul calls it) to perform the Law, and an Heir of the Promifes of it, and entered into the Covenant of God, and might be called a Cove^ r,anter\ as 'tis faid, i)f«f. xxix. 12. Tou^ and your littles oneSy &c. do enter into Covenant with the Lord^ and into his Oath^ &c. In the fame Senfe and Way of fpeakingaChriftian'sChild, dedicated to Chrift: in Baptifm, may be called his Difciple^ or ovit graf^ fed into the Body of hii Churchy or, aS he himfelf cx- J 9* A Defence of the exprefles it, Xf«^^;^, belonging to Chrift, or, a' Mr. Gale at p. 289. concludes with this Challenge v j^ f^^ w/// make appear that //aSulsyw c<«« once fignify in any Paffage, to make Difciples, exclufively «•/ teach- ing 5 / n't// »f tfje Infants too when they are grown uj>. But He brings nothing of Argument againfl: fuch a Paraphrafe as this : Go, make Difciples to me Qor, bring and enter into my Covenant] all Natiom Qhe Adult upon their Faith •, and their Infant Children upon their Parents dedicating them to me] baptiz^ing them in the Name^ &:c. Teaching them [even the Infants too, when they are grown up] to obferve^ &c. 4. It fhould beconfidered that the molt important Part, by far, of the Work which the Apoftles were charged with by this Commiffion, was to convert the unbelieving Nations, to preach the Dodrine of Jefus crucified, and raifed again, &c. and in a Word, to Teach and preach the Gofpel •, and that this Part of their Bulinefs lay among the Adult. For the Apoftles, when in any City they had preached and converted any Number of the Gentile People, and prepared them for Baptifm, commonly did (as our Saviour had done before) leave the baptizing of them, and efpecially of therr Children, to Depu- ties •, as is plain by what St. Tmil fays of himfelf^ j[ Cor. i. 1 7. And that therefore it was proper for the Evangelift, to exprefs this Office by a Word which in moft Cafes comprehends the Duty of teaching, which was the main and mofl: difficult Work which they were to do in their own Perfons^ the Pains which they were to take with the Adult. For all Writers in their Exprelfions, and Tranfla- tors in their rendring thofe Expreffions in another Language, aim at Words which may beft imprint on the Mind the chief and moft important Part of the Things they would fignify. So that I do not wonder that the Englijh Tranflators, and others whom Mr. Gale here quotes, either of the Eaftern or Weftern Languages, have rendered it. Teach. For though St. Matthew'^s own Word be of a more general and larfi^e Signification, Make Difciples ; yet as Words ia different Languages do feidom exadly an- Hiftory of Infant-BApif?n» i^^ aiifwer one another in the whole Import of each ; the EngU^^ and other Tranflators could hardly find ' any one Word that did better denote the main of what our Saviour meant by [xcLhli6c*8H7ewWT«; V. 19. has fomc Difference in Signification from ' J'lJ'a.^^onii, 'V. 20, is plain ffom his ufing thofe two Words, fo prefeatly one after the other, to dif- Q 2 ^crffl^ 1^6 A Defence of the ferent Purpofes. For elfe, if they were exactly Sy- nonymous, the Senfe would have run as incongru- oufly in the Greek as it does now in the Engtiflj. 'Teach all Nations, baftizing them, ^c. Teaching them to obferve, Src. If he had taken them fo, he would 'probably have faid ^ Teach all Nations to obferve^ &C. baptizing them. Bnt he ufes different Words to this Senfe *, Profelyte to me all Nations^ baptizing them, &:c. Teaching them to obferve, &c. Which difference the En- glifh, and other Tranflators, for want of proper Words in their refped^ive Languages could noE preferve. But the Senfe of Scripture is to be ta- ken from the Original, and not to lofe its Force for want of Englifli Words. Another Thing that has made the Tranflators the lefs curious concerning the rendring of this Word, Teachy m^^^d. oi Make Difciples, was, that in the Time of making the old Tranflattoas there were no Antipiedobaptifts fand when the EngUfh Tranflation was made, nouG in Englandy whofhould thence take occafion for therr Error, viz. to con- clude, that Infants, though a Part of the Kation, ihuft not be baptized, as not being yet taught. All People then underftood it thus •, That the Apoftles going into the Heathen Nations, muft firft teach and convert the Adult perfons, and baptize them •, and then at their requefl" baptize their Children into the fame Covenant, And while all took it fo, there was no hurt in letting the Word Teach, ftand ; lince it is true that the main Thing required of ihe Apoftles was, to Teach : their main Bufinefs being, as I faid, with the Adult. But when there appear Men, who catching hold of the Word, teach^ are thereby fcandalized, or drawn into the errone- ous Confequence aforefiid ; it is then very neceflary to make them underftand, that St. Mattherv's own Word, Make Difciples, does not give occafion for that Miflake •, becaufe tkough the way of making DifcF Hifiory of Infant-Baptifm, I ay Difclples which was more efpecially to be regard- ed and laboured by the Apoftles, was by teaching the Adult ^ yet the Scripture-word is of fuch a Latitude, as to take in any other way of making Difciples, which is allowable by the Tenor of God's Covenant in Ghrift \ into which Covenant if Chil- dren be not by God's Mercy admitted, they are in 4 woeful Condition. 'Tis plain that all the Tranflators themfelves took the Thing to be fo (for I think Mr. Gale will not pretend that any Tranflation was ever made by other than PaedobaptiftsJ and alfo that all thofe many Authors, whofe Words he quotes in thefe two Chapters (I mean the Chriftian Authors) un- derltood it, that not thefe Words, nor any other Words in Scripture, are to be conftrued to .ex- clude Infants from Baptifm. For they are all Pse- dobaptifts^ ev-en Mr. le Cler<: and Bifliop Burnet^ whom he fo much carefies, and Dr. Whitby, in whom he is fo wrapt up, is fo, or at leaft was fo, the lafl: Time we heard him fpeak of this Matter in Print. For in a little Pamphlet againft Dr. Edm wards, having been urged by him (as fome Peo- ple were formerly by St. Aufiin) with the Argu- ments for the Doftrine of Original Sin drawn from the Baptifm of Infants ; and having feen in the mean time this Book of Mr. Gale\ and in it fo many Elogiums of himfelf ^ he fpeaks^ as nigh as I can remember the Words, to this Purpofe; That he does think that Infants ought to be haptiz.ed ^ but yet he would gladly fee an Anfwer to the Arguments of the learned Mr. Gale to the con- trary. Now to what Purpofe is it to quote fomc par- ticular Sayings of Men to confirm a Tenet, which, when we read their Books, it appears they never held, nor meant their Arguments to that Purpofe; but the Contrary ? O 3 5. Where. 1 98 ' A Defence of the 5. Whereas he obftinately contends at p. 255, and 275. that y.A^n]ii6> is never ufed as a Verb Neuter, to be a Difciple to any one *, he fhews his Temper (ov Chara^er, as hecallsic, when he fpeaks of me) to be, To deny any Thing, though never fo plain, when it ftands, or he does but fancy it to ftand, in his way. For fear that y.aihli6iif nva. (hould be rendered *, To make fuch or fuch an one a Difcf- ple ^ fj-cthlzviiv Tivt fhall not fignify -^ To be a Difciple to fuch or fuch : Which yet both every Man and Boy that reads the Language, knows to be fo ^ and every Lexicon renders fo^ and many of his own Quotations (all, as I faid before- that he brings from fecular Authors) make no Senfe unlefs they be rendered fo. The firft that he brings, p. 267. has plainly the neuter Signification, To be a Difci- ple, or Scholar, to (fo happy he is in applying Quo- tations) and if any one will bellow the Pains to read (as I have been fain, tonoPurpofe, to do) the reft of bis Quotations where it is conftrued with a Dative Cafe-, he will find that in ail ot them it is ufed as a Neuter, and cannot be tranflated, learn, or 'teach, or make Difciples, but to he a Difciple to. As, p. 275. Bei7]g a Difciple ttS 'srccjpi^ to his Father, And fpeaking of Ifocrates. Such an one, and fuch an one iy-aBnTzva-iv dvTT.^, were Difciples to him. And in like manner iiM^.v^tm nrl And p. 2,83, 284,285. out of ClcfTJ. Alex. Toii Mdyoi^, tzS Ndt^ApaTw, yvdffii ^dip^dfo)^ TrJ Kveiy. And p. 286. out of Origen, To7i )J'iciTctti, are all to be tranflated by being a Difciple to. To the A'fngi. To Namaratus. To the learn- ing of the Barbarians. To the Lord. To ignorant Men. Unlefs Mr. Gale would have us fay ;"Such a Man learned to the Magi, or taught to them -, or was taught to them. As y.A^tj}f,i is a Learner, not a Teacher (mt\\ every one but Dr. Whitby) fo y.ahlifiiv, when it is aSive (as it is often, lince St. A'fatthew's Time, in Ecclefiaftical Writers) is to make Peoplt Learn' Hiflory of Infa/it'Baptifm. 199 Learners, or Difciples ^ and when it is neuter (as it was always before) to be a Learner or Difciple to, or under, any one. I happened to look into the Index of CUm. Alex. and there is a Reference to three leveral Places of the Boole, where fMcth^zw is found. Two of them are, where it is ufed in the neuter Signification. And the Index-maker might have noted feveral more fuch. But on one he makes a particular Note, that it there fignifies, docere ut difcipulum. Mr. Gale lets them down all Three, with this Preface ^ / remember I have read in Clem. Alex, (and, I fup- pofe, would have done, if there had been Ten) though Two of the Three make diredtly againft his Notion. Such a Man may be well enough imploy- ed in fearching for Quotations-, but there ought to be fomebody elle to judge whether they are for his Turn. He would evade this Abfurdity of bringing fe- veral Inftances of its neuter Signification (when ^his Bufinefs was to maintain that there are nonej by fuppoling, at />. 277. that when y.Miuiiv iscon- ftrued with a Dative, there is a Prepofition, (TuV or rS'^-, under ftood. And fays, The Fajfage whence I gather this., is a good Inftance againfi Stephens, Con- ftantine, c^c. (under which ^c. are comprehend- ed all Lexicons that ever were wrote % and Dr. Busby he had named, as being againft him. Two Pages before) ThePaflageis out of Origen. Now here one would have expected Origens yfe of [jLAhliva with fuch a Prepofition. But (to the Laughter of all School-Boys that Ihall read it) he inftead of it brings in, with a long Preface, a Qjiotation of Origen ufing the Taffive fxMivo[/.cu fo, lU(j.ABi{liviAiniu -7^' tJ 'ZfdCjd, edotim apud patrem. Having been inJlruBed, when with the Father. And to expofe himfelf yet more, fays, Here Origen ufes //*9»l€u'j/c for the fame as i/.a,v^lvuv^ which is as O 4 much 200 A Defence of the much as to fay ^ To teach is the fame as, to learn. The like Work, or worfe, he makes in the next Paragraph with s Paffive of Iremus^ where tliereis no Dative at al), //ct6n7sv95iV -^ Tk,v a-ttotuksov. As if he did not yet underftand that though the Adive, to teach^ or make any one a Difciple ; or the Keuter, to be a Difciplcj does not reqqire a Prepofition, yet the Paffive, to he tavght^ or difcipled, by any one, docs. Then there follow Foiirteen of his Quotations more, that are nothing at all to the Purpofe, not ha- ving any Thing of u.'j.h']zva in them. Thefe, you'll fay, are mean and poor Obfervati- ohs. How can I help it, if 1 am fet toanfwer fuch a Book ? He had l^egun this Nonfenfe at p. 263. where he fays, fXAvHyu fignifes properly docere, as well as difcere. There is in Scripture an Inilance of this Word nfed as a Neuter. St. Matthew Ch. xxvii. 57 fpeakiiig of Jofeph of ArimathcA^ f^ys, °i r^ iviv; k^.tt^^ntai 70 Ih9-k. Mr. Gale, if he had had the trandating of this, Vvould have rendered it (as he does all the reft of that very Conftrudion) without any mention of the Word, Difciple. But this being tran dated to his Hand*, rva^ Jefus'j Difciple:, he would have the Tranflation altered- And if it were true, which he pretends, that (xa^liva does alv;ays fignify active- ly, to teach \ then this muft have been rendred, who alfo himfelf taught to Jefus. Into fuch Abfurdities do People run, when they will obftinatcly deny Things that are plainly true. He would turn it in- to, a PaillVe, had been inftruUed, taught^ brought o'ver,^' or any Thing, fo it be not, was a Difciple to. Let us fee if St. Johnh Autority will convince Him.' Her//. xix..3S. exprefles the fame- Thing ^ Mv. )/.aA:]^rii ri in^'^^ being a Difciple of Jefus. 'Tis piity- this Place was not Ihewed to Ut.Galei that ' . , - we Hifiory of Infant-B/nptifm, 20 1 we jniglit: have feen how he would have exercifed his Faculty of twifting and warping, upon it. He was in the right (if it had been fearable ^ and if he was refolved, Senfe or Nonlenfe, to carry his point) to deny that the Neuter y-AQnlcva (which was in ufe before St. Matthew^ Time) fignified, to be a Difcifle. For if that be granted, that ThaC was the known Signification of it before^ and St, Matthew only turned it into an Adive j nonq will doubt but the Adtive muft be, to make Dif- ciples. There needs nothing more to be obferved of his Rhapfody of Quotations : but tliefe few general Things. Flrfiy That a great many of them are, as I faid, abfolurely impertinent to the Purpofe ; having not the Word fxctQtfjivay nor any derivative of it ia them \ but are about uk^u^ audio^ 'zra.iJ'iveo^ infii* Secondly^ That of thofe which have the Word, the far greateft Fart would have been belt tranfla- ted by making Difciples '^ or, being Difciples to ^ or, beifig made Difciples. But he without any Ground cboofes to tranflate them by teach^ learriy &c. which was the Quellion. This any one will fee, thatper- ufes, the Places. thirdly^ That there are indeed fome of them, that are beft rendied by teach, or being taught. And that is nothing but what would have been granted him at firft \ that where the Gircumftances of the Pdflage, and of the Perfons fpoken of, do fliew it to be meant of adult Perfons now in the State of Learning •, there to make Difciples does import teaching of them. And in fuch Places it does often belt fit the Conftrudion of the Senteiice toexprefs it. 2o2 A Defence of the ft, 'tcMh. Becaiife, as I faid before, in mofl: Places where the Word occurs, the difcipling is by pre- fetit teaching. But our Saviour, or St. A^atthw^ or his Interpreter, feem to have gone out of the ordinary Road of Words, to apply here a Word of fo large a Signification, as to include any way of entring Difciples, which is, as I faid, agreeable £0 the Tenor of God's Covenant, and receiving Perfons into his Fold, or pecuUnm, And this very Thing, of choofing a new Word on pnrpofe for this Sacrament, (viz.. difcipling in general) is of it felf a Proof that it is not to be taken in the fame limited Senfeasthe Word,fc^c^- i>ig. For if it had been to exprefs. Teaching ^ there were plenty of common and known Words in ufc for that. Some few PafTages I (hall note as I go along-, and fo difmifs thefe Two Chapters. p. 259. And again at the End of Chap. vii. and again at the Beginning of the viii. he accufes Pr. Hammond of Prejudice, Partiality, and contra- didinghimfelf jwhen hetranflates ixct^tfiiCtrAJi^ make Difciples, And yet he confefles at one of them, p. 293. that moft Pasdobaptifts, who argue from that Text, do give the Word that Senfe. Ail that be fays, of moment (befide his angry and unman- nerly Cenfures of that worthy Man) is, that though in his Anfwer to Six Queries he do contend for that Senfe, and argue from it for the Capacity of In- fants to be difcipled by Baptifm ^ and in his Dif- fertations on Epifcopacy render it in difcipiilatuin Voca' te \ yet in his Paraphrafe and Annotations he aflerts the direEh contrary^ and thus paraphrafes the Words ; 'Teach all Nations the Chriflian Doiirine^ &C. \ know not what Edition of the Paraphrafe and Annotations Mr. Gale has met with \ nor have at prcfent any Opportunity of comparing the feveral Edi. Hifiory of InfanuBiiftifm, soj Editions •, but I know there is feme Variety in them as to the Notes on this Text^ and that in fome of them the Doftor does (as well as in the Six Queries) alTert the proper Signification to be ; tnake^Difciples : Which it is a Wonder to me, if Mr. Gale was ignorant of. I remember to have feca a Pamphlet givirvg an account of thofe Variations in the later Editions. But they do not amount (as Mr. Gale reprefents) to a Contrariety, or Contra^ diSlion. It is to be noted that That great Man li- ved a good Part of his Time before there were any Antipaedobaptifts in England, or at leaft, before there were any confiderable Number of them, fo as to be taken much notice of (which indeed there were not till that great Rebellion) and in thofe former Editions (or one of them) he had, it feems, in his Paraphrafe exprefTed only that which was the main Part of the Office of the Apoftles given them by this Commiffion, viz.. teaching and converting. And there was not then any fear of any one's miC. pnderftanding or perverting the Senfe, fo as td think he meant the other to be excluded. But up- on the Rife and Increafe of Antipsedobaptifts, he thought it neceflary to guard againft their Miftakc by giving the full Senfe of the Scripture^ word. This is a Thing that has happened to many even of the belt Writers -, that before fome Seft or new Opini- on has arifen, they have ufed Expreflions more un- guarded againfl: that Error, than they would do afterward. So it was with Eufebim in refped of the Ariati Herefy ^ and with many others. No Man can think that Dr. Hammond ever took thofe Texts, or any Text, to be againit the baptizing or difci- pling of Infants. F. 166. He fays, that in all the Paflages where- in he has obferved the Word, it does neceflarily include Teaching, or at leafl may admit it. And that if it ever fignify to difiipU^ and exclude teach* 5 ©4 A Defence of the ing (which he thinks it does not) yet that is not ^e Signification in which it is alw&ys^ or commonly^ iifeH.- ■ This is. more : niodcft than [Mr. G/nlc ufes to be. Ko doubt it does more commdnly^ i. e. in moft of the Places where one fltall find it ufed, appear by the Gircumftances of the Perfons there fpoken of, to relate to adult Perfons •, and confequently mult be fuppofed to be accompanied there with prelent teaching. p. 270. Where in a Faflage of Clem. Mex. Mr. Gale hys fjLct^nlivuv is interpreted by Clement himfelf to mean cT/J^fto-x-j/f, as it relates to the An- gels, and {MAv^Jiviiv^ as it relates to Perfons taught ; he Ihould have faid, /xA^yfjivz^eu is interpreted i^Av-d-dynv (For to he taught^ is the fame as to learn ; but to teach is not) This Miftake he makes ever and anon. And at the Foot of that Page, St. Juftin's Word iJ.it3-ifjiu-^m>a/ iii TO. ^Htt S'tS'AyiJialce. fllOUld haVC been tranflated \ made Difciples to the Divine Do-, Brine, For taught to it, is neither Senfe nor Lan- guage. And fo in the Pages before, the Sayings of Ignatius fhouid have been tranflated ; / do mxo begin (jLet^tfjivi^au to be made a Difcifle •, and I fjieak to you as Fellow-Difciples. And the next, of giving good Examples to the Heathens their Neighbours, ^at they might by their Works utt^nliv^hsu he made Difciples.,. or brought to Chrifl:ianity. And fo in molt of Mr. Gale's own Qiiotations. P. 271. That Paflageof Jufiin Martyr fhould be, rendred, God has not, nor does as yet, bring on his Judgment [meaning, the Day of Judgment] as hnow' ing that fii.ll fame every Day fxa.d-njivoy.kv^i m ro ououa TO xp/r« avTv^ are made Difciples Qor, do become Dif- ciples] to Qor, in] the Name of his Ojrifi, and do forfake the Way of Error, [and the Sentence Ihould have beea continued as it is in Jufiin-j Hiftory of Infant'Bi^tifm. *!S€>5j J^ii T^ l/ofxetlQ- » |) idiriKff &c, M^j(;o»r down hit Judgments ^ which neither agrees to the Words, nor the Senfe. But fwhat is material to our Pur- pofe) the Place plainly fpeaks of Baptifm, vit.. of fotne daily being made Dilciples, forfaking Idola- try, and being baptized in the Name of Chrift, and receiving fuch Gifts or the holy Spirit as the Chri- Itians at their Baptifm are known to have received ; many of which (as learned Men have proved from this and other Paflages in St. Juftinj did continue in his Time to be given Chriftians at the Time of their being baptized, and of the Bifhops laying their Hands on them. Mr. Gale's Exception, that to difciple or ProfelyUj into the Name of Chrifi is a Phrafe never ufed, is it mere Cavil i hs 70 ovofxu, is £0 be rendered here, as $a>'7rli(^ovJif iii tb '6voy.a. Matth. XXviii. 19. in the N^i*»e. And his other Objedion, p. 273. that if ^ifji^iixwot fignify here bapttjued'^ it will make a grofs Tauto- logy; is a worfe. For it is the fame Order of Words, as our Saviour ufed •, Difciple all the Nati. ons^ b apt iz.ing them. And his Third, That (ptfjt^oixtm did not fignify baptiz.ed{o early as St. 5fw//«'s Time, is a fhrewd Proof of what fome have thought that he has read the Fathers no otherwife than by fearching fuch Places as the Index of certain Words ufed in this Debate, directed him to. It is impof- fible to read Jufiin without perceiving that he ufes it as an ordinary Word for bapttz,ed, I my felf had quo. «o^ A Ikfence of the quoted to Mr. Gde his firft Apology ; where ha- ving difcourled largely of Ikptifai, he tells us, that this was one of the cotnraori Names of it, Yl«.kh\(u 9 tS73 7^ AsJ^f, (pajicrfxoi. Thts Wafhing is galled (pcSjiffn'oi. And a few Lines aft^r, he repete§ again, in what Name o ?«y7<6^.sK©- K^{}ajy the bapti- zed Perfon is waflied, viz* Of thep^ather,^ ore. And in the next Page again, how after the Baptifm the Pcopk go to Prayers, praying . v^ n kctulZy, }C) tS . ts-cuJ^ot ixctd^tfjiv-yeii Tui XpK6>, difci- pled to Chrift from a Child. P. 282. He had been bringing there foHrteen o^ fiifteen Inftances of what the Words, aiKw^'Wiw J^iua,&:c. dofignify in Paflages of the Authors there quoted ^ for which, as for an impertinent Digref- fion, he ought to have asked the Reader's Pardon.' But inftead of it, he fays, This is a very home Ar^ gurnent that fxct3-ti]iva in all fuch Places necejfarily im~ flies hearing and learnings &c. and then adds, This is fujflciently demonflrated. It muft needs be, that the Mafter to whom Mr. CaU went to School, taught his Boys to conclude their Declamations with fome great boaft of their Performance. For the conclu- ding, that becaurert>t^. 2^6. that by (xcr.^^fi^v, the Difciples, the Apoftle intends only the Converts, exclufively of their Chil- dren, if they had any. Now I fay, that every one that reads the Scrip- ture, and the Rules that it always gives concern- ing Circumcifion, mud; underftand the Attempt of impofing it, to have reached, and to have been in-, tended, to the Children as well as their Fathers; and that (though they be not mentioned, yet) the Nature of the Thing does of it felf evince it. Fof Hifiory of Infant -Ba^tifinl 209 For whether it be J^irj, the Seed of Ahraham^ pr Profelytes to them, that receive Circuracilion • it is notorious that all of them received it on thefe Ternis, .that they and all their male Children of Eight bays old or above, were to undergo it. This might be proved from the Cafe of Abraham^ Cen. xvii. 12, 13. it. xxi. 4. of any Profelytes, Gen. xxxiv. 1 5. Exod. xii. 48. But I forbear to fpend Time in the Proof of a Thing, which every Body, but he, underliands. Moreover thefe Jeroi^ Believers, who* dilputed among themfelves Ayhether this Yoke of Circum- cifion fhould be laid on the Gentile Believers, of not, did pradife it thus in refpeft to their own Chil- dren; as appears from ^(^j xxi. 20, 21. And can any one now think that thofe Sticklers for Circum- cifion, mentioned AUs xv, 5. who held it was need- ful to circumcife the Gentile Convert?, did not meai*! that thofe Gentile Converts fhould do as they did,i;/z,. circumcife their Children too ? The Children are noC mentioned ; but a Circumftance plain by the Nature of the Thing, needs it not. He imputes grofs FalJJmd to me. But either that," or eXkgrofs Ignorance belongs to him, when he fays. It was meant exclufwely of their Children^ if they had any. Whereas no Rule of Circumcifion was ever meant fo. He feems to think, that it was ufed, as the Antipsedobaptifts vvould have Baptifm to be, exclufwely of Children. But even they do know that Circumcifion, and all other Chriltians, that Ba'ptifnj, have been ever ufed inclufively bj them. And that which I faid, that it was Children r/^^- cially on whom the Weight of this Yoke would have fallen, is fo plain and eafy to account for, that he mult be fhamefully dull, that needs the Explanatiort. For if a Man of adult Age had received this Do^ ftrine, he himfelf mufl have been circumcifed ; bu^ fo mult all his Male Children too. This mdy be 210 A Defence of the counted equal. But in the fucceeding Generatrons it would have fallen on the Infant Children only. So that I had good Reafon to fay, that they were Children efpecially on whom this Yoke would have come. p. 319. He names another Place of my Book, where I infinuate (but how is his Confidence funk > He was wont, when he affixed a falfe Thing on me, to lay, I owned it) that the Comm'iiTiony Matt, xxviii. ip. and the Comment of St- Hierom on it, relate only to adult Perfons. I had the Patience to turn to the Place of my Book, that he refers to, and do find his Accufation falfe. I think not to take that Pains again j but if he fay fuch Things of me, to conclude them to be falfe by the Qiftom. The Reader may confult the Place if he pleafe. But if I had infinuated {o ^ how abfurd is he to fpend Two Chapters agaihfi; me, to prove what I my felf had infinuated or taught? Next, having much leifure, he brings fome Texts to prove that the Apoftles were to preach the Gof- pel, where they came. And then concludes, not for- getting to afTure us, that what he has faid does flaitdy demonfirate. So it does ^ Something. But 'tis pretty to obferve whata Liberty betakes in talking of the Method of my Book. He at the later End of this Chapter, and Beginning of the next, brags that he has difcovered tun Error in my ve- ry Foundation i, in the very Groundwork of my Syftem. And he means thisObfervation concerning the Word iidL^t{]iii(TeO.. 370. obferving that Philo and Jofephus, who are fomething elder, have no mention of this Cuftom of baptizing Profelytes. To which an Anfwer muft be made here, if any where- and if one would bring his immethodical Arguings into any brevity. It is much fiich an Argument, as that of Mr. Tombs, which I recited, was againft the An- tiquity of Infant-Baptifm among the Chriftians ; that among all the antient Chriftians that menti- on it, Eufehim ^nd fome others have nothing about it. Philo was all taken up with allegorical and Philofophical Flights. Jofephus wrote the Hiftory and Antiquities of the Jews in much the fame way as Eufebius of the Chriftians \ their Original, their Kings, their High Priefts, their Wars, &c» in no fuch Books one can reafonably expeft an Ac- count of their Rituals, or the Ceremonies of ad- mitting Profelytes into their Religion. But the Talmud and Books of the Rabbles, which I cited, do contain (as our Common-Prayer Book does, for our P^eligious Ufages) the Rubrics for their Ceremoi :nies of this Sort. Mr, Hiftory of Infant-Baptifm. 2 r j Mv.Gale at that/). 370. refers us to two Pafla- ges of Jofephus, /. 13. where he thinks this initia- tory Baptifm would have been mentioned, if it had been in ufe in the Time of the Afacchabees and later Kings. Hyrcanus having fubdued the Edo- vtitesj fuffered them to continue in that Country, en Condition they would be circumcifed^ and live ac- cording to the Jewifh Laws. And they out of Love to their Native Country^ complied to receive Circum- cifon^ and live after the Fajhion of the Jews. And the like Expreflions he ufes in the next Chap- ter but one, in relating the like Terms required of the Itureans, who had been conquered by Art- fiobulus. Here Mr. Gale concludes that at this time Profe- lytes were not ufed to be baptized, but circumci- ied only ^ becaufe Jofephus mentioning one, fays no- thing of the other. Indeed he does not make his Argument fo fair, as to fay, He does not mention it j but boldly fays, jofephus informs us, that Hyr^ canus made and initiated them Jews by Circumcijfion only. But the Words are, as I have recited. Circumcifion is here by Jofephus mentioned, as the chief and mofc remarkable Circumftance where- by the Jews were diftinguifhed. It was alfo the moft difficult and painful of the Things impofed ; and (as one Mr. Stokes^ a Writer againft Mr. Gale^ whofe Book I have but juft now feen, and who has dubbed him Dr. Gale, obfervcs) it was mofc contemned by other Nations j fo that the chief Difficulty was in farcing them to receive that. Baptifm, as an eafy Thing and not unufual among other Nations, may well be fuppofed to be in- cluded in the general Words* The other Jewifh Laws. An Argument which prevailed with Mr. Emlin (as 1 noted before) and does prevail with moft that fpeak of this Matter, is, That lince it is no- ' P 3 torious •214 ^ Defence of the torious that the '^ews have fuch a CuRom now, of baptizing their Profelytes \ and it appears by their Books that they had the fame'in the Time' within lefs than One Hundred and Fifty Years of our Savi- our, and they fpoke then of it as a Cuftom always iifed.by their Nation *, and that it cannot be con- ceived that they would borrow it, or ufe it in imi- tation of our Saviour Chrifi-, or the Chrift-ians, whom they difdained and abominated^ There is all reafon to conclude that they derived it from their Anceftors, as they fay they did. None can maintain the Contrary, but one whom his Hypothe- fis forces : Efpecially when the Scripture it fclf Therefore Mr. Gale here fays, He will not in- fift upofi it. But he does a worfe Thing. He denies a plain Matter of Faift, that was before his Eyes. . He fays, Of the Paflages cited by me, Not . one does fo much as ajfert or intimate that the Bap- tlfm of Frofelytes was in ufe in our Saviour's Tinie. Mr. Stohs has found him tardy -^ and has referred him to the firft of them, which fpeaks of the Ufe of it in David and Salomons Time. And there are (as he tells him) feveral others. And indeed no Body that had Eyes could mifs them. Yet he 3t/?. 333i 334- fays it over again. P. 328. Another Shift is, that perhaps they do not ff^e^ak of an initiatory^ Baptifm^ but only a Purifica- tion from the Blood of Circumcifion. His Reader, that will read the Paffagesover again, mull be a (ha med for him. They do all fpeak of entring Profelytes ^:, fome, Adult ^ fome, Infants ^ fome^ Males;' fome. Females. And whereas he would except thofe found in the Mfra it felf; there are none that mention prff/^/y^zV^ plainer than they. And they -alfo.inftance in Female Children ; which makes his Exception concerning the Blood of Circumcifion to be abfolute Nonfenfe. P. 32^. Hiflory of Infant-Bcipifm. 21$ V. 329. He would prove a Thing that is a di- reft Contradiflion to what he had faid the Page before. For there he had yielded that a PalTage there produced out of the Tahnud did jhew indeed what was the At) to mention fome of the leaft Shocking of thofe plafphemies. Even thefe do fliock every Chrifi;iai]i Reader. The old Blafphemous Books of Celfus^ Porphyry^ Julian the Apoftate, and others then written againit the Chriftian Religion 5 though fet forth with a great deal of Wit and Learning (ftjch as makes our modern Atheifts and Deifts look in Comparifon, as a Parcel of very fordid Imitators) and therefore thought fit by fome Chriftians to be preferved •, were however, for the Odioufnefs of the Subject, by the far major Part thought fitter to be burned ; and accordingly they (and alfb the Books of the old blafphemous Heretics) arp (except fome Fragments, which by being confuted have been preferved) long ago extinguilhed. How much more ought this putid Rubbifh, which Mr. Gale here rakes together and tranflates, to have been fb ferved ? Thofe Rabbins out of whom he fetches thefe Blafphemies, are not (I think not one of them) thofe whom I had cited as mentioning the Jewijh Baptifms. And if they had, it had been nothing; to the Purpofe. Ho more, than if I had quoted Tacitus upon any Difpute of the Roman Cuftoms or Hiftory, he fhould for Apfwer have recited and tranflated for the Ufe of an Englijh Reader thofe vile Reproaches which that Hiflorian calls on the y^ir/and Chrijlians-, oji God, and on our blelTed Saviour. The Teflimonies of thofe Chriftian Writers which he quotes, from that p. 348. to the End of the Chapter, fetting forth the Charader of the Jewifj Writers •, As, that they are for the molt part. 2iS 'A Defence of the part, a vain, trifling, enthufiaftic, perverfe, and luperftitious Sort of People (for which he cites Jtiftifi Martyr^ Scaliger, Buxtorf, Lightfoot^ Du Tin^ Xe Clerc. And efpecially St. John Baptifi^ and St. Steven) is certainly true, and known to be fo by every Body *, and one that fpends fo many Words in proving it, niufl; be almoft as trifling as they. Efpecially where it is nothing to the Purpofe, as It is not here •, fince (as I have been forced often 3to fay) we do not appeal to them for any Thing 56vherein their Candor, Judgment, or Sincerity is depended on-, but only perceive by their Writings, and ritual Books, what their Ufages and Tenets are. And this Ufe of their Writings, Mr. Gale knows very well, that feveral of thefe fame learn- ed Men, particularly Bupctorf, and Lightfoot^ do make to good Purpofe. For though they have no Opi^ iiion of the Men^ yet from their Books and Dif- putings they came to a more particular Underftand- ingof their Cnftoms-, to which Cuftoms the Phra- fes of Scripture do often allude and refer • and the Senfe and Meaning of fuch Places of Scripture is thereby better underftood. C H A P. X. Efides the3f«tp(/^ Writers themfelves, I quoted mj Other antient Writers, fome Heathens, fome cGriftians, mentioning ihtjewiji) Cuftom of bapti- sing Profelytes. One was Arrian a Philofopher li- ving at Rome* Mr. Gale excepts againlt his Evidence, as not early enough •, One Hundred and Fifty Years after Phrilt. Sup^ Hijlory of InfdnuBApifm. 219 Suppofe jt were fo much after, Chrift's Bifth (as it was almoft) is not this an Evidence coming very near to the Time of 'Johnh and Chrilt> .bap- tizing ? . . ' \ He fays again, that perhaps Arrian might mifl-ate the Chripians for the Jews ; and Ipends (everal Pages in reaching after Probabilities for this Con- jefture. But thofe fo rambling, and little to the Purpofe ; that I, who knew that a learned Man or Two had fpoken of this as poITible, do count it lefs probable after having read thefe Pages. At belt, It is but a Conjedture. The plain Words, repeted feveral times, are, The Jews. The fame Anfwerer (hould not give both thefe Anfwer?*. Flrfi^ That it was too long after Chrift's Time, Secondly, That it was not long enough after his Time for the Chriftians to be diftinguifhed from the Jews. If there were no other Evidence be- fide this, that the Jews ufed Baptifm as well as the Chriftians; there were more Room for this Guefs. But this, corroborated by fo many more, renders the Evafion very precarious. P. 363. He is fain to ufe the very fame Shift for Gregory 'Nazja.riz.en\ that he lived too late to be an Evidence. All learned Men know how much his Teftimony is valued for the Cuftoms of Chriftians , and there is the fame Reafon for his knowing thofe of the Jews. \ many of whom lived in that Country. Mr. GaU fays. His Words may be underftood (nay, he infults any one that underftands theiu otherwife) of Wafhings for Uncleannefs ,• and not of any initiatory Baptifm. .This he confidently fays, though the Comparifon be there purpofely made betvyeen Mofesh Baptifm, and John\ which was an. initiatory one; and Chrift's, which was alfo plain- ly fuch ^ and though the Words themfelves CMo- fes i2o A Defence of the les baptized *, hut that was with Water only ; And he- fore that J in the Cloud and in the Sea~\ do compare two feveral Baptifms of Alofes •, that at Mount 5«- nai^ with that in the Cloud and in the Sea. Which laft St. Taul himfelf fpeaks of, as an initiatory Bap- tifm, and a Type of the Chriftian Baptifm, and laying like Obligations on the Jews, as the other does on Chriftians. Which is a quite different Pur- pofe from that of walhings for Uncleannefs. I quoted St. Cyprian and St. Bafd fpeaking of the fame Jewijh Baptifm. Mr. Gale did not care to re- pete them. And has nothing elfe to fay, but that they amount to no more than St. Gregory'^. And if they amount to fo much, it is fufficlent. Efpe- cially {ince St. Cyprian will furely be allowed for an antient Evidence. And he is there giving the Reafon why the Apoftles in inftrudting and bapti- zing ^ Jsvp^ had no need of Pains to teach him the Bodrine and Belief of the Father*, but only of the Son. (Whereas a Gentile mult be inftrufted concern- ing the Father as well as the Son and the Holy Spi- rit) For the Jews had^ fays he, already^ and a long timp ago, the Baptifm of the Laxo^ and of Mofes, and were now to he baptized in the Name of Jefus Chriflr. Now cou^ld any Man living, befide Mr. Gale, have the Forehead to fay that St. Cyprian does not here fpeak of fuch a Mofaical Baptifm, as was initiatory into a certain Faith or Profeffion •, the Faith of the true God ? Though this, and fome of the refl-, be exceed- ing plain *, yet this Anfwerer draws his Conciuli- on, at P. 355. without altering his Countenance at all -, but turning confidently to his Sir, tells him -, 'Tts fy§ciently evident Mr. W. has faid nothing which rifes A any probable Proof For J leave you to judge whe- ther every Pretence to this has not been fufficiently refits Hifiory of Infant-Buftifml '221 refuted. He puts a great Confidence in his Judge. I quoted TertulUan^ antienter than any or the reft 5 and alfo St. Taul^ tellifying that all the Jews, at their coming out of ey^gypt (before the Walhings for legal Pollutions were inftituted) were baptiz.ed vnto Moks. iCor. X. 1,2, which fame Expreflion St. Cyprian Cas I fhewedj ufes for their being bap- tized into the Faith of Jehovah. To all this he fays nothing. P. 365. He will no longer be on the Defenfive ; but will undertake to prove the Negative, viz.. that the Jews had no initiatory Baptifm. The Scripture, he fays, makes no mention of it ; Though I had quoted St. Paul's Words juft before. I added al-, {6 another Text. Exod. xix. 10. which the Jews themfelves, as I Ihewed, underftood of an initiato- ry Baptifm at their entring into the Covenant of the Ten Commandments and other Laws at Mount Sinaiy or Horeb. He proves that they could not then by that wafh- ing at Sinai enter into Covenant ; for that they had done before by Circumcifion. This he fays, though the Scripture does expref- ly fay, that they did then enter into Covenant; and there be recited the particular Interrogations and Anfwers of it *, and in a Recital of another Covenant Forty Years after, Deut.xm. i. it be faid i That that Covenant in the Land of Moab was befide the Covenant which he made with them in Horeb, Though they had Circumcifion, as the Seal of the Covenant with Abraham *, that does not hinder but Baptifm might be a Seal of this. As the Jewifh Writers do all fay, that their Fathers entered into Covenant by thefe three Things j Circum- cifion, Baptifm, and Sacrifice. And of this laft 5»lfo the Scripture ufes the Tame Phrafe, Pf 50. 