w 
 
 > ' 
 

 0. 
 
 
 
 5^ 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 ..-vT 
 
 _Q. 
 
 
 
 : '^ 
 
 1) 
 -a 
 
 
 
 *** 
 
 (— 
 
 
 
 •S ^ 
 
 CL 
 
 
 
 f. ^ 
 
 "3 
 5 
 
 
 
 *25 g 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
 ^ l^ w 
 
 i> 
 
 
 i 
 
 o 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 C 
 CO 
 
 
 
 i ^ 
 
 2 
 
 
 1 : 
 
 1 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 §; 
 
 ?*» 
 
 ■a 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 % 
 
 c . 
 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ i 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 1 
 
 
 10 i 
 
 % 
 
 - 
 
The Mode and Subjeds of Baptijrui 
 
 li ' '■' ' ' j' i t: 
 
 SERMON ^^ %; J' 
 
 MATTHEW xxvUi. 19, 20. 
 
 Go yfy therefore, and teach all nations, haptv^ing them in the nat, 
 of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghojl ', teac 
 ing them to ohferve all things tuhatfoeijer I have commani 
 you : And, lo, I am nv'ith you al-way^ even unto the end cj if. 
 luorld. Amen. 
 
 IT hath pleafed the Father of Mercies to beRow on fallen 
 man a revelation from heaven. In it is contained the 
 fcheme of grace, i^hich brings life and immortality to lighr. 
 It fhows the way by which to efcape the wiath to come, and 
 to find the favour of God. All fcripture is given by his in- 
 fpiralion, -^^^ is profitable for do<ftrine, for reproof, for cor- 
 region, for inftru<5tion in righteotifnefs ; that the man of God 
 may be perfect, thoroughly furnilhed unto all good work?. 
 
 Till the human heart be humbled, in meafure, man feels 
 not his need of divine teaching ; nor will he make the fcrip- 
 tures the man of his counfel. But, my brethren, and peo- 
 ple, it is doubilefs the cafe that many of yt u poffefs a wil- 
 lingnefs to have your principles and pradice fquared by 
 the word and teflimony of Jefus Chrifl. My text contains 
 fome of the lafi words of our great High-P.ieft. It is the 
 general orders which he gave his firft apoftles, and left for 
 the inftiuiftion, pra<ftice and comfort of all their facceff rs, to 
 the end of the world. In the vcrfe which precedes my text-, 
 Chrift informs us that all power in heaven and in earth i^ 
 given unto him. His words, therefore, are clothed wjtix 
 authority. May we hear, and fear, and be obedient. Where 
 the word of a kiijg is. there is power ; and who may fay unto 
 the King of Zion, Whar doft thou ? 
 
 So far as we be Chriftians, all that is necefTary to enforce obe- 
 dience is, to know wha- Chrift would have us to do. Perhaps 
 not a palTage in all the oracles of truth contain* more extenfive 
 
4 The Mode and Subjeds [Serm. I. 
 
 inftruflion than do the words of my text. The commands are 
 exceedingly broad ; the Baptifmal Inftitution comprehends all 
 obedient difclples ; and the comforting piomife is durable as 
 the world. 
 
 In my text, Chrlfl Jefus, the Head of th6 church and Lord 
 of alj, conftiluted his prefent and fucceeding difciples to be apof- 
 tles unto all nations. It contains their commiffion, and general 
 and particular orders. In it they are direfted 
 
 I. • To go and difciple all nations. 
 
 II. To baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the 
 Son, and of the Holy Ghoft. 
 
 III. He directs thefe newly conftituted apoftles, and all 
 their fucceifors, to teach their baptized difciples to ohferve all 
 things whatfoever he had given in commandment. 
 
 Laftly. For their encouragement and comfort, he adds. 
 And, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. 
 Amen. 
 
 I ruppofe it will be expedient, and with me it is an indlfpcn- 
 fable duty, that \ lay each of thefe propofitions as fairly and as 
 fully before you as I can. But I fiiall not obferve the order in 
 whicli they lie in my text, which is as I have juft (lated them. 
 For I have many things to fay unto you, in agreement with my 
 text, but fear that you aie not, all of you, able t^bear tliem 
 now. We fhall therefore begin with the 
 
 II, Which contains Chrift's command to baptize, in the 
 name of the Father, and of the Son, and of tlie Holy Ghofl, 
 ihofe who iliall be diicipled of all nations. 
 
 Kor do I purpofe to call your attention, at this time, to the 
 whole which is implied in this proportion. But what I pur- 
 pofe is, to define a few words which appertain to the ordinance, 
 and then colle(5l the fcripture account of baptifm, with fome 
 other texts, which may throw light upon the fubjed. After- 
 vards, in difcourfes which may follow, I may produce evidence, 
 that nty definition of baptifm is accurate and juft ; and (how 
 how the apoftles and primitive Chiiftians underftood this mat- 
 ter, and how they pradiled. When this is done, it will be eafi« 
 ly fe:n, what is the outward and vifible pait of baptifm j and 
 then the purport, end and dcfign of the inftitution may call ior 
 fome attention. 
 
 Before I proceed to open, illuftrate and confirm thefe partic- 
 ulars, I have feveral things to fay unto you. For I wilh you 
 to attend to the fubjecSt without partiality and without hypoc- 
 rify. I pray God to remove daiknefs and all prejudice from 
 
Serm. I.] of Bapiifm. 5 
 
 your minds, that you may, indeed, come to the law and to the 
 teftlmony of Jefus Chriil in this matter. 
 
 You will confider me as under the ftrongeft worldly induce- 
 ments to continue to believe and pradlife as I have heretofore 
 done; for fhould I, after mature ccnfideration, be conftrained 
 to believe and praftife differently, you will be releafed from all 
 legal obligations to afford me any farther fupport ; my relations 
 will, the rooft of them, probably be greatly lliccked and difpleaf- 
 ed, at ihe report ; many, whom 1 highly value as Chriftians, 
 and numbers of them zealous preachers of the gofpel, will, it 
 may be, confider me as loft, and worfe than loft, to the church, 
 and world ; and, befides this, multitudes will, no doubt, fay all 
 manner of evil againft me. All this being true, with a thou- 
 fand other conne<5led fmaller evils, and nothing of a worldly na- 
 ture in profpedl, fave what is contained in the promife of Jefus 
 Chrift, you cannot but conclude that I fliall proceed no farther 
 in this matter than I am obliged to, in following the Lamb of 
 God whitherfoever he goeth. 
 
 Having faid thus much with leQjefft to myfelf, I will ftil! 
 add, that, Ihould a change in my belief and pra<ftice, refpeiling 
 the fubjeft on hand, bring me to a more full belief and pra<5lice 
 of the truth, I fhall, on the whole, be a gainer. But, fhould a 
 change take place, and I be called to fuftain all the evils which 
 I may calculate upon, and after all be plunged myfelf into a 
 hurtful and bewildering error, furely all the meek and lowly 
 in heart would rather commiferate than revile me. 
 
 Another tiling I would mention to you, fo that the fubje(5t 
 may, if it poilibly can, meet your minds without prejudice. 
 You ought not to fix your judgments, nor found your belief, 
 upon the arguments or conftfiions of great and good men, any 
 farther than fuch arguments and confeffions are conformed 
 with the fcriptures of truth. Should we hearken to what the 
 greateft and beft of men have confeffed and afSrmed of the 
 fubjecft which we are about to confider, and have our belief and 
 practice correfponding with what they have written, the matter 
 would, moft evidently, go againft what we have, in time paft, 
 both believed and pra<ftifed. For they have very generally, or 
 very many of them, if not all cf them, confeffed, or afl^lrirtcd,^ 
 however their pradTiice may have been, that immeifion was the 
 mode praaifed by the apoitles and primitive church. This i 
 purpofe to prove to you in its proper place. 
 
 What I have more to aJd, before I proceed to the irain 
 bufinefsj is, to ftate a few plain truths, 
 . A 2 
 
t3 T/je Mode and Subjecis fSerm. I. 
 
 1. Baptifm is a pofidve inftitution, about which we can 
 know nothing, as to its being a Chrillian ordinance, but from 
 •what Chrift, and thofe infpired by his Spirit, have taught us. 
 
 2. All which we are required to believe and pra(5tife, with 
 refpefl to the Chriftian ordinance of baptifm, is declared to us 
 by Jefus Chrift and his forerunner and apoftles. 
 
 3. When Jefus Chrift firft inftitured the ordinance of bap- 
 tifm, he, no doubt, delivered his mind fo clearly and fully upon 
 the fubje<5t, that his immediate difciples and apoiiles unierftood 
 and pradtifed as he would have them. 
 
 4. Every thing which hath, by the precepts and command- 
 ments of men, been added fmce, is diftinct from the ordinance, 
 and makes no part of it. 
 
 5. No man, or body of men, have any more authority to 
 add to this ordinance, or to diminifh from it, than they have to 
 inftitute a new one and call it Chrift *s. 
 
 6. Whenever, and wherever, this ordinance is fo changed, 
 as to lofe the intent of the Inftitutor, then and there the ordi- 
 nance is loft, and becomes no Chriftian ordinance at all. 
 
 Having laid thefe preparatory obfervations, remarks and 
 plain truths before you, we proceed to confider the fubjed now 
 on hand, which is — 
 
 Chrift's command to baptize in the name of the Father, and 
 of the Son, and of tlie Holy Ghoft, thofe who fhall be difcipled 
 of all nations. 
 
 What is propofed for the prefent difcourfe Is — 
 
 1. To define a few words which appertain to the ordinance 
 of baptifm. Then — 
 
 2. To coUe(!!t the fcripture account of baptifm. together 
 widi fome other texts, which may throw light upon the fubjed. 
 Afterv/ards,' in fome following difcourfes, we may — 
 
 3. Produce evidence, that my definition of baptifm is ac- 
 curate and juft. Then fhow — 
 
 4. How the apoftles and primitive church underftood this 
 matter, and how they pradifed. When this is done, it wilt 
 be eafily feen — 
 
 5. What is the outward and vifibk pare of Chriftian bap- 
 tifm. Then — 
 
 LqjQIy, The purport, end and defign of the baptlfmal 
 jiiftitution may call for our attention. 
 
 Agreeably to what is propofed, we are — 
 
 I. To define a few words which appertaia to the ordinance 
 of bantifm. Thefe are— 
 
Serm. I.J of Baptifm. 7 
 
 1. BaptiJlerion<i Greek; hapujler'iiim^ 2.nd lava rum, Lalin;- 
 a font, a bath, a wafliing place, a velTel to v.-alii the body in j 
 tnglifh. 
 
 2. Baptifma and hapiifmos^ Greek ; Bapt'ifma and Lot'io, a'fo 
 ahlutia faura, Latin ; bapiiim, waihing, iacied, ceremonial 
 wafliing ; Enj^lifh. 
 
 3. Bapujiesy Greek ; lapt'ijla^ Latin ; one who dips, a 
 baptift; Engliih. 
 
 4. Baptizd., Greek ; Ijptl'zo^ mergo^ Iwco, Latin ; to baptize, 
 10 dip all over, to waili ; Englifn. 
 
 5. LouOi Greek ; lavoj Latin ; to wafli, to rinfe, to bathe ; 
 Englifh. 
 
 2. We are to coUe<rt the fcripture account of baptifm, to- 
 gether vrith fome other texts which may throw light upon the 
 fubj-a. 
 
 VVe will begin with thofe pafTages which fpeak of the bap- 
 tifm of John. 
 
 1. Matth. iii. 5, 6, 7. Then went out to him Jerufaiem^ 
 and all Judea, and ail the region round about Jordan,' and 
 were baptized of him in Jordan, confefling their fms. But 
 when he faw many of the Pharifees and Sadducees com.e to 
 his baptifm, he faid unto them, O generation of vipers, 5cc. 
 
 2. Verfe 11. 1 indeed baptize you with water unto re- 
 pentance, &c. 
 
 3. Verfes 13, 14, 15, 16. Then cometh jefus frona 
 Galilee to Jordan, unto John, to be baptized of him: bat 
 John forbade him, faying, I have need to be baptized of thee, 
 and, comeft thou to me ? And Jefus anfwerin^, faid uiitQ 
 him. Suffer it to be fo now, for thus it beccmelh us to fulfil 
 all righteoufnefa : then he fuffered him. And Jefus, when he 
 was baptized, went up ftrai^htway out of the water. 
 
 4. Matth. xxi. 25, 26, 27- Ihe baptifm of Jrhn, whence 
 was it, from heaven, or of men ? And tliey reafoned with 
 themfelves, faying. If we fhould fay. From heaven, he will 
 fay unto us. Why did ye not then believe him ? But, if we 
 fhall fiy, Of men, we fear the people, for all hold John as a 
 prophet. And they anfwered Jefus and laid, We cannot tell, 
 &c. 
 
 5. Mark i. 4, 5. John did baptize in the wildernefs, and 
 preach the baptifm of repentance for the rem'.ffion of fins. 
 A.id there went out unto him all the land of Juc'ea, and they 
 of Jerufaiem, and were all baptized of him iN tlie rivei" of 
 JordaD, confeffing their fias. 
 
4 
 
 h 
 
 S" • • * ne Mode mid Subjed's [Serm. 1. 
 
 irfes 8, 9, lo. I indeed have baptized you with 
 nd it came to pafs in thofe days, chat Jefus came 
 izaieth of GaHlee, and was baptized of John in Jor- 
 ^dan ; and ftraightway coming up out of the water, &c. 
 
 7. Mark xi. 30. The baptifm of John, was it from 
 heaven, or of men ? 
 
 8. 'Luh iii. 3. And he came into all the country about 
 j^.,. Jordan, preaching the baptifm of repentance for the remiffion 
 f^y^ fins. \ . 
 
 9. Verfes 7, ^. Then (aid he to the multitude that cam.e 
 fcTth to he baptiied of him, O generation of vipers' 
 bring^ forth thereifo^e fruits meet for repentance. 
 
 10. VtY^t 12. Then came alfo publicans to be baptized. 
 2 t. Verfe 16. A. indeed baptize you with water. 
 
 .. 12, Verfe 2 1. Now when all the people were baptized, 
 it came to pafs that Jefus alfo, being baptized, &c. 
 
 13. Luke vii. 29, 50. And all the people that heard him, 
 and the publicans, jultitied God, being baptized with the bap- 
 tifm of John. Buf the Pharifees and lawyers rejedled the 
 counfel of God againft themfelves, being not baptized of him. 
 
 14. Luke XX, 4. The baptifhi of John, was it from 
 heaven, or of men ? 
 
 15. yokn i. 25, 26. Why baptized thou, then,-if thou be 
 not that Chrift, nor Llias, neither tliat prophet ? Johnanfwer* 
 cd them, faying, I baptize with water. 
 
 16. Verfe 28. Beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing. 
 
 17. Verfe 31. That he Ihould be made manifeft to Ifrael, 
 therefore am. i com« baptizing with water. 
 
 18. Veife 33. He that fent me to baptize with water. 
 
 19. yohn iii. 23. And John alfo was baptizing in Enon, 
 near to Saiim, becaufe there was much water there ; and they 
 came and were baptized. 
 
 20. John iv. i. The Pharifees had heard that Jefus made 
 and baptized more difciples than John. 
 
 21. John X. 40. Beyond Jordan, into the place where 
 John at Sift baptized. 
 
 22. j4ds i. 5. John truly baptized with water. 
 
 23. Verfe 22. Beginning from the baptifm of John. 
 
 24. ^ds X. 37. After the baptifm which John preached. 
 
 25. ABs x\. 16. John indeed baptized with water. 
 
 26. yW-s xiii. 24. When John had firft preached, before 
 his coming, the baptifm cf repentance to all the people. 
 
 27. Jcis iviii. 15. He (ApoUos) fpake and taught, dill- 
 
Serm, I.] of Bapiifnu 9 
 
 gently, the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptifm of 
 John. 
 
 28. /Ids xix. 3, 4. Unto what then were ye baptized ? 
 And they faid, Unto John's baptifm. Then faid Paul, John 
 verily baptized with the baptifm of lepentaiice, faying unto the 
 people, that they Ihould believe on him, which fhould come af- 
 ter him, that is, on Chrift Jefus. 
 
 We will next turn our attention to thofe texts which mention 
 Chrlft's baptifm. 
 
 1. Matth. xxviii. 19. Go ye, therefore, and teach all na- 
 tions, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
 and of the Holy Ghoft. 
 
 2. Mark xvi. 15, 16. And he faid unto them, Go ye into 
 all the world, and preach the gofpel to every creature : he that 
 believeth, and is baptized, (hail be faved. 
 
 3. John iii. 5. iixcept a man be born of water, and of the 
 Spirit, &c. 
 
 4. Verfe 22. After thefe things, came Jefus and his difci- 
 cipies into the land of Judea, and there tarried with them and 
 baptized. 
 
 5. Verfe 26. Behold the fame baptizeth, and all men 
 come to him. 
 
 6. Jobfi iv. r. 2. When therefore the Lord knew how 
 the Pharifees had heard that Jefus made and baptized more 
 difciples than John, (though Jsfus kimfelf baptized not, but 
 his difciples.) 
 
 7. ^tvj- iii. 38. Then Peter faid unto them, Repent, and 
 be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jeiiis Lhrid, for 
 the remiffion of fms, and ye fhali receive the gift of the Holy 
 Ghoft. 
 
 8. A^s ii. 41, Then they that gladly received bis word 
 were baptized. 
 
 9. yids viii. T2, 13. But when they believed Philip preach- 
 ing the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name 
 oi Jefus Chrift, they were baptized, both men and women. 
 Then 5imon himfelf believed aifo, and when he was baptized, 
 &c. 
 
 10. Acis viii. 16. Only they were baptized in the name 
 of the Lord Jefus. 
 
 11. Verfes 36, 37, 38, 39. And as they went on their 
 way, they came unto a certain water ; and the eunuch fiid, 
 See, here is water, what doth hinder me to be baptized ? 
 And Philip faid. If thou believeft with all thin;; heart? thou 
 
lO The Mode and Subjeds [Serm. L 
 
 niayeft. And he faid, I believe that Jefus Chrift Is the Son of 
 God. And he. commanded the chariot to (land ftill. And 
 they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eu- 
 nuch, and he baptized him. And when they were come up 
 out of the water, &c. 
 
 12. j^cis \r.. 18. And he (Saul) arofe, and was baptized. 
 
 13. jids X. 47, 48. Can any man forbid water, that thefc 
 fhould not be baptized, wliich have received the Holy Ghoft 
 as well as we ? And he commanded them to be baptized in 
 the name of the Lord. 
 
 (4. ^Fis xvi. 15. And when fhe (Lydia) was baptized, 
 and her houfthold. 
 
 1$. Verfc 33. And was baptized, he (the jailer) and all 
 his, ftraightway. 
 
 16. j^ds xviii. 8. And many of the Corinthians, hearing, 
 believed, and were baptized. 
 
 17. y^i.?j xix. 5. When they heard this, they were bap- 
 tized in the name of the Lord Jf fus. 
 
 1 8. Ads xx\u 19. And now, why tarrieft thou? Arife 
 and be bapt'zed, and wafh away thy fins, calling on the 
 name of the Lord. 
 
 19. Rom. VI. 3, 4. Know ye not, that fo many of us as 
 were baptized into Chrift Jefii?, were baptized int(7 his death ? 
 Therefore we are buried with him by baptifm into death, that 
 like as Chrift was rai:ed up from ihe dead by the glory of the 
 Father, even fo we alfo fhruld walk in newnefs of life. 
 
 20. I Cor, i. 13, 14, 15. 1 6. 17. Were ye baptized in the 
 name of Paul ? 1 thank God dia: I baptized none of you but 
 Crifpus and Gaius ; left any fh'^'uld fay that I had baptized in 
 mine own nan.e. And I baptized alfo die houfehold of Stepha- 
 ras : Befides, I know not whether I baptized any other j for 
 Chiift fent ine not to bapt^zj, but to pre ich the gofpel. 
 
 2 1- I Cor. vi, II. Bat ye are wathed. 
 
 22. I C r xii 13. For by one S'orit are we all baptized 
 in'o one body.* 
 
 23. 1 Cor. xv. 29. Life \^hat Ihail they do that are bap- 
 tized for the dead > 
 
 24. GciL iii. 27. Por as many of you as have been bap- 
 tizetl into'Ch.'ift, have put on Lhrift. 
 
 25. Fph. iv. 5. One baptifm. 
 
 26. £ph. V 26. i iiar })e n^ght fan<fl'fy and cleanfe it with 
 the waftiing of water by the word. 
 
 • This litend*, as fomp fupp fe^ the Baptifm of the Holy Ghnft. 
 
Serm. 1.] cf Baptifnu 11 
 
 27. Col. ii. 1 2. Buried with him in baptism, wherein alfo 
 ye are rifen with him. 
 
 28. Titus \\\. 5. According to his mercy he faved us, by 
 the waihing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghoft. 
 
 29. Heh, vi. 2. The dodrine of baptifms.* 
 
 30. Heh^ X. 22. Our bodies wafned with pure water. 
 
 31. 1 Peter lii. 21. The like figure whereunlo even bap- 
 tifm doth now fave us, (not the putting away the filth of the 
 flefli, but the anfwer of a good confcience towards GoM, by the 
 refurredion of Jefus Chrift,) 
 
 Thefe, I believe, are all the texts in the New Teftament 
 which have a plain and obvious refererjce to either the baptifm 
 of John or of Chrift. They afford us the fum of all the knowl- 
 edge which we can have of either the mode or fubje<5ls of Chrif- 
 tian baptifm. What thefe paffages fay, we may believe ; what 
 they do not countenance, we may not believe. I will now fet 
 before you thofe paffages where waihing is mentioned, and the 
 Greek words which are ufed. 
 
 1. Matth. vi. 17. Bat thou, when thou fafteft, anoint thy 
 head, and (rnpfai) wa(h thy face. 
 
 2. Matth. XV. 2 Why do thy difciples tranfgrefs the tra- 
 dition of the elders ? for they [nlptontai) wafh not their hands 
 when they eat bread. 
 
 3. Matth. xxvii. 24. When Pilate faw that he could pre- 
 vail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took 
 water and {apenipfato) wafhed his hands. 
 
 4. Mark vii. 2. And when they faw fome of his difci- 
 ples eat bread with defiled, that is to fay with {anlptois) un- 
 wafaen hands. 
 
 5. Vqt{q 3. For the Pharifees and all the Jews, except 
 they [nipjdntai) wafh their hands oft, they eat not, &c. 
 
 6. Verfe 4. When they come from the market, except 
 they {bapt'ifontai) wafh, they eat not ; and many other things 
 there be which they have received to hold, as the {baptijmous) 
 wailiings of cups and pots, brazen vefTtls, and cf tables. 
 
 7. Verfe 5. But eat bread with (^«//)/5/V) un'.^'a{h en hands. 
 
 8. Verfe 8 For, laying afide rhe commandments rf God, 
 ye hold the tradition of men, as the {baptijmous) wafhing of 
 pots and cups. 
 
 9. Luke y, 2, And xhtj [apeplunan] were wafhing their 
 nets. 
 
 • It is not certain that this hath any reference to Chriftlan baptifm , If 
 it bave» it muft refer not to thxt on\j. Sec Doddridge in loc. 
 
12 The Mode and Subjeds [Serm, I. 
 
 lo. Luke vii. 38. And flood at his feet, t)ehind him, 
 weeping, and began [hrechein) to wafti his feet. 
 
 li. Verfe 44, And he turned to ihe woman, and faid 
 unto Simon, Seeft thou this woman ? I entered into thine 
 houfe, thou gaveft me no water for my feet ; but fhe 
 (el/rexe) hath wafhed my feet with tears. 
 
 12. Luie xi. 38. And when the Pharifees faw it, that 
 he had not firft [ebaptiflhe) waflied before dinner. 
 
 13. John'xn.'], And faid unto him, Go<, and [nipjai) 
 wafh in the pool of Siloam ; — he went his way therefore 
 and {enipfato) waflied. 
 
 14. Verfe 15. Then again the Pharifees alfo alked him 
 how he had received his fight ; he faid unto them, He put 
 clay upon mine eyes, and I (enipfamen) waflied and do fee. 
 
 15. John xiii. 5. After that he poured water into a bafon, 
 and began [nlptdn) to wafti the difciples' feet. 
 
 16. Verfe 6 And Peter faid unto him. Lord, dofl thou 
 (nipteis) wafli my feet. 
 
 1 7. Ver. 5. Peter faith unto him. Thou fiialt never (tiipjes) 
 wafli my feet. Jefus anfwered him, If I {nipfo) wafli thee not, 
 thou haft no part with *ne. 
 
 i«. Verfe 10. Jefus faith to him. He that is [okloumenos) 
 waflied, needeth not fave {tiipfnjlhai) to wafli his feet, &c. 
 
 19. Verfe 14. If I then, your Lord and Mafter (enipfa) 
 have waflied your feet, ye alfo ouglit [mptein) to wafti one 
 another's feet. 
 
 20. A8s ix. 37. And it came to pafs in thofe days that 
 ihe was flck and died, whom when they had {loufantes) waflied. 
 
 21. Acfs xvi, 33. And he took them the fame hour of the 
 night, and [eloufen) waflied their ftripes. 
 
 z2. Aas xxii. £6. And now, why tarrieft thou ? Arife and 
 be baptized, and {apoloufal) wafli away thy flns. 
 
 23. I Cor. vi. II. And fuch were fome of you ; but yc 
 {^apeloufagthe) are waflied. 
 
 24. Eph. V. 26. That he might fandlify and cleanfe it 
 with (loutro) the wafliing of water by the word. 
 
 25. I Tim, v. 10. If flie (en'tpfen) have waflied the faints' 
 feet. 
 
 26. Titus ill. 5. By the [loutrou) wafliing of regeneration. 
 
 27. Heb. ix. 10. Which ftood only in meats and drinks, 
 and {dtapborois baptifmols) divers wafliings. 
 
 28. Hcb. X. 22. Ji.a^'ing our bodies Ueloumenoi) «^flied 
 with pure water. 
 
Serm. L] of Baptifnu 13 
 
 29. iPeter n. 22. But it is happened unto thenti according to 
 the true proverb — and the fow that(/»^^/^«?^ was-wafhed, &c. 
 
 30. Rev. i. 5. Unto him tliat jbved vS^^n^f^loufantl) 
 waftied us from our fins in his own blood- 
 
 31. Rev. vii. 14. Thefe are they who came out of great 
 tribulation, and [epiunan) have wafhed their jeb^s in 'the blood 
 of the Lamb.* '^"^H fea^,, 
 
 Thofe paffages which make mention of sprinkling, with the 
 Greek words ufed, now call for your attention. 
 
 1. Heb. ix. 13. For if the Hood of bulls and goats, and 
 the afhes of an heifer [rant'izoufa) fprinkling the unclean, &c. 
 
 2. Verfe 19. He (Mofesj took the Hood of calves and of 
 goats, with water, and fcarlet wool, and hyfTop, and {errantlfe) 
 fprinkled both the book and all the people. 
 
 3. Heb. yi. 22, Having our hearts (tfrr^«///*wfnoi) fprinkled 
 from an evil confcience. 
 
 4. Heb. xi. 28. Through faith he kept the pafTover and 
 the [prnfchufin) fprinkling of blood. 
 
 5. Heb. xii. 24. And to the blood of (rantifmou) fprinkling. 
 
 6. I Peter i. 2. And to the [ranti/mon) fprinkling of the 
 blood of JefusChrift. 
 
 Laftly. You will now give attention for a moment to thofe 
 paflages of fcripture where the word dip is r;:entioned. 
 
 1. Z,«i^xvi. 24. That he may (^<3/>j-^) dip his finger in water. 
 
 2. Mutth. xxvi. 23. And he anfwered and faid, He that 
 {embapjai) dippeth his hand with me in the difh. 
 
 3. Mark xiv. 20. And he anfwered and faid unto them, 
 It is one of the twelve that (embaptomenos) dippeth with me in 
 the difli. 
 
 4. John xiii. 26. And he anfwered, He it is to whom I 
 (hall give a fop when I have [bapfas) dipped it ; and when he 
 had [embapfas) dipped the fop, &c. 
 
 5 Rev. xix. 13. And he was clothed with a vefture 
 [bebammenon) dipped in blood, 
 
 A few remarks on what we have paiTed over will clofe the 
 prefent difcourfe. 
 
 I. We fee that all the words which appertain to the ordi- 
 nance of baptifm, fignify the fame which they would, provided 
 immerfion were the fcripture mods. 
 
 • P/unB properly fignifies to wafh clothes ; as lauS, the body ; and n.'pfS, 
 the face and hands. 
 
 B 
 
14^ The Mode and Subjeds [Serm. II. 
 
 2. We fee that the fiibje^l of baptifm is .very repeatedly 
 mentioned in the New Teftament. It is brought to view ex- 
 prefsly in about threefcore paflages. 
 
 3. Whenever baptifm is mentioned, and neither the word 
 bapti%d nor baptifmcs is ufed, the word fubftituted plainly inti- 
 mates that bathing or wafhing the body all over, is the mode 5 
 for this is the fignification of loudf which is the word, and the 
 only word, which tlie fcriptures employ in the room of bnpu%o» 
 
 4. ' Whenever bapti%d or baptifmos is tranflated wafhing, a 
 ceremonial and not a common walliing is manifeftly intended. 
 
 5. We find that in all the places where fprinkling is men- 
 tioned, the original word?, rhantizd, ^nd profchuftfiy are very dif- 
 ferent from baptizo zrA baptijmos» 
 
 6. You will pleafe to obferve, that wherever we find, 
 through the New Teftament, the word, to dip, it is from the 
 fame theme whence baptizo comes. 
 
 7. We fee that every tiling looks as though immerfton might 
 be the mode ; and, as for fprinkling^ there is, to fay the leaft, 
 nothing which looks like it. 
 
 SERMON II. 
 
 MATTHEW xxviii. 19, 20. 
 
 Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name 
 of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghofl ; teaching 
 them to obfer've all things ivhatfoe'ver I have commanded you : 
 And, lo, I am with you alivay, even unto the end of the 
 '■juorld. Amen, 
 
 THE bufmefs which we are now upon depends very much 
 upon the definitions of certain words, and principally 
 upon the definition of the word baptize, and upon the certain 
 evidence of fuch definition or definitions being accurate and 
 iuft. For we can no otherwife underftand what God the Lord 
 faith unto us, than by knowing the import of the words by 
 which he is pleafed to communicate his will. The great 
 Teacher who came from God, hath doubtlefs communicated 
 his mind fo explicitly that the humble in heart may know the 
 common matters which relate to faith and pradlce. If we 
 devoutly fearch the fcriptures, and feek wifdoni as filver, and 
 
Serm. II.] of Baptifm. 15 
 
 fearch for her as for hid treafures, God will make us to under- 
 ftand knowledge, and to ferve him with acceptable pradlice. 
 The Spirit of the Lord hath moil certainly chofen acceptable 
 words, words of definite meaning. We are to fearch out their 
 fignification, and to be obedient. I cannot judge of their fig- 
 niiication for you, nor can I anfwer for the judgment whicii 
 you fhall make up, nor can you for me. 
 
 1 am by my office obliged to exhibit, fo far as I can, all 
 thofe divine truths which relate to faith and pradice. I am 
 obliged to believe and pra^ife according to the beft licjit 
 which I can gather, or have in any way afforded m€. You 
 are under fimilar obligations. 
 
 Whilft we proceed, T wifh you to believe fully two things ', 
 one is, that truth, if believed and pradcifed, will not, on the 
 whole, harm you. The other is, that the mod fure way to 
 acquire truth is, to be of a humble and obedient mind, read^ 
 to receive the truth. For God refifteth the proud, but giveth 
 grace to the humble. 
 
 In the preceding difcourfe, we attended to the definition of 
 certain words which appertain to the ordinance of baptifm ;. 
 and then collecfled the fcripture account of baptifm, together 
 with fome other texts which are fuppofed to throw light upon 
 the fubje(fl under confideration. In tlirs difcourfe we are — 
 
 3. To produce the more dire<5t evidence that my defini- 
 tions of baptifm and to baptize are accurate and juft. 
 
 The definition which I gave of baptifm was, a luajlnngi ^.fn- 
 cred^ a ceremonial wafhing. I will now add to this definition, 
 that it is immsrfion, or dipping one all over in water. 
 
 The definition which I gave of the viord bapt'i%Q is, to dip all 
 over, to- wa(h. I will alfo add, that the word fignifies, to wafh 
 the body, or any thing, all over. What I mean is, that thefe 
 are the fignification of the words baptifma and bapti%u, which are 
 rendered baptifm, and, to baptize. 
 
 I am now to produce evidence, that this is a juft and accurate 
 definition of the words. 
 
 You will obferve, that this is quite different from thtfulje&j 
 of baptifm; that is another fubje<a, which muft be attended to 
 in its place. 
 
 The evidence which T have to offer, in order to fix precifely 
 the jufl fenfe and meaning of the words hapiifm and to baptize, ^ 
 is coRtainjsd in the following fads. The 
 
 I ft. Comprifes what the Greek Lexicon, Concordance, and 
 two Englifti I)i(5tionanes, teftify of the words. 
 
16 The Mode and Subje^s [Serm. II. 
 
 Schrevelius's Lexicon teftifies, the import of bapttfm is lotto, 
 wafliing. Alfo that to baptl%e fignlfies to «t<j/7j, to put under 
 water, or under any other liquid thing ; to fink, dip in, duck or 
 plunge over head, to immerfe. 
 
 Butterwcrth's Concordance fays, Baptifm is an ordinance of 
 the New Teftament, inftituted by Jefus Chrift, whereby a pro- 
 ieffed believer in Chrift is, in the name of the Father, and of 
 the Son, and of the Holy Ghoft, immerfed in and covered with 
 water, and then raifed up out of it, as a fign of his fellowlhip 
 with Chrift in his death, burial and refurredion, and a fign of 
 his own death to fm, and refurre(5^ion to newnefs of life here, 
 and to life eternal hereafter. The fame Concordance defines 
 the word to baptize thu? — to dip, immerfe, or plunge. 
 
 t.ntick's Didionary fays, that — Baptifm is a facrament that 
 admits into the church. — Bapt'izer, one who chriftens, or dips. 
 —Baptijlery, the place of baptizing at, a font — Baptize^ to 
 chrilteii, plunge, overwhelm.— i^fl//iz^^, admitted to bap- 
 liirn, dipt, &:c. 
 
 Bailey's Dictionary, fpeaking of baptifm, or rather the place 
 In which perfons were baptized, fays, Baptjjlery is either the 
 place or veflel in which perfons are baptized. In ancient times, 
 this being performed by immerfion, the perfons fo initiated 
 went into a river and were plunged ; but in the time of Conftan- 
 tine the Great, chapels or places on purpofe to baptize in, 
 were built in great cities, which was performed in the eaftern 
 and warmer countries by dipping the perfons ; but in procefs 
 of time, in the weftem and colder countries, fprinkling was 
 fubftituted in place of dipping ; which was the origin of our 
 fonts in churches. ' 
 
 2. J will repeat fome of the attendant or circumflantial 
 fa<51s, which have relation to the ordinance of baptifm, that 
 you may look at them and judge for yourfelves, whether the 
 preceding definitions appear juft. 
 
 John baptized in the river Jordan. 
 
 He was baptizing in Enon, becaufe there was much water 
 there. 
 
 The name of the place, where baptifm was adminiftered, is 
 baptifterion, or baptijlery^ which fignifies a place in which to walh 
 the body all over. 
 
 Baptifm fignifies to dip, plunge, immerfe, or wafh the body 
 all over in water. 
 
 Baptizer fignifies one who dips, plunges, or wafhes the body 
 all over in water. 
 
Serm. II.] of Baptifnu 27 
 
 To baptize fignifies to plunge under water, to dip, or to wafh 
 the body all over. 
 
 To be baptized is to be plunged, immerfed, or wafhed all 
 over in water. 
 
 Does this whole matter, taking fo many of the words, and 
 Como. circumftances, and finding them all fo well agreeing to- 
 gether, help you, in any degree, to the definiticn of the word 
 baptize? Suppofmg thefe things be lads, and you had never 
 had any prejudice for or againft the word baptize, would you 
 be able to gather the meaning of it from what hath been faid l: 
 There is an objc(^icn ftarting in the minds of fome of you, 
 which fhould be now obviated, left it prejudice your minds 
 from the truth. 
 
 The objedion is, Do not the words fignify fome o^jer things,- 
 as well as ihofe which have been mentioned ? 
 
 ylrif. I have thought they did : but 1 have fearched in fev- 
 eral didicnaries, and read many authors upon the words, yet 
 have not found one didionary which has given a definition of 
 the woids different from what I have given; nor one author 
 who has been able to fhow, that the true meaning of the words 
 is any otherwife than vrhat 1 have mentioned. Befides, the very 
 ccurie of argumentation which Dr. Lathrop, Mr. Cleave- 
 LAND and others have taken, by which to prove that baptixb- 
 hath fome other iignification than to dip, immerfe, to bury or 
 overwhelm, is an implicit confeffion that they were not able to 
 prove any fuch thing. It is alfo a flrcng prefumptive argu- 
 ment, that no different fignification can be found. 
 
 Their argum.enL is this : Bapio fignifies, in one inftance, in 
 the Old Teftament, to wet v/ith the dew of heaven. Baptt%d is 
 th; offspring oHaptC) and ccnfequently may be taken in the fame 
 fenfe. This argument is of the fame weight with the follow- 
 ing : My father believes in fprinkling, as being baptifm : I 
 am his offspring, and confcquently I believe the fame ; when 
 the fad is, I am largely convinced that it is no fuch thing. 
 Would gentlemen employ fuch an argument, did not their caufe 
 labour ? Such an argument, wlien it ftands, as it does, at the 
 front of all their fuppofed evidence, is an i.mplicit confefliona 
 tliat they cannot prove what they wifh to.* 
 
 _ * Since writing the above, I have met with Cole's Latin DiSHonary^ wh-cn 
 gives one Englifh of baptlzo, to fprinkU. It hath, Indeed, been matter of no 
 little furprife, that all modern didionary compilers have not given one defl*. 
 niiion of the word baptize, to fprinkle ; for it, in^Jecd, is one fisnifigatioi:^- 
 
 £ 2 
 
] 8 The Mode and Subjecfs [Serm. II. 
 
 This matter will have farther attention in another place. 
 
 3. The words baptifmos and baptlzo have two, and only 
 two, tranflations in the New-Teftament. Thefe two are, 
 lapttfm and tuaJIAng. They are very generally rendered, 
 haptijiriy or to bapti%e. This is their iifual tranflatlon. But 
 feveral times in Markf Luke, and in the Epiflle.tothe Hebreivs, 
 they are rendered waftiing. As tlie wafhing of pots, and cups^ 
 and brazen vefTds and tables, or feats on which they reclined, 
 when they ate meat ; and diaphorois baptifmols ia Hebrew is 
 rendered divers ivnJJjtngs. 
 
 In the law given by Mofes, the people were, on many oc- 
 eafions, to bathe their bodies, and wafh their clothes in water ; 
 and alfo to put their pots and cups and brazen vefFels into wa- 
 ter, that they might be cleanfed from ceremonial uncleannefs. 
 To thefe legal ceremonies the Pharifees had added traditional 
 ones, which were, no doubt, obfervtd in the fame manner as 
 thofe appointed by the Lord. If fo, then the wafliing of pots, 
 ^'c. in Mark, was putting them into water, as the command 
 was to do, Lev'it, xi. 32. The divers wafhings in Heh, ix. 10. 
 were ceremonial wafhings, or bathings, in which the body was 
 waflied, or dipped. Numb, xix. 19. This being the cafe, does 
 iiot this matter go to confirm, or determine, what is the defini- 
 tion of baptifm ? 
 
 4. We will now mention a few noted witnefTe?, who have 
 given their teftimony as to the meaning of the word bapti%6. 
 
 Calvin, a very warm oppofer of the Baptifts, (hall, as a wit- 
 nefs in this caufe, fpeak firft. His teftimony is, Howbeit, the 
 very word of baptizing fignifieth to dip." 
 
 Zanchius, as brought forward by the Rev. Mr. Butterworth, 
 
 •which thepradice of many Chriflians, for two er three hundred years paft, 
 has given to the word. 
 
 Had all lexicons, and all didlonarles, for the two laft centuries, borne 
 united teftimony, that one fenfe of the word baftizd was to fprinkle, it 
 would not have heen half fo unaccountable as it now is that they have fo 
 generaiiy retained the ancient and primitive fignifications, and refufed to 
 rtdopt the modern one, which prejudice, convenience and modern praftice 
 have given to it. Indeed, could a thoufand modern lexicons and diAionaries 
 he found, which ftiould fay, to fprinkle is one fenfe in which baptlzZ is ufed, 
 it would all come to nothing, unlefs they Ihould tcftify that this is one of its 
 ^acicnt and primitive fignifications : and even then, it w-ould come to no 
 more than this, that the word is lefs determinate, than it is now fuppofed 
 to be Could they do this, it would be ftill nothing, unlefs they prove the 
 fcrlptures ufe it in this fenfe, which they cannot do. i:ut if they could, it 
 ^Yould not bt fully to their point, unlcfs they can Ihow that it is thus ufed lu 
 application to the 01 finance, 
 
oerm. II.3 of Baptifnu 19 
 
 fhall be my next witnefs. He fays, bapttzo is to immerfe.;, 
 plunge under, to overwhelni in water. 
 
 I could quoie, or bring forward, a multitude of witneffeSj 
 and all from our own order, the Pedobaptifts, to prove the 
 fame point. But in the mouth of two or tliree witnefles, if 
 they be good ones, every word fhall be eftablilhed. We will 
 therefore produce but one more ; that Ihali be good Dr. Owen. 
 " For the original and natural fignificalion of it {baptizo) figni- 
 iies to dip, to plunge." 
 
 5. I will mention to you a Greek word, which Paul re- 
 peatedly ufe?, as fignifying the fame thing as iaptizot and 
 where he means the fame thing, namely, baptifm. 
 
 In I Cor. vi. ii. Paul, fpeaking to the Corinthians of di- 
 vers kinds of vile fmners, fays, " And fuch were fome of you ; 
 but ye are wafhed," &c. 
 
 EpL V. 26. That he might fancflify and cleanfe it (the 
 church) with the nvajhtng of water, by the word. 
 
 Heh. X. 22. Let us draw near with a true heart, in full af. 
 furance of faith, having our hearts fprinkled from an evil con- 
 fcience, and our bodies ivajhed with pure water. 
 
 The Pedobaptifts acknowledge that luajhing, in thefe texts, 
 means baptifm^ and I know not that any of them deny it. Bap- 
 tifm and wafhing appear to be ufed as fynonymous words, or 
 as words fignifying the fame thing. If this be the cafe, then 
 the two words, baptizo and loud, which are tranflated, one to 
 baptize, and the other to wafh, mean the fame thing, and are 
 thus intended by the Apoflle. Then, provided we can deter- 
 mine what louo means, we can alfo determine what is the figni- 
 fication of baptizo. This word, louut fignifies to wa(h, and to 
 bathe the body in water ; for thus it is generally if not univer- 
 fally ufed, and from it is loutron, a Ijath, or place to wafh the 
 body in. Befides, the word louo is never ufed in tlie New-Tef- 
 tament, nor any where elfe, to my knowledge, to fignify either 
 fprinkling or common wafhing. Its appropriate fenfe appears 
 to be, bathing, or wafhing any thing all over ; as you may fee, 
 A^s ix. 37. and xvi. 33 ; 2 Peter ii. 22 ; which are the only 
 places where I recollect the word louo is ufed, fave where the 
 ordinance of baptifm appears to be referred to. This being 
 the cafe, the matter appears juft as it would, provided the or* 
 dinance included the bathing of the body in water. This is 
 letting fcripture interpret Iifelf j and the interpretation which 
 it gives is, baptifm is bathing, or wafhing the body in water. 
 This, therefore, may help ygu a l^tle towards deterznining in. 
 
20 ^ The Mode and Subje^s [Serm. 11. 
 
 your minds what is the fignification of bapti%Q. For km is 
 repeatedly ufed in fcripture, as importing the fame mode of 
 vvalhing which is commanded in the ordinance of baptifm. 
 
 6. Paul's defcription of the mode of baptizing, or of what 
 is done to thofe who are baptized, may afford you farther 
 light upon the fubjed. 
 
 Paul brings this matter up to the Roman and Coloflian 
 Chriftians, as a matter well known to them. To the former 
 he fays, Ro7n. vi. 4. Therefore we are buried with him by 
 baptifm into death, that like as Chrift was raifed up from the 
 dead by the glory of the Father, even fo we alfo fliould walk 
 in newnefs of life. To the other he fays, Col. ii. 12. Buried 
 with him in baptifm, wherein alfo ye aie rifen with him, 
 through the faith of the operation of • jod, who hath raifed 
 him from the dead. 
 
 Upon thefe texts, Dr. Doddridge has the following note. 
 " It feems the part of candour to confefs, that here is an allu- 
 fion to baptifm by immerfion, as was moft ufual in tliefe early 
 times." fiere the good dodtor fays, " as was mojt ufual ;" 
 this I fhall, by and by, explain to you." 
 
 In the mean time, you will pleafe to pay due attention to 
 what was done to thofe who were baptized, and which ap- 
 pears to be familiar to the Roman and Coloffian Chriftians. 
 The Apoflle makes no remarks, and explains nothing to them, 
 but fpeaks to them as though they would and did well under- 
 ftand what he meant, when he faid, *' We are buried with 
 him by baptifm unto death ;" and, " Buried with him in 
 baptifm." It is plain fadt, that Paul thus fpeaks, and it alfo 
 appears, very plainly, that he had no apprehenfion but that he 
 fhould be underftood. 
 
 Bifhop Hoadly's declaration" appears to be much in point : 
 * If baptifm,' fays he, * had been then,' I e. in the apoftles' 
 days, ' performed as it is now among us, we fhould never have 
 fo much as heard of this form of expreffion, of dying and rif- 
 ing again in this rite.'* 
 
 Thefe things I have thought it my duty to lay before you, 
 that I might aflift you, by a number of plain facets, to form a 
 judgment, each one for himfelf, what the meaning of baptifm 
 is, and what the word to baptize fignifies. 
 
 I have ftill more light upon this fubje«5l, and fhall, in the 
 next difcourfe, lay it within your view. It will perhaps be, to 
 fome of you, more convincing than any thing which I have as 
 yet exhibited. iBut previoufly I will make one obfervation, 
 
 * Tsn J-cuers. 
 
h> 
 
 Serm. IL] of Bapiif?n. 21 
 
 and It is this : all the evidence which we have been exhibiting, 
 we have on one fide of the queftion ; and, if I miftake not> 
 none on the other to countera(5l it : for if my memory and 
 judgment be corred, the wifeft and beftofmen, of our own 
 denomination, have alTerted, that thefe things are fo. I do not 
 fay that all good men have ; but the moft learned have, aad 
 fome who have appeared very pious. 
 
 But you will fay, Why have they not pradifed differently, 
 if tliey have thus believed ? I am not anfwerable for their prac- 
 tice ; but, if the Lord will, I fliall, ere long, give you the rea- 
 fons which they aflign. 
 
 I fliall only add, for the prefent, two or tliree confequences, 
 and then leave the fubjedl for your confideration. 
 
 1. The Baptifts have, againlt our pradice, and for theirs, 
 that kind of evidence which is, perhaps, in all cafes but the 
 prefent, confidered the nioft unequivocal and certain. This 
 evidence is given in by a cloud of witneffes, who, whilft they are 
 bearing their teftimony, condemn themfelves every fentence 
 they utter. If tliefe men, who are confeffed by both fides to 
 be both pious and learned, may be believed, the caufe will moft 
 ceitainly be determined againft us ; for there was never a 
 clearer cafe. They unitedly teftify that the fcripture mode of 
 bapiifm is immerfion, but omit the pra(Sice. In this they con- 
 demn themfelves. 
 
 2. The fcripture fenfe, and, for aught appears, the only 
 fenfe, of baptifm, is, dipping, immerfion, burying in water, be- 
 ing overwhelmed, and the like. 
 
 3. We are brought to this dilemma, either to commence 
 Baptifts, as to the mode, or do as cur fathers have done, con= 
 fefs the truth in theory, and negle<5t it in pra(fllce. 
 
 SERMON III. 
 
 MATTHEW xxviii. 19, 20. 
 Go yet therefore, and teach all nations t baptizing them in the name 
 of the Fat her i and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoji \ teach- 
 ing them to obferve all things avhatfoever I have commanded 
 you : And, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the 
 <world. Amen. 
 
 MEN, brethren, and fathers, we are ftill upon a very im- 
 portant fubjedt— a fubjeft which highly concerns us as 
 Chrittians — a fubje^ in which our feelings, our reputation, and 
 
22 The Mode and Subjeds [Serm. III. 
 
 The Mode 
 
 our peace too, may^not be a little concerned. Many things^ 
 not to fay every thin^, call upon us not to go too faft ; and, 
 at the fame time, obedience to our common Lord forbids all 
 backvvardnefs, in purfuing where his truth and Spirit lead us. 
 
 All which I requeft of you is, with candour hear, wiih 
 readinefs obey, what truth fhall didate. 
 
 Should we, after lorg and ferious deliberation, be obliged to 
 believe and pradife differently from what we have heretofore 
 done, we fhall be much expofed co two things : one is, to be 
 reviled ; the other, to revile again. What we fhall need is, 
 patience to bear the one, and grace that we may avoid the other. 
 
 Perhaps human nature is more inclined to nothing than to 
 an overbearing fpirit. It is perfe<5lly confonant with human 
 nature to make ourfelves, and not the fcriptures, the ftandard 
 of both faith and pracftice. Tlie natural confequence of 
 this is, cenfure againft all who dare to think, or aft, as we do 
 not. To guard you againft unreafonable and common preju- 
 dice, I will, for your confideration, fuggeft a thought, wh'.ch 
 "we may do well to remember ; and it is this : many, who 
 fhall believe and praftife as we have long done, may be as 
 honeft and faithful as we then were. This being true, the 
 following confequence is plain, that the line of conduit which 
 the Baptifts ought to have pradifed, in months and years paft, 
 towards us, the fame, if we be Baptifts, will it become us to 
 purfue with relation to others. It requires not much forefight 
 to difcover, that we fhall need much of that wifdom which is 
 profitable to direct. 
 
 Whiift it may be indifpenfable with us to ufe every prudent 
 mean to diffufe that light which God may gracioufly afford us, 
 it will be our wifdom to do every thing in fuch a manner as 
 not to heighten, but, if poffible, to lower the prejudices of 
 good people. 
 
 Whiift you, my dear friends and people, know thai light 
 chafeth away the darknefs,^ and that truth w"lll ultimately pre- 
 vail againft every error ; I'folicit your candour and prayerful 
 attention, that error may not be retained, or prevail againft 
 any of us, to our wounding. 
 
 Our attention hath already been called to the definition of 
 a number of words, which relate to the ordinance of baptifm, 
 to the fcripture account of baptifm, together with fome other 
 texts, which were fuppofed to throw light upon the fubjeft, 
 and alfo to fome evidence in fupport of the given definitions. 
 As the great queftioa turns upon what is commanded, and as 
 
Serm. II.] of Baptifm. ■' 2-3 
 
 that cannot be otherwife known thaft Vjf. making fure the im- 
 port of the words ufed, we (hall therefbse'fearch for additional 
 light and certainty, by inquiring — ' . ' 
 
 4. How the apoftles and primitive (^ri|lians underftood 
 this matter, and how they pra(5tired. ' ^ 
 
 If this can be made plain, then, perhaps, your minds will be 
 falisfied, and your judgments made up. 
 I proceed to lay the evidence before you. 
 There appears no neceffitv of fpending time to produce evi- 
 dence that the apoftles underftood the matter to be as I have 
 proved to you that "it was : for they, no doubt, underftood the 
 words which Chrift fpake, and the commands which he gave : 
 befides, if the apoftles and primitive church pra<5tifed thus, it is 
 evident that they thus underftood it ; for doubtlefs they, ef- 
 pecially the apoftles, were honeft men, and pradifed as they 
 underftood Jefus Chrift to have dire<rted them. 
 
 I will here make two obfervations to you ; and I wifti you 
 to remember them. 
 
 The firft is, no perfon fliould, efpecially in important mat- 
 ters, make up his judgment, that any particular fubjeiJl is true, 
 till he has evidence of its truth. 
 
 The other is, the beft proof which the nature of any cafe 
 admits of, may and ought to be confidered as evidence, and fo 
 received by us, as to thofe things we are called to believe and 
 pracfllfe. 
 
 There are different degrees of evidence : the higheft kind 
 produces knowledge. When the evidence is fmall, it produces 
 a weak and dubious belief. But where It is fuch that, on fup- 
 pofition the thing be true, the evidence could not be greater 
 than it is, there we are obliged to yield our aiTent, and we do 
 violence to our reafon if we will not believe. 
 
 The evidence, which we have with refpecH: to the practice 
 of the apoftles in the matter of baptizing, differs in degree, 
 and, in fome meafure, in kind, from the evidence which we 
 have refpe(^ing the practice of the church in later ages as to 
 the fame matter. But if we have, with refpedt to the pra<5lice 
 of both, the beft evidence which the different cafes admit of, 
 we are under obligation to believe the evidence good, and the 
 fa^T:s true which are fupported by it. 
 
 We hav^e much the fame kind of evidence with rerpe<5l to 
 the praftice of the apoftles, which we have as to the practice 
 of the church for many ages after them. Mr. Baxter, bifhop 
 Hoadly, and others, t^ify, that the apoftoiic pradice was, 
 
24 The Mode and Subjeds [Serm. IIL 
 
 immerfion. We have, moreover, as to their pra<5lice, a much 
 higher kind of evidence. In fupport of their pradice, I fhall 
 produce the beft kind of evidence, and afterwards, whilft fpeak- 
 ing of the practice of the church in fucceeding ages, may oc- 
 cafionally bring forward fome of the other kind of evidence, 
 in fupport of the apoftles* pradlice. 
 
 As to the pra(5lice of the apoftles, in the adminiftratlon of 
 baptifm, I obferve, we have in the fcriptures four diftin^l 
 fources of evidence. The 
 
 1 ft. is this. When baptifm is mentioned by the difciples 
 and apoftles, and the common word is not ufed, they uniform- 
 ly employ one particular word, and this word is of very deter- 
 minate fignification, and expreffes the bathing, or wafhing, of 
 the body in water, as Heb. x. 2 2 : Having our bodies (Uoumenoi) 
 ivafied with pure water. Ads xxii. 16. Arife and be baptiz- 
 ed, and {apoloufai) wafh away thy fms. i Cor. vi. ir. But 
 ye are {apoloufajlhe) nvajhed. By the determinate fignification 
 of this word, their practice appears to be immerfion. 
 
 2. The apoftles were commanded to dip, immerfe, or 
 plunge all over in water, the perfons whom, they admitted to 
 this ordinance. This is evident from the determinate fignifi- 
 cation of the word to baptize. Says the command. Go ye, 
 therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them, &c. We 
 have before proved what is the fignification of this word, and 
 confequently what Chrift commanded his difciples, when he 
 fent them to baptize. 
 
 I do not now fay that die apoftles immerfed any ; but this 
 Is what I fay, they were commanded thus to do. I leave it for 
 you to determine, whether they did, or whether they did not. 
 
 3. I obferve to you, that the New-Teftament, wherever it 
 fpeaks of the apoftles baptizing any, fays they immerfed them, 
 or dipjt them all over in water. For this is the plain, literal 
 and common, if not the only fignification of the word. I ftill 
 leave it with you to determine whether the apoftles did, or did 
 not, pradife thus. 
 
 Left fome of you may have forgotten what I have before 
 proved to you, and confequently entertain fome doubt whether 
 baptifm may not fometimes fignify the application of water in 
 a different way ; we will make two or three obfervations. 
 
 1. The plain, literal and common fignification of the word 
 is to immerfe, over^'helm, dip, or to plunge all over. 
 
 2. There appears to be no evidence that it is ever ufed fo 
 much as once, in any part of the Bible, to fignify the applica- 
 
Serm. 111.] of Baptlfnu 25 
 
 tlon of vvater in any other fenfe. Even In thofe paiTages where 
 I have in time paft fuppofed that the meanini; might be, and 
 probably was, ivajhing without immerfion, the fenfe appears to 
 be putting into water or immerfion, and not what we com- 
 monly underftand by the word wa(hing. Of this you may be 
 convinced by confiderinfi the treatment to which the Jews were 
 accuftomed with refp?<5l to thofe veffels which were ceremo- 
 nially unclean. They were to baptize them, or put them into 
 water, as ycu may fee, LevU, xi. 32. " And upon whatfoever 
 any of them, when they are dead, doth fall, it fti^ill be unclean ; 
 whether it be any veffel of wood, or raiment, or fkin, or fack ; 
 tuhatfoever 'ifeffel it be, wherein any work is done, it mu!^ be put 
 into nvater^ and it Ihall be unclean until the even } fo it fhall be 
 cleanfed." 
 
 3. I will obferve to you tliat It would moft vifibly be a re- 
 flexion upon the great Teaclier who came from God, to fap- 
 pofe that he Ihould, when appointing a pofitive inftitution, ufe 
 words afide from their plain and commonly received fenfe ; that 
 too without giving any Intimation of his ufmg the words in any 
 fenfe differing from the common, efpecially when he was fet- 
 tlng up a new inftitution, about which his moft faithful follow- 
 ers could, in all fucceeding generations, know nothing but from 
 the words ufed In and about the inftitutioa. Does not all this 
 appear plain and reafonable ? 
 
 Now the Bible in the plain, literal and common fenfe of 
 the words which It ufes, fays, the apoftles dipt, plunged or 
 immerfed all fuch as they admitted to baptifm. You will 
 judge for yourfelves whether the apoftles pra<5lifed thus, or 
 whether they did not. 
 
 4. The pra(flice of the apoftles is farther Illuftrated and con- 
 firmed by what Paul tells the Roman and Coloffian Chriftians, 
 with refped to what took place when they received tlie ordinance 
 of baptifm. He fays to the former, *' We are buried with him 
 by baptifm into death :" To the other he fays, « Buried with 
 him tn baptilm." Paul fpeaks of this matter as a thing perfedly 
 underftood by Chriftians in his time, and ufed it as an^rgument 
 to promote their weanednefs from the world, and growth In 
 (an<5lifi cation. But have you not either paffed over thefe and 
 fimilar paifages, without noticing them, or confidered them 
 rather hard to be underftood ? But how eafy is it to underftand 
 them, provided the apoftles pra<5iifed as the fcriptures fay they 
 did ! I ftill leave it with you to determine for yourfelves hcwr 
 the apoftles pradlifed. 
 
 C 
 
26 The Mode and Suhjeds [Serm. Ill, 
 
 This is the beft evidence which the nature of the fubjecH: ad- 
 mits. This matter, the apoftles' pra<5lice, was tranfaded many 
 ages fince. We have the teflimony of the fcriptures as to what 
 it was ; this is evidence enough : however, we fhall occafionally 
 add the teftimony of nnen. 
 
 We fhali now attend to the practice of the church, and difcov- 
 er, if we can, how it was for ages after the apoftles. The beft ev- 
 idence which tliis part of my fubjecl admits, is that of human 
 teftimony.* I by no means reft the merit of the caufe on this 
 evidence. At the fime tin^.e, it may weaken the prejudices of 
 fome, and be a mean of confirming others in the belief of the 
 truth. 
 
 It appears fo plain a cafe that we can hardly refufe affent to 
 it, that as the church hath for a feries of ages pra(5lifed, fo have 
 tbey believed. When we ftiali fee what their pracflice hath 
 been, we fliall ihe more eafily concede that their belief hath been 
 fimilar. 
 
 What is now before us Is to produce and to receive evidence 
 relative to the pra<5lice of the primitive church. It is the fol- 
 lowing : — 
 
 I. This evidence confifts in the united teftimony of both 
 thofe who pra<5lifed the adminiftration of the ordinance by im- 
 merfion, and thofe who ufed fprinkling, and called it baptizing. 
 
 Mofheim, a very noted church hiftorian, and not very friend- 
 ly to the Baptifts, bears dired teftimony that John, Chrift's 
 forerunner, and the church in the firft ages of Chriftianity, 
 pracflifed immerfion as the mode of baptizing. The following 
 you may take as a fample of his evidence. " The exhortations 
 of this refpe<aable meffsnger (John) were not without efFe<5l ; 
 and thofe who, moved by his folemn admonition, had formed 
 the refolution of correding their evil difpofitions, and amending 
 their lives, were initiated into the kingdom of the Redeemer 
 by the ceremony of immerfion, or baptifm."f 
 
 Speaking of the church in the fecond century, he fays, " The 
 perfons that were to be baptized, after they had repeated the 
 creed, confc/Ted and renounced their fms, and particularly the 
 devil in his pompous allurements, were immeifed under water, 
 
 * Clirlft's promife to his apoftle*. to their fucccffors, and to the Church 
 may affure us, that the ordinance of haptifm, by which his people fljould 
 be diflinjiuifhed from the world, wcmid ever continue. Therefore could 
 we know what the Church hath always praaifcd, efpecially that part of 
 it which hath been moft feparate from the worhi, t!itn thejr pradlice wouW 
 afford a Orong argument in favour of what the iriftitu'-ion intended, 
 
 I Century I, chap. iii. fe(5t 3. 
 
Serm. III.] of Baptifnu 2T 
 
 and received into Ghria's kingdom by a folema invccation of 
 Fatlier, Son, and Holy Ghoft, according to the expnfs command 
 of our blefTed Lord.* The Doaor fpeaking of Ibme inferior 
 fedts of the feventeenth century, and particularly of a fed called 
 Coiiegiants,fays, " Thofe adult perfons, that defire to be bapti- 
 zed, receive the facrament of baptifm acc(.rding to the ancient 
 and primitive manner of celebrating that inrtitutlon, even by 
 imrmrfion,^''-\ 
 
 Mr. Bailey, In his Etymological Englifh Didcionary, fays, 
 " In ancient times, this (baptifm) being pei-^formed by im- 
 mcrfiou, the perfons fo initiated went into a river, &:c. and were 
 plunged." 
 
 John Calvin, in his InfiituUons^ Book IV. chap. xv. fed. lo, 
 fays, " It is certain thai the manner of dipping was ufed of the 
 old church." 
 
 Here are three fubftantlal wltneffes. Thefe might be fuffi- 
 cient, feeing there is not one to be found who will, or dares, give 
 direct and pofitive teftimony againfl the truth of what thefe 
 affirm. But fince there are an hoft who (land ready to give in 
 their teftimony, even againft their own pradlce, we will hear 
 what two more of them will teftify relative to the important 
 caufe now on trial. 
 
 Thefe two (hall be Dr. Cave and the famous Mr. Baxter. 
 
 Dr. Cave, a great fearcher into antiquity, fays, " That the 
 party baptized was wholly immerfed, or put under water, which 
 was the common^ conjiant and ttniverfal cuilom of thofe times ; 
 whereby they did fignificantiy exprefs the great end and effedls 
 of baptifm, reprelentingChriil's death, bur'.al and refurredion, 
 and, in conformity thereto, cur dying unto fm, tlie deftrudion 
 of Its power, and our refurredion to a new courfe of life," &c.:|: 
 
 Mod remarkable is the teftimony which Mr. Baxter gives to 
 tills truth, in the following words : *' It is commonly confeffed 
 by us to the Baptifts, (as our commentators declare) that in the 
 apoftlfcs' time, the baptized vere dipped overhead in v.ater, and 
 this fi.^nifieth their profeffi n both of believing die burial and 
 refu rreiftion of Chrlft, and of their own dying unto fin, and liv- 
 ing, or rifing 2?ain to nev^'nefs of life, or being buried and rifen 
 again '.vith Chrift, as the apoftle expoundeth baptifm. Col. ir. 
 12, and Kom. iv, 6. And though (faith he) we have thought it 
 lav;tui "jj dlfufe the manner of dipping and to ufe lefs water, yet 
 we prefume not to change the ufe and figniiication of it ; io then 
 
 * Century II. part ii. chap. v. fedl i %. f Vol. v. p. 488. 
 I Ten Letters. 
 
2S The Mode and Subjecls [Serm. IlL 
 
 he that lignally profe/lss to die and rife again in baptifm witli 
 Chriftj dolt), fignally profQCs fa ving fait /j and repentance', but this 
 do all they that are baptized according to the apoilolic 
 practice. "* 
 
 As thefe witneffes teftify, fo do all learned and pious men who 
 have critically attended to this fubjecfl, and afterwards given in 
 any direct and pofitive evidence upon the matter. 
 
 2. The evidence as to the pradice of the primitive church, 
 confifts in the tedimony of men to this truth, that the church 
 did for thirteen hundred yeai*^ praiftife immerfion, fome extreme 
 cafes excepted. 
 
 The only evidence which I purpofe to give in fupport of this 
 for the prefent, is tlie teftimony of the author of Ten Letters to 
 Bifhop Hoadly upon the mode and fubjects of baptifm, and the 
 confeilion of Dr. I.athrop that it was even fo. 
 
 The author of the Letters aflerts that this was the pradlice of 
 the ciiurch for thirteen hundred years after the commencement 
 of the Chridian era. Dr. LathropsfTents that this was the fa(^ ; 
 as yen may fee, by reading his four fermons on baptifm, where 
 he gives thefe letters a particular attention, and is fuppofed to 
 affent, where he makes no objedlion. 
 
 3. Ail the churches in Europe, Afia and Africa, ever have 
 done, and do now, pradtlfe immerfion, fave thofe who are now, 
 or have been, under the jurifdiAIon of the Pontiffs of Rome. 
 
 The fame witnefles who bore their teftimony to the laft 
 particular, give in their evidence in fupport cf this, and in the 
 fame v,My ; the one aflerting the fact, the other afisntizg that 
 it is even Co. ' 
 
 4. The very reafons which have been given and which are 
 dill given to juftify the contrary pradice, are a plain confeffion 
 ihat immerfion, or burying the fubjsdls under water, was the 
 practice of the apoftles and primitive church in the ordinance of 
 baptifm, and w-hat Chrid commanded to be done. 
 
 The reafvTis which are alleged why fprinkling may be fubfti- 
 tuted for immeifion, are, the want cf health, in fome inllances 
 where tliey fuppofe baptifm to be necelTary ; the weaknefs of 
 conftitution with refped to fome, and the coldnefs of climate 
 with refpe»ft to many, and as to all in northern climes in the 
 wintry feafon. Heie is a filent acknowledgment, that it is not the 
 inftitution, that it is not the permiflion of Chrift, but mere acci- 
 dental and local circumftances, which make it lawful to lay by 
 
 * Ten Letter* 
 
Serm. III.] of Baptifnu 29 
 
 the command of Chrlft, and to receive in its (lead the precepts 
 and commandments of men. 
 
 Mr. Bailer fays, in his Diaionary, that baptifm was perform- 
 ed in the eaftern and warmer countries by dipping the perfons 
 all over ; but in procefs of time, in the weftern and colder 
 countries, fprinklilig was fubftituted in the place of dipping. 
 
 Dr. Lathrop in his fermons implicitly confeiTes the following 
 extracts to be both true and genuine. 
 
 Mr. Baxter, in his Paraphrofe on the New- Tejlament^ obferves 
 on Matth. iii. 6. " We grant that baptifm then was by wafhing 
 the whole body ; and did net the difference of our cold country, 
 as to that hot one, teach us to remeniber, ' I will have mercy 
 and not facrifice,' it (hould be fo here " 
 
 The author of the Letters to Bi/Joop Hoadly^ in the twenty- third 
 page, writes thus : " Mr. Baxter, we have already feen, excufes 
 the matter by the coldnefs of our climate. Calvin, the celebra- 
 ted reformer of Geneva, obferves in his Expofition of Afts 
 viii. 38, * We fee here what was the baptifmal rite among the 
 ancients, for they plunged the whole body in the water.' Now 
 it is the cuftora for the minliier to fprinkle only the body or 
 head, and he too excufes this fprinkling, but how, I cannot well 
 recolledt, not having Lni book at hand.*' 
 
 Blfhop Burnet, though he thus defcrihes the primitive bap- - 
 lifm, *' With no other garments but that might ferve to cover 
 nature, they at firft laid them down, as a man is laid in the 
 grave, and then they fald thefe words, I baptize, or wafh, thee 
 in the name, &c. Then they ralfed them up again, and cleaa. 
 garments were put upon them ; from whence came the phrafes 
 of being baptized into Chrift's death, of being buried wiih him 
 by baptifm into death, of our being rifen with Chrift,and of our 
 putting on the Lord Jefus Chrift; of putting off the eld man, > 
 and putting on the new,'' — and though he juftly obferves that 
 facraments are pofitive precepts, which are to be meafured only, 
 by the inftitution, in which there is not room left for us to carry, 
 them any farther ; — yet forgetting his own meafure of the infti- 
 tution, viz. the party baptized was laid down in the water, as- 
 a man is laid in the grave, he fays, " The danger in cold cli- 
 mates may be a very good reafon for changing the form of/ 
 baptifm to fprinkling,"* 
 
 I propofe for the prefent to note but one quotation more, andi 
 that Ihaii be in the words or Dr. Wall, as quoted in the Liters*, 
 
 * Buina's Ejpofition of the Thirty-nine Artickv^ 
 C 2 • 
 
so The Mode and Subjeds [Sefm. III. 
 
 The Dodlor, in giving the reafons why, in Queen Eb'zabeth's 
 reign, the cuftom of dipping was laid aiide, oblerves, ♦* It being 
 allowed to weak children to be baptized by afFufion, many 
 found ladies and gentlemen firft, and then, by degrees, the 
 common people, would obtain the favour of tlie prieft to have 
 their children pafs for weak children, too tender to endure dip- 
 ping in the water."* Now, 
 
 6. It may be eafy for you to gather what is the outward and 
 vifibie part of the ordinance of baptifm. 
 
 It is to immerfe proper fubjeifts in water, in the name of the 
 Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoft. This is the out- 
 ward and vifible part of baptifm, the fcriptures being judge ; 
 this literal and plain meaning of the command being judge ; the 
 pradlice of the apoftles being j adge ; the pradice of the church 
 for more than a thoufand years being judge ; and even if we 
 appeal to thofe who refufe to pra^ife thus, they add their tef- 
 timony, that it is what was commanded. They pretend not to 
 fay that any new command hath been given, or that the old 
 one hath ever been changed. What Ihall we fay to thefe 
 things ! ! ! 
 
 I conclude by fubmitting a queftion, and a few inferences, 
 for your confideration. 
 
 The queftion is. If immerfion be from heaven, and fprinkling 
 from men, by whr;t authority do we continue the pradice f 
 
 The inferences are — 
 
 1. We, who call ourfelves Pedobaptifts, are as ahoufe divi- 
 ded againft itfslf. To fay the leaft, we appear thus. Our cham- 
 pions will look us in the face, and a/Tare us, that the Baptilts 
 have plain fcripture for their mode, and yet we have a right to 
 choofe on the fcore of convenience, Sec. what mode is pleafmg 
 to us. Thus fay Calvin, Hoadly, Owen, and others : whilft 
 in their pradice they have been, in this inftance, like the fervant 
 who knew, but did not his lord*s will. Thefe good men have 
 confefled rather too much for the credit of their pra(Jlice, and 
 our comfort while copying it. Many, however, have rifen up, 
 in defence of our fathers' practice and ours. They invent 
 many ingenious hypothefes to prove it fiom heaven, bu; not 
 ©ne affords a folid conclufion which fiiows it to be fo. 
 
 2. According to the light which for the piefent appears, 
 we cannot but conclude that our definitions of baptifm and to 
 baptize are fciiptural, accurate and juft. If we will do the 
 wU of God, we muft pradtife what he commands. 
 
 • Vol, a p. 30. X Ed. 
 
Serm. III.] cf Bapiifnu Si 
 
 3. It appears that it is not left with us to choofe what mode 
 we will pra(flire in adminiftering or in receiving the ordinance of 
 baptilm ; for we find but one mode to il : and we mult pradife 
 this, or none. We may fprinkie a perfon in tlie name of the 
 Father, &c. and we may wafli the face, or any part of a perfon, 
 in the fame facied name ; but it is not poffible to baptize a 
 perfon in this way ; for fprinkling, vor any fmall partial wafhing 
 never was, is not now, nor ever will be, what the fcriptures 
 mean by Chriftian baptifm. 
 
 4. That a peribn muft be greatly unacquainted with the 
 plain, literal, fciipture account of baptifm, or extremely preju- 
 diced, not to fay perverfe, to affirm that the Bible fays nothing 
 about immerfion, or burying in water for baptizing. For it 
 fpeaks of this mode, and of no other, in the application of water 
 as a gofpel ordinance. 
 
 The Baptifts have for their mode the broad hafis oi fcriptures 
 antiquity, and the uninterrupted, and fomewhat univerfal prac- 
 tice of the church. 
 
 5. It appears that for well-in form.ed Pedobaptiils to oppofe 
 the Baptifts, as to thsir mode of baptizing, is very great wicked- 
 nefs. For the Baptifts have the advantage of plain and exprefs 
 fcripture on their fide, and the learned, critical and candid 
 Pedobaptifts know it. 
 
 Ignorance is the beft and only excufe which we can make for 
 ourfelves for any oppofition which we have made againft the 
 ancient and primitive mode which the Baptifts have pradifed in 
 the adminiftration of the ordinance. Our contention in this 
 matter hath not been againft the Baptifts merely, but it hath been 
 againft their Lord and ours. 
 
 Dr. Lathrop appears genercufly to grant the truth, that 
 immerfion is fcripture baptiim, and only contends that fprink- 
 ling be alfo allowed ; which every candid mind would readily 
 do, were there one text of fcripture to fupport it, 
 
 6. No true Chriftian, if he knew what he did, would ever 
 make light of immerfion, which the Lord commands, and the 
 Baptifts pradtife, as the mode of baptizing, or, more ftrii^ly, as 
 baptifm itfelf* 
 
The Mode and Subje6ls [Serm. IV. 
 
 SERMON IV. 
 
 MATTHEW xxvili. 19, 20. 
 
 Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name 
 of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoji ; teach' 
 ing them to ohferve all things ivhatfoever I have commanded 
 you : And, lo, I am nvith you altvay, even unto the end of the 
 world. Amen, 
 
 WHILST difcourfmg to you upon tliefe words, I have, 
 as I fuppofe, proved to you what is the outward and 
 vlfibie part of baptifm. You have, to appearance, given a 
 ferious and folemn attention, and, I hope, a candid one, to what 
 hath been faid. 
 
 All which I afk of you In this matter is, thac you in the fpirit 
 of meeknefs hear the whole, and then judge and praclife in fuch 
 a manner as you cannot refufe to do, without doing violence to 
 your reafon, and without difobedience to the command of Heaven. 
 
 Some of you may be afraid of difcord ; but whence, I pray 
 you,will difcord arife among brethren ? Will a candid, prayerful 
 and felf- denying attention to truth caufe this feared difcord ? 
 Hadi truth a tendency to produce difcord among the faithful 
 followers of the Lamb of God ? I knov/ that once, when Chrifl 
 preached the doctrines of the crofs, multitudes of profefling 
 difciples went back, and followed no more with him. 1 hope 
 it will not be dius with any of you. But, my brethren, how- 
 ever it may be with any of you, one thing is clear — I ought, 1 
 muft declare to you, fo fall as I profitably can, all thofe truths 
 of God which appear neceffary to build you up in found faith 
 and holy pra(5tice. 
 
 As I have faid before, fo fay I unto you again, that all which 
 I^afk of you is, to give truth a candid hearing, and yield your 
 affeiit, when fads are plainly proved 
 
 Noihing fhould, by me, be thought too much to be done, to 
 clear away irom your minds the da'knefs of prejudice, together 
 with any error eou* belief and pra^ice which you may have im- 
 bibed, in part, by my me:ins. I (hall, therefore, in thi!^ difcourfe, 
 after having attended to the purport, end or defign of baptifm, 
 
Serm. IV.] of Bapiifnu *9S 
 
 anfwer fome obje<fl;ons, which may for the prefent obftru(*l the 
 force oi truth. 
 
 Before we proceed to the particular bufinefs of this difcourfe, 
 jrou will, if you pleafe, attend for a minute to a few queftions, 
 and their anfwers. 
 
 1 . Is it not a plain cafe, that it is my duty to deliver to you 
 the whole counfel of God, according to the beft light it may 
 pleafe him to aiford me ? 
 
 2. Is it not equally plain, that your duty is to yield, not to 
 me, but to the truths which I deliver, an obedient ear ? 
 
 3. Should you, from an uncandid and prejudiced mind, 
 refufe to be converted by the truth, will the fault be mine ? 
 
 4. Should I exhibit full evidence, as to the fubjefl on hand, 
 and exhibit that evidence clearly too, or fliould it be that I have 
 done this, and yet great difficulties fhould arife, will you be 
 juftified (hould you lay the blame to me ? 
 
 5. Should I teach you the truth, and produce all the evi- 
 dence which you can afk for, and you fhould, ail, like faithful 
 Chriftians, believe it, where or whence will arife any difficulty 
 among us I Should any of you refufe to believe, will you charge 
 your difficulties to my account ? 
 
 6. Are not all of you determined that you will hear can- 
 didly, and believe upon evidence ? 
 
 You will pleafe to give a Chriftian and judicious anfwer to 
 each of thtfe queftions, and let your pradice be conformed 
 with the gofpel of our Lord Jefus Chrift. 
 
 Having laid before you the principal part of the fadls and 
 evidence, which I intended, as to the vifible and outward part 
 of baptifm, now — 
 
 Lajlly, The purport, end and defign of the Baptifmal Infti- 
 lution may call for fome attention. 
 
 The purport, end or defign of this Chriftian ordinance, or 
 inftitution, appears to be — 
 
 I. For a dividing hne between the kingdom of cur Lord, 
 and the kingdoms of this world. 
 
 John was Chrift's forerunner : he was fent before his face to 
 turn t)ie hearts of the fathers to the children, and the difo- 
 bedient to the wifdom of the juft : to make ready a people pre- 
 pared for the Lord ;* and that Chrift fhould be made mani- 
 feft CO Ifrael, therefore, fays John, am I come baptizing with 
 watcr.f John's million comprehended a double purpofcj to 
 
 * Luke I 17. f John i 31. 
 
34 The Mode and SuhjeBs [Serm. IV. 
 
 make ready a people, prepared for the Lord, and to rcanifeft 
 Him unto lirael. The people which he inftruinentally made 
 ready, and prepared to receive the Lord, he baptized ; and it 
 appears from his rejeding many of the Pharifees and Sadducees, 
 that he intentionally baptized none other.* The whole dif- 
 courfe which he had with them, Matt. iii. 7 to 12, is good evi- 
 dence that he admitted none to baptifm but fuch as brought 
 forth vifible fruits of repentance. Such perfons he adir>itted 
 among that people which he was making ready for the Lord. 
 This people were, when prepared, to compofe that kingdom, 
 or the beginning of that kingdom, which fh.ijl never be de- 
 ftroyed, and which is an everlafting kingdom, which (hall ftand 
 forever ; Daniel ii. 44. and vii. 27. This kingdom Chrift calls 
 the kingdom of heaven, and fays, it is not of this world. 
 
 It appears to be this kingdom, which was now at hand, al- 
 moft ready to be l#t up, of which Chriit fpeaks to Nicodemus, 
 when he fays, John iii. 5. Except a man be born of water and 
 of die Spirit, he cannot enter mio the kingdom of God. 
 
 All this does, for fubftance, meet the fentiment of Bsptifts 
 and Pedobaptifts on this fubje<fl. Both fuppofe, that none can 
 belong to tJiis kingdom widiout being born of water, or bapti- 
 zed. Both fuppofe that men may profefledly, or vifibly, belong 
 to tliis kingdom, without being born of the Spirit : but, perhaps, 
 neither the Baptifts, nor Pedobaptifts, would fay, that any do, 
 ftridly fpeaking, belong to this kingdom, except they have 
 been born of water and of the Spirit. Our Lord faith, Verily, 
 verily, excepi a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he 
 cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven. Ifa man cannot 
 enter into this kingdom but in this way, he cannot U^ong to 
 it in any other. 
 
 B >th fides grant, that baptifm, or to be born of water, ;is the 
 only way of admittance into this kingdom. They aie not fo 
 well agreed as to what it is to be boru of water, whether it be to 
 be fprirkled, wafhed, or immerfed. Concerning this matter 
 you n^uft judge ^or y-^urfelves. 
 
 This belr g a givwi point, rliat the defign of baptifm is, that it 
 (hoiild be for a diN '.tirg line between that kingdom, which the 
 God cf heaven ^vas to let up in r/ie latter days, and this world, 
 1 wf uk fuggtft for >' ur cf.i;liaeration — Which drr.ws the line 
 of icparatic»n 11. '?; clearly bn%veen this kingdom and all ether 
 kingdoms on earth ; to ent: it by being fprinkled j or by be- 
 
 * Matt. iii. 7. 
 
Serm. IV.] of Bapilfnu 3S 
 
 ing vifibly and adually burled in water, and riling as it were 
 from the dead, to join this kingdom ? 
 
 I will alfo fugged one thing more for your confideration : 
 Which hath the moft dire<5l and natural tendency to caufe 
 Chrift's kingdom to appeal to be, as it really is, not of this world? 
 To have almoft ail admitted into it, in infancy, and fo in unbe- 
 lief, and all by fprinkling, or by a little water put upon the f^ce, 
 and the greater part of them living in open wickednefs, or 
 manifeft unbelief, and unnoticed by the church to which they 
 are fuppofed to belong ; or, to have none admitted but profefled 
 believers, and thefe admitted in a way which fignificanily fays, 
 that they turn their backs upon the world ; yea, that they are 
 dead to the world, and are rifen with Chrift ? I only fuggeft 
 this for your confideration. I hope to attend to it in its place, 
 but not to-day. 
 
 2. The purport, end or defign of baptifm appears to be 
 for a manifeftation, that the fubjedsofithave forfaken all, yes, 
 their own lives, for Chrift's fake and the gofpel. 
 
 How can this be more vifibly manifefted, than by being 
 buried with him in baptifm ? How can a man more vifibly for- 
 fake all, than he does when buried ? How can any one more 
 manifeftly forfake his own life for another, than by voluntarily 
 fubmitting himfelf into the hands of another to be buried 
 alive ? 
 
 Is not this agreeable to what Chrift faith, Whofoever he be 
 of you that forfaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my 
 difciple ? 
 
 3. It appears to be for a reprefentation of our being wafhed 
 from our fms in the blood of the Lamb. 
 
 John, the revelator, faith, fpeaking of Jefus Chrift, the faithful 
 wiinefs, " Unto him that loved us, and wafhed us from our (ins 
 in his own blood." This is a figurative expreffion, fhowing 
 at once the procuring caufe, the blood of Chrift, and the eracious 
 effeifl, cur fouls purged from dead work? to ferve the living 
 God. Can any natural fign reprefent this more fully, than 
 does baptifm, in which our bodies are wafhed with pure water ? 
 
 4. The purport, end or defign of this Chriftian ordinance 
 appears to be for the pr<jmotion of piety in individuals, and 
 purity in the church. 
 
 What can have a ftronger tendency to move the heart of a 
 Chriftian to piety and weanedneG from the worH, than has the 
 inftitution of baptifm ? Seeing ar -very remerabrarce of it he is 
 put in mind, how Chrift dkd/orjinf and how every one who 
 
36 The Mode and Subjects [Serm. IV. 
 
 hath believed and beeen baptized, has by the ordinance fignally 
 died tofiUi been buried from the world, and raifed again to new- 
 nefs of life. Hath not this ordinance alfo an equally ftroiig 
 tendency to preferve the purity of the church, ftiould it be ad- 
 ininiftered as we have proved it ought to be, by immerfion only ? 
 And fhould another thing be found to be true, that vifible be- 
 lievers only fhould be admitted to it, what a world of unbeliev- 
 ers would this fliut out of the church ! How differently v^^ould 
 the profefled church of Jefus Chrid appear from what it now 
 does ! 
 
 If my information be correal, every natural-bom fubjeft of 
 the crown of England is, according to the laws of their na- 
 tional church, to be baptized, and immediately confidered as a 
 member of the church. This is, indeed, confident, if all the pa- 
 rents have, in any paft period, been profelyted to the Chriftian 
 religion, and if baptifm have come into the place of circumci- 
 fion, and to be adminiftered to children and infants, as that 
 was. 
 
 Not only £o, but probably nine-tenths of the inhabitants of 
 New- England, if not of our nation, belong to the church, ac- 
 cording to the profcifTed belief of the Pedobaptifts. Upon the 
 fame principle I preiume that more than three-fourths of all the 
 adults in this and the neighbouring towns belong to the church, 
 and have, if the principle be according to the gofpel, a right 
 to require admittance to the Lord's Supper, and baptifm for 
 their children. Then, upon the fame principle, would their 
 children be members of the church, and entitled to all the priv- 
 ileges of God's houfe, as they come to years, and nothing fhort 
 of grofs immorality could juftify their exclufion. Does this 
 look as though Chrift's kingdom were not of this world ? 
 
 5. The purport, end or defign of baptifm appears to be 
 Well defcribed by Dr. Goodwin, in the following words : *< The 
 eminent thing fignified and reprefented in baptifm is not fmgly 
 the blood of Chrift, as it ivafies us from our fms, but there is 
 a further reprefentation therein of Chrift's death, burial and 
 refurreftion, in the baptized : and this is not in a bare con- 
 formity to Chrift, but is a reprefentation of a communion with 
 Chrift in his death and refun edlion ; therefore it is faid. We 
 are buried with him in baptifm, and wherein we are rifen with 
 him, &c. And moreover, here it is that the anfwer of a good 
 confcience, which is made the inward effe<n: of this ordinance, 
 1 Peter lii 21, is there alfo atcribnted to Chrift's refurretflion, as 
 the thing fignified and reprefented in baptifm ; and as the caufe 
 
Serm. IV.] of Baptifm, 3^ 
 
 of that anfwer of a good confclence, even baptiim doth now 
 fave us, as it is a figure of falvatioii by Chrift." 
 
 6. The purport, end or defign of the ordinance appears to 
 be. to poini out, or fliidow forth, the forgivenefs or remilTion of 
 fin?, and the being cleanfed from them. Hence the propriety 
 of fcripture expreflions, which are like the following : The 
 baptifm of repentance for the remiilion of fms, Mark i. 4. 
 Arife and be bapiiz'^d, and wafh away thy fias, Atts xxii. 16. 
 Here it is w^orthy of the critical reader's notice, that the word 
 translated zvnjh atvay^ is apoloufalj which fignines to waih clean, 
 or to wafh out a (lain, ai well as to waih away. It is alfo 
 worthy to be obferved, that the word louo, whence this is derived, 
 is the only wnrd or theme, fave hapu^d^ v.'hich, in the New-Tef- 
 tament, fignifies to wafli the body. This being well confidered, 
 it cannot be doubted but baptifm is a moft fignificant repre- 
 fentauion of the remiffion of fm, or cleanfmg from it. 
 
 Lajlly. The purport, end and defjgn of the ordinance of 
 baptifm appears co be, for an open and manifeil declaration 
 that thofe who receive it, do heartily, and of a ready mind, put 
 on Chrift, enter into his fervice, receive him to be their Prophet, 
 Prieil and King, and covenant to be for him, and for him 
 only. Accordingly it is faid, As many as were baptized into 
 Chriff, have put on Chrift : They have put on his name, his 
 fcif denying profeffion, his fuiFerlng, defpifed, but glorious caufe. 
 
 Is the purport, end and defign of bapiifm as hatli been now 
 ftated ? then the mode is immerfion ; and thofe who change the ' 
 ordinance from dipping to fprinkling, and apply it to unbelievers, 
 pervert the ordinance, lofe its import, and make it quite another 
 thing. This we have, for years, ignorantly done. 
 
 We v.m11 now attend to the arguments, which the late Rev. 
 John Cieaveland hath left us in fupport o{ f pr inkling, as being 
 authentic baptifm. This Mr. Cleaveland was, and I believe 
 juRIy too, efleemed as one of the moft pious and faithful fer- 
 vants of Chrift. Whilft I was favoured with a perfonal ac- 
 quaintance with him, he ftood very high in my eilimaiion, for 
 his unafte<fted piety, and fervent fimplicity, as a preacher of 
 the everlafting gofpel. I dill retain the fame opinion of the 
 good man. But great and good men are not always wife. 
 In any inflance where their wifdom hath failed them, we fnould 
 be careful how we follow. T!ie Bereans would not take Paul 
 for a guide, without firft bringing him to the ftandard of divine 
 truth. The Bereans were juilified. Should we treat Mr. C. 
 in the fame way, he could not, and I am incJinsd to think, he 
 D 
 
58 The Mode and ^Subjecls [Serm. IV. 
 
 would not, thou.e^h he were living, condemn us. I might let 
 his v;orks and arguments in fupporc of fprinkling, fleep, were 
 it not, that fome of you, my people, and perhaps others, may 
 by ihem, in one particular, be kept from beholding Chrift, as in 
 an open glaf^. 
 
 The good man's objeft was, to prove that baptifm by fprink- 
 ling is authentic, or is fcriptural ; or that fprinkling is baptifm. 
 I ivlil now lay before you his fuppofed ftrong arguments by 
 which hefupports the validity of fprinkling for baptizing. Af- 
 ter dating the principles of the Baptifls, as to the ordinance 
 now confidering, his 
 
 I ft. Argument is, "Their learned men know that the word 
 hapt'izd in Luke xi. 38, and hapt'tfmous in Mark vii. 2 — 5, are ufed 
 to fignify the fame as niptd is, i. e. proper waftiing, or making 
 clean by the application of water, in cafes that do not neceffarily 
 require dipping as the mode of wafhing/* The anfwer to this 
 IS : That neither the learned men among the Baptifts, nor the 
 learned among any other clafs of men, know any fuch thing. 
 Befides, baptifihe, in Luke^ and hapttfmous^ in Marky have refer- 
 ence to, and mean, a ceremonial, a religious, or rather, as may 
 be more properly called in thefe inftances, a fuperftitious wafh- 
 ing. What is meant by a ceremonial wafhing, you may fee by 
 looking into the ceremonial law : Lemit. xi. 52, and in NumLxix. 
 19, where you will find that this ceremonial wafhing was, to 
 put into water, or to bathe one's flefti in water. You hence 
 fee that thefe two pafTages, with which Mr. Cleaveland lays the 
 foundation of hisfupport of fprinkling for baptifm, utterly fail 
 him, and come in as auxiliaries to confirm immerfion as the only 
 fcripture baptifm. I will not fay that nipto is never ufed to fig- 
 nify ceremonial wafhing, and fo intend the walhing or putting 
 the hands into water, [pvgvie) with abundance of exactnefs, as 
 Dr. Dod<iridge expounds it, or up to the elbows, as L'Enfant 
 renders it. But one thing is evident to all who will examine 
 the texts, and compare them with the ceremonial wafhings of 
 the ceremonial law, in conformity with which the Jewifli doctors 
 meant to have their traditional ceremonies, that laptlzd and 
 haptifmcs are not ufed in the fenfe in v/hich nip^d generally is. In 
 every point of view, Mr. Cleaveland's texts utterly fail him, and 
 go to deftroy the cuftomor tradition he brought them to fupport. 
 Befides, I do not find that laptizo is ufed, in any place, for 
 walliing the hands, or for waftiing or dipping a part of the 
 body, or any other thing. Mr. Cleaveland's 
 
 «d. Argument is bnilt upon Hehreivt i«. 10. where the 
 
Serm. IV.] of Eaptifm: S9 
 
 Apoftle fpeaks of (diaphoro'is lapt'ifmois) divers wa-fhings. Here, 
 where the Apoftle is fpeaknig of divers ceremonial wafhings, or 
 bathings, Mr. Cleaveland, without the leaft poffible evidence, 
 concludes the Apoftle means divers fprinklings. 
 
 The fame anfwer which was given to the firft argument be- 
 longs to tliis, as Mr. Cleaveland has produced no evidence, that 
 (haptifmois) wafhings, or bathings, means fprlnklings, fave that 
 in the 1 3th and 2 1 ft verfes. The Apoftle makes ufe of the word 
 fprinkle, when fpeaking of the application cf blood, and fpeak- 
 ing of the unclean ; he fays, they are rantl-z.eJy and adds, al- 
 moft ail things are by the law purged, calherixed^ not haptlzeJt 
 with blood. It is fiOt a little furprifing that a man of Mr. Cleave- 
 land's good fenfe Ihould fay, and that Dr. Lathrcp, and other 
 men of erudition, (hould follow him, in faying, thefe different 
 fprinklings, in the 13th and z ift verfes, refer to hapttfmxjis^ when, 
 had they looked three words farther, they would have found 
 them to be, kai dikaiomafi farhcs, the liberal Englifti of which 
 is, ** The ordinances of God concerning the ceremonial rites of 
 bloody facrifices !" Had they looked into their Greek tefta- 
 ments, they might, with eafe, have feen that their argument 
 would not bear examination. Surely, had thefe gentlemen had 
 the right of the queftlon, they never would have compelled the 
 Apoftle to explain by the fprinkling of blood, what he meant by- 
 bathings or vvaftiings with water. Perhaps a more forced expo- 
 fition of fcripture is feldom heard. Befides, the Apuftle told 
 them, by placing what is tranOat<:d, carnal ordinances, between 
 divers wafhings in the loth, and fprinklingi in the 13th and 
 2ift verfes, that he intended no fuch thing as they fuppofed. 
 If I miftake not, Mr. C.'s 
 
 3d. Argument is an attempt to prove that bapio and lapti%o 
 are ufed to fignify fomething more than to dip, put into water^ 
 6cc. When the good man brought forward his argument, lie 
 forgot — &c. — which belongs to his quotation from Dr. Gale, 
 and which includes immeifion and overwhelming, and which 
 comprifes the whole which Mr. C. has proved that bapt'vzo £\g' 
 nifies. But, waving his forgetfulnefs, we will attend to what 
 lie fays. All which he appears to do here is, to (liow that 
 bapto't)r baptizo are ufed to wafh, dip and wet witii fprink- 
 ling the dew from heaven, and to overwhetm. That is, bapto 
 fignifies to dip, put into water, wet with the dew of heaven, &c. 
 and baptixo Signifies to dip, put into water and overwhelm. 
 What is the confequence ? According to Mr. C it is this : Be- 
 cftufe bapto is fometimes ufed to fignify one's being wet with the 
 
40 The Mode and Subjetls [Serm . IV. 
 
 diftiiilng dew of heaven, &:c. therefore bapi'i%o Tignifies the lame 
 »hing : Becaufe hapio fignifies in one place to wafh without 
 di])ping, therefore bapti%d fignifics to wafh without dipping ; 
 and becauie hapto is lomecimes ufed to fignify tc colour, or ftain, 
 by afpeifion, or the like, therefore baptlx.o is ufed in the fame 
 fenfe ; therefore fprinkling is authentic baptifm. What evidence, 
 I pray you, my hearers, is there in ail this ? Yes, what fhow or 
 appearance of evidence is there in all this ? Would ten tho^jTaiid 
 fuch arguments afford you the leaft convidion, or gain your 
 ailen!:, v/here you had a cent to Icfe ? 
 