5. ' ' thof9 62^" A Defence of the 'tijofe'^hdt have made a Covenant with me hy Sacri- fice. P. 357. Whereas the Words of that Text, £xod. xix. 10. are^ Sanclify them^ &c. and Id them wa^i their Cloths^ and be ready againft the Tbird Day, Scc, And I. had fhevyn from Maimon. the Gemara Ahen £z.ra. Selden quoting a great Number of Rahbies, that (befide their Under [landing that Santiifying to be WaPiing) i\\t Jews did apprehend, that where- cver in the Law the wafhingof the Cloths is com- hiarided ^ it means much more the wafhih^, of the Body it felf •, he denies that Phrafe to be fo meant 5 and yet in the fame Page, p. 367. heedkfly recites one of the Texts from which it is plainly proved. Which is iVMw^. xxxi. i9>24. There all that Elea- zar prefciibes to fuch as had killed any Perfon, or touched any flain, was. To purify themfelvesy &:c. And ye fi] all wajh your Cloths on the Seventh Day \ and ye Jhall be clean. Now it is plain from Numb. xix. V. 16^, i7» 18,19. that every Perfon in their Cir- cumltances was to wafh or bath his whole Body, as well as his Cloths. p. 370. What he produces here out of Jofephus and Phih-f I fhewed juft now, in anfwering the Beginning of his Ninth Chapter fwhere this ought to have GO me in, if any where) to be nothing to the Purpofe. P. 371. If ever any Man confuted himfelf^ our Author does it here. For his Bufinefs was to de- jiy that the Jeipj had any initiatory Baptifm ^ and particularly that the Scripture no where fpeaks of any fuch Thing. And whereas I had produced twO Places of Scripture that do fpeak of it ^ he proves here, that the one does not fpeak of it, becaufe the other does. St^ P^w/fpeaks of it, iCor.x. There- fore Exod. xixi does not. Whereas if eicher of them .fpeak of it, his Argument is loft. That in the Cloud Hiftory of Infant-Ba^tifm,, is 2 J Cloud and in the Sea St. Fml calls a Baptifm. But that having been done in a tranfient and typical way, and without exprefs Covenanting, there might be afterward at Horeb a more explicit Performance of the Ceremonies. \ By juft the fame arguing he in the next Page^ f. 372. overthrows the Teftimony which I brought of Nazianzen^ Or. 39. where he refers to both the faid Texts of Scripture, and diftinguiflies the two Times. Mr. Gale pleads that Nazianzen paraphra- fes, I Cor. X. T?7ff Sea typified the Water, the Cloud the Spirit. True. But does not he, befide this, fpeak of the other ? Mofes gave them a Baptifm ^ but that was with Water only. And 'u^ rhv, before that, they Were baptized in the Cloud and in the Sea. P. 373. He falls again upon that Plea (which has been ufed two or three Times, though not worth once ufing) that he can name Writers that make no mention of this Jewipj Baptifm. Barnabas^ he fays, has not one Word. And then two Pages more fpent in fhewing that Juftin Martyr has not one Word of it neither. Does he think any one will read them over to fee whether he fay true or not ? What does it avail that they do not mention it ; if, St. Paul., and the Chriftian Writers which I quoted, and fo many of the Jewijh Writers them- felves do? But he produces a Place in Jufiin., where he thinks it muft have been mentioned, if there had been any fuch Thing. Trypho acknowledges that the Paflo- ver and other Sacrifices could not be ufed, now that the Temple was deftroyed. Juflin asks, what Part of the legal Ordinances did remain in ule at fuch a Time, trypho anfwers, the Sabbaths \ G>- cumcifion ; the new Moons., and baptizing upon Vnclean- nefs. Here Mr. Gale fiys, He would have mentioned this other initiatory Baptifm, if it had been in ufe with them. " ' He is 24 ^ Defenc'5 of the He is fb forgetful, or impertinent, as not f& mind that this initiatory Baptiim was not by Try- fho accounted necelTary to the Jews themfelvesy but only to Heathens profelyted. And Trypho was Ipeaking only of what the Jews were to do. And this, if he had thought of it, would have made him omit the quoting both that other Place of Jufiin which he brings, p. 374. and the follow- ing one of Tertullian, p. 376. where he urges that "fertullian makes Baptifni to be a new Ordinance. But the Senfe of the Place is only this •, That it began but now at Chrift's Time to be ufed on any Pofterity of the Faithful. ^•377- The Saying of Orlgen. Comment, in Joann. p. 11(5, 117. looks moft plaufible for his Turn of any •, where Origen fays, He [[Heracleon] cannot fhew that any Prophet did baptiz.e. "Ov y6 lyrn S'^^ax But it is a Proof, how a Scrap of a Line or two out of a Difcourfe may be perverted by thofe that have the Bafenefs to do it, to a Senfe quite contra- ry to the Import of the Difcourfe it felf. Origen is there commenting on that Queftion of the Pharifees put to John Baptift. John i. 25. Why haptiz.efi thou then, if thou be not the C^rii't, nor Eliai, nor that Prophet ? He had obferved before, p. 109. the Difference between ^npo^jiTH?, and onps^inTWf)- a Pr^j/jW indefinitely, and Jhat Prophet ^ and that the Queftion of the Jews is not to be underftood con- cerning the ordinary Prophets \ but one particular one, whom they expedled to come, that Ihould be like vnto Mofes', as Mofes himfelf had foretold; Deut, 18. And having by the Way, blamed many PafTages in Heracieons Commerii on that Text ; and particularly, that he had underftood the Word, 5 npo^ijTHf, in that Queftion, of a Prophet at large. He fays, p. 11 5. That there may very well be re- turned Hiflory of hfant-Baptifm, 225 tnrned this Anfwer to that infulting De,mand of the Pharifees^ who feem to have thought that the ChriJ} and Elias were to baptize in their own Perfons; but that he that was The roice of one crying in the Wildernefs^ &c. might not baptize at all. " You, Sirs, do put to him who was fent as a " iMeflenger before the Face of the Chrifl:, to pre- " pare his Way before him, an unhandfome Inter- *' rogation i being ignorant of all the Mylleries that '' belong to his oifice. For the Chrifl (and Jefm " was he ; though you would not have it fo) did " not baptize himfelf [or in his ovon Perfon~] but his *' Difciples. And he it was, that was that Prophet. *' And what makes you think tlut Elias when he '' comes will baptize, iH ^a. hm ^v3-/«tr«pia IJa^, Kp ** Tiif -rs Kyjt'l'^ ■^^p'on?, (^ioixiva. A.87p8- 'lua. 'acKAtj'^^ oT.^AviV' ** leptua-/ TfcTo 'srojTie-Ai ^ Who in Ahah^s Time did not *' baptize the Wood upon the Altar, which was '' to be wafhed before it was burnt up, when the " Lord fhould (hew himfelf in Fire? For he or- ^' dered the Prielts to do that-, not only once-, for ** he fays, Do it the fecond Time, crc. 'o ro'ivw (xii ** d'jiii (ict'/liacti roTi, aak' iri^on 7^ ifya rzj^^^&'fn ', dvrcui Ai^iai (pmiv^ 'Oi{ (xovoti o^itAiTAi tv^ait- ** 7\i^in' K) OK. T*f h^ny-iy^v y-iv ^yiv hetyKot \hiy)/ouivof ; 22.6 A Defence of the •« (Tdi^ai 'tiva 7MV Upo!pi(}iov ^cf^Tis-AvJA. That botU the " Chrifi, and Eliasy and every Prophet ought to bap- '' tize ; adds in exprefs Words ^ T'*? tp/^ow which he quotes. P. 385. John baptized with the Baptifm of ^^- pentance: is, as Mr. Stokes obferves, no more thaa what is faid of Circumcifion, Rom'iv. 11. that it is a Seal of the Righteoufnefs of Faith. Yet every one knows that it does not exclude Infants, who are at prefent as incapable of Faith as they are of Re* tentance. The Places which he here cites of Jofephus and Origen^ are yet lefs to the Purpofe. There being nothing in them from which one can guefs that they had at the writing of them any Thought at all fro or contra about any Children being there. They do only obferve that it was necelTary for the Adult that came, to confefs their Sins, and amend their Lives. At lalt, p. 385. He brings the Objection, which I had recited, of Mr. Stennet, That if the Jews had fuch a Cuftom of baptizing Profelytes and their ChiU dren; It muft have been an Invention of their own^ being not commanded in the Law of God. To that I gave two Anfwers. Mr. Gale takes notice only of the Firft ; That they quoted, as we fee, Texts of Scripture, fuch as I there men- tioned. He fays, What then? They may cite the whole Bible ^ though not a Word in it makes for them. And a few more fuch huffing Expreffionsj but nothing to overthrow the Interpretations they gave. I anfwered, Secondly, Putting the Cafe, that they miftook the Senfe of thofe Texts ; yet when they had upon that Autority eftabliflied a Pradice of baptizing Profelytes and their Children j and that Q, 4 Frafticc 2^2 A Defence of the VvAddct had now continued many Ages: If our Saviour iiad meant that the Apoftles in baptizing Profelytes of the Nations, fhould have altered that Pra(!lice, and denied Baptifm to the Children of fuch Profelytes as they baptized ; We have all the Reafon in the World to think that he would have fore-warned them of it. And I inftanced in a like Cafe that might have been put, if the Nations had been required to keep the Feafts^ among which was the Feafl: of Dedication ; not commanded by God, and yet kept for many Ages, and obferved byChrifthimfelf. To this Mr, Gale replies nothing at all ^though every Antipjedobaptift, who is convinced that they had fuch a Cuftom, muft be moved by it \ to fee that our Saviour, who mufl; know of the Cuftom, gives no Caution againft it) But he only runs out to the End of the Chapter in an Account (not at all to the Purpofe here) of the Diftindion of fe- veral Sorts of Traditions of the fews-^ how fome were more firmly grounded than others. Where- as our main Qiieftion is of the Matter of Faft; whether there were fuch a Cuftom, or not. The moft trifling of all, is his Attempt to evade the Force of that PafFage in the Talmudy Jeramoth^ c, iv. concerning the Difpute between Rabbi Eliez^er^ and Rabbi Joflma (of which I thought I had faid enough in my Introduliion to hinder any one's running into the fame Paralogifm) He fays, p. 38y. Since thofe Rabbins controvert the Bap- tifm of Profelytes ^ it can't be thought a Traditi- on of Mofes, &c. Now he need but open his Eyes to fee, that they do not controvert the Duty of fuch a Baptifm, no more than the Duty of Circum- cifion-j but only the Queftion, Whether one of thefe, and which of them, may denominate a Man a Profelyte, if the other of them be by forae chance fpiifrng. And Hifiory of hfant-Baptifm. sj^ And the fame overfight was at his p. 387. where he takes Baptifm fand he might as well have proved Circuracifion) to be eftablilhed on the Piodoimcing of the wife Men. Whereas it is only the Determi- nation of the forefaid Queftion, which they fouud upon that. The bragging ConcluIIon, />. 391. I would not have the Reader overlook *, nor would Mr. Gale I fuppofe:, becaufe he is careful conftantly to ufe it ^ fo that one might know any Book of his by it. C H A P. XL HERE begins (that with which his Book fhould have begun, if he had meant it an Anfwer to mine) his ventilation of the PafTages which I brought of the Fathers or antient Chriftians. He at firfl: fpends two or three Leaves in talking backward and forward about the Regard which ought to be given to the Fathers, concerning which he thinks it worth the Reader's while to know his Opinion. I think not: partly for other Reafons ; and part- ly, becaufe one Part of it deftroys the other. The Chapter it felf begins at P. 400. With a malevolent and ungrateful Ac- cufation of my Performance in colledting their Say- ings ^ as if I had fet down thofe which are (as he ftyles it) for my Purpofe •, and omitted thofe againfi Infant- Baptifm. I made a Profeflion that that Colledion fhould be impartial. And if it be valuable for any Thing, it is for that. As it had been an ill Thing in me to break that Promife *, fo it is a bafe Thing, if I have not, to accufe me falfly of doing fo. I have received the Acknowledgement of feveral Rea- ders, 2^4 -^ Defence of the ders, both of the Impartiality ufed in collectings and of the civil Treatment of the Antipaedobap» tifts. But the Talent of fome Writers confifts in railing. One Thing is vifible to every Body •, that I have produced feveral Qiiotations, making for their Side of the Queftion, which none of their Writers had found or knew of. On the other Side, it is pof- fible that fome might efcape me : t never pretend- ed otherwife. Yet ^o it has happened, that none lince, that 1 know of, have been produced (and particularly none by Mr. Gale^ which is a poor Thing in an Antagonift) except fuch as I fpoke of in the Beginning of my Second Part, and gave the Reafons for my omitting them, viz^. fuch as are either fpurious, too late, nothing to the Purpofe, or, &c. under which laft Sort, of thofe nothing to the Purpofe, I comprehended all fuch as do fpeak of the Bjptifm of adult Perfons (which every Bo- dy acknowledges was common at the planting of Chriftianity) but without any Note of denying it to Infants. Now whatever may be faid of others, Thefe Two out of Barnabas^ which he here brings as omitted by me, and making againft Infant-Baptifm, are plainly not at all to the Purpofe. And the Firfl: of them is one, which I did quote at large •, and I was the firfl:, that I knew of, that difcovered it to relate at all to Baptifm \ not to the Quell; ion of Infant-Baptifm-, but to that Ce- remony of giving a Tafl:e of Milk and Honey to the new baptized Perfon, whether Infant or Adult. It is recited, (much fuller than he recites it) in my Tart II. Chap 9. %.6. (fo (hamelefs is he for charging me v;ith omitting it, even if it had been to his Purpofe) he takes a Scrap of the End of my Quotation, and puts it among his Autorities. It proves nothing but the forefaid Ceremony. The Hijiory of Infant -Baptifm, 255 The Second does indeed fpeak of the BaptiTm of adult Perfons ('to which purpofe he nriight have produced a Hundred in a Day's time) as if any one did not know that Multitudes of new Con- verts were at that time baptiz'd ; and ihat their Baptifm is more often, and more largely fpoken of, than that of their Children. Againft which Bap- tifm of their Children there is nothing in this, nor in any other Paflage ot Barnabas. The two firft Chapters of my Book have (as I declared in the Prefacej no Q_uotations that fpeak exprejly of Infant-Baptifm : But of original Sin, as it affefts Infants ^ of the NeceiTity of Baptifm to Salvation^ of Baptifm fucceeding Circumcifion, c^c. The Two firft, which I bring from Clemens Roma^ nm:c. Upon which he grounds this immodeft Cavil, p. 409. That I feem to import that St. John copied thefe Words from Hermas. It can feem fo to no Body but to him. Nay I believe it did not fccm fo to him ^ but only he had a Mind to catch at an Occafion of Reproach. My Words import no more, than that our Saviour ha- ying given fuch a Rule, the ChriHians of Hermas'% Time 23 S J Defence of the Time mufl; needs know it^ and Hermas (or the the Angel, if ic were a proper Revelation) might exprefs the Subftance of it, before St. '^ohn had in his Gofpel fee down the Words themfelves. P. 409. He fays he will take this Occafion to ex- ?. lin would have to be, [uch as are converted from Infi- delity. That fitted his Turn befl-, that our Savi- our fhould fay, Except any one of thofe that are iiewly converted from Infidelity, be born again, c^c. but the Defcendants of Believers may have the Kingdom without it. Whereas our Saviour's Words are. All that is horn of the Flejh. Mr. Etnlins Guefs, as it had but little ground, fo he exprelled it with Brevity and Modefty. But here we have a Ramble and a Wild-Goofe Chafe, to find what is meant by any one. Any one what ? Says Mr. Gale^ Any one Be'mgf any one Angel ? anyone Man? Woman? Child? [This is his way of examining the Words of our biefled Saviour, as if he had fome Sophifter, his Fellow, to oppofe] At laft he fixes it for his own Hypothelis, as the other had done for his-, Any one "who is come to the Vfe of his Reafon^ and has heard the Word^ &c, (as if they only were to be admitted to the King- dom of Heaven.) And this^ fays he, we ajfert, as the only genuine Meaning of our Lor£s Words. I do not deny but that in many Propofitions of Scripture, however generally exprefled, we mull limit the Meaning to fuch Subjeds as the Context does (hew to be the only ones there intended j provided thofe Limitations be plainly grounded on the Context. As here. The Difcourfe of our Saviour is plain- ly concerning human Perfons already born ; be- caufe he fpeaks of the Necellity of their being horn again. And their fir ft Birth was of the Flejh j as he fiys in the next Words. And they muft be fuch as are in a Capacity, or may be brought to a Capacity, of being Members of the Kingdom of God ^ for the main Difcourfe is about bringing them thiiher. And Hiflory of Infant-l^apifm* 2^i And fuch as are in a Capacity to be baptized with Water (which our Saviour here exprefles (horn of Water) and by the Mercy of God put in- to a new Spiritual State by the Virtue and Influ- ence of the Holy Spirit fwhich he here exprefTes,' horn of the Spirit.) Thefe Qualifications are fpoken of in the Con- text •, and no other : None concerning the Age of the Perfon, nor any concerning the State of his Parents, Heathen orChriftian. Therefore the Words of Chrift being univerlal for all fuch \ the Socinians^ unlefs they can main- tain that one defcended of Chriftian Parents is not at firfl: born of the Flejli^ mufl not make Limi- tations of their own ; but mull (if they would have the Perfon come to the Kingdom) bring him, as well as they would a converted Hea- then, to this riew Birth of Water and of the Spim rit. And fo the Antipaedobaptills, if they do confefs that their Children are bom of the Flejh j and yeC do wifh, pray, and hope, that being dedicated to Chrift, they fhall come to the Kingdom of God ; and cannot deny but a Child is capable of being' wafhed wjth Water -^ nor will deny (but on the Contrary, hope) that their Child is capable of having the Benefits of Chrift's Covenant fealed and applied to him by the Spirit of God; muft noC make Limitations of their own to this univer- fal Law and Command of Chrift, which requires this new Birth of Water and of the Spirit in order to their entring God's Kingdom •, and makes no Exception or DiftindVion of Infant or Adult j but allowes to both of them an Admiflion into his Kingdom. Of thefe Qualifications mentioned, the only one of which they can make any doubt, is, how aa Infant can be bom of the Spirit. Of this I had gi- K. yen 242 A Defence of the ven the Senfe of the Antient Chriftians. Van f . Chap 15. §. 8. and alfo in the Explication arid Inforcement of this Text. Vein II. Chap." 6. §. I. and fhewed that the Antipaedobaptifts do own, that the Spirit of Chrift is applied to In- fants, and unites them to him *, and quoted the Words of Mr. Tombs^ and of Mr. Danvers. Mr. Gale at p. 422, 423. recites fome of my Words *, does not offer to deny that the Holy Spirit does feal and apply Tar don of SitJy and other Promi-^ fes of the Covenant^ to the Infant ', but only men- tions fome other Offices of the Holy Spirit in the Adult, over and belides thofe which Infants are capable of. Now that does not hinder but that an Infant may be horn again of the Spirit by thofe Operati- ons of the Spirit of which his State is then capa- ble \ though he have not at prefent fome farther Graces of the Spirit, of which the Adult only are capable^ of which thofe particular Texts cited by Mr. Gale do fpeak. In this Rule of our Saviour, pronounced fo folemnly ^ Verily, verily, J fay vnto you ^ except any one be born of Water and the Spirit *, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. Mr. Emlin adds, of his own Head, and without any ground from the Text, A Heathen converted cannot, nor can, his Children. But a Man or Child horn of Chriflian Tarents may. And Mr. Gale, with no better ground than the other, is fain to add to Chrift's \X^ords, and make them run thus j No adult Perfon can j but a Child may. The Reafons he gives, why this Rule cannot, concern Infants, are thefe, P. 415. ivV/?, They don't know this Lawj therefore it caar^ot oblige them. Hijiory of hfrnt-Baptifml 245 Jufl what might have been faid of the Infants of the Jews. They did not know the Law of Circumcifion-, yet God Almie,hty told their Pa- rents, that thofe of their Children whom they re- fufed or negledted to circumcife, fhould becutoffi A BenefatSor who proirifes to adopt a poor Man's Child, and make him his Heir, if he will give iip his Child to him \ is not bound to do it, if the Parent refufe. Chrifl: promifes the Kingdom of Heaven to our Children, if we will dedicate them to him in the Sacrament of Dedication which he has appointed. He does not promife it, if we re- fufe. 'Tis not a Thing due to themi by Nature. This Benefit, or this Lofs, concerns the Chiid| although at that Time he know it not. p. 415. He makes his Second Reafon by con- fronting a Saying of St. Veter to this of Chrift. I Pet. iii. 21. Baptifm faveth us '^ not the putting away of the Filth of the Flejlj •, but the Anfwer of a good Confcience toward God. Mr. Stokes ferves him in his kind. He bids him do with this Text, as he did with Johniii. 5. put in the Word CAdult^j here, as he did there. Dr. IVhiiby had given a better Anfwer to their Argument from! hence. That St. Paul^ Rom. ii. 28, 29. fays of Circumcifion the fame Thing in effed that St. Peter does here of Baptifm , That the true Circumcifion is not that which is outward in the FleJJj-^ but the inward Circumcifion of the Heart and Spirit •, and yet none would argue front thence that Circumcifion fhould not be given to" Infants, who could not at that Time have theCir* cumcifion of the Heart. Mr, Gate labours to fhew a Difference *, but ill vain, as any one will fee ^ The Aim of St. Paul being to inculcate this •, that any one's Circumci- $on which he had received in Infancy, would not R ^ _ " ayaU 244 ^ Defence of the avail him, if after he grew up, he did not cir- tumcife his Heart, and keep the Covenant which Circumcifion had fealed to him. And St. Peter^s Words running in the fame Style are plainly ca- pable of the fame Senfe, that Baptifm received in Infancy would not fave the Man, who did not, after he came to Age, with a good Confcience make good the Engagements of the Chriftian Re- ligion, into which he had been by it entered. There- fore as St. P4ul\ Words cannot be made an Ar- gument to prove that Circumcifion was not then received in Infancy (it being notorious that it was) no more can St. Peter^s Words argue •, that Bap. tifm was not then given in Infancy by the Chri- ftians to fuch Children as they had. Nay, further, if St. Paul do fo fpeak of Cir- cumcifion, which was then adminiftred to Infants only, and had been by himfelf received in Infan- cy ; much more might St. Peter fo fpeak of Bap- tifm, which at that Time had more Subjefts which had received it at their adult Age, than they were who had received it in Infancy ^ (and St. Peter himfelf was one of them) and yet not imply any Denial of the Benefit of it to the Children of Chriftians, provided they did, when they came to Age, perform the Duties of it. And this Com.parifon and Parallelifm of St. PauPs Words about Circumcifion, with thofeof St. Peter about Baptifm, does not only take off the Objecti- ons of the Antipsedobaptifts raifed from this Text of St. Peter ; but all that they raife from other Texts, where Baptifm, and the following Duties and Effeds of it, are put together in the fame Sentence. -Such as Matt, xxviii. 1 9, 20. Baptize, &c. teaching them^dcc. Rom.Yl.^. Buried with him in Baptifm^ &c. that we jlwuld walk, &c. And at other Places j The Baptifm of Repentance^ and the like. For Hiftory of Infant-Baptifm, 24^ For as when St. Taul fays here, Circumcifion profiteth, if thou keep the Law : And a little after fpeaks of fuch as by the Letter and Circumcifion do tranfgrefs the Law ; He does not, though he join them in one Sentence, mean that at the fame time when they were circumcifed, they did either keep or tranfgrefs the Law -, but only that as they grew up, they did feme of them keep ^ forae of them tranfgrefs. So the forecited Texts, and fuch other, though they join them together in one Sentence, do not neceflarily imply that at the fatne time they were baptiz.cd and taught •, baptiz^ed and walked in newnefs of Life : Baptiz^ed and repented. But that, as they grew up, they had thefe Confequences of Teaching, Walking, Repenting, &c. Such Expreflions would fit, not only thofe that had been baptized when Adult (as molt of the Chriftians in the Apoftles Time hadj but (as we fee by St. Paul's fpeaking in jufl: the fame Phrafe concerning Circumcifion) thofe who had received Baptifm in Infancy. Mr. Gale pleads that the Cafes of St. Peter'i and St. Paurs Difcourfe are not Parallel. FirJ} Becaufe St. Paul does not fay of Circumcifion (as St. Peter does of Baptifm) A'bf this has the good Effeft •, but the other. Which is broadly to de- ny St. Paul to fay that which he plainly does fay. Secondly^ Becaufe St. P^w/does not fpeak this of Circumcifion while it continued in Force j but now it was aboliflied. But (as Mr. Stohs well anfwers) the Jewinj Chriftians (to whom St. Paul here fpeaks) did even then ufe it, and reckon it to be ftill in force as to Jews^ though not to Cemiles, A^t xxi. 20, &c, R 5 And 24^. A "Defence of the And St, VauI fays here, Circumcifion profitet'h^ if thou keep the Law. By which it appears that his Argument to them is, adhominem-^ fuppofing, and fpeaking to them of it, as it was when it was in full force. And befides *, what St. Taul here fays, is in ef- fed the fame with what is faid, Deut. x. i6. it. XXX. 6. Jer. iv. 4. when it was in full force. p. 418. His Third Exception againft my argu- ing from this Text, is that trite one \ That our Saviour, John vi. 53. makes the fame NecefTity of eating his FleJI^^ and drinking his Bloody as in John iii. 5. he doc's of being baptized. Therefore (ince it is confefled that That eating and drinking (whe- ther it beunderftood of the Sacramental Eating, or of Faith in Chrill) does not belong to Infants; we fhould by the fame Reafon account them to be excepted in. the other Command of Bap- tifm. This has been anfwered a Hundred times. That all Commands of God or Man (how general fo- ever the Words are) are to be underftood as meant and directed to fuch only as are capable of the Thing commanded. Mr. Gale often urges this Rule. I faid, we do not deny it. The Command of adual Faith (which he thinks, is the Meaning of eating in John vi.) is plainly impoffible to In- fants-, but their Baptifm, their being dedicated to Chrifl:, is not at all. The Command to all Jewi to worfiiip, offer Sacrifice, &c. did by the Na- ture of the Thing, concern only the Adult. The Command that all Males be circumcifed, concern- ed all without Exception, Infants as well asAdult; becaufe of that they were capable. So in the Cafe of thefe Texts. Infants being excepted in the Ap- plication of the Command, John vl of which they are (if adual Faith be there meant) as yet in no wife capable, is no ArgumenC that they Ihould be ex- Hifiory of Ifzfafit-Baptifm, 247 excluded from the Benefit of John iii. 5. of which they are capable. Neither do the ExprefTions of our Saviour run alike in both the Places. That of Joht vi. was fpo- ken to Perfons that could hear and be admonifli- €d ; Except ye eat, &c. and can concern only fuch.' That of Joh/s iii. is a general Definition of the State of all Perfons born of the Flelh ; Except any one be born again. Baptifm is the Sacrament of Initiation, or entring into Covenant; and of that Infants are capable. And whereas Mr. Gale in the next Pages brings more In ftances of Things of which Infants are not capable *, A'farc.xv'u i6, . fie that believeth not^ Jljall be damned. John iii. 1 3. He that believeth not, is condemned already \ where Infants cannot by the Nature of the Thing be meant-, they avail him nothing toward a Proof that they are not meant here. P. 420. He will needs give us his Opinion, what God will do in reference to the eternal State of thofe Adult among the Heathens, who have nei- ther Faith nor Baptifm. In which Matters fo far out of human reach, the more forward any one is to obtrude his Opinion, the lefs it is to be re- garded. This however he gives but as an Opi- nion ; We have Reafon to hope, &c, But concern- ing the eternal State of Infants, dying unbapti- ^ed (as he would have all that die in Infancy to do) he is more pofitive, and talks with [as much Allurance of the Decrees of God, as any confi- dent Man can do of Matters of his Trade, or any Mountebank of his Skill in Receipts ; fo that no Pope with St. Peterh Keys in his Hand can more peremptorily difpofe of Places in the King- dom of Heaven. For p. 421. He makes that his Fourth Reafon againft the baptizing of Infants in order to their admiflion into Heaven, that all Infants (mean- R 4 1^5 '248 A Defence of the ing, as his Words fhew) baptized or not, of Heathen or of Chriftian Parents, of the Wicked as well as of the Godly) fliall ajfuredly befaved. If Modefty be neceflary gny where ^ it is when we fpeak of the future judgments of God in Ca- fes not revealed. Godly Parents in all Ages have been felicitous for the Salvation of their Children *, and inafmuch as they have been under God the Authors of their Being ; Nature it felf, as well as God's Word, has ftrongly inclined them to wifh, pray, and endeavour that that Being might become a happy and advantageous, and not a mi* lerable Being to them. And accordingly have been careful to ufe any Means prefcribed by God Almighty for that Purpofe. The godly Jews^ to make ufe of that Seal of Circumpifion to enter them into God's gracious Covenant, whereby he had promifed them to he a God to them and their Seed : To ufe their own Prayers, and to bring them to any Prophet or holy Man and defire him to blefs them in the Name of God, e^c. The godly Chriftians to bring them to Chrift to be dedicated to Him and the Father and Holy Spirit, to be baptized in that holy Name for the Forgivenefs and Wafliing off that Stain and Pollution which is by corrupt Nature, in which they were conceived and born- To im- plore the Mercy of God to receive and admit them into that his merciful Covenant made to Mankind, by which he Will for Chriji^sSake^andto all that are his^ give an eternal Life, which is a greater and higher Advantage than could natu- rally be expeded for them j and to defire that In order to obtain this ineftimable Benefit, there be ufed, befide their own Prayers, the Prayers and Offices of Chrilt's Miniller, and of his Church, Now Hijlory of Infmt-Bapifm, 249 Now this Man would have nothing of this to be done \ but fays in effed, It is more than needs. The Child without all this, is asfafeas with it 9 and after all this the Child of an Atheift, who regards not Chrift or his Covenant or any Prayer to him, or Sacrament of his, is as fafe as this Child. If you enquire for the Ground of this ftrange Aflurance^ you have hisDiftate; If there be any Mercy in God All Infants^ who could never of- fend hir/ty jliall ajfuredly be faved. And by being faved, he does not mean only Cas fome of the Greek Church did, and as the Roman does now) that unbaptized Infants, and Heathen Mens In- fants, (hall be in a State of little or no Punifli- ment or Suffering ^ but he means (as appears by his other Words) fhall \\2Lvethe Kingdom of Heaven, And this without inferting any Thing ofChrift's Mediation and Death as the meritorious Caufe of their Salvation ^ but fb pleads their Caufe at this Place, as if they needed it not. Let him there- fore be the Man to anfwer the Challenge which St. jiufiin Fourteen Hundred Years ago made to any ' impious Perfon, who, when Infants were brought to Church to be baptized^ fhould dare to affirm that they may be faved without that Regeneration, as ifChrifi had not died for them ^ For it was Sinners that he died for ^ &:c.. and to fay (as he there fets him a Form) Carry back from hence thefe innocent Creatures \ The whole have no need of a Thyjician but they that are fick. Chrifl came not to call the Righteous^ but Sinners. St. Auftin thought there would never be any Chriftian prefumptuous enough to accept this Challenge. He fays there. De fee- cat, merit. /. i . r. 1 8. Such a Thing never was faid^ nor ever willbe faid in the Church of Chrifi. There was never a Ur.Gale at that Time, and he thought, uever would be. But 25 o ^ Defence of the But thoii, Ghriftian Reader, if thou liaft Chil- dren, efpecially fuch as are in danger of Death*, and haft that pious Concern for their everlafting Welfare, and for their obtaining that heavenly Purchafe of Ch rift, even eternal Life^ whichever/ good Parent ought to have. Depend not on any fuch Mountebank Aflurances, or arrogant Didlates of Men that make fo bold with God's Judgments, as if they themfelves were Judges, But humbly apply to Chrift himfelf (who has procured this wonderful Favour) and to his Word ; and feek for fuch Aflurances for thy Child's Soul as are grounded on that, and not on Mens bold Reafon- ings; ufe earneft Prayers to God in the Name of Chrifi-t that for his Sake (and not merely becaufe it has never adually offended him) it may be received into thofe everlafting Habitations which he has prepared for all that are His, and for none elfe : Do not conceive of Heaven as of a Place due to human Nature, though it could be con- ceived innocent ; much lefs in the corrupt State that it is now in. Remember what David fays of our natural Birth, Pf. li. 5. Pray particularly that God would not remem- ber thy Sins, or the Sins of its other Fore-fathers ; but that its Soul may be waftied from all Pollution in the Blood of that immaculate Lamb, which on- ly can make a Soul pure enough to be received in- to the Place that was purchafed by it. Read that Record of God, i John v. 1 1, I2. That God has gi- njen to us an eternal Life •, and this Life is in [^or, by] his Son. He that has the Son, C^r, has an Intereft in the Son] has this Life : He that has not the Son of God, has not Life. No Man will, or dare, fay. Infants ftiall be excepted in that Sen- tence, which requires that they be in Chrift, or have Chrift for their Saviour : Nor can give any good Proof that they (hall be excepted in this before .' Hifiory of Infant^ Baftifm, 251 before us. For which Way come they to belong to Chrifi, or to have him^ but as they are dedica- ted and entered into his Covenant in the Way that he has appointed for all whom he will favc, to be entered ? Read that godly Saying of the pious and judi- cious Mr. Hooker (which I recited, Fart II. Chap. 6* §. I.) in his Ecd. Pol. /. 5. §. 59, 60. If Chrift himfelf who giveth Salvation^ do require Baptifm j It is not for us to found and examine him^ whether un^ haptiz.ed Perfons may he faved : but ferioufly to do what is required^ &c. The Words of Chrift are general ; Except any one. And Matt, xxviii. All Nations. He does no where except Infants. Mr. Gale fays, They never could offend him* No more could the brute Creatures. Shall they there- fore go to Heaven? But he will fay, thefe are of Human Race. Has Human Race any Claim to Heaven ? It is the peculiar Purchafe of our Blef- fed Saviour for all thofe of Human Race that are Hi^. He procured it, and has granted a Poffibility and Promife of it to Mankind under certain Li- mitations and Conditions (without excepting In- fants) one of which Conditions is this of the Text. He fays, if it be fo, then Millions of Infants will not be faved. And he had made before the like Objedion concerning all the Heathen World, the Adult Heathens. To all which Sort ef bold Inquiries, we can return only this ^ Chrift has told us, to whom his Word is come, what we our felves are to exped. Concerning thofe to whom it never came, who- ever bufily inquires of him ; And what fhall thefe Men do ? Or, what (hall become of them ? Does in Effedl receive from him this Anfwer^ What is that to thee ? He has faid in general ; The Ser- vant that knew not his Matter's Will, and did Things 252 ji Defence of the Things worthy of Stripes, fhall be beaten with few Stripes. And more than that he has not told us of their Fate •, and of their Children nothing at all. He will, we need not fear, deal with all Men, Adult and Infant, according to Rules of Juftice and Equity. But if a Man, a Worm, will not trull him with the ordering of thofe Rules ^ but will demand before-hand, what he will do with fuch ^ and what with fuch ^ He giveth not Account of any of his Matters. A modeft and humble Spe- culation about fuch Things may be ufeful, or however excufable. But to talk and determine after this arrogant Rate •, If there be any Mercy in him^ he will do fo with thefe j and fo with thole \ is good for nothing, but to create in us an kh-. horrence of the bold Prefumption of the Deter- miner. C'He fays, Infinite Mercy can^t tnake the Happinefs ef any of his Creatures depend vpon Conditions that jpere impojfihle for them to perform. As for any H&ppinefs that was due to themythls may indeed be a Rule. But the Kingdom of Hea- ven is not due to all his Creatures. And where h h not due, he may do what he will with his own-, and let what Conditions he thinks fit. And as for this Condition of receiving Baptifm in his Kame, he may well fay to any Parent; if you will dedicate your felf to me by Baptifm, and live accordingly, you fhall be admitted to that Happinefs- and fo fhall your Children, if you will dedicate them, and they do not afterward by their own Rebellion forfeit it. This Condition, Mr. Gale fays, is impoffihle for the Child to perform. True ; if he has an An- tipjedobaptilt Parent, or an Heathen Parent, or a very carelefs Chriftian Parent. But even in that cafe, the Child (fuppofe he do mifs of the Kingdom of Heaven j as all the antient Chriftians, when they ex- Hifiory of Infant-Ba^tifm. 2 5*5 expound this Text, do think he will) does not lofe any Happinefs that was due to him. And for other Children, whofe Parents or Sponfors dellre Baptifm for them, and it becomes impofll- ble by reafon of fudden Death, or other Accident ; it is the Hope of moft Proteftants that God does in fuch cafe accept of the Will for the Deed, and give them the Kingdom of Heaven ; becaufe here was the Heart and Purpofe to do what God com- manded. In fhort, this arrogant Rule, as he lays it down, ftrikes at God's Juftice in the Cafe of Circumcifi- on, as well as of Paedobaptifm *, and with the fame Afliirance as he here tells us, our Explication of this Text fuppofes a Thing which God can't do, he may upon hearing, Gen. xvii. 14. fay, That's what, God could not do. For Circumcifion was as im- poflible for the Child to perform, as Baptifm is ; and yet without it he was cut off. It is worth the while to obferve how ftrongly, and with what Sinews, this Argument which de- termins fo pofitively concerning what God can, or cannot do, is built. Our Saviour's Rule, Except any one, &c. cannot concern Infants, proved thus. P. 421. As it does not concern Angels, who, we are fure, fhall though not baptized, enter, &c. fo it does not concern Infants, who, we may rea* fonably fpppofe^ flia:!!, wtether baptized or not, all of them enter, &c. This was as yet lame^ becaufe between we are fure and we may reafonably fuppofe there is fome difference. Therefore within Three Lines it is mended ^ and inftead of we may reafonably fuppofe it is put Jlja/l afuredly. That does it. Only there is this difference ^ The Angels are there already ', but that unbaptized Infants, fuch as their Pa- rents refufe to enter into Chrift's Church here, Ihall 2 54 A Defence of the here, fhall enter there, we have no other Proof than this Man's jliall affuredly j and his giving a Rule to God Almighty's Power in the foOowing Words *, God our Saviour cannot ordain fuch unrea' fonable Laws. He brings at lad another Argument. In Marc. x. 14. Chrift fpeaking of Infants, fays, Of fuch is the Kingdom of Heaven. Why did not he quote all the Text; Suffer them to come to me : For of fuch., &c. Left we fhould underftand it thus ^ Infants are capable of being Members of the Kingdom of Heaven : Therefore bring them to me, and do not forbid them for their Infancy. Whereas he would have us expound it ( quite contrary to our Saviour's Inference) Of fuch is the Kingdom of Heaven ; therefore bring them not to me ; they need it not. P. 422. Comes his laft Exception againft our Argument from the forefaid Text of fohn iii. 5. That our Saviour there requires their being born of the Spirit^ as VitWasof IVater '^ which cannot be meant of Infants. To which I gave Anfwer twice or thrice in the Book he is anfwering. And here above, once to Mr. Bernard, once to Mr. Emlin, and once or twice to Mr. Gale. What I there (hew that the Antipasdobaptifts confefs of the gracious Offices of the holy Spirit in the Cafe of Infants \ Dan- vers fays, Who doubts it? I am fure T never affirm- ed the Contrary. And if our Author will deny it ; let him fpeak out. Inftead of that he recites fome Texts where are mentioned feveral other Operations of the Spirit (which are indeed peculiar to the Adult) but fays nothing to overthrow what I had faid *, That the Holy Spirit, befide his Office of converting the Heartp &c. does alfo apply Pardon of Sin, and other Trd* Hijlory of Infam-Baptifm. 255 Tromifes of the Covenant^ of which an Infant is ca- pable. Where he fays, p. 423. that I take this for all that's meant in the Text by born of the Spirit ; I anfwer, that That cannot be faid to be all. Be- caufe the Words being general, of any oneh being born of the Spirit, and applicable to the Baptifm both of an adult Perfon, and of an Infant ^ there may be feveral other Effefts and Operations of the Spirit on the Heart of an Adult, befide thofe that are common to the Adult and Infants. And whereas he quotes Dr. Whitby^ who would not have an Infant's Cafe comprehended in this Text -, Dr. Whitby when he animadverts that the Church in the Office of Baptifm does diredly quote and apply thefe very Words of our Savi- our to the Baptifm of every Infant, will not deny that they are applicable to it. Now at lafl: he returns to what I quoted from Hermas •, and P. 424. Excepts againft any Inference for P«- dobaptifm that can be drawn from that Part of the Vifion, where the Patriarchs and other holy Men, that had died before the Chriftian Bap- tifm was inftituted, are reprefented as baptized by the Apoftles in the feparate State. I owned that it does not fpeak direftly of In- fants *, and all that I pretended to conclude from it, was, the Necefiity of Water- Baptifm to Sal- vation, or to entrance into the Kingdom of God, in the Opinion* of the then Chriftians, i. e. the Chriftians of the Apoftles Time. Thofeare my Words. He fays, I concluded i 'therefore the Church of that Time baptized Infants, I did not fay that. But left it to the Reader to judge, how far it would follow from the Necefiity of Baptifm to all that clo enter j fmce the Patriarchs therafdves could "not 2 5^ -^ Defence of the not enter without it. Therefore I need fay no- thing to thofe «Three Pages, wherein he talks of want of Connexion, &c. as if I had made a Syllogifm of it ^ or Parables not being argu- mentativej not running on all Four j and fuch pe-' dantic Stuff. He fays, Thofe Patriarchs had been Adult, and had had aftual Sins in their former Life *, and for them might need Baptifm. He fhould have minded that Her mas {ox the Angel] does not make that the Reafon ^ but fays, 'they died in great purity ', Only this Seal was wanting to them. He con- cludes this Head at P. 427. With a merry Scoff; // this proves any Thing in favour of Infant- Baptifm, ^tis only, that they Jhall be baptiz^ed in the other World. But be that as it wilt. ^Tis fujficient that they are not to be bapti' 7jd here \ which is all we infifl on. If the Schifm can be fupported, and holdup its Head, till that time -, he is indifferent what becomes of the Queftion it felf. And if he gain his point here \ let who will gain it there. But it is bad venturing this, left thofe, whofe Parents refufed for them here, be refufed there. It was granted to thofe Patriarchs there •, becaufe it had not been inftituted here during the Time of their mortal Life. p. 428. Her6 he firft would willingly deny that by the Word, Infants, in a Faffage of Hermas therC recited, are meant Infants in Age. Which Eva- lion the mere reading of the Place does plainly confute. So not infilling on that, but faying with his ufual Modefty •, perhaps it may be fo *, he pleads ftill, that That Declaration of God's compaffio- nate Love to Infants ; All Infants are valued by the Lord, hc. does not (ignify any Thing to their Baptifm •, for that there is no neceffary Connexion between God's Love and Baptifm. There Hi ft cry of Infant-Baptifm, 257 There is as we have ieen, a Connexion made by our Saviour, between Admiffion into his King- dom, and baptifm. And we think Admiffion into his Kingdom to be an effedt of, and connefted x.o^ his Love. He obferves that the Words are, All Infants \ which he Paraphrafes \ All-, upon the fame Levels merely as Infants baptiz,ed, or not. Forgetting that Hermas had faid before, 'that all who enter mult have that Seal, and that Seal is Water. And our Saviour before him had fpoke to the fame Purpofe. He fays, Hermas calls Infants, Innocent. So does the Church of England in the Office of Baptifm % where yet it owns their being conceived in Sin: It means only j innocent in comparifon \ of a meek Temper, &c. He fays, 'tis ftrange that Hermas in his Reprc- fentations of the feveral Materials of which the Church was built, (hould never give Infants one Place, but conftantly negledt them. And yet this very Place that we are upon, is a Mention of them in that White Mountain, whicH v/as the chief of all that afforded any Stones to the Building. p. 430. To prove that Hermas had no Notion of Infant-Baptifm, he quotes an Exhortation of his, that is, as he thinks, inconfiftent with it ; / fay unto you all, whoever have received this Seal j Keef Simplicity, &C. This is your Man for Connexion in an Argu- ment. Though fuch an Exhortation be fas Mr. Stokes alfo obferves) but the fame that any Psedobaptift Preacher does commonly ufe to his People •, yet he (left the Reader fhould take the Inference from it againft Paedobaptifm to be fhame- fully weak and trifling) with his ufual Countenance tells us ', It is not pojfihle any Inference Jljould he more dirt^ and necejfary. . S I had S^S A Defence of the I had obferved that this Saying of Hermetic All Infants are valued by the Lord-, is to the fame Ef- fed, as -our Saviour's embracing Infants, and fay- ing, Of fuch is the Kingdom of God. Mr. Gale fays, that I fuppofed this a flain Argument for their Baptifm. 