 JLvery perfim of ienfe, who is acquainted with the Greek, 
 would, generally fpeaking, allow Mr. C.'s premifes, iha.t bapi 5 j 
 in different places, flgnifies the application of water in different 
 ways ; and that lapti-zo fometimes fignifies overwhelming. But 
 no perfon, who underftands the matter, will allow his conclu* 
 ficn, for it hatii no connexion with tli€ premifes. 
 
 Hi» argumer.t, in plain Engiilh, is tiiis : The verfj to wet, 
 fometiixies fignifies to fprinkle, as in a heavy dew we fay it 
 fprinkles, or wets ; the verb to overwhelm., fometimes fignifies 
 10 cover all over with water, as is the beach, by the ilowir:g of 
 the tide. Of confequence, to overwhelm is to fprinkle ; there- 
 fore to fprinkle is authentic overwhelming, or baptifm. The 
 fallacy of this argument is eafily deteifted, and with the fame 
 cafe may any one, who knows the different fignifi cations of baptd 
 and baptizoj uncover the fallacy and complete inconcluftvenefs 
 cf Mr. C.*s argument. 
 
 The plain truth is, he hath done his fide a diiTervlce ; for by 
 fearching he hath found, and implicitly acknov^'ledges, though 
 not intentionally, and (1 fuppofej without knowing it, that no 
 inftafiCe can be found where baptizo iign\fit\h the application of 
 water by fprinkling, or any other way, which docs not imply 
 overwriclming, or walhing, that isj a ceremoniai walliicg, 
 which is bathing, or putting into water. But — 
 
 4. There is another argument upon which Mr. Cleaveland 
 chiefly dwells, and upon which he appears greatly to reft the 
 defence of his whole caufe. It is his flrong hold againft immer- 
 fion, and for fprinkling ; and it is this : Baptifm with water, or 
 baptifm as a Chriftian ordinance, is to fignify Chnft's baptii^ing 
 with the Holy Glioft. I have no where found tliat he hath 
 proved that this is the great and principal thing which baptifm 
 Hgnifies ; nor do I by any means obtain convidion that the 
 mode of baptizing is to be determined, with certainty, from 
 this particular thing, even fiiould it be granted that one impor- 
 
Serm. IV.] of Baptifm. 41 
 
 tant defign of baptifm is to fignify Chrift*s baptizing with the 
 Holy Ghoft. But, as Mr. C. feems to depend upon the ftrength 
 of this argument more than he does upon the ftrength of any- 
 other, we will grant for the prefent, tliat baptifm with water 
 was appointed particularly, if not mainly, to fet forth the mode 
 in which Chrift baptlzeth with the Holy Ghoft. 
 
 Now the gieat queftion is, In what manner or mode, hj 
 fprinkling or overwhelming, did Chrift Jefus baptize with the 
 Holy Ghoft ? Mr. C. in his ireatife, replies abundantly, By 
 fprinkling, certainly. We will put this fubjed to the teft, by 
 inftancing the moft remarkable feafon which ever was, in which 
 Chrift, in a moft remarkable, public and aftoniihing degree was 
 baptizing with the Holy Ghoft. I prefume were Mr. C. now 
 alive, he cculd not, with any face of propriety, obje<5t againft 
 taking a fample for the whole, the moft remarkable inftance 
 which ever hath been, and perhaps which ever will be exhib- 
 ited of Chrift's baptizing with the Holy Ghoft. 1 am wiUing 
 to fubmit the ftrong argument of Mr. C. to this great fample of 
 Chrift's bapiizing with the Holy Ghoft. Are not all you, my 
 hearers, willing to leave the weight of his argument to fuch a 
 decifion ? I am perfuaded you all fay, Yes. 
 
 We will then bring hb argument to the propofed teft. 
 
 The inftance which we will take, (fcrfurely it is the moft 
 aftonifliing one,) is that which Chrift foretold, as related, Ads 
 ^' 5' "John truly baptized with water, but ye lliall be baptized 
 with the Holy Ghoft, not many days hence.^' Theaccomplilh- 
 rnent of this predidion and promife we have related in the four 
 firft verfes of the next chapter. It is thus : When, the day of 
 Pentecoft was fully come, they were all with one accord in one 
 place. And fuddenly there was a found from heaven, as of a 
 ruOiing, a ighty wind, and it tilled all the houfe where they 
 were fitting. And there appeared unto them cloveh tongues*. 
 like as of fire, and it fat upon each of them. And they were all 
 filled with the Holy Ghoft. 
 
 Here was truly a wonderful inftance of Chrift*s baptizing, 
 with the Holy Ghoft. 
 
 Here, i. All the houfe was filled witli the found, wind or 
 Spirit from heaven. 2* Cloven tongues, like as of fire, and.it 
 fat upon each of them. 3. They were all filled with the 
 Holy Ghoft. 
 
 We here fee that ihey were all overwhelmed ; for all tlie 
 houfe, where they were fitting, was filled ; and not only were- 
 they all overwhelmed, but t'* v were alio filled. 
 D 2 - 
 
4:2 The Mode md Subjeds [Serm. :IV. 
 
 It is left with you to determine, what becomes of Mr. C.'s 
 argument, upon which he lays fo much ftrefs, and of which he 
 ipeaks with fo much confidence, and net nnfrequently with an 
 air of triumph. Is Liere a word about fprinkling in any part 
 of it ? or is there any thing which looks like it ? Does it not 
 look confiderably like immerficn, or overwhehning ? At leaft, 
 does it not favour immerfion, or overwhelming, as much as it 
 does fprinkling ? If fo, then it proves nothing for fprinkling* 
 It is left with you to determine which fide it favours. 
 
 It is poflible, however, that fome of you may fuppofe, thai: 
 Mr. C. might intend ikat baptifm, if it may be fo called, which 
 the Holy Ghoft minifters, when it creates the foul anew. To 
 this fappofition, I willjuft obferve, *' The wind bio v/eth (faith 
 ChiiR) where it litieth, and thou heared the found thereof, but 
 canft not tell 'whence it cometh cr ivhithsr it goeth ; fo is every 
 one that is born of the Spirit.'' Would it not be extreme folly 
 to fuppofe that water baptifm reprefents the operations of the 
 Spirit, when none can know whence it cometh, or whither it 
 goeth ? It may reprefent the eifed of the Spirit's operations ; 
 and it is called, Ji being born, not fprinkled, of the Spirit. 
 
 5. In reading Mr. C.'s defence of fprinkling, as being au- 
 thentic baptifm, I noticed but one more diftind argument, and 
 it is this : 
 
 ** Nipto, hapti%o. louo, hrecho, plund^ or apopluno^ all fignify to 
 wafh." The conclufion which he draws from this is, in fhort, 
 the frllowing : To baptize is not to immerfe, but to fprinkle* 
 I fee no connexion between his premifs and conclufion. Befides, 
 Mr. C. tells us, page 80, that the Jews, by adhering to the tra- 
 dition of the elders, oblerved the wafliing of hands, and divers 
 other thingSr as a religious ceremony. Now, if all the words 
 which Mr. C. mentions, fignify to wafh, and yet for «• of them 
 figrify common wafhing, and another, and that bapti%o, fi;:nifies 
 cere nonial wafhing, and that be to put into water, as is the 
 cafe, what does his argument prove r It proves juft nothing to 
 his point. Had he proved, what he hath not even attempted, 
 that they all fignify the fame kind of wafhing, and that the 
 wafhing fignified was not immerfion, but fprinkling only, then 
 his conclufion would have followed, that fprinkling is bap- 
 tifm. 
 
 If the above arguments will not fupport Mr. Cleaveland's 
 Aeory, it muft all come dov.'n ; for they are the fuhftance, if 
 Botall the arguments, which he bath adduced, and I prefume 
 Jbetter cannot be found. 
 
&rm. IV.] of Baptifnu 43 
 
 I thought to have taken Dr. Lathiop's arguments upon the 
 fame fubjed, into confideratlon ; but upon re-examining them 
 I find there is no material difllrcilarity between his and Mr. 
 C.'s ; they therefore both ftand or fall together. A worcPor two 
 may be here added. 
 
 Dr. Lathrcp aiuires us that Cyprian, who wrote within about 
 one hundred and fifty years of tlie apoftles, fpeaking of fprink- 
 ling, fays, "In tlie facrament of filvation (that is, baptifm) 
 when neccjfity compels^ the fhorteft ways of tranfading divine 
 matters d.o, by God's grace, confer the whole benefit." The 
 Doif^or adds, '*The zxicitnls praci if ed immsr/ton.^^* 
 
 By this quotation of the Doctor's from Cyprian, and confeflion 
 of his own, being put together, it appears at once that all his 
 preceding arguments are erroneous ; for Cyprian does not 
 intimate that fprinkling was from heaven, but fays it wac from 
 neceflity. Befides, his calling baptifm the facrament of falva- 
 tion, fhows us the error, whence the neceffity of fprinkling came, 
 namely, a belief that the ordinance of baptifm v/as neceifary to 
 falvation. This being the cafe, and it alfo being true, as the 
 Do<ftor acknowedges, that the ancients praclifed immerfion, 
 fave when neceffity compelled, as they erroneoufly fuppofed, 
 the confequence is fairly this, that immerfion is from heaven, 
 the ancients being judges ; and that fprinkling is from men, from 
 neceflity, or rather from error. 
 
 I thought to have added no more upon the Do(5Vor's mode of 
 ChriRian baptifm. However, one argument ought to be taken 
 out of his hands, left it mifguide fome of his readers. He tells 
 us, that hapiizo, in Mark vii. and Luke ji. is ufed to fignify 
 the application of water to the hands. The only anAver needed 
 is, It is not thus faid, in Mark, or Luke, or in any other part of 
 the Bible. When the Doctor (hall re-examine the paifages^ 
 he will probably fee the miftake. 
 
 Will gentlemen, and Chriftians too, forever contend againft 
 immerfion, the inftitution of heaven, and £or fpr'mklingy which halh 
 nothnig but ermr smd convenience for its fupport I. 
 
 * Pages 24, 3J. 
 
44 The Mode and Subjeds [Serm. V. 
 
 SERMON V. 
 
 MATTHEW xxvili. 19, 20. 
 
 Go ye, therefore, and teach all nailonsy laptt%tng them in the name 
 of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghofl ; teaching 
 them to ohferve all things ivhatfoever I have commanded you : 
 And, loy I am fwith you alivay^ even unto the end of the 
 nvorld, Amen, 
 
 I HAVE confidence in you, brethren, thar ye will keep the 
 ordinances, as I fhall deliver them to you, and prove them 
 to be from the word of the Lord. 
 
 One thing I would ftill know of you, my brethren, whether 
 you, like the more noble Bereans, will receive the word with 
 readinefs, fearching the fcriptures daily, that ycu may know the 
 truth of what you hear. 
 
 You will bear in mind, that whofoever loveth father or 
 mother, houfe or lands, wife or children, more than Chrift, is 
 not worthy of him. If, through afFed:ion for any of thefe, you 
 fhould rcfufe to obey Chrift, it will be too evident that you love 
 them more than you do him, and fo are not worthy of him. 
 
 Should you love any erroneous belief and pra<5lice more than- 
 you do the truths of Chrift, you will, fo far as you manifeft it, 
 prove that you are not worthy of him. 
 
 Should you defpife me for delivering and vindicating the 
 truths of Chrift to you, you will at the fame time defpife him. 
 You will therefore give good heed to what you fay, and to wliat 
 you do in this matter ; for if it be of God, it wil: ftand, and- 
 none can overthrow it. It is hoped none of you will be found 
 fighting againft God. 
 
 This difcourfe may contain a review of what we have pafTed 
 over, together with fome application. In my firft difcourfe to 
 you on the fubje<5t, which we have ftill before us, the following 
 are tlie principal things to which we attended. 
 
 I. I propofed a number of plain truths, confidered to be as 
 fiift principles, for your attention. 
 
 I. Baptifm is a pofitive Inftltution, about which we can 
 knov7 nothing, as to its being a Chriftlan ordinance, but from 
 what Chrift, and thofe infpired by his Spirit, have taught us. 
 
 3. All which we are required to believe and pradile, with 
 
Sei-m. V.J of Bapiifm, 45 
 
 refpedl to the Chrllnan ordinance of baptifin, is declared to us 
 by Jefus Chrilt, and by his forerunner and apoflles. 
 
 3. When Jefus Chrift fi'-ft inftitu-ed the ordinance of bap- 
 tilm, he no doubt delivered his mind fo clearly and fully upon 
 the fubjecft, that his difciples and iminediate tbilowers under- 
 ftocd and pradifed as lie would have them. 
 
 4. EveiT" thing which hatli, by the precepts and conimand- 
 ftients of men, been added fmce, is afide from the ordinance* 
 and makes no part of it. 
 
 5. No man, nor body of men, hath any more authority to 
 add to or diminiih from this ordinance, than they have to infli- 
 tute a new one and call it Chrift's. 
 
 56. Whenever, and wherever, the ordinance of baptifm is fo 
 changed as to Icfe the intent of the inftitution, then and there 
 the ordinance is lofi, and becomes no Chriftian ordinance at ail. 
 
 II. I defined for your information a number of words 
 which appertain to the ordinance of baptifm. 
 
 We found all thefe to be juft as we might expefl to have 
 found them, provided immeriion be baptifm, or the mode in 
 which it is adminiftered. 
 
 Bapiijierion, a place in which to wa/h the body. Bapiifm, im- 
 merfion, or dipping one all over in water. Baptlzo figniiies to 
 dip, or wafh. the body all over in water. Lono (a word feveral 
 times ufed in reference to, or fignifying the fame, as baptifm) 
 is, to wafti, to rinfe, to batJie, &c. Then, 
 
 III. I fet before you all the texts in the Ne^^'-Te (lament 
 which relate either to the baptifm of John, or to that of our 
 Lord Jefus Chrift. In tlie next place, I propofed for your 
 meditation the paflages of fcripture where wafhing is mention- 
 ed, and the Greek words which are ufed. I then called your 
 attention to thofe pafTag^s in which fprinkling is mentioned, 
 ?.nd to the Greek words which are made ufe of. Lafdy, I read 
 to you thofe fcriptures where to dip is mentioned, and aifo the 
 Greek words wliich are rendered to dip. 
 
 In r.fjt one of the places, where the ordinance of baptiim is 
 brought to view do we find one word about fprinkling, or any 
 thing which looks like it. In every place wher« to dip is men- 
 tioned, we find a near relation to baptifm ; every word which 
 is ufed, coming from the fame root or theme, from which 
 bapt'izb comes. 
 
 As to the v/ord ^^oq/I:, we find no relation between the words 
 which figniiy to walh, and thofe which fignify to baptjze, fave 
 in thofe few inliances where the meaning is to wafh the body, 
 
46 The Mode and Subje^s [Serm. V. 
 
 or pnt into water, or wafli a thing all over. When we come 
 to the Greek words which fignlfy to fprlnkle, we find no fim- 
 ilarity, or likenefs, between them and the word to baptize. 
 
 In all the places where baptizing is mentioned, uot a word is 
 ufed which looks like fprinkling ; where fprinkling is mention- 
 ed, there is not a word ufed which appears like baptifru. 
 
 In my next difcourfe, I produced my evidence, that my 
 definitions of baptifm and to baptize were accurate and juft. 1 
 dwelt largely upon this evidence, for the merit of the whole 
 fubje(^ depends greatly, if not entirely, upon the determlnaie 
 meaning of the words, which our Lord ufed in the inftitution 
 of the ordinance, and when fpeaking of it. When we know 
 the determinate fignlfication of his words, we know what he 
 fays, and what we ought to underftand by the words which he 
 ufes. The evidence which I produced, was, in (hort, the fol- 
 lowing: 
 
 1. The Greek Lexicon, Butterworth's Concordance, Bai- 
 ley's and Entick's Didionaries, bear their united teftimony, 
 lliat the plain, literal, and common, if not imlverfal, fignifica- 
 tion of the words hiptifm and to baptize^ is immerfion and to 
 immerfe, bury in warer, to dip, or to plunge a perfon all over 
 in water. H^re are four learned and pofiiive witnefTes to the 
 fame thing. Indeed, they give no other fignlfication, fave it 
 be to wafh, which we have feen intends a ceremonial wafliing, 
 which is to put into water, or to bathe. 
 
 2. I repeated fome of the attendant or clrcumfiantlal fatfls, 
 which have relation to the ordinance of baptifm. John bap- 
 tized in the river Jordan. He v^'as baptizing in Enon near 
 to Salim, becaufe there was much ivater there. The word 
 laptijlery fignlfics a place in which to wa{h the body all over. 
 Baptifm fignifies to dip, to plunge, immerfe, or to wafli the 
 body ail over in water. Biiptlzer fignifies one which dips, 
 plunges, or wafhes the body all over in water. To hoptize fig- 
 nifies to immerfe, plunge under water, or under any other 
 liquid thing, or to dip, or to put into water. To be baptized 
 is to be plunged, immerfed, or wafhed all over in water. 
 
 Thefe thirg€ being true, is it not eafy to determine what the 
 ordinance < f byptifm fignifiss ? 
 
 3. The words baptifmos and baptizo have two, and only two, 
 tranflHiions in the New-Teftament. Thefe two are baptifm and 
 ivnfhin^. Where their meaning is wafhing, or where they are 
 thus iranflated, it is a ceremonial wafhing, which is to put 
 into water, or bathe the fleih in water, as you may lee, J.evit, xi. 
 
Serm. V.] of Bapufnu 47 
 
 32. Numb. xlx. 19. When they are tranflated haptifm^ or to 
 bapti%ey the thing intended is tlie baptifm of water, of fire, of 
 fufFerings, or of the Holy Ghcft. 
 
 4. I brought forward feveral noted wltnefTes, to bear their 
 united teftimony, that I had given a juft definition of the word 
 bapti%d : thefe were, John Calvin, Zanchius, and Dr. Owen. 
 
 In the next place I mentioned to you that Paul repeatedly 
 ufes the word /<>«o, where he means the fame things as where 
 he ufes the word bapti%d ; that he ufes thefe words as fignifying 
 the fame thing. Whereas, louo fignifies to wa(h and to bathe 
 the body in water, and confequently baptizo means the fame. 
 
 Lajlly* I brought forward Paul*s expofition of the word 
 haphfrTii and fhowed you, that he expounds it, as being buried 
 with Chrift in baptifm, or immerfion. 
 
 In my difcourfe, which I next preached to you, I produced 
 evidence, that the apoftles and primitive Chriftians, not only 
 underftood the matter as I have defcribed it, but pradifed 
 accordingly. 
 
 In fupport of the apoftle*s pra^ftice, I obferved, that the word 
 louoy of determinate fignification, which they ufed to fignify 
 their practice, or what was done by them in baptifm, deter- 
 mines or fixes their pradlice to be immerfion. I farther obferv- 
 ed, that they were commanded to practife baptifm, or to bap- 
 tize, as I have defcribed it ; and that the fcriptures teftify, 
 that they thus did ; and alfo that the apoftles fay, the mode 
 of baptizing in their day was, by burying the fubjeds in 
 baptifm. 
 
 For witne/Tes that the primitive church pradifed immerfion, 
 we have Mofheim, Bailey, Calvin, Baxter, and many others, 
 all agreeing in this one point, that the mode of baptizing, or 
 baptifm Itfelf, among the ancients, was immerfion. We have 
 alfo evidence that die church thus pradlifed, for thirteen 
 hundred years, fome extreme cafes excepted. Moreover we 
 have widence that all the church, in Europe, in Afia, and in 
 Africa, fave that part of it, which is now, or hath been, under 
 the bewildering power of the popes, do now, and ever have, 
 praftifed immeifion. 
 
 Befides all this, the very reafons which the Pedobaptifts 
 afiign, why they have laid afide immerfion, fhow that fprink- 
 ling is not commanded by the Lord, but is taught by the 
 precepts of men. 
 
 You fee we have an ocean of wltnefTes and evidence againft 
 us J and all, or nighly fo, from our own denomination oi 
 
48 The Mode and Subjecls [Serm. V. 
 
 Chriftlans. What a world of evidence might we reafonably' 
 expe<fl that the Baptifts would be able to bring for themfelves', 
 and againft us and our practice, would v/e hear them, when 
 our own fide bring fo much againft their own pra(5trce and for 
 the Baptifts ! Befides, this evidence appears to ftand in its 
 full force againft us, there being no oppofite evidence to weaken 
 its force. Indeed we are, in this matter, rriuch like criminals, 
 who plead, at leaft the leaders of them, guHty to the whole 
 indi<5tm*ent. Jiowever, ioir.z have made a full plea of, not guilty 
 but in part. At the fame time, numbers of them, in their 
 plea, have convi(5led thcmfelves of being guilty throughout. 
 
 In the laft difcourfe, after holding to your view the purport, 
 end and defign of baptifm, 1 exam.ined one of their pleas of, 
 not guilty. But what evidence did the the good man give of 
 his innocence ? Can the largeft ftretch of charity allow more 
 than this, he kneiv not nuhat he did ? Was truth ever brought to 
 fuch ftraits as to require to be fupported by fuch arguments ? 
 
 APPLICATION. 
 
 FROM a review of the whole fubjeit, the following appear 
 to flow as neceflary cor/equences. 
 
 I. Whether we allow immerfion to be the fcripture mode 
 of baptifm, and the only one which it requires, or not ; one 
 thing is clear, that we have as much evidence of its being fo, 
 as we could have, on fappofuion that it were. 
 
 The fcriptures declare, in various ways, that this is the mode, 
 and mention no other. The fcriptures expound themfelves 
 to mean immerfion, or 1)arying. 
 
 We find not a fmgle trace, in all the fcriptures, where the 
 ordinance is fpcken of, of any thing (hort of immerfion being 
 mentioned. 
 
 Good men, who are fKilful in the true import of words, 
 have agreed, that the plain, literal and accurate meaning of 
 the word, to baptize, is to imnterfe or bury in water, &c. Nor 
 have any been able to fhow that in any part of God's word it 
 hath any oppofite meaning or application. 
 
 The church of Je:us Chrift have, in all ages, underftood the 
 matter of baptifm as I have explained it. We mult, however, 
 except for the laft three or five hundred years, many of thofe 
 branches of the church, which have been, or are now, under 
 the ju!ifdia:ion of the church of Rome. Tlie purport, end and 
 defign of baptifm alfo intimate to us, that this is the manner 
 of baptizing. 
 
Semii. v.] cf Baptijm ^i>9 
 
 IndeeJ, if there be any words in the Greek language by 
 which the Lord of the Baptifmal Inftitution could have told us 
 what he intended, the words ufed do this. For there are no 
 two words in the language, or, at leaft, none which have come 
 to our knowledge, which fo literally, fo uniformly, and fo exprefs* 
 ly, fignify to immerfe, or wafh, or bathe the body in water, as 
 do the words haptizo and louo. Hence, if immerfion be baptifm, 
 the Lord, if I may fo fay, could not have told us of it in the New 
 Teftament, if the words, chofen by the Koiy Ghoft, do not 
 afford this information. If baptifm be immerfion, then the 
 two moft fuitable words have been chofen to exprefs it ; but 
 if fprinkling bebaptifm, two words which were farther from the 
 point could not have been found. We find no inftance, in the 
 Bible, where they are thus ufed. In fhcrt, no two words, 
 which mention the application of water in any way, are farther 
 from the idea of fprinkling, than are thofe two which are ufed 
 when baptifm is intended. It therefore appears, that whilO: we 
 "have ufed fpi inkling for baptifm, we have departed from the 
 plain and primitive import of the words ufed, as far as we 
 could without a complete omiflion of v/ater. None can be at a 
 farther remove fiom the intlituted, fcripture baptifm, than 
 we have been, without denying it in whole. 
 
 2. Error is very infii^uating and deceiving. Surely it 
 hath proved thus in the iubjeft of fprinkling. 
 
 Cypriar, who wrote within about a huiidred and fifty years 
 of the apoltles, fpeaking of fprinkling, fays, as quoted by Dr. 
 Lathrop, "In the facrameni of fahution, (i e. baptifm) when 
 necejfity compels^ the fhrrteft ways of tranfadmg divine matters, 
 do, by God's grace, confer the whoh benefit." Here we fee 
 the origin of fprinkling for baptifm. 
 
 It was an early error In the church, that baptifm was 
 neceffary to falvation. Hence, when it was judged, that life 
 would be endangered by immerfion, the perfon niuft either 
 lofe his life by baptifm, or lofe his foul for want of being bap. 
 lized, or fome other mode muft be invented.- Or, if the fick 
 perfon was nigoly dying, he muR be baptized without immer- 
 fion, or probably \^i^ his foul, before he could be c* nveyed 
 where the ordinance ni'!ght be adminiftered. Under thefe 
 circumftances, man's fruitful invention devifed fprinkling as a 
 fubllitute for baptifrn. Here is the origin of fprinkling, as the 
 ancients have told us. 
 
 In procefs of time, found ladles and gentlev^on»en ^vifli d to 
 have fprinkhng fublUtuted tor bapulm in their b«haif j after- 
 
 E 
 
so The Mode and Subjecls [Serm. V. 
 
 wards others, till at laft, It became a general cuftom in many 
 of the European nations. In the mean time, the Baptifts, and 
 many others, objedted againft the pradice, as being contrary 
 from the command of Lhrift. Hence arofe the neceffity of 
 defending it, or elfe having it confidered as a departure from 
 the faith. Matters being thus, the invention of many was in 
 full exercife to defend fprinkling, as being of divine origin. A 
 number of ceremonial rites of the Levitical law were prefTed 
 into this fervice ; feveral parages of the Ncw-Tettament were 
 wrefted from thei.; natural meaning to a forced interpretation ; 
 and out of the motley mixture were formed what were ftyled 
 arguments ; but fuch arguments can iland no longer than while 
 prejudice lives to fupport them. 
 
 However, the moft dlfagreeable part is, a good number of 
 very pious and learned men have been carried away in this 
 whirlpool of deception. Their being deceived has deceived 
 others ; and we are, or have been, among the deceived. 
 
 3. Sprinkling is not from heaven, but of men. This too, 
 if I miftake not, by the fully and fairly implied conceflion of 
 thofe, who have written in its defence. 
 
 If from heaven, why, in the firft place, ufe it only when 
 neceffity compelled ! as was fuppofed to fave fouls from hell ? 
 If from heaven, why, afterwards, ufe it only in cafes of lefs 
 urgent neceffity ? If from heaven, why bring in the coldnefs of 
 the count! y as an excufe for ufmg it ? If from heaven, why not 
 mentioned in the inftitution of the ordinance, or in fome pajlTage 
 ■where mention is made of baptifm, or in fome other place in 
 all the writings of the Evangelifts and Apoftles ? If from heaven, 
 why rot intimated as being fo, by thofe who firil introduced 
 it ? If fprinkling be from heaven, why fo many inccnclujive 
 arguments in its fupport ? Is the word of God deficient in this 
 particular, and hath it revealed what cannot be fupported by 
 it ? If from heaven, why not commanded, enjoined, required, 
 or fo much as once hinted, as being a mode of a gofpel ordi- 
 nance, in any part of that revelation which we have received 
 from heaven ? 
 
 4. Another confequence is, That the fcripture mode of 
 bap'ifm is immerfion, and for aught we know, the only mode, 
 and neceflary to the adminiftration of the ordinance. 
 
 This is the plain, literal, fcripture fenfe of baptifm j there- 
 fore this is the plain, literal, fcripture mode. The fcriptures 
 mention no other mode ; therefore this may be, and i?, for 
 aught appears, ih? only fcriptur? irode. 
 
Serm. V.] of Baptifm. 5i 
 
 5. From what we have gone over, one thing appears cer» 
 tain : That Chrift never commanded any of his followers ta 
 adminifter any gofpel ordinance by fprinkling, and, at the fame 
 time, to fay, / baptize. For to do thus, wouM be to command 
 them to do one t lying, and to fay that they did another, 
 
 Tofprlnkfe is to rantize, which hath no vifible connexion wich 
 baptifm. To fay, Chrift commanded his difciples to rantize, 
 and, at the fame time, to fay, We baptize, is what noChriftian 
 would, knowingly, be willing to fay. This would, if I miftake 
 not, be making Chrift the minifter of fm. But what I have 
 long, implicitly, though ignorantly, done, others may ftill do. 
 
 6. Another confequence is, cuftom hath great influence 
 upon the human mind. It furely hath upon us. For, even 
 after we have full evidence that fprinkling, for baptifm, is not 
 from heaven, but was the ofFipring of error, and foflered by the 
 dark ages of Papiftical ufurpation, we are hardly perfuaded to 
 renounce it. But, my brethren, my expectation is, that after 
 you have fearched your Bibles through and through> and find 
 nothing of it there, you will give it up. 
 
 Should the Lord inquire of us, why we fabftitute fprinkling 
 for baptizing, and fay unto us. Whence is this fubrititution, from 
 heaven, or of men ? Would there not be great reafonings 
 among us what anfwer to return ? Should we fay. From 
 heaven ; he miglit reply, How do you prove it ? Should we 
 fay. Of men, then might he afk, Why do you praCtife it ? 
 
 7. Another confequence is, we have the fame kind of evi- 
 dence, and perhaps more of it, that baptifm is to be adminif- 
 tered by immerfion, or dipping, or putting into water, than v/c 
 have to fupport any other gofpel precept, or pradice. The 
 evidence which we have, in either cafe, is the iignification of 
 the words which are ufed to point out the thing to be believed^ 
 or pradlifed. 
 
 Were it not for the influence of habit, or cuftom, you would 
 as readily and naturally conclude, from the very words ufed, 
 that immerfion, or dipping, or waftiing the body in water, was 
 the meaning of baptifm, as that a religious eating of bread, 
 and drinking of wine, in commemoration of our dying Lord, 
 was the way to obferve the Lord's fupper. 
 ^ 8. We appear to be brought to this dilemma : We muft 
 either embrace the tradition of the elders, for the rule of one 
 part of our pra(n:ice j or we muft no more fprinkle and call 
 it baptifm. 
 9. Another confequence is, Thofe, who firft introduced 
 
3^ llje Mode and Subje^s [S^rm. V. 
 
 fprinkling for baptizing, had no more right fo to do, than they 
 had to inftitute a new rite, or ordinance, and call it Chrift's. 
 
 What authority havt wc to follow their erroneous and hurt>- 
 ful praAice ? 
 
 10. We have another confeqnence worthy of confideration, 
 and it is this : The Chriftian ordinance of baptifm is a moft fol- 
 emn and fignificant ordinance, and of very high importance. 
 
 I fpeak not of the vifible, or adual adminiftration of it, in 
 particular ; for I never fav/ it adminiftered, as Chrift hath 
 delivered it to his people : But I refer to the purport, end and 
 defign of it. It is, amoTig many other things, the great divi- 
 ding line, which Heaven I.ath appointed to be drawn between 
 the vifible kingdom of Immanuel, and the men of this world. 
 Doubtlefs there are a large number who belong to Chrift's 
 invifible kingdom, who are not, ftrictly fpeaking, or regularly, 
 in his kingdom vifibly, having not fubmitted to this ordinance, 
 which is the great an.d important line of diftin(5tion. 
 
 11. It appears that we are, truly, in a trying ftate. We 
 muft depart, in one inRance, from a long habit, or continue to do 
 as we have done, and yet not be able to vindicatse, by the fcrip- 
 tures of truth, our own condu<ft. 
 
 Lajily. We come, at length, to the anfwer of this old and 
 difficult and perplexing queftion : Where, and when, did the 
 religious feft called Baptifts, arife ? The anfwer is, plainly, 
 this : They arofe in Ju.lea, at the time when John came, 
 preaching in the wildernefs the baptifm of repentance. I men- 
 tion this confequence with confiderable affurance, becaufe the 
 New-Teft ament abundantly favours it, and no man is able to 
 contradid me. Should any attempt it, he will fail for want 
 of evidence. I fhould, not long fmce, have been gratified, could 
 I have found their origin any where in the dark ages of Popery, 
 or at tlie commencement of the reformation, among the famous 
 entliufnfts of Germany, Holland, Switzerland, or Weftphalia. 
 But, after having long purfued the perplexing refearch, I 
 found their oi'igWi where I Icaft of all expeifted it, in Enoa and 
 Jordan. 
 
 A few queftions are now to clofe the prefent fubjed:. 
 
 1. Is not immerfion the fcripture baptifm ? 
 
 2. Is fprinkling a mode of baptizing warranted by fcrip^ 
 ture ? If fo, where ? 
 
 7;. Are Old^Teftanaent rkes to explain New.Teftament 
 ordinances ? Is Mofes to corred what Chrill hath left incom* 
 plete ? Is it fo I 
 
Serm. V.J of Baptifm. 53 
 
 4. Will Chrill approve of that pradlice of men, which fo 
 changes his pofitive inftitution, as to lofe, greatly to lofe, the 
 purport, end and defign of it ? 
 
 5. Was it ever right, and is it now, for men to change 
 what Chrirt hath commanded to be in perpetual obfervation ? 
 Did the fuppofed extreme fa/9r jiiftlfy this change at firft, and 
 wiil trifling inconveniences juftify us now ? 
 
 6. Will it be wife and fafe for us continually to forfake the- 
 commandment of Chrift for the precepts of men .^ 
 
 7. Do you, my brethren, or can you, blame me for wi{h» 
 ing you to keep the ordinances of Chrift as he hath delivered 
 them to the faints ? 
 
 8. Should 1 have manifefted myfelf your friend, or Chrift's, 
 if, after having found fuch a precious, new and old treafure in 
 his word, as is the Chriftian ordinance of baptifm, I had not 
 ventured my life, or in other words, my reputation, my 
 eafe, my property, and my every worldly conftderation, to 
 bring it forth to your A'iew and acceptance, that you might 
 more fully walk in all tlie ftatutes and ordinances of the Lord 
 blamelefs ? 
 
 One requeft, my brethren, I pray you to grant me, and it is 
 this ; Search the fcriptures devoutly, and follow me fi> far as- 
 I follow Jefu.. Chrift, your Lord and mine. 
 
 SERMON VI. 
 
 MATTHEW xxviii. 19, 20. 
 
 Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations^ baptizing them in the name- 
 of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghojl ; teaching 
 them to obferve all things luhatfoever J have commanded you ,* 
 /ind, lo, J am with you alivay^ even unto tJi€ end of the 
 nvorld. Amen* 
 
 I HAVE already obferved to you that Chrift Jefus, the 
 Head of the church, and Lord of all, was now conitituting- 
 his prefent and fucceeding difoiples to be apoftles unto all na- 
 tions. My text is their commiflion, and general andpariicular 
 orders. In it they are dire(5led — 
 L To go and difciple all nations. 
 IL To baptize them in the nam-; of tb? Father, fe 
 
54 The Made and Subjeds [Serm. VL 
 
 III. He direfts thefts newly conftituted apoftles, and all 
 their fuoceffors, to teach their baptized difciples to obferve all 
 things whatfoever he had given in commandment. 
 
 La/liy, For tli^ir encouragement and comfort, he adds, 
 And, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world* 
 Amen. 
 
 What I purpofed to fay to you, particularly, upon the fecond 
 propofition, I have faid. I now recur to the 
 
 I. Which contains Chrift's command to his difcipks to go 
 and d'ljcipk all nations. 
 
 1 have already fhowed you what baptifm is, and the defign 
 of it. 1 am now, if the Lord will, to lay open what is com- 
 manded to be done before baptifm be adrainiftered^ alfo the 
 evidence which the Lord may afford me to prove to you that 
 my inRrudion is of him. 
 
 Your feelings, ray brethren and people, have no doubt been 
 highly wrought up, whilft I have opened before you one of the 
 laws of ChritVs kingdom amongft men. I have ftill more 
 things to fay unto you refpc-ding the rules and regulations of 
 this kingdom. I pray the Lord, that your minds may be fo^ 
 prepared XS) hear, that you may not forfake me and fke, as 
 many of Chrift's profeffed friends did, when he preached on a 
 fubjedl: which greatly crclTed their prejudices ai-d carnal ex- 
 pectations. 
 
 Your bufy minds, no doubt, will, before you are a^are, be 
 inquiring what great and good men, in our days and in the 
 days of our fathers, have fald and thought of thefe things ; 
 but we fhould look farther back than to our forefathers. The 
 man Chrift Jefus, and his infpired prophets and apoftles, 
 fliould be the men of our counfel. Should I fpeak according 
 to tiiefe, you may hearken to me with fafety : if contrary, 
 ccnvid me by the word and teftimony of Jefus Chrift ; for 1 
 appeal to thefe, for by them I ought to be judged. 
 
 One requeft, my hearers, I pray you to grant me ; namely 
 — Lay prejudice afide, and let fcripture, reafon and common 
 fenfe be heard for a few minutes. 
 
 Surely you muft confider my cafe more trying tlian any of 
 yours. For it is, perhaps, as difficult for me to combat my 
 own prejudices and carnal feelings, as it is for any of you to 
 contend with his : Befides this, I have to look your prejudices 
 in the face, while I venture to bring any of your old practices 
 to the fcriptures for trial. Yes, more than all this, I have 
 many trials to encounter, which you have not, nor can have. 
 
Serm. VI. J of Baptifriu 5S 
 
 I fiiould not have mack the attempt to brtnpr oar former 
 praftice to the ftandard for trial, had not my difficulties been 
 fo great, that I durft proceed no farther, without proving my 
 works. One of my practices hath been weighed in the balance, 
 and is found wanting. I am now, if my heart deceive me 
 not, willing to lead another of my works, or the fubjedts on 
 which fome of my works have been, to the bar for trial. If this- 
 {hall be found of wood, hay or ftubblc, may the fire of truth 
 burn it up, and may the fire of love caufe me to rejoice 
 while it (hail be confuming. 
 
 The proportion which will bring this other of my works to 
 the trial, is — 
 
 Cbrift commands his minifters to go and dlfciple all nations. 
 I have engaged to be one of thefe minifters. The command 
 is, therefore, binding upon me. I have gone forth, thai I 
 might obey. The great thing to be determined is, whether 1 
 have underftood what it is to difciple, or to make difciples, 
 and have praftifed accordingly. 
 
 The important queftion to be decided is juft. this : If I dif- 
 ciple any of you who are parents, do 1, as a neceflary confe- 
 quence, difciple all your children and houfeholds ? 
 
 The only difficulty, in this queftion, relates to children and 
 houfeholds. What it is to difciple the mafter of a family, is a 
 thing in which Chriftians gei^rally agree. 
 
 1 ought juft to remark to jcu, that matheUu/a/e, to teach, is,, 
 in its literal and genuine fenfe, ta difciple, or fo to teach as to 
 make difcipks. 
 
 To bring the queftion befoie you as fully as I can, I wiffi 
 you, each one of you, to fix his attention upon fome one family in 
 this town, in which family not a Chriftian is to be found. If 
 each one have his mind fixed upon fuch a Chriftlefs houfchold, 
 I will now put the queftion :— 
 
 Suppofe I, inftrumentally, difciple the father of this family,, 
 do I, as a certain confequenee, make difciples of the whole 
 family ? 
 
 Before you determine the queftion, it may be well to fix in 
 your minds what a difciple is. Let the fcriptures fpeak. The 
 difcipl'^s were called Chriftians firft at Antioch, kCts xi. 26. 
 The cDmmiflloH which Chrift gave to the firft minifters, and 
 to all fnccceding ones, as recorded Mark xvi. 15, 16, ie, Go 
 ye into all the world, and preach the gofpel to every creature;, 
 he that belkveihy &c. Here a believer is the fame as a difcipU, 
 Here we f«c a^ dlCciple, io. the f^nJfe of my tes^ is a believer,, tu 
 
56 The Mode and Subjeds [Serm. VI. 
 
 believer In Chrift, a Chriltian. This is the idea which the New- 
 Teftament, from beginning to end, gives us of a difciple. 
 There is, however, mention made of difciples, who were fo 
 but by profeffion, or who were vifible difciples only ; not 
 having the love of God in them. 
 
 Now try the queftion witli refpe<a to both forts of thefc 
 difciples. 
 
 Suppofe I, inftrumentally, difciple the father of a Chriftlefs 
 family, do 1, as a neceflary confequence, make Chriftians of all 
 in his hotfe ? You will pleafe to make up your minds, on this 
 queftion, decidedly. 
 
 Suppofe again, that I, inftrumentally, difciple the father of 
 a Chriftlefs family, do I, as a neceffary confequence, make 
 vijii/e difciples of all his family ? Let ycur minds be clearly 
 determined as to the anfwer. 
 
 Once more ; fuppofe I, by delivering the Lord^s meffage, 
 convert, or make a difciple of the father of a Chriftlefs family, 
 do I, of neceffary confequence, make any one oi his houfehold 
 befides himfelf a difciple ?* 
 
 Let fcripture, let reafon, let common fenfe, let any thing 
 fpeak, which will fpeak the truth, and determine thefe queftions. 
 Confider, take advice, and fpeak your minds. 
 
 Can you fuppofe, or can you not, that to make a father of a 
 family a difciple, his wife, his fervants, and his children, are 
 all difciples of courfe, or of neceffary confequence ? 
 
 Is not this a clear cafe ? and yet the great and momentous 
 fubjeft before us turns altogether upon the anfwer of this 
 queftion. 
 
 If difcipling the father of a family renders all his houie dif- 
 ciples, they are all fuhje<5ts of baptifm, they have the fcripture 
 qualification for it ; if it do not, then they have not the qual- 
 ification which my text requires to be in thofe who are bap- 
 tized. 
 
 You will judge for yourfelves whether houfeholds do thus 
 become difciples ; as for the reft, the fcriptures determine : if 
 they be difciples, they are to be baptized ^ if not, they are not 
 to be. 
 
 I know what your anfwer muft be, for by inconteftablefads, 
 in this town, the difc?pling of a father of a family does not 
 difciple his houfehold f it does not even make them vifible dif- 
 ciples, or give them even the appearance of being fo. 
 
 * Pffjudice may reply, You are to difciple the hoiifeholdby baptizing 
 them. 'J his contradicts my text, that fays, difciple them firft; 
 
Serm. VL] of Baptifm. 57 
 
 The following is for evidence, that perfons muil be made 
 difciples before they are baptized. 
 
 1. John made his hearers difciples before he baptized them. 
 He required, in order for baptifm, that they Ihonld bring forth 
 fruits meet for, or as evidence of, repentance, Matt. iii. 8. and 
 Luke iii. 8. 
 
 2. Chrift's difciples baptized none but fuch as were made 
 difciples firft, John iv. i, 2. 
 
 3. Chrift, in my text, gives no liberty to baptize any but 
 fuch as are firft difcipied. Yes, he commands his minifters to 
 difciple before they baptize. 
 
 The account which Mark gives us of .lie Apoftles* commif- 
 fion, and of the Baptifmal Inftitution, is confirming evidence in 
 this matter, xvith chapter, 15 th and i6th verfes ; * Preach the 
 gofpel to every creature : He that believetli, and is baptized,* 
 &c. Here believing is p^n before baptifm. The way adopt- 
 ed by fome to avoid the force of this text is, if they be bap- 
 tized, fay they, no matter when, before or after believing. This 
 way of getting clear of tlie difficulty appears neither wife nor 
 candid ; for it injures the plain meaning of the text, and 
 makes Matthew*s and Mark's account of the commiffi jn to 
 difagree. 
 
 What remains are a number of plain trutns, fads and con» 
 fequences, which have a more near or remote relation with 
 the fubjeifl on hand, and may ferve to throw light upon it. 
 
 In the FiasT place, we may take notice of two particulars* 
 which perhaps have not been fufficiently noticed. 
 
 One is, the ceremonial law, and the covenant of circumcifioa 
 which v/as annexed to it, appear to be difannuUed and pad 
 gway. 
 
 The following may make'this matter plain : The difannuUing 
 or abolifhing of the law we fee, Heb. vii. 18. There is verily 
 a difannulliag of the commandment going before, for the 
 weaknefs and unprotitablenefs thereof Alfo Gal. iii. 19, 
 Wherefore then ferveth the law ? It was added becaufe of 
 tranfgrefllons till the feed (houid come to whom \ht promifi was 
 made. What feed this is, to whom the pronsife was made^ 
 we are told in the i6:h vtrk of the fame chapter, " Now to 
 Abraham and his feed were the promifes made : He faith not 
 to feeds, as of many ; biat as of one, And to thy feed, which is 
 Chrift..*' We henc« fee, that Chrift was the feed to whom the 
 promifes were made, and chat ihe law (the ceremonial law) was 
 add?d becaufe of tranfgreiHons, till the feed, i, e. Chrift, fliould 
 
58 The Mode and Subje&s [Serm. VI* 
 
 com€. It Is hence plain, that the ceremonial law was to con- 
 tinue no longer than till Chrifl came. 
 
 The covenant of circumcifion appears to be annexed to this 
 law. For fays Jefus Chrift, John vii. 23, If a man on the fab- 
 bath day receive circumcifion^ that the law of Mofes fliould not 
 be broken^ are ye angry at me ? &c. 
 
 That this covenant of circumcifion, or the Sinai covenant, 
 which includes it, hath pafTed away, or is difannulled, fee Heb. 
 viii. 13. * In that he faith a new covenant, he hath made the 
 iirft old : now that which decayeth and waxeth old, is ready 
 to vanifh away.* 
 
 Befides, circunicifion is evidently a very important part of 
 that law, which is difannulled ; for, faith Paul to the Galatians, 
 chap. V. 2, 3, If ye be circumcifed^ Chrift fhaW profit you nothing* 
 For I teftify again, fays he, to every man that is circumcifed, 
 that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 
 
 It is hence plain, that the ceremonial law is no longer bind- 
 ing ; and tliat the covenant of circumcifion, which was incor- 
 porated wtth it, hath vanlflied away. 
 
 The other particular is this ; the promifes which were made 
 to Abraham and his feed, were not made to him in circumcifion^ 
 but in uncircumcifion ; and tlie covenant which was confirmed 
 of God to Abraham in Chrift, was while he was in uncircumci^ 
 Jiouj and about twenty-four years before the covenant oi circum- 
 ci/ion vfcLS given. Rom. iv. 8, 9, 10. — Gal, iii. 16, 17 — Gen, 
 xii. 3, 4, 7, and xvii. 10, 17. 
 
 Moreover, when Paul fpeaks of the covenant which was 
 confirmed of God in Chrift, he points out the exa<5t year wlien 
 this was made known or confirmed with Abraham, as though 
 he had a forefight, as certainly the Holy Ghoft had, of the con- 
 tention which ihould be long continued for want of judicioufly 
 underftanding what covenant fhould be difannulled, and what 
 covenant the law could not difannul. He tells us, Gal. iii. 17, 
 that this covenant, which cannot be made void, was four hun- 
 dred and thirty years before the law ; whereas the covenant of 
 circumcifion was about four hundred and fix years before the 
 law, with which circumcifion was united. 
 
 Seeing matters are thus, what, I pray you, my hearers, have 
 we to do with the covenant of circumcifion ? If we keep it, 
 Chrift fhall profit us nothing ; if we obferve fomething which 
 we fubftitute in its place, Chrift may profit us as little in fuch 
 obfervance. ' 
 
Serm. VL] of Baptifnu 59 
 
 I know it will be afked, Is not the church the fame now 
 that it was in Abraham's day ? I anfwer, yes, and the fame 
 that it was in Noah's, Enoch's, and Adam's, and the fame that 
 it ever will be. It will be afked again, Is not ihe covenant the 
 fame which it was in Abraham's time ? Yes, the covenant 
 which was confirmed of God in Chrift is unchangeably the 
 fame ; but the covenant of circumcifion which God made with 
 Abraham, renewed with Ifaac and Jacob, and Iblemnlzed with 
 Ifrael in the wilderaefs, (^Z)f«/. xxix. lo, ii, 12, 13,) is far 
 from being the covenant, the nenv covenant^ which God makes 
 with the houfe of Ifrael in our day. The covenant of circum- 
 cifion was, more than 17CO years ago, decaying, waxing old, 
 and ready to vanifh away. But you will again fay. Is net the 
 church compoled of parents and children, and of houfeholds, 
 now, as it was in Abraham's day ? Let Paul anfwer how it 
 was (as touching the gofpel) in Abraham's day and after. 
 Rom, ix. 6, 7, 8. * They are not all Ifrael which are of Ifrael, 
 neither becaufe they are the feed of Abrahann, are chey all 
 children : but in Ifaac fhall thy feed be called. That is, they 
 that are the children of the flefh, thefe are not the children of 
 God : but the children of the promile are counted for tlie 
 feed.' Juft fo now. The children of God, the children of 
 the promife are counted for the feed, and compofe the church ; 
 and of thofe who appear thus fhould the vifible chuch be 
 made up, and of none elfe. But, if by the queftfon be meant, 
 Does not church-memberftiip dei'cend from parents to chil- 
 dren, and from matters to fervants, as it appears to have done 
 under the old covenant of circumcifion ? '1 he anfwer is, The 
 New-Teftament no where acknowledges, nor does it knew, any 
 thing about a church thus made up. I would that all good 
 men would confent to take New-Teftament diredlicns and ex- 
 amples by which to conftitute and guide New-Teftament 
 churches. 
 
 But it will be afked once more. Hath not baptifm come 
 Into the place of circumcifion, and to be applied to fimilar fub- 
 jeds ? AnJ-iver. Circumcifion was a pofirive inftitution, and 
 fo is baptifm. Abraham and the Ifraelites knew nothing to 
 whom circumcifion ihould be adnr'iniftered, but as they receiv- 
 ed diredlion from the Divine Inftitutor ; juft fo it is with re- 
 fped to the adrnini'tiation of baptifm. The'Chriftians at An- 
 tioch, the Elders at Jerusalem, the church of Galatia, and Paul 
 and Barnabas, knev/ nothing of baptifm being fubftituccd! fir 
 circumcifion, 4^^ xv, i to 35 j QaL iii. and v, chapters. We 
 
60 The Mode and Subjeas [Sertn. VI 
 
 know nothing, and -can know nothing, as to whom baptirm Is 
 to be adminiikred, but trom what Chrift hath told us as to the 
 Aibjeds. No"R^»— 
 
 Secondly, I afk, What evidence have we from the Bible that 
 infants are to be baptized ? 
 
 You may/eplj, 'riiey are included in the covenant. What 
 covenant ? In that of circumcifion ? Surely not, for that 
 hath vaniflied away. If you fay. In the covenant that was con- 
 firmed of God in Chrift, I aTifivtr, It was not this covenant 
 which entitled Abraham's hcufehold to circumcifion ; there- 
 fore, though your children be in this covenant, that dees not, 
 cf itfelf, entitle them to baptifm ; whether baptifm be in the 
 place of circumcifion, or not. You will then fay, What can 
 entitle cur children to baptifm ? Anjiver. Their being difci^ 
 pies, and fo coming within the compafs, or pale, of ihebapiiC' 
 mal inftituiion. 
 
 As we can know nothing of the fubjeds of baptifm, any- 
 more tlian Abraham and ifrael could of the fiibjects of cir- 
 cumcifion, but from what we are informed in the inftitution, 
 and in what is faid upon it, we will inquire what the Bible faith 
 of this matter. 
 
 If the Lord, in his word, hath not given us fufiicient in- 
 Oruclion upon this fubje6t, we muft pradife in the dark, for 
 we liave no where elfe to go. 
 
 We will begin with John. i. Did he baptize any children ? 
 We have no evidence that he did. Befides, he told the mul- 
 titude which attended his miniftry, not to plead Abraham, or 
 Abraham's covenant, as a title to baptifm. Matt. iii. 7, 8, 
 9, 10. 
 
 2. Did Chrift's dlfciples, whilft he was with them, and 
 ^vhilft they made and baptised more dlfciples tlian John, baptize 
 infants, or any vifibly unbelieving children ? No evidence that 
 they did. 
 
 g. Is there any evidence from my text, which contains the 
 words of the inftitution, that infants, or unbelieving houfeholds, 
 were to be baptized ? None ; but the contrary. 
 
 4. Is there any pafTage in the New Teftament, which com- 
 mands, or fays fo much as one word, that infants are to be 
 baptized? Not one. 
 
 5. Is there any example, which fhows that the apoftles bap- 
 tized any upon the faith of parents, or mailers, or v^on the 
 faith or promifes of any others f 
 
Serm. VL] of B apt if m. 6r 
 
 I know, my brethren, there are three inftances, which are fup- 
 pofed hj fome to favour the ?flirmative of the queftion. I have 
 rather been of the fame opinion. If it he fo, may fd(fl:s con« 
 vince us. 
 
 We will look at each of thefe examples feparately. 
 
 The lirft fuppofed example we find at Philippi. Here v;as 
 a woman, named Lydia ; fhe appears to have been a woman 
 of bufinefs. She belonged to Thyatira, hut was now at Phi- 
 lippi, probably felling her merchandize, with feveral attendants. 
 The hiftory is thus related, ^Itts xvi. i3ih, 14th and 15th verfes. 
 *' On the fahbath ddy, we (Paul and other difciples) went out 
 of the city, hy a river fide, where prayer was wont to be made, 
 and we fat down, and fpake unto the women who reforted 
 thither. And a certain woman, named Lydia, a feller of 
 purple, of the city of Thyatira, who worfhipped God, heard 
 us, whofe heart the Lord opened, that fhe attended unto the 
 things which were fpoken of Paul. And when fhe was bap- 
 tized and her houfchold, fhe befought us, faying. If ye have 
 judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my houfe and 
 abide there." 
 
 This is all we know cf the matter. She belonged to another 
 city. She worfhipped God. She was, on the fabbath day, by 
 the fide of a river, where prayer was wont to be made. 
 The Lord opened her heart to attend to what Paul faid. Her 
 fervants were with her. She had a houfe, either her own, 
 or one taken for the time. She Vvas baptized, and her houfe- 
 hold. As to hsr having infants with her, you can tell, as well 
 as I. Moreover, whether her fervants believed the words of 
 Paul, you can, if you attend to the circumftances, form as 
 correcH: a judgment, perhaps, as any other can make up for 
 you. 
 
 The things to be confidered are, i. Lydia was a godly wo- 
 man. 2. She attended meeting. Paul found her where prayer, 
 was wont to be made, where religious women had been accuf- 
 tomed to meet. 3. She, like other religious people, took her 
 houfehold to m.eeting with her. 4. it appears that Paul bap- 
 tized none of her houfehold, but iiich as were with her at the 
 female praying meeting. 5. The flrong probabiUty is, tliat 
 Lydia. being a pious woman, one who worfhipped God, would 
 feleft for her attendants, m.aidens or fervants who alfo were 
 worlhippers of God. In verfe 40, we are told, the apoftles 
 entered into the houfe of Lydia, comforted the brethren, &c. 
 F 
 
€^ Th Mode and Subjeas [Serm.Vt 
 
 You will weigh thefe circumftarces, and make up for your- 
 felves, fo far as yen can, a righteous judgment. 
 
 The next example is lecorded in the fame chapter, and ap- 
 pears to be in the fame city. The hiftory of the matter is con- 
 tained in the 25th verfe, and on to the 34ih. The noticeable 
 
 facis, and on which we muft make up our judgment, are 
 
 The jailer fays, Sirs, What muft I do to be faved ? Paul and 
 Silas anfwered. Believe on the Lord Jefus Chrirt, and thou 
 ihalt be faved, and thy houfe. And they fpake unto him the 
 word of the Lord, and to all that were in his houfe. And he 
 was baptized, he and all his, ftiaightway — ^snd rejoiced, believ- 
 ing in God with all his houfe. 
 
 Here are th.ree things to be put together, i. The word of 
 the Lord Jefus was fpoken to them all. z. They were all 
 baptized 3. They all believed in God. Whether here be any 
 example of infant baptifm, you will judge, each one for him- 
 felf. 
 
 As fome have fuppofed that this paffage, and a few otheis 
 Gi fimilar import, afford an argument in favour of fprinkling, 
 it vciiy be well to give it a moment's confideration. Here we 
 are told, that the keeper of the prifon brought out Paul and 
 Silas. Where he brought them to, feems plainly enough to 
 be gathered from the 32d verfe, in which we find them fpeak- 
 Ing to the jailer the word of the Lord, and to all that were 
 in his houfe. In the next verfe we are inform.ed that the 
 jailer and all his were baptized. Where the> were baptized, 
 we are not told. One thing however is plain, it was not in 
 the houfe ; for in Terfe 34 it is faid, When (i. e. after the 
 houCehold were baptized) he had brought them into his houfe, 
 he fet meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God, with 
 all his houfe. From thefe obfervations, the following things 
 appear : — i. That Paul and Silas were in the jailer's houfe, 
 when they fpake the word of the Lord to all that were in his 
 haufe. 2. That when the ordinance of baptifm was admin- 
 iilered, they were not in his houfe. 5. I'hat the mode of 
 baptiz'ng then in ufe rendered it inconvenient to be per- 
 formed in the jailer's houfe. 4. After the ordinance was 
 admlniftered, they went into the houfe. Kow this favours 
 fprinkling, I fee not. 
 
 * The other fuppofed example is in i Cor. i. 16, where Piul 
 f^ys, I baptized aUb the houfehold of Stephanas. In the i6t!i 
 chap. I5:h verfe, we have a fiiort hiftory of S^ephanas's hou^e- 
 J^Jd; it i^ tiius, "Ye k'jow the houfehcldof S^ephana^,that it 
 
Serm. VI.] i^f Baptlfnu 6g 
 
 Is the firft fruits of Achaia, and that they have addict .^d tliem- 
 felves to the minillry of the faints '^ Whether there is here 
 found any evidence of infmt baptifoi, you will determine for 
 yourfelves. 
 
 6. Are the encouragements which are given to parents in 
 behalf of their children, made to their havir.g them baptized ;■ 
 or are the bleffings connedted with their dedicating them to the 
 I^ord, and with their bringing them up In his nurture and ad-nio- 
 jiit'ion ? With which, your Bibles will infcrni you. 
 
 7. Do we, or do any, pretend, that there is any certain 
 evidence, from either precept or example, for the baptizing of 
 Infanta? Indeed there is none. Trobably not many fwppcffe 
 it. 
 
 8. Is there, as fome have affirmed, the fame evidence for 
 baptizing infants, that there Is for obfcrvmg the Lord's day, 
 for admitting females to comrnuuion, and which there u for 
 family prayer ? 
 
 There is a day called the Lord's day, and religious things 
 were to be obferved on it. Are there infants, who are called 
 baptized Infants, and are they to be attended to as fiich ? 
 
 Feniales and males are declared to be all one in Chrlil:, and 
 fo fit lubjeds for the communion of faints. Are infants une- 
 quivocally declared to be fit liibj;<5ls of baptlfm ? 
 
 We have examples of family prayer, and are commanded to 
 pray with all prayer. Are there fcripture examoles of infant 
 bapt.ifm, and are we command<;d to baptize all ; and fo are 
 Infants inchided ? 
 
 9. Ought I to teach you infant baplnm, if our Lord Je fas 
 Chrift hath no where dire<5led me to do thus ? 
 
 10. Hath Jefus Chrift fp'^ken one word of biptifm, as being 
 fubftituted for circumciuon ? Hath he any where commanded 
 his minifters to teach this fubdiiution ? 
 
 Thirdly. Shall we go, and are we under the neccffiry of 
 going, to the law and covenant of clrcumcifion, to prove Infant 
 baptifra, when boih this law and •ovenant have long fmce 
 waxed old, been repealed, and have periihed ? Hcb. vil. 1 8, 
 19, and viii. 13. 
 
 But you will afk, Are not the bieffi.-gs of Abraham come 
 on the Gentiles ? Anj. Yes. You will then fay, rire not our 
 children Included in the promife ? Anf^-tr. If they be Chriil's, 
 then are they Abraham's {z^^^ and heirs according to the 
 promife. Gal. ill. 29. Abraham's children, after the fldh, 
 were not included in the promile, as the Ped^baptld'S (^'i our day 
 
04 The Mock and Subjects []Serm. Vi. 
 
 would have theirs. But you will fay again, Are not our chil- 
 dren included in the covenant ? In what covenant ? In that 
 of circumcifion ? Surely not. For though that covenant was 
 often renewed, yet it hath long fince pafled away. Is your 
 queftion this ? Are ihey not included in that covenant, which 
 was confirmed of God in Chrift, twenty-four years previoufiy 
 lo the covenant of circumcifion ? I anfwer, No man knoweth, 
 nor can know, but as your children give evidence, that they 
 poiTefs the Spirit of Chrlil. But as I have obferved to you 
 before, fo I fay again, even were ycur children included in 
 this covenant, and faints ; this does not of itfelf give them 
 any right to baptifm, any more, than Abraham's oelng in- 
 cluded in the fame covenant gave hirn a right to circumcifion. 
 Tliis covenant determines nothing as to the on^, or the other. 
 The covenant of circumcifion dcLermined who were to be cir- 
 cumcifed. So the ordinance or inftitution of Baptifm deter- 
 mines who are to be baptized. One determines no more 
 who are to be admitted to the ether, than does the covenant 
 cf an everlafting priefthood (Numb. xxv. 13.) determine 
 who fnall be minifters in gofpel days. In (hort, there is no 
 arguing from one to the other in this matter. They are both 
 of them pofitive inftitutions, and nothing can be known of 
 either, but what is revealed in its particular inftitution. 
 
 While viewiifg this fubjedl, you will inquire, What will be- 
 come of our children r 1 anfwer, God only knoweth. You 
 may rejoin ; But what fliall we do for them ? Anf. Dedicate 
 them to God, and, like faithful Chriftians, bring them up for 
 him. 
 
 Fourthly. We will now attend to fome legitimate confe- 
 quences which follow, upon fuppofition that the fubjeds of bap- 
 tifm are to be determined from the fubjedls of circumcifion. 
 
 1. One confequence is, every man who is converted to the 
 Chriftian religion is to be baptized, and all his houfehold, 
 though he may have three hundred and feventeen training fol- 
 diers born in his own houfe. Not only are thsfe foldiers to be 
 baptized, but their wives, children, and all other fervants, who 
 belong to this great man's houfe. A thoufand infidels are to 
 be baptized, becaufe one great man, their mafter, is chriftian 
 ized. 
 
 2. Thefe foldiers, with their wives, children and fervants, 
 are all to be confidered and treated as church members, or as 
 being in covenant. I confefs this does not look to me gofpel- 
 like. 
 
Serm. VI.] of Baptifm. <^^ 
 
 3. Another confeqaence is, the adults among ihefe, and 
 among all others, who are baptized, are not only to be admit- 
 ted to tlie communion, but required to come. I afk, Could 
 fuch a communion be called the communion of faints ?— one 
 great and good man, with hundreds of unconverted fervanls ! 
 
 4. All who have been baptized, and have, not, for mifde- 
 meanor, been expelled the church, have a right to baptifm for 
 iheir children ; and no man may f :)rbid them. 
 
 5/ Another confequence if, notwiihilanding ChriO: faith, 
 My kingdom is not of this woild ; yet the regulations v.'ere 
 fuch, efpecially the mean of admiiTion into it, as ftrongly, and 
 of infallible confeqaence, tended to make ic of this world, 
 and that abundantly fo. 
 
 6. Another confequence is, many leained and pious min- 
 iilers of New-England are inconfiftent with themfelves, in 
 requiring of perfons baptizcii in infancy a profeffion of experi- 
 mental religion, as a term of communion. It was not fo done 
 in Ifrael. 
 
 7. Another confequence is, many of ihe fame pious and 
 learned minifters are very inconfiflent with themfelves, in refu- 
 fmg bapiifm to the children of fuch as are, by their baptifm, 
 in regular church memberlhip, or in covenant, as it is termed. 
 
 I have taken, as you obferve, for granted, what I do uot 
 believe to be true, that fprinkling, or a very partial waflrngj !■» 
 baptifm. 
 
 Lajllj, Another confequence is, it doth, fo far as it liata its 
 perfedt tuork, deftroy the very idea of the gofpel church, coA- 
 tradidl the prophets, and make Paul and others fpeak not 
 the truth, and it throv/s us back to the fcate of the Jewifii 
 church. 
 
 Jeremiah, proph^fying of the gofpel church, falch, chap; 
 xxxi. 31 to 34, Behold the days come, faith the Lord, that I 
 will make a new covenant with the houfe of Ifrael, and with 
 the houfe of Judah ; not according to the covenant that I 
 made with your fathers, in the day that 1 took them by the 
 hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; but this fhali 
 be the covenant that I will make with the houfe of Ifrael, 
 After thofe days, faith the Lo^d, I will put my law in their 
 inward parts, and write it in their hearts ; and will be their 
 God, and they fhall be my people. And they (hall teach no 
 moie every man his neighbour, and every man iiis brother, fay* 
 ing, Know the Lord, for they fhall all know me, from the 
 Kafl of them, unto the greateft of them, faith the Lord. 
 V 2 
 
ere The Mode and Subjects [Serm. VL 
 
 If this means any thing, it certainly means that the gofpel 
 church (hall exceed in purity the Jewifh church ; that it (hall, 
 at leaft, be compofed of profeffing faints. Ifaiai} fays, chap, 
 liv. 13, All thy children Ihall be taught of the Lord. The 
 latter of thefe paffiges, our Lord applies to the gofpel day, 
 f/ohn vi. 45 : The former is applied to the gofpel church by 
 Paul, Heb. viii. 
 
 Mofes fays in Deut. xviif. 15, 19. The Lord thy God will 
 raife up unto thee a Prophet from the midft of thee, of thy 
 brethren, like unto me ; unto him ye fliall hearken. And it 
 iliall come to pafs, that whofoever will not hearken unto my 
 words, which he fhall fpeak in my name, I will require it of 
 him. 
 
 This, and much more, Peter applies to gofpel days, and to 
 the gofpel church, ^^s in. 22, to the end. Mofes truly faid 
 unto the fathers, A Prophet Ihall the Lord your God raife up 
 unto you, of your brethren, like unto me ; him Ihall ye hear 
 in all things whatfoever he fhall fliy unto you. And it fhall 
 come to pafs that every foul that will not hear that Prophet, 
 ihall be dejiroyedfrom among the people. Yea, and all the proph- 
 ets from Samuel, and thofe that follow after, as many as have 
 Ipoken, have like wife foretold of thefe days. Ye are the chil- 
 dren of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made 
 with our fathers, faying unto Abraham, And in thy feed (hall 
 all the kindreds of the earth be blefied. Unto you firft, God 
 having raifed up his Sen Jefus, fent him to blefs you in turn- 
 /••J away every one of ^' CM from his iniquities. 
 
 Through the New-Teitament, the gofpel church is, or ap- 
 pears to be, fpoken of as a fociety, nation or church of faints ; 
 and as being greatly different from the nation of the Jews. 
 But the fabje(5ls cf baptifm being determined by the fubjev^s 
 of circumcifion, brings the gofpel church, as to its conftituent 
 materials, to the fame condition with the church under the law 
 of carnal ordinances. Indeed, what is now, generally, called 
 the gofpel church, is Irardly io be diilinguifhed by its members 
 from the old Jewifh church. 
 
 Do not thefe things look as though the twelve hundred and 
 fixty years of Antichrift's reign were not wholly part ? Is there 
 not, my brethren, fome defiling error at the root of all this? 
 Can fuch ftreams, as are thefe confequences, flow from a pure 
 fountain ? Indeed many good minifters of our land have long 
 fmce difcovered fome of thefe evil confequences, and have la- 
 boured hard to rectify them. Prefidcnt Edwards, and many 
 
Serm. VI.] of Baptifm. 61 
 
 odiers, made a noble ftand againft this flood of corruption ; 
 yet they diicovered not the fountain, whence ihefe ftreams flow, 
 and will flow, till it be removed. Putting or miilaking the 
 covenant of circumciflon, for the covenant which was confirm- 
 ed of God in Chrift to Abraham, twenty-four years before 
 circumcifion was known, and fubilituting baptilm for circum- 
 cificn, and determining the fubjeds of the one by the fubje<5ls 
 of the other, without any aulhority thus to do, have produced 
 all this corruption, deception, and world of evil. Would good 
 minifters be perluaded to lay the axe at tlie root of the tree, as 
 John did, the evils would be foon rectified. 
 
 The fubjecl, on which we now are. is of fuch liigh concern- 
 ment to the church of Chril^, generally, and your corivicT:ion 
 of the truth of ic being almoft, or quite, ellsntial to our future 
 peace and union together, I would willingly omit nothing 
 which might chafe away your darknef?, and. caufe the true 
 light to appear. I will, therefore, add here the hiftory of 
 infant baptifm. Should we find that infant baptifm is of m.en, 
 as we have already found fprinkiing to be, it is hoped that you 
 will either give it up, or pradife it as being cf man's device, 
 and not, as Mr. Dlckinfon would have ir, as belonging to in- 
 fants by divine right. 
 
 The firll information which we have of infant baptifm is a- 
 bout the middle of the fecond century ; about which time Ire- 
 nasus, in one of his epiftles, has the following fentence : " The 
 church received a tradition from the apoftles to adminiiter bap- 
 tifm to iitile children or infants.'"*' 
 
 The next account we have of this m.atter (if we except 
 Tertullian, who oppofed the practice) i? given us by Origen, 
 In about the middle of the third century. His words are, 
 ** Little children are baptized for the remiffion of fins." For 
 the remiifion of original fin, or pollution ; for of this is he 
 fpeaking. Again lie fays, " The church had an order from 
 the apoflles to give baptifm to infants." 
 
 Another part of the hiftory of infant baptifm we have in a 
 quotation from the deciuonsof the famous C'.^unc:! at Carthage 
 in the year 253. It is this : "From baptifm and the grace of 
 God nons ought to h^ prohibited ; cfpecially infants need cur help 
 and the divine mercy." We have a farther account from 
 Auguiline, who fiourilhed about the middle cf the fourtJi cen- 
 tury. His words (writing of infant baptifm) are, " Let sone, 
 
 * Prcf, Dickinfon on Baptifm. 
 
G8 The Mode and Subjects [Serm. VL 
 
 therefore, fo much as ivh'ijper any other doflrlne in yrjur ears : 
 This the church hath always had, has always held." 
 
 The next we hear of infant baptifm is, that the pra«51ice was 
 confirmed, and {o put beyond difpute, by Pope Innocent the 
 Firft. 
 
 Now fire and fword were the all-conclufive ars^uments ufed 
 for the conviction and reformation of all who refufed to prac- 
 tife, or dared to call in qaeflion, infant baptifm. We will pafs 
 over the horrid perfecunons, which now began to be, and have 
 ever fiact been pra<5tifed, at intervals, upon thofe who would 
 not fubmit to the divine right of infants to baptifm, as confer- 
 red on them by the ghoflly Popes of Rome. 
 
 Luther, the famous German reformer, fays, " that infant 
 baptifm was not determined till Pope Innocentius ;" and Gro- 
 tius, in his annotauons on Matth. xix. fays, *' It was net en- 
 joined till the Council of Carthage."* 
 
 We oughr, however, to trace the hiftory nf infant baptifm 
 one ftep farther, and notice Calvin, and a multitude fiace, who 
 were unwilling to acknowledge their dependence on the 
 Mother of Harlots, for their authority in this matter ; and there- 
 fore with great ingenuity have difcovered infant baptifm, as a 
 gofpel ordinance, or the right of infants to it, in the law of 
 Mofes. Indeed they have fjppofed that this doctrine is implied 
 in a number of paffages of the New- redament. Yet, I be- 
 lieve, none who pracftife it, are willing to venture this New- 
 Tedament ordinance upon New-Teftament evidence. 
 
 Here you fee that tradUiGn is the foundation of infant bap- 
 tlftn ; error^ the belief that haptif.n ivnfies away onginalfni^ the 
 nurfe of its tender age; the church of Rome, the confirmer 
 and fcrong defender of It ; and the long fince repealed cere- 
 monial law of Mofes the evidence for it. You fee, the Introduc- 
 tion of infant baptifm was tradition. Upon tliis foundation 
 hath it manifellly reded ever fmce. All the ingenious argu- 
 n^ents ol learned and pious men, can, in fa<fl, add no flrength 
 to its firft foundation. The firft we hear of it is, it was placed 
 upon tradition, and there it hath refted, or been ftanding un- 
 eafily, ever fmce. 
 
 BefiJes, this traSulon, as well as the practice which follow- 
 ed, is doubtlefs the oiFipring of error, and man's invention. 
 At beft we have but one witnefs for it, in the mouth cf whom 
 nothing can be eftablifhed. Origen fays, " The church had 
 an grdcr from the Apoftles." Still we have but one wiigefs: 
 * Ancient £>ialogue Revifed. 
 
Serm. VII. ] of Baptif?n. 69 
 
 Moreover, the very expreilions of the Pedobaptifts ihow that 
 they v.tre from the beginning oppofed by the Bapiifts. Ire- 
 nscus fays, ** We have a tradition." Origen fays, " We have 
 an order." The Council cf Carthage fay, " Infants ought 
 not to be prohibited from baptifm." Auguftine faith, " Let 
 none fo much as whifper any other dodtrine in your ears." — 
 Does not every fyllable indicate the difpute which the Baptifts 
 had with the inventers and lupporters of this anti- evangelical 
 principle and practice ? 
 
 It is worthy of a moment's confideration, that not one of 
 the moft ancient fathers makes the leaft pretenfion that infant 
 baptifm is fupported by fo much as one palTage in either the 
 Oid-Teftament, or the New ; and tliey mention no authority 
 buc tradition y and an order from the Apoftles, &:c. wiiich, at 
 beft, are very uncertain things. 
 
 Whoever can fix their faith, continue their practice, and 
 venture their refponfibility on fuch a traditionary foundation, 
 I cannot. Upon this foundation for our practice, have both 
 we and our fathers ventured to oppofe the Baptifts, with great- 
 er or iefs degrees of virulence ; whilft, by our tradition, we 
 have greatly injured the ordinance of Chrift, if not, in this 
 inftance, made void the law of God. 
 
 In fine : Was not infant baptifm firft Introduced to efcape 
 the offence of the crofs ? Is it not, with many, unknowingly 
 continued for the fame end ? It bringeth the church to its 
 former ftate as under the law. If I yet preach circumctfion^ 
 why do I yet fuffer perfecution ? Then is the offence of the 
 crofs ceafed, CaL v. 1 1. 
 
 SERMON VII. 
 
 MATTHEW xxviii. 19, 20. 
 
 Go y£i therefore^ and teach all nations y baptizing them in the name 
 of the Father^ and of the Souy and of the Holy Ghofl ; teaching 
 ihem to obferve all things luhaifocveti I have commanded you : 
 and, loy I am auith you alivay^ even unto' the end of the 
 'world. Amen, 
 
 I 
 
 HAVE already fet before you the principal part of what 
 I intended under the two firft propofitions in my text* 
 
 What remains is to bring forward — 
 
70 The S^ode a'nd Si/l?JeCls [Serm. VIL 
 
 III. Chrlii's command to all bis miniftering fervants to 
 teacli all nations, or thoie who fiioiild be difcipkd among them, 
 to obferve all things whatfoever he had commanded them. 
 And then — 
 
 Lajlly, His comforting and ftrengthening promife, which 
 is, And, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the 
 world. 
 
 To thefe propi.fitions, your ferious, Chriflian attention is 
 requefted. The firft is — 
 
 III. Chrift's command to the minifters of his gofpel to 
 teach all nations, or thofe who flionld be dif:ipled among them, 
 to obferve all things whatlbever he had commanded them. 
 
 Here you f;e the extenfivenefs of my orders received, and 
 which I muft carefully obferve, would I be obedient unto the- 
 Heavenly Teacher, who came from God. 
 
 Chrift J-^fus, v/hen perfonally on earth, gave a new edition of 
 his own and his Father's mind and will. In this new edition, 
 he abrogated or left out, many ceremonies of the old, as being 
 no longer ufeful. Under the old edition, the church was in 
 its childhood, and therefore under fuch tutors and governors 
 as were not needed in her riper years. In this new edition, 
 Chriil hath pointed out what is to be preferved of the old. 
 The fum of the moral law and the prophets, were to continue 
 in force. Thefe are, indeed, in the very nature of things, bind- 
 ing on accountable creatures. But when Chrift, the anointed 
 and expefted Mefliah, was come, then all thofe rites, facrifices 
 and typica! inftitutions of the ceremonial law, which were, 
 together, as a fchool maPter to lead the obferver to Chrift, were 
 difannulled, being no longer of ufe. 
 
 You fee what minifters have authority to teach for both doe- 
 trine and pradice. It is what Chrift hath commanded them, 
 and ncthing which is contrary from it. 
 
 In time paft I have taught you the precepts of Chrift, fome- 
 w^hat largely. As 1 have taught them, fo you have, as is be- 
 lieved, received them to the faving of your fouls. The ordi- 
 nance of the fupper I have taught in its fimpliclty, and fo have 
 )cu received it. V'ou have alfo been informed, that Jefus 
 Chrift appointe'i bap-.ifm, as an ordinance to be obferved in his 
 cliUTch. But what that ordinance was, and who were the fub- 
 jedts of it, you have not been particularly told, till of late. 
 Nor had t, till a ftiort time fince, a clear underftanding of 
 either. I, no doubt, ought to have known them before ; but 
 till I did, I could not teach them to you. When I came \s^ 
 
Serm. VII.] of Bapi'ifnu «7i 
 
 the knowledge of them, it was no longer in iry power to be 
 failhlul to Chrift, and refufe to teach them. In the fimplicity 
 of my heart have I taught you what is baptifm, and who are 
 to be baptized. 
 
 Whether thefe things be, or be not, agreeable to my fcrmer 
 notions of them, is nothing to the point. One thing I am 
 fettled in, I have, of late, taught them to you, as Chrift hath 
 commanded me. 
 
 Not only was it my duty to teach yon thefe things, but I am 
 commanded to teacli you to obfe'-ve them : For then are you 
 ehrift's difciples, when you do all things whatfoever he halh 
 commanded you. 
 
 To obferve thefe things, is like obedient children to receive 
 inilrudion, and then to fearch the fcriptures, that you may kncxs- 
 how thefe things are. It belongs to me to teach you — 
 
 1. To obferve thefe things till you underftand them. And 
 then — 
 
 2. To obferve them in your pra<rt'ce. 
 
 1 . Would you walk in all the ftatutes and ordinances of the 
 Lord blamelefs, you muft obferve thefe things till you under- 
 hand them. 
 
 You and I have been unreafonably prejudiced againft light 
 and truth in thefe matters. If I do not misjudge, the Lord 
 hath, in anfwer to prayer, afforded me the needed light and 
 knowledge upon the fubjed. It was not in a day, nor in a 
 month, after my prejudices received a fhock, and my mind 
 partial conviction, that I obtained fatisfadion. Nor can I 
 expe(5l that you will, all of you, pofTefs fuch a ready mind, as to 
 give up your long, and almoft inveterate prejudices, and re- 
 ceive the light at once. It is by little and little, that anti- 
 cliriflian errors mull be deftroyed from the chui ch, and from 
 your hearts, as well as from mine. 
 
 You may expe.5t to find me ready, at any time, and at a!l 
 times, to afford you every inftrudlion, and to arf^^er any ob- 
 je<ftion which may occur to your candid minds. You fhculd 
 have your Bibles always nigh you, and pcffefs continually a 
 prayerful, teachable fpirit. Be detei mined to hearken to none 
 "but Chrift, and to be obedient to all his commands. 
 
 Be ca^e^ul to avoid all bitternefs and evil fpeak'ng. Wif- 
 dom will not dwell vith ftrife ; nor will tlie wrath of mac 
 work the righteoufnefs of God. 
 
 2. Ic belongs to xvit to teach you to obferve the ordinance of 
 baptifm, and tlie pioper fuKjccl^^, in y-DMr pra^ft'ce. You rruS^ 
 
72 The Mode and SubjeHs [Serm. VII. 
 
 underftand thefe things before you can acceptably pra<5Hfe 
 them. Some of you, no doubt, fufficiently underftand them to 
 proceed to pradice. But 1 have not thought it duty to haften 
 your pradlice, or to lead you by example, left the minds of 
 others fliould be injured. It is a time to weaken prejudices, 
 and not to increafe them. Wifdom dwells with prudence. Ma- 
 ny of your minds, as well as mine, are, with pleafing expedtation, 
 looking forward to the time, when we may, with nighly or 
 quite all our brethren with us, keep all the ordinances of the 
 gcfpel, as Chrift hath commanded us. 
 
 When you (hall underftand thefe things, happy will you be 
 if you pra(ftife them ; for all gofpel obedience gives pleafure 
 in the pradice. 
 
 As Mofes had much to do in Egypt, before God faid unto 
 him, * Speak unto the people that they go forward,' fo, my 
 brethren, I may have much to do before things (hall be in read- 
 intfs, and before the Lord (hall bid me fpeak, faying unto you. 
 Go FORJFARD. But, if the Lord will, I would live to fee that 
 day. 
 
 After Ifrael weni forward, and were baptized under Mofes 
 in the cloud, and in the fea, they had a tedious wildernefs to 
 pafs ; fo it may be with us. But, fhould we obferve the pillar 
 of cloud and of nre, we fhall come to the promifed land ; and 
 it may be, v/ith much fafety and fpeed, fliould we hearken to 
 the good counfel of Jofnua. 
 
 You know, my brethren, as it is my duty to teach you to 
 obferve all things whatfoever Chrift hath commanded me, io 
 ic is your duty to receive inftrudion, and be obedient. Your 
 obedience is not to be rendered to me, but to Jefus Chrift, and 
 to the word of his teftimony. 
 
 It will doubtlefs occur to your minds, Whom fliall we hear ? 
 One minifter teaches us one thing, and another teaches differ- 
 ently. You are to hear no man any farther than he fhall teach 
 you as the man Chrift Jefus hath commanded him. Minlfters 
 have no authority, any farther than they receive it from him. He 
 hath given them no power to teach, but what he hath com- 
 manded. When they tranfcribe out of the old into the new edi- 
 tion of God's word and will, and tell us that the rite and cov- 
 enant of circumcifion are to explain to us the obferv;irce of 
 a New-Tcftament ordinance, we are not obliged to believe them, 
 unlefs they point us to the place where Chrift hath fo command- 
 ed. You are to obey them who have the rule over you. But 
 even Paul was not to be followed any farther than he followed 
 
Serm. VH.} of Baptifnu 73 
 
 Chrid. So it ou.o^ht to be with you, in hearkening to what your 
 teachers lay. Minifters are but men, and they have proved 
 themfelves to be fo, by changing the ordinance of baptilrn intd 
 quite a different tiling, and by adminiflering their new rite to 
 fubje(fls to whom Jefus Chrift never commanded it. It furely 
 is a furptifing thing, and not to be accounted for, but from the 
 relics of human depravity, that fo many good men fhould, 
 unknowingly, do and teach things which are quite afide from 
 what Chritl hath commanded them. 
 
 It is too late for you, my hearers, to cloak yourfelves under 
 what great and good men have faid ; for the truth of the Lord 
 hath already been told you. Had I not come and fpoken to 
 you this word of Chrift, you would not have had fm ; but 
 now have you no cloak for difobedience. 
 We now come— 
 
 Lajziy^ To confider Chrift's comforting and ftrengihening 
 promife to his miniftering fervants : which is, And, To, I am 
 with you alway, even unto the end of the world. 
 
 Chrift Jefus hath been with his miniflers j and he will be — 
 
 1. In preparing them for their office. He was perfon 
 t^lly with his firft gofpel heralds, for the fpace of ihree years, oi 
 more ; after this he left them for a fhort time ; in this fhori 
 interval they paiTed a fevere trial. He was with them again, 
 at times, for forty days. Soon after this he fent his Spirit 
 upon them, ajid filled them with it to a remarkable degree. 
 Then they were prepared for their cffire. They fpeedlly filled 
 it remarkably, and the effect was wonderful. Three thoufand 
 were converted in a day. 
 
 Chrift is as really, though not fo apparently, with all his gof- 
 pel meiTengers, in preparing them to go forth into his harveft, 
 Thofe, who have not Chrift with them, to prepare them for then- 
 office, are but as wolves in fneep's clothing, when they go forth 
 into the mini ft ry. They preach iox jilthy lucre^ and frequently 
 have their reward. It is too often the cafe, that thofe, whom 
 Chrift hath prepared, are obli^ared to go into the field, or make 
 tents for their fupport, whilft fuch as run, not being fent, fwim 
 in luxury. 
 
 2. J?ras Chrift will be with his minifters in bringing divine 
 tilings to tlieir remembrance. 
 
 It is the Lord's Spirit which caufcth divine truth to occur to 
 'the minds of his fervants. Truths, which have been forgotten 
 for months, and it may be for years, or paffages which before 
 wer^ underftood, may be, and not unfrequently are, frcfli aqd 
 
 G 
 
74 The Mode and Subjeas [Serm. 'YIL 
 
 |)lain in the minds of his fervants, for their coir.fort, or for the 
 comfort and inftrud:ion of others, or for the comfort and ed- 
 ification cf both. 
 
 3. Chrift v.ill be with his minlfters in affording them wif- 
 dom, fortitude, and faithfulnefs. 
 
 Ihe entrance of his word giveth light. He makcth h'ght 
 their paths, and ordereth all their fteps. He makelh their feet 
 like hinds' feet, and caufeih them to be fwifter than the eagle, 
 ftronger than lions, wife as ferpents, and harmlefs as doves, 
 With what wifdom did Siephen fpeak ! With what fortitude 
 did Peter, Pau\ and a thoufand others, addrefs their p.udito- 
 ries ! With whiit wifdom hath he made his fervants to fpeak ! 
 Wirh what fortitude to bear, with what faiihfulnefs to endure, 
 for his name's fake i How remarkably hath it been thus, in 
 times of perfeculion ! And when will you find a time, when 
 they that are barn after the flefh do nr>t perfecute thofe who 
 are born after the Spirit ! How often is it the cafe, when min- 
 ifters, like Paul, wax bold, and teftify that Jefus is the Chrif}, 
 and what are his words and inflitutions, that they are perfecu- 
 ted, openly or more fecretly ! 
 
 4. Chrift is and will be with his miniilering fervants v/hilft 
 they are vcDroached and fuffering for his namiC and truth's 
 fake. 
 
 He fays to them all, \^ ihe world hate ycu, ye know that it ha- 
 ted me before it l^ated you. When Chrift's miriilters are reviled 
 and fuffer for hii fake, his truth and Spirit bear their fpirits 
 up. He gives them to believe and know, that though they 
 weep new, they Oiall fof-n rej. ice ; that their light aflli(5lions, 
 which are but for a moment, are piepaiing them for and work- 
 ing out for them, a far more exceeding and an eternal weight 
 of glory. 
 
 5. Chrift Jefns will be with his faithful minifteis in giving 
 them to fee their d' fire upon his enemies. 
 
 This appears to be particularly implied in my text. 1 hey 
 are commanded to go and difciple all nations. Their dtfire 
 is to fee difciples mutiplie.r?. They go foitl;, Chrift gees forth 
 with them. Many of C))rift's enemies fubmit to his yoke, 
 which is eafy, and to his burden, which is light. In this are 
 thev gra^fieo, and their defire on them is accompliftied. 
 
 6 ^ CI rift is with his minJfters in explaining and defending 
 his tru'h. 
 
 How did Peter, Paul and others, in the firft ages of Chrif- 
 tsanity, explain and vindicate the truth, to the confcundii.g of 
 
Serm. VII.] cf Laptifm» 7 J 
 
 both Jevvs and Gep.tlles I Whenever, in ag?3 fmce, he hath 
 fpoken the word, great hith been the comp.ir.v, or force, of 
 thofe who have pifililhed, explained and defended it. M:irtia 
 Luther J ^hn Calvin, and a num!:)i:r m )re in the rcform.iticn, 
 were like fi.irn-'Sr.'f Fire: nothing could ttop ihtmfrompubliihing, 
 explaining and defending the truths of the Saviour, lor he was 
 with th^m. 
 
 Yju will allc, How is It that Chriil is wiih his minillers. 
 when chcy contradict one the other, an i thenrdelves too ? 
 jinfvjir. It is not faid, that Chrift is with his niiniilcrs in ex- 
 plaining and defending error. Error is huTian ; truth is 
 divine. When mi:;iRers undertake to fupport error, they go 
 widiout ChriiVs biefnng and prefence in this their labour. 
 Hence it is that ihey are ^o contradivflory and inccniillenc ; and 
 are obliged to wreft the fcriptures from Lheir plain and eaiy fenfe, 
 to fupport a bel ved prejudice But when they t.^ke up for 
 truth, plain fc-ipture fuppcris t>»:m, and they have plain and 
 pleafanJ work, :ind their fabj^clsfapported '^-ith eafe,as you have 
 feen whdil atiending to the feverai truths in my text. 
 
 Befides, it may be the cafe, that fome very good mtn may 
 mix truth and enor, the cominanus of God and their o ''n tradi- 
 tions, together; and, whilit pra(ft)fing accordingly, they mz.j 
 enjoy a comfortable frame of mind, and hence conduce that 
 their beloved on pound is a^i fronfi heaven. This may be il- 
 luilraied by the following example. Mr. S. finis it to be a 
 truth, that hib i.^fant wfF.pring, as well as eve y thing elfe, 
 fhouM be devoutly given to God. He hath received and Ji Ide 
 a tradition from the fadiers, that hii i?ifarits Ih-'uld be bapt zed. 
 He pubUckly gives them to the Lord, and f leiTir ly prom'fes 
 t.i initruct them in die way of truth and duty. He, at the 
 fame time hath the ordinance of baptifn ad:nini:icred to them,^ 
 or adminifters it himfeif. During the whole traniafti'n he pof- 
 feffes much comfort in his min.i His confequence is, the 
 whole matter is according to truths j'i;t as God won'.' have it. 
 Is not this going a little too much by fenfe, and r.T quite e- 
 nough by fcripture r D 3es it not contain 2^Jpice of en. .uliafm? 
 WouiJ Lo^ the good man lave had the fame mental la-iofaction, 
 had he p-^ffiiTed the fame fpiri^ua'ity, and yet had omitted that 
 part which is enjoined by traiition only ? 
 
 LcifHy : Thi grea: Captain of Salvation is with his mini{^ 
 ters, to teach, lead and comfort them, in all their trials, in all 
 their ftraits. Whofoever will leave them, he will not. Though 
 fee, the Great High Prieft of our profeTion, when fuffering for 
 
76 The Mode and Subjeas [Serm. VII. 
 
 his people's fin^ was left alone—all forfook him ; yet, when- 
 ever his friends are affliaed, he kindly c^lls, faying, Lo, I am 
 ^Mth you. This harh been the ftay of good men in all ages, in 
 all circumftances. Thofe who have wandered about in Iheepfkins 
 and goat-fKins, who have been aiflided. tormented, of whom 
 the world was not worthy, have found their refuge here. 'J'here 
 is n-thing like this to fupport the feeble, diftreffed foul. When 
 godly miniiters have been obliged to leave their people, yes, 
 and their families, and fometimes their native country, for the 
 truth's fake, this hath fuftamed them — Chrifl was with them. 
 Trefideiit Edwards, for a noble, attempt at partial reformation, 
 was conltrained to fl?e his beloved charge ; but Chrift was, no 
 doubt, with him. Should I, for laying the axe at the root of the. 
 tree, be obliged to leave you, though, for the prefent I fe« 
 Eo particular reafon to apprehend fuch an event, yec I truft 
 Vhis will be my hiding place— Jefus, who will be with me*. 
 
 APPLICATION. 
 
 FROM what hath been faid in the preceding difcourfcs, it 
 appears — 
 
 1. That the two fides of the controverfy between the Bap- 
 tifts and the Pedobaptifts ftand thus. 
 
 Before I ftate the two fides of the controverfy, it is but rea- 
 fcnable that I define thrfe whom it refpeds. By the Baptifts, 
 on one fide, 1 mean the regular Calviniftic Bapdfts. By the 
 Fedobaptifis on the otlier, I now intend the Calviniftic Congre- 
 gationaliils among them. I give this definition, that I may be 
 clearly underftood. 
 
 You fee both fides are Calvinifts, that is, they a:Te agreed in 
 what are ftylcd the dodlrines of grace. They are both of the 
 congregational order, as it refpedls the governra«nt of the 
 ehurches. 
 
 Now for the controverfy— and it is this : The Baptifts hold 
 immerfion only to be baptifni. The Pedobaptifts hold that 
 fprinkling may be fubftituted for immerfion, and may anfwer 
 juli as well. 
 
 The Baptifts hold that the fcriptures know nothing of a Chrif- 
 tian ordinance of baptifm for unbelievers and infidels. The 
 Pedobaptifts hold tliat, if a great man, who hath a thoafand 
 faves, fticuld become a difciple, then all his houfehold are to 
 l^e counted difciples, and are to be baptized. 
 