1 have not that lucky Talent (in which he does fo excell) of cramming down the Reader's Throat Inferences from any Premifes. What 1 faid, was, that it is one of the Reafons vfed to prove that they Are fit to he admitted into the Covenant of God's Grace and Love by Baptifm. And I do ftill think it a ftronger one than any the Antipaedobaptifts can bring for the Negative : and fuch as they do not give any folid Anfwer to. But he fays, I did not reafon from the Words (and indeed it was not the Province that I had un- dertaken) but only cite them, as if they were plain to the Purpofe. He therefore undertakes the Rea- foning Part. And his Reafons are (fuch as he is lifed to) The T^edobaptijls do much pervert the Place. The Words have no Relation to Baptifm at all., nor to any thing neceffarily connected with it. What is there, J befeech yoUy that can make them faften upon this Place ? And fo he goes on ranting and infult- ing over tlie Paedobaptifts (and Dr. Hammond for onej till he comes to Dr. Whitby., whom he never paflTes by without a Compliment \ which here runs thus •, He is pie a fed to improve the Paffage to the vtmofi Advantage ; and he being in general fo very fair and fincere a Writer., and comprehending the whole Subfiance of what can be -urged from the Place :, I will examine what he has faid. And in that Ex- amination he begins gently, and forces himfelf to civil Language ; but before he has done, Nature returns upon him, and he tells the Do(^or ; his Argument is grounded on a Afifiake ; the DoB or gives no Reafon j This is dirtily begging the Queftion, &c. Now Hifiory of r/tfant-Baptifm* 2^9 Kow becaufe fince that Time the Doftor has pub-] lifhed his Wifh to fee an Anfwer to this Book of the learned^ the very learned Mr. Gale % I think it concerns him to anfwer this part himfelf. And iince he has given up to them the other Text of John iii. 5. (which the Church of England does not •, and the antient Chriftians would not have donej to vindicate at leaft his own Argument from this. For I, though I think it a very eafy Thing to fhew the Wcaknefs of all that is faid againft it here •, had rather for fome Reafons that he Ihould do it himfelf. It is certainly more to the Purpofe to write in his own Vindication againft this very learned Man^ than to write againft Dr. Sna^e in Vindication of another very learned Man. P. 433' The Expofition of this Text given by the late Biftiop of 5^/»V^«r;' (which he here like- wife attacks) may (becaufe he is dead) be here (for want of a better Hand) freed from that lit- tle which he objefts againft it. That Bifhop had, both in the other Text and in this, by the King- dom of God underftood the Church here, or, as heflylesit, the Difienfation of the MeGiah. Mr. Gale who was eager for this Senfe of the Word in the other Place, and faid, His Lord (hip had unanfwe- rably argued that That is the Senfe in which the Kingdom of God does ftand Mlmofi univerfally thro' the whole Gofpel ; is utterly againft it here, for a Reafon of much lefs Weight than was that of St. Auflins (which I cited) to prove that, not the Church on Earth, but the Kingdom of Glory was meant in John iii. 5. Which Mr. Gale there called a frivolous one. St. Aufl'm on thofe Words, John iii. Shall not fee the Kingdom of God, concluded the Kingdom there fpoken of to be the King- dom of Glory, and not the Church here , becaufe of the Church here it can't be denied, but a wicked S 2 or 26o 'J Defence of thi or unbaptized Man might fee it. Mr. Gale faid that was a frivolous Argument. And yet in Marc. X. 15. Shall not enter into the Kingdom: He concludes here, it mufl: be the Kingdom of Glory •, for into the Church here the greateft Fd- Uins may be admitted, if they concele their Wicked- nefs. If that was frivolous, this is much more fo. For in what Senfe foever a wicked Man, or un- baptized Perfon may enter into the Church; much more he may fee it. He ventures farther ; and puts the Cafe, Sup- pofe the Kingdom of Cod do mean the Church •, and (as his Suppofition muft be, if it be pertinent) Suppofe Infants were to be admitted into it \ yet how does it appear they were to be admitted by Bap- tifm ? Baptifm is the only way of admitting adult TerfonSy but is no where prefer ibed to Infants. And then he propofes a Method for a new Seft ; that ihould admit into their Church adult Perfons by Baptifm^ and Infants by doing to them as our Lord did to thofe here mentioned, viz.. by laying on of Hands., and Trayer. This, he fays, he fiould ra- ther imagin, if they are to be admitted at all. This were certainly better than their prefent Praftice of not receiving Infants into the Church at all. For the receiving them fome Way or other is plainly direfted and incouraged by our Saviour upon an Occafion like to this, Matt, xviii. And whereas Chrift at this time is faid to have received thefe by Blefllng and laying on of Hands, withoutany mention of the baptizingof them; Tiiac is no otherwife exprefled than it is often in the Cafe of adult Perfons who came to him to be healed, and who profefled their Belief in him, and upon whom he fometimes laid his Hands- and yet none of them is faid at that time to be bap- tized by him •, though none doubts but that they were baptized by his Difciples. Hijiory of Infmt-BA^tifm, 261 If the Antip«dobaptifts be once convinced of their Duty of receiving little Children in Chrifi^s Name by any Ceremony at all ; they will rather receive them by the Sacrament which he has ap- pointed for all that enter, than by this of Mr. GaW^ propofing. However, this ought ferioufly to be laid to Heart by thofewho will not at all receive me fuch little Child in Chrifi^s Name. Suppofing that the Bifhop's Interpretation of the Kingdom of Heaven fignifying the Church here, does not hold; but it fignifies the Kingdom of of Glory *, yet his main Argument from thefe Words for the baptizing fuch Infants does conti- nue firm : Since by the other Text, all that are to be Members of that mult be baptized. He brings alfo againft the Bifhop that Argu- ment, That if they be received to Baptifm ; they mufl: alfo to the Lord's-Supper. Which having been anfwered over and over, is now grown Thread* bare. He and his Sir having had this imaginary Tri- umph over, not me only, but the faid Doftor and Bifhop, do as two Cocks, here, as at all other Con- clulions, clap their Wings and crow. CHAP. XII. MR. Gale, becaufe next to Hermas I pafs to Jufiin Martyr^ and fo do fafs over (as he calls it) half the Second Century without any jittemft vpon it 'y begs that all the Space left out by me may be given him. And becaufe the Antip^do- bapdfts can bring no Evidence at all from theie Times; if we leave out any Author, as having nothing fro or contra about the Age of baptizing ; they claim them as being our Leavings. \^here- . S 3 as 262 A Defence of the as the Truth of the Matter is, that (if we ex- cept Ignatius who as he was going to Martyrdom, wrote fome fhort Letters of his laft Advice to the neighbouring Cliurches*, and Polycarp who wrote one fuch Ihort Letter) there is never a Book of the Fifty Years, he mentions, left. Of which if Mr. Gale were aware, you may fee, he will make a Flourilh to his ignorant Readers of a Thing which he knows has nothing in it. My Chapter ofCliiotations out of JufiinhsiS not^ as 1 owned in the Preface, any exprefs mention of Infant-Baptifm ^ but of original Sin, as it affeds Infants •, of Baptifm fucceedingCircumcifion, &c. He fays, The Proof of their holding theDodrine of original Sin (and that, befide adual Sins, there is in our Nature, fince the Fall, fomething that needs Redemption and Forgivenefs by the Merits of Chrift) concerns not the baptizing of Infants, For, though we do fay that Tliat Redemption and Forgivenefs is ordinarily to be applied to every one by Baptifm ; That lignifies nothing ^ unlefs Ju- J^in fay fo. Nor is it fulficient to fay, The Scripture teaches it ^ for the Queftion here imme- diately is not what the Scriptures teach •, but what Juftin teaches. Now this is very fubtile Arguing ^ but (as molt of your fubtile Notions) being a little weigh'd proves very light. There wants nothing to fee through it, but to remember that Jufiin knew the Scriptures. If they do teach, that original Pollu- tion does, in order to its Forgivenefs, require Baptifm ; and he knew and believed them j our proving that he held Pollution in Infants, proves by Confequence that he rauft hold their need of Baptifm. To (top this Difpute about original Sin, he re- fers to what he had faid at his 403d Page where the molt that 1 can make of it, is, that he be- lieve* Hifiory of Infmt'Bcipifm, 263 licves no fuch Thing. And here he queftions whe- tlfer J«/?/» and the Autients had ^y Motion of it. V. 440. He falls foul on my Tranflation of a Sentence which 1 quoted to Ihew that Father's Senfe of it. Dial. p. 94. Ed. Steph. where 'tis faid that Chrift condelcended to be born^ and haptiz.ed^ and crucified^ not being under any Neceflity or Want upon his own Account, of any of thofe Things \ but he did them -w^' cctrB dvjcHv '7royiis«vs* Which I tranflated. For Mankind, which by Adam was fallen under Death^ and under the Guile of the Serpenty befide the particular Caufe which each Man had of Sinning. He fays, It ought, he thinks, to be tranflated thus ^ for Mankind^ which from tn^Ot by\ Adam was fallen under Deaths and the Guile of the Serpent-, by their own A^ and Deed, every one ha- ving done wickedly. This were tolerable, even though the Miftake be his own^ if he did not add to it fome of his natural Impudence, and abulive Language. My Tranflation, he fays, is fuch as no School-boy would have made. Whether / did it out of Ignorance^ or Inadvertency, he will not determine. The only Difference is about ^ and r^. How they are in this Place to be rendered. Every one knows that an Author fpeaking of Mankind fallen under Death and the Guile of the Serpent &5 -ri 'AcTctw may be underfl:ood either thus •, From Cor, by] Adam, as the Caufe or Origin of that Fall, and Death •, as I tranflate. Or thus. From the Ttme of Adam, as Mr. Gale tranflates. They know like wife that ,^ with an Accufative doe§ iignify generally prater., befide , and fometimes (but very feldom) propter ^ by reafm of And tha£ ft, is the Seiifc and Scope of the Place, that muft S 4 de^ 2^4 -^ Defence of the determine how thefe Prepofitions rauft be render- ed here. Now all that I have feen, that have had occafi- on to take notice of this Saying of Juflin^ and, I believe, abfolutely all that did ever tranflate or interpret it, have underftood and rendered it as I did. Perioniusy whofe Latin Tranflation of Jujiin is in the 5. .p. Col. i5i8. renders &3 to 'A^n.*/^ : jida- mi opera \ by the Aleans []or Fault] of Adam. And its^Tijv )J^/cc,v d/jUv Ixitrs.- prater privatam ac propria 4m uniuscvjufq'^ culpam^ hefide every one^s particular and peculiar Fault [^or Sin.] In the Taris Edition, 1535. The Tranflation given by Langus, is ; Sed humani generis caufa, quod per Adam in mortern^ & fraudem fedu^ionem<^'^ ferpentis, conciderat :■ vt interim propriam pro fe maligne agentis cujufque culpam taceam. Dr. Hammond having Occafion in his Annotati' ens on Tf. $\. to quote the former Part of this Sentence, tranflates ■^ to A/etV, by Adam'j Fall. And that (hews alfo how he mult by the Tenor of the Sentence have tranflated the other Part too, if he had recited it. Of learned Men that have colleded the Tefti- monies of the Antients owning and bewailing our original Corruption, none 1 think, have omitted this of 'Juftin. However Fojfiw in his Hifi. Pelag. has not. Nor the learned Spencer. Annot. in Ori- ginem. p. 54. Whofe putting this among the other PafTages of the Fathers which fpeak of Original Sin, ihews how he would have tranflated it. For ac- cording to Mr. Calebs Tranflation it fpeaks nothing about it. He curtails the Senfe of it, that it Ihould not. The Reverend and Learned Mr. Bingham^ in that elaborate Work of his Origines EccL Vol. 4. Chap^ Hifiory of Infmt-Baptjm* 265 Ciiaf. 4. §. 7. tranflates it^ By reafon of Adam'j Sin ; befide the particular Guilt which each Man^ Sec. The Reader fees what Men I have named ; and will judge what a Fore-head that Man mult have, that will not allow them to underftand the Senfe of a Paflage in a Creek Father as well as himfelf or the School' boys. He would give a Color to his own Tranflation from the Connexion which this Sentence has with the Words next following. Which are. For God did this, "willing that thefe (^Men as well as j4ngels^ jhould aB with a free Choice and a free Tower to da what he enabled every one to do : That if they did choofe what was ^leafing to him \ he might preferve them immortal ^ but if, &:c. Now Mr. Gale fays. For Juftin to fay this, and conneB it by the illative Particle, For, to another Sentence wherein he faysy All fell in Adam, is fo great an Abfurdity, &c. But he perverts the Words •, and there wants nothing but reading them, to fee, that Juflin does not argue, that All fell in Adam^ and fo Men had a free Choice. But thiis \ God did this \j. e. caufed his Son to be bom, to be baptiz.ed, and to be cru- cified ', which are the very \A^ords of the difputed Sentence] for Men ; that they might once more have a free Choice. Mr, Gale in his EngUfh gives no rendering, but only a for Wotwiv, did it. Which would have made the Senfe not fo eafy to be perverted. He that will warp one Sentence, mult commonly bend the next. He fpends the next Pages in telling us Stories of ^'and ,J^\ 'attj often fignifies /row ; as from fuch a Place, or from fuch a Time (who doubts it ?) and St. Paul fays, Death reigned ^^5 ^AJ'a.u lAxpi Maxriat from Adam to Mofes. And if the Conftru- ftion of the Sentence had been alike here ; It mult, [ grant, have been fo1:ranflated here. But hs will not deny, that it often fignifies, from-, i. e. irom 266 A Defence of the from, or by, fuch a Cmfe^ fuch an Occa/ion, fucb a Man's Fault, As the learned Men, 1 mentioned, and 1 believe, all Tranflators of St. Juflin have here rendered it. For -^ he is more put to it. Yet the Lexicon does furnilh him with a few Examples. And then he goes to the Books y Diony/ius, Thucy- dideiy tells US long Stories of two or three Fights, where „^ is fo ufed. The Property of one that loves to hear himfelf talk. Had it not been more natural, if he had fought the true Import of it here, to fee how J«/?»» him- felf ufes it ? Of which this Dialogue would have given him Forty or Fifty Examples, where it al- ways (ignifies, beftde. There are Four or Five in the Space of a Page, /?. 69. Ed. pr^cdiB. Another God f^^ r7}ov ; Befide him that was feen by Ahra* ham. Chrift does nothing ^^^ yviif^m n Uo/nV^ hc' fide [or without] the Will of the Creator. Again, «a^^ T8Toy, bejide this. And again, <^^ tvv voifxivov Uonijwy befide him that is onderftood to be the Ma- ker of all Things, &c. fo p. 78. Another Cove- nant f^^ rh iv ofs/ XiypHi^, befide that made at the Mount Horeb. If Mr. Gale had amended my Tranflation of the Word £i/7/aV, there had been more room for his Criticifm Cbut that would not have advantaged his Plea) I exprefled it, Beftde the f Articular Caufe which each Man had of Sinning, It is better rendered ; Befide the peculiar Guilt {ox Crime] of every one of them that had finned. But this makes Jufiin not lefs plainly, fpeak of original Sin derived from Adam^ ibefide every Man's particular and aftual Offences. "Afl'ict fometimes is the Caufe or Reafon of any Thing. Sometimes a Crime or Guilt •, but never, what Mr. Gale renders it, an AB and Deed* ?, 444: itjiory of Infam-'Baftifm, 267 P. 444. In anfwering the next Paflage, where Juflin fpeaking of the Jewijh Circumcifion, and comparing with it the Spiritual Circumcifion, fays of the later *, And this, we being Sinners have thro'' Cod's Mercy recei'Ved by Baptifm ; and every one is fermitted to receive it in the ftme Way. He fir ft manfully proves that Circumcifion and Baptifm are two Things \ and that Jvflins faying i We re- ceive Circumcifion by Baptifm, is not faying, that Circumcifion it felf is Baptifm. What Readers, and what Anfwerers, muft this Man have ? Did ever any one pretend that the formalit ratio of them is the fame ? Or any more, than that one is to the Chriftians the initiating Ceremony inftead of the other which was fo to the Jews ? This Difputant would confute any of the Chriftian Fathers that fhould fay that Chrift crucified is to US the Pajfover Lamb \ becaufe one was a Lamb, and theother.isaMan. He obferves that Juftin in the fame Place fays, that Enoch and the other holy Patriarchs had the Spiritual Circumcifion \ and yet, fays he. Where when, or by whom was Enoch baptiz.ed ? The Senfe is plain to any Reader, that Enoch received it without any external Ceremony ; Abra^ ham and the Jews by external Circumcifion ; and the Chriftians (as his exprefs Words are) by Baptifm. Then through three pages he cites Sentences out of Juftin and other Fathers (and he might have brought an Hundred more) where they fpeak of the Circumcifion of the Heart, the putting away the Evil of our Doings, the Purification from all Error and Wicked nefs, o-c, as being the true Circumcifion chiefly intended .by God \ the Spiritual Circumcifion, our Circumcifion^ &C. And he would argue from thence, that they cannot ac- count Baptifm to be inftead of Circumcifion ^ be- caufe t6 8 J Defence of the caufe Purification of Heart and Life is inftead of it. But both of thefe may well confift. Purity of Heart and Life is the chief Import and Aim both of Circumcifion in the OU'Teflamem^ and of Bap- tifm in the New. That does not at all hinder, biTt that as Circumcifion was the external Sacra- ment to import this Purity in the Old, fo Ba'p- tifm may be inftead of it for the fame Purpofe in the New. And though the Fathers may in many of their Say- ings exprefs only the Comparifon between the Car- nal Circumcifion and the Spiritual ; without men- tioning at thofe Places Baptifm as the Sacrament of it •, yet it is fufficient that they at feveral other Places do exprefly mention it ; as Jufi'm does here. For he has been here (hewing that almoft all the Ordinances of the OU-T'efiament were Types of fomething under the New. As the PafTover-Lamb roafted, of Chrifl crucified : The Scape-goat, of Chrifl; bearing our Sins, and made a Curfe for us. The fine Flour ufed at the cleanfing of a Leper, of the Bread in the Eucharift. The Twelve Bells on the High-Priefl's Garment, of the Twelve Apoftles, and feveral more. After which follows this •, How the Jewijh Circumcifion was a Type of the true Circumcifion, which we receive, fays he, by Baptifm. Mr. Gale lays a particular Strefs on one of the Places which he brings •, which is a Saying of La^antius % That there was to be another Circum* c'lfion^ not of the Flejh as was the Firfi, which the Jews//// PraEiife:, hut of the Heart and Sprit. Up- on which he turns to his 5iV, Tou fee. Sir, he ex' f^i fly fays, the Second Circumcifion Is not of the Flefh ; but Baptifm is the plunging the Fkfll into Watery and is therefore oj the Fleflu His Hifiory of Infant-Baptifml cl6(^ His Sir might have had the Senfe to have told him, that as St. Taul faying that the true Circum- cifion is that of the Hearty in the Spirit^ and not in the Letter^ does not mean to deny the Being of the outward Circumcifion in the Letter, orFlefh but only that the other was the Chief. So LaBan- tins faying what he does there, does not mean to deny the Being of the outward walhing of the Flefh i but only that the other was much more to be regarded. P. 448. Where I had faid that this Saying of Jufiin is to the fame Senfe as that of St. Paul^ Col. ii. 1 1, 12. where he calls Baptifm (with the putting off the Body of the Sins of the Flefh, which attends it) the Circumcifion of Chrifi^ or (as it might more agreeably have been rendered) the Chrifiian Circumcifion. He anfwers, Firft, The Scriptures no where call Baptifm, Circum- cifion. A pretty way of arguing . As if that were not Scripture, which I cited. He proceeds, Now if Baptifm is never called Circumcifion in Scripture^ &Ci How natural and ncceffary does it appear^ to -under- ftand the Circumcifion^ Col. ii. to mean^ not Baptifm hut Purtty of Heart ? This is not againit me, but againfl St. Paul ; who, notwithftanding that it is no where fo called in Scripture, ventures to tell thofe Chriftians that they were circumcifed with the Circumcifion of Chrifi^ being buried with him in Baptifm. Secondly^ He anfwers, that St. Paul can't mean Baptifm there; becaufe he calls the Circumcifion he there fpeaks of, the Circumcifion made without Hands : Now Baptifm is not made without Hands. This might have been ufed for an Argument (though a weak one) that St. Paul did not meaa Baptifm j if his Words had not expreffed Baptifm. But 270 ji Defence of the But as his Words ftand \ it has no other Inference, than that St. Taul fpoke improperly. But the Propriety of his Words may be well defended. Partly becaufe he here joins together the outward and the inward Part of Baptifm ^and fpeaks of them as confidered together. And partly becaufe p/e/poTo/ii7©- may very well be taken (as %s/p«p>/jt6f, a Word of the fame grammatical Im- port, commonly is) not for every Work or Thing in which Mens Hands are at all ufed^ but for a Thing done by Chirurgical Operation, as Cir- cumcifion was. He fays. If the Circumcifion here called the Chrifiian GrcurHcifan, do confift both of the inter- nal and external Part of Baptifm ; it can't be cal- led Circumcifion without Hands j becaufe one Part of that is performed with Hands \ but St. PauN direft AflTertionis, that That which he fpeaks of, is done without Hands, and confequently cannot be Baptifm. But could he not fee that St. Taul does as di- reflly aflert that it is by being buried with Chrifi in Baptifm, as he does the other? What avails arguing that the Words Ihould not be fo, when they plainly are fo ? If one of thefe two Confc- quences muft be allowed ; either that St. Paul con- tradids himfelf, or elfe that this is a cavilling Ar- gument *, I doubt our Author and his Sir will come by the worfe. P. 451. Whereas I had faid that the Antients in Conformity to this Phrafe of St. Paul, were wont to call Baptifm is-z^i]o[aw d'xzfpo'sroinjov^ the Cir- cumcifion done without Hands j he fays, If my Mean- ing be, that they called the outward Part of Bap- tifm, Circumcifion without Hands ; He has a more honourable Opinion of them, than to fuppofe they could be fo grofly abfurd. I gave at this very Place References to the following Chapters of my Book, Hifory of InfMt-BAftijm. 2yi Book, in which Chapters I fet down at large their own Words where they do call it {o. He has the Forehead to fay, the Pajfages «f the Antients^ our Author refers to, I have conjulted particularly, and J'm pure they fay no fuch Thing. 1 am not much afraid that any that know me and him, will count me to be indeed a Liar upon his giving me the Lie. But I will fet down here again fo m.uch of them as is neceffary for the Reader to fee whether he be one, or not. In my Twelfth Chapter, Part I. here referred to, I recited the chief Paflages of St. Ba/irs Ser- mon againji the delaying of Baptifm. He that reads either the Sermon it felf, or the Sentences which 1 recited out of it, will fee that it fpeaks of the outward Part ^ i. e. the Baptifm it felf of their Bodies. I do not fay, that he excludes the inward Graces that God would work in their Souls, but wfes the Word as comprehending both. And to thofe who put off their Baptifm from Day to Day^ he addrefles himfelf thus. " A Jew does not delay Circumcifion becaulc *' of the Threatning that every Soul that is not cir- *' cumcifed on the eighth Day Jliall be cut ojffrom his *' People'^ and doeft thou delay the Circumcifion " made without Hands, a.-^it^anroiinlov 'snpijo/jt.yiv in the " putting off the Flefij, which is performed in Bap- tifm, when thou hearelt the Lord himfelf fay • Verily, verily, I fay unto you ', except one be born of Water and of the Spirit, he jhall not enter into the Kingdom of God? In the Fourteenth Chapter (there referred to likewife) I (hewed how St. Aufiin quoting this Paflage in his Difputes with Julian 1. 2. comr. JuL c.9» (but miftaking it to be a Sermon of St. Chry.. fofiom's) after reciting the forcfaid Words, fpeaks himlelf thus j Tou fee how this Man efiabUjhed in the 272 A Defence of the the Ecclejiajlicd DoBrine compares CircmHciJton to Circumcifiont and Threat to Threat. That which it is not to be circumcifed on the Eighth Day ; T'hat it is not to be baptized in Chrift : And what it it t^ be cut off from his People ^ that it is, not to eni ter into the Kingdom of Heaven. And yet you [[Pelagians] fay, that in the Baptifm of Infants the^e is no putting off the Flefl}^ i. e. no Circumcifion made without Hands ^ when you affirm, &c. I quoted alfo in the fame Chapter St. Chryfoftom himfelf, in his Horn. Fortieth in Genefin taking no- tice of the Fain and Trouble that was in Circumci- iion •, and how favourable God is to Chriftians in the Baptifm that he has appointed them in lieu thereof, in thefe Words j 'h ^{jcnripct. 'mpfJoiAri, &c. But our Circumcifion, I mean. The Grace of Baptifm^ gives Cure without Fain, &c. And it has no deter^ minate Time as that had ', but one that is in the very Beginning of his Age^ or one that is in the MidAle cf it, or one that is in his old Age, may receive Tourm 7w iyiip'Tr'^inioy ^ipt\ofj.YiV This Circumcifion made without Fiands. This is meant plainly of Baptifm it felfj and not merely of the internal Effeds* Thefe Places Mr. Gale fays he bad particularly confulted ; and, not daring to recite them, he aG- fores the Reader (who will never hereafter give him Credit) that they fay no fuch Thing. More of the Fathers fpeaking of Baptifm being to us inftead of Circumcifion, I referred to. Fart II. Chap. 10. §. i. As Origen, Cyprian.^ ^^^g' Naz.. Ouafl: ad Orthodoxos. St. Ambrofe, &:c. At iait he fays, that if the Fathers, and St. Faul too, do fpeak of Baptifm as I pretend ^ yet this does not affed /«/4»f- Baptifm -, and then runs on vaporing about the Want of Confequence from Infant-Circumcifion to Infant-Baptifm. But Hiftory of Infrnt-Baptifm. 27* But then why did he not i*ay this at firft ? A Man that has true Grounds to defend any Pro- pofition, is a mad Sort of Difputant, if he ftrive a long time to defend it by fuch as are manifeft- ly and notorioufly falfe. For whatever becomes of the Confequence \ it is notorious that St. ?aui and the antient Chriftians do fpeak of Baptifm as being inftead of Circumcifion \ and a Man does but difgrace his Caufe by denying it. The Rules by which he would overthrovv the Confequence, arc, if one mind the Logic of them, extremely ridiculous. We argue, that the Scripture ordering Circumcijion to be given to Infants as a covenanting and initiating Seal^ and ordering afterward Baptifm to be the covenanting and initiating Seal inftead of it, does by Confe- quence order Baptifm to be given to Infants. H« fays, This Confequence does not hold, becaUfe it is not ordered to be given to Infants. Which eve- ry one fees to be the Woman's Reafon, the deny- ing the Conclufion. Therefore P. 452. That he may give fomething like a Man's Reafon, he maintains that the Principle upon which the Argument proceeds, (vIk.. that what was done in refpeft to Circumcilion, mulb be done now in refped to Baptifm) does not hold in two other Particulars. One of the Time, the Eighth Day; the other of the Male Sex, to which Circumcifion was limited. And fo need not be fuppofed to hold in this. To the firft of thefe •, I had ftiewed him Chaf, 6: what a large and full Anfwer was given by St. Cym frian and the Concil in their Epiftle toFtij, who had made a like Objection concerning the Eighth Day as he does here : Not to oppofe Infant-Bap- tifm> but to tye it to the Eighth Day. They ihcw that ignorant Difputer, that the Circumftance of the Day was typical j and had not, by the T Mature 2JJ^ 'A Defence of the Nature of the Thing, the rame Reafon in the Spiritual Circumcijion (lb they call Baptifm) as it had ia the Carnal Circumciiion. Kow this does not prove but that the Principle may hold in all Points that are material, fubftantial and of mo- ment. The Second, concerning the Sex, is, we allow, a Difference of Moment •, as it determines the ad- mitting or rejeding all Females from the Seal of the Chriftian Covenant j in like manner as this prefent Difpute determines the admitting or rejedting all Males and Females too under fuch an Age. But he fliould have confidered that we hold the forementioned Principle [[what was done in refpeft to Circumciiion, muft be done in refpedt to Baptifm^ with this Exception; Vnlefs where Chrift has ordered an Alteration. As he has in this Point exprefly. For St. Paul fpeaking of the Chriftian Baptifm, (7««/.iii. 27,28. tells us, that whereas there had been a Difference made between Jews and Gentiles^ and between Males and Females ; there (hould be no difference made in either of thefe Gales as to Baptifm into Chrift. So many of you as have been baptised into Chrift^ &c. "there is wither Jew nor Greek, &c, Tloere is neither Male nor Female \ for ye are all one in Chrift Jefus. Now fuch an exprefs Exception in thefe particular Ca- fes ftrengthens the Law Cor, Principle] in all Ca- fes not excepted. Mr. Gale (hould, if he could, ihew us an Exception as clear ^s this concerning^ Infant and Adult % that though Infants were ad- mitted to the one Seal, they Ihould not be admit- ted to the Other. Though all this be plain and obvious, and fuch as not only any Clergyman, but almoft any ordi- nary Layman, could have told him ; yet he with his ufual Infolcnce infults all the Clergy upon it. And fays ^' 454i Wflory of lnfant~Bapifm\ 27.5 P. 454. If they were to confider the Matter more deliberately^ they would be ajhamed of all they have urged upon this Head* True genuine Arrogance ! He thinks himfelf ca- pable of making all the Clergy alhamed of their Arguments. It brings to one's Mind the Chara- fter which UwStokesf. 51. gives of the Antipjedo- baptifls (which I would not apply to all^ but fome, I fee, can come up to it) He having therfe concluded that Infant- Baptifra muft have been at the Time he fpeaksof, univerfally received, not oaly by fome particular Churches or Men, as they pretend, but by all Chriftians from hence ^ that there do not appear to have been any Debates or^ Difputes againfl: it, adds " There were certainly no Antipasdobaptifts in *' thofe Days ^ or elfe their Temper was quite dif- '' ferent from ours. Ours are, many of them, ib *' pofitive in this Controverfy, as to unchurch all *' that differ from them ; and of fych Martial " Souls, as that a diminutive Fellow of fcarce com- " mon Senfe fhall challenge Men of the brigbtefl: *'■ Parts." And a little after j Was there not a Dan- vers 'nor a Gale ? />. 454. Where I had brought a Paflage of St. 3^«/z«'s Apology (owning at- the fame time that it does not make direftly or immediately for or againit Infant-Baptifm) he will have it to make againit it ^ and that for thefe roiferable iReafons. Flrft^ If the Chriftians then had baptized In^ fants ^ he would have mentioned it in order to re- move out of the Emperors Mind all Sufpicion of iliheir murdering Infants and eating them. To which far fetched Imagination of his, vented be- fore in his firft Chapter, and brought here again, T 2 Ian- .^j6 A Defence of the I anfwercd there more thaa fuch a grQundlefs Cuefs could defer ve. Secondly^ He would have this Paflagc to make againft Infant-Baptifm-, becaufe 'jvftin there dc- -fcribes only fuch Circumltances as are proper to adult Perfons, as makiag their voluntary Choice "and Profeffions, &c. and does not mention their bringing their Children to Baptifm. This is no wonder *, fince he did not go about to inftruft the Emperor and Senate in all the Principles and Tenets of the Chriftian Religion *, but only to fhew that their Sacraments had no harm in them, but were innocent and pious. What be here talks of my making, and the Church of ■England making two Baptifms, one for the adult, another for Infants ; is nothing but a Sample of the infolent Liberty he takes to fay any thing, true or falfe, of any Man or any Church. They uie fome Prayers and Exhortations differing in the different Cafes j and that he calls two Sorts of Baptifm. And what he obferves of Jufiins faying, that our firfl; Generation is without our Knowledge or Choice •, but that a Heathen Man (for of fuch he there fpeaks) comes to this Baptifm (which is his Re- generation, or fecond BirthJ of his own Will and Choice •, is no more than he would have faid of any Profelytes voluntary entring into God's Co- venant by Circumcifion (which the 'jews, as I Jhewed, did alfo call his Regeneration) TheAdulc Profelyte did partake of this Regeneration by his own Choice. This is no Proof but that his In- fant Children had the fame Circumcifion and Re- generation, by their Parents dedicating them, and God's gracious Acceptation. ^' 4S7: HiJloYj of Infant'Baptifm. ^jj P. 457. I had faid that this Paflage of Jvfim is the mofi antlent Account of the way of hafizjng next the Serif ture. Mr. Gale adds, And that was by dip^ ping, which I do not deny to have been general- ly and ordinarily fo. And whereas he adds far- ther; Juftin here mentions only adult Perfons. I grant that too. But his next Words ^ He elfe-^ where plainly excludes Infants from being then };aptiz.ed in the Church, are an open Fallhood. And the next ; He fays that adult Perfons only can or ought to be haptiz^ed ^ are a downright Forgery ; and jolt like thofe of Danversy which I mention in a like Cafe, Part U. Chap. i. §. 5, Let him for Shame find where Juflin fays fo-, or elfe take to himfelf the Name of a Forger of Sayings for the Father s* P. 458. I had obferved that Juftin in that Paflage ufes the Word ^Regeneration, or" being born anew] for Baptifm •, and lo he does plainly. We bring them Qthe new Converts] to the Water .^ and they are regenerated by the fame way of Regeneration l*^ which we were regenerated. For they ar? wajhed with Water in the Name, &C. For Chrifi fays^ except you be regenerated you cannot enter, ^c ' \ Mr. Gale objefts, that though he talk of their being regenerated and join it pretty clofely fvith their being baptized ; yet he does not fay, Baptifm is Regene- ration. And then he brings two Places more of the fame Dialogue : One, where Jufiin fays ; We ar^ regenerated by him, by Water, Faith, and the Tree, Another ', Him that is wajlied with the Laver which is fir Remiffion of Sins and Regeneration. And thinks that thefe and the like Expreflions make againlt >niy AITertion •, whereas they are fo many Confir- mations of it. He fays, "Jufiin only thought that we, fome how or other obtained or fealed, 5cc. our Regeneration by Baptifm, as a Mean or Sign, ^c. jufi as wealfo obtain Remijjlon of Sins thereby, but not tha^ Baptifm is Remijfion of Sins or Regeneration* T 3 Thus IE78 [^ befefice of the Thus he would efcape. As if our Argument clepended upon a formal Or logical Identity of the Things. When I fay, that by regenerated they always iliean haptiz.ed •, I mean no more, nor does the Ar»- gument need any more, than that Re£eneratim does in their Senfe of the Word always imply ot connote Baptifm : So that if any Author of thefe Times do fpeak of any Perfon, Infant or Adult, regenerated', we are to fuppofe him bapHz.ed. I CxprefTed it Co at feveral Places, ^sCmp. 11. §. 4. Tlsey fo appropriated that Word to Baptifm^ as to ex- dime any other Converfiott or Repentance that is not accompanied with Baptifm, from being fgnifiedhy »V. Of which I give there feveral plain Proofs. The Authors which I cite, there, and through all the Book, do not ftand upon the metaphyfical Quid- dity or formalis ratio of the Things *, but do fome- times call it the Regeneration of Baptifm ; fometimes the Regeneration by Baptifm'^ fometimes the Bap' iifm of Regeneration ('which is St. PauCs Phrafe, Ttt. iii. $.) or, Baptifm for Regeneration. They ge- nerally underftand by it, a complex Notion of the outward Aft of Baptifm accompanied with that Grace or Mercy of God, whereby he receives the Perfon into a new Covenant, or new Spiritual State, (fo grofly. quibbling is Mr. Gale\ Evafion here *, He mufi doubt lefs mean feme farther Regtnf" ration than bare wafhing ; as if I had ever argued that the bare wafhing^ which is only the outward Part, were the Whole, either of Baptifm or Rege- neration^ PvCgeneration,, in the Senfe of the Fathers, is, (if we muft formally define it) Doe Change of the Spiritual State of any Perfon granted by God in Baptifm. And what is fairly concluded from their general ufe of the Word, is this, That they give that Term of regenerated to none but baptized Perfons, Of Hifiory of Infatit'Baptifm\ ]zj^ • Of this Obfervation, he f^iys, I mean to make fome ufe afterward. And whylhould I not, fince it is an undeniable one? And the fame may be obierved to a good and fair Purpofe, of the Term ''a>/©-, a Saifjt^ or Holy, and feveral others which are never given but to baptized Perfons, and are in Scripture or the Fathers given to fonie Infants. P. 460. When I obferved that Jujiin does here underftand that Rule of our Saviour, John iii. 5. Except any one he horn again y &c. of Water-Bap- tifm i and that all the Writers of thofe firft Four Hundred Years, not one Man excepted, did un- derftand it fo \ he finds out my Defign, viz. to have it believed that Juflin thought that That .Rule includes Infants. Which, he fays, is ab- furd, when I had owned before, that Juftin isipeak- ing there of adult Perfons. But there is no Abfurdity in it*. For Jultin^ though fpeaking there of adult Perfons, may give a Rule out of Scripture for the Neceflity of their Baptifm •, Which Rule may reach to the Cale of all Perfons, Adult or Infant, that Ihall enter the Kingdom, P. 451. In another Pafiage of 7w^'«'s Apology, concerning fome Chriftians of bis Time, Sixty or Seventy Years old, who, he fays, ln.mrauJ'Su e//«t.^«- '}iu^»a-Av tJ Xp/r6) were (as I tranflated it) difcipled ^or, made Difciples] f^ Chrifiin their Childhood -^ He would have i[jutBt{}i6^ij other Reafon, but becaufe it appears that /re- n^us was in that Chapter (but not nigh the Place where he fpeaks of infants regenerated) miftaken in a Point of Chronology •, by which Reafon he might condemn the Books, not oaly of all the antient Chriftlan Writers, but of aU Writers what- ' foever of thofe Tfmes. They having in thofe Times no common ata to ■reckon by (as we have now the Year of our Lor4) But fome reckoned only by the Confulfhips of the City of Rome (as if we had no other way of dating, than by the Mayoralties of the City of London) and fome by the Years of their Kings, or of the Emperors of Rome^ whofe Years were always in divers Countries diverfly computed, according as their Conquefts extended to each Country. They, i fay, having no better Method than thefe, did never write the Hiftory of any Thing much be- fore their own Time with any accuracy of Chro- nology, This ' Bifiory of Irrfant-BAftifml '2S5 This all Chronologers know to be the Cafe ; And even Mr. GMe (though he feems to be but little vcrfed in that Study) muft know fo much of it, as to be fenfible that all Men of Learning would (light this his Exception. But what cares he for that, fo it pafs with his People ? fie fays, Cardinal Baronim has obferved this ; jinnal. Eccl. ann, 34. He and many other Chronologers, have given their Opinion againlV the Determination of Irena- us in this Chapter, and elfewhere in his Book, that our Saviour lived to above Forty Years of Age. But he, it feems, not minding that this is (aid bj Iremtss at other Places as well as here, did cafl: in fome doubtful Words, whether this Thirty Ninth Chapter were not interpolated at that Place ; but not any concerning the Place which we are upon, that fpeaks of all Ages regenerated. Mr. Gale fays. The Cardinal's Rcafbas have, he thinks^ never yet been anfwered. Ko Body is able to help his thinking. But the Reafons, as they were at firft abfurd, have t)eea anfwered, not only by Cafaubon, Dodwell^ Petavi$is^ (whom Mr. Gale bimlelf mentions as anfwering) but by Feuar dentins^ who in hi^^Second Edition of JreriAm (hews irrefragably, that one cannot judge this Chapter to be fpurious from IrenAtus wrong Computation of the Years of Chrift's Life, that is made in it ; becaufe the fame miftaken Computa- tion is in th« Fortieth Chapter, where he not only fays the fame as he does here, but alfo brings a Text of Scripture, John viii. 57. T'hou art not yet Fifty Tears old, to ftrengthen his Opinion. This Mr. Gale fhould have feen, and fpared him- felf, and his Reader, and me, the Trouble of a Ca- vil of Ten Pages againfl: the Authenticalnefs of this Paffage about Baptifm^ only becaufe there is in the fame Chapter a Computation (which is per- haps iiS4 -^ Defence of the baps a miftaken one) about the Length of Cfjrljfi Jige. He fhews Irenxm'% Miftake in Chronology ^which is nothing to our Purpofe) and his owa Skill in it, atfuch a Rate, that if a Book were.to be accounted Spurious for having Miftakes and Contradidions in that Art \ his, as well as Bar^ mm^s^ mult be counted fo. There are many great Difficulties in that Study ^ and not more ia any Part of it, than in that which is im- ployed in enumerating the Years of our Saviour^s .Life. Barmius could folve them no better than by ma- king Herod live Nine or Ten Years longer than -be did. Which is a more palpable Miftake than any of Irenatts-^ and in which Spondanus would willingly have forfaken him ; but he excufes him- lelf, that he was an Epitomizer of Baronim, not a Critic upon him. Dr. Allix calls it, BaronimH Dream. Axidk^-Gale hasdream'd moreabfurd- ly, as we (hall fee. But firft he recites here, asagainft himfelf, what Cafaubarty and Mr. DodmU, and Petavius have faid in excufe for Irenecm. What the two Firft pleaded, does not foperti- nently come in hece. But the Anfwer that Peta^ vius gives, is certainly and plainly the true One. Jremm was engaged againft the VaUntinUm. Thefe Heretics made fome Advantage, for their wicked and blafphemous Tenets, of the Notion (which though a miftaken one, was then common) that Chrift preached but one Year after his Baptifm. Iren&m overthrows, not only the wild Opinions which they built upon this Notion, but the Noti- on it felf j and tells them, that they who pre- tended to have found out the deep Things of God, had not the Senfc to obferve in the plain Text of the Gofpel, how many PafTovers our Lord af- ter his Baptifm is mentioned to have kept at Hifiory of Infant-Bapifm, 285 JerufaUm. And he inftances in Three. One men- tioned, Johnii. 