 The Baptifts hold that the church of the Ncw-Teftament re 
 
Serm. VII.] of Bapiifm, 7T 
 
 conipofedofvirible or profefT^d fiints. The confiaent Pedo- 
 baptifts hold, that this j:;reit man, his thoufand flives, together 
 with his wife and children, all belong to the gofpel church, 
 though he only be a believer in Chrift. 
 
 The Bapiifts hold that none have a right to pirtake of the 
 Lord's Supper but thofe who are his friends. The confiftent 
 Pedobaptifts hold, that all the adults in this great man's houfe- 
 hold, if'they be not guilty of grofs immorality, have a right 
 to come. 
 
 The Eaptiils plead Ne-v-Teflament authority for the defence 
 of their principles and pradice, where ihey differ from their 
 brethren of ihe Pedobaptills. The Fed .'baptifts in fupport of 
 their fentiments plead convenience, and the covenant and rite of 
 circumcifion, which were decaying, waxing old, and ready to 
 vaniih away, more than j yco years ago. 
 
 The Baptifls bring nighiy threcfcore texts of fcripture, which 
 are plainly and fully to their point in favour of immerfion. 
 The Pedobiiplilts mention three or four texts, which, at mcfl-, 
 are but very doubtfully in their favour ; and, v.hen righdy un» 
 derftood, r/ippear fully againfl them. 
 
 What advantage, my brethren, have the Pedobaptifls over the- 
 Biptlfts ? And with what crime or error, in this matter do they 
 (land convicted ? 
 
 2. It appears that gofpel miniuers have no authority to 
 teach Cbriilians, that their children and fervants (hould be bap- 
 tized, becaufe Abraham's were circumcifed. 
 
 Chriil hath no where commanded them to teach thus. 
 Ghrift hath no where commanded them to teach infant baptifm. 
 ■At all, or baptifm upon the faith of a-T'^ther ; much lefs, that 
 they are to be baptized becaufe Abraham's were circumcifed. 
 
 3. It appears, that many of the pious and learned clergy of 
 New-England have made fome noble and promifiag advances, 
 towards truth in this matter ; yet in this they are inconfiftsnt 
 with themfelves. 
 
 i'hey will receive none to the communion but fuch as pro- 
 fefs faith in cur Lord Jefus Chrift, as well as repentance for fm i 
 and they will adminifier baptifm to the children of no ether. 
 Here, in two inftance.^ they refufe to follow the law of circum- 
 cifion. One, in refufmg to admit to the fupper, impenitent, 
 though civil, baptized perfons ; the other, in not admitting to 
 baptifm the children of all thofe who have been baptized. This 
 is confluent with truth fo far as it goQz ; but inconfillent wit;.t 
 G 2 
 
78 The Mode and Subjecls [Serm. VIL 
 
 the notion that the fubjeifls of baptlfm are to be determined 
 from the fiibje<5ls of circumcifion. 
 
 Thcfe good men, fo lon^ as they pofTefs their prefent light, 
 muft come over to the true Baptift ground, or fubmit to the 
 imputation of inconfidency. I wifh them to come over. For 
 myielf, I expedl to, though ray carnal nature hates the name of 
 a Baptiil as much as theirs does. But my better judgment 
 tells me, that the Baptifts are on the gofpel ground. 
 
 4. It is a marter of lamentation, that pious and learned min- 
 ifters have not a little more felf denial ; then they might be con- 
 fiHent 'A'iih themfelves, and with truth too. Could I be with 
 ^em, and afk them this plain queftion. Do you not find a little 
 backwardnefs from fearching critically into the primitive mean- 
 ing and pradice of baptifm ? I fear they would anfwer with 
 fome relu(5tance. 
 
 To me, I confefs, it appears an hard cafe, that the Baptifts 
 ftiould fuffer fo much reproach, merely on account of their fea- 
 timents, when many of our beft old divines have given them the 
 ground, and confeffed that their fentiments, as to the mode, 
 are from heaven, and ours from convenience. Our oppofitiot* 
 to them, on account of the fubje^s, appears but little belter, 
 being but poorly fupported by fcripture : they having tlie plain 
 •word, and full current of all the prophets from Mjfes to Mala- 
 chi, fo far as they have fpoken of the gofpel church, together 
 with the Ncw-Teftament in their favour ; whilft for us, in this 
 particular, nothing better can be alleged than the antiquated 
 rite of circumxifion. If the Baptifts be right, why not join 
 ihem, and fuffer fmall inconveniences ? If wrong, why not 
 prove them fo ? It is pitiful that great and good men ihould be 
 dallying wiih inconclnfive arguments, when the time is long 
 fmce come, that the high'zjay of hoHnefs fhould be io plain, that 
 nvayjar'ing men, though fools, fnculd not err therein. 
 
 5. We fee why good men have been fo divided among them- 
 felves, as to infar t bapiifm. 
 
 The reafon is, they go without Chrift in this matter. He is 
 not divided. 
 
 Some baptize all. Others will baptize only the children in 
 the houfeholds of ^"mmunicants. Some baptize upon the 
 half-way covenant. Some will baptize all who are under age. 
 Agiin, others will baptize all under feven. Others ft ill will 
 baptize upon the good promifes of godfatliers and godmothers. 
 You will obferve I ufe the word baptize in a fenfe which I be- 
 lieve to be improper, but I would not offend you with a word* 
 
Serm. VII.] of Bapttfm, 79 
 
 when my meaning may be underftood. But what propriety is 
 there in all this inconfiftency about the fubjeds of baptifm ? 
 Does not the matter look as though there was no rule to go by, 
 or as though none underftood what it was ? 
 
 6. We fee why good men, when writing or fpeaking of 
 baptifm, are left to fpeak untruths. 
 
 It is doubtlefs becaufe they will follow their own prejudices, 
 and not the truth. Error hath divided them, and Chriil is not 
 with them in what they fay. Some good men, not many, dare 
 affert, in oppofition to the Baptifts, that there is not a word a- 
 bout immerfion for baptifm, in all the Bible. For laymen to fay 
 thus, \s prefumption, and for men of learning to make the aifer- 
 tion, is almojl unpardonable. For they know, or ought to know, 
 that the word to baptize, is not once mentioned in all the Bi- 
 ble but immerfion is mentioned, unlefs they mean to play upon 
 the word^ and then it is a truth, when baptizo is mentioned im- 
 merfion is, if they will give it its plain, literal Englifh. 
 
 If the Baptifts have the plain, literal and unequivocal fenfe 
 of the fcripture in their favour, is it not enough that they are 
 defpifed and perfecuted by the wicked of every clafs and not 
 helped by any ; but mull we add to their affl dion, by falfe- 
 hood or equivocation ? O prejudice ! what wilt thou not do, 
 even in a faint ! 
 
 Befides, our good brethren, who are fo warm againft the 
 Baptifts, and will not allow them a word for their mode, do not 
 agree together to inform us what the mode Oiould be. One 
 tells us, it is fprinkling, another fays, pouring is the mode, a 
 third contends for wafhing the face, a fourth is for putting wa- 
 ter on the back of llie neck, as the Swifs are faid to do ; whilfi 
 others affirm, that all ihefe are right. Now, fuppofe the Bap- 
 tifts are wrong, who (hall we fay are in the right, or is there 
 no right in this bufmefs ? Does not all this look juft as it would 
 were there an error at the bottom ? Hath the great Teacher 
 who came from God, left matters thus at loofe ends ? Does 
 the Bible thus differ, whilft pointing out the mode ? No. Its 
 language is puie and determinate. 
 
 7. It appears, that, in infant fprinkling for baptifm, the in- 
 tent of the inftitution is loft, and becomes no Chriftian ordinance 
 at all. 
 
 Both the thing itfdf and the fuHjeds of it are changed. It 
 is quite a different thing from what the Inftitutor hath appoint- 
 ed. Neither this mode nor thefe fubje<5ls are known in the in- 
 ftitution, nor in any paflage of the Bible, where baptifm is 
 
80 The Mode and Subje&s [Serm. VII. 
 
 mentioned. This mode is of man's device, and the fQhje(5ls of 
 it have, at bell, bat a traditional right. For grtod men to do 
 tha^. wnilil they think it confillent with trath, appears to be a 
 fin of ignorance ; but if any do thus, while they know what 
 the fcriptures enjoin, their practice defer ves a harder na ne. 
 
 8. It appears that dipping, immerfion, or burying in the 
 name of the Father, and of the Son, and'of che Holy Ghoft, is 
 baptifm. 
 
 No man of real piety and folid learninjr ever doubted it. 
 Whereas, fprinkling hath been doubted by many, denied con- 
 tinually by a large clafs of Chriilians, and been proved by 
 none to have been ever appointed as the Chriftian ordinance of 
 baptifm. 
 
 9. We fee, that every plea which hath hctn made, for a 
 general or partial neglect of the fcripture mode of baptifm, is 
 an indirc6t though unmtentional charge of negligence, or want 
 of benevolence, or of forefight, in the D'.vine Inftitutor. Let 
 every man of candour and common fenfe examine this matter. 
 Did not the Lard, who made our northern climes, know how 
 cold they are ? — Did he know them to be too cold for his dif- 
 ciples who might live in them, to be feparated fi om the world 
 by being vifibly buried and raifed again to join his kingdom ? 
 VVhy then did he not mention an exception in our favour, and 
 rot leave us to fuff^r this inconvenience, or be in perpetual un- 
 certainty and continual difpute, to def^ad our, at belt, but 
 doubtful pra(n:ice ? Did he not perfedly know all the compeUln^ 
 nwejjiiies which Cyprian and others would, in their erring judg- 
 ments, find to break over the bounds of the baptifmal inftitu- 
 tion ? Why then did he ma!;e no provifnn fcr thefe extreme- 
 cafes? By doing this, he would have faved the Pedobaptiils a 
 world of anxiety, contention and cenfure. The fad appears to 
 be, that our Lord intended, that the way of admiflion into his^ 
 kingdom fhouM be Tiniform, and that thofe who would notfub- 
 inic to ir, Ihould fuffir the inccnvenience of darknefs, €rror and 
 flrife. 
 
 10. From what hath been faid in the preceding difcourfes,. 
 is not the following a fair and undeniable conclufion ? That I 
 and OLher Pedobaptlft minifters, fo far as we have fpoken a 
 word againft the Baptiftf, and efpecially that thofe, who have 
 publickly warned their people to avoid the Baptifts and flee 
 from chem, as from a dividing and dangerous herefy, have in 
 this matter aded the part of the old Scribes, Pharifees, hypo- 
 crites — who would not go into the kingdom of God ihemfelves, 
 and thofe who were entering, they hindered. 
 
Serm. VII.] of Baptifm. 81 
 
 I by no means fuppofe that all who have done thus, are in- 
 deed hypocrites, fave in this particular. No reafonable doubt 
 can be entertained, but many of them are learned, pious, and 
 very ufcful m*en ; men, whom the Lord hath greatly honoured 
 as labourers, in gathering in the harveft of fouls. Many of 
 thefe have been, in meafure, bold, zealous and faithful, like 
 Peter ; yet when they diifemble, or teach and praiSlife contrary 
 from the truth, they are to be blamed ; yes, they ar«, in this 
 inftance, worthy to be rebuked. 
 
 It would, indeed, be very injudicious in me to contend that all 
 which the Baptifts have faid and done is juftitiable. It would 
 be equally injudicious to jailify myfeif, or my brethren, where 
 we have both faid and done tilings contrary from the church 
 and name of Jefus of Nazareth. It is time for both minifters 
 and people to look to this matter, left the Lord fend leannsfs 
 into our fouls. 
 
 1 1. From a review of the whole fubjecfl, the following in- 
 ference appears natural, and at the fame time worthy of much 
 confideration. The divinely conftitnted method by which any 
 of the fallen race are to enter the kingdom of heaven below, re- 
 markably fets to our view the way by which we are to com- 
 mence perfect members of the kingdom of heaven above. Out 
 obedience to the former is a pra<^ical declaration of our faith ia 
 the latter. 
 
 Jn joining Chrift's kingdom on earth, we profelTedly die un- 
 to fm, go down to the grave, are buried, and rife, ai from the 
 dead. To join the kingdom of glory, we mull a<flually expe- 
 rience wh^t is but fhadowed forth in baptifm. We muft die, 
 be buried. Or return to the duit, and rife from tne dead. 
 
 How exa<5lly doth our entrance into the church militant (had- 
 ow forth our hoped for entrance into the church triumphant 1 
 It aHb appears that Chriil hath diredled, that the ruSje>fts of 
 the one fticuld be profefTedly, what the fubjedls of the other 
 fiiall be actually, all faints. 
 
 How beautiful doth the church appear^ fo far as fhe obferves 
 the commands of her Lord, as to the members which fhe ad- 
 mits, and the manner of receiving them ! She thus refembles 
 Jeriifalem, which is above, which is the mother of us all, if we 
 be Chriftiacs. May the Lord dire<S our hearts into the love 
 of the truth. 
 
 In the concluficn of the whole. It becomes us to add, to the 
 fifths delivered, what Chrift Jefus added to my text : Amek, 
 
 END OF TBE SERMONS^ 
 
A MINIATURE HISTORY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 BAPTISTS. 
 
 IT may be pLufmg to fome of mv readers to be prefent- 
 ed with a brief account of the B^iprifls. I fhall extract 
 this account from the writings rf thofe who were not of the 
 Baptift denomination, but rather prejudiced againft their. 
 
 Here it may be obferved, that the religious fe^r, c.Uled 
 Baptifts, have caufed the learned world more perplexity and 
 refearch to decypher their origin, than any other fedl of Chrif- 
 tians, or, perhaps, than all others. Yes, this refearch hath 
 bafHed all their erudition in ancient ftory. 
 
 It is not difficult to fix the period when one fedlofthis 
 denomination was firft called Petrobrufians, when another was 
 known by the name of Waterlandians, when a third was de- 
 D'i^minated Mennonites, &c. But the difficulty is this, to afcer- 
 tain the time, place and m.edium, by which Chrift's difciples 
 were led to adopt the peculi-ir fentiment, which is now held by 
 thofe called Baptiits, and which diftinguifhes them from all 
 odier cenominaiions. 
 
 It may be farther ohferved, that if no onej however learned 
 and wife, be ab'e to trace this fed to any beginning fliort of the 
 days of theaponies, orcf Chrift, it is poffible tliat it then arcfe. 
 B fides, if a-i other religious denominations, or the Pedobaptift*, 
 who include all which are not Baptifts, can be traced to a prob- 
 able origin ffiort of the apoftlec, and the Baptills cannot b^, it 
 affords ftiil more prcbabiiity, that they might have ariten then. 
 
 I wifh Tiy readers to indulge me in one queftion, and to give 
 me an explicit anfwer. Are you willing to have the ojigin of 
 the Bip'jfts falrlv explored, and to open your eyes to the light, 
 IhouM li;{ht he afforded ? 
 
 Y'-u cann -t, rny Chrillian readers, unlefs ycur minds be un- 
 du'y f^-aved by prejudice, do other wife than fay, Yes. For, 
 thougn y^u be not very friendly to the Baptifts, you will not 
 deny rhenn what you grant to your worft enemy, libeity to fpeak 
 the truth, and that truth its weight, at leaft in meafure. 
 
 It ought to be particularly noted, that my obj.:cl is not to 
 give the hiftoiy of a name, but of a principle. I ihall not con« 
 
A MINlATaRE HISTORY, &C. 83 
 
 tend who were finl called BaptiTrs, Anabaptlft-, MennoDites, cr 
 the like ; but who have held the peculiar fentiment which is 
 adopted by thofe who are called Baptifts. Wherever we fiad 
 this principle, there we find the men, the Chriftians, v^ho, had 
 they lived in our day, would be ftyled Baptifts. Nor is the 
 prefent controverfy,this, Whence came that mode ofbaptifni, 
 which is pra<5lired by all, who are known by the name Baptifts ? 
 For this mode is granted, generally, if not imiverfally,' by a!l 
 learned and honeft men, to be as ancient as John the Baptift 
 and the apoitles. This mrde is, indeed, not peculiar to the 
 Baptifts, for the Pedobaptifts. for maiy centuries, pracflifed this 
 mode ; and many of them do, to this day, pradife imn^.erfjon. 
 The peculiar chara^eriftic of the Baptifts is this : They hold, 
 that the ordinince of baptifm is to be adminiftered to adults cr 
 to vifible believers only. 
 
 One natural confequence nf this principle is, when any ens 
 who was baptized, cr fprinkled, m his infancy, comes over to 
 the Baptifts' fentiment, tliey require him to be baptized. 
 Hence they are called Anabaptifts. Another very natural 
 confequence is^ this fentiment conftralns the Baptifts to cppofe 
 the baptifm r f infants. Hence they are diftinguiftied by the 
 name of Antipedobaptifts. 
 
 I Ihall add one obfervation more, and then proceed to give 
 you a fuccinc> hiftory of the Baptifts. I'he obfervation is this : 
 Whenever and wherever I find perfons, who hold the peculiar 
 charadtariftic fentiment cf the Baptifts, I fhili call them by 
 that name. Their hiftory now follows. 
 
 L The origin ci the Baptifts can be found no wliere, unlefs 
 it be conceded that ic was at Jordan, or Enon. 
 
 Dr. Mofbeim, in his hift-^ry of the Baptifts, fays, "The true 
 cr'igin of that h6t, which acquired the denomination of the An- 
 abaptifts by their adminiftering anew die rite of baptifm to 
 thofe who come over to their comm.union, and derived that cf 
 Mennonites from the famous man to vrhom they owe the e:reat- 
 eft part of their prefent felicity, is hid in the rtmote depths cS antlq. 
 uity, and is of confequence extremely difficult to be afcertained." 
 Here Dr. Molheim, as learned an hiftorian, though not {o 
 candid a one, as the fcience of letters can boaft, bears pofidve 
 teftimony, that the origin of the Bap:ifts is hidden in the re- 
 mole depths of antiquity. Nothing is more evident than this ; the 
 Doftor either knew not their origin, or was not candid enough 
 to confefs it. At leaft, we have this conclufton, that he could, 
 fiad their origin no v/here fhort of the apoftles. 
 
84 A MINIATURE HISTORY 
 
 II. A large number of the Baptifts were fcattered, opprei- 
 fed, and perfecuted, through many, if not through all, the na- 
 tions of Europe, before the dawn of the reformation under Lu- 
 ther and Calvin. When Luther, feconded by fevei al princes of 
 the petty ftates of Germany, arofe in oppcfition to the over- 
 grown ufurpatioFiS of the church of Rome, the Baptifts alfo 
 arofe from their hiding places. They hoped that what they 
 had been long expelling and prayirg for was now at the door ; 
 the time in which the fufferings of God's people fhould be 
 greatly terminated : but God had not raifed Luther's views of 
 reformation to nigh the height the Baptifts were expeding. 
 Their detedation of the Mother of Harlots, owing to theii bit- 
 ter experience of her cruelties, and ihe clear gofpel light with 
 which they had been favoured above Luther, and their ardent 
 defire to be utterly delivered from her cruel oppreiTions, made 
 them wiih to carry the reformation farther than God had ap- 
 pointed Lutlier to accomplilK They were foon difappointed 
 in Luther, and probably did not duly appreciate the reforma- 
 tion which he was inft rumen rally efFe<fting. It was as might 
 have been expelled ; the Lutheran-^ and the Baptifts fell out 
 by the v/ay ; and Calvin, if not Luther, warmly oppcfcd them. 
 See M'Jheim. Cent, XV I. Chap iii. Sea. 3. Part 2. 
 
 Molheim, vol. IV. page 427, fpeaking of the Baptifts, fays, 
 ** This fedt ftarted up all of a fudden, in feveral countries, at 
 the fame point of time, and at the very period when die firft con- 
 tefts of the reformers wiih the Roman Pontiffs drew the atten- 
 tion of the world." 
 
 From this we have one plain and fair dedu(5tion ; that the Bap- 
 tifts were before the reformation under Luther and Calvin, and 
 therefor- did not take their rifs from the eathufiafts under Mun- 
 •zer and Storck, or at that time ; or at Munfter. 
 
 III. The HuSItes, in the fifteenth century, the Wickliffites, 
 in the fourteenth, and the Petrobiufians, in the twelfth, and the 
 Waldenfes, were all Baptifts.* To this fafi Dr. Moftieim bears 
 the following teftimony.f *' It may be obferved that the Men- 
 nonites (i. e. the Baptifts of Eaft and Weft Fnefland, Holland, 
 Gelderland, Brabant, Weftphalia, and other places in the North 
 of Europe) are not entirely mtjlake?i^ when they boaft their de- 
 fcentfrom the Waldenfes, Petrobrufians, and other ancient k6isy 
 who are ufiially confidered as witrnjes of the truth in times of 
 
 * Not all, every one ; but all, generally, 
 t Fcl. IV. pp. 4z8, 429* 
 
OF THE BAPTISTS. ^^ 
 
 Kniverflil daiknefs and fuperftiiion. Before the v'lCc of Luther 
 and Calvin, there lay conceahd in almojl all the countries of Eu- 
 rope, particularly In Bohemia, Moravia, Switzerland and Ger- 
 many, manyperfons, who adhered tenacioufly to the following 
 do^rine, which the Waldenfes, Wickiiffites and HufTues had 
 maintained ; fome in a more dif^uifed and others in a more 
 open and public manner, viz. Thai the kingdom of Chrijly or the 
 viftble church he had fjlall'ified upon earthy teas an ajfenthly of true 
 and real faints, and ought therefore to he inaccejfihle to the vnched and 
 unrighteous, and alfo exempt from all thofe injlitulions luhich human 
 prudence fuggeJIs to oppofe the progrcfs of iniquity, or to correct and 
 reform tranfgrejfors. This maxim is^ the true fource of all tie 
 pecuiiaiities, that are to be found in the religious do6trine and 
 difcipline of the Mennonites, (or Baptifts in the North of Eu- 
 rope) and it is moi\ certain that the greatejl part of xkit^z peculi- 
 arities were approved of by many of thofe who, before the dawn 
 of the reformation, entertained the notion already mentioned 
 relating to the vifible church of Chrift." 
 
 From this teftimony of Dr. Mofheim we may remark— 
 
 1. That the Mennonites were Baptifts, or Anabaptifts, for 
 ihefe different names he ufes to exprcfs one and the fame thing. 
 
 2. That the Petrobrufrans were Baptifts ; for the BapriUs 
 aflerc, and Molheim allows it, that they were iheir progenitors 
 in principle and practice. Befides, in his hiftory of the twelfili 
 century, part II. chap. v. feci. 7, he exprefsiy tells us, that one 
 of tlieir tenets Avas, that no perfons nvhaffjcutr ivere to be hapiizcd 
 before they 'were come to the full ufe of thtir reafon. 
 
 3. That the Waldenfes, Wickiiffites and Huflites were Eap- 
 tiils ; for, as Morneim fays, they ali held to the great and lead- 
 ing maxim, ^'hich is the true fource of all tlie peculiarities that 
 are to be found in the religious doftrine and difcipline oi the 
 Mennonites. ^^f^ feveral denominations of Chriftians v.ere 
 not known by the ancient, modern and appropiiate names Bap- 
 tifts. But their do»5trine and difcipline were the fame with our 
 Baptifts, and were they now living, they would he thus called. 
 In other words ; juft fo far as they were conftftent w ith their 
 great and leading maximy and juft fo far as the modern Baptifts 
 are conliftent with their great and leading maxim, juft fo far 
 thefe ancient and modern Baptifts are alike the one to the other. 
 
 4. That in the fixteemh century the Waldenfes, Petrobru- 
 fians and other ancient fectb (i. e. of die Baptifts) were ufually 
 conftdered as having been witneftes of the truth, in the times of 
 H 
 
^6 A MINIATURE HISTORY 
 
 darknefs and univerfal funerRiLion. How d fferently from this 
 would and do many confider them in our day ! " 
 
 5. That before the rif- of Luther and Calvin, there lay con- 
 cealed in almoil all the countries of Europe, particularly in Bo- 
 hemia, Moravia. Switzerland and Germany, many perfons who 
 held the fame dcifttir.e and difcipl.ne with the Baptifts in our 
 day, and were, of neceflary and fair confequence, of the fame 
 denomination. 
 
 IV. We have already traced the Baptlfls down to the 
 twelfth century. We have a]fo found that they were fcattered 
 over almoft all the countries of hurope, and were, in the dark 
 ages of popery, die witnefTes of the truth ; or have been ufually 
 thus confidered. Befides, v/e have found that ihe Waldenfes 
 were, in principle and practice, Baptifls ; or in other words, 
 we have found that the Waldenfes were Baptifts. We will 
 Jiow fee to v.'hat origin we can trace the Waldenfes. 
 
 Dr. Maclaine, who iranllated Mcfheim's church hiftory from 
 the original Latin, gives us, vol. III. pages 118, 119, under 
 note G, the following hiftory of the Waldenfes. His words 
 are, *' We may venture to affirm the contrary (i. e. from what 
 MrHieimhad juft fiiid of the Waldenfes taking their name from 
 Peter Waldus) with Eeza and other writers of note ; for it 
 feems evident, from the beft recortls, that Valdus derived his 
 name from the true Valdenfes of Piedmont, whofe dodrine he 
 adopted, and who were known by the name of Vaudois and 
 Valdenfes, before he or his imimediate followers exided. If 
 the Valdenfes. or Waldenfes, had derived their name from any 
 eminent teacher, it would probably have been from Valdo, who 
 was remarkable for the purity of his doctrine, in the ninth cen- 
 tury, and was the cotemporary and chief counfelior of Beren- 
 ^rarius. But the trufli is, that they derive their name from 
 their vallies in Piedmont, which in iheiri|mguage are called 
 Vaux. Plence Vaudois, their true name ;"' Hence Peter, (or, 
 as others call him, John) of Lyons, was called in Latin Val- 
 gus, becaufe he had adopted their dcclrine ; and hence the 
 term Valdenfes and Waldenfes, ufed by thcfe who write in 
 Enc?i;rh, or Latin, in the place of Vaudois. The bloody En- 
 qui'iV.or Reincrus Sacco, who exerted fuch a furious zeal for 
 the deilruaion of the Waldenfes, lived but about eighty years 
 after Valgus of Lyons, and muft th^efore be fuppofcd to know 
 whether or not he was the real founder of the Valdenies, or 
 Leo-lifts ; and yet it is remarkable, that he fpeaks of the Leon- 
 %i as a feci that had flourished about five hundred years ; nay, 
 
©F THE BAPTISTS. 87 
 
 fnentions srtithors of note, who make their anliqiiity remoant to 
 the apoftolic age. See the account given of Sacccts book by the 
 ycfii'u Gretfer in the Bibliotheca Patrum. I know not upon 
 what principle Dr Molheirn maintains that the inhabitants of 
 the valhes of Piedmont are to be carefully dirtingnifned from 
 the Waldenfes; and I am perfuaded that whoever will be at 
 the pains to read attentively the 2d, 25th, 26:h, and 27lh chap- 
 ters of the firft book of Leger's tiiliorie des Eglifes Vaudoifes, 
 will find this diPiiniflion entirely groundlefs. — When the Papills 
 aiks us where our religion was before Luther, we generally 
 anfwer, in the Bible, and we anfwer well. But to gratify their 
 tafte for tradition, and human authority, we may add to this 
 anfwer — and in the vallies of Piedmont. 
 
 To the above we may add, one of the Popifh Writers, fpeak- 
 in,^ of the Waldenfes, fays, " The hcrefy of the IValdsnfes ts ths 
 oldejl herefy in the ivorld.^'* 
 
 It is here worthy to be particularly noticed — 
 
 1. That Reinerus Sacco fpeaks of the Waldenfes, or Bap- 
 tlfls, of his day, as a fed that had, at that time, flouriPaed for 
 about five hundred years ; which brings the hiftory of the Bap- 
 tifts, as a religious fedt, down to the fifth century. 
 
 2. That tliis fame Reinerus Sacco mentions authors of note, 
 who make the antiquity o^ the Waldenfean BAptiils to remount; 
 io the apofioiic age. 
 
 3. That the Baptiils are the moft ancient of all the relig- 
 ious feds, who iiave fee themfelves to oppofe the ghodly pow- 
 ers of the Romanics. 
 
 4. That if there be any body of Chiillians, who have ex- 
 ited during the reign cf antichrift, or of tlje man of fin, the 
 Baptiils have been this living church of Jefus Chrill. 
 
 5. Ths confsq-ience cf the vv-hole is this: The Bapfids 
 have no origin fhort of the Apoftles. Tliey amfe in the days 
 of John the Baptifi, and increafed largely 'in the days of our 
 bl^ifed Saviour, when he fiiowed himfelf unto Ifrael, and in the 
 days of his ApoRles, and have exiRed, under the fevered oppref- 
 fions, \\ith intervals of profpe>*y, ever fince. 
 
 But as to the Pcdobaptifts, their origin is at once traced to 
 about the middle of the fecond century ; when the myflcry of 
 iniquity not only began to v,'ork, but, by its fermentation, had 
 produced this error of fruitful evils, namely, that baptifm v.'as 
 effential to falvation : yes, that it was regeneration. Hence 
 arofe the neceffity of baptizing children. Now comes forward 
 
 * PrefiJcnt Edwards's Hift. of Redemption, p. 267. 
 
83 A IvilNlATyRE HISTORY 
 
 Irenx.is, and informs that the church had a tradition from the 
 Apodies to give baptifm to infants. We are told in the Appen- 
 dix to MoOieim's Church Hidory, that one of the remarkable 
 things which took place in the fecond century was the baptiz- 
 ing ot infants, it being never known before, as a Chriftian or- 
 dinance for them. 
 
 What a pity it is, that good n -^.i, who have renounced the 
 error, whi^h was, as church hiflory informs us, the progenitor 
 of infant baptifm, fhould ftill retain its pra<5iical and erroneous 
 offspring, to the prejudice and marring of the church of God ! 
 Not a fnigle fedl of the PedobaptiRs can iind its origin nearer 
 to the Apoftlesthan the fecond century. We hencexonciude, 
 that their origin was there, and that they then and there amfs? 
 in the mydery which was then working. May the Father of 
 liglits open the. eyes of my brethren, that they may come out 
 ©f this, perhaps, the laft thicket of grofs error and darknefs. 
 
 I will now add — 
 
 V. The teftimony which Prefident Edwards bears in favour 
 of ll:e Waldenfes and other faithful ones, who were fcattered 
 through all parts of Europe in the dark ages of Popery. It is 
 the following : 
 
 " In every age of this dark time, there appeared particular 
 perfons in ail parts of Chriftendom, who bore a teftimony a- 
 r(ainft the corruptions and tyranny of the church of Rome. 
 There is no one age of antichrift, even in the darkeft time of 
 all, b^t ecclefiaflical hiftorians m-ention a great many by name, 
 who manifefted an abhorrence of the Pope and his idolatrous 
 wordiip, and plead for the ancient purity of doctrine and wor- 
 ihip. God was pleafed to maintain an uninterrupted fuccef- 
 iion of witneifes, through the whole time, in Germany, France, 
 Britain, aud otlier countries, as hiilorians demonftrate, and 
 mention them by name, and give an account of the teftimony 
 which they held. Many of them were private perfons, and 
 many of them minifters, and fome magiftrates and perfons of 
 great diftintftion. And there were numbers in every age, who 
 were perfecuted and put to death for this teftimony. 
 
 " Behdes thefe particular perfons, difperfed here and there, 
 'Jiere was a certain people, called the Waldenfes, who lived fep- 
 arate from all the reft of the world, who kept themfelves pure^ 
 and conftantly bore a teftimony againft the church of Rome, 
 through all this dark time. The place where they dwelt was 
 the Vaudois, or the five vallies of Piedmont, a very mountain- 
 ous country, between Italy and France. The place where they 
 lived was compaffed with thole exceeding high mountains, call- 
 
OF THE BAPTISTS. 89 
 
 «d tiie Alps, which were almoft impiifrable. The pafTage over 
 ihefe mountainous, defert countries, was fo diffii-nlt, that the 
 vallies where this people dwelt were ah^ioft Inacceflible. There 
 this people lived for many ages, as it were alone, where, in a 
 ftate of feparation from all the world, having very little to do 
 with any other people, they ferved God in the ancient purity 
 <if his worfliip, and never fubmitted to the church of Rome. 
 This place, in this deiert, m.ountainous country, probably was 
 the place, efpecially meant in the 12th chap, of Rev. 6th 
 verfc, as the place prepared of God for the woman, that they 
 fhould feed her there during the reign of Antlchrifl:. 
 
 ** Some of the Popilh writers themfelves own that that peo- 
 ple never fubmitted to the church of Rome. One of the Pop- 
 ifli writers, fpeaking of the Waldenfes, fays, the herefy of the. 
 Waldenfes is the oldeft herefy in the world. It is fuppofed, 
 that this people firfl: betook themfelves to this defert, fecret place 
 among the mountains, to hide themfelves from the fcverity of 
 the heathen perfecutions, which v.-ere before Conftantine the 
 Great; and thus the woman fled into the wiluernefs from the 
 face of the ferpent. Rev, xii. 6 ; and lO verfe 14, And to the 
 woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that fhe might 
 fly into the wildernefs into her place, where fhe is nouriflied for 
 a time and times and half a time from the face of the ferpent. 
 And the people being fettled there, their pofterity continued 
 there from age to age afterwards, and being as it were by nat- 
 ural walls, as well as by God's grace, feparated from the reft of 
 the world, never partook of the overflowing coiruption." 
 
 It is hoped diat the reader will very carefully and candidly 
 compare what is teftified to us by three very learned men, Dr. 
 Mofheim, Dr. Machine, and Prefident Edwards. The tefti- 
 mony of the firft is, that the Waldenfes and many others who 
 are ujually coufuhred as iv'ttnejfes of the truth in the times ofunher-^ 
 faldarhnsfs ^wd fuperjlhicn, were eff^ntially agreed with the Bap- 
 tifts of modern date, as 10 prlncipls and praclke^ or as to the 
 great maxim, whence flow all the peculiarities of that denomi- 
 nation. Ills teftimony, in Ihort, is this ; the Huflites, the 
 Wickiifiites, the Petrobrufians, and the Waldenfes, with other 
 witnefTes of the trutJi, fcattered over Europe, in the dark ages 
 of Popery, were elTentially the fame with the Baptiils of later 
 times J or that they all v/ere what we call Baptiifs. 
 
 Dr. Machine teftifies that the Waldenfes flour iflied as earlv 
 as the fifch ceniury ; yes, he informs us that fome authors of 
 note carry their antiquity up to the aooftolic age. 
 H 2. 
 
90 A MINIATURE HISTORY 
 
 Prefident Edwards informs us that thefe Waldenfes were 
 the m:Un body of t)ie church in the dark ages, and have been, 
 together with their Icattered brethren, the pure church of Jefus 
 Chriit, during the reign of Antichria, and, of certain confe- 
 quence, were fucceiTors of the pure church, from the days of 
 Chrift and his apoRles. 
 
 ^ The fair confequence of all is this, that the Baptifts have been 
 the uninterrupted church of our Lord from the apoftles* day 
 to ours. 
 
 I may, indeed, exclaim, What have 1 been believing, what 
 ]iave I been doing, with refpeft to the Baptifts, all my days ? 
 
 I know, and I confefs, that the hillory of the church aifures 
 me, that the denomination of Chriflians to which I have belong,- 
 ed, and to which 1 do tlill vifibly belong, came through the 
 church of Rome, and was broken off from the mother of har- 
 lots, and it is not greatly to be wondered at, if all her filth 
 fliould not be yet wiped away. At the fame time, the fame 
 hillory aifures me, that the Baptifts never have fubmitted to 
 her fupeiftitions and filthy abominations. 
 
 I am fomewhat furprifed at my own long continued igno- 
 rance, and at the yet remaining darknefs of my brethren, as 
 to this matter. But above all, what fhall I fay, at the hard 
 oppofition which fome good men yet maintain againft; their 
 brethren, the Baptifts ? Surely they might with great propri- 
 ety be addrelfed in the words of Gamaliel : " Take heed to 
 yourfelves what ye intend to do, as touching thele men." If 
 ye will not favour them, " refrain from them, and let them 
 .alone ; for if their counfel or work be of men, it will come to 
 nought ; but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it ; left 
 haply ye be found even to fight againft God." 
 
 All the power, craft, and cruelty of the wicked, though 
 practifed for nighly one thoufand eight hundred years, have 
 not been able to prevail againft them. Surely the mifguided 
 ical of good men will not. 
 
 In this ihort Hiftory of the Baptifts, we fee the continued 
 .nccomplilhment of one of Chrift*s promiifory predidions, 
 which is. Matt. xvi. 1 8. The gates of hell Ihall not prevail 
 ap-ainft the church. That denomination of Chriftians which 
 are called Baptifts, are the only known fociety of profeffing 
 Chriftians, againft which Satan hath not prevailed, either it\ 
 point of doa:rine, or difcipline, or both. This church, or old 
 and inveterate herefy, as Satan would call \\f he acknowledges^ 
 
OF THE BAPTISTS. 91 
 
 by the mouth of his fervants, the Romanifts, that he could 
 never fubdue. It is true, Satan hath joined many of his legions 
 to it, as he did many falfe brethren to the difciples in the days 
 of the apofties. But he hath never,- no, not for an hour, pre- 
 vailed upon this ancient and primitive church to give up the 
 do(5lrines of grace, or the adminiilrations of the ordinances as 
 Chrill delivered them to his people. That which Ihe firll re- 
 ceived, Ihe ftill holds fall, and will. In ail the hiftory of the 
 church, we read of no other body of profeffing Chriftians, after 
 which Satan hath caft fuch a continual flood of waters ; but 
 hitherto the earth hath helped the woman, and the flood of 
 perfecution hath not prevailed. Satan^s future efforts will be 
 equally without effecl:. 
 
 My Fathers and Brethren in the minidry, and my brethren 
 among the profefTed difciples of the Lord Jefus Chrift, fuffer a 
 word of exhortation. 
 
 If you will not take up the crofs, and fo increafe the num- 
 ber of Chrift's continually preferred, yet always fuffering, little 
 flock, be ye careful how ye fet yourfelves in array againft them ; 
 for more are they who are for them, than are thofe who are 
 againft them. With you is an arm of flefh, in all your oppo- 
 fitions, but with them is the Lord their God to help them, 
 and he will help them ; and by and by he will help them 
 right early. 
 
 I fhall be very pleafmgly difappointed, fhould I not be, by 
 many of you who are rulers in ifrael, fet at nought, for com- 
 ing over to the help of the Lord againft the mighty. But, if 
 I may but know the truth, and pleafe the Lord, it is, with me, 
 but a comparatively fmall thing to be judged of you, or of 
 man's judgment. I do, indeed, wifti for the continuance of 
 your good opinion and friendfhip, but I cannot pofTefs them 
 at the expenfe of truth. That I might teftify unto you thefe 
 things, I have rifl^ed every thing which the world calls valuable. 
 I am now determined, and through the grace of our Lord 
 Jefus Chrift I hope that to the end of my life 1 Ihall be deter- 
 mined, to venture every thing in defence of the dodrines and 
 ordinances and chnrch of the Son of God. I befeech all of 
 you, who know the grace of our Lord Jefuf, that ye do not as 
 did many of the chief rulers in ifrael. They believed on 
 Chrift, but did not confefs him, becaufe of the Pharifees, left 
 they fliould be put out of the fynagogue ; for they loved the 
 praife of men, more than the praife of God. John xii. 42, 43. 
 
92 A MINIATURE HISTORY, ^C, 
 
 You have now heard me, and know what I do. You will 
 therefore now make up your judgment. But I pray you, 
 remember one thing : With what judgment ye judge, ye 
 fhall be judged. 
 
 I am, Reader f 
 
 Thy Servant, for the GofpePs fake, 
 
 DANIEL MERRILL. 
 
E -At rati from the Bapltjl Mi/Jtonary Magazine, No, 4. 
 
 Account of the Baptifl Church lately conflituted 
 at Sedgwick, Diftricl of" Maine. 
 
 THE Rev. Daniel Merrill graduated at Dartmouth 
 College, 1 7 89, was ordained over the Congrcgalional 
 Church in Sedj^vvick, in September, 1793. -^'^ labours have 
 been very much blelTed among his people, who have expe- 
 rienced feveral precious feafons of revival under his miniftry, 
 particularly in the years 1798, and 1801. 
 
 Several circumftances occurred to lead Mr. Merrill, in the 
 courfe of the laft year, to review, with more critical attention, 
 the grounds on which he had praifl-ifed infant haptifm. The 
 refuk of his inquiries may be learned from the preceding 
 Sermons on Baptifm, and from the following account of his 
 baptifm, &c. 
 
 At a meeting of the church (or covenanted brethren) Feb. 
 28, 1805, they voted unanimouily to fend for a Council of 
 Baptill minifters to come and ailiil them in the following par- 
 ticulars, viz. ift. To adminifter Chriftian baptifm to them ; 
 2d. To conftitute tiiem into a church upon the primitive 
 Baptift platform ; 3d. To fet over them in the Lord the 
 Rev. Daniel Merrill, to be their miniller. 
 
 Agreeably to their requeft, Melfrs. Pitman of Providence, 
 Baldwin of Boflon, and Williams of Beverly, accompanied by 
 a number of brethren, took pafTage at Salem, at 8 o'clock on 
 Thurfday evening the 9th day of May, inftant, and arrived at 
 Sedgwick the Saturday following, at one, P. M. Lord's-day, 
 half paft 10 o'clock, Mr. Pitman preached from Ads v. 20. 
 After an intermilHoii of half an hour, Mr. Baldwin preached 
 from I Cor. iii. 9. After another intermiffion of a few min- 
 utes, Mr. Williams addreifed the people again iiom Proverbs 
 sxv. 25. At 6, Mr. Baldwin preached again from Solomon's 
 Song, i. 8. 
 
 Monday, May 12, at 2, P. M. the Council formed, and then 
 adjourned until the next day. At 3, alTcmbled in the Meet- 
 ing-houfe, and Mr. Wiiliams preached from John xiv. 21. 
 After which proceeded to an examination of the candidates 
 for baptifm, until the day was fpent. 
 
 TuefJay, 13th, examined a number more candidates. At 
 half paft 10, Mr. Williams preached particularly on the infll- 
 tution, from Acts ii. 41, Immediately after, we repaired to 
 
94 Account of Sedgwick Bapllfi Church. 
 
 the water's fide. The place fixed upon for the adminiftratioa 
 of this folemn ordinance was in the tide waters of Benjamin's 
 River, about one mile from the fea. \ more beautiful or 
 convenient place is fcaicely to be imagined. 
 
 The land adjoining was fufficiently elevated to accommodate 
 fpedators with the belt poffible prcfped ; and yet floping fo 
 gently to the margin of the river, that thofe at the fartheft 
 diifance might lee as plainly as thofe who flood nighoft. 
 
 As foon as the people v.'ere aifembied at the water's fide, 
 folemn prayer was offered up to that God whofe oidinance we 
 were goin^ to attend. A profound filence reigned through 
 the alTembly, when Mr, Baldwin took Mr. Merrill by the hand, 
 and Vvalkip.g flowly into the water, repeated thefe words. And 
 they ivenl down both into the ivater^ both Philip and the Eunuch^ 
 and he baptized him. When they had gotten to a fuitable depth, 
 the ordinance was perfiirmed. Mr. Merrill, rifmg from the 
 watery j^rave with a very pleafant, fmiiing countenance, could 
 not refrain expreffing the heart-felt fatiifadion he enjoyed in 
 this a<51: of obedience. As they afceaded out of the water, 
 Mr. Will ams went down with Mrs. Merrill, repeating thefe 
 words, And they ivere both righteous before God. iv ailing in all 
 /he commandments and ordinances of the Lord bhimelefs. in this 
 way the baptizing v.-as condudted, until all the candidates 
 prefent were baptized. Here, we beheld fixty-fix perfons 
 buried in baplifm by thefe two adminiflrators, in forty-tv/o 
 minutes ! The candidates, both females as well as males, de- 
 fcerded into the water v-ith the greateft calmnefs imaginable 5 
 and in general, they came out of it rejoicing in fuch a manner 
 as we have feldom feen. Num.bers of them could not refrain 
 giving glory lo God our Saviour, who by his own example 
 marked out this hum.ble, blefTed way. i'he fpe^ftators behaved 
 with the utmoll propriety. They v.-ere not only folemn, but 
 many of them were in tears. A heart mui.t be adamant not 
 to have fofteued at fach a moving fcene. The fervlce was- 
 concluded by prayer and fmging. 
 
 At 5 o'clock the people alfembled again at the Meeting- 
 houfe, and Mr. Pitman preached to thep^ from John xii. 26. 
 
 WednefJay morning the Council me' and arranged the 
 buflnefs of the afternoon. Then examined and baotized 
 nineteen candidates more, in the i^me place and mar.urr as 
 defcnbed above. At i o'clock affembled again in the Meet- 
 ing -houfe ; v;hen the baptized members, having, as v. c ; ^ pe, 
 prft given ihemfelves to the Lord, now gave themfclvea to one 
 
Account of Sedgwick Baptiji Church, 95 
 
 another by the will oi God. After thus covenanting with 
 each other, the Rev. Mr. Cafe, by the appointment of the 
 Council, addreffed them in a few v.'ords, and gave the right 
 hand to them, in to^en of our fellovvlhip with them as a fifter 
 church of Chrift ; and by folemn prayer, commended them to God 
 and the laord of his grace, which is able to build them up, and give 
 then- an inheritance among all them that are far.d'ified. 
 
 The Council immediately proceeded to ordain Mr. Merrill. 
 
 Mr. Baldv/in introduced the folemnity by prayer ; and 
 
 then addreiTed the people in a well-adapted and very impref- 
 iive difcourfe, founded on part of the 3d verfe of the epiftle of 
 Jude : Earnejlly contend for the faith once delivered to the faints* 
 The ordaining prayer was made by the Rev. Elifha Snow of 
 Thomaftown ; the charge, by the Rev. Abraham Crmmings 
 of Vinal-Haven ; the right hand of fellowfhip, by thj Rev, 
 Eliflia Williams of Beverly ; and the concluding prayer, by 
 ^he Rev. John Pitman of Providence. 
 
 MANNING £5f LORING, No. 2, CORNHILL, 
 
 Have for fale, among a great variety of other valuable Books, the 
 following interefling Publications, viz. 
 
 Short Hillory of the ancient Ifraelites : with an 
 
 account of their Manners. Cuftoms, Law?, Polity, Religion, 
 5e(51:s, Arts, and Trades, Divifion of Times, Wars, Captivities, 
 &c. By Dr. Adam Claike. Price i del. 25 cents. 
 
 Zion's Pilgrim. By Robert Hawker, D. D. 
 
 63 cents. In this interefting and ferious little work, the fol- 
 lowing fubjecls are evangelically treated in the way of narrative. 
 
 I. The Moral Man. 2. 1 he Moral Preacher. 3. The 
 
 Family at Prayers. 4. The Traveller. 5. The Prayer- 
 Meeting. 6. The Poor Man's Experience. 7. 'the Mournful 
 Believer. 8. The Cries of Unbelief. 9. A Believer under 
 the Hidings of God's countenance. 10. IheSeimon. 11. 
 The Rernaiks. \z. The Dead Child, it,. The Suicide. 14. 
 The Ploughman. 15. The Strayed Sheep. 16. An Inn. 
 17. The Jew. 18. The Diary'. 19. Market day, 20. The 
 Grace. 21. The Paralytic. 22. The .^lable Boy. 23. The 
 Difafter. 24. My Relations. 25. The Book. 26. The 
 Brothers. 27. The Houfe of the Inteipreter. 28. The Pic- 
 ture Room. 29. Monuments. 30., Mottos. 
 
BOOKS for f ale by MAN>nNG £if Loring. 
 
 Life and Charader of Mifs Sufanna Anthony, 
 
 of Newport. Containing Extracts from her Writings. By 
 Dr. Hopkins. Price 75 cents. 
 
 Romaine's Triumphs of Faith, Walk of Faith^ 
 
 and Life of Faith. 3 dels. 50 cents. 
 
 An elegant edition of Mrs. Rowe's devout Ex- 
 
 ercifes of the Heart, witli a copperphite. Price i del. 
 
 New Pocket Biographical Diclionary : contain- 
 ing Memoirs of the moll eminent peifons, ancient and mod- 
 ern, who have ever adorned this or any other country. By J. 
 Kingfion. Price 2 dols. 
 
 Memoirs of the Life and Character of the late 
 Rev. Cf)rne]ius Winter. By the celehratcd William Jay, 
 Price I dol. 12 cts. 
 
 God the Guardian of the Poor, and the Bank 
 
 of Faith : or, a Difplay of the Providences of God, which 
 have nt fundry times attended the author. Ey William 
 Huntington, S. S. Price i dol. 
 
 Redemption, a Poem in five Books. By Jofeph 
 
 Swain. To which are iinnexed, ic8 Hymns hy the fame 
 author, and a (liort Eifay on Church Fellox^.fliip and Social 
 Re)i,g:ion. Price 87^ cents. 
 
 Wright's complete Life of Chrift, of his Apof- 
 
 ties, Evangelids, Difciples, &c. including the lives of John the 
 Baptill, the Virgin Mary, and many other eminent perfon«, 
 and primitive Chridians. With Plates. Folio. 5 dols. 
 
 Buck's Treatife on Religious Experience : in 
 which its nati^.ro, evidences, and advantages are confidered, 
 under tlie following heads, viz — 
 
 The nature of Religious Experience in general. — The ad- 
 vantages of Experience. — The Young Lhriftian's Experience. 
 — Expeiience of the Chriftian in middle age. — Diftreffing Ex- 
 })ericnce. — On happy Expeiience — Remembrance cA pad Ex- 
 perience. — On the Relation of Experience. — The Aged Chrif- 
 iHin's Experience. — Dying Experience. — Advice refpecling 
 Experience. Tiie evil of the want of Experience, i doL 
 
 ^ This work is recr-mmended to the attentive peruPril of 
 younjy Chriftians in particular, and to all who dehrc inlormu- 
 tion relative to the true Chridian Charci,51er. 
 
 Chriftian Memoirs in the f(n*m oi a New Pil- 
 grimage to ths Heavenly Jerufalcm. By W. Shrubfole, 
 z dole 1 2 cents. 
 
THE 
 
 SECOND EXPOSITION 
 
 OF 
 
 Some of the falfe Arguments, Miftakes, anS 
 Errors 
 
 REF. SAMUEL AUSTIN. 
 
 PUBLISHED FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC. 
 
 BY DANIEn MERRILL, 
 
 PASTOR OF TUE CHDRCH OF CHRIST IN SEDGWICK^ 
 
 And In the days of thefe kings fliall the God of heaven fetup a klii^- 
 dom, which fhall never be dedroyed : and the kingdom fhall not be 
 left to other people, but it (hall break in pieces and confums all thefc 
 kmgdoms, and it Ihall {land forever. Daniel. 
 
 Another parable fpakc he unto them, The kingdom of heaven is like 
 unto leaven, which a woman took and hid in three meafures of meal, 
 till the whole was leavened. ^^aj Ckrijl. 
 
 Buy the truth, and fell it not. Solomon, 
 
 B ST A': 
 
 Prlntea and fold by Manning ^ Loring, N°' 2, Comhill 
 
 1807, 
 
District of Massachusetts^ to wit : 
 
 BE IT REMEMBERED,That on the twenty-fixth day of June, in the 
 thirty- firlt year of the independence of tlie United States of Amer- 
 ica, Manning tf Loring, of the faid diftridt, have depofited in this 
 office the title of a Book, the right whereof they claim as Proprietors, 
 in the words following, to 'wit : — " The Second Eypofition of fome of 
 the falfe Arguments, Miftakes, and Errors of the Rev. Samuel Auftin. 
 Publifhed for the Benefit of the Public. By D.iniel Merrill, Pallor 
 of the Church of Chrifl in Sedgwick." 
 
 In conformity to the A6t of the Congrefs of the United States, enti- 
 tled, " An A*5l for the encouragement of learning, by fecuring the 
 copies of maps, charts, and books, to the Authors and Proprietors of 
 inch copies, during the times therein mentioned :" and alfo to an A(9-, 
 entitled, •' An A<51 fupplementary to an Aft, entitled, An Adl for the 
 encouragement of learning, by fecuring the copies of maps, charts, and 
 books, to the Authors and Proprietors of fuch copies, during the times 
 therein mentioned ; and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of 
 defigning, engraving, &nd etching hlflorical and other prints." 
 
 WILLIAM S. SHAW, Clerk of ih« Di/iria tf Majacbufdts. 
 
To the Reader, 
 
 DEAR FRIEND, 
 
 To the carelefs finnery and to the ind'Amt and 
 erroneous faint ^ I appear a fool ; and the prefefit controverfyy 
 efpccially on my fide^ to he needlefs and luithout profit. But 
 it luill he foon known y that more is depending on it than are 
 all the treafurei of the Indiesy or than the pleafures of time. 
 It has heen Satan^ s fuhiilty^ from the heginning, io lead men 
 from God's inftitutionu A compliance with this fubtilty war 
 the Jin of our fifl parents, and ruined our race, A compli- 
 ance ivith this provoked God to cajl the ten trihes as cut of 
 his fight, A neglect of the Lord^s ordinances carried the 
 Jews into the Babylonfh captivity for feventy years. For 
 the fame profanation of the Lord^s ordinances, they are noiu 
 a taunty a bye-wordy and a curfe, among all nations. A 
 compliance with the fame device of Satan produced Antichrif^ 
 and Jiill upholds him. 
 
 The devil is the fame deceiver now that he was nearly fix 
 thoufand years ago. He then reprefented fin as a pleafant 
 thing, and the way to wifdom. Jujl fo now. Thofe, who 
 in any and every age have confidered the pfitive injlitutions 
 cf the Lord to he of very facred importance, have heen called 
 by perhaps every name luhich the malice of Satan could invent, 
 Thefe ill names and reproaches arejlill the lot offuch as keep 
 the ordinances as Chrijl delivered them. What falfehcods 
 have heen wickedly circulated agalnfl the Author of thefe 
 pages ! How many, from luhom we might have expedled 
 better things, have faid, Report, and lue will report it ! 
 
 Kind reader, I kno w hut one thing which the public can 
 lay to my charge, and it is this : — / am jealous for the honour 
 of Jefus, the King of the Gentiles (is well as jews. I plead 
 for obedience to his injlitutions aftd ordinances. I plead againfl 
 thfe who would and do corrupt them. I plead againft the 
 prief and people who difohey my King. I plead with argu- 
 
TO THE READER, 
 
 ments Jo plaitiy that a child may underjlnnd. I plead the 
 plain nvcrdi the open luord, the unadulterated word of 
 Gcdy as my defence. I have injured no man in this matter^ 
 ciherivife than I have charged guilt upon the corrupters of 
 God^s word. My opponents defpife me^ but the Lord will 
 rebuhe them. It is bis caufe which 1 defend. He will one 
 day plead my cauje^ and put my enemies to fhame. I have^ 
 and do fUll^ wilUngh hear reproach for Jefus^ fake. I 
 heartily commiferate the cafe of thofe wh9 are on the oppofite 
 ftde, I fee their end coming : it may not be far off. 
 
 Reader f IfraeVs defpifing Elijah did not fave them ; Ju- 
 dah's fitting Jere7niah at nought did not fave them ; nor will 
 it avail the oppofers to fet at nought the baptized church, with 
 their leaders. 
 
 Reader, if I be a real ChrifHan, I am a real Baptifl, and 
 the Lord huth made me both. If I he a Chriflian, then in 
 the fincerity of my hearty I befeech thee to ir.quire for the 
 order of Chri/l's houfe, as for thy life, for it is for thy life ; 
 for others luill fon receive of the plagues of Antichrif, 
 When you fl:>all fee, in the following pages, with what J a If e 
 arguments, mifakes, and errors, Air. A. hath laboured to 
 defend his fide, I pray thee afk thy f elf this quejlion, — Can 
 the caufe of truth thus labour, and need fuch means of defence^ 
 in the hands of an able difputant ? The reafon why Mr, A, 
 hath fo committed himfelf is not becaufe he is unable to argue 
 well in a goad cafe, but on account of his having undertaken 
 to defend a bad one. 
 
 I now cotnmit the matter to God and to the reader'* s hefi 
 judgment, praying the Father of Lights to fend forth light 
 and truth y and fpeedily fubdue the world unto himfelf 
 
 With good will to all men, 
 
 I am the reader s friend, 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 
 Sescwicx, Avcv9T IX, iSc^t 
 
Second Expofition, ^x. 
 
 We appeal to the Bible ^ to Jlubborn facts^ and to 
 common fenfe. 
 
 TO ALL WHOM IT MAY CONCERN. 
 
 MEN, BRETHREN, AND FATHERS, 
 
 IVIy public writings are ilill attended with a 
 feries of pain and pleafure. It is painful to me to contra^^ 
 did men of education, talents, and refpedability, and to be 
 contradidled by them, as has been the cafe, and probably 
 will be for the prefent. But it is pleafing, tliat God, who 
 feparated me from my mother's womb, hath called me, not 
 only to the knowledge of his word generally, but to know 
 the order of his houfe, and to defend it. 
 
 I am very little difappointed at the reception which my 
 writings receive : for when God taught me to difcover the 
 blinduefs and errors in which I and my brethren were, I 
 faw dire<^ly that my repentance and reformation would 
 bring an army of oppofers : for the moment in which I 
 condemned myfelf, I condemned them ; and when I for-» 
 fook my evil practices, I pradically condemned thofe who 
 continued in them. 
 
 My Lord and Mafter was called Beelzebub, and his firft 
 apoftles were faid to be mad. I calculated to partake of 
 4bme of the fame kind of ufage. That many of the wicked 
 oppofe me, is not ftrange ; that hypocritical fcribes and 
 phaiifees oppofe me, is no caufe of wonder; that good 
 men, who have not light and refoiution fuificient to re- 
 nounce their educational prejudices, Ihould oppofe me, is 
 nothing more than might have been expe*^ed, nor is this 
 different from what was expeded j but; that good men 
 
6 Second Expoftlion of 
 
 fnould life the artillery of the wicked, and defend their 
 errors by fophiftrr, and 1 might almofl fay by deception, 
 is not what I fo fully expected as I find to be true. Nor 
 was I fully apprifed, that good men would treat me wich 
 all that contempt with which the men of Succoth did Gid- 
 eon, and Nabal the fervants of David. But I find feme 
 are difpofed much the fame way. I have no difpofition to 
 teach them, with the thorns and briars of the wlldernefs, 
 nor with the fword of fteel : but I truft in the God of 
 Ifrael, that the day is not far off, when they fhall be taught 
 by the fword of the Spirit, which is the word oi God ; and 
 when they fliall be willing to hear, and fhall treat with more 
 refpeft and much lefs rudenefs, fuch as would indrufl them. 
 
 Ivlr. Samuel Auftin I confider to be one of thefe good 
 men. He is impatient of contradiflion, and has informed 
 the world that he hath clofed his public correfpondence 
 with me ; yet my pen muft expofe his errors, and the public 
 muft hear it. At the fam.e time, I pray the Lord that not 
 a fentence may efcape my pen, which fhall give either him 
 or his brethren needlefs pain. It is alfo my defire, that 1 
 may never withhold a truth which the caufe of Chrill: lliall 
 require me tt) make public. It is truth, plain truth, on 
 w^hich I depend, for the fupport of Chrift's caufe; which I 
 hope is my caufe. I Ihall not ridicule Mr. A., nor fhall I 
 attempt to defpife him, or fpare him out of pity ;* nsr do 
 I afk him ever to fpare me again, becaufe he fo pities my 
 v/eaknefs that he will not fully expofe the nakednefs of the land, 
 I afk no favour, in this way, from Mr. A., nor from any 
 other man. Let truth be defended, let truth be thoroughly 
 defended, though * appear a fool. 
 
 i can with fome degree of fincerity fay, I pity Mr. A. ; 
 yet 1 pity the fufFering caufe of truth more. It is my fet- 
 tled judgment, that he thinketh himfelf to be doing God 
 jervicc, in his oppofition to the caufe of the Son ot God. 
 It will, no doubt, wound his feelings, when 1 fliall prove 
 him guilty of fophiftry, and miilakes, and mifreprefenta- 
 tions, in his zealous labours for the caufe of error; but I 
 muft confider his feelings as he alfo may foon confider 
 them, of very little worth, when they are to be woundad 
 or truth given up. 
 
 I Ihall not mention every miftake and error which are 
 found in his Letters ; but fhall endeavour to give fuch an 
 account of them generally, that the reader may noi, unleft 
 
 * Sec Mr- Auflin's Letter*, p. 20, 4, 3. 
 
Mr. Aujlin's MiJ}akes. 7 
 
 lie lovf^ d.iikncfs rather thvm liglit, be ftambled in them. 
 It mii^ht not be nec'eflary to make any reply, were it not 
 tirat m his title pag« he promifed to do fometliing, and 
 I'onie ot" his readers might rake it for granted that he had, 
 uiilefs his falle arguments, his weak arguments, his millakes, 
 milVeprefentations, &.c. were cxpcfed. This I Ihall now do. 
 but previoufly, it may be well to noie, that Mr. A. is on 
 the retreat ; for he concedes, 
 
 1. That fprinkiing is not buptifm ; or, that he is unable 
 to prove it to be fo. His words are, page 8, " Neither 
 have I faid that fpr inkling is baptifm. Here, again, is 
 untairnefs. Where is quotation ?" I will furnilh him with 
 more than one. Says Mr. A. in his firit pamphlet to me, 
 page 46, " VvHiy may it (external bapuifm) not as well be 
 by aiTufion or fprmkUng F'' Again, page ioo, fivshe, "We 
 deny that inimerfion is any more baptifm ihnn JprlnU'mg or 
 pouring." My oblervation upon this is, When a good man 
 iiath repeatedly aei'/ocated a certain tenet, and afterv.'ards, 
 
 lis having fpoken in its fa- 
 it ; and if he be horriil, be 
 mud be difpofed to reliuquiih it, when he charges his Op- 
 ponent with unfairnefs for placing it to his account. 
 
 2. He concedes, that pcedobaptifm hath no martyrs to 
 witnefs for it. Page 15, he fays, " By confefTors, you 
 rnean fuch as have fufiered maiLyrdom for the doclrine of 
 pasdobapt'fm. I never pretended we had any. What the 
 reafons are that we have none, I may not be able to aingn.'* 
 The reafons are very plain. Pasdc baptifm was appointed 
 by iTien, not by the Lord ; and it was appointed for men, 
 not for the Lord ; for worldly, fuperfiitious men too, and 
 for fuperftitious purpofes. Thefe are reafons enough why 
 God never fufiered any of his friends to die in the defence 
 ot it. 
 
 The public (hall now be prefented with a ftw famples oi 
 Mr. A.'s falfe argumentations or fcphifms. 
 
 I. Says he, pages 10, ir, '■^ Peter, influenced by his 
 carnal pre'judiciSy tliought he muft by no means come unto 
 one of another nation, becaufe they were not of the cir- 
 cumcifion ; but it was told him, What God hath cleanfecl 
 tliat call not thou common, 'i he character of Cornelius, 
 if we are to be governed by the decifion of God, was a full 
 warrant for Peter to hold communion with him ; and it 
 would feem, though he had this ground only for it, he hav- 
 ing not yet been baptized, had he refufed he would have 
 wichilood God : for he favs, « Forafmuch then, as God 
 
8 Second Expofition of 
 
 o-avc thern the like gift that he did unto us, what was I 
 that 1 could withi^and God.' So it is apprehended, that 
 the allowed facft, that God hath cleanled this multitude of 
 pious perfons (juil mentioned) and fealed them as his, with 
 the like gift of the Holy Gholf which he hath beilowed on 
 )ou, obliges you not to treat them as common or unclean.'* 
 Mr. A.'s argument, in plain Englifh, is this : — Peter 
 would have wlthltood God, had he not h:ive had commu- 
 nion with the devout Cornelius, v.-ho had received the Holy 
 Ghoft ; and h.id he not baptized him, feeing he received 
 the word gladly^ and was a qualified fubjedl for the ordi- 
 nance. Therefore, and what ? This, Th^ Baptllls lutthjland 
 Gody by refujlrig to ccrnrr.une at the I^ord^s table iv'ith thofe nvho 
 are not labt'ized. This is one of the fir ft rate of fophifms. 
 Peter would have withftood God, had he refufed to have 
 baptized believing Cornelias ; therefore, the baptized church 
 v.irhrtar.d God, bccaufe they lefufe to commune with un- 
 b:iptized perfons. Peter's commitfion and orders were to 
 baptize thofe who believed, therefore he would have with- 
 ftood God had he refufed. The Baptifts have no commif- 
 llon, order, or liberty from God, to commune at the Lord's 
 table w4th any till they are baptized, yet th:y iv'ithjland God 
 'if they refufe. Into what abfurdity do Mr. A.'s errors drive 
 him ! But lays he, •' Pious perfons having received the like 
 girt of the Holy Ghoif , obliges the Baptifts not to treat 
 them as common or unclean." Certainly, and we do not. 
 \v e fpeak unto tliem the good word of the Lord, and invite 
 them to fcruike the papiftical errors of fprinkling and infant 
 baptifm ; and when they, Cornelius like, will hear whatfo- 
 ever the Lord faith unto them, we. gladly commune with 
 them in bo:h the ordinances, and in God's appointed way 
 ICG : firft in baptifm, then in the fupper. 
 
 2. Ihe next *\\V^ -.'rg-'-nent or fophifm of his v.hlch I 
 fiiall mention, is the anfwer to the queftion which I put to 
 him, in the words f^Uovang : — Suppofe there be a refor- 
 mation at this prelent time in Worceftf r, where you refide. 
 Suppoie fifiv p-eribns of the brighteft talents be converted. 
 Not one of them has been baptized, or even fo n)uch as 
 fprinkled. I providentially ride th.rough the town next 
 v.eek ; by chance I meet ^i^. A. in the ilreet, and put this 
 queftion — Have thole very refpeclable chara^fters, who have 
 of late been hopefully converted, joined the church (mean- 
 ing the vifible church) ? The fophiftry is in his anfwer, 
 page 14. His anfwer is, "Yes. What! become con- 
 vened to Chrift, ^iVid yet not join his kingdom ?'* Here 
 
Mr, Aujiin's Mijiakcs, 9 
 
 he tells me and the public that his anfwer Is yes ; whereas, 
 if I cm underftand any thing by what he fays, he has given 
 no anfwer to the queition, but has anfwered another, which 
 I put not. The queftion propofed was, Have thefe con- 
 verted unbaptized perfons joined the church, the vifibls 
 church ? Yes, fays Mr. A. they have joined Chriii's king- 
 dom. Yes ; but this is not the queftion. The quellion is. 
 Have they joined the vifible church of Chrlft ? Yes, fays 
 he, they have joined his kingdom. If I comprehend Mr. 
 A. this is Iheer fophiilry and evafion, and manifefls that 
 the place is too ftrait for him. If they have joined th* 
 vifible church, why do he and his brethren converfe with 
 them, in order to their joining ? Have Mr. A. and his 
 brethren been idling with all the perfons whom they have 
 profeffedly admitted into the vifible church ? and does he 
 fuppofe that his brethren, through the Chriftian world, 
 have been merely playing with folemn things, when they 
 have publickly received vifible converts into the vifible 
 church ? Not a cliild in Worcefter, cf ten years old, but 
 can at once anfwer the queftion, which Mr. A. appears un» 
 willing to folve. Indeed, it is a difficult one for him : for 
 if he fay no, it fpoils his argument for communion with 
 unbaptized perfons ; if he fay yes, that they have joined 
 the vifible church, then he is contrary from all men of 
 whom I have ever before heard or read. Bcfules, he would 
 be fubjedi to another difficulty ; perhaps not 0^2 in ten 
 thoiifand, if one in the world, will believe him : even chiK 
 dren know better. Indeed, the time fpoken of by the 
 prophet is come, when children ihould rule the pr ofefTed 
 people of God. I am forry to fay thus of Mr. A., for I 
 believe him a valuable man in many refpeds ; but his good 
 things mud not fan<5lion his bad ones. When he employs 
 his time and talents to defend Antichrift's ordinances and 
 church order^ he muft be expofed and rebuked Itarply, 
 that he may be found in the faitii. 
 
 3. We will nov/ attend to another of Mr. A.'s fophifms^ 
 by which he overturns his whole fcheme. 
 
 His fcheme or notion is, tliat the being bom again, and 
 efpecially its being known, conftitutes perfons members of 
 the vifible church. For, page 14, he fays, *♦ What ! be- 
 come converted to Chrift, and not join his kingdom ?" 
 intending the vifible church, unlefs he meant to evade. 
 But now we fhall fee him, in contradiction to himfelf, 
 plead with his full ftrength againft it ; or otherwife, he is 
 purpofely keeping the fubjed in debate out of fight, 
 B- 2. 
 
lo Second Expcfition of 
 
 We will hear what he fays. In page ic2, of his Sift 
 I.etters, his words are, " Whatever be defigned by the 
 kingdom of God, and whatever is to be underllood here, 
 by being born of water and of the Spirit, both are necef- 
 fary, as pre-requihtes to a perfon's entering into this king- 
 dom. 1'he biith goes before the entrance"" To this, in 
 my Letters to him, page 73, my anfwer is. If you will be 
 kind enough to inform the public, for hov>r long a time a 
 perfon raurt be born before he enters into the world, then 
 they will poflefs a necelfary datum to underftand your new 
 doctrine, that tlie birch gops before the entrance. In reply 
 to this, fays Mr. A. page 26, *' Is regeneration then, in all 
 cafes, an entrance into glory ?" Here he lliifts the fubjetfl 
 wiiich is debating. I was not fpeaking of the kingdom of 
 glory, but of the vlfible kingdom of Chrift. Here he takes 
 for granted what I have no difpofition to deny ; and then 
 would have the pubic believe, what he is unable to prove, 
 that the- being born of water, or that baptifm, is not the 
 entrance into the vifible kingdom of Chrill. He takes for 
 granted, that regeneration is not. In all cafes, an entrance 
 into glory. Very well ; no perfon faid it was : but his 
 argument, or conclufion, is what I diHike. His argument, 
 in Ihort, is this ; Regeneration is not an entrance into glo- 
 ry ; therefore, baptifm is not an -entrance into the vifible 
 church. Such an -.irgument as this, proves nothing to any 
 man's advaritage : it is a mere fophifm. 
 
 I will here, that every thing may be perfedly plain, pre- 
 sent with exadnefs my fentiments on this fubjed. 
 
 Firil, Regeneration, or the new birth, is an entrance into 
 the fpiritual, or what is ufually termed the invifible, king- 
 dom of L'hrift. 
 
 Secondly, The being born of water, or baptifm, is an 
 entrance, or the entrance, into the vifible kingdom of Chrift. 
 
 Thirdly, Dying in Chrijl is the entrance into the kingdom 
 of glory. 
 
 Now, it is the entrance into this fecond kingdom, the vifi- 
 ble kingdom of Chrift, which is the fubjed of controverly. 
 
 We fhall now (how that Mr. A. has changed the fub- 
 jert, or otherwife is chargeable with felf-contradiflion ; he 
 H'iil acknowledge which he pleafes. If he have changed 
 the fubje(5t, and proved what is not controverted, and then 
 taken for granted the fubjeft of debate, he is chargeable 
 with fophirtry, or falfe and difingenuous argumentation. 
 If he have not changed the fubjed, but intends the vifible 
 Hngdom of Chrift, then he is guilty of felf-contradidion. 
 
Mr. Aujiuii Miftakes. i \ 
 
 as will now appear. Page 26, he fays, the words of Chrlft 
 are, * Except a man be bom of water, and of the Spirit, he 
 cannot enter into the kingdom of God. Now, fays he, 
 ** Let us apply this mode of expreflion to a famihar eafe. 
 King Ahafuerus makes a banquet for queen Ellher, and 
 invites Haman. He orders Haman to be told, that except 
 he is habited in white, he cannot enter in to the banquet. 
 Haman puts on white clothing accordingly. Now, fays 
 Mr. A., is Haman's clothing himfelf in white, before he 
 enters in to the banquet, preparatory to it, or the entrance 
 itfelf?'^ 
 
 By the illullration in this his f^imiliar cafe, he tells us, if 
 there be any meaning in it, that to be born again, or con- 
 verted to Chrift, is not the entrance into the vifible king- 
 dom of Chrift, but preparatory to it. But in page 14, in 
 anfwer to a difficult queRion which I propofed to him, he 
 told us that it is the entrance ; not only fo, but he tells us 
 that he hath the apoftles with him in the matter. I pre- 
 fume he will not tell us that the apodles are with him on 
 both fides of the contradidion. I do not fo much blame 
 Mr. A. for contradiding himfelf, as I do for his continuing 
 to travel in that crooked path, in which no man can go 
 ilraight. 
 
 The above may ^^rve as f imples of Mr. A.'s fophifms, 
 or falfe arguments. I agree to prefent more of them, and 
 t© Ihow that his reply to my Letters is little elfe but one 
 continued fophifm, fhould the public good demand it, and 
 the Lord give me opportunity. 
 
 The public fhall now be prefented with a few of his 
 weak arguments, and he appears to have none but of this 
 defcription. 
 
 I. The fir ft weak argument which I fhall mention, is In 
 page 32 ; and it is given the public in order to deftroy the 
 natural argument for immerfion which we have in Mark 
 i. 5. from the force of the word in. The text is this, * And 
 there went out unto him all the land of Judea, and they of 
 Jerufalem, and were all baptized of him in the river of 
 Jordan.' The common fenfe cf this text is, that they were 
 immerfed, or buried in baptifm. But to fet this natural 
 and fcriptural argument alide, Mr. A. prefents the public 
 with the following argument. '< I have (fays he) a Bible 
 pretty full cf plates ; in one of them referring to this tranf- 
 a(^ion, the Bapti ft and the Saviour are reprefented as ftand- 
 ing in the margin of the ftream, to a depth a little above 
 their ankles, and John is pouring water from his hand on 
 
12 Second Expofit'ion of 
 
 the he.id of the Saviour." Had Mr. A. have added, that 
 this phite of his was inferted in his Bible by the dire<5lion 
 of the pope, on purpofe to deceive thofe who regard pic- 
 tures more than they do Avords, very few of his readers 
 would probably have been deceived by it. 
 
 2. Another of Mr. A.'s weak arguments is found in 
 page 13 ; it is againft what is called clofe communion, and 
 in the words following : — " O thou fpirit of Brainerd, reft- 
 ing in the bofom of thy much-beloved Jefus, dod thou wit- 
 nefs the fentence which has been pafTed upon thee by one 
 of thy fellov/ difciples in this world ? Doft thou hear what 
 is faid of thee among men, that when with them, even 
 when thou didft drain the energies of thy nature in impor- 
 tunate prayer, and in incellant labours for the converfion 
 of poor heathens, thou waft \\>thout, where are dogs, and 
 forcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers ?'* 
 
 What a pity Mr. A. had not have told us one thing 
 more, and have proved it to us, that the amiable and pious 
 David Brainerd was a perfetft man, and could not err ; 
 then his argument would have had force, and we fhould 
 have concluded that he walked in all the ftatutes and ordi- 
 nances of the Lord blamelefs ; then to have known his 
 practice would have been the fame as to have known the 
 word of God and our duty. Till Mr. A. fhall prove this 
 much needed point, his argument muft ftand for a iveak 
 ^ne ; for it is nothing to the prefent bufmefs to know what 
 Mr. Brainerd did or did not, as to divine inftitutioiis, ualefs 
 it be firft proved that he could not err. 
 
 3. But Mr. A. has another argument, page 21, which 
 beggars both thefe ; it is upon the fame fubjecfl with the 
 preceding argument, againft clofe communion, or againft 
 my arguments for it, and to deftroy them all at one ftroke. 
 His words are, " About a year ago, I was at the houfe of 
 a minifter in this county, and the converfation turning 
 upon the exceilive vociferation which fome men pradtife in 
 prayer, the lady of the houfe obferved, that a fliort time 
 before a Baptiil: miniiler called upon them, and received 
 hofpitality for the night. According to the orders of the 
 houfe, the minifter being abfent, he was reqr.efted to lead 
 the family in prayer. He did fo ; but it was with fuch a 
 ftraining of the voice as fairly ftunned the family, and 
 fpoiled dieir devotions. Having fat a little while after the 
 conclufion of the prayer, the lady took the liberty to a(k 
 him, Why, Sir, do you halloa fo in prayer ? Do you im- 
 agine the Divine Being is a great way off ? He replied. 
 
Mr. AuJlhCs Mijlakes, 1 3 
 
 that he had got into the habit, and had nor, indeed, much 
 to lay lor it ; but, in fact, it was every thing to him, for if 
 he did not pray in that founding manner, his people would 
 not think it was praying at all.'^ 
 
 This is, I confefs, a lingular argument ; but how it 
 ftrikes againft dole communion, I have not ingenuity fuffi- 
 cient to difcover ; for furely this Baptift minifter was for 
 open communion, whiift the good lady and her family op- 
 poled it. \^''hy Mr. A. fhould tell fuch a foolifli and im- 
 probable ftory as this, is doubtlefs beft known to himfelf. 
 However, 1 will venture to expofe one of his reafons, and 
 it is this, — To gratify not a very good difpofition, in ridi- 
 culing the Baptifts. Yet, as ridiculous as they arc, he 
 confciTes his principal objedlicn agalnft them is, their refuf- 
 ing to commune with him in the fecond gofpel ordinance, 
 whilH he rejects the firft. This reafon is not given in his 
 identical words, but I venture to propofe it to the public, 
 as being fupported as his by facts and common fenfe. 
 
 'we Ihall now turn our attention to a few of Mr, A.'s 
 miltakes ; by thefe, as well as by his fophiflry and weak 
 arguments, we may judge of the papiftical errors which he 
 hath undertaken to defend. I do not fay, that by the mif- 
 takes we m.ay judge of the man, for fhould we, I apprehend 
 we fhould do him great injuUice, for the man is honoura- 
 ble ; but his caufe and errors, which are now finking, are 
 deteftable, and his defence of them miferable. To be fure, 
 the m.an liimlelf appears to difadvantage, whilft defending 
 fo bad a caufe ; and the many miftakes which he is obliged 
 to make, whilH: labouring to defend fo crooked a fide, mull 
 excite fome unfavourable fentiments in thofe to whom he 
 is unknown. But if he Riffer a little, better fo than to have 
 his errors pafs without correclion ; indeed, dcftruction is 
 the deferved portion of his errors : we mull therefore op- 
 pofe fome of his miftakes. 
 
 I. The firil miflake which I fhall mention, is in his 
 reply to the following requelf, v/hich I made in the 17th 
 page of my Letters to him, and in thefe words : — Should 
 you write again, pleafe to inform me by what authority 
 you contradid the tranflators of the Bible, and injure tlie 
 lenfe of this text, (A<51s xvi. 31.) by telling us, that the 
 jailor rejoiced domellically ? His reply is, page 6, " Is this 
 Chriilian treatment, to charge me with contradiding the 
 tranflators ? I have not done it." To fettle this matter, I 
 will prefent the reader with the words in quellion, both as 
 given us by the tranflators and by Mr. A- 
 
14 Second Expofition rf ^ 
 
 Traiifliitors riy, " He rejoiced, believing in God with 
 all his houie.'* 
 
 Mr. A. fays, p?ige 87, the proper rendering is, " He, 
 having believed in God, rejoiced with all his houle, or 
 domelticall)'.'' 
 
 Here, the tranflators fay cne things Mr. A. fays the proptr 
 rendering h another. The reader will judge whether Mr. A. 
 does not ctntradict them ; and if he does, this is one mriiakc. 
 But Mr. A. has found a new turn to the original Greek 
 participle for believing. In his former Letters, he told me 
 it was in the fmgular number ; in my Reply I obferved, 
 every Englifh reader, who is acquainted with the coniViTic- 
 tion of language, knows it is the fume in our common 
 Bibles ; but now he has difcovered it to be in the perfecl: 
 tenfe, therefore, and v\'hat ? therefore, fays he, it ferves to 
 refcue the text from your prefumptuoiis comments. I will 
 give the public the text, with Mr. A.'s participle rendered 
 literally in the perfect time ; it ftands thus : — He (the 
 jailor) rejoiced, having helU'csd in God with all liis houfe. 
 I afk, what advantage is Mr. A.*s new difcovery to blm ? 
 and how does it refcue the text from my prefumptuous 
 comments ? AH my comments are, that the Bible fpeaks 
 plain Englifh, and is to be taken as it fays. I appeal to 
 the world, to judge whofe comments are prefumptuous ; 
 mine, for taking the Bible as it fays, or his, for changing 
 both words and iQi\\^. But Mr. A. replies, " Your pre- 
 fumptuous comments are calculated to make your unlearn* 
 ed readers conclude, that the jailor's houfchold are faid to 
 be believers as well as himfelf.'' My anfwer is, the tranf- 
 lators of the Bible tell us that this is tlie cafe, and is the 
 fenfe of the original; and Mr. A. fays he has not contir.- 
 dicled them.. '1 hen my comments are juil, and calculated 
 to make my unlearned readers, and learned too, conclude 
 juftly, that the jailor believed and all his houfe. 
 
 2. I will now prefent the reader with three or four of 
 Mr. A.'s miftakes, which he makes in writing lefs than a 
 page. In pages 8, 9, he quotes three of my definitions. 
 
 Firil:, Im.merfion in the name of the Lord Jefus, or in 
 the name of the P'atLer, Son, and Holy Ghoft, is the only 
 gofpel baptifm* 
 
 Secondly, No perfon has a right to gofpel baptifm, but 
 upon his making profeiTion of gofpel faith. 
 
 rhirdly, No perfon is a member of Chrid's vifible church 
 till he is baptized. 
 
Mt\ Aujiin's Mifiakes. 15 
 
 To thefe Mr. A. replies tluis ; — " Thefe fentlments, I 
 faui, and you are not alliamed to avow the confequence, 
 go to exclude from ChriiVs vilible church all the multitude 
 of eminently pious and holy perfons, male and female, who 
 have lived and died the fubjeds of baptifm by fprinkling 
 or afFufion only, and merely becaufe they have not been 
 baptized by immerfion. This was my leading objedion, 
 and you appear to totter under the weight of it. It is 
 ftrange it does not cridJJj you to the ground. I Jhould think 
 any man, who had made fuch a conqueft over his preju- 
 dices, could not have this army of co-heirs with Chrift of 
 eternal bleffednefs pafs before his imagination, after having 
 treated them in this cavalier v/ay, nv'ithout Jinking as loiv as 
 the mojl feeling felf-detejlation cov.ld place him. You fay, * If it 
 be conclufive againft my principles, let it deftroy them.* 
 It does^ Sir, deftroy them. Let it but touch them, and they vanifu 
 like a bubble.'' 
 
 All this fays Mr. A. We will attend to his variety of 
 miftakes in this quotation. The fidl is, That J appear to 
 totter under vhe iveight of his obfliion. His obje<5lion is, 
 that my principles go to exclude from Chriil's 'vifdle church 
 all who are not baptized, or immerfed, in the name, &c. 
 This is his objeciion, under which he lays 1 appear to totter. 
 This is his m'fale. For the avowing of this truth, fo far 
 from making me tott^r^ it emboldens me to tell him another, 
 That all who hold to and receive the human rite of fprink- 
 ling, for the Lord's ordinance of baptifm, are witliin the 
 limits of Antichrift's church, and have fubmitted to liis 
 ordinance, and received one mark of the Beaft. Did Mr. A, 
 know his duty and his privilege, he would come out from 
 his errors, and efpeclally from this, and be feparate ; then 
 would the Lord receive him into his vifible churcli. 
 
 But Mr. A. adds, " It is (Irange my obje(51Ion does not 
 cruili you to the ground." This is ariother of his niifi:akes. 
 For ic is not ftrange at all ; for the good word of God 
 fupports me, by bearing its teftimony in favour of the cor- 
 rcdnefs of my principles. The Lord tells \\^^ that l^e hath 
 1 know not how many pious, godly perfons within the 
 limits of Antichrift ; befides, he points cut the time in 
 which they would be within thefe limits, and informs us 
 tliat this is the time. See Rev. xvii. xviiiT xix. xx. and 
 particularly chap, xviii. 4. v/here he, by a voice as from 
 heaven, calls to thefe perfons, faying, * Come out of her, 
 my people, that ye be not partakers of her fuis, and that 
 ye receive not of her plagues.' Did Mr. A. know what 
 
1 6 Second Expqfition of 
 
 he is doing, he would be ailonillied and confouRded. lie 
 is himfelf refunng to obey the Lord ; and not only fo, he 
 IS ignorantly doing what he can to blind others, fo that 
 they alfo may be difobedient. This is a great miftake in 
 him. He may think me bold ; I am fo, and truth makes 
 me {o ; yes, and the time is come, in which the children of 
 God, who know the truth, may be bold. For the leaven, 
 which Tv'as to leaven the whole lump, is remarkably fer- 
 menting ; and the time is not far off, when the dominion, 
 and the greatnefs of the kingdom under the whole heaven, 
 fliould be given co God's people. The ftone cut from the 
 mountain without hands, will foon fill tlie w^hole earth. 
 At fuch a time, and thus circumilanced, fuch as know the 
 figns of the times, may be bold to vindicate the »ways of 
 God to men, and to affert the laivs^ ordinances^ and rightful 
 authority of their King. 
 
 Another miftake. which Mr. A. makes in the above 
 quotation, is, that his objedion deftroys my principles. 
 Again, in the clofe of the pafTage, he fays, " Let it but 
 touch them, and they vanifh like a bubble." This is all 
 miftake. The good man knows not what he fays, nor 
 whereof he affirms. 
 
 One fentence, which I have not yet noticed, deferves 
 particular attention. *^ J JhouU think (fays he) any man^ 
 ivho had made fuch a conquefl over his prejudices, could not have 
 this army of co-heirs tviih Chrijl of eternal hlejftdnefs pafs before 
 his imagination, after having treated them in this cavalier luay, 
 without finking as low as the mof feeling felfdetejlation could 
 place him.''^ 
 
 I forgive Mr. A. all his rudenefs of fpeech, perceiving 
 he hath a zeal for God, but in this particular not accord- 
 ing to knowledge. He fuppofes that he is with the truth ; 
 but, as his brother Emmons informs us, luhen a man comes 
 to the truth, he KNoirs it. Can he fuppoie, that I (hould 
 deteft myfelf for telling' him the truth, and for placing 
 many cf the Lord's people within the limits of Antichrift, 
 when the Lord tells me they are there, and commands them to 
 come out ? Befides, who knows but God hath chofen me, to 
 be one of the weak inftruments, by which his people Ihall 
 fo effedually hear his voice as to be obedient ? However 
 this may be, one thing I know — it becomes me to declare 
 his truth, and not be afraid. May Mr. A. hear and obey. 
 
 3. I muft nov/ mention another of his miftakco, which 
 is alfo conne^flcd with u fophifm. 
 
Mr. AujTtn*s Miftakes. 17 
 
 I do not expofe Mr. A. that I may provoke him, unlefs 
 it be to relinquifh a bad cauie ; but that he may lee \s'hat 
 abfurdities and blunders It unavoidably leads him into, and 
 thus be perfuaded to give truth one candid review. Mr. 
 A. has abilities enough to go ftraight in a plain highway, 
 but no man has a lufficiency to go thus in a crooked path. 
 
 This miftake and fophlfm of his are in page 12, where 
 his words to me are, " You fay, page 20, one of our prin- 
 ciples is, that no perfon is a fit fubject of baptifm, unlefs he 
 be a penitent \ if it is, (fays he) the greater is your error ; 
 but I do not believe it is : it was not Dr. Gill's principle." 
 This is Mr. A.'s miftake ; for there is not a Baptift in the 
 world, nor has been, who has any principles upon the fub- 
 je<Sl, but this is one of them, that no perfon is 2ijit fuhjecl of 
 baptifm unlefs he be a penitent. Had Mr. A. have known 
 the gofpel fitnefs for baptifm, he would have known this 
 with equal certainty that he knows an hypocrite is not a fit 
 fubjecl for communion at the Lord's table. Befides, his 
 argument to prove that Dr. Gill did not hold this principle 
 is a mere fophlfm, and proves no fach thing. If Dr. Gill 
 exprefsly fays, as Mr. A. informs us, " that Simon Magus 
 was baptized In a pure and apoJlrAic ^<ayy*' this is no evi- 
 dence that he was a fit fubjecl. Simon Magus was bap:iz.ed 
 upon a profejfion of faith ; this was the pure and apoilolic 
 way ; yet he was not a fit fubject, he only appeared to be. 
 The adminiftrator was but a man, and was therefore obli- 
 ged to judge from what was vifible. Could the adniinif- 
 trator have feen Simon's true character, he would have 
 known him to be not a fit fubjecl. The admlniftrator's not 
 difcovering this unfitnefs, did not change Simon's hypocrisy 
 into gofpel fitnefs for baptifm ; yet, as Simon made pro- 
 felllon of faith, and appeared to polfsfs it, he was baptized 
 m the pure and apoftolic way. 
 
 4. Mr. A. in the fame page, gives us another of his 
 miltakes. Says he, " Be tliis (about Simon) however as 
 it may ; one of your principles is, that no perfon is a 
 member of Chrift's church till he is baptized. This re- 
 duces you to the necefllty of contending, that there may be 
 millions of vifible Chriftians, eminently fuch, who are nut 
 in Chrift's vifible church. One would fuppofe beforehand, 
 that a man rauft be put to it excefilvely to maintain fuch a 
 /entlment as this." To be fure, fuch as judge beforehand^ 
 fuch as judge of a matter before they hear it, might fuppofe a 
 man put to it exceflively, to maintain, that there may be 
 c 
 
1 8 Second Expofition cf 
 
 millions oi vlfible Chriftians, eminently fuch, who are not 
 in Chrid's vifible church. But when one comes to hear 
 the matter, and finds this was to be the cafe, that manv 
 were, at fuch a time as this, to be found, not only out of 
 Chrift's vifible church, but within the limits of Antichrili's, 
 and efpecially when one comes to hear the Lord calling 
 this multitude out of her, he no longer fuppofes the man 
 holding this principle muft be put to it excelTively ; but he 
 knows the opponents have an hard fide to defend, and that 
 they muft make many mifiakes. 
 
 5. We will therefore attend to another of Mr. A.'s mif- 
 takes. Says he, pages 16, 1 7, a man " may have no knowl- 
 edge of the vifible church, yet he may know that he is a 
 finner and needs forgivenefs. He may be acquainted with 
 Chrift, and the way of falvation through him, and believe to 
 the faving of his foul. This may be known to hundreds of 
 Chriftians, at a diftance. He may, of courfe, be a member 
 of the vifible church : for a man's vifibility refpeBs 'what he is 
 in the eyes of others. Would he iiot be a member of the lyifible 
 churchi if he were baptized F If he "jjouU, then the fuppofed 
 dt^iCuhyy from his Jliuation, is no difficulty at all.^^ 
 
 Here Mr. A. gives up and condemns his whole fcheme, 
 and then adds a great miftake at the clofe. The reader 
 will bear in mind, that Mr. A.'s fcheme is, that when a 
 man is converted he belongs to the vifible church; for he 
 fays, pa-ge 14, "What! be converted to Chrift, and not 
 join his kingdom ?" as he explains himfelf, What ! become 
 converted to Chrift, and not, at the fame time, become a 
 member of his vifible church? But here, ke tells us. That 
 the converfon of an heathen being hnoivn to others^ is fivhat con- 
 Jlitutes him a member of the vifible church. To Ihow Mr. A. 
 that by labouring to extricate himfelf from one perplexing 
 cafe, he ha6 involved himfelf in another of equal difficulty, 
 I will propofe for his confideration this queftion : — Suppofe 
 no Chriftian knew of this heathen man's converfion, would 
 he then belong to the vifible church t If he anfwer, Yes, 
 then he contradidls what he has juft faid, that a man^s viji^ 
 bility refpeds ivhat he is in the eyes of others. If he fay. No, 
 then he gives up his fcheme, that a converfion of a perfon 
 conflitutes him a member of the vifible church. Mr. A. is in a 
 perplexing cafe. But we wttl fee his miftake at the clofe. 
 « Would he not (fays he) be a member of the vifible 
 church, if he were baptized ?" To be fure, if he were bap- 
 tized he would be a member of the vifible church ; for 
 ^ofpel baptifm is the very thing which conftitutcs him a 
 
Mr, Aujiin's Mijlakes. 19 
 
 member. Now, fays Mr. A. " If he >\^ould, then the fup- 
 pofed difficulty, from his fitiiation, Is no difficulty at all." 
 That is, if a converted heathen, who is favoured with an 
 adminiftrator, baptized, and thus received into the vifible 
 church, would be a member of it, then there is no difficulty 
 in fuppofmg him a member of the vifible church, though 
 he has never been thus favoured, nor ever admitted into it. 
 In what confufion are Mr. A.'s ideas ! Ihe fault, however, 
 is not his deficiency of talents, but in the miferably errone- 
 ous caufe he is defending. 
 
 6. But I haften to another of Mr. A.'s miftakes. In 
 my Letters to him, page 38, my w^ords are, — All your 
 objc<fl:ion againft allowing that the apoille (in Rom. vi. 4. 
 and Col. ii. 12.) alludes to and intends water baptifm, is 
 confidered to ariie from an apprehenfion that immerfion 
 would certainly follow. His reply is, page 33, " You muft 
 confider it fo, if you will ; but my apprehenfion really has 
 another origin. It is, that an infuperable objedion vrould 
 be fuiniflied agn in fc the apoille's infpiration ; for then he 
 would teach us, that water baptifm, inftead of the baptifm 
 of the Hcly Ghoft^ is the thing by which we become dead 
 to f n and rife |o newrefs of life." 
 