13,23. Another, Johnv. i. And the Third, that at which he was crucifiedk And adds, that the Vdentiniam making him to have lived but one Year after his Baptifm, do take away that which was the mofl necejfary and horn- rable Part of his Life, •!//«.. that in which he had the Age of a Mafier, or, 'teacher (^Magiftri, S'lii'a.a-KAKK^ I fuppofe) and was Senior^ an Elderly Man. For that at his Baptifm he was not full Thirty, but as St. Luc exprefles it, beginning to he about Thirty, Now the Age of Thirty, fays he, is the Age of Youth ^ and it reaches to Forty. Then at Forty or Fifty a Man comes in atatem Seniorem, to his elderly Age % and that Age our Lord had when he was a Teacher. Quam atatet/t hahens Dominus nojier docehat^ Petavius owns this Account to be a raiftaken One ; yet (hews that here is nothing wherein /rr- naus can be faid to contradidt himfelf^ he ob- {erves that he owns our Saviour at his Baptifm to have been but Thirty, or not fo much ^ nay, that he urges it. And, that he quotes the mention of three Paflbvers after that ; which was enough to confutetheOpinionofhis living but one Year after. But that he fuppoJes at the lame Time, that be- tween Chrift's Baptifm and his beginning to Preach, there paffed fo many Years as did make up the V Years after his Baptifm to amount to above Tcn^ and perhaps Twenty, ». e. that after he was bap- tized, he (laid feveral Years before he entered on his Office of Preaching*, fo that he lived in all above Forty, and perhaps nigh Fifty. ^ This Petavius takes to have been Jrenans's Hy- pothefis concerning the Years of Chrift's Life. Mr. Gale fays. He does not attempt to prove this^ and does not, or will not fee that Irenau/s ^.Owa Words do plainly prove . U. trtginta ijui- d(ft§ 2^6 ji Defence of the dem amorum exlfiem, cum veniret ad baptifmum • Deinde Magifiri Atatem perfectam habens venit Hie» rufalemf &c. He was but Thirty Tean old when he came to Baptifm. Then afterward when he had the complete Age of a Mafter^ or, Teacher (which he in the fame Chapter defines to be Fortyj He came to Jerufalem. So that it is plain Jrenans thought, there paf- fed ten Years ('the Difference between Thirty and Forty) between his Baptifoi and his firft going up to Jerufalem. Kow that firft going to Jerufa- lem was at, or prefently after the beginning of his Preaching: as appears, John ii. is* Though this be very plain ^ and though it be jaftly accounted a bafe Thing for any Writer in a Difpute againft an Author of Credit, not to grant fo much as that Author makes out plainly and convincingly \ but to brawl and con- tradid eternally right or wrong j yet Mr. Gtde^ not regarding who Petavim was, and how much the Learned World owes him in point of Chro- nology ^ not only flights his Account of the Senfe of this Place, which is a very juft One •, but throws at him (as he does every where round about upon any that he thinks it his Intereft to villify) feme of that Dirt and Contempt which is fo natural to him. It amounts to nothing. ^Tis too wild and fanciful a ConjeEhure^ founded purely upon Petavius'j Imagination. Very pleafant indeed. ^Tis wly begging the Ouefiion-, &c. When a Difputant has nothing of Senfe or Truth to oppofe to an Argument ^ this Faculty of contemptuous facing and brawling it out, is of con- iiderable Ufe before an ignorant Mob^ but no where elle. If the Plea be, that Irenam was wrong in this Computation ^ and that the Time of fontius Vi-r Ute\ continuance la his Office of Governour ha- ying Hiftary of Iftfant'Baptifm. 287 ving been but Ten YearE (or a little above) in aii fas the Roman Hiftories and Jofephusdo fiiew) And John's Baptifm having begun in Pilate's Time, Luc. Wi. I. Our Saviour's Death, which was alfo in PfUte*s Time, could not be much above tea Years after his Baptifm ; this muft be confelled ; nor does PetaviHideny it. But Jrenms might be ignorant of thefe Chronological Charaders, ho«r long Pilate held the Office (for there is no plain Footfteps of thetn in the Gofpeis) or might not remember them, or not animadvert to theoi. And fo this Chapter may be genuine. As it ap- pears plainly to be by the Style and Method, and it* coherence with the next Chapter, and by thefe two Chapters being the only ones that treat on one of the Heads propofed in the firlt Chapter of the firft Book to be treated on. What JrenAus adds, That antient Men who had teen in Company with St. 'John in jifla, did te- ftify that he did u(e to fpeak of our Saviour as of one that had arrived before his Death ad Atatem Se^ niorem^ to an elderly Age •, and that fomc other of the Apoftles, whom fome of the faid antient Men •tiad feen, did fpeak to the fame Purpofe; is with- out Ground made another Proof of the SpuriouC- nefs of the Book. It is not faid that St. 'john^ or the other Apo- ftles, named any number of Years \ only ufed the general Word Atai Senior. And that That mult imply Forty or more Years, is only Iremns^ No- tion of the Word. The feveral Stages of Man^s Life, Childhood, Youth, mature Age, &c. have, ■in different Countries, different Meafures by the 'KJ'it of the Place afligned to them. Befide that in the Truth of the Matter Irmam was not lb much miftaken as many have thought. By making our Saviour live to Forty, he is, if miftaken at all, yet nearer the Truth tbaa Mr. Galt^ wh» 288 A Defence of th$ who talks of Thirty or Thirty One. So that his fevere Imputation on Irenam ; If he was guilty of fo palpable a ContradiUiotf \ he is not to he trvjied in any Cafe, redounds, on hinfifelf. And put the Cafe, thaC Jremiu had fallen into a Contradidion of himfelf in this Computation of Years long paft ; would it follow from thence that he could not give an Account of Things of his own Time, that In- fants did ufe to be regenerated, or baptized ? Mr. Gale thinks that at that Time they could not be ignorant of the Circumftances of Time re- lating to Chrift's Birth. That is fo far from be- ing true, that at that Time they did not know thofe Circumftances that were more obvious than the Years of his Age. They knew not then, nor do we know yet, whofe Daughter the BlelTed Vir- gin, his Mother, was; nor whether thofe that are called his Brothers and Sifters, were only his Kinf- men, or Kinfwomen, or were the Children of his reputed Father, or even (as fome now venture to fay) of his Mother. The Number of Years that hefpent in Preaching was a Thing much more ob- vious and likely to be known, than thofe of his Age. And yet many before Iremus^ thought it continued but one Year-, and fome after ward, even learned Men, continued in that vulgar Error. T'er- tullian^ Africanus^ Clem, Alex. &:c. fuch poor Chro- nologersthey were \ and fo incurious were they (provided they reraembred the Miracles, and pra- difed the Precepts) concerning the Time or Year in which they were done, or delivered. p. 468. Our Author will no longer fight under Baroniush Banner, nor encounter Petavius alone in iingle Combat on his Behalf; but will fet up for himfelf a Chronological Demonftration. And ic feems to be the firft of that Nature that ever he ventured on. A Man never expofes himfelf io much, as when he will aeeds talk confidently of Things Hiflory of hfant-Bitptifw] ^2g Things he underftands not, Declaming here will not do j nor a good Face and Aflurance. He has the fame Fate that another Adverfary, which Pe- tavius had in his Life time, cameHto ; who having publi(hed a Chronology, for which he highly va- lued himfelf (as fome ignorant Readers think our Author has fhewed great Learning in this) Peta" 'vius taking it to task difcovered moft egregious Blunders in it ; advifed him never more to pretend to a Mafterftiip in that Sort of Learning ^ but fuch a Chronologer, fays he, Difci^ulorum inter juheo plorare cathedrai, I Ihall not trace the Demonftration along hy^ its feveral Steps. It takes up Eight Pages. It, I mean, and the large Encomium of the late Glo^ riousj &c. in the Belly of it •, whofe coming into England is pertinently brought in, to illuftrate the Notoriety of the Time of Chrift's coming into the World. One, he fays, could no more be forgot than the other. It traces in a notable manner the Years of Chrift's Life compared with thofe of the Empe- rors, fometimes upward, foraetimes downward. He demonftrates Chrift to have lived, fometimes but l^'hirty One Years •, fometimes but Thirty ; fometimes Thirty Three. And Tiberius's Time af- ter the Death of Augujlus, (which is known by every Hiftorian to a Day^ fometimes Twenty, fometimes Twenty Three. As if a difference of Three Years were nothing in a Difpute, which is but about Five or Six in all. In the Search after the Year of Chrift's Birth, he ridiculoufly takes it for granted that he was born the firft Year of the common ara. And many fuch proofs of his Skill there are. 29© ^ Defence of the Many Difputes of Learned and Unlearned, of Antients and Moderns, have been concerning our Saviour's Age. Whoever of them be in the Right, it is certain Mv.Gale is in the Wrong-, who in fpite to Iremus making it to be but of Thirty, or Thirty One, or Thirty Three Years, does by con- fequence make him to be born after Herod was dead ^ and fo by another Confequence does, in- Iteadof proving Iren^im's Book fpurious, prove St. Matthew's (which places his Birth in the Days of Herod) to be fo. For it is fo plain by Cir- cumftances, as to be now uncontroverted, that Herod died in the Vear of the Jtilian Period 4710. And hardly any do maintain the Contrary, but that our blelfed Saviour died in the Year of the fame Period 4745. from which Thirty Three or Thirty Four reach back but to 4712 or 13. And yet the Circumftances of the Star ; the Wife Men coming from the Eall ^ the Forty Days of the blelTed Virgin's Purification ^ the Return to Naz^a- reth \ the Flight into Egyft, and Stay there • are Proofs that the Nativity of Chrift was a confide- rable time before Herod's Death. This Ignorance is the more palpable and fliame- ful, becaufe, though he had no Skill in Chronolo- gical Calculations (as 'tis plain he has not,, and therefore fhould not have pretended to difcufs fuch ThingsJ yet he may be fuppofed acquainted with our Englijh Bible : in feveral Editions where- of, for the Ufe of Readers unskilful in fuch Mat- ters, the Years of Chrift's Life are fet in the Mar- gin againfl the feveral Paffages of it ; and he might have feen the Thirty Sixth Year fet to the iaft of them. If this were only in the Church- Bibles 'j he might be fuppofed never to have feen. them. But the leller Editions with the fame Chro- nological Notes are common in the Hands of Chil- dren that learn to read theBibk% There Hifiory of Infant-'Ra,ptifml 291 There have been Chriftians fo ignorant of this Matter, as to think our Saviour lived but Thirty One Years (whom A-f;;^w here confutes) but none" for thefe laft Thoufand Years. And there have been fince fome, that thought he lived but Thirty Three. But none that had ftudied that Point (ex- cept Mr. Gale) for thefe Hundred Years. The Thirty Third Year of the common ^r^ is indeed the Year on which almofl: all do place his Death.' But he that does not yet know that the Beginning of that Ara is feveral Years below the real Year of his Birth,. Ihould not have meddled with this Queftion. Were it not for onePafTage in St. Luc iii. ^i: (that our.Saviour in the 1 5th Year of Tiberius^ when he was baptized, began to be about Thirty Tears of j4ge) all the other Circumftances mentioned in the Gofpel Hiftory, are fuch from which one would have guefled, as /r^«^«j does, that he had lived to an elder Age. That Paflage has tortured all Chronologers who have gone about to reconcile it with Matt. ii. i,&c. that his Birth was in the Days of Herod the King. For the 15th of Tibe^ rius (taking it according to the common Con ftru- dion) began Aug. 1 9. in the Year of Jul. Per. 4741. (fourteen Years then expiring, and the 15th be- ginning from the Death of Auguftus ^ which was Aug. 19. 4727.) Now Herod having died (as I faid) in the Year 4710. (a little before the Paf- . fover, as Jofephus fhews) Thirty Years reckoned upwards from Aug. 19. 4741. reach back no far- ther than to Aug. 19. in the Year 471 1. Which is a Year and upwards after Herod's Death. So that fome greater Skill in thefe Matters, than our Author Ihews, is neceflary to explain thele two Places of Scripture fo as that one of them may not be contrary to the other. U 2 Bifhop 29^2 A Defence of the Bifliop Pearfon (who had ftudied this Matter as deeply as any one) does in his LeStiona in ABa Adoft. fhew the Difficulties which (till remain in this Computation. Some of which I will here fct down, that they may abate the Confidence of any Writer of our Author's fcantling \ who is fo far from being able to overcome them, that he does not know of them •, and yet reproaches St. Jren^us for being in fome Miftake in a Calculation which no Man then or fince has been able certainly to fix \ but in no Miftake fo grofs as Mr. CaWi own are. Bifhop Pearfon had faid that the Beginning of the Chriftian Church is to be fixed at that Pemecofi mentioned, ABs ii. and then adds, But what Tear that was in Cor, which is all one, what Year it was in which Chrift died] does mt^ J think, appear from the Scripture, Nor is there any CharaSier left^ which does certainly and determinately fix it. That Chrifl was born under the Reign of Herod, toe know. How many Tears he fChrift] lived, is not certainly known- We know that he was born in the 'time of the Taxing made by Cy renins. But what Tear that was-, the Annals do not teach. Therefore there can no certain and undoubted Epocha be made from the true Time of our Saviour^s Birth, That John began the Office of baptiz.ing in the i%th Tear of Tiberius, is certain* But how long he had exercifed it, before Chrifl was baptized by him ^ How foon Chrifi after his Baptifm began to preach the Gofpel : How many Pajfovers there were between his Baptifm ftnd his Death ', does not yet fully appear &c. The moft antient Fathers have delivered nothing cer- tain about the Tears of Chrijl^s Life. The Opinion of hit Preaching but one Tear {which is manifeftly falfe) m it began too early ^ fo it prevailed a long time. nat Hifiory of Infant-Ba^tifi^. 2 9 J that Chrifi was crucified under Pontius PiJate, is certain. But Jofephlis briefly fajfes over the Af- fairs of Pilate in Judasa, and does not diflinguijh his feveral Tears, That the vulgar xra is not true (as to the Time of Chrifl^s Birth^ we may be fure ; fince it does not reach back to the Time of Herod j nor to Thirty Tears above the I %th of Tiberius. Thefe are tlie Tilings wliich Mr. Gak thinks IrenAus muft know, all of them. Though he him- felt knows none of them. As for the Year of Chrifl's Death, which Bifhop Tearfon thinks not certainly and determinately known ; he himfelf a little after (becaufe one that would recite the Hiftory of any PafTages in a Chrono- logical Order, muft fix fome Epocha or other) fixes it on the 19th of Tiberius, which is of the vulgar <rr's Ac- count of the Baptifm of Chrift, Anno Dom. 16. (which was the • 1 5th of Tiberius's Confortlhip in governing the Provinces ; but no more than the 13th of his full Imperial Power) is, that Pilate's Government in Judea could not begin fo foon as Ann. 26. Becaule he, as Jofephus fays, continued but Ten Years in theTlace ; And being fent for by Tiberius to anfwer for his Crimes, favcd his Neck by Tiberiush dying before he arrived at J^on7e. Now Tiberiuis Death was March 1 6. An- no Domini yj . Therefore Dv. AIHx thinks P//. ded toward the Uter End of Thirty Six he might have begun in Twenty Six. Whereas there is an Objection obvious againft Dr. jillix'^s Scheme •, that if our Saviour had bcea Thirty Three at his Baptifm, St. L«p, though he might have Ssiid, about Thirty^ yet would never Jl^ve ufed the Word d^yofizvO-^ he begun to ,be, or was near -, if he were Three Year^ above it. Hq anfwers, that Clem. Alex. Strom, i. reads it, not d^XouifB- but \^'xo(jt.zv'Q- (as he does indeed, '^Hf 3 lHi, The Word npfcx©- with a Genitive, foraetimes has both in Scripture and in other Authors, the Senfe and Property of 'zr^ypiQ-^ prior to, or before the Thing next mentioned. In John I. 15. and again, v. 30. it is of neceflity fo conftrued (as Dr. IVhitby obferves -arpfoTo? f^m «V. He was before me. And Nonnus in the Paraphrafe of that Place ufes both it, and 'tst^utit'^ fo. np27©- And there are feveral Examples of the like in the Creek Writers-, fome of which Dr. Whitby quotes in his Comment on this Place. The Senfe, I think requires that it (hould be fo rendered here ; In thofe Days there went out a Decree from C^far Auguftus that all the World fhould be taxed. This Taxing 'o-purti iyiv(\o was before that Cyrenius was Governour of Syria. Or, Before that Taxing which was made by Cyrenius when he was Go- vernour 0/ Syria. Every Body then remembred that Taxing. If Chrift had been born but then 5 he would not have been near Thirty when he fuffered. Tertullian mufl: needs have underftood it ^ol For he C 4. comr. Marcion. c. 19. fpeaks of the Enrolling or Regiftring at which Chrift was born as being known to have been in the time of 54- turninus's Government of Syria. Conflat^ fays he, Cenfus aBos fub Augvflo nunc {J.tunc^ in Judaaper Sentium Saturninum. It is known that there was at that Ttm tthe Time of Chrift^s Birth] a Re^ ^o6 J Defence of the i'tflritig of the People in Judssa made under Augnftu* hy SentiusSaturninus. Now if he took it to be ia the time of Satuminus ; he mufl: know that iC was not in the Time of Quinnius (for there was about Twelve Years diftance between Saturmnus'% going out of that Office, and Ouirinius''s coming into it) and confequently mufl: have underltood this Text of St. Lvc, not, wheriy but before Cyreni* us was Governour of Syria. This Interpretation of the Place is confirmed by the Difficulties which all, even the moft skil- ful Chronologers, that have taken it in the for- merly received Senfe, have found in reconciling i£ with the Hiltory of thofe Times. Baromus find- ing the Timesof Ouirinlus's Government of Syria too late for Chrift's Birth, thrufl;s it up Eight years without any other reconciling of Paflages, than faying broadly ^ Jofephus is miftaken. Others being aware that this is too grofs (for this Re- volurion of the State of Judaa is connected by Circumftances with the Roman Afrairs,j do allow this Taxing to have been at this time, as Jofephus fets it^ after Archelaus\ Banifhment. But then they think that there was another Regiftring or Taxing of the whole Empire before this, in He- rod's Time, under which Chrifl: was born : in which they are certainly in the right (Tacitus ^^"^Sy that j4ugvfius made fuch Rolls or Reviews morethaa once) But then they fuppofe farther that Qniri- fiitts was Governour of Syria then too. And {q the Words of the Engiipj and other Tranflations would infer.; Now this iafl is a very improbable Thing. Jo- fephus particularly names the Governours of Syria during the later Part of Herod's Reign. Not the Years indeed of each of them *, but by Circum- ftar.css, Titius muft have been Five or Six Years be- fore Hetod's Death: Prefently after he fpeaks of ' S^ Hifiory of Infam- Baptifm'. ^ of ■Sattirtiinui-, with whom Herod had much Converfe and Bulinefs ; and he feems to have held the Place Three or Four Years. And he fays exprelly that Saturnirius was fucceeded by Farus^ in whofe Time Herod died ^ after Varus had been his Keighbour (as one may judge by the Circumllances of their Ck)nverfe) about a Year. So that here is no room for Ouirinius, Some fuppofe therefore that Qui- rinius never was the ordinary Governour of Syria in any Part of Herod's Reign (for that would have been mentioned) but that while Saturninus or one of the other, was the ordinary Governour, Quiriniui was fent with an extraordinary Com- miffion to Tax Jud^, But this is very hard to fuppofe, while 7«(5f^^ had its own King. Thefe Sort of Governors were not fent, except into fuch Countries as were reduced to Provinces -^ as Syria had been now for a long time, hut Jud^a not yet. But fuppofe it •, ftill there does not feem any Rea- fon that jgtorder to tax the People of Judaa, he Ihould be^Ride Governour of Syria. The Tranflations do not make very good Senfe." They don't know what to do with the Word iF^tt^Tif. The Vulgar, H^c defcriptio prima faUa efi k Pra/ide Syria Cyrenio. Some mean by it, Hac frimadefcriptio: Others, Hdc defcriptio primhm faBa ejl. As ours, I'his "taxing was firfi made when, &c. Concerning any one taxing it can't properly be faid to be firfi made at fuch or fuch a Time : for one taxing is made but once. They who think Quirinius was twice Governour, would I fuppofe, if the Words would bear it, tranflate ^ This lax- ing was made when Cyrenius was Governor the firit time. But neither will the Words bear that Con- ftruftion \ nor is there any appearance that he was twice Governor. X 7. But ^o8 A Defence of the But if we underftand it •, Ihis was a Taxing [jK Regiftring] prior to, \jctr, before^ that which was when Cyrentus was Governor of Syria •, both the Word 'srptiTn is neceflary in the Sentence ^ and k agrees with the Hillory ot the Times. I know that Jufiin Martyr^ in his Apology to the Emperors, does fuppofe Chrift to have been born at that time when Ouirinius being made the ordinary Governor, did ux Judaa. His Words (hew that he means that time. Bor he calls Ouirinius the fir ft Governor of Judaa for the Ro- mans. During the Time of the Kings, the Romans had no other Governors in 'judAa but the Kings. But when Archelaus (the laft King, or Ethnarch^ there) did, as we call it, abdicate ^ then the Ro- mans fent Governors to receive the Taxes and Tribute. And of thefe Ouirinius was the firft. But for Jufiin to fet the Date of Chrift's Birth at this time, is a Miftake of above Ten Years, and proves nothing but (what 1 faid befgi|) that the Chriftians of thofe Times had no SkilWn keeping the Account of Time. Jraneus made no Miftake comparable to this. And yet no Body for this, has judged Jufiin^ Apology to be fpurious ; nor even for his Miftake of making Ptolomy Vhiladel- fbus contemporary with Herod^ which is a Miftake of above an Hundred Years. I have been larger in this than was needful for anfwering Mr. Gale. Every one fees how poor an Evafion it is, to deny the Authenticalneft of any antient Chriftian Book, becaule it has Miftakes in the Chronology of the Years of Chrift^s Life. The Explication I have given of St. Luke'^s Words concerning the Taxing does not I confefs fettle the Time of it : It Ihews it to have been before Quirinius's Time, (and io removes a puzzling Difficulty) but not how long before. I do not write thefe Things for UuGale^ to whom they arc Hifiory of Jnfant'-Bafufm, ^09 are ufelefs ; nor for the Learned in Chronology, to whom they are necdlefs ; but that the ordina- ry Reader may have a Conception of the Years fomething nigher the Truth. Let U5 fee fomeof Mr. Calis Arguments. P'^-jo. He fays, It was commonly known front tht Cenfual Rolls of Auguftus, at what T%me and at what "Place, oitr Lord was born. And therefore he thinks frenaufy or anv of the antient Chriftians, could IJOt raiftake the Time. To fay, It was commonly known, is grofs Igno- rance, if he thinks fo ^ and a grofs Abufe of his ignorant Reader, if he fay it without thinking io^ That there were Rolls of the Number of Citizens or Freemen in each Province, laid up for fome time in the Capitol, or fuch like Place is very probable. But there is no Account of any Chriftian that ever faw them ; nor likelihood that they might have had the Sight and fearching of them, to find the Name of any particular Per- fon, if they had defired it. But he talks as if they were common in every Bodie*s Hands. If any Chriftian had ever feen them, and had leen our Lord's Name Jefus regiftred, as the Son of Jo'- feph and Mary, born in fuch a Year of Amvftvs^ and had declared to his Fellow-Chriftians fuch his Account i this had at once ended all Difputes and Miftakes ; and all Chriftians after that would have agreed in one Account. Whereas we fee oa the Contrary, that thofe few of the Antients that about an Hundred and fifty or Two Hundred Years after the Time have faid any Thing about it, have differed very much ; not only Irenaus^ but all the reft. Neither they nor we having any plain Proof of the very Year when Chrift was born, or when that Cenfvs or Taxing was, but thefe Two : It muft have been in Herodh Time \ and it muft (if the Words are taken ftri^ly, and X 3 no ^^o 'A 'Defence of the Ho Miftake be in the Copies) have been at or Under the diftance of Thirty Years reckoned back from the 15th of Tiberius computed from fon\e Epocha; but ic is not certain from which. He fays, y«/?/« Martyr and Tertullian dodppeal to thefe Rolls kept at Rome. Juftin does at the Place I juffc now mentioned, 'jipl. 2. circa med.) tell the Emperors, that it had been prophefied that the Chrift fhould be born at Bethlehem, a Village nigh Jerufalem ; and that our Jefmwsis accordingly born there, Tou may^ fays he, learn from the Tax-Rolls made by CyrCnius, your firfi Governour in Judxa. He fappofed or guefled that there were then remaining in the Emperor's Cullody fuch Rolls, which they might, if they pleafe, fearch ; but it does not follow, that any one that would, might fearch them •, much lefs that any one had fearched them upon this Account. And the Saying of TertulUan imports no more. He fpeaks of them as of Rolls, which one might fuppofe to be. kept in the Roman Archives ^ not as though he had fcen them, or had any Account of any one that had; much lefs as though he knew what they contained concerning Chrift's Birth, or the Time of it. And indeed, if there were then any in Being, and Jufiin and he had been permit- ted to fearch them*, oneofthofe Two would have fearched in the Time of Ouirinius, arid the other in the Rolls of Safwmnus^as I Ihewed from their feverai Words. .' 'Tis probable enough that both of them were jnift^ken in their gueffing that the Names of par- ticular Perfons were fet down in them. Sup- pofe the Names of every one, and the Parents of every Child, were fet down in the firft Copies drawn up in the feveral Provinces*, yet it is like- ly that in thofe Copies fent to Rome and laid up ItiQTCy there was, recorded only the Number of Per- Hiftory of hfant-Bapifm. 311 P^rfons in each City, Tribe, &c. and the Value of the Eftates. Elfe, the Account of all the Pro- vinces and Kingdoms of that Empire would have filled Books too many for one Houfe to hold. In fhort, thefe Rolls, if. they had been fearched, might have given fome lights but fince no Body did fearch them : neither did Irenaus know, nor do we knov^, what was in them. Befides, that Iremus's Miftake was not in the Date of Chrift's Birth. H^ fets that at the 41ft of Auguftus-^ which is the Time, or within a Year of the Time, that the Chronoiogers would have it •, and which they think thofe Rolls, if they had been fearched, would have confirmed. His Miftake was in the Number of about Ten Years which he fnp- pofes our Saviour to have lived after his Baptifm, and before his Preaching : Which Number of Years the Time of Pontius Tilate reckoned by Jofephus to be but Ten Years, will not allow. He had not read, or did not mind, that Limitatioa of Ten Years in Jofephus. Juft as Mr. Gale had not read, or did not mind, that of St. Matthew, that he was born in Herod's Time, which will not al- low him to have been fo young as Thirty at the 1 5th of Tiberius, taken by the ordinary Accounto P. 471. ifChrifi lived Forty Years from the ^.ifl of Auguftus '^ he could not be crucified in the Reign of Tiberius] Why not> The 41ft is indeed too late upon other Accounts. But if he had been bora jinn. Per. Jul. 4710 (in which Auguflns began his 41ft Year) fince Jiberius lived to 4750. Amo Dom. sj. There is the Diftance of Forty Years; Our Saviour did not indeed live to that lafi: Yeair of Tiberius. But why does Mr. Gale fay, that if he had, he would not have been Forty ? Ibid.'] Pilate rums removed from the Government at leajt a Tear before Tiberius (i/W] whence comes' this News ? Jofephus relates how VitelUus, Go- X 4 yejjof ^ 1 2 'A Defence of the vernor of Syria^ hearing of Tilateh Villanies^ fent MarceHus to take care of Judaa^ and ordered P»- late to be carried to Rome to anfwer for his Crimes before Tiberius •, but before he was brought thither, Tiberius died. That Sailing to Rome could not take up nigh a Year. Jbid!^ He was made Governor in the nth of Ti* berius, and continued but Ten Tears'^ Biftiop Vflter fliews that it muft have been Ten Years, and forae Months over. Now from the later end of Tibs' riush 1 2th Year, to his De^th, jar^ Jbut X^n YjCars, Seven Months. r.^,.* .-.< .^-^V ^^lhr^d^\^' p. 472. Mr. Gale runs downward Seventy Years to the Deftruftion of the Temple^ to find the Time of Chrift's Birth j reckoning backward up again the Years of the Emperors that were be- tween j not one of them being truely accounted. The Aim is, that llnce that Defl:ru(ftion happened j4nn. Dom. 70. he may by fubtrafting out of Se- venty the Years that pafTed between Chrift's Death and it, leave but a few for the Time of his Life. He cites Authors that fay Forty (or fome of them Forty two) Years were between the PafTion and that Deftrudion. This would leave for Chrift's Life but Thirty or Twenty Eight. Our Chrono- loger himfelf was afhamed of this Foot of the Account. By adding forae Scraps to the Empe- ror's Years, he makes the Sum (which really was Seventy and no more) Seventy One. So he leaves our Saviour Thirty One. And, to the Shame of all Chronologers, and of St. John (who recites at leaft Three (probably Four) Paflbvers after the Baptifm at about Thirty) fays, p. 473. Jbtut which Age (viz.. Thirty One) he was crucified* t\'ii ' Could not this poor Accoraptant perceive where the Miftake of all this lies? The Deftrudtion of the Temple by Titus was indeed Anno Domini 70. [That is, .Seventy Years, aadno more, had pafl'ed '\ ■' from Hifiory of Infant-Bapifm'. g i j from the Beginning of the common ara by which we reckon the Annas Domini^ to the Time of the Deftruftion. But does it follow that no more Years hadfpaQed from the true Time of Chrift's Birth ? Every Body that has fpent an Hour ia in thefe Studies, knows that Ara is too fhort \ and that our Saviour was born feveral Years before the Beginning of it : Six, or Five, or Four at the leaft. Elfe no Body need ftudy for the Time of Chrift's Birth •, but depend upon it, that it wa^ from this prefcnt Year 1719 Years- And cur Difputant feems to know no better. In the fame Page he very ferioufly quotes Clem. [Alex. Origin, and Phlegon, as Authors by whofc Computations .the Erroneous Account of Jrenaus may be made apparent. There Thlegon places the 1 5th of Tiberius (when St. Luke fays our Saviour was baptized) Forty Years before the Deftrudion of Jerufalem^ Anno Domini 70. And Qemens and Ori^en place our Saviour's pajfwn Forty Two Years before it. And he takes notice that Phlegon fays fo exfrejly-j and that Jrenaus can't be fuppofed ig- norant of it. Does he think thefe Accounts to be true and confiftent ? If not, Why does he dwell upon them to the Reproach of Jrenaus ? But if he do ("and he feems to think fo in earneft) Then our Saviour died Two Years before he was baptized. Rather he might have feen by this, that all Men in thofe times, as well as Jren^us^ were at a Lofs in counting the Years of our Saviour's Life. That he may fhew fome of his own Skill ia Chronology, befide what he quotes from Authors; he fays here, that this VhUgon wrote a little be- fore Jrenaus was born ; and the next Page but one, fays, he wrote but in JJadrians Time. Does he think that Jrenaus was not born before JJadrian*^ Time 5 and efpecially the later end of it, Ann. 138. to 5 T 4 ^ Defence of the to which Year Thlegon brings down his Chronicle > this can't be Mr. Gde. This mufl be fpurious. P. 474. He runs over the lame Computation again, out of Jofephus, after a more aDfurd man- ner than before. He gives us a Table of the Years of the Emperors -^ wherein the Reign of Tiber iw is Twenty, which every one knows was Twenty Two and above an half*, and which he bimfelf in the Page before had fet down Twenty Three. The Foot of this Account is in the nexC page, Chrifi mufi have fvjfered at near Thirty Tears of Age. Boys that are taught Arithmetic, if they perceive the total Sum to be certainly wrong, call it over again and amend it, before they (hew it their Mafter. Here is a Proficient who fhews his Calculation to all the World ^ the Foot whereof ftands as you fee. p. 473. He had given us an Ivt^mct of his own (which if it had been true, would have compen- fated the tadlum of Reading |[all this Trafh) that there are Obfervations of EcU^fes that will fettle all this Matter. How ignorant have all Chrono- logers been, who have in Volumes difputed a Que- ftion which this young Mafter inth? Art can de- monftrate at once ? 'Tij fUin^ he fays, from^ &c. and from the Obfervations of Eclipfes, that AugU- ftus died Fourteen Years after the Birth of Chrijt. Now the Year of Avgu(ius's Death we all know ; that it was ?er. Jul. 4727. duobus Sextis Cajf. which is Arm. Dom. 14.. And the Day Aug. 19. So then Mr. Gale's Eclipfe will fix our Saviour's Birth forae time in the Year before Anf^- Dom. i. Per^ Jul. 4713- I fhould be unwilling to have fo mean a Thought of this Correftor of Jrenaus, as that he Ihould in-^ tend no more than that Auguftus died in the Year aforefaid (which every one knows) and that an Eclipfe that Year at a certain diltance before his Deathj Hifiory of Infant" Bapif^, ^i^ Peath, and another in the fame Year at a certaia diftance after it, do confirm that to be the Year which the Hiftorians who mention his Death, do mean : But that if he be asked, how old our Saviour was at that Year ^ Ann.Vom. 14. Whether 14, or 16, or 18, or 20 ; and defired to prove his An- fw.er by the Hiftory of fome Eclipfe happening at a known diftance from our Saviour's Birth \ he fliould have nothing to fay, but only that Augu^ fius died in the i4.th Year of thofe called the Tears of our Lord. We mufl: not think ib poorly till we hear farther from him about the Eclipfe. He himfelf has faid Four or Five times over, that the Birth was the 41ft of Auguftus ^ and fays in the next Page, that Augufius reigned Fifty Seven Years (fo he did, reckoning from the Death of his Un- cle^ and fomething over^ the Eclipfe, when it comes, will make thefe Pages fpurious. Or elfe, that Fifty Seven exceeds Forty One but by Four- teen. p. 475. Mr, Cde makes a fecond Exception againft this Paffage in Iren^us^ wherein Infants are reckoned among thofe who by Chrlfi are regenera- ted unto God • that we have not the original Words of it (as indeed we have not of any of his Works, except a few Fragments) but only a Tranflatioa in Latin. But fince this Tranflation is fo antient ; made cither in the Author's own Time (as Dr. Grabe thinks) or at leaft fas he proves) foon after •, and has been quoted, owned, and acknowledged all along ever fince ^ This muft appear to any Reader of thofe antient Books, a very frivolous Evafion ; made only for the Neceffity of an Hypothefis, which cannot Hand a fair Trial. But this it is to have to do with an Adverfary that runs from the Matter in Hand into long Difputes and Cavils about the Authenticalnefs of the Books. All, 5 1 6 'A Defence of the AH, or io a manner all the Quotations that have been made by the Laxin Fathers from IrenAus have been taken from this Tranflation, and have beea allowed \ and it is too late now to demur to its Autority j efpecially in fuch a Place as this, which runs agreeably, and pertinently, to what goes be- fore, and what follows. It is indeed compofed in an uncouth and barba- rous Latin Phrafe, partly for that the Tranflator had but a mean Faculty in that Phrafe (which is no Exception againft the Truth or Faithfulnefs of the Tranflation) and partly for that he has aimed to keep in his Latin aU the Jdioms of the Creek which he tranflated ; and to render every Sentence verbatim (which will make any Tranflation barbarous) But this rather afliires than overthrows the Repute of its Fidelity ; and is the Cafe (though not perhaps in the fame De- gree) of all in that Time, who tranflated the Books of the Gofpel, or any Book which they ac- counted of awful Autority ^ as is apparent in the Fragments that are left of the old Italic Verfion, and in the whole vulgar Latin Tranflation of the Bible •, and much more in the Greek Septuagint. This is it, which the Writers whom Mr. Gale quotes here, do note as a Fault in the Tranflati- on V that it is in a dull, barbarous impolite Style. They do not impeach the Honefl:y of the Man. His Fault was, aiming at an exceflive exaftnefs. That unhandfome Exprefljon of Scatiger's (which no body but Mr. Gale v/ould have ^xprefled with an Air of Serioufnefs) that the Tranflator was an Afsy is taken out of a Book, which has done Scaliger a great deal of Difcredit; as the like Ufage has done to Luther^ and forae others. Both thefe Men gave their Pens too much liberty in cenforious and extravagant Expreflions^ but it feems they gave their Tongues more. And they have had ,£> after l^iftory of Infunt-Bapifm', j 1 7 after their Death, Friends or elfe Enemies, who have publiflied to the World all their rafh Sayings fpoken in PalTion, Difpute, or Table-Talk. Which Courfe if it were taken with the heft Men that are, would expofe their Charafter. 'Tis well whea a Man's fedate Thoughts are worth publifliing. No body's Tattle is. As for the Inftances which Mr. Gale has picked out of the whole Five Books, where there is fome variety between this Tranflation and fome Tran- fcripts of the Original, found in Eufebius^ Epifbani' us, &c. They are not more confiderable for Senfe, nor more in Number, than are found in the Copies of any Book whatever, that has had €0 many Copies tranfcribed of it, as this Book and Tranflation mult be fuppofed to have had. Epi" fhanius might tranfcribe from one Copy which had fome various Leftions, which the Copy made ufe of by this Tranflator had not. There are none that alter any Dodrine, Hiftory, &c. deli- vered by this holy Father. Mr. Gale, who ex- cepts again ft any Dodrine of Iremus being pro- ved by this Tranflation, might with the fame Face except againft any one Tranflation of the Bible. For in comparing that One with fome other Copies and ibme other Tranflations, there would more various Leftions be found. And whatever various Leftions there are of any other Place of Irenaus ; there are none of the Place before us. To one that is fo endlefs in his Cavils and Ex- ceptions againft Books and Tranflations, we muft, I think, ftop his Mouth with that Anfwer of Mr. Stokes p. 43. ^Ttsyour common Method to evade the Autority of the Fathers^ by faying^ They are bui^ TraJlationSf &c. But you have neither Originals not Tranjlations of thofe early times^ on your Side ■- • Were there no Antifxdoba^tifls then, to tranjlate ? &C. P. 480: jiS A'Defence of the ?. 