 Here Mr. A. is again in difficulty. His dimcuky arifts 
 from a mi (lake which he has made. I will endeavour 10 
 expofe the one, and thus help him out of the other. His 
 miftake is, that we fhould endanger the Infpiration of the 
 iipoftle, did we not believe that we become dead to fm and 
 rife to newnefs of life by the baptifm of the Holy Ghoft. 
 The faift is, Mr. x^. has wholly miftaken the fcriptures, in 
 this matter. Tliey fay nothing about a perfon's becoming 
 dead to fm, or rinng to newnefs of life, by the baptifm of 
 the Holy Ghoft ; nor by w^ater baptifm, otherwife than by 
 a figure. This expofes his mnfiake, and opens the door for 
 him to leave his difficulty, if he chocfe. For furely, eur 
 not believing contrary from the fcriptures, but believing 
 them as they are. can furnifli no infuperable objeaion, ncr 
 an objedion of any other kind, againfl the mfpiration of 
 the apoftle,* 
 
 * This miftake of Mr. A.\ he might receive from the Rev. Mr. 
 Parifti, of Byefiekl, whofe ftrong party Sermon was founded upon the 
 fame mifiake, J^et the reader but be delivered from this new notion, 
 that pcrfons arc born again by being baptized with the Holy Ghoft, and 
 he at once fees through the fallacy anddifcovers the profound weaknefs 
 of what Mr. P. fo fmartly faid againft the Baptifts, in his Sermon of 
 May laft. The author ha» fallen into the vtry miilake to ^whicb he 
 
20 Second Expofttion j)f 
 
 ^'. I vyjll now prefent the public with an whole clufter 
 of Mr. A 's mi Hakes, and they may be taken as a fpecimcn 
 of aii the remainder ; afurwards ibme of his mifreprefenta- 
 tions will be noticed. This group of miftakes is in his 
 47th page. In the firft place, I will prefent this bundle of 
 
 ionfuiercd the Baptifts, on account of their eitreme ipnorancc, to be 
 much cxpufcd. He has, fo an irircmmcn degree, mifapplicd one of the 
 f.gures of infpiration. He has been kird enough to inform us, that 
 Ipiritual baptilm, or the baptifm of the Holy Ghoft, is the new birih, 
 ov regenen.tirn \ but hr. lot furnifhcd his authority. He tells us that 
 the te:.i means this. We ileny ihat the text, or hat any other text in the 
 Bible, has eviT faid sny fuch hing. How are we buried ivith Cbtiji in 
 t-ptifm, or taipd ivith him in bapifm, in the moment of regeneration, 
 any more then n every fuccecding holy exerciie ? This is a new invcn« 
 tlon of his and his brethren, to ge rid of the gofpel baptifm. 
 
 Tht old Pcmanifts confidered ivatcr beptifm to be n-^enerntion, or the 
 latter to he cor: c-dled with the former, or to depend on it; fo that, 
 when baptism was performed, regentraricn was effected. So have the 
 Cliurth of Fnglarjd confidered this matter. But, if I miflahe not, no 
 avthor, till Mr. P. and Tome of his hiethren, to juilify rhcir unfcriptural 
 rite of fprJnkli'ng, and to take from, che ha] tized churcli the plain fcrip- 
 turc account of go'pei hrptifm, arofe, hav ever pretended that regeneia- 
 t on is the baj)tifm of the Holy Gho.l. The fiible mentions nothing of 
 their forced ccnftru(5ion of the figurative language of infpiration. The 
 krip:ure account is totally diff'-rtnt from Mr. P.'s. That informs us, 
 Ads i. 5 that the difclples, who had Jt ng before followed their divine 
 Lord in the re^cn.rct oTt, fnouj'd be baptized with the Holy Ghofl not 
 m^ny c lys bc7icr. Mr. P. muft either conclude, that prrfons in the days 
 of ChriR and ]:is Jpr flies v.'cre legcnerattd twice, or that the baptiim 
 of the Koly Ghoil i.s n* w a different thing from whi^t it then vras ; or 
 th.'.t rpg*r.eratic;n is not the baptifm of the Holy Ghofl; and cciifequenthy 
 that a litt!e Trior e erudition is ntctjfur-^ to his explaining tl>€ bold Jtgures of 
 Tii-elati^,n 
 
 But to fpoil Mr P 's whole fuppoftd Hrength at a flroke, let the 
 reader but view hi? tcntraft. It is this — '* As the hrrial ( f J#i"us Chrifl 
 g:?.ve evidence that he had really died, the jbft for tJvc unj^ift ; fo we, in 
 oi:r fpiritual baptifm^ fh.ow curi'tUes to be really dead tc f.n." 
 
 Mr t'. (.on\i^i-M(,i,vr equals fpiriti'ci baptifm\\'\ihrget:criJt:cn,\igt 13T, 
 
 cf the CoUe<5:ion. "f hrn wt will take regeneration inftend of fpiritual 
 baptifm, and fee how his contrail w"ll fiand the teft <ifcrijture and his 
 own ftPtiments *' As the burial of Jefus Chrifl gave evidence that he 
 had really died, the jnfl for the vnjuft ; fo we, in regeneration, ihow 
 ourfelves to he really dead to fin." 
 
 The fcrip'urcs fay, The wind blowcth where it hfleth, 2nd thou 
 hcareft the found thereof, but card not tcil whence it cometh nor 
 V. hither it goeth : fo is ev ry oriC that is born of the Spirit. Enng forth 
 fruits meet for rcpfntjnce, cr aj evidence of repentance. By their iru:ts 
 ye fhall know tli«m, 8^c. In thefe texts, nor.in any other, is there any 
 jitimztii.n, th.- 1 in rcgcneratirn we fhow ourfclvis to be dead to fni ; 
 but tliut this is n:ade vifible by the fruits of regeneration, or by the 
 adi«M.s of the now creatL're ; but not by the operation of the Spirit; »n 
 which he ift regenerated 
 
Mr. Atijin's Mijlakes, 2r 
 
 ini flake? entire ; then expcfe them one br one. Mr. A. 
 intioduces and prefents them in the follovving manner. 
 
 " In page 74, to my argumtnt (lays he) Ircm your fup- 
 pcied opinion, that many dying in infancy are iaved, you 
 reply in this manner : — ' Perhaps your idea is this, That I 
 
 If I underflard Mr. P.'s fcntiments, they are, — i. That a natural man 
 hath rot cne fpiritually good thought, a. That regeneration is cifedcd 
 by the fpecial agency of tlie Holy Ghoft. 3. That the manifeji exerdfes 
 of the ne\r creature are the natural confequcnces of regeneration^ but are 
 not themfclves regeneration. 
 
 Thefe being his feBtimcnt*, then his contrafl is at war with them, as 
 well as with the Bible : for we do not, in regeneration, fhow ourfelves 
 dead to fin ; but in the confequent a<5ls or fraits of it, we fnow this. 
 
 If thcfe cbfervaticns be juft, Mr. P. had been more prudent had he 
 kept his Sermon to himrelf, and exprefied lefs fear lefl the/>cor, ignorant, 
 and illittrate Baptifts fhould greatly injure the caufe of Chrift, by rr/tf- 
 applications o{ fcripture jigures- 
 
 But Mr, p. in his note, pages 145, 144, hath manifefled his mind to 
 fee fo crowded with oppcnition to the baptized church, as to deprive him 
 ©f his ufual fprightlinefs of recclledion. Thus it hath happened to him, 
 to is common to thofe who arc over zealous ; they betray thcm.felveg, 
 rather than foil their cpponei;ts. As Mr. P, harh, with no fniali rude- 
 nefs, espofed him.felf, be cannot jullly take it unkindly to have his note 
 increafe its publicity. I fhall take hberty to tranfcribe a few ftntences, 
 of which I ftiould have thought Mr. P. incapable, fhould he publickly 
 deny their being his, and prove his innocency, then will they be taken 
 from his account. But they look fo like other parts of his Sermon^ 
 proof might be difficult, unlefs he deny the whole. 
 
 Says he, '■ Pnvbably the 'Baptift) denomination have received fome 
 advantage, in :l.e courfc of a century or two, from a few folitary con- 
 gregational preachers joining them, who had received diplomas from 
 fom.e college. This mufl, however, be one of their minor advantages ; 
 for when was it known that the dijlinguifced members of a party defgrted t 
 Men^ ccnfciius of their inferiority to their brethren in literature a!;d talent/, 
 have a pczverful temptation to apo/iatize, where their relative great nep 
 Vfi.l be advanced." 
 
 A few queflloiis for the reader. * 
 
 r. Could Mr. P. had not his recolkcftlon been left, but have called t© 
 mind, that the very ap oiile who wrote liis text, was one of thefe dcfertert f 
 
 2. Did not Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, James, and Jude, 
 all of them, defert their party, the Jewiih church, and join the Chriftian ? 
 
 3. Did not Martin Luther and John Calvin defert their party, the 
 judaized and Judaizing church of Rome .? 
 
 4. Did net all the celebrated reformers of the reformed church defert 
 their party, and come out, in meafure, from the man of fin ? 
 
 5. Did not all the leaders of the Congre^atioiial and Prefbyterian 
 denominations when they broke off from t]ie Church of Lnglacd, or 
 from the communion of the Pepifts, defert their party ? 
 
 6. Weri. none of thefe, diftinguifheu member j of ths p»rty >vh<:r.c'' 
 they broke off? 
 
 C 2 
 
^z Second Expojltion of 
 
 believe feme Infants, who have not been immerfcd, HTny gc 
 to heaven, and be finally favcd. This, Sir, I do believe- 
 But what hath this to d^^. wirh the prefcnt controverfy r' 
 It hath this to do vith it, Sir ; it entirely rehires your 
 hypotheAs You liave no fwarrant to believe any human 
 b/ing is faved, who is nrt to you a v'Jibh n.emltr of the hwg- 
 dom of Chn/l. This is ihe force of the arginrunt^ which yoil 
 have not noticed at all. Your notion of holding people to 
 be good per pie, and heirs of glory, who have no vifible 
 place in the kingdom of God, is an outrage upon common 
 fenfe, and a contradiction to the whole Bible. You exclude 
 all infants, without exception, from this vifible kingdom ; 
 tlie confeqiience is, that no warrant remains for you to 
 confider any of them a? faved. All the heirs of falvation 
 are fpoken. of as being fuch vifibiy in this world. Ifalah 
 hi. 9. And their {qq^ Ihall be known among the Gentiles, 
 and their offspring among the people : all that fee them 
 fhall acknowledge them, that they are the feed which the 
 Lord hath bleifed. Hundreds of other texts there are to 
 the fame purpofe.** 
 
 The reader v.ill particularly notice my words, which 
 gave ocaifion to Mr. A. to make the miftakes which follow. 
 My words are, I believe ibme infants, who have not beea 
 inimerfed, may go to heaven and be finally laved. I then 
 afk, But what hath this to do with the prefent controverfy ? 
 His reply is. " It hath ihis to do with it ; it entirely refutes 
 your hypothefis." Tne reader (hali knov.- my hypothefis ; 
 it is this — No unbaptized perfon beloxigs to the vfihlc church 
 cf Ci:rift. This hypothefis, fays he, is entirely refuted by 
 allowing, that fome children, who have not been baptized^ 
 ex immerfed, and fo not in Chrifl's 'vifihk church, may be 
 finally faved. If this femiment refute my hypothefis, then 
 the old papiflical notion which Mr. A. hath adopted is 
 trac — That none but church members can pojfibly be faved. This 
 is one (if his miftukes. 
 
 Aeain, he fays, " You have no ivcrrani to believe, that 
 any human being is faved, who is not to you a vifible 
 
 7 Did not Mr P. in his zeal, fo for^^et himfelf, as to denounce all 
 iho famous lejtler^ of his own and of all other denominations, that h« 
 Blight, r.ot ill a very becoming manner, aim his unkind (hafts againft -i. 
 few folitary Congregational preachers, who have, to anfwer a good 
 onfcience, dared to renounce the traditions of aien, that they might 
 keep the comiraTidpicnts of the Lord 1 
 
 I IhaH now have Mr. P. to his own refl^AioBs, and tlie public tc 
 form their own judgment, upon fucli jsvana^emcnt as liia. 
 
Mr, Aujihis Mijiakes. 23 
 
 member of the kingdom of Chrift." I will here prefent 
 iTiV wairant. G<^d tells me, Rev. xviil. 4. that he hath 
 people witliin the limits 01 ylntkhriji's church. Thofe who 
 are within the limits of Antichrift's church, are not to me, 
 nor ought they to be confidered by aiiy, as members of the 
 v^fible church of Chril^. I have, therefoie, a warrant to 
 believe that fome of thefe, who are born of Chrill's Spirit, 
 being within the limits of Babylon, and many of them 
 living and dying there, not only may be faved, but mufl be. 
 This expofes another of his miftakes. 
 
 Again, fays he, " '1 his is the force of the argument, 
 which you have not noticed at alL" What the force of 
 the argument ? That none but vifible church members can 
 be faved. Which, fays he, " you have not noticed at all.'* 
 Then it Ihall be noticed ; for it is one of the firft-born fons 
 of the church of Rome. The pope, m.oft alfuredly, con- 
 fiders himfelf and his church as the only church ot Chrift, 
 and that none can be faved cut of his bounds ; hence it is 
 lawful for him to kill all heretics, all who will not fubmit 
 to his holy cathohc church ; and to convert by fire and 
 fvvord, as for many ages he did, the heathen nations to his. 
 religion, and compelled them to be members of his church. 
 'I'hefe violent meafures may be greatly palliated, if the 
 pope's ftntiment be corre<^. It is, however, the fame with 
 Mr. A.'s. Hence, if the force of Mr. A.'s argument Le 
 allowed, or the fcntiment in which the force of it is, not 
 one within the limits of Antichrifi's kingdom, r.ot one with- 
 in the Mahometan countries., not one in any heathen nation, 
 can be faved. No, nor can one infant, from Adam's da)r 
 to our's, have been faved ; nor can one adult, who may 
 die at fea, where there is no Chriitian to behold him, nor 
 one who may die in our own land, and is not known to be 
 a Chriftian by others, be ever faved. For Mr. A. informs 
 us, we have no luarrarit to beheve that any are faved who 
 are not members of Chr'ijVs vifible church ; and page 16, he 
 tells us, that no man is a member of Chrill's vifible church, 
 unlefs he is feen or known to be fo by others ; for, fays he, 
 *' y^ mans vifib'iTity refpedts what he is in the eyes of others.'* 
 Hence, if Chrillians do not know or confider us to be of 
 their number, there can be no hope of our falvatioa. I 
 will confider the force of this argument farther, when he 
 fhall defire it. 
 
 Again, fays our author, " Your notion of holding people 
 to be good people, and heirs of glory, who have no vifib/e 
 place in the kingdom of God, is an outrage upon common 
 
2^ Second Expofition of 
 
 fenfe, and a contradldlion to the whole Bible.'* That is, 
 my notion that any are converted before tliey belon;^ to the 
 'o'ifihk church of ChriR:, and that there are any of his holy 
 or regenerated people, who do not belong to this church 
 of Chrift, is an outrage upon common fenfe, and a cdntia- 
 didtion to the whole BiWe. I venture to fay, that all the 
 genuine common fenfe which there is in the world, will fet 
 down this charge oi Mr. A.'s as one of his m'tftakes. Be- 
 fides, I will venture to fay a little farther, that I know of 
 no denomination of profeffed Chriflians, in any part of the 
 globe, fave his holinefs the pope and his blinded and big- 
 goted adheren^ts, who are in fentiment with Mr. A. Yes, 
 and the Bible no where intimates, that my notion is errone- 
 ous, or that his is corred ; but, on the other hand, it every- 
 where, when the fubject is mentioned, teftifies that my 
 notion is according to truth, and that his is a miftake, not 
 to fay a delufion. The preaching of John was, that the 
 people fliould repent and be converted, for the kingdom of 
 heaven, the vifible church of Chrifl, was at hand ; other- 
 wife, they would not be. prepared to join it. The plain, 
 the fimple, the unequivocal idea is> that they muft be con- 
 verted to God. before they v.*ere fit fubjeds, or prepared to 
 join the vjfible cJiurch of Chrift. 1 he preaching of Jefus- 
 Chrift was the fame, and he fpake and ftill.fpeaks the fame 
 language. The broad commiffion vv'hich our Lord gave 
 his difciples was, that they fhoiild teach, and fo teach that" 
 their hearers ihould become difciples, believers, and con- 
 verted perfons ; and this too before they were to baptize 
 them, or to receive them into the tifibie ohixrcn of Chrift.. 
 Thofe v\'ho were thus converted were, as we are told in the- 
 A&is of the Apoftles, added to the church daily. Befides, 
 the Bible fpcaks of God's having people, who are not only 
 out of Chrift*s v'fible church, but within the limhs of Anti- 
 chrifi^ Kev. xviii. 
 
 Again, Mr. A. goes on, and tells me, faying, " You ex- 
 clude all infants, without exception, from this vifible king- 
 dom." Certainly, and who told JAm to put them in ? Ho 
 adds, ** The confequence is, that no warrant remains for- 
 you to confider any of them as faved." This confequence. 
 IS another oi hi^ mi/lakes, Theie is no connexion between 
 his premife and concluiion. 
 
 Once more, fays he, " All the heirs of falvation are 
 fpoken of as being fuch vifibly in this world." This alfo 
 is one of his miftakes. But he has attempted to prove it. 
 Let us heiu- his evidence. <*^ Ifaiah Ixi. 9, And their feed 
 
Mr, Aujlin's M {/lakes. 25 
 
 fhall be known among tlie GentiiCs, and their offspring 
 among the people ; all that fee them lliall acknowledge 
 them, that they are the feed which the Lord hath blefTed. 
 Hundreds of other texts there are to the fame parpofe." 
 To what purpofe ? To prove that none fhall be faved, but 
 fuch as belong to the vijible church of Chrift on earth ? 
 This text fays no fuch thing ; yet he fays, " Hundreds of 
 other texts there are to the fame purpcfeJ^ Truly, tJiere 
 are ; but ivhere Is there one to h:s purpofe ? Kot a fir.gle 
 text, from Genefis to Revelation, which gives him the leafl 
 countenance. 
 
 Thefe miftakes, which have been now mentrcned, may 
 be taken by the reader as a fample for the reft ; indeed, 
 his pamphlet is lilde eife but on^ great nujlahe. 
 
 Should Mr. A. take advantage, becaufe I have not ex- 
 pofed all his miilakcs, and hereafter pretend tliat I admit 
 one fentence of bis erroneous fbitemenis to be true, becaufe 
 I have not in particular e,\poftd the whole, I may, if the 
 Lord v.iil, at fome future time, unmallc the reft ; but for 
 the prefent v.e will turn our attention to two or three of 
 his mifreprefentations. 
 
 I. The firft which I fnall notice is in page 14, where, 
 fpeaking of the vlfhle church of Chriil, his words are, 
 ♦* Your breaking up of the church of Chrifl into little petty 
 detachments, and making it neceifary for a man to become 
 incorporated into one of them, in order to his being a mem- 
 ber of that church, is unfcnptural," The whole of this is 
 a fheer mifrcprefentation. What the good man meant, or 
 can honeftly mean, I know not. If he mean, that it is un- 
 fcripiural to hold the church cf Chrift hath many brancher, 
 fuch as, the church of Corinth, the church of Ephefus, the 
 church of Colofle, the church in the hcufe of thilemon, &c. 
 is unfcriptuial, then he would have us heihve that the Bills 
 is vrfcr'ipiural. If he would have us believe it to be un- 
 fcriptural, to hold that a perfon muft be incorporated into 
 a particular branch of Chrift's ciiurch, in order to his being 
 a member cf ihat branch, then he would teach us that the 
 fcriptures are not crnfiftent with comm.on 'i^rS'^. If he 
 intend to convey to the public this idea, — that I make it 
 r.ccelfary for a perfcn to be incorporated into feme partic- 
 ular branch cf Chrift's church, in order to his being ^member 
 of his vifiLle church, this is mere mifrcprefentation ; I have 
 no fuch fentiment ; I have, to my knowledge, advocated 
 nothing which locks like it. My fentiment is, that when a 
 ptrlon is baptized upon a prcfefTicn of faith he belongs to 
 
26 Second Expoftiion of 
 
 Chriil's vifible church. This is what I told him I'n the 2 2d 
 page of mj Letters to him. Ke has either mifieprefented 
 the fcriptures, and taught us to believe that they are un- 
 Icriptural and contrary from common fenfe, or he has mif- 
 reprefented my fentiment, w hich I have publickly and fully 
 exprelfed. 
 
 2. His next mifreprefentation which is to be noticed, is 
 in his I ith page ; it is contahied in his anfwer to a pafTage 
 which he quoted from the 2cth page of my Letters to him. 
 1 will give the public the paifage, together with the re- 
 mainder of the paragraph. It is this — * The manner (fay 
 1 to him.) in which _y&z^ throiv the cbjePaon before tlie public, 
 has a very natural tendency to give an incautious reader a 
 very unjufl idea of the tendency of my principles. He 
 would naturally enough conclude, that I muft, if confiftent 
 with myfelf, believe that no one except the Baptiils has 
 any religion ; that I confider and treat all others as being 
 impenitent and ungodly ; yes, as being profligate and unre- 
 generate. A more unjuft idea could not be communicated ; 
 fuch an idea is not only inconfiflent with my principles, but 
 they forbid any perfon's fuggefting that fuch an idea could 
 fairly be deduced from them. One of our principles is, 
 that no perfon is a fit fubjed of baptifm, unlefs he be a 
 penitent, a godly, a regenerate perfon.' 
 
 To this Mr. A. faw fit to reply, in the words following : 
 " No, Sir, it has a tendency to give a juji idea of the ten- 
 dency of your principle ; you yourfelf could not be Mind 
 to this tendency^ for you cell it natural. He would, indeed, 
 naturally enough conclude, that you mufi, if confiftent with 
 yourfelf, believe that none except the Baptifts have any 
 religion.'' Then, to complete the matter, he adds one c^f 
 his fophifms, to prove that he had done well. Both his 
 mifreprefentation and fcphifm muft be here expofed. 
 
 "The manner in which he threw his objevftion before the 
 public (he fays) has a tendency to give a juft idea of the 
 tendency of your principles. You could not (continues he) 
 be blind to this tendency, for ycu call it naturalJ' Here he 
 pervev'ts my words, and makes me fiiy jurt what I der.ied,. 
 or juft the contrary from what 1 faid. What I told him 
 w^as, *' that the manner in which he threw the chji8ion before 
 the public, has a -very natural tendency to give an incautious- 
 reader a very unjujl idea of the tendency of my principles.'^ 
 He tells the public, that it has a tendency to give a juJl idea^ 
 and that I call it a natural tendency. That is, he tells the 
 public Lha: I allow that the maimer iu which he threw tlie 
 
Mr. AuJlirLS Mijiakes, 27 
 
 «bje6Hon before them has a natural tendency to give a juji 
 idea of my principles ; whereas I told him it had a very 
 natural tendency to give a very unjuji idea of them. Such 
 management will afford but little credit even to a bad 
 caufe. 
 
 But we will attend to his fophifm, by which he would 
 prove the whole. Says he, *♦ Nothing i'; plainer, than that 
 you have no warrant to believe a perfon has any religion 
 who has not the vi/tbility of religionJ^ Certainly, we have 
 no warrant to believe that a perfon has any religion who 
 has no appearance of it. But what hath this to do with 
 the prefent debate ? How does it prove, that, to be con- 
 fiftent with my principles, I muft believe that none has 
 religion but the Baptifts, when my principles are, that no 
 one can honeftly become a Baptift, or a baptized profefior, 
 unlefs he be prev'ioujly a pojfcjfor of religion. Mr. A. is 
 either afraid to know the principles of the Baptiil:s, or he 
 cannot underftand them, or he will not ; for if he can and 
 would know them, then he could not honeftly make fo 
 many miftakes about them. 
 
 3. I will mention but one more of his mifreprefenta- 
 tions, and that is in page 31, in which he prefents to the 
 public certain fentiments, and reprefents them as being 
 mine, whereas they are fome of his own, which I put to- 
 gether for his infpedion. He has infpeded one particular, 
 and fays of it thus : "You make (fays he) the ftrongeft 
 application of this imaginable. You fay, to be buried with 
 Chrift in baptifm, to be planted in the likenefs of his death, 
 and to be rifen with him in baptifm, Rom. vi. 4, 5. and 
 Col. ii. 12. is to be baptized with the Holy Ghoft, or the 
 baptifm of the Holy Ghoft exadly coincides with this rep- 
 refentation." Thefe fentiments are by no means mine ; I 
 beli-eve no fuch thing. To fhow the reader Mr. A.'s mif- 
 reprefentation, and that the ftrange work that he attributes 
 to me is his, I will prefent the above palfage with its con- 
 nexion, as fet down in pages 30, 31, of my Letters. 
 
 I obferved to him thus : — ♦ Speaking of Kom. vi. 4. you 
 fay, page 45, *' The fpiritual, internal baptifm of the Holy 
 Ghoft, exactly coincides with the whole of his (the apof- 
 tle's) reprefentation, and invariably produces the effects he 
 mentions." 
 
 * In page 48, fpeaking of Col. ii. 12. your words are, 
 *' It is juft like the other/' i. e. it is juft like the above 
 palfage, Rom. vi. 4. 
 
28 Second Expofaion of 
 
 * In the pafTage which we have been juft conridern», 
 pages 33, 34, you tell us, " Water baptifm is undoubtedly 
 a fymbol of the baptifm of the Holy Ghoft, which is a 
 iigurative-baptifm ;'* pages 60, 61. 
 
 * In page 60, you have thefe words,—" There mud be 
 fome evident likenefs between the fubjed to which a word 
 is applied, in the natural and primitive ufe of it, and the 
 fubje8 to which it is applied as a figure ; otherwife there is 
 a grofs impropriety in the figurative ufe of it." 
 
 * Now, Sir, (faid I) permit me to put thefe ideas, con- 
 ceflions, and declarations of yours together. 
 
 * I. To be buried with Cbrift in baptifm, to be planted 
 in the likenefs of his death, to be buried with him by bap- 
 tifm, Rom. vi. 4, 5. and Col. ii. 12. is to be baptized with 
 the Holy Ghoft ; or the baptifm of the Holy Ghoft ex- 
 aftly coincides with this reprefeiitation. 
 
 * 2. There is an evident^ likenefs between the natural 
 idea of planting, burying, and rifmg as from the dead, and 
 the figurative baptifm of the Holy Ghoft, or there is a grofs 
 impropriety (as you fay) in the apoftle*s figurative ufe of 
 the words. 
 
 * 3. Water baptifm is a fymbol or figure of the baptifm 
 of the Holy Ghoft ; it is, therefore, a burying, a planting, 
 or immerfion^ your Letters as well as the word of God 
 being judge. 
 
 * Hence, Sir, (faid I) by going a large di fiance round, 
 to avoid wliac you feared, you have proved to my hand 
 what I endeavoured to eftablifh through the courfe of five 
 lermons.' 
 
 The reader vill now judge who it was that made the 
 Jirongejl .ipplicat'ion imaginable, and whether it be not a mif- 
 reprefentation for Mr. A. to palm his erroneous fentiments 
 upon the pubhc as being mine ? 
 
 But fays Mr. A. "I obferved to you, that the things 
 compared by the apoftle were, our death to fm with Chrift*s 
 natural death, our fpiritual burial with his burial, and our 
 rifmg to newnefs of life with his refurrection. In the lan- 
 guage of the apoftle, the baptifm he fpeaks of is diftin- 
 guilhable from the burial, the latter being in or by the 
 former. I repeat it, and beg you would not overlook the 
 diilinvftion. I take thefa things, oiir death, burial, and ref- 
 urred:4)n, to be efifeifls, and baptifm the caufe." 
 
 As Mr. A. begs me not to overlook the diftinctlon be- 
 tween effects and caufe, I Vvill not, but attend to it ; and 
 
Mr. Aufilns Mijlakes. 29 
 
 tbeii we fniill fee if bis caufe looks any the better for be- 
 ing attended to. 
 
 He informs us, firll, That death to fm, fpiritual burial, 
 and rifing again to newnefs of life, are the effects of bap- 
 tifm. 
 
 Second, That water baptifm has fome evident likenefs to 
 the baptifm of the Holy Ghoft, or to regeneration, which 
 produces thefe effeds, death to fm, fpiritual burial, and 
 refurreclion to newnefs of life. 
 
 Third, That the baptifm of the Holy Ghoft is the caufe 
 of our death to fm, fpiritual burial, and refurreilion to new- 
 nefs of life, and fwater baptifm has fome evident likenefs to it. 
 Now I aik the reader, and am willing Mr. A. Ihould 
 hear me, firft. What likenefs is there between infant fprink- 
 ling, or affufion, and w^hat he calls the baptifm of the Holy 
 Ghoft, or a being born of the Spirit, which, fays he, is tlie 
 cojije of fpiritual death, burial and refurreciion ? Is there 
 any likenefs between them ? Chrift aifures us that we know- 
 not hotv the Spirit gcesi or comes, in regeneration ; there 
 can, therefore, be no evident likenefs. There muft, 
 however, be fome evident likenefs between the baptifm 
 of the Holy Ghoft, or regeneration, and the fprinkling 
 or pouring water on an infant ; or one of thefe two things 
 ?s true ; either, fir ft. The apoftle was guilty of a grofs im- 
 propriety in likening them together ; or, fecondly, He has 
 not hkened them together, as Mr. A. tells us that he has. 
 If the apoftle have not compared or likened them together, 
 then infant fprinkling, or affufion, is not gofpel baptifm, or 
 elfe one of the following things is true ; either, firft. There 
 is noHkenefs between water baptifm and the baptifm of the 
 Holy Ghoft, as Mr. A.Jieils us there is ; or, fecondly. The 
 apoftle, in Rom. vi. 4, and Coi. ii. 12, is not fpeaking of the 
 baptifm of the HJy Ghoft^ where Mr. A. fays he is. Hence, 
 Mr. A. hath not lold us the truih, or infant fprinkling and 
 affufion are not gofpel baptifm. Befides, no perfon, in the 
 full ufe of his reafon, can fay there is even the hajl likenefs 
 hstween putting a little ivater upon a child* s face ^ and the pro- 
 dudtion of a natural death, burial and refurredion. Mr. A. 
 then has but this alternative, either to rehnquifti his bad 
 caufe as loft, cr confefs his wrong ftatements, forfake his 
 erroneous pofitions, take new ground, and fot out afrefh. 
 No wonder Mr. A. tells us, that, if we write again, our 
 performances will not be entitled to notice, unlefswe bring 
 fomething new, or give the controverfy a new turn, p'or, 
 I confefs, were I on his ground, I (hould prefer any nev^r 
 
30 Second Expofitlon of 
 
 thing, and any new turn, rather than have the old, tried 
 lubftantial truths brought againd me again. 
 
 2d, But I have another quefliou to put to the reader. 
 It is this. Does your Bible fay, in any one place, fo much 
 as one v/ord about bapii/m, (whether the haptifm of water or of 
 the Holy Ghofl;) as being the caufe of death to fin, fplritual 
 burial, (unlefs the houfe ueing filled, on tiie day of Pente- 
 coft, with the divine prefence and glory, might be thus 
 termed) or of refurrection to newnefs of life ? It muft fay 
 thus fome'-cuherej or this muft be the fentiment of the Bible, 
 or Mr. A. hath made wnoihev great mijlake^ and was hardly 
 prudent in begging me to notice it. tjhould he fay, tJiat, 
 on the day of Pentecoft, the apoftles v.-ere fpiritually bu- 
 ried, that is, they were immerfed, or overwhelmed in the 
 ever memorable atfufions of the Spirit, then he becomes a 
 Baptift at oiTce ; for he fays, water haptifm is a fymbol, or 
 figure oi^ it. But, if he 4iy, that he intends, by the hap- 
 tifm of the Holy Ghoft; his regenerating inHuences, then I 
 have another queftion to put to the reader — 
 
 3d. Does your Bible ever fpeak of regeneration, or con- 
 verfion, as being the haptifm of the Holy Ghoft ? It ap- 
 pears, that Mr. A. and his brethren have gotten a kind of 
 haptifm of their own ; a kind of haptifm of the Holy 
 Ghoft, which contradicts tlie Bible account of that haptifm, 
 nearly as much as do their fprinkling and affufion for hap- 
 tifm,. This ihey appear to have invented, to juftify them 
 for fettlng afide the gofpel water baptiim. Thus has it fre- 
 quently happened, fucji, as venture to depart from the 
 good old Bible way, arc conftrained to invent fome new 
 errors to cover their old ones. 
 
 I wilh to make a few obfervations, and then Ihall quit 
 this part of my reply to Mr. A. 
 
 1. I wiili to know of him, or of. any of his brethren, 
 who told them, that to be dead to fm is to be baptized of 
 the H.ly Ghoft ^ Rom. vi. 2. 
 
 2. I wilh to know of ;iny of them, if tliey be able to tel" 
 me, who gave them the inform.ation, that to be baptized in- 
 to Jefas Chrift is to be baptized into the Holy Ghoft, and 
 
 With the Holy Ghoft ? Rom. vi. 3. 
 
 3. I wifti to know whether, according to their notion 
 of infant haptifm, their children are not baptized into Jefus 
 Chrift ; and then whether all their children are bapti/ed 
 with the Holy Ghoft ?, For fays Paul, So rriany of us as 
 were bapti/.ed into Jefus Chrift were baptized into his 
 
Mr. Auftins MiJ}akes, 31 
 
 4. I wiili to be informed by ftny of them, who told them, 
 und how they obtairred their information, that to be buried 
 with Chrirt by baptifm into death is the fame as being bap- 
 tized wirh the Holy Ghofl ? Or, to pleafe Mr. i\. I will ftate 
 the queilion a little differently. Who told liim and his 
 brethren, that the effei^ of being baptized with the Holy 
 Ghod is to be buried 'vjith Chr'tj} by baptifm ? For f*ys Paul, 
 Rom. vi. 4, We are buried with aim by baptifm^ into death. 
 He does not, however, fava word of this being the^i? of 
 the baptifm of the Holy GhoJ}. 
 
 5. I delire to know who told them, that to walk in new- 
 nefs of life was to be baptized with the K'.y Ghoft, or 
 was theeffeif^ of this bapttlhi ? Rom. vi. 4. For fays Mr. A. 
 " the fpiritual, internal, baptifm of the Holy Ghofl exactly 
 coincides with the whole of this reprefentation." Rom. 
 vi. I — 6. 
 
 6. I wilh to know of Mr. A. or of any o^ his brethren, 
 whether Peter, John, James, and the reft of the holy breth- 
 ren, who were allembled in Jerufalem, on the memiOrable 
 morning of PentecoO:, were baptized tiL-ice by the baptifm 
 of the Holy Ghoft ? For they were raiftd to ncwrufs of life, 
 long before that morning arofe 5 and Mr. A. tells ns, that 
 to be rafedlQ ne-wnefs of life is the effect of the baptilm of 
 the Holy Ghoft. They muft therefore have been thus bap- 
 tized long before, or the effe3 m.uft have preceded the caule. 
 To underRand which would puzzle Mr. A. as much as it 
 did Prefident Edwards to under/land the felf-determining 
 power in the Arminians. I'hl'^, hov.-ever, mull be under- 
 ftood and explained, or elfe they will not be able to clear 
 themfelves from the herefy oi fpiritual anahaptifm. For none 
 of them will dare deny, but the difciples were baptized 
 with the Holy Ghoft, on the morning of that memorable 
 day, when thoufands were converted under Peter's fcr- 
 mon. 
 
 7. I wiih to know who told thefe good men, that to be 
 planted in the likenefs of Chrift's death in baptifm is the 
 baptifm of the Holy Ghoft, or is the effe(5t of it ? 
 
 8. I wifh to know of Mr. A. or of any of his brethren, 
 who told them, that to be buried with Chriii in baptifm is 
 to be baptized in the Holy Ghoji, or is the efeci of this bap- 
 tifm ? Col. ii. 12. 
 
 9. I defire to know of them, who gave them autharity 
 to fay and teach thefe things? We find not a word of all 
 this matter in all the Bible. If they would, any of thenir 
 be confidered as miail\ers of Chrift, they ihould teach what 
 
32 Second Expofiticn of 
 
 he hath commanded them, and not be amufing their hear- 
 ers and the public with mch vain things, and for a purpofe 
 A ill more vain, to pervert the gofpel of Chrift, or, at beft, 
 its tirlf ordinance and the fubjeds of it. 
 
 Perhaps Mr. A. vvili not again beg me to attend to his 
 dillin(5^ions : but I fnall, if the Lord give me opportunity, 
 unlefs he and his brethren ceafe to pervert the Scriptures as 
 they have hitherto dene. 
 
 We fhall now take under confideration fome other things, 
 which, in Mr. A.'s Letters need corredlion. It may furprife 
 the public, that a man of Mr. A.'s chara<fler, and good 
 fenfe, fhould mifs the truth at every ftep. But when it is 
 confidered, .!.at the fide which he defends is nothing but 
 falfehood and error, the furprife vanifhes, and it would 
 have been unaccountable, had he done otherv.'ife, and yet 
 been confident v.ith himfelf and caufe. 
 
 Such as continue in their errors will, no doubt, be dif* 
 pleafed with me for expofmg him and them, and will pro- 
 bably wilh to hear no m.ore of the controvcrfy. But fo 
 long as truth is better than error, and the command con- 
 tinues, to contend earnePJy for the faith which was once 
 delivered to the faints; fo long mull- the errors of the er- 
 roneous be expofed. 
 
 Some of the remaining errors in Mr. A.'s Letters, which 
 need corredion, are the following : 
 
 I. Says he to n e p. 7, " Your third Letter tome is now 
 to come under confideration. 
 
 '♦ In the beginning of this Letter, you make pretentions 
 to cancloui and fairnefs, l'..t renounce them both at the ve- 
 ry next ftep.'* 
 
 I think myfelf happy, that I may anfwer for myfelf, and 
 the public fhall fee how I renounce candour and falrnefs. 
 He gives the following for evidence. *' For (fays he) yoti 
 make me to maintain that manifeft unbelievers are proper 
 and gofpel fubjedls of baptifm. Thefe are your luords again. 
 I have /aid no Juch thing." This is Mr. A.'s accufation : 
 and I appeal to the Bible, to ftubborn fafts, and to com- 
 mon fenfe, if he have not faid the whole v.'hich I have laid 
 to his charge ; and whether he have not denied the plain 
 matter of f ic^, that he might excufe himfelf, and charge 
 me with renouncing candour Aiid fairncfs ? 
 
 Says Mr. A. " What I maintain is, that the infants of 
 vlfible believers are gofpel fubjecTts of baptil'm." 
 
 We appeal to the Bible, if infants of vifib^e believers, 
 as well as others, be not manifej}!y unlsHtven P That informs 
 
Mr. Aiifiin^s MijMes^. 55 
 
 lis, lhi\t man is born like a nvild afs's colt. It does not ex- 
 empt believers*^ children any more than others. Befides 
 favs our Saviour, Except a man be born again, he cannot, 
 lee the kingdom of God. Is Mr. A. an Arminian, or a: 
 Welleyan Klethodid, and fo has he adopted the inventions 
 of men to pervert thefe texts ? If he have, llill I will fhow 
 the public, that he has denied a plain fact, to get rid of 
 a difficulty. For, in the fame page, and in the preceding, 
 he, fpeaking cf the jailer, and of his hcufehold, charges me 
 with prrjumptuous comments, which^ fays he, are calculated to 
 make your unlearned readers conclude, that the jailer's 
 houfehold are iaid to be believers as well as hirafelf. Where- 
 as the evidence from the ufe of this participle is quite the 
 other ^iuay.^^ Here Mr. A. informs us, that the jailer's 
 houfehold were baptized, when they did not believe ; and 
 charges me with prefuraptuous comments, becaufe I held 
 with the plain Scripture account of the matter, that the 
 jailer rejoiced, believing in God with all his houfe. Mr. 
 A. holds that the houfehold of the jailer was baptized, 
 while they were unbelievers^ and that this is a j.uftification of 
 his and his brethren's practice. Now I appeal to th; 
 common fenfe of all men, if unbelieving houfehoUs, or if the 
 unbelieving members of a maniftjlly unbelieving houfehold be not 
 vianifcfc unbelievers. If they be, then Mr. A. holds, that 
 manifejl unbelievers are proper and go/pel Jub'jeSts of laptifm / 
 or elfe he charges the Apoftles. with baptizing improper 
 and ungofpel fubjecls. For he holds, that they baptized 
 fuch> and c]"'arges me v/ith prefumptuous comwenU^ where I 
 fl]0w, that tliey did not baptize fuch untit and improper 
 fubje6ls. I now appeal to every man, who has common 
 fenie, whether Mr. A. has not contradicled plain matter of 
 fad ; denied his own fentiment, and charged me unjufOy ; 
 and all this to get rid of a difficulty into whieh his errors 
 have brought him ; and whether he does not hold to the 
 unfcriptural and popilh fentiment, that manifejl unbelievers 
 are proper and gnfpel fubjeds of baptifm ? 
 
 2. In page 2 i, fays Mr. A. to me, " In p. 17, you make 
 a very unfair ftatement* You fay^ ' Beudes it is your fen- 
 timent, that baptilm is to be obferved, or received, when 
 we are infants ; w^hen we know nothing about it. Hovr 
 much fcrious reverence and confcientioufnefs infants have, 
 we know not !' Is this fair ? Is it honeft i Vou have omitted 
 to mention our adult baptifms entirely." Truly, I have 
 omitted it, but will now meniion it, and ejpoie the who!^ 
 biilmef>. 
 
 s X 
 
34 Second Expofition of 
 
 I. Mr. A.'s fentiment is exadly as I fat it clown ; but 
 I did not expoie the whole. For his fentiment is, as I ob- 
 ferved, that baptifm is to be received, when we are infants, 
 when we know nothing about it. He holds, that this 
 ought to be the cafe univerfally, in all Chrifiian lands. 
 For it is his fentiment, that all parents, where the gofpel 
 is preached, ought to be believers, when their children are 
 born ; and that all fuch children ought to be baptized or 
 fprinkled in their infancy. Thus he hold.-., that, in gcfpe-l 
 lands, all ought to be baptized before they believe ; and 
 that none fhould be taught till after they are baptized. 
 Juft the contrary from what Chrift commanded, and the 
 Scriptures every where teach. Thus we fee, could his 
 error have its perfect work, how ferioufly they v.'ould rev- 
 erence, and how confcientioufly they would obferve the 
 l^ofpel ordinance of bapLifm. They would fo reverence it, 
 and fo confcientioufly obferve it, that not a fmgle believer 
 in the whole nation ihould have the privilege to fubmit to it 
 according to the exprefs command of our Saviour. No 
 one fliould be taught, and then baptized ; but all fhould be 
 baptized, and then taught. 
 
 But, 2d. Says }i«=-, "You have omitted our adult bap- 
 tifms entirely." I have ; but will be faulty in this partic- 
 ular no longer. Now, for their adult baptifms. What 
 are they ? The reader fhall hear, and then will never for- 
 get them. Their adult baptifms are, when a mafter of a 
 family is converted, his houfehold of adult Impenitents 
 inuft be baptized as well as the believing mailer. This is 
 Mr. A.'s principle, and if he will not acknowledge it, I will 
 prove it to him. He tells us, that the PhiJippian jailer be- 
 lieved, that his houfehold did not, and yet, that they wer<^ 
 proper fubjeds of baptifm ; and that the baptifms of fuel: 
 unbelieving houfeholds are their adult baptifms. Thefe 
 are not juft his words, but thefe are his fentinients, not de- 
 duced from his principles, but from his declarations and 
 affertions, as tl:i€ reader may fee by confulting his Letters to 
 the author. Befides, this is juft in agreement with their 
 principles. If they deny this, they give up their princi- 
 ples, and ftand upon nothing. They have no other de 
 fcription of adult baptifms belonging to their fyftem ; un- 
 lefs in fome rare inftances, a heathen bachelor or maid, 
 without a family, might be converted, and then fuch an 
 adult might be admitted to fprinkling. 
 
 The public are now defired to judge, with v\-hat propri- 
 fjty Mr. A. aiferted, in his firft Lctter>, faying, " We a;- 
 
Mr, Aujitns M'lfiakes, 2>S 
 
 ferioufly reverence, and ccnfcientiouny obferve the goipel 
 ordinance of baptifm, as do the B:^.ptii^s." Upon this, I ob- 
 ferved to him, that it vas his fentiment, that this ordinance 
 is to be cbferved or received when we are infants, v>'hen we 
 can know nothing about it, How much ferious reverence 
 and confcientioufnefs infants have, w^e know not. To this 
 he replies, ** Is this fair P Is it honed ?" Yes, and I appeal 
 to the Bible and to the common fenfe of the public, if the 
 whole truth, fairly laid open, would not have made him ap- 
 pear more erroneous, and given his fentiments a worfe hue ? 
 But as he hath faid, " Is this fair ? Is it honeft ?" he is now 
 defired to inform the public how much ferious reverence, and 
 confcientioufnefs the infidel, orunbelievinghoufeholds of con- 
 verted mailers, or parents have ? Have unbelieving adults, 
 whofe hearts are hardened by experience in wickednefs, any 
 more ferious reverence or confcientioufnefs, in fubmitting 
 to baptifm, at the command of their mafter, or of the offi- 
 ciating prieft, than have infants of a day old ? Suppofe 
 the jail-keeper in Worcelier be convened, and his family, 
 or houfehold, confift of half a dozen of unbelieving adults, 
 with how much ferious reverence and confcientioufnefs 
 would they obferve the gofpel ordinance of baptifm \ 
 Should they fubmit to be fprinkled, or partially wafhed, 
 or have water poured upon tliem, or have water applied to 
 them in fome other way, which Mr. A. might fancy to be 
 gofpel baptifm, then might the fpecftators behold one of his 
 adult baptifms, which he fays I have omitted entirely. I 
 confefs, did I hold to fuch adult baptifms, and did my op- 
 ponent neglect to m.ention them, I would never complai.i 
 of fuch omilTion, unlefs my judgment were what it is not, 
 or I wiihed my fentiments to be had in everlafting re- 
 proach. 
 
 Let the Bible dodlrine of gcfpel baptifm, let the Bible 
 ^a'fts, relating to gofpel baptifm, let common fenfe, as to 
 gofpel baptifm, judge whether Mr. A.'s adult baptifms be 
 any way preferable before the heathen rites, praclifed in 
 honour of Jupiter, or of other heathen gods ! The Bible 
 knows nothing about fuch adult baptifms, as he and his 
 brethren advocate. The fadl is, they have loll tlie idea of 
 gofpel baptifm, and of the fubjeds too ; and now confider 
 themfelves juftified in contending eameftly for the com- 
 mandments and traditions of men. 
 