480. If the Place muH be allowed for genu- ine; yet Wc.Gale will not be fQiind without fome* thing to fay. His Third Exception is, that by tl\e Word \re^eneraud~\ in it, there is no reafon to underhand {^baptized] And whereas I had faid that the Vwn Miftake in the Import of the Word, thac makes him think our Saviour's Speech mult be conftrued otherwife than the Words ftand. He thinks that Baptifm means only the outward Parcel the external wafliing; whereas it is (as he had better expreffcJ it btfore in explaining, the new y "'"Birth 5^2 A Defence of the Birthj one Bapdfm, or, one Regenerafion, of Water and the Spirit in Conjun(^ion. This Mi* flake appears to hang in his Mind by what he fays, P. 485. Chri^ fpeah of Spiritual Regeneration^ and no other. For had he by born again meant Baptlfm, &c. He fpealts indeed of a Spiritual Regeneration, i. e. of the Ferfons coming into a new Spiritual State. Which is efTeded by the outward Adioa appointed by Chrifl:, accompanied with the Grace and Operation of his Spirit. As for the Senfe ia which a baptized Infant hbom of the Spirit, I have been forced to fpcak of it twice or thrice already- Mr. Gale will not feem to underftand that there is any Efficacy at all of God's Spirit extended to infants to put them in a new Spiritual State j but yet he dares not openly deny it. He refers here p. 484 to the 25th Article of the Church of England, as if that made for him. There is nothing there for his Purpofe. Our Church plainly owns two Parts in one Sacrament ^ the outward vifible Sign, and the inward Spiritu- al Grace. If he pleaded only, that the inward Spi' ritual Grace, the being born of the Spirit-^ is the Chiefs No Man woufd oppofe him. Every one knows it. P. 485. From another Place of Scripture, which I cited to (hew that the Scripture applies the Word, Regeneration to Baptifm, it will appear by Mr. Gale^^ Rule, that St. Paul alCo Ihedfincethe Time that In* f ant- Baptifm prevailed. For he ufes it fo •, Tit. iii. 5. He faved us by the Wafhing Qor Baptifm^ of Re- generation. Mr. Gate allows that by the waflnng of Regene- ration is meant Baptifm ; that is^ fays he, by the whole Phrafe ; but then he brings in a logical Qiiib- blc about the Quiddities of the Things •, that -'' vpaflnng Hiflory of Infant -Buftifm, ^22 Xitafhwg denotes Baptifm j but Regeneration does not. This Metaphyfical Diftindion is grounded oii that Miftake of his, (which I mentioned juft now, and which runs through all his Arguings) that the Sacrament of Baptifm confifts only in the outward part, the corporal wafhing: And it is nothing pertinent to our Argument. For the Argument requires no more, than that the Word, Regeneration^ does generally in the Scripture (as here) and more conftantly in the Antient Fathers, carry along with it a Suppofal of Baptifm (whe- ther as a Caufe, or EfFedt, or neceflary adjundl, is nothing to the Purpofe of our Argument) fo as that where-ever any Chrifl^ian Author fpeaks of any Perfons regenerated (as Iren&m here fpeaks of Infants regenerated) we may conclude they were baptized. That Regeneration does connote Bap- tifm. The Reader law before at his /?. 458. and fees here, and will fee again \ that whenever he is put to a Shift, he flies to this logical Qiiirk for an Eva (ion. I gave a Solution of it, in an- fwering his forefaid Page 458. V, 487. He objefts, that Baptifm is often called,' the Baptifm of Repentance \ and yet that Repentance does not fignify Baptifm. This then Qiews the difference between the ufe of the Word, Repentance ^ and the ufe of the Word Regeneration^ or, new Birth :i that the Name of Penitent is often in the Scripture and the Chriftian Writers given to Perfons not yet bap- tized •, or is given to them in refped of fome greart Change and Recovery from a Sinful Courfe into which they had after Baptifm fallen •, but the Name of Regeneration, or Regenerate, never. la this very Chapter concerning Irenaus^ I gave the Words of Greg, Naz.ianz.en, warnine; a baptized Perfon a£,ainft tailing back into Courfes of Wick- Y 2 ednefs^ 324 A Defence of the cdnefs; There is not <«»otW Regefleration to be had afterward ; though it be fought with never fo much Crying and Tears. And yet he grants in the next Words that there is Repentance after Baptifm. The Baptifm of John is often called the Baptifm of Repentance (and all the three Places of Scrip- ture, which Mr. Gale produces here, Marc'i. 4. jiU:i xiii. 24. and xix. 4. fpeak of that) but none but the Baptifm of Chrifl:, is called the Baptifm of Regeneration. Whatever Epithets may be com- mon to baptized and unbaptized Perfons •, the Term regenerate is not. p. 489. Concerning the ufe of this Word among the antient Chriftians ; whereas 1 had faid that in their ufud Phrafe it fignifies Baptifm ; he in his vfual Phrafe^ ^^Y^, ^T'is one of the mofi groundlefs jijfertions that I ever met with, &c. Now the Thing is what every one that has read them, knows to be true. But how fliall one con- vince his Readers ? If any of them has read but fo many of them as are recited in my Book *, he mufl: lee that this Anfwer of their Defender is not true. Mr. Whifton, though he be engaged on the fame Side, yet having read what I fay, and what he fays here, owns in his Primitive Infant-Bap'* tifm^ p. 7. That Regeneration ij here \juiz.. Johniii. 3, 5.3 and elfewhere, (generally, if not confiantly) ufcd with Relation to Baptifmal Regeneration is undeni- able. Mr. Whifion adds, not as fuppo/ing the bare outward Ceremony to deferve that Name. \A^hich we all know. To difprove this ufe of the Word, he tells his S;>, that he has already fhewn him that Juftin by the Word Regeneration-^ cannot be underftood to mean Baptifm. The Hiftorj of Infant-Baptifml ^ 2 ^ The Words of Juftin which I produced, con- cerning new Converts that came to be baptized, xWere ; Then roe bring them to fame Place where there is Water ; ai^d they are regenerated by the fame Way of Regeneration by which we were regenerated ; For they are wajhed with Water in the Name^ 6cc. The Reader muft pardon me for troubling him with the Words over again \ for I muft declare, and I do it in cool Blood, I never met with any one of fo finilhed ESrontery to deny Things that are plain and vifible. When Mr. Whifton faid. This Ufe of the Word was undeniable *, he meant it could not be denied by any Man of tolerable Mo- defty. For other Fathers after Jufliriy he has beerj fearching the Indexes \ and though Nineteen in Twenty of the Places to which they direded; muft have been plain for this Senfe ; he has found fome that may bear a Cavil. There is hardly any Word whatever of fo de- terminate and conftant a Meaning, when it is applied to one Subjedl •, but that if it be ufed in relation to another Subjed of a different Nature, it takes a different Senfe. The Word Bapttfin^ it felf is found fometimes ufed in relation to Suffer- ings, or to rices *, baptiz.ed with Affliftions ^ or, in Voluptuoufnefs, &c. This does not hinder ns to fay, that the Word Baptifm has a conftant Signi- fication, viz,, the Sacramental wajhing in the Form appointed. So if I fay that the Word, regenerate^ has a conftant Senle among the antient Chriftians 5 to mean, or connote Baptifm *, no Man of Senfe will challenge me with Inftances, where the World^ or the Earthy Sec. is faid to be regenerated^ i. e. new- made^ new-moulded^ &:c. becaufe he naturally knew I was to be underftood concerning the Senfe of thp Word, when it is applied to ^fen j and in their religious Concerns, Y 3 And 5 2$ "^A Defence of the And even when they are applied to the fame Subjeft (as Regeneration to Men) it is alfo com- mon for all Words to be ufed fometimes metapho- rically, and by way of Allulion. In which Cafes no Man expefts a ftrift Account of the fame Senfe of a Word as it has in its ordinary Signification. But fuch Differences as thefe do always appear by the Scope of the Place. Now mult 1 follow Mr. Gale in an impertinent Ramble which he has made to pick up fome fuch Inftances. They be- gin at P. 489, There he brings two Places of Origen \ where, by hisownConfelTion '!sajKiyyv)i<) eivcii rg-a.Kiyyzvi(TiAv. They fear not Death ^ nor efieem Life i for they believe that there is a RefurreBion. The Place that he quotes, />. 493. of Clemens Jiomanus may moil fitly be confidered here before- hand ; becaufe the Senfe of it is like thefe other. He fays, Noah preached 'zs^ciKiyyinijiAv to the World, Which is meant either (as Junius, the firft Edi- tor, underltands it) a RefurreBion \ or elle, that he by preparing the Arc admonifiied Men of that Peltrudion gad Renovation of thp World, which W4S liifiory of Infartt-Baptifm, 327 wa3 then coming and did quickly come; whereby the World that then was, being overflowed with Water , peripied; and the reftoring it was a ^. 425. He had been fpeaking of the Duties of Matrimony, and the great Guilt and Mifchief of Adultery. And then iays, ri T^ v'ofj!.©- ^ what Provifion does the Law make ^gainft this ? The Subftance of the Anfwer is, That in order to clear the World from fuch Mifchiefs, the Law orders the Adulterer and the Adulterefs to be both put to Death. And then he pretends to fhew that the Provifion made by theGofpel is not inferior to this •, that the Law and theGofpel do agree, ere. 'nyd^rot Tro^vivffa.ja., &C. For a Woman that has fallen into Adultery is indeed, as yet alive in for, to^ Sin \ hut Jhe is dead Tcui ivJoKcui to [^or, by] the Commandments [dead inLaw. "2 But jhe^when fje has repented^ ojov civctyivv\)^?.(ra.i being as it were^ born ove^ again by the Change of her Mannerty 'sretMyy-vzffia.v ex^ C^"^ ^■'^^ ^ RefurreEiion to Life, ^he former Harlot being dead \ and Jhe that was be- gotten by Repentance., coming to Life again. Mr. Gale^ not obferving the Occafion of .thefe Words (which was not in the Index) has loft the Emphafis of them •, and tranflated them wrong. For n^viiti^^i (j-h TH? -sropi/fif THf 'TFa.KciiSii Can never be conftrued ^ She is dead to the former Adulteries j but the former Adulterefs being dead. No Body would feek for the ordinary Senfe of a Word from fuch a Sentence as this, which all runs upon a quafi. She is, 04 it were another Wo- man ; and fo, is, as it were, born again. And in the following Words •, Av]ika A/96Ast;ro; yivov]au 7'hey are at prefent ficned. He means j They are by Hifiory of Infant-Baptijm. ^29 by the Sentence of Condemnation in the Gofpel, ds it were, or, in efFeft, Itoned. There are none of the other Inftances which he gives of the ufe of the Word (which are at all pertinent to this Matter) but what may, I think, be fairly fuppofed to have in the Author's meaning a Relation to Baptifm ; though he has picked out one or two where this Relation is not at that Place exprefTed. Tertullian fays, We are born in the Space of Ten Months ; which is the Nunt' her of the Commandments, by which |[or, in which, or, unto which] we are regenerated. Which may be paraphrafed |^or, baptiz.ed2' For the baptifmal Sponfion was, as, to believe in God ; fo alfo, to keep his Commandments. In which refped, as they often fay, we are regenerated ^or baptized] to, or into, the Creed, or Faith ; fo here TertuU Han means ^ we are baptized to, or unto, the keeping of the Commandments. The reft of the Places he cites, either have not the Word at all (as that of Barnabas, which he calls a very remarkable one) or have it in a Senfe which is plainly enough, and in fome of them exprefly, applicable to Baptifm. In Clements Epitoma & Eclog<& there is much Talk of Baptifm \ moftly concerning the Valemi- nians Way of explaining the Dodrine thereof. And it appears that they, as well as the Catho- lics, gave it the Name of Regeneration. There are fuch Sayings as thcfe. Epitom. p. 802. Our Regene- ration is from Water and the Spirit. And a little after ^ Therefore our Saviour was haptiz.ed, though not needing it himfelf, that he might fanElify all Wa- ter to thofe who jhould afterward be regenerated By it Cmeaning, this Regeneration] we are clean fed not only in Body, but alfo in Soul. And it is a Proof of even our invifible j^or inward] Parts being fan- pified by it, that unclean Spirits, which are infolded in ^^a A Defence of tbs in the Sifuly dre purged away by this new and Spirt' tual Birth. The Water above the Heavens. For as Much as Baptifm is performed by Water and the Sfi* rity &c. All this Hands together in Clement- And yet Mr. Gale p. 49 ^. Leaves out all the reft; and quotes that Scrap out of them ; This new and fpiritual Birth Qor, Generation'] and would make his Rea- der believe they are fpoken without any Reference to Baptifm. And at the fame place he quotes out of the preceding Page of Clement, p. 8oi. Baptifm^ which is the Sign of Regeneration ; as Words making for his Turn •, and fays, Clement is fa far from leaving any room to imagine^ Baptifm is Regeneration^ that he ixprejly fays^ ft is the Sign of it. All fuch Places do, as I faid before, help to prove that the Antients connefted the Notion of Regeneration with that of Baptifm ; not limiting themfelves to one logical Idea of the Word ; but ufing it fometimes for the inward Part of the Sacrament, and oftner for the whole Com- plex Notion of it ; as 'tis not half a Page from this, where the Words I laft quoted, are, Our Re- generation is by Water and the Spirit^ but never fpeak of it as a Thing that can be feparate from Bap- tifm. Mr. Gale's Bufinefs was, to prove that the Word is ufed without including, fuppofing, or connoting Baptifm : So as that the Infants, which Iren For other Books of Clement y where he fpeaks, not the Senfe of the f^alentiniansj but his own, Mr. Gale at P. 490. quotes hh Padagog. lib. i. p. 90. laying,' God receives thofe that fly to him, ly eivctyivvhircK tJ 'srviv[Jt.ct}i hi i^o6:y UviufxA Q>i^ k'^ipipijo iTrdva itH vAa\©-. And the Spirit of God moved upon the Face of the Water. Origen meaning to exprefs how in the Sacrament of Baptifm the Holy Spirit is pre- fent and does ratify the Promifes thereof, does, ^in Allufion to that Scripture Phrafc, of his be- ing at the Creation carried Qor moving] vpon the Face of the Water) fpeak of it as being fo in the Cafe of Baptifm alio. Tb x^ vZv iTt(?ifouiy>s. Who is now alfo i. e. in this Cafe alfo of Baptifm, ac- com- ^34 A Defeme of the companying the Water. But to fay, that mw at- fo^ i> e. in the Adminiftration of Baptifm alfo the Spirit of God is preferred above the Water^ is too inlipid a Senfe for Mr. Gale to afcribe to Origen. And if it were the Senfe ^ it avails nothing to the Proof of that which he brings it for, viz,, that Origen mentions here Regeneration without conno- ting Baptifm ^ for it is the Baptifmal Regenerati- on that he is fpeaking of. Thus I have had the Patience to follow him, and trace all the (^^uotations he has brought againft me \ which after all, do prove utterly imperti- nent to the Purpofe he brings them for. And in- deed it was impoflible to difprove a Thing fo certainly true, as this is ^ that this Word is con- ftantly ufed by the Antients with a Relation to Baptifm. Or if there were among Thoufands of Jnftances, One or Two where that Senfe did not appear (as it happens in the Cafe of almoft all Words, that a Man may light on fome few Pla- ces where they are ufed in an odd and improper Senfe) yet that ought not to be accounted fufficienC to overthrow a general Rule. The Senfe was fo known and univerfally receiv- ed both in the Greek and Latin Church (which Concurrence of the two Churches in the ufe of their Phrafes does not happen always) that a Writer citing a Place out of another Author, or out of the Scriptures, will fometimes (quoting by Memory) ufe one of thofe Words where his Author had ufed the other. As Clement y in one or two of the Places which I have recited, quo- ting the Scripture where Chrill was baptized by yohn, exprefles it, regenerated by him. And St. Hi' erom does the fame. And fo on the other Side, The Conftitutions. I. 6. c. i 5. citing John hi 5. Ex- cept any one he horn of Water^ &c. expreffes it ^ rkyfA j<3 Kvp/©"* «aV IM) tU (iccrji^rH s^ vJ'etjQ-, Sec, Ihs Hijiory of hfa/it-Baptifm, ^55 The Lord fays^ except any one he baptized with Water and the Spirit. Befide the Drudgery, I muft bear with his Reproaches. P. 493. jind now could any Body^ Sir^ that had read thefe Vajfagcs^ fairly pretend, &c. if Mr, WaU had not read thefe Books ^ he ought not fe readiiy, &C. If he had read them^ what excufe can be framed for him ? I have read fo much of them, that I am fure of one of thefe Things *, that either he has not read them any other Way than by Indexes ; or elfe does not underftand them •, or elfe againft his Confcience faces out a Senfe contrary to what he fees in them. For in feveral of thefe Places which he cites, the Sentences before, or after, make it palpable that this Word is taken in that Senfe againft which he contends. Moft that he here brings, are out of Clemens Alexandrinus. No Wri- ter can (hew the Senfe in which he takes the Word, regenerated^ more dearly or pofitively. To give one Inftance •, to which others, if they be fearched, will prove like. Mr. Gale brings a Paflage out of his Padagog. /. I. p. 90. where he would per- vert the Senfe, as I Ihewed jiift now. If he had read on, he could not have miftaken. For in the next Page but one, p. 92. where Clement dlfputes againft fome who pretended that Baptifm does not put us into a complete State of Ghriftianity (they required fomething elfe *, I know not what) he has fuch Sayings as thefe ; ApeLyzynMifja tv Ivynof^ 6cc, IVhen we are regenerated [hy which he means plain- ly there, baptiz.ed^ we prefently receive the Perfeiii' on, &:c. When our Lord was haptiz^ed avJUa yh ^at- rij^oixivo ttJ Kt/fiw, prefently came the Foice from Heaven, declaring him the Beloved, &c. Let us then ask thefe wife Men \ was Chrifi as foon as he was regenerated, cLtetyiWYi^ih, perfe^, or not, 5(C. As f)on as baptized by John ; he is perfe^, ^c. He is fer" J 3^ u4 Defeffce of the ferfeEt by the Laveir alone j and fanUifled hy ih coming of the Holy Spirit on him. And a little aftCTi O [jiovov dfctyivvii^ihi to(X'7rip7v }^ rivoixa. iyji) ^ ip^7'«&«'f, &c. He that is oHve regenerated (as the Name of that "Thing is) and inlightened^ is prefently freed from Darknefs tor, the State of Darknefs] and receives from that Time Light []or, the State ot Light.] Befide that the Words, baptized and regenerate are here ufed promifcuoufly ; and that Chi ift him- felf is here faid to be regenerated (which it were blafphemy to aflert in any other Senfe, than bap- tiz.ed) Here are the very Terms of the Queftion* Regeneration, Clement fays, is the Name fot Bap- tifoi. Which is the dired Contradidory of what Mr. Gale would prove out of him. This Queftion whether the Word, Regeneration, does always imply Baptifm, is but fubfervient to the main Queftion •, whether Infants were at this time baptized. But there is in this fame Padagog,. of Clement /. 3. c ii. p. i^'j. a Paflage which fpeaks of them not only as baptized then in Cle*- mentis Time (after the Apoftles 90.) but alfo as baptized in the Apoftles Time, and by the Apo* ftles. I am alhamed I had not found it, when I publilhed my ColUElion of fuch Paffages. I have been lately advertifed of it by learned Men. I Ihall not recite it here ; but in an Appendix at the End of this Defence^ which ftiall contain that, and one or two more Quotations fit to be added in another Edition of my Hiflory of Infant- B apt ifm ; if it ever have another. ?. 494. Mv.Gale fays of me; What Excttfe can he framed for him ? For . it is apparent by thefe In* fiances^ &c. that the mofi ant lent Fathers^ by Rege- neration mean foms thing Spiritual and Internal, md very different from Baptifm* Now Hifiory of tnfant-'BApifm. ^^j Now the Dream is out. It feems he has difpu- ted againfl: Regeneratioii in Baptifm all this while ; as fuppofing that there is not, or. that we hold that there is not, any Thing fpiritud or internal la. Baptifm. Whether any Book whatever could have taught this Man Modefty, Civility, or Hu- inility, I know not. But a Catechifm (if his Mo« ther had had the Grace to teach him it) would have inftrufted him, that the Sacrament of Baptifnl eonfifts of two Parts : The outward vifihle Sign * and the inward ffiritual Grace ^ The One done, or iifcd by Men by Chrift's appointment *, the Other conferred by his own merciful Covenant and pro- mife. The Fathers take it no other wife. AH Chriftians, Protcftants and Papifts, take it no otherwife. If he had ever been at Church, and had feen any Perfon, Adult or Infant, baptized ; The Sentences, Prayers, and Thankfgivings, ufed in that Office, do all exprefs this. He has fo long ftudied what /3a<5r7he referred to, as confirm- ing that Senfe of the other Place (where Infantas are faid to be regenerated to Go£) to be, that they were baptized, and had that their Regeneration, which Iren^m mentions, by Baptifm, Hiftdry of hfant-Baptifm, ^41 P. 495. Mr. Gale faces it out to that mofl learn- ed, judicious, and modeft Perfon ; It is, I think-, Mreilly to the contrary Senfe. And that, for no better Reafon than that Irenes does not here fay, that Baptifm is Regeneration ; but only calls it the Baptifm of Regeneration. Let the Reader fcan this Reafon, and be amazed at the Degree of AlTuranceofthis Man. Irenms fays in the next Words, that the f^aUn- tinians do fay •, that this Redemption of theirs (/. e, Chofe prophane and blafphemous Rites which they fet up inftead of the Chriftian Baptifm, and of which I gave fome Account in my Book) is necef- fary for ail that have received the ferfeB yvu To receive, that Regeneration^ which is by the Faith,, is a likq Phrafe to that which he ufes. /,. i. c. i. propefinem Who holds fiedfafl that Rule of Truth, which he recei' ved at his Baptlfm. For all the Creeds of the Churches of Catholics in thofe Times, into which they were baptized, whatever Article they omit- ted, had that of the Conception^ or Birtb, of a Fir- fin Hifiory of Infant-Bapifm, j 4 ^ gin *, And that the rather for the Sake of thefe Ebionites^ who had begun in the Apoftle's Time ; Jren£ui% Admonition to them, to receive their Re- generation hy^ or, according to the Faith, or, Belief of Chriftians •, may well enough be underftood to be, by Baptifm into the true Faith. Mr. Bing^ ham and others have fhewn, that n, &c. to have done-, and keeps the Emphaf^ which molt of the modern Tranflations and Expo*, litions have loft. I will tranfcribe it here •, tHcr* it muft have a Place alfo in the j4ppendix, I pro- mifed, of Quotations to be added to thofe in my Hiftory. For a Qiiotation that tranflates this Text right, is as much to the Purpofe as one that eri prefly fpeaks of Infant-Baptifm. The Occafioh and Context of the Words may more fitly be fet down there. Bat the Words are. Comment, ih Matth. p. 332. • . . yvvri cif)^AiAttii vTipov 'Ttoji -TJTe'Qrf 7tV ai'J^^ct. Of a Hus- hand and IVife^ both Vnbelievers^ fometimes the Hus- band believing firfl in time, faves his Wife. Andfomt' times the Wife believing fir f:^ does afterward ^erfvoade her Husband. Mr. Gate tranflates it, When the Hus- band believes firfl:, he fometimes faves his Wife, And rohen the Wife believes firfi^ jhe perfwades her Huss. band. He leaves .out the firft Words, 'Ai'^^poV;^ yvvauKof, aixipoji^uv dTrt^av. When a Husband and a Wife are both Vnhelievers '^ which regulate the Senfe of the following Words ^ and plainly fhew the Coverfions fpoken of in them to be from, ttnbelief to Chriftianity. This I don't call Ignorance; but fomething worfe. In the remaining Words (which biiu- j68 A Defence of the himfelf fets down) that he fhould not underftand that oTs iJLiv durip, and in ^ yvvi)-, fhould have been rendered ; fometimes the Husband, and, fome- times the Wife, looks very like Ignorance. In the former Claufe, he (though he had the Greek before him, and wrote it down) follows the Latin •, where fome Printer or Compofitor has tranfpofed the Words (for Huetim was not capable of fuch Blun- ders) and inftead of AUquando vir qui prior credi" dity uxor em fervat^ has printed, -vir qui prior credi' dity uxor em aliquando fervat. But in the later Claufe, where the aliquando is fet right \_Aliquando autern initium faciens uxor, &c.'} he has followed neither the Greek nor the Latin, Origen we fee here, underftands St. Vaulh Words of an unbelieving Husband being fand^lfied and fa- ved by his Wife^ and of an unbelieving Wife fan- tilled andfaved by her Husband j to be meant, of the One being converted from Vnbelicf, being made ctChriJiian [|or, as St. Paulas common Word is, a Saint'} by the Means of the Other. Which, added to what I and others have cited from other Fathers, confirms this to be the current Inter- pretation given to this Place by the Antients. He does not here go on to the following Words, ^Ife were your Children unclean • but now they art Saints ^or holy] as not being pertinent to the Mat- ter he was difcourfing of. But he that went fo far as toparaphrafe ^yUTou in the former Part of the Verfe, has been made ayi©-, a Saint., a Chriflian^ could not mifs of tranflating the laft Words •, It£/ Tat rkKVA v^uv AKA^cL^oi Iti^ clfg would your Chil* dren be unclean, i. e, kept in the Heathen State ^ Unbaptized, vvv o AyidWiv. But now they are Saints^ u e. Chriftians ^ which can be meant no otherwifg than by being baptized into Chrilt. 1 have tiiftory of Infdnt- Baptifm, 569 I have endeavoured to make this Senfe of thac Text plain, in a little piece which I believe Mr. Gale has feen. But he, who had fo openly accufed me of giving up all Proof from Scripture, could not with any Credit own the Sight of it. And indeed fhames himfelf by letting his Reader lee by one Attack before, and this a Second one, upon my Argument from this Text, that I had not omitted all the Proofs fjrom Scripture. He fays at lalt,, That Dr. Whitby^ and Bilhop Burnet are very accurate in froving, that the Words^ Norv are your Children holy^ do fpeak only of feminal holinefs. Yet, as much as he worfhips thofe two Men,' he fays in his Contents \ Their Senfe cannot be the true one. And he tells them, their Argument for Infant-Baptifm from feminal Holinefs, is a Petitia principii. By which 1 fhould guefs that they have faid fomething beyond his Reach •, for that is the common Name that he gives to all Arguments thaC he cannot anfwer. I remember fomething of that Sort of Argu^' ment from feminal Holinefs. But, as I never ufcd it, it is not my prefent Bufinefs to defend it6 Let thofe that will, derive their Childrens Saint- ihip from their own. I queltion whether it be a Rule in the Heavenly City (as it is in fome Cities here) that a Man may claim his Freedom by his Father's Copy. A Parent that has an Infant-Child like to die, may, if hepleafe, fay to God ^ Jhou wilt fave this Child^ becaufe he is mine, and derived from me. 1 had rather have it to fay, Becaufe he isChrijFs^ dedicated to him'j and cannot be favedhut for his fake. If this Doftfine be true, David had ill Luck m his Conception and Birth •, to be ]^ tpen in Iniquity, • and that tn Sin his Mother did conceive him : When B b thefe 37© A Defence of the thefe Fathers can beget their Children in femind Holinefs^ and their Mothers conceive them in Saints Jhip. Yet I do not diflike that Sentence of Mr. Bax- tery where (as I cited him) fpeaking of a Child dying before adual Baptifm, he fays, Believing that our Heart-Confent and Dedication (Qualifies Infants for a Covenant-right before a^ud Baptifm. A devout Dedication of a Child to Chrilt, to be received in- to his Covenant of Forgivenefs and Regeneration, joined v;ith a fincere Purpofe of Sealing this by Baptifm, may, we hope (though the Child be fuddenly fnatched away) be accepted by God for the Deed. P. 516. He would retrieve the Credit of that exploded Interpretation of this Text given by fome Antipzedobaptifts ^ fanBificd by the Wife ^ that i?, fays he, to the Wife, meaning, for the ufe of the Bed ', fo as that he though an Unbeliever, is not an Adulterer to her ; nor (he an Harlot to him. And the Children are holy, i. e. not Baflards. And he is £0 void of Shame, as to fay, twice in one Page, that this Explication is built on my Trinciplej. My Principle is, that St. Paul by the Word ayiofy Saints, or Holy, when applied toPerfons, does al- ways mean, Chrijlians. And by w^iWcw, and H^/rti?-- ijiboi, does always mean fuch as have been made, or are become Chriftians •, and that he never ftyled an Unbeliever, a Saint, or fanBified. Mr. Gale'^s Expolition would have St. Paul to mean, that the unbelieving Wife, or Husband, continuing fuch, is fanBified. But St. Paul explains nyia^ou in the Fourteenth Verfe, by faved in the Sixteenth. Does Mr. Gale think that faved means nothing biit allow^ ed the Vfe of the Bed ? The Oudre put by the Corinthians to St. Paul^ was not^ whether it were Fornication for Two fuch Hifiory of Infmt- Baptifm, 371 fuch Parties to cohabit ; fo that the Children would be Baftards. Nor does St. Vaul anfwer it, as he would do a Queftion of Lawful or Unlawful ; but only of expedient or inexpedient. If the Queftion had been whether it was a Sin or not; he would never have faid •, To this Queftion / fpeak^ not the Lord: nor would iiave advifed the Chriftian Husband to cohabit with the unbelieving Wife, if ^e be mlling to dwell with him. The Wo- man's willingnefs to ftay, would not, if the Que- ftion had been about Fornication, have mended the Matter. Let Mr. Gale try how this Bed-SanQification will fit Origens Paraphrafe, which he juft now commended, which was, that fometimes the un- believing Wife is fandlfied, faved, or perfwaded by her Husband, a Believer •, and fometimes the unbelieving Husband by the Wife, a Believer. That is, we'll fay. Sometimes the Man is fandified to his Wive's Bed ; and fometimes Ihe to his. Non- fenfe. Whereas to fay, Sometimes an unbelieving Husband is brought to Chriftianity by his Wife -, and fometimes the Wife by the Husband *, and then by the Confent of both, the Children are made holy, or Saints, i. e. Chriftians, by Baptifm \ is good Senfe, and a good Reafon why St. Paul ftiould advife them to continue together. In (hort, not only this Explication of the An- tipaedobaptifts, but all the Modern ones that for- fake the antient Interpretation, have this fatal Abfurdity \ that they make St. Vaul fpeak of the Man, or the Woman ; and the Children, ?.^ fanEti» fied^ or Saints^ without Chriftianity. Which he never did, nor would have done. P. 517. Mr. Gale asks, what can this Holinefs of the Children be, that fprings from the Chri- ftianity of the Parents ? 'the Baptifm of the Parents Bb 2 can'f 572 ji Defence of the can't fer'oe for the Children. True. But the Chri- 'ftianity of the Parents may make them baptize their Children. And then they are in St. TauCs Senfe, iLytot^ Holy, Saints, or Chriftians. p. 519. The PafTages which I produced, from Origen do, as Mr. Gale confefles, fpeak direBly and clearly of Infant-Baptifm. They fpeak of it as a known Principle of Chriftians, and ordered by the Apoftles. And whereas Mr. Whifion having before his Eyes the Places themfelves, has ventu- red to fay, and to print, that it is not plain from them, that the Infants he fpeaks of, were fuch as we commonly call fo i but that his Words may be underftood of Lads big enough to make Cate- chumens •, he could not have more fhamed his Eye- fight. And it ought tp be a Warning to him, not to Print any Thing in fuch hafte ^ for the Words are, nuper natl parviili'y And, IVhat Sin could they have ? Mr. Galeh only Exception is, of the Authenti- calnefs of the PafTages; of which I had fpoken largely ^ which the Reader muft fee, if he would underftand the Difpute between us. - He wonders that all the Paflages about In- fiUt-Baptifm fhould be in the Latin Tranflati- ons ; and none in the Greek remains, which are, he fays, larger than of any Greeh Father before him. The Thing were no Wonder, if it were fo. Since he having written above Twenty Times as much as any Gree\ Father before him ; the Greek remains, though larger than of thofe before him,.,: are yet not the Twentieth Part of what were extant in Sr. Hieromh Time ^ who, as 1 Ihewed, had read in the Greek his Sentiments of Infant- B.iptifm. One Hiflory of h/aftt-Baptifm. ^7j One Paflage which Sir Peter (now Lord chief Ju- flice) King brought from the Greek, and I from him, Mr. Gale in many Words labours to prove to be nothing to the Purpofe ^ as fpeaking only of new Converts compared to Infants. Neither did I, nor do I, pofitively maintain the Contrary. I was the firfl that ihewed the Doubtfulnefs of the Phrafe, But whereas he puts into my Mouth thofe rude ExprelTions and Reflections on'that great Man •, of artful leaving out of Words, &c. Let him take them to himfelf j they are his natural Talent. I faid no fuch Thing *, but only acknowledged that That Sentence by being compared with the follow- ing ones is rendred ambiguous. I have fince found a Paflage in the Gveel^ viz.'* Comment, in Matt. Tom. 15. which fpeaks manifefl:- ly of Infants in the proper Senfe, (for to fatisfy Mr. Whifion, and Mr. Gale, it names thofe of one Day old) and, 1 think, (hews plainly Origen's Senti- ments of the Neceflity of their Baptifm. 1 fliafl not tranfcribe it here ^ but in the Jppendix I mentioned. If it be allowed, it makes aU my Anfwer to the Ex- ceptions he here brings againfl: the Places in the Tranjlations, needlefs. But as I had drawn up the Subftance of my Anfwer to thofe his Exceptions before I found that Paflage •, and as it is the lalt Trouble I fliall have with him : I will not grudge the Pains of tranfcribing that alfo •, that both to- gether may give the fuller Satisfaction. P. 521. Mr. Gale^ not content with what I had owned, that Rufinus (outofwhofe Tranflations fe- veral of the Paflages which 1 brought, were fetch'd) took a great Liberty in tranflating^ fometimes' abridging, paraphrafing, d-c. fometimes omitting, or altering a Place where Origen had vented any of his Angular and heterodox Opinions •, thinks it worth his while to get together and recite, B b 3 m% 374 A Defence of the not only all the Cenfures of Rvfinm'^ Tranflation that he could find in Huetins, Dallle, Du Pin, Ta- ritiHs, &c. but any Thing that tends to difcredic the Tranflations of the Fathers in general. They have, he fays, a very bad Name. And where Gro- tim fays, Some Pieces afcrihed to Origen are not his^ and fame interpolated. Mr. Gale turning the Word, fomey into a great deal, would have us believe none. One that had not read the Works of thefe Modern learned Men, which he here cites, would think by this Account that they had a much worfe Opi« nion of Rufinus^s Tranflations than they had real- ly. They, notwithftanding the Fault they find with his paraphraftical way, do upon many Occa- Jions quote his Tranflations and depend upon them, as being Origens Senfe in the Main. And Mr. Gale himfclf in the Chapter before, wjl. f-Orl'^' (when he fought for Evidence againfi: Irenam) thought the TraElat.in Matth. (which is a Tranflation of Origen of far lefs Credit than Rvjinuss are) a good Au- tority. HuettHs^ who knew befl: of any one, what Cre- dit was due to each Tranflation, though he give the Preference by far to thofe done by St. Hierom^ yet he more than an Hundred Times recurs to thofe done by Rufinus, either to confirm, or to explain the Senfe of fome Place in the Greek Trades on which he is making Notes. And particular- Iv when he is vindicating Or?V^« aga'mi}: Janferiusj Bifliop of Tpres (who accufed him of a Thing he was not guilty of, viz.. the Denial of original Sin) he does it by one of the fame Quotations, which I brought for Proof of his holding In- fant-Baptifm. For Origen fpeaks, there, and at other Places, ofboth thofe Points together. Ifaid, Hi/lory of I»fant-Baptifm, j 7 5; I faid, whatever Rufinus might add of his own in his Tranflations, he would not^dd any of this Sort of Sayings which exprefs an acknowledge- ment of original Sin ; becaufe he himfelf was in- clined to the contrary Opinion ^ as 1 have fhew- ed plain enough, and Huetim more largely. Of this Mr. Gale takes no notice. And he does wifely. For it renders all that Sufpicion which he would raife of Rvfinm's inferting thefe Paflages of his own Head, utterly incredi- ble. ' Mr. Whiflon, though he be engaged on the fame Side of the Difpute with Mr. Gale^ and had feen his Objections, confefles, p.^o, of hi^ Primitive Infant^ Baptifm' I think we may allow them in the main to be genuine. And the worthy Dr. Grabe declared to me, that he bad met with £b many Fragments of thofe loft pieces of Origen-, quoted by Greek Writers or in the Catena's^ as do manifcftly Ihew the Latin of Rufinm to have been taken from them, though after a more loofe and paraphraftical manner than is ufual in a Tranflator. If there were found in thefe Tranflations but one, or but two Places, and thofe in Rvfinus alone, that did fpeak of Infant-Baptifm ; there might have been fome Reafon for this Sufpicion. But when they are found in feveral Places, brought in on feveral Occalions, in Tranflations made by fe- veral Men who were of feveral Parties, and Ene- mies to one another (as Rufn and St. Hierom were) and upon no Tentation (for Mr. Gale himfelf will own that there was no Difpute then about Infant- Baptifm) To fay, that they be all forged, is a Thing that will fink no Man that confiders and weighs the Reifonablenefs of any Plea. And thus to except fometimes againft the Book, as in Ire- naus: and fometimes againft the Tranflations, as Bb 4 here; 97^ A Defence of the here-, is in Effeft to fay that he will not Hand io the Voice of x\ntiquity. Of the Paflages cited, one is from the Homilies en St. Luc ^ tranflated by St. Hierom\ which fpeaks to the fame Purpofe as the reft. Mr. Gale having no other efcape, fights his Way through, and pelts St. Hierom with Reproaches for a Tranllator as bad as Rvfinui. I had from Erafmus quoted St. Hierorr^^ own Words, that in That Tranflation of the Homilies on St. Luc he had changed nothing \ hut exprejfed every Thing as it was in the Original. Here Mr. Gale P. 524. Sends his Sir to compare the Tranjlations with the Originals j and tells him, what he ihall find there. He is either £0 very ignorant as to think, or elfe would have the ignorant Reader think, that thofe Homilies on St. Luc are extant in the Ori- ginal (for of thofe he muft be underftood to fpeak j or elfe 'tis no Anfwer to what 1 faid) and that he had compared them. If they had been at all extant in the Greeks I muft have been very dull to cite them in the Latin. Such Homilies as are ex- tant both in the original, and in St. Hierom's La- tin (as for Inftance, fome on Jeremy) anfwer fo well to one another, that Huetii^ fets no other Latin over againft the Greek than St, Hierom's\ and whe^ the Greek Copies have fome Words vi- tiated fo as to marr the Senfe •, he very often correds them in his Notes by the Latin. The Latin fliews what the Greek muft have been, and Huetim who fays, the Latin does in many Places recede from the Greeks imputes that to the Varia- tion of the Greek Copies fince St. Hierom's Time. And Bifhop Pearfen in his Findicia Ignat. concludes that St. Hierom muft have been very exaft in the Tranflation of the Homilies on Luc by this j that Hijtory of Jnfmt-Baptifm, ^'jrj Kupnus^ who had the Original, and out of Envy fought to find what Faults he could in the Tran- flation, mentions no interpolation but one of two Words \iat^-, natural which fhews he could find no more. Mr. Gale fays, St. Hierom in tranflating Eufebi' n^s Chronicon, and de locis Hehraicis owns that he altered fome of the Chronology and Geo- graphy. That is quite another Cafe. The Skill in Chro- nology improved by degrees. And for the Geo- graphy of the holy Land, St. Hierom living on the Spot many Years after Eufebius was dead, might naturally come to know the Names and Circum- ftances of many Cities and Places there, which Eufebipu had omitted or miftaken. And any one that is able, does well to corred Millakes in thofe Matters. Efpecially when he owns the Alterati- ons that he makes. But in Matters of Religion any Thing that is new, is faulty for being fo ; and the Perfedlion of it is, to keep clofe to the Primitive Patterns. But Mr. Gale cites fome Sayings of St. Hierom, where he confeflcs that in the Tranflation of fome Books even of Ori^en he had omitted what was bad or erroneous, and kept in only what was found and ufeful. But, Hr/?, That is not adding any Thing. And Secondly^ There are Two different Aims in tran- flating. And he at feveral times had both of them, viz. Either to fatisfy the Curious what it was that Origen held (and in fuch Cafes he fets down all, found or unfound.) Or, to publifh fome Traft or Difcourfe of Origen for the Ufe of vulgar Chriftians: In which if there were many nfeful Things, and fome unfound Tenets he did well to omit the Later. And this Mr. Gale ihould not call St, Hierom's Confejfion that he did fb. J7 S A Defence of the fo. He fleads it in his own Vindication againft thofe that accufed him of difleminating Origen's Errors. But even this is not adding any Thing. And befides, in the Homilies on St. Luc (which is the only Book I quoted) he declares he took the former Courfe. Mr. Gale cites Mr. du Pin. Vol. III. j>, 132. where after he had given Inftances of Rufins licentious way of tranflating fome Pieces, he adds ; St. Hi- train's Verfions are vot more exaB. And there Mr. Gale cuts off the Sentence ^ and makes much life afterward of this Verdiftof Mr. ^« F/« againft St. Hierom. Whether he do fay juft fo; and do not add any Exp^eflions in Abatement of what be had faid, I know not. A Reader that has du Pin by him, may do well to fee. But it is certain, the Expreflion taken ftridly is not true. St.Hierom may in fome Books have made fome para- phraftical Alterations, or Omiflions (though none, he fays himfelf, on St. Luc) but not nigh fo many as Rufnus. Mr. Gale tells us over and over again, that thefe Tranflators do confefs and own the jilterations they have made, and warn the Readers of them. There is then the more Credit to be given them ; when they fay they have altered nothing. They do in • fome Books of Origen own that they have left out many Things that were unfound v and abridged fome Books that were too long (as Origen's Style is indeed redundant; but there is no Sign of their adding any Thing of their own (except in thofe Books where they declare they have fupplied Ibme particular Chapters that were mifling) I mean, not any material Thing. Tranfitions they mult make for the Gaps where they left out any large Paflage. But this is nothing to the Homilies on St. Lw, in which St. Hierom fays, he altered no- ^ Of Hifiory of Infant- Bdftifm. ^jg Of the Commentary on the Epiftle to the Ro- mans (out of which one of the Paflages concerning Infant- Baptifm is taken) thereare two Fragments preferved m the Greek, viz,. Phibcal. c. 9. and r. 25, Mr.Gale tells us twice over that of that in c. 25. there are in ^M^»«tf'sVerfion hardly any Footfteps of the Original preferved. Suppofe they had been both wanting in Rufinus ; what Wonder ? Since, as I faid, he profefTes thac he had (hortned that Work by one half. All that can be argued from hence, is, that as there is in that half which he has preferved, one Place that mentions Infants Baptifm, probably in the Whole there were Two. And juft fuch an Advantage accrues to his Ar- gument from that which he quotes P. $16 of Rufitjus complaining that feveral Vo- lumes or Tomes of this Comment were wanting, before he took it in Hand, fere apud omnium Biblio- thecas (which he in tanflating augments to, all JLibraries.') This Argument weighs backward. Therefore he to make it turn the right Way, does in the next Page call this Deficiency an Interpolation ; which is quite the Contrary. Thofe Two Sentences of Rvfinus^ which Mr. Gale here recites out of the Peroratio of his Tranflation of Origen on Epifi. ad Romanos^ were not meant by him for any ferious Account of what he had done in that Work; but for a Jeer on St. /y/>r<7w ; who had fet out Trads in his own Name, whereof all the Subftance was (as Rvfinus would inflnuate) ta- ken out of Origen. So that Rvfinus pretended, he might as well have called this franjlation^ Rufinl Expofitio^ &c. as St. Hierom had intitled fome Works of his, Hieronymi Lihri^ &c. which were little more than Tranflations of Origen. But he fays, he would not get himfelf a Reputation by fuch Tricks pf a Plagiary. Tho' 5 So Jl Defence of the Tho' this appears by the Sentence it fcif, and by his putting the Name Hieronymi into it ^ and though Huetim (out of whom, I qneftion not, Mr. Gale had it) do note the Diift of it ^ yet he, Jike a true Reprefenter of Things, fets down the Sentences, but leaves out the Note. p. 527. Whereas one of the FafTages I cited, was from Origtn^ Homilies on jfoflma [Thou wafl an Jnfanty when thou wafi baftiz,ed~\ concerning the Tranllation whereof I produced Rufinus\ Declara- tion, that he had in that Tranllation neither ad- ded nor omitted any Thing •, but truly rendered what he found in the Greek Books. Mr. Gale would here prove Rufinus a Liar • becaufe in one Part of a Chapter fnot that which I cited, but another) there is found the Difference of a few Words be- tween ^t//«'s Tranllation, and a Qiiotationof that Part in the Philocalia. But, Firfij The Difference is of no Moment. And, Secondlyy There is no knowing by the Philo- calia how the Original was. For their Way, when they intitle a Chapter, as taken oat of fuch or fuch a Tome, is, after they have recited fomething out of that Tome, to run to another Tome where there is any Thing to the fame Purpofe; and then go back to where they left off. And this commonly, feveral times in one Chapter •, as appears in all the Excerpta which they have taken out of the Books againft CfZ/wi ^ and would, no doubt, appear in the other, if the Ori- ginal of the other were extant, as it is of them. Mr. Gale gives Inftances of fome Chapters in the Philocalia, which are there faid to be tranfcribed from fuch or fuch a Homily of Orlgens on fuch or fuch a Book of Scripture ^ whereof one Ihall not find any Footftep in Rufinus^s Latin. Huetius will tell him the Reafon of this. Oa- ^en compofcd feveral Setts of Sermons or Homilies oa Hifiory of Infant-Baptifm, ^Si on tbe fame Book or Epiftle. One perhaps when he was young. Another Volume of Sermons on the fame Epiftles, when he was old. St. Gregory and St. BafiL fometimes lighted on one of thefe Vo- lumes. Rufinus on another, f^ide HuetH Prafat. in Origeniana^ p. 4. They that can think that thefe PalTages concern- ing Infant-Baptifm in the Tranflations of Origen^s Works were put in by the Tranflators, who li- ved but an Hundred and Fifty Years after Origens Time •, and yet do maintain, that in Origeris Time there was no Infant-Baptifm •, do make them more abfurd Men than we can conceive them to have been. For the Praftice of the Church could not have been changed from Antipsedobaptifm to Pse- dobaptifm in that fpace of Time, but that fuch learned Men, as St. Hierom efpecially was, muft have known it. Eufehius*s Church-Hiftory writ- ten in the intermediate Time, and tranflated by Rvfinus-t muft have taken notice of it. Or the very Tradition from Father to Son muft have carri- ed a Memory of it. And then, for them to make Origen feveral Times overfpeakofa Thing which all the World knew was not in ufe at his Time, muft have made them ridiculous. Mr. Gale obferves twice or thrice, how dipping of Infants in the ordinary Baptifms in England, be- gan about Two Hundred Years ago to degenerate into pouring or fprinkling. 'Tis true, it did fo j but every Body knows it, and the Time of it. And therefore he that (hould in tranflating a Book written before that Time, put in any Thing of fprinkling as ufed ordinarily in England in the Author's Time, would be hooted at. The like would have been in the Cafe of thefe Men. liRu- finus had firft fallen into fuch a Blunder, he would not haveefcaped theLafh of St. Hierom. Nor if St. Hierom had been guilty, would Rvfinus have fpared jS2 A Defence of the fpared him. But the Contrary is true. For nofe only both of them do tranflate Origen fo fpeak- ing of Infant-Baptifm as being ordered by the Apo- ftles •, but all of that Time, St. Auftin^ St. Chry^ foftom^ &c. that do fpeak any Thing of it, fpeak of it as praftifed not only in Origen's Time, buC from the Beginning. If Mr. Gale had been a candid Inquirer after the Truth in this Queftion concerning Origen s holding, or not holding the Doftrine of Infant-B^ptifm •, he would have taken notice of a Paflage in St. Hi- erom \ who being the greateft Reader of Origen^ Works in the Original, of any Chi iftian that ever was, brings in, in his Difcourfe of him, fuch Cir- cumftances as do plainly fhew, not only that he held it, but alfo built fome of his particular Tenets upon it. And fince his Works (which were more than all the Bibliotheca Patrum that we have now) are loft (the Greek of almoft all the Tranflations of the greateft Part) fuppofe we could not be fure of the Authenticalnefs of this or that Paflage in the Tranflations, nor find any Pafl^age in the re- maining Greek to that purpofe ; yet thefe Two Things concurring together, that there are fevc- ral plain Places in the Tranflations ^ and a plain Teftimony from one that had feen the Originals ; that this Doftrine was held by him, and was then vifible in his Books ^ would convince any Body, except it be one that has a Task fet him to main- tain the Negative, and maintain it he muft. The Paffage in St. Hiercm^ which I mean, was in my firft Edition, not fet down in this Fifth Chapter which is concerning Origen^ and which Mr. Gale is here anfwering. But it was in the Kineteenth Chapter (which fpeaks of St. Hierom and the Pelagians) §. i6. And in the fecond Edi- tion I put a Note of it into the Fifth j becaufe it clears Hifiory of Infant-Baptifm, ^Sj clears up the Doubt concerning Orlgenh holding Infant-Baptifm. Mr. Gale^ I doubt not, had feea both. It is St. Hleromh jeering Advice to the Pdagi- ans, who were put to it how to give any good Account of the Reafon of baptizing Infants, fincc they would not own that they had any original Sin or Corruption. He in arnocking Way advi- fes them to march over to Origens Opinion j Qiti praterita in calls & antiqua delifta folvi dicit in bap'^ tifmo. Who holds that their Sins committed in a for" mer State [[the State of Praeexiftence] in the Cele^ fiial Regions are forgiven them in their Baptifm. This is a plain Proof that Origen did ufe to fpeak of Infant-Baptifm ^ and that St. Hierom had feen the Places where he did fo ^ and that the Do- dtrine of baptizing Infants was current in his Time ; lince he endeavoured to link his Tenet of Prse-ex- iftence to it. But we have found, as I faid,* in the Original Text of Or;]^^« a Paflage, which will, I think, clear up any Difficulty that remains, and ftop the Mouth of all Objeftions or Evalions concerning the Senle and Pradice of the Church in his time \ which was about Anno Domini no. After the Apoftles no. ThePaflage is fo much to the fame Senfe and Purpofe with thofe tranflated by St. Hierom and Rufinus ', the Style and Phrafe fo much the fame ; the fame Texts of Scripture quoted, &c. that it is not only it felf an Evidence, but alfo confirms thofe other to be genuine Tranflations. It fhail be recited at large in the Appendix^ which I think to fet at the End of this Anfwer ^ meaning alfo to print a confiderable Number of them for the Ufe of thofe who have the firit or the fecond Edition of my Hiftory. 5 84 A Defence of the My next Chapter was Quotations out of St. C^' frian who flourifhed an Hundred and Fifty Years after the Apoftles. Him, and his Time, and all that comes after ^ Mr. (j^/e yields as pradiling In- fant-Baptifm. So that I wonder what Work he means the Man, who, he fays, is to write art Anfwer to my Book, (hall have. For he himfelf has in thefe Reflexions anfwered the firft Five Chapters to p. 43. And that, if we believe him himfelf fufficiently. But if the other Man be to anfwer all the reft ; Mr. Gale has done ill to yeild it all before-hand. What is the Gonfequence of this Gonceffion we will confider prefently. But he throws in fome Difparagements of the Men and Times which he yields up. T. 528. Firfl, St. Cyprian fpeaks as plainly of In- fant-Communion, as hedoesof Infant'Baptifm. Concerning this Matter 1 have fpoken Three or Four Times in this Anfwer ^ and alfo had fhewed largely in my Bo6k, that there is no Proof of mere Infants (but only of Children of Four or Five Years old) being admitted to the Communion in St. Cyprian's Time • and that, except that Time and Place, there is no Account (at leaft, that I know of. I do there refer my felf to fuch as had ftu- died that Point more •, no Account, I fay) before the Year Four Hundred, of Children being admit-* ted at all in any Church. Of which fince he will take no notice^ I (hall not repete the fame An- fwer to all his Crambesj but add this general Reply. That this is at belt but an Argttment ad homi^ nem. It is a Queftion in the prefent Chriftian Church, whether giving the Communion to In- fants be an Error, or a Duty. The prefent ^Fif- ftern Chriftians think it an Error. The Greek Church, which is, I think, thebiggefl: half of 0(7^/- ftendom, think it a Duty. To thefe laft, an Ar- gument Hiflory of I»fa?it-Baptifw, 385. gument againft Infant-Baptifm drawn from the Pradice of thofe Times which gave the Commu- pion as well as Baptifm to Infants, weighs back- ward ; and confirms the Thing which it would overthrow. To us and all Chriftians hereabouts, it weighs but very little. It proves only that thofe . Churches and thofe Times which did fo, were, in our Opinion, in an Error in one Thing. Does that overthrow the Force of an Argument taken from their Doftrine aiid Praftice in other Things ? It is not, in the Opinion of any Chriltian, a F««- damental Error. If Providence fhould place any of us in Mufcovy^ or any Country of the Greek Chriftians, where this Cuftom is ufed ^ we fhould iiot (do, as Mr. Gale, and Another^ would have the Antipcedobaptifts and other Diffenters do here) re- iiounce their Communion j unlefs we had feme greater Reafon than that. There is no good Argu- ment to prove any Thing, which does not prove it to one.Chriftian, as well as to another. . Secondlyy St. Cyprian he fays was an African ; and fo were the Sixty Six Bifhops whofe Teftimony is joined with his; fo that probably Infant-Baptifm began in the Church of Carthage. Does Mr. Gale take his Readers for fuch Idiots,' as to think a Teftimony is difparaged, becaufe he can tell where the People that give it, lived ? So Origen lived at Alexandfia; and Mr. Whifton thinks it began there. And Irenam at Lyons in Gallia. By that Account it began there. Thofe Chriftians, whofe Children, St. Paui fays, were Saints, lived at Corinth. And the Places Where he is mentioned to have baptized the whole Houfholds, were all in Greece. Some perhaps will think it: began there. But our Saviour, who commanded tittle Children to be received in his Name, was, ac- cording to the Flefh, a ^evo. So that the Chrifti- an Baptifm began there. Antip«dobaptifm begaii gc among 5 86 A Defence of the among the Alp, or in Germany, Will that be ta« ken for a Refutation of it ? Thirdly^ The Africans were generally Men of weak Vnderftandings. And St. Aufliuy another African thought it an ApofioUcal Tradition. St. Aufiin concludes partly from Proofs of Scrip- ture ; partly becaufe it had been ever ufed from the Beginning by all Chriftians, that it was AfO' fiolica autoritate traditum^ ordered [[or, delivered down] by the Autority of the Apoftles. Is there any Thing in ^his, whereon to ground a Note ot Con- tempt upon St. Aufiin? Does not Origen fay the very fame in the Places we were lalt fpeaking of? Can the Antipaedobaptills account it decent in their Champion to infult, as abfurd, fometimes the prefent Divines, fometimes the antient Chri- ftians, for faying that which all Chriftians in the Woild fay, and ever faid, except themfelves. For a parting Blow, he has preferved a Tefti- mony againfl: Infant-Baptifm ^ which ought in Po- licy to have been one of his beft;. He fays, Tho^ the African BiJJwps were no wifer, &c. The Greek Church feem very plainly to have been fiitl of another Opinion. Here one would exped fomething that according to his Promife fhould feem very plain. 'Tis this at laft; Diony/ius Bifhop of Alexandria^ writing a Letter concerning the Charader of Novatian (whom he makes a Monfter of Impiety) fays of him, after a great many worfe Things, that he did d^il^.v aym Aa7po;', male void holy Baptifm Qwhich Words Mr. Gale tranflating, adds a Crime that he was never _ac- cufed of, making him a Quaker •, he utterly difk/lows holy Baptifm~\ and, rh t^ oivj^ 'ttUiv it) oi/.oKoyidcf wia- rpiTTSiy^fubvert the Faith and Profefflon that goes before it. Here Mr. Gale fets his Thumb' Diony/ius fpeaks of th? Profeifion of Faith going before Baptifm. Now H'iftory of hfant-Baptifm, jEf Now this is a known Things that a Profeflloa of Faith was ufiial before Baptifm (I after others, had fpoken largely of it) in the Cafe of Perfons baptized at full Age (as Novatian was) made by themfelves as the Faith they then a6:ually had ; in the Cafe of Infants, made by their Sponfors, as he might fee in lertulUan (for there were then no Presbyterian Baptifms without Sponfors) as the Faith into which the Infant was baptized, and in which he was to be inftrucled, and which he muft hereafter hold and keep, if he expected any Bene- fit by his Baptifm. This was abundantly enough to make Dlonypui fay what he did. And is no more than any one would now fay concerning fuch a Cafe, that a Chri- ftian turning to Wicked nefs or Apoftafy, renoun- ces his Baptifm, and the Profeffion of Faith, thae went before it. This might well enough be faid even of one that was baptized in Infancy, in re- fpeft to the Profeflion made in his Name by Spon- fors at his Baptifm. But Dionyfius was now fpeak- ing of a Man who was known to have been bap- tized at Age. He reprefents him as one who ha- ving been an Infidel and a very wicked Man be^ fore, and then in a Fear of Death defiring to be baptized, and in order thereto making the Pro- fellions, and being baptized in his Bed of Sicknefs, had afterward been as bad as ever before. That was frujirating holy Baptifm^ and perverting the Faith and Profeffion made before it. This is all that Mr. Gale has to prove that the Greek Church were of another Opinion than St. Q- frian^ and his dull Africans. His Clients muft needs fhink this but a very in- different Plea to clofe their Caufe with. But he to excufe himfelf, and put them out of hopes of any better from any other Pleader, plainly tells them, they muft not expc^ to find any Paffages mne in' V G C 2 confjfcttf 388 A Defence of the confiflent Mo that Practice Qhe Pra6;ice of Infatlt- Bjpcifm]] $han this is. I don't love boaftiiig, to the degree that he does. Yet this, 1 thtnk, I may fay, that I, though their Adverfary as he would reprefent me, pro- duced feveral Paflages more plaufiblefor Antipie- dobaptifoi j than this •, or indeed than any he has brought •, and tbofe fuch as had never been made ufe of in that Difpute before. I produced Impar- tially all that 1 found. As for Dionyfvs.\ there is a particular Reafonto fatisfy us that neither he and his Church of Alex- andria, nor the Church of Rome^ nor that of Cap- fadocia did take the Dodrine and Pradice of In- fant -Baptifm to be any Error in St. Cyprian and his Church of Carthage. For all thefe (and indeed all the noted Churches in Chrifiendorn) were enga- ged at that time in a Qiieftion and Difpute about Baptifm •, not in any Queftion whether Infants are to be baptized fof that, as 1 have often faid, there was never any Qiieftion made by any Church nor by any Man, except TertulUan^ for a Thoufand Years) but in a Queftiou whether Baptifm recei- ved from the Hinds of Heretics or Schifmatics was valid, or not. Cyprian, of Carthage^ FirmlUan o( Cappad a a y and many other Bifhops and Churches faid a was not-, but that Men baptized by Here, tics muih ;ft:bey would be admitted in the Church, be b3;T.izeu a-ncw ; and they pradifcd accordingly. Stephef} Biihcp of Rome^ and feme with him, main- tained the Contrary. The Contention increafed to a great Heiglitb, a.id lafted a longtime. Con- cils were held on each Side in Et^rope and Jfia, as we'll as in Africa. Ma?iy MefTages and Letters fent. Stephen canicd it fo hi^h, as to renounce in great meafure Communion with Cyprian^ Firmili^ an^&c. This Dionyfus o( Alexandria (whom Mr. Gale here would make 3a AnUp^dobaptift) aded the Pare Hifiory of hfrnf-Ba^tifm, ' ^ 89 Part of a Mediator, and wrote pacificatory Let- ters-, whereof good Parts are preferved by £»- febiuS' Now I fay, if the Practice of baptizing Infants, which is known to have been then uled by the Churches of >^/r;V;?, had been at that Time by any of the other accounted an Error ;. it could not h'ave mifled of being cenfured, or taken notice of, in the Difpute. When they were inveighing each a^ainft the other's Miftakes about tlie Narnre andUie of Bapcifm-, Stephen^ who reproached Q-pri^K for an A- bufe of Baptifni in one Refpeft, 'oiz. forgiving it to Men who had already a Baptifra which Stefhtn thought (though received in a bhmeable way, yet) valid ^ would alfo not failed to have cenfured the Abufe of it in this other refpeift, if he had thought the giving it to ly/fants to be an Abule. But fo it is, that ill the whole Difpute there is not one Word faid about it. A certain Sign that there was no difference in their Tenets and Ufages in that particular. So that the Proof of the African Church ufing it, and the Silence of the reft, is a Proof for all of them, that they ufed it; and for Dionyfius and his Church among the reft. P. 530. Here he enters on the Recapitulation, or fummingnpof what he has done: Of the Argu- ments he has ufed ; of the Texts of Scripture ^he has explained, or cited ; with which he has done, as he has with his Table of Authors. For as in the one he has given you the Name and Edition of every Dictionary or School-Book ; fo in the other, if he has mentioned or occafionally refer- red or alluded to any Text ; he puts that Text down in the Index to fill up the Number. I ihall not follow him in the Re-capitulation ; but leave him and his Sir (to whom he ever and anon addreftes, Tou fee. Sir) to applaud and crow over their egre^ia facinora & res pr^chre gej}as ; Cc 3 as 59© ^A Defence of the as knowing that whatever I may do with his Ar- guments, I can never Hop or quell, his Humour of boafting. Inftead of that, \ crave leave toaddrefs my felf in a few Words to the Antipaedobaptills ^ and in a few to my Brethren of the Clergy. 'The Firft, If they cannot from the Evidence, and the Picas pro and contra^ determine their Opi- nion concerning the Times of Origen, TertulUaN, Jremus, &c. fhould at leaft weigh in their Minds the Confequence that follows from this very Thing that is granted concerning the Pradice of Infant- Baptifm, viz.. that it can be plainly traced up to St.* Cyprian's Time. The Force and Weight of the Confequence or Argument from thence does not lie, as Mr. Gale vionld reprefent, that it began in that Time •, but fince it was not ufed from the Beginning, we ought not to ufe it • but it lies thus • that which we can plainly trace fo far up, we have all Reafon to think was from the Beginning. We are now at above Sixteen Hundred Years diftance from the Time that all the Apoftles had left the World. Of thefe Sixteen Hundred, One Thoufand Four Hundred and Fifty are granted and yielded. Not to mention now the improbable Things which the penyers of it are forced to fay, to ftave off the Evidence for One Hundred farther up, [The Books are not genuine ^ fuch a Part of the Chapter is interpolated : They by hfams don't mean as we do : The Tranflations are not right ; which is the Plea that the Papifts ufe when we urge to them Texts of Scripture, ere] But to fpeak of the Time that is yielded. Of the Sixteen Hundred, the firft Two Hundred (which, with the Hundred Years of Apoftolic Times, make the Three firft Centuries) areowned ]by all Learned Men of all Perfwafions, to have beea Hifiory of Infant-BA^tifm. 591 been the moft pure both m Doftrine and Praftice.^ They that except againft the Canons, the Coun- cils, the Cuftoms (ince Conflantins^s Time (when the Empire turning Chriftian, the Riches of the World came into the Church, and by degrees corrupted it) as not fo fafely to be relied on •, do yet extol the Purity of the three Firft Centuries (/. e. the Time of Chrift and the Apoftles, and Two Hundred Years more) when there was no Tentation from the Love of the World to warp Mens Confci- ences. That which depraved the Church, when it did come to be depraved, was the fame Place-hunting that has fince depraved and ruined every particu- lar Church, and State too, that has been ruined ; and will do more. But in the Times we fpeak of, there was no Place worth Handing for ; but thaC of a Martyr , to make a glorious End of a Life which would have been, as St. Paul fays, if in this Life only they had hoped in Chrifi^ the molt mife- rable. Now the Times of St. Cyprian, which are yielded, were far within that Space,* and in the midft of the Perfecution. He himfelf at the Head of his people, and Multitudes of them with him, and af- ter him (as many of them had done before him) gave up their Lives as a Sacrifice to the Teftimony of the Truth of our holy Religion j Butchered by the Cruelty of their Heathen Governors in their Hatred to the Chriftian Name and Dodlrine^ which they faw, did by theConftancy of fuch Men in- creafe, in fpite of all their Oppofition. Thefe were the Men whom Mr. Gale repreftnts to you, as the dull Africans. And thefe were the Times which he at p. 541. would have you com«» prehend under the Name of the more corrupt Centu» ries. If you were to read this holy Martyr's learn- ed Works, and pious Letters •, you would be fuf- Cc 4. ficienfe 592 ji Defence of the ficiently angry with your Advocate, for fl:yling(as he does, p. 529. the Letter he there fpeaks of, (which to read, would be for your better Infor- mation) a trifling and empty Rejily. Honeft Men, that have, or think they have, aii honefl; Caufe, hate to have it defended by Pleas that are not true. He tells you in the next Words, p. 529. that they ufed Infant- Baptifm, perhaps only as an indijferent Things or in Cafes of Danger, I de- fire no other Judge than one of your felves, to lee, by reading the Place it felf, where they fpeak of the Neceflity of it in terms as high and higher than we do now, if that be not as diredly falfe a Reprefentation of it, as ' can be given by any Man of any Thing. He has undertaken to defend you. I deiire you to defend him, if you can. And if you cannot, you know what you ought! to do. Mr. Danvers him felf did not fay but that this Place fpokeof Infant-Baptifm as a Thing, not in- different, but necefiary and ordinary. He thought of it (as Mr. Gale does now of Orlgens and Ire- nAus\ Sayings) that it was forged. That Thought, though it be fo plainly confuted that fuch a Plea will never be ufed any more, might at that time be his Mlfah. But to deny a Book before one's Face to fay what it does plainly fay concerning the Danger to the Soul of an Infant dying without Baptifm, is a Thing that needs a better Defence than that which ^aMtA Danvers. Mr. Gale himfelf ufes commonly to fpeak of the Three firfi: Centuries, as early Times and fit to be appealed to. But here feeing this to be Fifty Years within themi would have it to avail no- thing, unlefs Teftimonies be brought for the fame Practice, v^ithln the other Two Hundred and Fifty. And though that have been done; yet he knows liow to get a Verdiifl that.it Jias not. 'Tis but faying Hifiory of InfAnt-Baftijml 395 faying fo pofitively, and Four or Five times over, f. 540. 'The Autority of the Primitive Fathers for at leafi Two Hundrtd and Fifty Tears gives no Counte- nance^ &c. and then appealing to liis SiV, p. 541. Tou fee. Sir, there is indeed nothing in whatever they advance, which can in the leafh favour their Opini" on, &C. But fhould he not mind, or could he think that you would not mind, that even this Queftion and Anfwer in a meeting of Sixty Six Bifhops at the Year after the Apoftles, an Hundred and Fifty, con- cerning the baptizing of an Infant before the Eighth Day, does carry in it an Evidence for Se- venty or Eighty Years higher? It cannot be thought but feveral Bifhops among fo many, were Seven- ty or Eighty Years old (which reaches up to Se- venty or Eighty from the Apoftles) and it is plain by the Difcourfe, that not one of them had any Doubt or QjJetlioa of baptizing in Infancy ; which yet they muft have had, if it had not been in ufc ever fince they could remember ; or if they them- felves (fuch of them as were born of Chriftian Pa- rents) had not been baptized in Infancy. For St. Cy- prian tells Fidpts, that there was not one in all the Number who doubted but that a Child muft be baptized before the Eighth Day, if Need require. Much lefs then did they doubt but that they muft be baptized in Infancy. Mr. Gale would have you conceive of St. Cyprian as an obfcure Bilhop, of no greater Converle than with his Africans. But it appears by his Books and Letters that he had great Correfpon- dence and Communion with the moft noted Churches and Bifhops then in the World. In all which Churches his Memory was alfo afterward honoured, as of a glorious Martyr. JVherc: ^94 -^ Defence of the Whereas Mr. Gale, at p. 541. would have you inlift upon Proofs within the firft Fifty Years, or lefs ^ if he mean other than Scripture- Proofs, he mocks you ^ and takes you for more ignorant than I hope you are. At the Year of Chrilt Fifty, *. e. after his Afcenfion about Seventeea. Whether any Book of the New-Teftament was written, is not certain. But for certain no other Book of any Chriftian, of which we have any Memory 5 nor ia a long Time after. And indeed very few are left, either of the Apoftles Times (befide their own) or of the Hundred Years following. The Per- fecution and Oppofition againft Chriftianity it felf, hindred them from any Leifure to write of any Thing but the Defenfe of the Fundamentals of their Religion. There is little in thofe few that remain, about the Rituals of it. Of thofe Remains that are left, elder than St. Cyprian, I have told you what Jvflin^ Jren&us^ TertulUany and Origen do fay ^ and intend to give in the jipperi' dix a Qiiotation or Two out of Clemens Ale x an- drinus \ and do wilh you could read the Books your felves. When the World became Chriflian (which was chiefly in the Fourth Century) more Books were written. And accordingly the Tetlimonies are many, full, and undeniable. Neither does one of them fpeak of it as new •, or as a Thing that needed Proof ; but as of a Thing fuppofed and ordinarily known. No Council ever enadted it, or made Canons to injoin it ^ becaufe no Church or Seft of Chrifcians had ever denied it. On the Contrary they occafionally inftance in it as a Thing that had ever been. PeUgius, v/ho kt up a Se(fl that denied original Sin, was gall'd with that Argument of the Catho- lics •, Pi'''hy are Infants baptiz.ed for the Remijfion of ■Sin, if. they have not original Sinf Adlual Sins they cats Hifiorj of Jnfant'Biipifm, 19% can have none. And forae that aggravated his Er- ror, accufed him of it, as a Confequence of his Tenet, that he pleaded againft the baptizing of Infants. He declared an Abhorrence of the Slanderous Imputation^ and faid, they accufed him of faying a Thing which he never heard any Chriftianj no not even any SeBary^ fay. And if there had ever been any Church in any Time, or any Part of the World that denied In- fant-Baptifm ^ he mufl: have heard of them. For he was a learned Man ^ and had lived in the moffc noted Churches of £«rc]?e, J/ia^ and Africa. And they had then but Three Hundred Years, or un- der Three Hundred and Twenty, to look back to the Time of the Apoltles. Thefe and many fuch decifive Evidences, were in that Part of my Book, which Mr. Gale gives up and cannot deny. Now this Fourth Century, in which Conflantin the Emperor became Chriftian, was none of the corrupt Times of the Church, nor the next Cen- tury to it i I mean not to- any hi^h Degree. I faid before, that the World with its Pomps coming into the Church, corrupted it by degrees, with Ambition, Fadions, Schifms, Parties, &c. But that was not done to any high degree prefently. 'Twas that Fourth Century that had thofe fhining Lights •, Conftantin the firft Chriftian Emperorj EufebiuSy Athariajius^ St. Bafd^ the two Gregories^ St. Hlerom^ Sc. Chryfoflom^ St. Auflin, &c. Thefe Ml'' Gale himfelf, when he quotes them, ftyles Saints ^ St. Cyprian^ St. Bafil, St. Gregory, &:c. Do you think he accounts them Saints? Does he al- low them to be Chriftians? Will he own that there was any Church of Chrift at that Time ? Would he have held Communion with the Church then^ or any Pait of it? His ^9^ J Defence of the His Anfwrer, either Affirmative or Negativf, will fly in his Face, fo long as he holds that un- charitable and unchriftian Opinion (which he has profeded in this Book of his, and which was the only one he could find to confront and defeat the Exhortation I gave you againft feparating from the Church, though you thought her to be in an Error in Points not fundamental) I mean his. Opinion and AfTertion that Psedobaptifm is a fun- damentat Error in the Conftitution of a Church,, that the Age and Manner of receiving Baptifm, are of the Ejfefjce of it. That Baptifm ^o given as the Psedobaptifts give it, not only is blamea- ble m its Circumftances, but becomes m Baptifm °y that Perfons fo baptized are 7wt true Af embers of the Chrifitan Churchy have no Baptifm \ no Title tQ Church Memberships but JJjould be difclaimed \ no more to be communicated with, than one would communicate TP/V/^ Pfr/^w he cannot efleem baptiz.ed. Thefe Portions he maintains, p. 77, 78, e^c. to 84. and without any Shame or Modefty, pretends that I fuppofed all of them to be right. And he in- timates worfe, and fpeaks them as far as he dare s. that the Church of England has no Blfljop^ Tref- hyters^ &c. Now I fay, A Man holding thefe defperately uncharitable Pofitions, could not have held Com- munion with the Church of the Time we were fpeaking of For in all that Time, by all the Footlleps found in reading the numerous Books then publifhedj, there is no Appearance of any- Church, nay, not of any Sed, but what were Pse- dobapiills. I know, you generally do not hold fo unchari- table a Tenet (but only he, and fome few) If you did, I would never advife you to come to Church ; nor any Church to receive you. St, Hiftory of Infam-BapHfm', ^97 St. Taul when he fpoke iTJjejf. ii. of tht Falling away^ or Degeneracy, dTo^asUj that fhould come in the Church, or greateft Part thereof, iaid , there was fomething that did then let^ or xoith- hold, i. e. put a Stop to the coming of that ^p-. fiafy^ and to the revealing of that AUn of Sin^ who Psuld fit as God in the Temple of God^ i. e. in the Church, which he fhould defile. An,d he faid that ''fhat which did then let, would let until it were tnken otit of the Way, And, that they knew what it was'^ for he had told them^ when he was prefent with them. That is, he had told them in private. It being not a Thing fitting to be publifhed. For it was the Power of the Roman Empire^ of the Deftru- ction of which, or its being taken out of the Way^ it was not proper for St. Paid at that time pub- licly to fpeak or write. But it came abroad among the Chriftians afterward -^ and tlicy knew what it was, that he had told the 'Thejfaloman. Chriftians, viz.. that when the Roman Empire fhould be deftroyed •, Then that wicked fljould he reveal-- edf &c. Now that Empire was not deftroyed at once 5 but by degrees. And accordingly fome modera Divines have placed the Beginning of the Apoflafy fooner, fome later : But none fo foon as the End of the Fourth Century •, in which (or before which) lived all the Fathers that I cited fpeaking fo ful- ly and plainly of Infant-Baptifm, that Mr. Gale yields St. Cyprian ('who lived in the Middle of the Third Century) and all downward. Some did of late, with great AfTurance of their Skill in computing the Hiftory of the Prophecies, fix the Beginning of the Apoftolical Times about the Middle of the Fifth Century, viz,, at the Year Four Hundred Fifty Five, or Six. But moll Rea- ders ofScripture did then think even that Date to be by many Y?ars too foon (for the Scripture does not ^§S A t>efeme of the not for every Decay of the Church impute Ap. fiafy^ or falling away to it \ but then when the Corruption becomes a Gangreen. And the Ro- man Empire held a conliderable degree of Power, even in Italy^ to a much later Date) And now they i themfelves may fee their own Miftake. For it was by their Hypothelis to laft but i25o Years (which with the 456, make 1716) and then a great Advancement, or Refurredlion, of true Religion and of Chrift's Kingdom was to begin. Which he that thinks to be now, or does not fee that Chriftendom is yet in the Dregs of that Degeneracy, does not know what Religion, or Chrift's Kingdom is. But none as* I faid, did ever conceive it to have began during the Fourth Century. I mention thefe Things to you, for this Rea- fon-, that you (who perhaps may not be acquaint- ed with the Charai^er of the Chriftians that li- ved in the feveral- Ages or Centuries of the Church, by reading the Books and Hiftories of each Century) may be able, by fuch general Accounts as lie open to all Readers of Scripture, to un- derftand that the Centuries which we quote, and which Mr. Gale yields^ were not within the Space of that falling avpay\ but were Times wherein the true Spirit and Genius of Chriftian Religion and piety did continue to a Degree, to which we may wifh we could fee any Thing equal in our Time. And that confequently you may per- ceive, that not only thofe that have told you, that infant-Baptifra began but of late under fuch or fuch a Pope of Romc^ but alfo Mv.Gale who infinuates to you that it began in the corrupt Centu- ries^ do abufe you. You perceive and mind, that I fpeak now only of the Time that he yields, from St.Cyprian and downward. Not but that there is Evidence, both from Hijlofy of hfant-Bapufm. j 9^ from Scripture and from the elder Fathers (fuch as may fatisfy any impartial Inquirer) of its be- ing from the Beginning. Suffer me to advife you of one Thing wherein the Writers againfl: Infant-Baptifm take Advantage of your Incapacity to read the antient Chriltian Au- thors your felves. There are fome of the Fathers, who in their Books that are left have not happened to fiy any Thing about the baptizing of Infants ; there having not been any Difpute about that ia their Time ^ and yet they have perhaps occafion by reafon of the frequent Biptifms of adult Converts then, to fpeak of the Sacrament of Baptifm in ge- neral. And when they do fo fpeak of it in general. 'Tis common with them to mention Faith, and a ferious Purpofe of Amendment of Life, (fc, as necefTary for thofe who are by that Sacrament en- tered into the Chriftian Covenant. Now it is ufual with the Antipiedobaptift Wri- ters to colled a Number of thefe Sayings, con- cerning the NecefGty of Faith, &c. as there are Thoufands of them. Thofe of the faid Writers who are cautious not to difcover the Weaknefs of their Plea, pick them out of fuch Fathers in whofe Books there is not any mention of the Cafe of Infants ^ and they would have an unlearn- ed Man conclude from them that thofe Fathers mult have thought Baptifm of Infants impradica- ble, becaufe they do in thofe general Sentences fpeak of Faith and Repentance as requillte to Baptifm. Now all fuch Arguings are fliewed to be in-con- clulive by this one Obfervation, w^. That thole Fathers who were unconteltedly Picdobaptifts, and in whofeTimethePradice is notorioufly known, do, when they fpeak of Baptifm in general, fpeak in the fame Language, and infill upon the fame Qiialifications. A learn- 400 A Defence of the A learned Friend has fent me a Colle^llon of Several fuch Sayings, of fiich Fathers as the An- tipxdobaptifts themfelves do own to have pradi- fed Infant Baptifm j and advifed me to let you fee fome of them. St. Cyprian^ who lived in the 150th Year after the Apoftles, is now well known to the Antipje- dobaptifts, as one maintaining the Doif^rine of Piedobaptifm i and yet he, when he is difcourfing 6f Baptifm in general, has Sentences concerning the Neceffity of Faith, Repentance, &c. to Baptifm, as pofitive as can be found in any Father whatfoever. As for Example. £py?. 75. Ed, Oxon. Qui cum Noe in area non fuerunt^ non tantum tiur- gati per aquam non funt^ fed Jiatim diluvio illo peri- erunt. Sic <^ omnes quicunq\ in ecclejia cum Chrifid 7Jon funt^ forii peribunt ^ nifi ad unician & falutare ecclefia Sacramentum per Panitentiam convertantur. •' They who were not with Noah in the Arc, *' obtained no purgation or cleanling by the Wa- '' ter, but even periihed by that Floud. So alfo " whoever they are that are not with Chrift in *' the Church, will perifh as Men out of it; un- " lefs they do come, with Repentance to that only fa- *' lutary Sacrament of the Church. Here one of the Writers, I mentioned, should from the univerfality of this Sentence, whoever they are^ have concluded that no Perfon whatfoe- ver was in Cyprians Judgment capable of that Sa- crament of Baptifm without Repentance •, if we had not otherwife known his Sentiment concern- ing Infants being baptized, from thofe Places of his Books where he treats particularly of their Cafe. The like Ufe they would make of his 70th Epi- ftle, where he is fpeaking of the Interrogations made at Baptifm \ Dofl thou believe, &c. if he had hapned never to write any Thing concerning the Baptifm of Infants. (jre^. Hijlory of Infant-Baptifm, ^oi Greg. Nyjfen lived in thofe Times and PJaces, ivhen and where the Antip^edobaptifls themfelves now do not deny that Infant-Baptifm was in ufe, viz,, more than an ilundred Years after St. Cypri- an. He mentions Faith and Prayer among the Things that complete the Sacrament of Baptifm. Or at. Catechet, c. 33* ; . ^ripioy. Prayer to Cody and the imploring of the Hea- venly Grace^ and the Water^ and faith are the Things that make up the Sacrament of Regeneration. . St. Cyril^ St. Chryfofiom, St. ^ujlin h'lmkif, wheil they fpeak of Baptifm in general ufe Sayings like to thefe. Yet we are fure from other Places in their Books, that they underftood the Cafe of Infants to be a particular and excepted Cafe •, and that they were to be baptized though they had not at prefent thofe Qualifications ; but that they were by Baptifm dedicated to that Religion which would teach them, and which did require of them, thefe Conditions as they grew up. ^ And I gave in my Book^ PartW. Chap. i. ^2.' a Pattern of two Sayings ^ one of St. Bajil. And one of St. Hierom. Which, if we were not fure of the Contrary, might make one think that they were Antipaedobaptifts, f/2,. a Place where St. 5^- /// fays \ One muft believe fir ft i and then he fealed with Baptifm. St. Hierom fays of the Apoftles^ That they firfl: taught the Nations, and then bap- tized them- For it can^t be^ that do receive the Sa- crament of Baptifm^ unlefs the Soul have before rH ceived the true Fatth. And the Catechifm of the Church of England fpeaks at the fame rate ^ There 7s required of Per fans to be baptiz^ed Faith and Re- fentance. Yet it is known that all thefe knew, and allowed of the baptizing of Infants, i>^ Ad 402 J Defence- of the And therefore when we meet with fuch Say- ings in the Book of fome other Father, who per- haps has not occafion in any Part of his Book tc fpeak of the Cafe of Infants •, yet we have no fuf- ficient Reafon from fuch Sayings of his, to con-* dude his Meaning to be that they fhoald not be baptized ^ any more than it can be concluded from the like Sayings of St. Aufiin, St. Chryfo- fiom, &:c. Mr. Danvers^ and fome other Antipasdobaptifls, tliat have made it their Bufmefs to colled: great- Numbers of Qiiotations from the Fathers, have, if they aimed at convincing Men from thence that thofe Fathers were againft the baptizing of In- fants, done very imprudently to fet down, among the reft, fuch Sayings of St. Aufiin, and others who are known paedobaptifts •, becaufe thefe be- trayed the Miftake of the Senfe which they would ^ave put on all the reft. This Anfwer may fatisfy the Doubts of fome Who have been ftaggered by fuch Quotations \ and nl^t have fatislied Mr. Gale of the Invalidity of that Argument which he brought from fuch a Saying of Dior,yfiusoi Alexandria^ which I a little above rehearfed. As to the other Difpute, concerning the Man- mr of adminiftring Baptifm, into which he has dragged me by putting my Name into that Part of his Book ; I need not do as he does \ re-capi- tulate what I have faid : For he hirafelf has given up your Plea •, fo far as it makes Immerfion -ahfo- lutely necefTary. Dipping, he fays, it niuft be. The Word, Baptize, necelTarily fignifies that. But he cannot maintain that Senfe of the Word to be conftant, not even in his own Inftances, but by yeilding that if any Part of the Thing be covered with Water ('tis no matter whether put into the Water, or the Water put over that) the Thing ' ■ is liifiory of Infant-Baptifmi 40J is dipped. And he inftances •, By dipping the Nib of a Pen in Ink, the Pen is dipped. Which will juflify, not only the Sprinklers, but him that fhould baptize by putting the Tip of the Perfon's Finger in Water. A Thing reproachful to Baptifm, both in your Senfe and ours. And which if I had faid, I fhould be afhamed ever to Ihew my Face in any Difpute about Baptifm. If I do addrefs to my Brethren of the Clergy ; I ought to do it as to them from whence it is fit- ter for me, to receive Advice^ than give any to them. But as it has happened to be my Lot to fpend a good deal of that Time, which they do much better im ploy, in thinking, talking, read- ing and writing about this Matter -, I would hum- bly hope that a few Words of the Refult of my Thoughts, concerning the Queftion, and the Schifm raifed upon it, and the Way to heal it, or prevent its fpreading, may be not unkindly taken. I am clearly of Opinion, that it was not any Scruple or Offence taken at the baptizing PerfonS in Infancy, that raifed this Schifm. As that has been from the Beginning in our Church, and in all Churches j The Unity and Satisfaftion of all People in it, from the Beginning till of late, is a proof that it muft: be fome new Thing at which the Offence was taken. There has no Novelty oir Alteration, that 1 know of, in the Point of Bap- tifm, been brought into our Church, but in the Way or Manner of adminiftring it. The Way that is now ordinarily ufed we cannot deny to have been a Novelty, brought into this Church by thole that had learned it in Germany^ or at Geneva, And they were not contented to follow the Ex- ample of pouring a Quantity of Water (which had there been introduced inftead of Immerfion) but imprdved it (if I may fo abufe that Word) from Dd i pout-! 404 'A Defence of the pouring to fprinkling •, that it might have as littfd Refemblance of the aatient Way of baptizing, as pofllble. 'Tis that I verily believe, that has given the Occafion. And by all the Search that I have been able, in difcourfe with the vulgar People, to make into the Grounds of the Diflatisfadion which they have conceived concerning their Baptifm received in the Church in their Infancy, the main Hinge has turned, not upon the Time, but the Manner of its Adrainiftration. Mr. Gale (as well as the reft of their Writers) feems to have been fenfible of this. And therefore, though he intituled his Book Kefleftions upon mine, which had not medled (or but in a few Lines) with the manner of bap- tifm ; he fought his Advantage by drawing in, by Head and Shoulders, a Difpute about that ^ where- in he knew that the Examples of Scripture and other Antiquity, and the full Perfwafion of that People, and of all the Eaftcm Church to this Day, is on his Side; and I had the Didadvantage to plead for a way of Baptifm, of which the beft I could fay, was, that it is fufficient for the Ef- fence of Baptifm \ but could not deny the other (ex- cept in the Cafe of Danger of Health) to be the fitters The Solemnity of the Ciicumftances in the Ad- miniftrarion of Baptifm (as alfo of the other Sa- crament) does very powerfully ftrike and affed the Mind of any devout Chriftian that fees it ad- minillrv J. The Eaptifm of an Infant cannot have all the Solennity which that of an adult Perfon may have. The previous Fafting and Prayer, the penitent Confefilons, the Zeal and Humility and deep Aifettion of the Receiver may be vi- fible there; v.' hich cannot be in the Cafe of an Infant. But for that very Reafon we ought not to deprive the Admlniltration of this Sacrament to Hiftory of hfam-Ba^tifm. 405 to Infants of any Solennity of which it is ca- pable. The Immerfion of the Perfon (whether Infant or Adult) in the Pofture of one that is buried and railed up again, is much more Iblemn, and expref- fes the Delign of the Sacrament, and the Myfte- ry of the fpiritual wafhing much better, thaa pouring a fmal) Quantity of Water on the Face, And that pouring of Water, is much better thaa fprinkling, or dropping a Drop of Water on it. If it be done in the Church in, or at the Font, and the Congregation do join in the Prayers there iifed \ it is much more folemn than in a Bed- chamber, out of a Bafon, or Pipkin, a Tea-cnp or a Punch-bowl, and a Bed-Chamber is perhaps not quite fo fcandalous as a Kitchen or Stable ; to which Things look as if they w?onId bring it at lafl. Thefe Innovations and Alterations for the worJe, thefe vilipendiums of the holy Sacrament Ihewn and ufed in the baptizing of Infants, I take to have been the Occafions of the Difguft and DiP fatisfaftion conceived by the People concerning the Baptifm they had received in Infancy, and to given rife to the Schifm of the Antipaiidobaptills (which never fpread much in England till thele Abufes were notorious) and to be to this Day Caufes of the Growth of it. And confequtntly, that the reforming of them would be by God's Grace a good and likely Means for the healing of it. And we have reafon to give God thanks, that the pre- fent Orders and Rubrics of our Church are all calculated for the reforming of theft Abufes, and preferving the Dignity of this holy Sacrament ; and that there wants nothing but the due ExecD- tion of them, and our confcientious performing of that which we all folemnly promifed before God and the Bifliop, when we had the Charge of Souls I^d 3 com- 4o6 'A Defence of the committed to us, that xoe would conform to the Liturgy of the Church of England, as it is now by Law efiablijhed. That excellent Liturgy orders the Priefl: (and accordingly he is bound in Confcience) that (if the Godfathers and Godmothers fhall certify him that the Child may well endure it) he do dip it in the Water difcreetly and warily, &c. 1 know that they are generally of late very backward in certifying this, or confenting to it. But that is nothing but an ill Cuftom. Many of them are fa- tisfied that the dipping or bathing a Child in Wa- ter has no fuch danger to the Health, as has been pretended. But they are unwilling to do otherwile than has of late been done. A few Examples of the old Scripture-way would cure this Prejudice. And the Curates of Parifhes, as on one fide they are no fit Judges of the Strength or Weaknels of the Child, and fo mult not do this againfl; the Parents or Godfathers Will ^ fo on the other Side might it they would, much influence the godly People to confent to it. I do not fay, that any one Curate (if all round about him dofhew a con- trary Temper and Inclination) can do much in it '^ but the joint Endeavours of any competent Number in a Neighbourhood, having both fuch plain Truth, and the Liturgy, and all antient Pradice on their Side, would eafily convince the People, that That which al) our Fathers in this Ifland praftifed, till few Years ago, without any Damage to their Children's Health, cannot be im- prafticable now. I propofe this not for the Cafe of fuch Chil- dren as are weaker than ordinary, but only in the Cafe of fuch as have as good a degree of Strength to bear it, as Children ordinarily have. And having fpoken my Senfe of this Matter to my Brethren more largely above at the End of my An- Hiftory of Infant-Baftifm, A^crj Anfwer to Mr. Gde\ Fifth Chapter, fhall not trou- ble them with Repetition. To thofe who ufe fprinkling inflead of dipping, or even of pouring Water (which Uft is injoined by our Church even in the weakefl: Child's Cafe). I would humbly reprefent the Confideration of the Duty of Obedience which they owe, not only to the Rules of the Church, to which they have promifed to conform ; but alfo and chiefly to our Saviour himfelf, whofe Word of Command is Baptize I wifh they would ftudy the Notion and Emphalis of that Word. We are forced to fome Pains in Defence of our Praftice againft thofe who pretend that it does neceflarily and abfolutely in- clude dipping in its Signification. I think we mutt not, and cannot, deny that it includes wafliing in its Signification. They will do well toconfider^whe- ther they fhall be able to juftify before our Savi- our, that a Drop, or a Sprinkle or two, of Water can be fo fairly underftood to be a wajhing of the Perfon in his Senfe as pouring Water is. I know that it may be juilified in Mr. Gali'^ Senfe of the Word, baptize. As a Pen, he fays, is dipped, if the Nib of it be dipped, 'I hope none of the Church will think fit to ufe fuch Quibbles in a feriousand facred Thing. Suppofe that fuch a wafiiing by fprinkling, or a Drop be fufficient in Cafe of feme NecefTity that may happen (as I hope it is) (hatl we thereupon in ordinary Cafes go as near to the breaking of Chrift's Command as poffibly we can ? Do we provoke the Lord to Jealoufy? Are we flronger than he ? I know that fome Midwives and Nurfes do on the Chriftning Day (which they think is obferved, not fo much for the Sacrament it felf, as for their fhewing their Pride, Art, and Finery) drefs the Child's Head fo, that the Face of it being hid deep under the Lace and Trimming which Hands up D d 4 high 4©? A Defend of the high on each Side, the Minifter can't come at the Face to pour VVarer on it, fo as that it may rua off" again-, but what Water he pours, will run in - among the Headcloths (which really is likely to do the Child more Hurt than dipping would have done). But he mult make them remedy this In- convenience. And give them tounderftand, that if they will have their Children baptized •, they mull bring them in fuch a Drefs as to be capa- ble of it. Concerning the other Abufe of this Sacrament, the adminiftring it in private Houfes, Bed Cham- bers, c^c. to Children that are well, I fpoke my Senfe in my Book in the Notes I made on St. Aufiins Ac- count of the devout People running to Church with their fick Children that were in danger of Death, to have them fpeedily baptized. 1 have this more, to lay to the Confciences of thofe my Brethren of the Clergy that ufe themfelves to give thefe Bed-Chamber Baptifms •, that they would confider, both the Prophanation and Indignity they bring on Chrift's Sacrament, and alfo how direftly con- trary their Pradice is to the Liturgy which they are obliged in Duty and by folenn Promife to con- form to. The Liturgy appoints two feveral Offi- ces for Baptifm of Infants in two feveral Cafes. One more folenn for public Baptifm, to be ufed no where but in the Church-, to which all Chil- dren that are in an ordinary State of Health are t3 be brought. The Other to be ufed in Houfes in Cafes of Neccfiity, and not clfe. And thefe are very different (not different Baptifms, buC have different Circumftancesj one from the other. Now for any Clergyman that is under the Ob- ligation of Confcience I fpoke of, to take one of thefe, (that of public Baptifir ) and ufe ir in Hou- fes, is plainly contrary to the faid Obligation. And fome of the Prayers fo mifapplied become ab- furd Hijlory of Jnfmt-Bfipifm. 409 furd and ridiculous. For Example^ The Minifter ftanding at the Font in the Church is to fay that Prayer \ Grmnt that rvhofoever is here dedicated to thee by our Office and Min'ijiry^ &c. Can he think that That Here is applicable to this Parlour or Bed- chamber? Is it not fcandalous fo to apply it? or has he any autority to omit or alter the Form ? The Prophanation and Indignity in general oa this Sacrament on occafion of this Houfe-Baptifm, is fo notorious, that I do appeal to the Experi- ence and Confcience of all that ufe it, if they themfelves be not fcandalized at the indecent Cir- cumftances that do almoft always attend it. All the Regard is commonly given to the Prepara- tions for eating and drinking-, very little to the Sacrament. Very few of the Company join in the Prayers •, but only in the Feafting and carnal Jollity, which is too often carried on to fuch Ex- cefs, as is more likely to bring a Curfe than a Bleffing upon the whole Undertaking. This is commonly yet worfe, when it is in an Ale-houfe or other lewd Houfe. Thofe who in fuch Cafes are chofen for God-fathers and God-mothers, are ge- nerally Perfons ignorant of the Terms of the Baptifmal Covenant themfelves; and when they fhould.make anfwer in the Name of the Child to the holy Interrogatories ^ they neither mind the Subftance of the Thing asked, nor do know what Anfwer is fit to make ; but do only in a ridicu* lous manner give a Bow, a Curtefy, or a Nod ; and that often not without apparent Signs of mockery ; and they frequently (hew a very vain. Irreverent, and wanton Behaviour before, and in, and after the facred Adminiftration. Is not this enough to turn the Stomach of any ferious Chri- ftian that is prefent? And if they refledt with themfelves, and think; Is this the Way that I was baptiud in t to occalioa perhaps their falling into the 4^o A T)e fence of the the Error we are fpeaking of, and refolving to be baptized again ? Can a Minifter of Chrift take any Comfort, or can he think that the Dignity of the holy Office which he is performing is preferved in fuch a Management ? In all Parifties where Baptifm at the Church is generally left off, the People are fo ignorant of what is to be done and faid at Baptifm (many of the young People having hardly ever been prefent at one) that if a Child be brought to Church to be baptized, neither are the Congregation fenfi- ble of their Duty of joining in the Prayers, nor do the God-fathers know what Anfwer they are to make \ but there are holy Queftions publicly put without any one to anfwer: Whieh, however it pafles in a Bed-Chamber, is a great Scandal and Abfurdity when a Sacrament is adminiftring in a Chriftian Congregation. And when the young People of fuch a Parifh come to the Curate, to be prepared for Confirmation •, they are found to have but a flender Apprehenfion of what wasfti- pulated in their Name at Baptifm (which is the chief Thing that Ihould make them capable of Confirmation) becaufe though they have learned the Words in the Catechifm, yet having never feen the Thing tranfafted, they have not near fo lively an Idea of the holy Covenant. But where Baptifms are duly adminiftred in the Church in the Time of Divine Service^ all the Congregation do both learn to underftand the Office of a God- father ^ and it is ufually performed with fuch de- cent Serioufnefs as the'Kature of the Thing re- quires \ and the whole Congregation (as St. Auji'm expreffes it) of the Saints []or good Chriftians] does this Office of ojfering the Infant to God for the receiv- ing of the Spiritual Grace. And there is alfb that more momentous Advantage, (with which, as with one of the Reafons why Baptifm fliould always, if poffible, Hifiory of Infrnt" Baptifm. 411 poflible, be adminiftred in the Sight of the People,' our Church does inforce the Command) that every Man prefent is put in Remembrance of his ovpn Pro- fejfion made to God in his Baptifm. No ferions Chriftian, that has confidered thefe AdvantJges would have his Child mjfs of them; nor would have him baptized in that difadvan- tageous Way, if the Minifter would. If any Man defire Baptifm for his Child that is well, and yet has fo little Value for it, that he thinks it too much, and refufes to bring him to the right and proper Place of receiving it \ what I might do foir the Sike of the Child, fwho as Naz.ianz.en fays, is not in the Fault) is a Queltioii by it felf ^ but if the Man himfelf had not yet been baptized, and did ask it with fuch an irreligious Coldnefs, and infifting on fuch haughty Terms; I am fure I would not give it him (of what degree foever he were, from an Emperor to a Beggar) but let him keep his Pride with his Heathenifm ; for it agrees very ill with Chriftianity. In the Primitive Times, if any Heathen Man,' high or low, noble or ignoble, would turn Chri- ftian, and be baptized ; the Chriftians did not ad- mit it to be done privately. He mult fome time before the Baptifm come into a full Congregation of Chriftians, and there ftanding up in a Place ia the Church provided for that Purpofe, openly repete the Chriftian Creed, and declare his awning of it. Some that had been in Repute and in great Stati- ons among the Heathens, were aftiamed to do this, but the Chriftians would not believe him to be fincere till he did it. Our Chriftian Anceftors in England, though they had in large Parifhes, Chap- pels, and Oratories, for the Eafe of fuch as lived re- mote from the Mother-Church, for hearing God's Word, and praying, c^c. yet none of them would }ofe the Privilege of receiving the Communion, and of 412 A Defence of the of having this other Sacrament of Baptifm con- ferred on their Children, in the Mother-Church to which they would bring their Children, though it were a long Journey, to be baptized by dip- ping in the Font. And do we their degene- rous OfF-fpring turn not only the Font into a Bafbn, but alfo this Mother-Church into a Bed- chamber ? I know that if any Curate of a Parifh do in- fill npon having all Children of Rich and Poor, that are in Health, brought* to Church, and do rcfufe to fhew the refpeft (fa thofe ignorant half Chriftians call itj of bringing the Sacrament to their Houfes \ and do plead the Rubric and Or- der of the Church in his own Vindication \ he ihall in fome Parifhes of haughty, rude, and ill- bred people meet with a great deal of obloquy \ And among other Things they will objefttohim, not only the Example of fuch or fuch a Neigh- bour Curate, who complies in this Mattery but alio that fuch or fuch a one of thofe that are in the highefl; Station in the Church does many times fiiew that Condefcenfion, which he refufes to do, And we muft blufh, that fuch Things can bcfaid, and we cannot deny them. But every one in the Holy Orders ought to reckon his CommilTion to be received from Chrift : And under Chrift, from that Church in which, and by whofe Rules and Canons, he is called and fent^ and not to follow the Example of any particular Man or Men, in how great Station foever, in Things wherein they deviate from that which fhould be their Rule as well as ours. What mult be done, or can be donp, in Places where Presbyterians lie in wait to draw People from the Church into Separations, and do offer their Service to any humourfome Man or Wo- man, that it the Parifh Curate will not baptize their Hifiory of Infant-'Bapifm* 41 ^ their Child at home, they will ^ is more thaa I am able to determine. It mull; be left to the Bifhop of the Place, to direft which of the two Evils muft be cliofen. I have been credibly in- formed that the late Pious Biftiop oi London found it neceflary to advife his Clergy in the City to com- ply in this Matter with their People, rather than let them fall into the Hands of thofe Seducers \ but that in his Vifitation in the Country Places he advifed them to keep fteady to the Rubric. Certainly thofe Leaders of the Separation will have a good Load of Guilt*, who neither will reform Abufes among their own Followers, nor fnfFer us to do it among our People. Thefe are the Men, who when the Church made an Order for private Baptifm of Children in danger of fpee- dy Death, did ^0 clamour againft it, that one of them faid,.it was unlawful even though the Child was to be damned for want of Baptifm. I knowr that many of the Parochial Clergy do wifh and defire that the Bilhops would in open Court, and in the Audience of the People, lay a ftridt Charge upon them, not to baptize any Child that is well in a Houfe. Becaufe otherwife the People are apt to tell the Curate, that he might do this, if he would-, and endeavour to bring the more Envy upon him for vefiifing. There is one Thing that I am loth to fpeak of; that fome of the Clergy are thought by fome People to ufe this Compliance for their own for- did Gain^ and for the Sake of the Vrefem, which is given to the Baptizer tor fubmitting the Sacra- ment, and his o'vn holy Office to the Humour of fome irreligious Parents. St. Taul fpcaks of fome who did kee^ jile-houje with God^sWordi that is his Phrafe, x Cor. i'l. 17. KctTrtiMvovJn iw Koyov n <3>iB fell it, proltitute if, in the faniie Senfe as Au- thors 4^4 -^ Defence of the thors life the Word KATt^nhivnv tw <^iKm ; or, t»> lipifvm^ to fell Jufiice, or, fell a Peace as a KclTrnki^^ an Ale-Houfe-keeper feUs his Ale. God Almighty keep us from doing this with his Sacrament. It is more than enough ; it is to a dreadful Degree too much, that Benefices, Places, Offices, Promo- tions in the Church are trucked. If we can keep any Thing unproftituted •, it (hould be God's Word and his Sacraments. St. James fhews the Mifchief of having any refpeft of Perfons, Rich and Poor, in Concerns of Religion. It will certainly have the fame EfFed there, which Solomon fays, it has every where, where it is admitted. To have re- fieU of Perfons is not good (he means it is a very mifchievous Thing) For a Piece of Bread that Maii will tranfgrefs. Thefe Clergymen (if there be any fuch, tor 1 own, I know of none, only there runs in fome Peoples Difcourfes fuch a Cenfure) do every Lord's-Day fay that Prayer \ That God would give Grace to all Bijhops and Curates- -rights ly and duly to adminifier his holy Sacraments, They pray this for themfelves among the reft. They ihould not by undue Adminiftrations defeat their own Prayers. I could w.ifh alfo that the ufual Feafts at Chrilt- nings, and the Cuftomary Prefents then given by the God-fathers, &c. were left off ^ and that the Clergy would perfwade their Parifhioners to leave- them ofK They may very well be called, Nehujli- tan. How innocently or commendably foever for a Sign of fpiritual Congratulation they were firft ufed *, as they are ufed now, they bring more Difgrace than Credit to the Sacrament. Befide the finful ExcefTes too common, they do, like the Popifti Ceremonies, fwallow up all the Regard that fhould be given to the Subftance of the Sa- erament it felf. They are alfo the Caufe of the Diffi' Hifiory of Infant'Baptifm. ^ij DifHculty of procuring God-fathers to poor Peo* pies Children. The Sura of what I would propofe to the Con- lideration of my Brethren and of all pious Mem- bers of our Church on this Head, is, That what- foever brings a Difcredit, a Contempt, an Indig- nity, or Prophanation on the Sacrament^ as it is adminiftred to Infants, does help to inereafe the Doubts of thofe who are inclined to bc: dillatis- fied with their Baptifni received in Infancy, and fo is an occafion of promoting the Schifm j and fhould be reformed on our Side. Another Thing that I think ufeful for any of the Clergy whofe ill-fortune it is to be under a Neceffity of being concerned with any of their People in this Queflion, is, that they make a Dif^ ference between Three Sorts of Antip^dobaptifts ^ for there is a different Sort of Management fit to be ufed toward them. Some few of them do ftill continue to hold Communion with the eftablifhed Church in the Public Prayers, and in the other Sacrament ^ and in this too, as far as is confiltent with their Opini- on, /. e. when their Children are adult, and de- fire Baptifm ; they advife them to receive it in the Church, at the Hands of the lawful Minifter. They are fenlible, that whatever becomes of the Queftion of Pxdobaptifm *, Schifm is certainly a great Sin. I did, in my Book, give my Thoughts (but profefTing to fubmit them to the Judgment of thofe who are over us in the Lord) that fuch Men, though in a Miftake in that one Opinion, ftiould be received as Brethren ; and that, as they do not excommunicate us, fo we (hould not them. And that in this Cafe, where there is no diffe- rence in the Fundamentals of the Faith, nor any felf-willed Spirit of Oppofition, that Rule of St. Faul does hold, Phil, iiu 15. If in finy Thing yo /^i6 J Defence of the ift othermife minded {j. e, of different Opinions^ God jliall revele even this unto you. Nevertheless whereto we have already attained Qor, in Things ivherein we agree] let us walk by the fume Rule i let -us be unanimous. Thefe Men give a good Proor that they have not that felf-willed Spirit of Op- pofition that I fpoke of, by this; that they do noti run into the Separation. For that is a Thing which all proud, felf- conceited Perfons love above all Things. And 'tis for the Sake of that (that they may have the Honour and Pride of fetting up, or keeping up, a Party by themfelves) that molt of them do value the Opinions for w/hich they ftickle. ^ St. Paul fays, There mufi be Seds [or He- refies2 i^ a Church \ that they which are appro^ ved may be made manifefi, or diftinguilhed from the reft. He means, I think, that the Sefts will take off all the proud, felf-conceited, fchifmati- cally difpofed People. And that • he that is not drawn away with this Tentation, does fo far af- frove himfelf a folid, humble, and good Chriftian. And we may add this Particular, that he that withftands that Tentation in England, may be ven- tured any where. For there is no Place in the World, where Chrift is named (or if I except one, that Ihall be all) in which the Sinfulnefsof Schifm is fo little confidered -, or the Encouragements and Tentation to it fo great. Thefe Men there- fore, even where they err, are to be thought to aft in the Sincerity of their Heart. And there is a very different Deportment due toward fuch, from that which is to be ufed to wilful Oppofers. The determining of the Queftion, whether they fhall be continued in Communion will belong chiefly to the Bifhop of the Place (if ever it pleafe God that the Difcipline and Autority of the Church be reftored) and not to thofe of my Brethren to whom 1 pretend to offer this my Advice. But the Hifiory oj Infant-Baptifrn', 417 tlie Bifhop himfelf will regard the^ Character of the Men which the Parochial Clergy fhall give. I do not mean that they ought to be flattered by any one that has the Cure of their Souls, as one oflate with his new Divinity flatters them and all erroneous Chrifl:ians; That whatever their Errors in Religion be, yet if they be fincere in the Choice of their Tenets, and judge as well as they can, and pradife accordingly j they are then (though in an Error) in as good Cafe as thofe that hold the very Truth according to the real Meaning of Chrifl: in the Scripture, and praftife accordingly. Or, as he exprefies it, and calls, it a Demonflratiorit That wherever the Sincerity is ecjual^ it mufi have equal Effe^ in jufl:ifying- the Perfon. 5uch an untheolpgical Opinion (that Ignorance, or Error, excufes not only a tanto, but a toto) will make St. Faul (who always lived in all good Confcience, and in thofe many Ihings which he did contrary to the Name of Jefus, was fincere, and did what he verily thought with himfelf he ought to do) tO have been as unblameable and as much juftified in that Oppofition to Chriftianity, as he was in hold- ing the Truth afterward. This makes a Socinian, a Quaker^ a Papifi^ and for ought I can fee, a 7»rc, if they be fincere, to be in as good Cafe as the molt Orthodox Chriftian. The Antipcedobaptifl: himfelf, of whom 1 ani fpeaking, will not, if he be a Man of tolerable Senfe and Underft:anding, accept of Comfort to his Confcienceon fuch aGround as this, which will jullify the C^aker in the Denial of all Baptifm, as foon as hira in the Denial of it to his Children un- der Age ; and the other Antipsedobaptifts who make a Schifm for their Opinion) as foon as him who owns, and defires to keep the Communion of S4ints» Ee A\} 4 1 8 ^ Defence of the All that I would fay to reprefent fiich a Maff,. as fit to be admitted to Communion, is, Firfi^ Tha€ Ills Error about the Time or Age of giving Bap- tifm is not a Fundamental one, And, Secondly^ That* he does not make 3 Schifnl for it : and, 7kV. 1 7. that under the Gofpel Infants dying fhe means, all In- fants dying) are in the Covenant of Grace. And ten Lines afrer, fays. Where Faith, Repentance, &c. are wanting in the Recipients ^ there cannot be right Church* AfemherJ]}ip •, nor can they be in the Covenant of Grace \ let Men pretend -what they pleafe. And p. 16. That the New-Teftaiuent Church is wholly of a new Frame ; that we are not concerned now with what was done under the Old-^eflament. Forgetting that St. Paul tells the Gentile Chri'ftians that the Bieffmg of Abra- ham is come on them', and that they who were of the wild Olive-Tree are grafted among the natu- ral Branches. Here in ten Pages he difputes againft the Inde- pendents. And 'tis pretty to fee how they confute one another. He concludes f/ith Quotations from Bifliop Burnet.^ Dr. IVhitby, Continuers of PooPj Anno- tations^ Affemblfs Annotations, &C. And what is mod; ridiculous, he quotes here, and in Twenty Pla- ces more, BiQiop //i^'/or's Liberty of Prophecy ing '^ a Book written in O/^-y^r's Time to puzzle the Schifl matics then in Power, by fhewing that even the Papifts and Anafiaptifts had as much to fay for themfelves as they had ^ and produced their Ar- guments, which himfelf fhewed afterward to have no Solidity in them. CH.AP. II. To difprove the JewiJJ) Baptifm of Profelytes, he tranfcribes Mr. Gale ; and (what Mr. Gale thought not ti!; tc do., llnce the Place has been examined) Sir Norton Ktmchbul-^ and (not know- 430 A Defence of the knowing who fpeaks for him, and who againft him) Godvoyns Mofesand Aaron^ which plainly alTerts this Cuftom of the Jews *, and fays, /?. 37. that he can't underftand, ifthe Cuftom had been to baptize Pr<7- felytesy why the Pharifees fhould ask John^ why he baptized Jem. Oa Matt. XIX. 14. and i Cor. v'll. 14. he brings over again feme of the moft trite Pleas which the Antip^dobaptifts have ufed in their Delcants on thofe Texts. There is nothing elfe in this Chapter, but that he catches hold of that fubtle and airy Diftindion of Fundamentals^ which Mr. Gale^ I think, has invent- ed for them, whereby to juftify their Separation from the Proteftant Churches, with whom they would yet feemto agree in all fundamental Points of Faith. It is a Device which, I fee, takes with them. He manages it p. 47, to this Purpofe. " There are fome Things or Doftrines, which " tho' they are noi fundamental Points of Religion^ or *' n&ceflary to Salvation ; are -^tt fundamental^ or ef^ *' fentially neceflary to the Confiitution of a Church. /' And here wefay,Baptirm is fundamental, or ef- *' fentially neceflary. And he fays, " Baptifm of Infants by fprinkling " Cand I fuppofe he would fay, by pouring Water, " or even dipping of them^ is indeed no Baptifm. " And therefore though we honour them [^the Pro- " teftants]as Z?/-ffi?rw, love them ci% Children of God, " and Believers^ &c. yet we cannot join with them ^' in a Church- State. They feem to have had fome Cue given them by fomebody, that feparate they mult ^ or elfe they do nothing to purpofe. And they ftrive for far fetch'd Pleas to juftify their fo doing. As for this new invented One, it is the emptieft that ever was ufed to juftify fo great a Sin and Wickednefs. For Hijlory of Irtfant'Bu^tifm, 4JI For it appears on the firft weighing it, that any defect in Baptifm, if it does not hinder any fingle Perfon from being a Chriftian^ does not hinder a Bo- dy of fuch as have that defeat, from being a Church. If a Man be once a Chriftian, there is no new ufe of Baptifm to make him a Prieft (or as they call it an Elder) or to make him a Bifliop. So that if they were a Number of Chriftians before (which a new Preacher would have to be the Definition of a Church) they may without any new Trial of the Validity of their Baptifm have Church Officers, and be a Church in the Senfe of that Word which is acknowledged by all. This Author manages this Argument a great deal more weakly than Mr. Gale hiiftfelf did. He fays, p 48. " It is proved by Heb. vi. i, 2, 3. and Matt. ** xxviii. 19, 20. that Baptifm is fundamental to " Church-Communion, and to the Confticution of " a Church:' What thofe Texts do fpeak of Bap- tifm, tends to Ihew its Neceflity for one's being a Chriftian, or being faved ^ but they have nothing particular in reference to Communion^ or the Conftir tution of a Church. And he hasfpoiled the whole Argument by faying '* We do not unchurch all other Proteftant Churches '* — There's fcarce any Thing more diftant from *'• our Thoughts. Mr. Gale would not have taught him to have faid fo. He would have taught him to fay ^ we do not nnchriftian them, or deny their Salvation ; but un- church them we mull \ or elfe we cannot juftify our Separation-, which is the main Point of all. The Third CHAP, has (befide the common Pleas which have been anfwered an Hundred Times) nothing new that is material, but thefe ab- furd Propofitions. 4$ 2 A Defence of the P. 49' That the Doftrine of original Sin began to bedifputed ^»n, Dom. 250. p. 50. That the NovatUns (which is true) and the Donatifls (which is falfe) were before Conftantin% Time. Of both of them he fays, that it is to him ap* parem^ that they before thatTimeoppofed the grow- ing Errors or Herefies of the Times. And, that the Waldenfes and Albigenfes fprang from the Nova- tians3.ndi Donatijis. P. 54, That Mr. Wall (meaning me) confefles that Juflin Martyr excludes Infants from being bap- tized, and in the Church, and fays, that only adult Perfons can or ought to be baptized. Mr. Davye had laid in his Preface, that he was not confcious that he had wronged any of the Au- thors cited. By which it appears, he does fome Things that he is not confcious of. P. 57. That St. Cyprian taught that the Church of Jlome was the Mother-Church. And here he quotes Daille obferving from St. Cyprians 59th Epiftle, that St. Cyprian thought the Eucharift neceflary to Infants for their Salvation. Which (as proved from that Epiftle) has been fhewn to be Mr. Datllps over* light in TQSidiil^facrificandum for fanElijicandum^ ad' mitted to the Eucharijl inftead of baptiz^ed. And tho- Mr. Davye was told of this, yet he had rather follow the Overfight than confult the Place. The Eucha- rift was called a Sacrifice ^ but the Recipients never were faid to be facrific'd. p. 58. That the Novatians and Donatifts kept their diftind^ Congregations from St. Cyprian\ becaufe of his Infant-Baptifm. This, as to Infaut-Baptifm, is as true of thQ Donatijis who did not arife till neat an Hundred Years after St. Cyprian was dead, as it is of the other, who in his Time made a Schifm, but difputed not one Word of Infant-Baptifm. Hijlory of Infant-Baptifm* 4j*^. V. 59. Having fhewn that the. Novatiatis differed from St. Cyprian in feveral other Things •, he infers^ " From all which we have very great Probability OTi._ " our Side, that they rejeded the Baptifm of In«i, " fants." This Argument will fetch in the whole Legion of Heretics to be of Mr. Davyeh Side. For they, all of them, diifered from St. Cyprian in many Things. ... P. 60. He ekes one Gabriel Prateolmai faying of the Novatiansy that they affirmed that Infants did not ftand in need of Baptifm. He that will be aC the Pains to fearch the Place in Prateolus, p. 123. will know which of the Two, Prateolm or Danvers^ was the firft that forged this on the Novatians (for Banvers once faid this of them, and was foundly fhamed for it) I do not thisk the Reputation of either of them worth the Pains. From p. 61. to the End of the Chapter, he pil- lages that Chapter of my Hiftory wherein I men- tioned fome Moderns who have made Objedions againft the Opinion of Infant-Baptifm, being ufed generally or vniverfally from the Beginning. Many of whom anfwered their own Objedions^ or re- canted them. But Mr. Davye recites their Objedi- ons, and omits their Anfwers 5 and fo brings in Dr. Hammond and Mr. Baxter among, the Antipse- dobaptifts; and BiihopTleyor who declared what he wrote to have been only fome Objedtions eafy to be anfwered ; and Bifliop Barlow who had in his Youth in a Letter to Mr. Tombs^ faid fome Things of the antient Hiftory, which being without his Know- ledge printed long after^ he recanted as having beeri written in the Time of his Ignorance. Yet Mr. D^- •vye reprints the Letter at large, but not the Recan- tation ^ though he faw them both together in my Book; And having recited out of Mr. Stennet a Say- ing of one ranjlsb concerning the antient Pradtice Ff tifed 434 -^ Defence of the lafed at Alexandria^ which has nothing of Proba- bility in it, nor is confirmed by any antient Hifljo- rian •, he, to put feme MarlTof Antiquity on it, quotes Socrates for it, /. 5. c. 7, 9. and 1. 7. c. 7. meaning, I fuppofe, Sorr4ff;theHifl:orian : But he might as well have cited Socrates the Philofophen One fays no more of any fuch Matter than the Other. And this is Mr. Davyeh way. CHAP. IV. He enters upon his Task of bringing Proofs that the Donatifts were Antipse- dobaptifts. And having firft premifed, what I mentioned before, concerning the Council of Neo- cAfarea and Balfamon^ and coming to fpeak of his Domiifis^ he makes feveral grofs Miftakes of their Tenets about other Matters^ as that they rejeded Chrifm, &c. f. 6$. and then afTerts of their Tenets concerning lafant-Baptifm Things abfolutely falfe ^ as that they held that Infants reeded not to be haptiz,ed. P. 66. He quotes Drw- ctntius (who held only that Infants who had mif- fed of Baptifm might yet by God's Mercy be faved) as an Antipaedobaptift. He fays, p. 67. "That " Fulgentius the Donatifi and Crefconius denied In- ** fants-Baptifm, and aflerted only that Bap- " tifm which is after Faith, as faith the Mag^ ** deburgenfian Hiftory. Auguftin alfo in his ** Epiftle to Marcellus writes againft them for de- •' nying Baptifm to Infants." And many other fuch ftrange Things, copied, I think, moftly out of Danvers. Now there is not one Word of all this true. Neither St. Auftin, nor the Hdagdeburgenfes have one Syllable ofwhat he here quotes from them. St. Au' fiin has no Epiftle written to any one of that Name, And Mr. Bavye has given me the Trouble of read- ing all his Epiltlesto MarVfllmus, In all which he feas Hiflory of Infant-Bapifffi. 4] J has nothing about the Donatifts^ fave that in one or two of them he entreats MarceUinus Cthe Emperor's CommifTioner) in his Court of judicature to abate of the Rigor of the Law againft fome of them that were convided of Sedition, Outrage, and Murder j that the Church might have the Repute of Modera- tion. Of their Tenets about Baptifm not one Word. If thefe Proofs will not do, he demands Proofs of the other Side from us that the Donatlfls were for Infant-Baptifm. Several of us, and I forone, gave Proofs from the Councils of that time, and o- ther Evidences j to which he has nothing to oppofe. P. 69. He would however get the Pelagians of his Side. He owns that St. Auftin fpeaks of them as allowing and praQifing Infant-Baptifm ; though they denied original Sin. But he fays, *' T cannot help " heftating a little about it." And becaufe they faid that an Infant dying unbaptized may have an eternal life fomewhere, though not in the Kingdom of Hea- ven (into which, as theyconfefled, no Infants but baptized ones could enter) he thinks " It canhard^ " ly be believed they were for Infant- B apt ifm.^^ He concludes a little more modeftly, that if what he fays of Pelagius be not a Proof ; it muft be al- lowed for a ftrong Probability ^ and fays •, " For my *' own Part, I believe. He and his Followers were '' for Believers Baptifm only." - — So the Bell chinketh. P. 70. He quellions whether Pelagim\ Creed, and Celefiius's Confepo {idei, of which I gave Copies out of St. Auflin^ be genuine. And what is worfe, fays, it may be queftioned by my Confeilion. They were authentical Pieces fent or given by them in their own Defence to the Bilhops of Rome. No Maa can fappofe, even if he thought St. Auftin to be a Forger, that he would forge cj: mifrecite public Records kept at Rome. Viz F.71: 43^ -^ Defence of the - ?. 71. He would prove from feme Canons or Synodical Epiftlesof the Councils of Carthage and Milcvisj Anno ^\6. directed againft the Pelagians -y that the FeUgia-ns or fome People of that Time op- pofed the Baptifm of Infants *, becaufe ihofe Ca- nons do, as he fays, anathematize fome that did op- pofe it. Now there wants nothing but the reading of the Canons and Epiftles, by any one that can read them, to fee that they do not fpeak of any that op- pofed it j but only of fome that thought it muft not be given to new horn Infants before the Eighth Day ; and of fome others {viz.. the VeUgians'} who de- nied that any original Sin derived from Adam was' forgiven to Infants in it. P. 72. He fays, Thofe againfl: whom thefe Canons were made mult have held, that Infants, tho' un- baptized, might enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. TheDiltinftion the Pelagians made between an eternal Life fomewhere, and the Kingdom of Hea- ven, is beyond Mr. D^t'^A Skill. They held tliat Infants who miffed of Baptifm might have an eternal Life fomewhere, they knew not where, as being without Sin ; but that baptized Infants did enter into the Kingdom of Heaven^ as being not only without Sin, but alfo regenerated in Chrifi:. P. 75. For the following Centuries, he finds that the Council of G'f/'^^^.i decreed, that Infants newly born, if fick, or not able to fuck the Breaft, fhould be baptized, though it were not Eajler-iimt. Would any one but he conclude from hence, that either the Bifhops of that Council or any one elfe of that time denied that they were to be baptized at all ? Another Synod Mr. Davye has found quoted. The Bracarenfian Synod in the Seventh Century con- demned the Errors of the Mmckts and PriJcilUa^ Hiftory of I/ifA'/zt^Baptifm. 4^7 -»//?/. Now Cafander fays, that in the Twelfth Centwy in Bernard's Time, arofe the Alhigenfes, who to the reft of their Errors borrowed from the Manichees and Prifcillianijls, added this, that the Baptifm of little ones is unprofitable. • From hence this notable Arguer concludes that there were Antipsedobaptifts in the Seventh Century ; whereas the Proof is only of the Twelfth^ when fome People holding fome antienter Errors added to them this of Antipsedobaptifni. CHAP. V. P. 77. Having renewed that abfurd Pretence of Dmvers^ that the old Britons denied lafant-Baptifm, and quoted nothing for it, but that Edition of Fabian which Banvers had lighted on (wherein the mifprinting of three Words makes all the Miftake) he concludes p. 81. *' If all this won't be allowed for Proof- .' *' I muft let my oppofers enjoy their contrary O- " pinions i it's not much material yet I mult '' tell the Reader, thefe Confiderations weigh with " me^ to make me believe thefe Britons were real- '' ly for Believers Baptifm only. 'Tis an Advantage to have a Faculty of believ- ing what one will, with Reafon or without. P. 81. For an Evidence in the Ninth Century, he is not a (ha med to bring upon the Stage again that Blunder which Danvers made in the Scory of Hinc- marus^ Bifhop of Laudun •, which has been ex- pofed even to ridicule. And finding in Dan- a/fri's Book the Bibl. Patr. and the Magdehurgen- fes quoted for Things not there to be found, he copies* the Quotations juft as they were in Danvers. A Thing that he did not think of here, but ar- gues at large in his Recapitulation at p. 1 22. and fays, he tannot omit it •, is a manifelt Inftance of F f 3 his 4^3 A Defence of the his venturing to affirm confidently Matters of Fadt which he only guefles at, and which are not true. He obferves that I in my Preface do fay, that St. Auftin has whole Books againft the Vela- gians wherein he proves the Dodlrine of original Sin from the Praftice of Infant-Baptifm. Mr. Davye pofitively aflerts the Contrary, viz.. that from the Doftrine of original Sin in Infants St. Jujiin infers the Neceffity of their Baptifm, and fays. His Works do plainly jhew this to every Rea- der. And, that mine is a wrong Conftrud:ion of them. And, that he vehemently infeveral Places condemns the Fclagians for fvfferlng Infants to die without Baptifm. Could any Man in a Thing that had been true, and which he had read himfelf have exprefled a greater Confidence than he does in this which is notorioufiy untrue? Every Man that has read any Thing of St. Auftin againft the Pelagians (if it were only thofe Places which I quoted, which are not the Hundredth Part) muft fee with his own Eyes that St. Aiffiin all along, and many times over, fpeaks of the Pelagians as owning and praftifing In- tant-Baprifm ^ and argues with them, that the Cu- ftom ufed by the whole Church and by themfelves of baptizing Infants ought to convince them that they have original Sin which needs to be vvaftied away. Mr. Davye fays, this is not a congruous way of arguing •, nor to reafon with them like Men of Senfe. Is not^ lays he, the fame Argument ufed a(rainfi us now ? And do not the Pddobaptifls argue from original Sin tO the Neccffity of Infant-Baptifm ? The Other-is a thwarting way of arguing, and very, vnlikely. Bat good Mr. Davye^ if there be fomething which may be fee n with one's own Eyes by any one that will be at the Pains to go and fse ic ^ andfome do go and Hrflory of Infant-BAptifw. 4 J 9 and fee it-, for you to fit at home, and guefs by Congruities and Lihlyhoodsj how the Thing muft be •, and not only to disbelieve them that have feen it ^ but to face them down that they give wrong Accounts^ is to take too great a Liberty to your felf. What will become of your Credit, even with your own Party, if thefe Books of St. Au' ftin Ihould be tranflated into Ertgliflj ; or if any of them be able to read them in Latin ? The P^edo- baptifts do indeed argue with you /row yourCoa- feliion of original Sin, to convince you of the Ne- cefTity of Baptilm to Infants*, and good Rcafon; becaufe you do (many of you) own the former, but deny the later. St. Auflin argues with the Telagim ans from their Confeffion of Infant-Baptifm to con* vince them of the Do(Srine of original Sin, with the like Gongruity on the other Side ^ becaufe they (not fome, but all of them) did ovon Infant-Bap- tifm, but deny original Sin. And whereas yoa fay here, that he vehemently in feveral Places con- demns them for fufFering Infants to die without Baptifm^ Bring one of thofe Places: Orelfetake fliame to your felf; and never meddle any more in Matters of Antiquity which you underftand noto In the mean while you may read, if you pleafe, the Places that I have brought in my Hiftory, Part I. Chap. 19. where you will find Pelagius, Ce» leflius^ and Julian owning the Necelfity of Infant- Baptifm (not for the Cure of original Sin from Adam indeed •, but for entring the Kingdom of Heaven) and fome of them anathematizing any that fhould deny it, if there were any fuch y but they fay, they never heard of any that did. One of them fays, he never knew any one fo igyiorant-^ or fo impious as to fay, or to have a Thought, that Infants are not to be baptized. Another allots 9a eterml Anathema to any one that fhould fay it F f 4 »» 44o J Defence of the is not mcejfary for Infants. And fee if you can fin4 jne mifquoting or mifreprefenting the Words of ?ny Author in any of thofe Places^ a Courfe too common with you. You go upon Congruities. When you at one place infinuate of St. Auftin that he forged thofe Confeffions of the Pelagians wherein they own In- fant-Baptifm ^ do you think that congruous^ that the fame Man fhould reprefent them, as own- ing it, and yet vehemently condemn them as dif- pwning it ? , P. 83. Mr. Davye comes at lafl; to the Twelfth Century, the Time of the WaUenfes and Alhigen- fes. Some of the later {viz.. the Petrobufans) did indeed (as I, among others, have ihewn) deny Baptifm to Infants: The firft Body of People ia the World that we read of, that did fo. After all, I know not how it happens, but I cannot be very angry with Mr. Davye. A Maa that writes in fuch a Fafhion as can do no Body any hurt (becaufe he difcovers at the very firft Sight that he has no Skill in the Things, he talks of, nor has taken any Care of the Truth of his Qiiotatioiis) does not near, fo much provoke one's indignation, as one fh.it in a more plaufibie and cautions Manner perverts the Truth. A Reader is apt to make Allowances for the Temper of a^ Man, his Incapacity, and his open Way. 'Httnc ego fat is Im^uto^ qui vultu morbum incrjji^^ fatetur. Mr. Gde fpoke of fomebody that Ihould an- fwer my Book. Was it Mr. D.uvye ? Was he to account for t:he Times after St. Cyprian with a^ much Succefs as the other had done :or thofe be- fore? It may feem fo. For he c:*r*Liudes, /?. 140. "" ' ' ' ~ as Hifiory of Infmt-Bapifm, 44.1 as Mr. Gale ufes to do. " All which, I think, ^' has been made apparent in the preceding Trea- " tife j which may be a fufficient Anfwer to , " and to the Hiftorical Part of Mr.t^^//'s Book *^ of Infant-Baptifm. I crave Pardon of my Brethren, the Clergy, for inferting this Digreffion about Mr. Davye's Book f which is juft come to my Hand, and whicii I am fatisfied they will never read over) in the Addrefs I was making to them. It is to convince them of what 1 was faying j that if any of them 4o wiite hi this Caufe ; the Antipsedobaptifts will never fuffer him to have the laft Word. For if ifuch an Aufwer as this can find one that will print it, oJid Men that will buy and read itj the AntipasdobaptiPis will never want Authors. I crave leave to go on with a few Words to the Clergy. I hopethofe that fhall write in Defenle of Infant- Baptifm, will not drop or fuffer to fink, the Ar- gument from Antiquity •, now that we have car- ried it fo far, and produced plain Evidence of its ufe among Chriftians, from Authors fo nigh the Apo- ftles Time. There are, befide the Time fpent in arguing, difputing, and talking each Man for his Side of a Queftion (in which Eagernefs feldom fuffers Men to weigh Things foberly and impartially. But there are, I fay, befide thefe) Times, in which every ferious Man confiders the Reafons and Proofs of Things by himfelf. Now a Man that does this, . will fee it impoflible to be conceived, that in a Praftice fo public and notorious as Baptifm is, they whofe Fathers or Grand-fathers lived in the j4pofiles T'tmCy (hould not kflow what was done in that Ttme^ as to this Matter. 44^ -^ Defence of thf The Tcflimonies fo far op, as to an Hundred and Fifty Years after that Time, they do now yield affdownj and make, I think, but very weak op- |K>iTtion againft thofe which are brought from Au- thors within the Hundred. They that have for- merly been told by their Leaders, that the bapti- sing of Infants began under fuch or fuch a Pope of Riimf^ will fee Things with another view, when in following the plain Footfleps of it, they come, not only up to ConJfafttms^sTimQ ^ but do pafs or fhoot theGulph, as 1 may call it, that is between That Bnd the Age of Martyrs •, and can trace it there as plasnly as in the Ages below. They yield Cyprian. I have, jf I don't flatter my ielf, vindicated the Teftkrnonies of Origen ; and of Iren^m^ who was born in, or about, the End of the Apoftolic Times. Higher they cannot expeft to have the exprefs mention of fo particular a Thing, for want of Books between that and the Scripture Times. There is indeed one of our own Order, one by ProtelTion of the Church of EngUnd^ who has med - died in this point, and has to our Difgrace faid in Print, p. 1 5 . that till Cyprian'j 7/?w none hut adult Trrfons were baptlz.ed \ and even in his Time baptiz^ing of Infants was very rare. One would wonder what fhould make him fay this, or from whom he had it. He himfelf, I can eafily guefs, knows little of the M-atter. He has either (hot his Bolt blind-fold, or elfe he has had it from fomebody. It could not be his Father;, he never lighted on that Paradox. I don't think he has it from the Man whofe Caule he is there defending. He, for a very good Rea- fon, avoids any Talk of the Tenets of thofe weak Men in fever al Jges. Mr. leClerc^ or any of that Sort, have not faid any fuch Thing that 1 know o?. Let me be far enough, if 1 don't think he has ta- ken it on truft from Mr. Gale, and thinking it -might help, among the other odd Things that he h45 Hifiory of Infrnt-'Biiftifm, 44^ has faid, to do feme Prejudice to the Church of England^ has put it in at all Adventure. If ! guefs right, that he has learned it of Mr. Gale \ he is a pregnant Scholar, and has already outfliot his Ma- iler. For even he never ventured to fay that in St. Cyprian's Time it was rare. To thofe that (hall write to inforce the Argu- ments from Scripture^ 1 would humbly recommend one Advice or Two. One is, that although many of the late Englijfj Writers in defence of Infant-Baptifm have thought fit to omit the Arguments from John iii. 3, 5. and from I Cor. vii. 14. yet they would not be difcoura- ged from ufing them. A right Tranllation, and Explication of the Words, in thofe two Texts, would contribute much to fatisfy the Doubts con* cerning the baptizing of Infants. In explaining the Senfe of both of them there is an Inftance how much the Alteration (which hap- pens in procefs of Time) of the Ufe and Meaning of Words in common Language, does, with illiterate Men, weaken the Force of an Argument taken from a Text of Scripture or any antient Book, where any Words are ufcd that have had their Ufe fo altered. I confider who I am fpeaking to now. And to them I do not think it needful to fay any Thing concerning the antient Meaning of the Word, ^e- generate^ or. Born again ; or of the Words, Saints^ or fan^ified. Whereas I and Mr. IVhifion and feve- ral others have pofitively affirmed that the Word Regenerate is in the antient Phrafe ufed conftantly Cor, as Mr. Wloifton cautioufly exprefTes it, almofi confiantly) in relation to Baptifm \ and Mr. Gale has fo politively denied this •, that he, or elfe we niufl: be guilty of a notorious Untruth, in Mat- ter of Faft i I fpcak now to thofe that know or can know when they pleafe, by minding as they fead theantieat Books, where that Guilt fettles. They 444 -^ Defence of the They know alfo how new, and unheard of in the antient Church, that Interpretation of fome late Expofitors is, who by Water in John iii. 5. would have us underftand not material Water^ but fome myftical Thing; fnch as our Saviour com- pared to Water in his Difcourfe with the Samari- tan Woman, John iv. 13, 14. And by Saints, I Cor. vii. 14. not Chnftians^ or Perfons Chrifi^cd (which is St. Taul's conftant ufe of, the Word) but Children^ Saints^ or holy, i.e. born holy by a Holi- nefs previous to their Baptifm. And by fan^ifi- ed (when a Heathen Wife is fandified by her Hus- band a Chriftian) not converted to Chriftianity, and brought to Baptifm, but the Man is fan6i(ied to his Wife, i. e. The Husband foteft bona confcien- tia uti irif delis conjugis vafe. Bez.a^ one of the firft that gave that Interpre* tation, a being Chrijfs, or, Chrijiians. And the Sandion here given to the Command of fuch a receiving of them, is the higheft that is ever given : Even the fame that is given to the Command of receiving the Apoftles themfelves. For as it was faid to them ; He that receivethyou^ receiveth me j and he that receiveth me, receiveth him that fent me : So the very fame is faid here of re- ceiving Children in his Nam^e. The Difpute is concerning a confidcrable Part of Chrifl's Flock: And it is, Whether they (hall be admitted into his Fold, or not. The Infants of Mankind, taken together with all fuch as are un- der the Age at which the Antipasdobaptifts re- ceive them, do make, I believe, a third Part of the whole People. Our blelTed Saviour will certainly at his coming be much diffleafed (for he was fo once upon Earth on a like occafion) either with us for receiving G^ them-, 450 A Defence of the Hifiory^ 8rc. them ; or elle with them for re jewing them. \t behoves us all therefore to mind what Things dif- pleafed him here ^ and with fuch Care and Impar- tiality to ftudy and learn his true Will and Mean- ing *, and with fuch Sincerity to follow it \ and for our Performance of both thefe Things, fo to implore his Heavenly Direftion and Affiftance; That when he ^j all appear, we may have Confidence^ and not be aftamed before him at his Coming, Amen. Finis. 451 L'i flOi/i POSTCRIPT. SO M E of the Antipsedobaptift Writers do give us Occafion to obferve the great Mif- chief to Religion, that comes by any ones forg- ing Words, and attributing them in Print to any antient Father : So great, that though the firffc Forger Ihould repent, and publickly recant what he has faid \ yet the Mifchief and ill Confequence would continue by ignorant Men's taking him aC his firft Word, and commonly adding to it. Jvflin Martyr is (a Very few excepted) the EI- deft of the Chriftians whofe Books are left to us. He was born in the Apoftle's Time, and wrote about Forty Years after it. A Teftimony of his is more confiderable than of Five or S\yL later Ones. Any Words of his, that (hould plain- ly and exprefly determine, either for or againfi Infant-Baptifm, would be a more material and decifive Evidence than any that has as yet been produced from Antiquity on either Side. The greater muft the Impiety be of any Writer in this Controverfy, who fhould forge Tucji Decifive Words in his Name. Mr. Gale^ writing his Reflexions on a PafTage which I had cited out of 7w/?;Vs Apology, ('where he fpeaks of fome Circumllances, ufed at the bap- Gg 3 " tizir.g 452 P S C R 1 P T. tizing of adult Converts; adds thefe Words ; at his Page 457, 45^- *' St. Jujiin here mentions only adult Perfons : *' And elfewhere plainly excludes Infants from '* being baptized in the Church ; and fays, That Adult Perfons only can^ or ought to he ba^tiz^ed. This, if true, is a very pofitive Evidence. Mr. Davye, having mentioned the fame Paf- fjge of JufiinjSind knowing nothing to the Contra- ry, but that what Mr Gale had farther attributed to him might be true, recites Mr. Calebs Words (as if they were from his own Knowledge or Reading) and adds to them another Forgery of my confejfing the Thing to be fo. In thefe Words, at his Page 54. *' St. Jujiin mentions only adult Perfons, and *' (elfewhere as Mr. Wall himfelf confefTes) excludes " Infants from being baptized, and in the Church ; *' and fays, That only adult Terfons can, or ought *' to be baptiz^ed. If Mr. Gale can produce no fuch Words of St. Jufiin (as I am confident he cannot) and Mr. Davye can produce no fuch ConfefTion of mine (as I am fure he cannot j they are both of them Forgers of Evidences. And it concerns not on- ly the Caufe of Religion and Truth in general, but particularly the Credit of the Antipatdobap- tifls, that they be called to Account, whether they can or not: And if they cannot, that they be difowned. Otberwife they will be worfe than the Papifts: For whereas fome Impoflors former- ly did, for the Maintenance of Popery, forge Decretal Epifiles, under the Name of Biihops, as antient as Jujiin Martyr; they, were credited for fome Time: But when the Cheat came to be detefted, all the honeft Papifts did them- felves join in condemning and expoUng it j and they FOSTCRIPT. 4^^ they now difown, and are athamed of the Epi- ftles. I did, as I pafled along, take notice of this foul Dealing of both of them, at f. 177, and p. 432. of this Defence. But I had a Mind to give a Me- morandum of it here by it felf. Becaufe the At- tempt being extaordinary ^ and the Evidence for the Antiquity of Antipaedobaptifm far more con- fiderable, if it be a true one, than ever was heard of j 'tis pity but it Ihould be brought to light, and into a fair View. I don't know whether Mr. Davye can find the Place in 7»/?/«'s Works 5 but Mr. Gale can j if it be there. The Author being ahfent from the Prefs, the Reader is de fired to Corre^ the following E R R ATA. I^Age3.Line32. r. heaped, p. 17. 1. 9. and p. i8. 1. 6. r. choquing. p. 18. 1. 18. fuch as learned Men have proved that the J-ervs and antient Chriftians did fet apart for holy Ules. r. This ftxould come in, two Lines af- ter, v/:f. after the Word cVef^^oi'. p. 20. 1. 37. r. rife. p. 21, 1.33. f. autority at all r. autority of any Church or Chri- ftian Society at all. p. 21. 1. «»«^e/)e» r. th^ Members, p.22, 1. 28. r. from Heathenifm. p. 23. 1. 34. r. Name. p. 24. 1. 32* are to be baptized r. are to be baptized, muft be baptized. p. 25. 1. 23. f. be abfurd r, be tooabfurd. Ibid. 1. 34. r. pal- pable, p. 28. 1. 16. r. This Determination, p. 32. 1. 9. f. Af- fairs r. Affairs of Infants. Ibid. 1. ii.r, the Ads. p. 37. 1 7, f. fo undcrftood r. fotobe underftood. p. 40. 1. 15. r. before him. p. 41. 1. T I. r. fo foon. p, 42. 1, i . f. all, I fay, by him r, all, I lay, who by him. p. 44. 1. 8. f. heard fome r. heard of fome. Ibid. 1. penult, r. whole guiltlefs. p. 47. 1. 9<). r. thofe, p. 50. 1. 6. r. lets. p. 51. 1. 24. r. this Labour. Ibid. 1. penult, r. which it. p. 5 5.1. 28. f. the material Objeftionr. the moft material Objeftions. p. 56. 1. 3. f. Quiddignum^^c, r. Quid dfgnum tanto feret bic promisor biatu, Ih'id.X, penult, f. my charginj^ E R R J r A cT^arging r.my miftake in charging, p. 57. 1. 1^. f. and r. ^c, p. '^8.1. 14. r. their Party, p. 62.L 18. f. could r. I would. p. 6'^. 1. ult. r. deferring, p. 72. 1. 16. f. did own r. did not own. Ibid. 1. ao. f. Language may. r. Language, may read if they pleafe. p. 76. 1. antepen. f. from r. from them, p. 77. 1, 8, r. referved. p. 79. K 21. x. takes, p. 80. 1. 8. f. come from, r. come out from. Ibid. 1. 24. f. that it might r.that he might, p. 83. 1. I. r. the Error, p. 88.1. 26. r. their ufe. p. 52. 1. 2. r. be a juft. Ibid. 1. 26. f. ^stTrli^u or any other derivative r. /?«-'5r//r« or any derivative. Ibid. 1. <;, t. Concil.Trid. p. 94. 1. 35. f. true, ^cfTflii^co r. true, if ^offrji^a. p.'-95« l.i. P.'I38.3 r.Now add to this what he fays, F. 138. Ibid. 1. antepen.'?, queftion the r. queftion between the. p. 10©. 1. 27. r. being ea- iily pleafed. Ibid. 1. uH. r. Goods delivered, p. loi. 1. 31. r. feveral Inftances. p. 112. 1. 28. r. does not include, p. 114. 1. 35. f. fome mifapplication r. the fame mifapplication. p. II 7. !. 26. r. place, p. 1 19.1. 13. r. Priefts. p. 120. 1. 1. f. com- monly a r. a comrBonly. p, 122. 1. penult* r. ^Ae/afr/. p. 125. 1. ult. V. has enlarged, p. 130. 1. 28. f. juft a Degree r. juft fucha Degree, p.133. 1. 15- r.they might. Ibid.l. 17. r. Gnat. p. 134. 1. 17. r. exceptthe Roman, p. 13$. 1. 6. r. as St. Paul, p. 138. 1. 17. f. that Text and r. thatThatand. p. 14^. !. 21, f. mentions, were r. mentions, were baptized, were. p. 148^ !, 5. r. fo clear, p. i '54. 1. 21. f. of the Context r. in the Con- text, p. 160, 1. 3. r.Chriftian Parents, p. 168. 1. 17. f. or any o- ther,fkleor. p. 169. 1. 18. r. inftances in that. p. 173. 1. 12. f. declaiming r. declaring, p. 174. 1. 1 8. r. ought not to neglect. p. 180. 1.26. f. ihamelefs, p. 182. 1. 2i. £inftance that r. inftance, befide St. Matibevr, that. p. 201. 1, 3. r. feafablc, p. 228.1.8. f.reprefent,inr. reprefent, any Abfurdity in.p.280. I. I. r. f^ctQifjivofjLcu. p. 293. 1- 25. f. Ep'fi.he r. EpiJi.Part II. It-. I. he. p. 296. 1. 17. f.This r.His, p. 298. 1. 5. r. J^iAjpi-^-at p. 305. 1. 17. f. /W5J' MC TpiyT/r©- r, uiv w 'rr^coTir©-. Ibid. 1. 32. f. f. 4. r. I' 4- p* 3 14. ^' 18. f. had r. has. p. 342. 1. 26, ?'. know r. knew, p.351. 1. 27. f, Beiides thefe r. Befides: Tliefe p. 354. 1.6. r. Infant, p. 361. 1.35. f. defired r. denied, p.374. 1, 30. r. fanfenius. p. 375. 1. 34. r. fink with no Man. p.382. 1. 20 f. almoft all the r. almoft all : The p. 389. 1. 15. r. not have failed, p. 397. 1. 34. f, Apoftolical r. Apoftatical, p.^oo. 1. 18. f. Ecfkfid r. Ecclefidi. p. 401. 1. 31. f. that do r.that the ^ody do, p.403. 1. 10. f. from whence r. from whom, p.405, 1. 24. r. to have given, p. 419. 1. 26, f. alTured r. afTumed. 5. 422, 1. 4. r« evertipii. p. 447, 1. 27. de it capable of. AN APPENDIX Containing the Additions and Alterations I N T H E THIRD EDITION O F T H E HISTORY O F infant -iSapttfm, That arc moft MateriaL INTRODUCTION. PAGE XLV. /. 1 5. add, Godwyfiy Mofes and Aaron ^ I, i.e. 3. To the making of a Male profely te at firft, Three Things were required, i. ^Circumcifion. 2. A kind of Purification by Water. 3. The Blood of Oblation, Mofes Kotfen. fol. 20. Of a Woman Pro- felyte were required only Purification by Wate^ and Oblation, Drupusde tribm SeUi^. Gg4 P.XLIX, ^ J P P E N D I X, p. XLIX. after Mifna it [elf] add, (Which is a Syftem oithi Trad it Ions and received QuJ}(fms of the 7fipj compiled within an Hundred Years of the Tinie of Chrifl\ and^oiEjw's baptizing ; as learned Men, Dr. Prideaux ComeUiion^ I. 5. And Dr. Wotton^ Preface to Mifcell. Vlfcourfes^ have com- puted the Diftance) mentions che fame. For the Mlfna, Chetbahothy 1. 1 and /. 4. fpeaks of a Child becoming, or being made a Profelyte. ^ Ibid, a little after, add. Which is alfo fliewn by Dr. IVatton to be a juft Confequence from the Words of that Law •, which he cites more largely, and in the original. Afi- fcell. Difc. Fol. I. c. 8. BOOK. P. 10. /. 24. For particular Caufe which each Man had of Sinning^ read, peculiar Guilt of each of them who had finned. , Ibid. At the End; of .§. i. add, In anfwer to the Exceptions made againfl; my tranflating ^^ here by frdtcr^ I have in the De- fenfe of thi« Book ihewn that many learned Men, all that 1 have feen, and I believe abfolutely all who have tran dated this Place, have fo rendred it. And that Jufiin^ ordinary Phrafe, and par- ticularly in this Dialogue, is, to ufe it fo. P. 14. In the Title of Chap. 3. read. Quotations out of St. Irenaus and Clemem Alex' ^ndrinas. P. 1$. At the End of §. 3. add. And I. I. c. 18. Concerning the Falentinian He- retics, who altered and corrupted both the Form of APPENDIX. 5 of Chrillian Baptifm, and the Manner of admi- niftring it (of which Corruptions i have occalion to fpeait particularly hereafter. Ckip. 21. §. 2. •and Part 11. Chap. 5. §. i.) he fays. TO ZetJAvS. This Gene-ration of Heretics has been fent out by Satan for the fruji: rating {pv denying^ of the Baptifm of Regeneration unto God [i. e. the true Chrillian Baptifm, inftead of which they fet up a Mock-Baptifm of their own;] and the DejiruElion of our wholfi Faith C^f Religion]. And it appears by the following Parts of the Chapter, that the ralentinians ^Ko aped the Chriftians in calling their Mock-Baptifm by the Name of Regeneration and Re- demption-, hiy«(Xl 3 a.v}t)U ayctyKO/AV eivau- ■■■ "ivct hi 7hv vsrip TS'eivjet AiystiMif u(yiv dfAyeyivvil frivol' ThcV fay that it Ctheir way of Baptifm] is necefary for all true Gnoftics^ that they may be regenerated unto that Pow- er which is above all, i. e. above the God of the Chriflians. And /. 5. c. 15. fpeaking of the blind Man whom our Saviour cured by Clay and Spittle, and bade him walhin the Pool of Siloam:, and calling this Application of Clay, and this wafhing, in an al- legorical Way a Creation, or new Formation of his Eye^ and a Baptifm; he ftyles that Wafhing, Lavacrum Regenerationis-, The wafhing of Req^etitration. And a little after, Siynul & plafmationem & earn quA per lavacrum efh Regenerationem refHtuens ei. He gave to him at the fame time his Formation {viz.. that of his Eye] and that Regeneration which is by the La- ver {viz,. Baptifm.] And/. 4. c. 59. difputing againU the Ebionitet (who denied our Saviour to have been conceived in the Womb in any miraculous manner, but thought him to have been begotten by Jofeph in the ordina- ry ^ jp p E N D I :s> ry way) he asks them v how they think to efcape the generation of Death for the Curfe attending the natural Generation] if they do not believe that new way of Generation which was foretold to jihaa [^Behold, a Virgin ^all conceive'} and fb, earn recipiofit ejua efi per Fidem regenerationem ? Receive that Regeneration [[or Baptifm] which is by tht Faith Ipv Creed ?] This Place is mangled in the old Copy. And Dr. Gr^t^e (hews that the Senfe requires the Words X_eam recipiat qua efi} to be reftored in the Blank. And it is to be noted that the antient Creeds al- ways had that Claufe of the Conception of a Vir- gin, in oppofition to thefe Ebionites. And a common Name for the Creed was (as Mr. Bingham (hews) n/r/<, the Faith. According to which Faith Ire- vs]pS [^OVff>f k] T» ni'ivf/.AJ&: TH KaBoS'O) dytcl^ejcUm He is perfe^ed [j)V perfeftly initiated^ by the Waftj- irg 8 J V P E N D I X, ing- \j)V Baptifm] aUne, and fanSlified by the Coming of the Holy Spirit on him. And a little after he concludes thus ; o u'ovoi' dvaryivvw^iU, t'^'Trifih' xj rivoua. £p^«j )y (pcoJtS-eif, eo7ni\hAKleu Jx 'rs-cipa.y^pnixct^ &CC. He that is once regenerated, as the Name of that ^Sacrament] *V, and inlightenedy has his State immediately chanfrm ed^ &c. Here the Words ^a.-T]i}^oiJLiv©^^ and AmymnQsi?^ haptiaed and regenerated are all along uled pro- mifcuoufly. And Chrift himfelf Is in fome of the Paragraphs faid to be baptiz^ed by John^ and in fome regenerated. And moreover Clement fays ex- prefly ^ The Word Regeneration is the Name for Baptifm *, fo that though he do not here fpeak of the Cafe of Infants *, yet his ufe of the Word, and his declaring it to be the common ufe, confirms the Senfeof that Saying of Jrenausy which fpeaks of Infants regenerated. §. 9. But in another Book of the fame Trea- tife Clement himfelf alio does fo fpeak, as to fup- pofe and^take for granted that the Apoftles did baptize Infants, or little Children, ^auS'ia., viz., Padagog. /. 3. c. 1 1, prope ab initio. ^s,'\i He is in this Chapter giving direftion to Chrl- " ftian Men and Women concerning the Gravity and Modefty to be ufed in their Apparel and Orna- ments. And among other Things fpeaks of the Rings then ufually worn on their Fingers, and the Scales engraven on them. He earneftly for- bids all idolatrous and lafcivious pidures or En^ gravings •, and advifes to fuch as are innocent, mo- deft, and ufeful ; and fays thus j Let your Seal be a Dove, or a Filh, or a Ship under. Sail, or a Harp, as was that of Poly- crates \ 6v an Anchor, which SeUucus made his Choice. K^V dhuuuv rU «, 'AxoroA* (MfXprKTiJiu ;^ ruif i^ vS^a^Q- avA7^ei r yvvcCiKA* on j « yyvri dp^cty.ii>h vTifoy Toje rrrtSri riv olvJ'fA. When a Man and his Wife are both ■unbelievers \ fometimes the Aian believing frfi in time^ faves his Wife. And fometimes the Wife believing firfl does a while after perfivade her Husband. He that fo paraphrafes the Man fanBifiedy i. e, converted to the Chriftian Religion by his Wife, and the Woman in the fame SenCe fanUifying her' Husband, could not well underftand the SanBity Cor Holinefsi ot the Children otherwife than their be- ing baptized into it. P, 303. /. 19. Part II. Chap. 3. §. 5. add, —And if one were to amend by the Senffe witfiout any Book or Mmufcipt. I Ihould think that APPENDIX., 17 that ^v(fiuy has crept in by Miltake for 'tsroMav (of for the Verfe Sake Tfoc ToAtuf. For he often lets an , jinapxfi us go for the Fourth Foot of his Iambic) The Senfe according to the Editions, is. Your Life u not offo many Tears as arc the Tears of my facrif- cifigf i. P. officiating in the Prieft's Office. Which is -a Senfe very difficult to be reconciled in Hifto^ ry with Truth. That of Vapehrochius \ Tou are not fo old as I am^ is true*, but it is but a poor Senfe of a Father fpeaking to his Son. Tou are not fo old as my grey Hairs are^ i.e, I am io old as to have been grey-headed before you were born, is. to the Purpofe of the Father's Argument at that Place. J Add dele' the next Paragraph. p. ,305. /. 23. add, I faid in the former Editions, that That one plain )?lace aforefaid, which makes this Gregory .born after his Father's Baptifm and Ordination, did feem to overweigh all the Reafons of Chro- nologers to the Contrary ^ but I have fince mind- ed another Adfurdity that attends it. St. Hicrom de Script. Ecclef fpeaks of this Gregory as having been his Mafter. Praceptor metn h quo Scripturas^ iilo explanante^ didici. Now St. //^Vrow himfelf was born the Year 329. And it is not likely that he fhould fpeak fo, of one that was but Four Years older than himfelf. Perhaps it may be more likcp. ly that a Word may have been printed or writ- ten wrong, than fo many Abfurdities be allow- ed. I fliall determine nothing; but leave it to others. P. 385. 2.35. add. But the more exa(^ Accounts, and particular- ly Mr. liiniborch^s Hiftory of the Inquifition^ do di- ll h 4 ' ftin- i8 AT F E N D IX. Ilinguilh the WaUenfes from the Mbigenfes both as to their Tenets and their Places of Abode. And 'tis, I think only among the later that any Anti- pasdobaptifls were found. As Frame vi2i% the firftj and in thofe Times the only Country in Chri' ftendom where clipping of Children in Baptifm was ordinarily omitted, fo there firfl; Antipaedo- baptifm began •, and there only for fo long ago as the Eleventh or Twelfth Century found any Abettors. P. 434. /. 30. I did not in the Firft, nor Se- cond Edition proceed to give any Inftances out of any other Book befide the Scripture, of the Word n,a,'-^'i!^a ufed for wafhing by Perfufion; partly becaufe it does not belong to the main Matter of my Book, which is a Hillory, not of the manmr of adminiftring Baptifm, but of the Suhje^s of it^ Infants or adult only. And partly becaufe I had, as for other Authors, referred the Reader to Mr. Walker'^s Do^rint of Baptifms \ where there are a great many. But yet having lately met with a very plain Inftance of that ufe of the Word in Origen., which I think is not a- mong Mr. iValksr^s -, 1 will give it to the Reader. It is in his Comment, in Joann. Tom, "j. f. 11 5. ed. Rotom. 166S. He is there examining the Ground of that up- braiding Demand made by the Pharifees to St. Johnl ^hy he^baptized, if he were not the Chrifi, nor Elias, nor that Prophet. And fays, that they had no Reafon to think that either the Chriftox EUas^ when they came, would baptize in their own Per- fons. And that accordingly Jefus (who was the Chrifi and that Prophet) (Jid not baptize in his own Perfon, but his Difciples. And coucernipg Elias Jie ipeaks thus ^Q'thtPharifees^' '' "^'- V" AW E N D IX. 1^ Vov ; iAl roL cm t» ^vaiA^^iv |iJa*, y(^ tk( n ^Ayjtei^ ' fict'rj'ia'a.vj©- ; I'jiKiKivilau jS toYj hpivffi nro 'zsrotfia-cut ^^. " How come you to think that EUas when he *' fhould come, would baptize • who did not in *' Aha\>% Time baptiz^e the Wood upon the Altar, " which was to be walhed before it was burnt by " the Lord's appearing in Fire ? But he orders *' the Priefts to do that j not once only, but iays, '' Do it the Second Time. And they did it the Second, '' Time. And^ Do it the Third Time ; and they did *' it the Third Time. He therefore that did not " himfelf baftiTLe then, but afligned that Work to *' others, how was he like to baptiz^e when he ac- ^' cording to MaUchfs Prophecy fhould come ? In the Text i Kings Y.vm. 33. The Order given by Elijah, is. Fill four Barrels with Water^ and pour it on the Burnt-Sacrifice and on the Wood. This Origen calls the baptizing of the Wood. P. 457. After the Words Qhe late King J^ww's Time.3 add, A Clergyman, who was my Neighbour and Acquaintance ; the Reverend and Learned Mr. Ed* ward Brown J Reftor of Sundriflj, who had been born and bred at Rochefter^ did fometime after the Revolution make inquiry concerning that Re- gifter Book *, and was told by one that was an old Officer under the Chapter, that it was ftolea away in King Jameses Time. Mr. Brown wrote a Memorandum or Certificate of this ^ and before he died, gave it to Dr. Barker, Reftor of Braflhead ; who told me, lince Mr. Brown's Death, that he had it. 3a ji Pf E N DI X: it. But t^iePerfons are now all dead j and the Certificate is loft. p. 457. After the Words I^are dipped] add. Therefore it is probable that Erafinus wrote his^ Colloquy called )x^votp(tyict m £n^lan^. In whicfiT he brings fn One Saying : We dip Children newly come forth from their Mother^ iVomb, all over into colAW.a- ter^ xphich has flood a long tiipe jn A Stone-t^ont ^ /will, fiet^fity., till it fiinh. ''i*.'497^ After the End of BufebiHi's Creed, adcl*;;.' ■ Here are recited in the Body of the Creed thole V?6rds pf the Apoltle, Co/, i. 15. csrp&rioTox.or Wctjk Kf/f$«i. And it is obfervable how they are para- j^r^fed in the next Words, -jt^; ^tfV7«K ajc^va>v ly. .'« Q^Il((le)f y-y^vniJikvov. Begotten of God the 'Father before all Worlds {_Qt Ages] by which we may be fure they would not have tranflated, u^uTotqk©-- rrrttf-M? i<.7«Vs»f as OViV En^UP) doesv thi firfi born of eyexy Creejkture .(of ' which Englifti Expreflion the' Brians and Socinians take an advantage) but bori%\ tor begotten] before all the Creation. o I'rrASoo. After /. 3 5. add^ , Yet if any in thofe Times did fcruple the Ufe of the Word o^woio-^®- as being not a Scripture Word. ^ but did by other Words fhew their Belief in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, One God, to be Catholic ; Athanafim owns fuch Men for Brethren j and fays, it was the Cafe of Bafll of Ancyra* P. !|3J.,After thb Words [by St. Matthew in that Place] add. And when he fpeaks of People baptized in thf Name of C/jr//?,. ufes the fame Word -^ jyut^tfJivoiJLmt ^f.r^. 9v.o,f^ '^ Xfif <. , As in his Dialog' p'Sj* td Stfph^ he J P P E N D IX. 21 he fays, " God has not hitherto brought on, nor does yet bring on the Day of Judgmenty yivaxrKuv Irt KctOt* it^jiX^v Ttvtti /!/*0«75t/o/^4i/«f in 70 ovofAO, n Xp/ra avt^* Knowing that there are fiill every Day fome Difci- pled into the Name of his Chrift, and withdrami from the Way of Error^ Where that he by difcipled, in Qor into] the Name of Chrifi^ means baptiz^ed in his Name, is apparent not only by the Phrafe Cfor no Author ever fays, J[tS'cic«V£«f, &c." Thefe and fuch like Gifts of the Spirit did, it leems, con- tinue in his time to be given to Chriftians at their Baptifra. And whereas the main Objection againfl this Senfe of the Word 'i^ctQidrn and fxcSidivz^cu in the Cafe of Infants, viz.. that they fhould be under- ftood to be difcipled to Chrift by Baptifm before any adual Teaching, is ; that That Word is fel- dom (the Objedors fay, never) ufed without in- cluding prefent aftual teaching in its Significa- tion. 'Tis true that it is far oftner ufed in the Cafe of fuch as do at that Time learn, or havelearn- ned, or been taught; and fo are all Words like or parallel to it. As when we fay, fuch a {lafter's. Scholar .^ Pu^ll^ Servant^ Apprentice^ &:c. Such a Cap- taia^s Soldier, 6-c. Thefe Words are far oftner u- fed in the Cafe of prefect learnings Jerving^ bearing Arms^^':, faecaufe there is oftner occalion to fpeak of them 22 J P P E N D IX. them in that State. But yet it is truly and pro- perly faid of any Lad, that he is fuch a Man's Pupil or Scholar, as foon as he is entered and con- figned to learn of him, though he has not yet began *, fuch a Matter's Servant or Apprentice, as foon as he is bound to him \ though he does not yet bear Arms. la like manner the Word {jLA^nlk xe^r?, a Difci- fU of Chrifl, is far oftner ufed in the Cafe of fuch as have already began to learn and pradife his Religion -, becaufe there is oftner occafion in Books to fpeak of fomething which they do or fay, or which happens to them during the time of their Difciplelhip, than there is of that firfi: A<^ of their entring-, but it may truly and pro- perly be ufed concerning a Child that is now de- dicated, configncd, agreed, and entred to learn and praftife it, though he has not yet began. And it is fo ufed when there is occafion to fpeak of fuch a Cafe. If any one will diligently compare thefe Three Texts, Matth. X. 42. Marc ix. 4I. Z/wcix. 48. He will perceive thefe Three Terms : the receiving of ary one as ixa.S>{}ny, a Difciple j and the receiving him as -r^ Xe^ra oV7* belonging to Chrifi : And the re- ceiving him Iv Ivai^ctlt Xetra /?; the Name of Chrifi ; to be ufed by our Saviour, as Terms equivalent, lignifying the fame Thing. And he will there alfo plainly fee a Child fo received by our Saviour hirafelf. As for the Language of the Old-Tefiament, a Child, or little one, has the Term given him of being emered into Covenant. Deut. xxix, li, i2. Kow in that Language (and indeed in any Lan- guage) a Covenanter, or Son of the Covenant : And a Trofelyte-, and a Dtfciple, do\ fignify the fame Thing. Ah Infant can for the prefent no more cove-' ■JP F E N D I X. 23 covenant y than he can learn. Yet he has the Name of a Covenanter^ being dedicated to that Covenant by his Parents. And 1 fhewed before that to call an Infant fo dedicated, a young Profelyte, was a common way of fpeaking. There is (as Dr. Lightfoot in his Hor. Hebrl quotes) in Bab. Schabb. fol. 31. an appofite Exam- ple of fuch a Ufe of the Word DifcipU -^ where one comes to Rabbi Hiilely and intreats him j Fac me Difcipulumj ut me doceas* Make me \ov enter me] thy Difciple *, that thou mayeft teach me. So that it was a ufual Acceptation of the Words, Profelyte, Difciple, Covenanter^ in the Language which our Saviour fpoke, and in which St. Mat-' thew wrote. It is faid, Luc ix. 57. It came to pafs as they went in the Way \ a certain Man faid unto him ; Lord^ I will follow thee whitherfoever thou goeft ^ Now St. Matthew calls this Man, and another who of- fered himfelf at the fame time, Difciples. For he Chap. viii. 19, 2©, 21. having recited the fame that St. Luc does, concerning the firft Man, fub- joins immediately ^ Another of his Difciples, Irz^^ '^ Tuv {xetQtOuv tfu-Ts, faid unto him y Lord^ f^ff^r me firfi to bury my Father. The later is exprefly called a Difciple by St. Matthew ', who calling him another DifctpUy does implicitly call the former likewife a Difciple •, though it feems to be the firft Meeting that the Firft had with our Saviour •, and neither of them had gone any farther than to exprefs a Purpofe of following him. Eufebius in his Demonft. Evangel. I. 3. c. 7. brings an Inftance of one that makes a Propofal, or fets up for a Teacher of any Art or Science. "On yi J^it^d/TiLUf iTretyyiKietv jW6t6H/>ta]of T/c©" I'Tra.yy'iKK'Qau* Ol rrfotr^ifoyjii ivil^i'j^irtr. One gives out that he will teach fomf 54 Jl P P KN D I X. fome Art. 7he Dlfciples, being defirous of the Slilt^ offer and commit themfelves to the Mafier- They arc here called Difciples before they had began to learn any Thing •, only they were appointed or cove- nanted to learn. In Numb. iii. 28. The Koathites were fet apart to be Keepers of the Charge of the'Sanauary. When this Aflignation or Dedication of them and their Pofterity to this Office was once made ; the Infants as well as the grown Men, have the Title given them of Keepers of that Charge. For fo are the Words ; In the Number of all the Males from a Month old and upward were Eight Thovfand Six Hun' dred keeping the Charge of the Sanctuary, Many of thefe Inftances have been communica- ted to me by the forefaid Reverend Dr. Jenkyns^ who had obferved them as he read. So little do grammatical Derivations of Words fignify to limit the Senfe of them ^ which muft ra- ther be taken from the common ufe of them in the Books and Languages from whence they are quoted. Mct^nlyii is derived from y.ctv^dva to learn. Therefore may a Grammarian fay, it cannot be applied but to one that does now adually learn. But we muft rather fee in what Latitude St. Mat- thew (who, or whofe Interpreter, was, I think, the firft that formed the Derivative ixMlivcj from it in any aftive tranfitive Signification) does ufe the Word. And he ufes it, not only for prefent Learners, but for fome that only were ap- pointed to learn. The Word has indeed always a Reference to Learning', but does not always fup- pofe that Learning to be at that prefent time, when any one is made or ftyled a Difciple. P. 542. Chap. ii.§. 3. After the Words Crefto- red Unityl add, • A APPENDIX. 2^ A Praftice, which the Paftors of the French re- formed Church not long ago in their Letters to the late Bifhop of London, and thofe of Geneva lately in their Letters to the Univerfity of Ox- ford, have in a generous and laudable Way imi- tated in refpea: of our Erj^Ulh Separatifts, though iifing in many Things the fame Ceremonies that thole of France ^n^ Geneva do, P. 549. after the Words \\i I computed right at Fart L Chaf. 1 1. §. 6.] add, Of which I do fince that time make a Queltion for the Reafons given in this third Edition. FINIS. In the Prefsj and will he (hortly Publijhed. THE Hiftory of Infant-Baptifm, fin two Parts. The Firlt, being an Impartial Colle- dlionofall fuch Paflages in the Writers of the Four Firft Centuries, as do make for or againft it. The Second, containing feveral Things that do help to illuftrate the faid Hiftory, in Two Volumes %vo. The Third Edition, with Additions and Alterati- ons. By W. Wall^ Vicar of Shorehm in Kent. (