 3. Says Mr. A. page 26, "There are fome men, fir, 
 who have not a jot of oil, nor a grain of balm, in their 
 velleb, who yet have infinite real about th.ings of compur- 
 
3^ Sccc?id Expojnon of 
 
 atlve InJliTerence. Th^ lefs determinate evlJence there ts,, 
 the more poutive do they feem to be." By the connexion 
 in vvj.ich this paliage is introduced, ir is manifeft that the 
 Baptifts are intended. But we appeal to the public, if Mr. 
 A. have not mi:l:aken their characLcriftics. *' Infinite zeal 
 (fays he) about things of coxnparaLive indi^erence.** Who 
 more zealous than Mr. A. and his brethren, about baptifm ? 
 Yet they, efpecially he, confefs it to be of fuch comparative 
 indifference, that it may be adminiftered at one time, or at 
 another time, or at no time ; and that it may be in one -way^ 
 or in another way, or in cJmoJ} any way. It is not thus with 
 the Baptifts. *' Ihe lefs determinate evidence (fiys he), 
 there is, the more pofitive do they feem to be." Nothing 
 can better apply to Mr. A. than does this ; for I ihowed 
 him, in my Letters, that he had no determinate evidence, 
 nor even probable evidence, in favour of his errors ; yet 
 he is, if pofllble, more pofitive than before. "They plant 
 themfelves (fays he) on an elevation enveloped in vapours, 
 and yet fancy that they on/y have the feeing faculty." We 
 can fee, that to be baptized in the river, is not to be fprink- 
 led 01^ of it. We can fee, that to Iiave our bodies auajhed 
 with pure or ample water, is a different thing from having 
 a little put upon our facvs. We can fee, that for converts, 
 to be baptized when they hear the word gladly, is not the 
 fam^e as to be fj->rinkled before they can underlland one 
 word from another. We can fee fome difference between 
 burying believers with Chrifl in the very folemn and fig- 
 nificant ordinance of baptifm, and the fprinkh'ng or pour- 
 ing water on adult infidels becaufe their mailers believe. 
 We do not claim exclufive poffefilon of the feeing £iculty :. 
 we believe Mr. A. has k, but with relation to gofpel bap- 
 tifm, will not \\% it. 
 
 Again, fays be, *'^They make a thoufand times m.ore 
 fufs about the m.ode of a thing, about converfion to. that 
 mode, and the putting in pra(flice that mode, waiting 
 months to give it publicity, and feviding from Dan to 
 Beerflieba for agents to be employed about it, than if all 
 the inhabitants of Louifiana were converted to Chritllan- 
 ity." ! ! This we believe to be a very rafii untruth, ofc' 
 wliicli Mr. A. muft repent in the prefent or future world. 
 
 4. The public will excufe me, though in this place I 
 may prefent them with a quotation of unufual length. In 
 my judgment, it is expedient, in the prefent debate, to be 
 liberal in quotations. My reafons arc two : one is, that 
 my opponents (haH have no plaufible. objection to make^ 
 
Mr. Aujllr's Mijiakes, 2>7 
 
 that their fentiment is not fuirly ftatej j the other is, that 
 then very many of my readers will Jifcover for themfelves 
 the fallacy and weaknefs cf my opponents' arguments, by 
 infpe;5tion, before they are particularly eipofed. It would 
 pleafe me well to be ufed in the fame \vay ; then would 
 the readers, on both fides of the quellion, pollefs a mere 
 generous opportunity to know the truth : but thofe who 
 contend with me will ufe their pleafure in this maatter. 
 
 The quotation is in pages 37 and 38, and in the follow- 
 ing words : — 
 
 " The fecond proof which I advanced againft your doc- 
 trine of the exclufive meaning of the word laptizo, is the 
 pafiage in i Cor. x. 2, And were all baptized unto Mofes 
 in the cloud and in the fea. Here your reply is founded 
 altogether on the force of the prepositions under^ through, and 
 in. Prepofitions are every thing with you. But how are 
 we to underhand them ? Beyond all doubt, the declaration 
 of the apoille is founded upon the fact in the Mofaic narra- 
 tive. This you have not dared to look in the face. You 
 ikulk under prepofitions, in the hope they will (hield you 
 from the eyes of thofe who are able to detecl your fophifms. 
 But you miUiT: come out. You have committed yourielf 
 before the public. You have impofed on the credulity of 
 your unlearned readers, by indefenfible afTertions, which 
 you do not fapport, and rauft be rebuked for your temerity. 
 This text alone is fufficient to confound all thofe affertions. 
 The apoille fpeaks of the whole multitude of Ifrael, and 
 comprehends every individual. All our fathers. Now 
 will you undertake to fay before the public, that all tli::fe 
 fathers, individually, were immerfed in the cloud, when the 
 facred narrative fays, E}:od. xiv. 19, And the pillar of the 
 cloud went from before their face and fcood behind them ; 
 and it came between the camp of the Egyptians and the 
 camp of Ifrael ? Will you fay that they w^ere individually 
 immerfed in the fea, when the facred narrative is, verfe 22, 
 And the children of Jfrael went into the midft of the fea 
 upon dry ground, and the waters were a w^all unto them 
 on their right hand and on their left. If by the fea be 
 meant the bed of the waters, that was diy ground under 
 their feet ; if the waters themfelves, they were en each fide 
 of the congregation as a wall." 
 
 I will here, in the firfl place, give the public a particular 
 ftatement of the facls which caufed the good man to fpeak 
 fo fmartly, and to aifert thinps fo roundly, and then I fhall 
 
38 Second Espcfition of 
 
 endeavour to expofe his errors, with which the quotation is 
 crowded. 
 
 The accurate ftatement now follows. In his firft Let- 
 ters to me, page 57, his words are, " Another cafe in 
 which the word bapti%o is undeniably uied to convey an 
 idea entirely different' from tliat of complete immerfioii, 
 and which, for fome reafon bclf known to yourfelf, you 
 have thcught proper to omit, occurs in i Cor. x. 2, And 
 were all baptized [ebaptizanto) unto Mofes in the cloud and 
 in the ftra." To this I replied, page 42, thus : — « Here 
 let Paul explain himfelf, or let the preceding verfe explain 
 what this means. The preceding yQx^Q is, Moreover, breth- 
 ren, I would not that ye fliould be Iguoranty how that all our 
 fathers were under the cloudy and all palfed through the fea. 
 Then follows verfe 2, And were all baptized unto Mofes ir. 
 the cloud and In the fea. How does this undeniably convey 
 an idea entirely different from that of complete immerfion : 
 It looks to me fomewhat like the fame idea. It certainly 
 has the appearance of being overwhelmed, or completely 
 encompaifcd. They were all un<kr the cloud, they all 
 palfed through the fea ; they were baptized in the cloud and 
 in the fea. This your undeniable evidence againll: the idea 
 of immerfion, appears, upon the very face of it, to favour, 
 ftrongly to favour, the very truth which you brought it to 
 deftroy.'* 
 
 We will now attend to the errors which he hath given us 
 within the limits of one paragraph. 
 
 1. " Here (fays he) your reply is founded altogether 
 upon the force of prepofitions.'' 
 
 ^Tijiver, The force of my reply was founded upon the 
 words of the apolUe ; I was difpofed to let him. explain 
 himfelf. Mofes faid nothing about baptifm, nor of the 
 fathers being baptized unto him, either in the cloud or in 
 the fea ; but as Paul had brought forward this manner of 
 exprellion, and as he only had thus done, I confidered it but 
 reafonable to allow Paul to explain himfelf. But as Mr. 
 A. contrary from all reafonable men, will not fufFer a man, 
 even the apollle^ to exphtin himfelf, and treats me not ve^y 
 clvilh- for my referring the matter to Paul, we will there- 
 fore hear Mr. A. 
 
 2. Says he, " Prepofitions are every thing with you. 
 But how are we to underhand them ? Beyond all doubt, 
 the declaration of the apoRle is faaivJed upon the fatfl in 
 the Mofaic narrative. This you have not dared to look in 
 the face." 
 
Mr. Aujlln's Mijiakcs, 39 
 
 Arj-iver. Is it with me, or with the apoflle, he is con- 
 tending ? I hcive made no prepolitions. I added none to 
 thole iifed by the apoflle. I jull fet to view the text, as 
 Paul dehvered it, " Beyond all doubt, (lays Mr. A.) thefe 
 prepofitions are to be underRood by the facl in the Mofaic 
 narrative.'* Suppofe this to be true, yet is not Paul's ex- . 
 pofition of Molcs's narrative as good as Mr. A.'s ? But, 
 fays he, '' This (the Mofaic narrative) you have not dared 
 to look in the face." This is Mr. A.'s flieer miilake ; for 
 I trull:, through grace given unto me, there is not a fmgle 
 text in all the good vs'ord of God, but I dare look it in the 
 f ice, and am wiUir.g to underitand its full import, with 
 a defire to obey it. 
 
 1 fnall now endciivour to look his two formidable texts 
 full in the face. The tirll is in Kxod. xiv. 19. And the 
 pillar of the cicud went from before their face and flood 
 bihind them ; and it came between the c:imp of the Egyp- 
 tians and the camp of ifrael." This explains one part of 
 what Paul fa}s, n:J,n:eiy, That all our fath.-rs v,-ere under the 
 iloml. Tlic pillar -A cloud v.-ent from before their face and 
 flood bcliind tlieni. 'x^hen it })aifed over oil of them^ as it 
 paiTed from front to rear. This may figuratively reprefnt a 
 tcmb-Jrcne, which lies over the ivhole grave. Very well ; and 
 what is the other text which I dare not look in the face ? 
 It is this, vcrfe 22, And the children of Ifrael went into the 
 midii of the fea upon dry ground, and the ni'aters were a 
 Kuall unto them on the right hand and on the left. This 
 gave Paul an occafion to iiiy, And all palFed through the 
 iea. Here is the Mofaic narrative He found that the 
 iea, or the ^waters of the fea, were a wall on each fde oi all 
 the IfraeliUs. Put thefe v/alls and the figurative tomb-flone 
 t? aether, they ^vould be fomething oi -j. figurative tomb ; 
 there would be ibme rcfemblance. Hence Paul rai"-ht, in 
 a figurative way of fpeaking, without oiiending any, except 
 the oppofcrs of gofpel baptifrn, f;iy, And were all baptized 
 unto Moies in the cloud and hi the lea. The cloud and 
 fea, taken together, cncompafled them, or overwhelmed 
 them, as tliey were following Moles their leader ; and in 
 the mean time they experienced a very memorable deliver- 
 ance, which, as a figure, points out the deliverance from 
 fni, or the falvation by Jefus Cliriil:, even as water baptifm 
 does. Now we appeal to the Bible, to the Ihibborn fa<5ts 
 related, 10 €omm(m fenfe, to any thhig and to every thing 
 which will fpeak the truth, if Mr. A. had not better have 
 do'gc nothing in defence of his errors, than to bring fuch 
 
<o Second Expofition of 
 
 texts as thefe to the confideration of the public. For doe» 
 not this veiy matter look a little like immerfion, the gofpel 
 baptifm ? And where is there the lead refemblance of his 
 popilh notion of pouring or fprinkling ? It would be ridic- 
 ulous to fay, tliat all the Ifraelites were fprmkled, or had 
 •^.vater poured upon them, either from a pillar of fire or 
 from the fixed walls of water on each fide. This is Mr. 
 A.'s artillery, by which he has, if we may believe his own 
 words, confounded all my ailertions, and taken away viy 
 defenjive armour ; or, this is fufficient to do it. 
 
 3. But, fays he, " You Jhulk under prepofitions, in the 
 hope they will iliield you from the eyes of thofe who are 
 able to detect your fopliifms." The public will judge 
 whether I have Jl-ulkcd under prepofitions, or under any 
 thing elfe, or whether 1 have any occafion to for the prefent. 
 But from what does Mr, A. fuppofe I am Jiulk'mg ? He 
 plainly tells me, " From the eyes of thofe who are able to 
 dete(5l my fophifms." I appeal to every impartial reader 
 of his Letters, whether he has, in either of his pamphlets 
 dete(fled any of my fophifms, or fliown me to be guilty of 
 owQ. He has told me in the public hearing, page 43, 
 *' That he pitied me^" and in page 20, *' thai he -zcguIJ be nierci- 
 ful and not expofe, too m:ich^ the naiednejs of the land,** Sec, 
 But where has he proved me guilty of a fophifm, or any 
 confiderable mi (lake, or one mlfreprefentation, or one tri- 
 
 Jiingj unmardy argument ? 
 
 4. But, fays he, " Tou rr.uj} cone out, Tou have commit- 
 ted vourjelf before the public. 7'ou have inipo/cd on the credulity 
 of your unlearned readers^ by ivdefenfible ajfertlcns^ nvhich you do 
 not fupport, and mifl be rebuhed for ytur temer-ity.** 
 
 yJnf'u.^er. I confefs I feel myfelf happy, that I live in a 
 Lind of freedom, where I am not afraid to come out, and 
 defire Mr. A. to make good his charge. Let him ihow, if he 
 be able, in what 1 have committed myfelf before the public. 
 Let him Ihow, if he can, for I invite him. to expofe me, and 
 I alk oi him neither /)iVv nor mercy, fo as to keep back one 
 truth, by which he can expofe my impofition upon the cre- 
 dulity of my unlearned readers, by fo much as one indefen- 
 fible affertion. If I have not done this in a fingle inftancc, 
 but do fupport my affertions, and Mr. A. be not able to 
 gainfay them, but by fi^ch weak and beggarly arguments 
 '<i%pi^ures in his Bible, calling to the fpirits of dead men, or 
 telling (lories about a Baptiif minifler's praying too loud. 
 Then I all;: for what temerity I am to be rebuked by him. 
 Mr. A. ought to remember, that we Jo not live whtie 
 
Mr, AujViris Mifiakes. 41 
 
 the mouths of the baptized church are (lopped by prifons, 
 fires, racks and gibbets. Truth begins to break forth with 
 brightnefs. The God of the baptized church will defend 
 her, and his plagues begin to be poured upon Antichrift ; 
 and fuch of God's people as do not hear his voice, and 
 come out of her fpeedily, may receive not a little of thefe 
 plagues. 
 
 5. For a general anfwer to Mr. A.'s reply to my 
 expofmg his erroneous notions of diaphorois baptifmois 
 Keb. ix. 10. the public are referred to my Letters to him, 
 p. 43, 44, and 45. But as he confiders himfelf to have 
 gained fome advantage from the ufe of the word diapho- 
 rois in a diiferent connexion, fome fmall attention mud 
 be paid to it. His words are, " The Greek word is ufed 
 but in one other place in the New-Teftament ; that is in 
 Rom. xii. 6. Having therefore gifts differing, d'laphora, 
 according to the grace given to us, whether prophecy or 
 miniftry, &c. Thefe gifts, fays he, are d'lffcvent in k'uid.'^ 
 
 The following obiei vations will fhow, tiiat the text, Rom. 
 xii. 6. and the word dhplora as there ufed, will afford him 
 no help. 
 
 1. For, to fay the lead, it is a very doubtful thing, 
 whether the gifts, differing according to the grace given, be 
 dijfererd hinds of gifts, or different fpecies of the fame hind oi 
 fpiritual gifts. Indeed to me it is no doubtful cafe at all. 
 For there are different kinds of gifts of the Spirit. Such 
 2.S gifts effcntially conneifled with the finner''s fahaf'on^ mirac- 
 ulous gifts^ and edifying gfts. Thofe gifts of which Paul is 
 fpeaking, Rom. xii. 6, 7, are of the latter kind, and differ- 
 ent fpecies of that kind. This text is therefore nothing to 
 his purpofe. 
 
 2. But grant it, if h^ choofe, that the gifts fpoken of 
 are different in kind ; yet it will not follow, as he fuppofes, 
 that the fame adjective, in Heb. ix. 10. muft mean different 
 kinds of baptifms. It might ir one cafe mean different 
 fpecies of the fame kind, and in vanother ditferrnt kinds. 
 So it v/ould prove nothing to his purpcle, even fuppofe it 
 meant juft as he fays. 
 
 3. But, fuppofe farther, that the ufe of the word dia^ 
 phora, Rom. xii. 6. would prove, that in Heb. ix. 10. the 
 apoftle is fpeaking of diiferent kinds of baptifms, then it 
 would confound Mr. A.'s whole argument from the text, 
 as to gofpel baptifm, or worfe ; for then he mud fay one 
 of tliefe two things ; either, firft, that it hath nothing to 
 
42 Stcond Exprjition of 
 
 do witii gofpel bnpti.'ni ; or fecondly, that there arc 6.\?[e? 
 ent kirds of goij el bapliims. If he fay the firil, that it 
 hath r( thirrg to do v ith gcfpelbnptifm, then it vould cor." 
 fcurd his argumeiit, f r r then he would all this while have 
 been arguing fiom a topic which hath nothirg to do with 
 the fiibje6t. jf he fay the other, that there are different 
 kinds ci gofpel baptifnis, then he dees wcrfe than give up 
 his whole argument ; for he implicitly charges the apof- 
 tie with falfehood, and our Lord Jefus Chriil with impofi- 
 tion and negligence. He implicitly charges the apoftle 
 with falfehood ; for Paul exhorts the Ephefian Chrillians 
 to unity, and ufes as one argum.ent to this, that there is 
 but one Lord, one faith, ojjc hapt'ijm. New if there be d'l^ir- 
 ent k'wch of gofpel baptifms, Paul muft have fpokcn falfe- 
 ly, with a defign, no doubt, to deceive. Put this is 
 rot the wcrrt v. hich Mr. A. df es. L'e implicitly charges 
 cur Lord Jefus Chiift vith irpcfiti( n and negligence ; 
 for r.iir Lord knew how to fpeak in fuch plain bnguage, 
 that his poor, ignorant and devout followers might under- 
 ftLjn.l him. Put inftead cf doing fo, (if Mr. A. be correci) 
 i:e If < aks in fi'rh ambiguous and imcertain langurtge, that 
 f'-r iexeral of the fiift: centuries, no one undertlcod Irim, 
 and none ^^cre certain that they underftcod him to mean, 
 ;;r that he did mean, by gr fpel bapiifm any thing fhort of 
 immerfon, till Pope Ckmtnt the Fifth, in the fourteenth 
 centiirv, arofe and informed xY.^ world, that y/r//7/'//>/^ Ihould 
 be iwl'td and gofpel baptifm : And indeed had it not been 
 for Mr. Auftin of Worcefter, the Chiifiian \^rrld wruld not 
 have known, to this day, thiit there were different kirds of 
 gofpel baptifms. 11 ms sccordivig lo Mr. A. err ble/Tcd 
 Lord and JSaviour (face king to iayj has impoftd upon his 
 ignorant fc^Uowers. Not only Ic. ])ut the compaihonate 
 and all-wife Saviour hath given the law of j-oijel baptifm 
 in iiiCii equivocal ard uncertain teims, that fc ior n as \.\% 
 f(;ll(>w(rs com.e to ki ow any thing alijut letters, thiv m.rft 
 be c(ii:erding about what it is. P(>r it could not but be 
 e>:pe<fKd that iome of tie moie itnorant ones v.culd con- 
 tend 1(r tie old way whidi v.-as pradifcd, with few e>:cer- 
 ticns. 1( T fifteen ht'rdred years. Yes, and not only fo, but 
 Matt! eu', and Maik, ard Luke, and Jt.hn, and Pauh r.nd 
 Peter, hiive agreed togeiher in keeping us igrcrart. P(T 
 wherever and \\henever they have If.ckcn of gofpel bap- 
 tifm, they hsve rm.ifcimly Jprken (f it^ when they have 
 mentioned any explanatory circumfh:nce ab( ut it, as th(-vigh 
 it veie ere thirg, and as thet^^h tJ at ere thing v^eie im- 
 
Mr. Aiifiin's MyUka, 43 
 
 merfion. T-Li:. iil. 6. tells us, that the penitents were bap- 
 tized in Jordan. Mark tells us, \. 5. that they were baptiz- 
 ed in the rivtr of Jordan. Luke informs us, that when the 
 ordinance of bapLifm was adminillered, they not only camo 
 to the zi'Mer, bat went into it. Avits viii. John gives us to 
 underilaiiJ, that b iptifin was admiui.lsrei in a cerLaia 
 place, hdcaufd there was much water there. John lii. 23. 
 Paul tells ui, that as many as were baptized into Jemi 
 Chriil, were buried and raifed with Chrid in the ordinance, 
 Rom. vi. 3, 4. Col. ii. 12. Peter teils us that baptiim is a 
 fit^ure of our falvation, anfwering to the Hgure, the ark, in 
 which Noah was faved. Chap. iii. 21. of his fifil epiitlt-. 
 Now all thefe have agreed together to deceive us, if it b^ 
 a deception, and to make us, poor, ignorant creatures, who 
 have not come to maturity of judgment^ correcintp of knowi- 
 edje, and Jiability of fulth, believe, that gofpel baptifm i^ 
 but one thing, and that one thing is immerfion, in the nUiiic 
 of the Father, <Scc. Whereas they have not faii lO much 
 as one word ^howl fpri,i.Uirig or pourng being the malter of 
 gofpel baptifm, or given ii much as one circumftanc^- 
 which makes it look as though fprinklin^: or pouring- vvu. r. 
 ever either commanded or prac^ued. Indeed nad not Popj 
 Clement, in the year I30j,have told as that fprinklhig w.i^ 
 valid, fcriptural, gofpel baptifm, no Chridian for the nut 
 eighteen hundred years of Chriftianity, would have knowM 
 that it was fo ; and all might have proceeded on in their 
 ignorance, and have believed, that as there were bat one 
 Lord, one faith, (o there was but one valid, fcriptural, gofpci 
 baptifm. In much the fame l^ate of ignorance might the 
 Chriilian world have now been, with refpect to another 
 important matter, had not Mr. A. been raifed up to inftrufl 
 us, that there are different kinds of gofpel baptifms. Uoq^, 
 not this budnefs of ^lr. A. do worfe than confound his 
 argument ? Does it not make his Popifli baptifms look 
 worfe than it would for him to give up his argument from 
 Pleb. ix. 10? In (hort, hid he not better have taken my 
 advice, if he would maintain his fide, to fay nothing about 
 it? 
 
 6. Wc will now attend to Mr. A.'s lall and moft formi- 
 dable argument againll immeriion, as being the only gof- 
 pel baptifm. As this laf} A^d main argument is but \}\Q,olJ 
 Antichriflian argument, with a new drefs, it might receive 
 but little notice, were it not that by repeatedly turning it 
 over before the public, they may, one after another, fee the 
 mjrh of the beall upon it. Another coniideratioa may 
 
44 Second Expofaion of 
 
 render it advllable to pay fome attention to it ; and it is 
 this : This their Jirjl and lafl argument is the only argu- 
 ment for which they have even a plauiible pretence. It 
 was the principal argument which Cyprian in the third 
 century ufed for fprinkiing, or aitufion ; and it is the lall 
 which Mr. A. ufes in the nineteenth. Cyprian doubted its 
 validity ; but Mr. A. is fomevvhat confident that it will 
 anfwer. 
 
 ■\Ve will now hear his argument. 
 
 Says he, page 40, 41, 42, "To conclude this part of the 
 controverfy on the mode of baptifm, omitting the much 
 that might be faid in favour of fprinkiing and afFufion, as 
 both warranted in the fcriptures, I will content m.yfelf with 
 one remark ; and tlial is upon the impradic ability of the 
 ordinance according to your account of it. In befieged 
 cities, whei-e there are thoufands and hundreds of thou- 
 fands of people ; in fandy deferts, like fome parts of Af- 
 rica, Arabia and Paleftine, and in fom.e northern regions, 
 where the dreams and the ponds, if there be any, are fhut 
 up by impenetrable ices ; and in fevere and extenfive 
 droughts, like that v%'hich took place in the time of Ahab ; 
 fufficiency of water for animal fubfiftence is almoil unpro- 
 curable. In fom^e cafes it is entirely fo ; infomuch that 
 millions of human beings have fuffered great diftrefs by 
 thirft. Now fuppofe God fhould, according to the pre- 
 di^ions of the prophets, pour out plentiful effufions of his 
 Spirit, fo that all tlie inhabitants of one of thefe regions or 
 cities Ihall be born in a day ; upon your hypothefis there 
 is an abfolute impcilibility they fhould be born into the 
 kingdom, while there is this fcarcity of water; and this 
 may laft for months ; yea, as long as they live. And thefe 
 thoufands and hundreds of thoufands of Chriilians, m.uil 
 remain all this while, and perhaps die, without having 
 once the confolation of fupping with their Redeemer. 
 Now it muft require very clear evidence to convince me, 
 that the effence of baptifm lies in that which, in fb many 
 cafes of this kind, mull defeat the very defign of it ; and 
 that baptifm is ever- an indifpenfable prerequifite to the 
 Lord's Supper. This moreover is altogether unlike what 
 we find on the face of apoftolic pradice." 
 
 Thus fays Mr. A. in the light of the nineteenth century ; 
 and what does it all come to r The following remark may 
 fhow. 
 
 I. The whole of it is argumenium mi pcifficnes, that is, 
 an argument addrcifed to the paffions and prejudices of men. 
 
Mr. A:iftin"s Mijlahs. 45 
 
 2. We muft make Chrid's pofitlve inftitutions bow to 
 our convenience jufl: when it fuits us, becaufe in feme pof- 
 lible cafes, which have never yet happened, and never will, 
 
 we could not be baptized according to the command and 
 pattern given, with refpe(5t to that ordinance. 
 
 3. God may, not according to the predictions of the 
 prophets, give a great rain from the upper fprings, and fhul 
 up the lowrr onss, fo that a nation or city may be born in 
 a day, and there be, at the time, not water fuSicient to^ 
 baptize them, therefore baptifm cannot always mean bap- 
 tifm, that is, immerfion ; bu: muft fometimes mean ran- 
 tifm, that is, fprinhling, 
 
 4. If thoufands and hundreds of thoufands fhould be 
 bt)rn, on that very day in which they had fpent the laft 
 of the water, which the city, or fandy defert contained, 
 what would Mr. A. do then ? Would he not do as fome 
 of the popifli monks a,re faid to have done, baptize them 
 
 with fand ? 
 
 5. But there is another difficulty. Suppofe their vines 
 fiiould not yield their fruit, what would he do then, as to 
 the fecond gofpel ordinance ? No doubt he would fubftitute 
 water, or forae other liquid, if he had any ; for if he may, 
 to fuit the times, change the very ellence of one ordinance, 
 he may, no doubt, change the element of another. But 
 fuppofe he had no fubftitute, fo that it would be utterly 
 impoffible to fup with his Redeemer ; then Mr. A. would, 
 if confifteut with himfelf, conclude, that Chrift never in- 
 tended to command the real ufe of bread and wine, or any 
 other material elements in the ordinance of the fupper ; 
 for the want of bread and wine may happen as ofcen and 
 to as great multitudes, as the want of water. Then he 
 might conclude thus : 
 
 *' Now it muft require x-'ry clear evidence to convince ni?, 
 that the ejfence cf the Lord^s fupper lies hi that tuhich, m fo 
 many cafes oi this kind, muf} defeat the very defign of it." 
 Thus Mr. A.I with the very fame argument, by which he 
 condem.ns my principles, juftifies the Quakers. Juil fo far 
 as his argument is good in one cafe, it is the fame in 'the 
 other. His argument is either good for nothing, becaufe 
 it proves too much, or elfe it proves juft enough, and the 
 Quakers are in the right. 
 
 6. The "/a many cafes of this kind,'' wliich he fuppofes 
 muft defeat the very delign of baptifm, are mere imagina- 
 tion J not one of them has ever occurred, or is ever like 
 to. 
 
 E 2 - 
 
4^ Second Expofition cf 
 
 7. Bat his concliuiing words are panlcularly noticeable ; 
 they are thefe : *' This moreover is altogether unhke what 
 we find on the i.iQ^ of apoflolic praflice." 
 
 If he mean, th;it what he hath been faying, and that his 
 whole argument is altogether unlike what we find on the 
 face of apoftolic pradice, it is a folemn truth. For we 
 do, indeed, find not a word of his popilh and V\-icked ar- 
 gument and praflice in any of the writings of thofe holy 
 men. We appeal to the Bible, to flnbborn fails, and to 
 the common {(^tSq of all mankind, if there be, in any one 
 text of the whole Bible, where it fpeaks of gofpel tim.es and 
 •"gofpel ordinances, {o much as a fingle (hade of likenefs 
 between the apotlolic praclice and Mr. A.'s argument, and 
 the errors which he would fupport by it ? But if he intend 
 by his clofing aifertion, that liis argument and tenets are 
 altogether like wh-i^ we find on the face of apoflolic prac- 
 tice, then his affertion is very illy founded, and deferves a 
 worfe name than I choofe to give it. But this I will fay, 
 it m^ay, at lead, be numbered among his other great mif- 
 takes, and the argument itfelf may increafe the number of 
 his' weak cnrs. 
 
 A man of fenfe muft indeed have a miferable fide, to be 
 'compelled to vSii fucli miierable arguments in the defence 
 of it. 1 can bear with tolerable patience to hear Mr.' A. 
 accufe me of repetitions, Tor I had rather be guilty of a 
 thoufand, than to have one fiich argument as tliis iaftly 
 laid to my account. 
 
 7. Were it not for the importance of the prefent con- 
 troverfy, I might be apprehenfive fome of my readers 
 would gladly difmifs the remaining errors of Mr. A. ; but 
 when it is confidered that his errrrs, generally fpe^ikinj, 
 belong to a great clafs of m.en, and that fjitis, who are 
 witii him in them, are not only men of fenfe .md eruditi; n, 
 but of piety too ; and befides, when it is confidered, th-t 
 where his errors are expofed, mmy may have them, and 
 more may take heed not to imbibe tl em ; then it will ap- 
 jpear that too r»^:Uch cannot be done to bring tliem into ihtir 
 defired difrepca. I fliall therefore' fet another clufter of 
 ihern to public view. In the firft place w;fliiirt^t;the'rfl 
 down, as Mr. A. hasgiven them' to us in his^3d'^age,''a'nd 
 then expofe.them Individually. They ar6 contained in^-his 
 words which follow. " Theae is but little ' .h'a^clil3,-=tlK(t 
 your mod partial readers will be quieted by tlie.Siew/_in- 
 vention' of yours, as much at' variance with comniofr f^fife, 
 'arid with the explanations of yoiir rKiptidbrcthrcTr/'as Mi^ii 
 
Mn Aujiin's Mijlakcs. 4-; 
 
 the icrlptures, that the covenant of circumcidon is bat a 
 token of the covenant of grace. That it is but a mere 
 law, and that circamcilioii itfelf is this covenant. This is 
 twilling and turning indeed. ' The covenant of circumci- 
 fion equal, (fay you) every man child being circumcifed j 
 every man-child being circaaiciled equal, the circumciiin'^ 
 of the flelh of their forelkin ; the circumcifing of the fleih 
 cf their forefkin equal, the token of the covenant between 
 God and Abraham ; here the token of the covenant be- 
 twixt God and Abraham equal, the covenant of circumci- 
 ■fion : for it is a well known axiom, that things that are 
 equal to the fame are equal to one another.* This alge- 
 braic equation, my frien J, i/.' />/(}' t'j you, I will leave under 
 a fimple quotation." 
 Som2 of his errors contiln3d in this quotation are, 
 I. His calling it an invintion of mi.ie, to c infidc-r the 
 covenant of circunicilion as but a tuksn of t!ie cjv:narJ of 
 grace. '1 his is far from being an inven:ion of mine. For 
 f.iith the Lord, G^n. xvii. 9, 10, i i. " Thou ihalt keep my 
 covenant therefore, thru and thy [■^^l after thee, in their 
 generations. Tnis is ray cavjnan!: which ye Ih ill keep be- 
 t veen m^ and you aii thy feed a^ter thee ; e^jyrj mj.n-ch'dd 
 am )ng you Ih ill be circumcipd \ and ye fliall clrcu^nnfs the 
 Jiijlo of yo'iv for-f^:iny and it ihall be a token of die c^v^nuni 
 b t-jj'xt me ^.Ai you.''* In the 13th verfe, GoA, fpeaklng 
 manifeftly of this fame covenant of circumcifiou; faith, 
 My covenant fli ill be in your Jl-^jl), for an everLiHring cove- 
 nant." Alfo in verfe 14. fpeaking of the fame covenant, 
 the Lord Iliith, " And the uneircamcifed man-child wjj/} 
 JI^Oj of his foreikin is not circumcifed, that foul (hall be 
 cut off from his people, he hath br'jken my cJVfn.rnL** Does 
 Mr. A. fuppofe, that the unclrcumcired man-child had 
 broken the covenant of grace ? If he do, the fcriptures fay 
 ao fuch thing. He had broken the covenant of circumci- 
 fion, or the law, or covenp.nt of circumcifion had not been 
 obferved v/ith relation to him- Thus we fee my invention 
 is the good old Bible account of die matter. However, it 
 is not to be wondered at, that he fhould wifh to get rid of 
 this matter by caUing it a new invention of mine. - For this 
 good old Bible account de;1:roys his anti-chriUian notion ol' 
 puttiTig' -children into the covenant of grace by baptizing^ 
 ftiem. For all the plea which he has for this fuperfifitious- 
 bafinefs, is, that Abraham and his feed put their childreii/ 
 as he and his brethren erroneoufly fuppofe, into • that cove^- 
 iiartt, by. tircumcifing them. But this Bible account of 
 
4^ Second Expo/it ion of 
 
 circumciiioii rern.n-es this part of the myjhry of iniquity ; 
 and fliows that Abraham's children were net put into the 
 covenant of grace by being circa. xicifed, aiid f ) it deftroys 
 the notion of jndaizing Chriiliiuis piudng theirs in by hap- 
 tlfm. 
 
 2. Another error in the above quotation is, his repre- 
 fenting what he calls my new Invention, as being at va- 
 riance v/ith common fenfe, and with the expln^nations of my 
 Baptiil brethren, and with the Bible. 
 
 As to the explanations of my baptized brethren, I kn jvv 
 not what they are, not recoUecLing, or having never feen 
 any of them. Yet, fijiding that my invention appears to 
 harmonize perfe^ftly with the Bible reprefentation, and 
 knowing that the Bible and common fenfe agree, and alfo 
 knowing that ray baptized brethren generally agree with 
 both, I conclude, tliat I am not greatly at variance with 
 either of the three. 
 
 3. His ne:ct error in this cln.ler is hi 3 declaration, that 
 my confidering the covenant of circnmciUon to be but a- 
 token of the covenant of grace, and that circumcifioa itfjif 
 is this covenant, is t^juyiing and turning indeed. 
 
 I appeal to the Bible and common iQ-oS.^^ if I have not 
 gone iide by fide with both of them. If I hive, ther?* is- 
 nelther t^julfllng nor turning about it, fave it twills his erro- 
 neous fentiments, and turns \\\s nithn of putting his gracehf:'. 
 children into the covenant of grace, by fprinkling them, 
 out of credit, au'l make; It appear as It fhoLiid, an inven-- 
 tion of man. This is what T call, going right forward. 
 
 4. The ocher error, which I Ihi'l here mention, is hij- 
 unreafonable pity towards me. It was fogreat, that he 
 has left us all in ignoran.ce of vwiat the covenant of cir- 
 cumcifioa is. The public wou'd have been under great 
 obligation to him, had he pitied me lefs, and fo had given 
 them a plain view, or clear account of the covenant of cir-- 
 cumcifion. But as the matter is, the public muLt ftlU h^ 
 uninformed, or elfe take my new invention, th2 good old" 
 Bible reprefentation of this matter. 
 
 8. Another noticeable error of Mr. A.'s Is his implicit 
 denial, that the Piedobaptiil theory is clogged with the 
 abfurd principle, and practice too, fo far as their principle 
 and practice agree, that if a South-Carolina planter be 
 converted; his houfehold are difclples of courfe, and are 
 to be baptized, though his flaves be 5000. Thisisjuft their 
 abfurd principle and pradice too, fo far as they are con- 
 Gilent with themfelves ; and Mi\ A. has implicitly denied 
 
Mr. Aujl'ms Mijlakes. 49 
 
 it, and as he confefTes it to be a clog to their theorTr rf true, 
 and alio an abiardity, it appears to me expedient, in this 
 place, to prove the fait againll their theory, and thus to 
 lix an abfurdity upon their practice, and clog it as much 
 as I can. But in the fir.l place, I will give the public his 
 attempt to get off. 
 
 In page 46, his words are thefe : fays he to me, " In 
 page 62, you fay, refpeding Abraham's houfehold, * But 
 let it be more or lefs, one thing is certain, they were all to 
 be circumcifed on account of Abraham's being a good man, 
 full of faith.' That which is certain can eafiiy be prov- 
 ed. Proof is not furnifhed ; and it is beheved never can 
 be furnifhed. Yet you would make ufe of this a/Tertion to 
 clog the Psedobaptill theory with the abfurdity in pradice, 
 that if one of us ihould convert a South-Carolina planter, 
 into a difciple, we of courfe make difciples of all his flaves, 
 though they were 5000." 
 
 Thus fays Mr. A. ; and now what I wiih is to prove this 
 abfurdity upon his theory, and thus clog it as much as I 
 can, and, if poffible, fpoil the ili-gotteiT credit of this juda» 
 izing theory, and (lop its prcgrefs. 
 
 My arguments, by which to accomplifh this, are two. 
 I. They take the law of circumcifion as their example 
 and jufiification. Their principle is founded, or built upon 
 the law of circumcifion. This law is recorded Gen. xvii. 
 12. Thus, *•' He that is eight days old fhall be circumcifed 
 among you, every man-child in your generations ; he that 
 is born in the houfe, or bought nv'ith -tnomy of any Jlrangery 
 which is not of thy feed." This is the law, and if the read- 
 er wifh for any explanation, it is furniftied to his hand in 
 verfe 23, where Abraham's obedience to it is thus ex- 
 prefTed. " And Abraham took Ilhmael his fon, and all 
 that were born in his houfe, and all thai lij^re bought la'ith 
 monev, every jnile among the inj.n of Ahrahain s houfe^ and cir- 
 cumcifed the flefh of their forefkin, in the felf-f ime day, as . 
 God had fuid unto him." Here is the law, obedience and 
 example, which Psdobaptills profefs to follow, and on this 
 account, and in this particular, they are juLfly ftyled, Juda- 
 izing Chriifians. But my prefent buli'iefs is to Paow, 
 that their fentiment, or principle, leads them to baptize 50 
 or 500, or 5000 flaves, belonging to a South-Carolina 
 planter, provided he be chrillianized. My argument is 
 this. Abraham had many fervants born in his houfe, and 
 bought tuith hh mon^y, years before the covenant of circum- 
 cifion was given. He had 3 18 trained foldiers or fervants 
 
£0 Second Exj)o^fiiIon of 
 
 born in his hoafc, and how many bought with his moner 
 we know not. He might have many more, before th^ d ly 
 of their circumcifion. For afterwards he was called a 
 mighty prince^ Gen. xxiii. 6. Now all thefe, which Abraham 
 poifefFed on the day of circumcifion, let them be 50, or 
 500, or 5000, were all circumcifed, on account of Abra- 
 ham's being a good man, fall of faith, or on account of 
 the covenant of circumcifion, which was made with him. 
 The principle of the Pcedobaptifls is founded on this very 
 bufmefs, and is meant to fquare with the covenant of cir- 
 cumcifion ; and their praiflice with the pra:lice of Abra* 
 ham. Befides, their principle is, that every believing pa- 
 rent or mailer of his family, is to his family as Abraham 
 iX'as to his. Hence my charge againil them is, that to be 
 coniillent with their principle, and to go through wita 
 their theory, they mull baptize a converted Sjuth-Caroiin i 
 planter and all his houfehold, whether he have 5, 50, 500, or 
 5000 flaves belonging to it. Upon the fame principle, I might 
 add, tn he confijient lu'ith thtmfAves^ they would be, in tiiis 
 particular, downright papilis, and baptize the fubje^ili of a 
 mighty prince J becaufe he v/as converted. If this principle 
 be a gofpel one, it will bear examination, and not be the 
 worfe for being pra<5lifed to perfecftion. If it be abfurd 
 when pradifed thoroughly, it is not the lefs fo when prac- 
 tifed fmally. The only difference is, the abfurdity does 
 not appear fo glaring. 
 
 2. My other argument is. That all the evidence for in- 
 fant baptifm, to v/hich the P^edobuptids can make any plau- 
 fible pretenfion, is founded upon the above abfurd principle. 
 They can make no plea, that the families of the jailor, 
 Stephanus and Lydia were baptized upon the faith of the 
 parent or m.ifler, but upon the principle, that they were 
 thus baptized, becaufe Abraham's family were circumcifed 
 upon his faith. Now I argue thus, If it be according to 
 the gofpel to bapfize a fi-nall family, or houfehold, on the 
 faith of a believing parent or m ifler, it is according to the 
 fame gofpel to baptize a lirger onj ; and, if the principle 
 be good, the larger the better, if there be any ad\^antage 
 in it, for then the m^re will be proated. Becaufe [ thu5 
 argue, Mr. A. charges me with wilh; ng to clog the P.eio- 
 baptid theory with this abfardicy in praclice. I confefi, I 
 am not for halving matters, but for having good principles 
 thoroughly praflifed, and the abfivdity of bad ones fally to 
 appear* 
 
Mr, Aufiin's M'ylakcs. 51 
 
 I ccr.f.cU'r iryft'lfas l.iivirg turned k'mg^s ii'alence. I fee 
 Try fornxr errors, i^nd rcnourcc them ; I ct^ridemn them, 
 as ha\-irg been prr.diled by iryfclf, arid cannct juflify them 
 as praftiled by others. 
 
 li" my argiin^erts be j\:(l, Mr. A. ccrfcfles tl eir prr!.*5tlce 
 is abfiird ; or that it is abfurd to piadife upon fnch a the- 
 ory. If the pradiice be abiurdj the theory is fo too. If 
 my arguirents be Lot juft, if they >e not founded upon the 
 Tery principle of their pradice, they are invited to expofe 
 thtm, and to do it thoroughly. But if my arguments be 
 corrcctj then tlxy are invited to leave their abfurd pratftice, 
 and come up to the help of the Lord, to the help of the 
 Lord againil: the mighty. 
 
 Upon the fame page, whence he took the laft quotation, 
 ^■r. A. tells me that he higljly eAeems the gofpel ordi- 
 nance rf baptifm. ; it is hf.ped that his future v.ritings will 
 bear a better tcfiiii.ony in his favour. Cn the f^m^e page, 
 he alfo informis m.e, he has cxpofed himfelf to great perfon- 
 a! tv;'";'a- to guard ihe facrednefs of that ordinance. Would 
 it not be veil for him to expofe himfelf to a few more, that 
 he mi^ht keep the ordinance according to the com.miand- 
 ment ;ind pattern given ? 
 
 In page 48, he (through an error of judgm^cnt^ charges 
 me w ith cf ndcm.ning nyielf. His wrrds are. " You have 
 attempted to fix opprobiium upon the dodlrine of Pasdo- 
 biiptiim, by deriving it from the foul fink of popery, and 
 upr-n its abetters, as cnlified under the banners of Antichrift.. 
 But you have condemned ycurfelf with rcfped to the firft, 
 by c(5ncccing, th.at fprinkling was praiftifed in the cafe of 
 clinicks befc re popery exifted, ard tl at infant baptifm was 
 in general pradi^ed in the days of St. Auftin." 
 
 Kerc the grcd man's error is in his judgment. I have 
 never crnccded that fprinkling, for goipcl baptifm, was 
 pra<5"tifed in the cafe of clinicks, or in ?;ry other cafe, before 
 popery eiified. The myf.ct^j cf this huqu'dy began to work 
 even in the apofties' d:.'ys, and popery hnd gotten con- 
 fioerr-b:e footing, when they fuhdiuitcd f]'nnkl'ng in the 
 cafe of lick perions, for gofpel baptifm. When St. Auftin 
 fl-curifiied, popery was in its full tide of fucccf5ful exper- 
 iment. It had new fpread over ni^hly all what was call- 
 ed the Chiiflian world," fave the Heretics, as the Pi'odchyJD- 
 tifts called thtm, in the vallies of Piedmont. Iheie Cod 
 preferved from the mark of the IVaft ; and they never 
 iuhm.ittcd to the p( v t rs rjf Autichrifl. Ihefe were the 
 progenitors ef the picjcnt Baptifis \ and by the Romanifts, 
 
52 Second Expofition of 
 
 they were ftyled the oldefl herefy in the world. Hence, 
 Mr. A. inftead of {towing a contradiction of mine, has 
 through error of judgment, added one to the number of his 
 miftakes. However foul the fmk of pcpery is, from that 
 came Paedobaptifm, and it is one of the main pillars of the 
 man of fm. Befides, all who plead for it, plead for the 
 principal ordinance and prac'tice of Antichrift. Chrift 
 hath no where commanded Paedobaptifm ; nor has he in 
 any place commiffioned his minifters, either to preach or 
 pra(5tife it. But the Pope hath done both. 
 
 In his 49th page, he appears to have fome clonng ftrokes. 
 " On the whole, fays he, the controverfy between you and 
 me is brought to an iffue. It is this. The foundation of your 
 Jljadonvy fabric was laid in ajfertion : The fuperfruciure iocs 
 reared in ajfertion : It has been attempted to be holden up by of 
 ferticn ; and it has at lajl vatiijhed as a mere Jhadowy thing.''^ 
 Even this aflertion requires a little proof. By it Mr. A. 
 expe<51ed to give the finifning ftroke to the taking aivay of 
 n>y defenjive armor. I frankly confefs, it hatli as riiuch pow- 
 erful eihcacy towards removing it, as any palfage, or 
 even page which preceded it. I might, however, have 
 excepted the two fii (I lines of his title page ; for there he 
 tells us that it is done. Had he not given us the infor- 
 mation, inthe firft outfet of his pamphlet, that Mr. Merrill's 
 defenji-i>s armor was taken from him, no perfon who un- 
 derftood the controverfy, would have gathered the idea 
 from any thing which followed. 
 
 ' We will now turn our attention for a momient to his laft 
 Letter, in which he makes fome obfervations upon my 
 clofing one to him. In tliis he does not appear in perfectly 
 good humour. All his fentences do not appear like apples 
 of geld in pidures of filver. He fays that the court, by 
 wliich his errors were tried, is not in the Bible'. This is 
 alfo his miftake ; for all the texts in the Bible., which fpeak 
 of a particular fubject, is die Bible with relpecl to that fub- 
 je6l. He alfo tells m^e that I entirely loll fiidit of the ob- 
 ject which I ihould have had in view, the iupport of my 
 own theory and pra<5lice. This is alfo his miftake ; for I 
 kept in fight the fupport of my own theory and pradice, 
 and the deftrudion of his. He farther fays, That the court, 
 w^hich was eredted was not the one to which he appealed. 
 This is a third miftake ; for it was the Bible with refpe(5t 
 to his three great Antichriftian errors ; which are, fprink- 
 )ing for goipel baptifm, manifeft unbelievers the fubjeds 
 
Mr. Auj^ln's MijMes. 53 
 
 of brptilrn, and communion with unbaptizcd pcrfons. B/ 
 the Bible thele tliree were tried and condemned. Had 
 Mr. A. when he wrote his reply, poflefTed a folemn fenfe 
 of this truth, that by the Bible he, as well as I, mu(t be 
 judged at the Lilf day, he would, prcbably, have omitted fev- 
 eral of his cpitliets, and have endeavoured to prove, unlefs 
 he were convinced of his errors, that though the court was a 
 good one, yet he had not a fair hearing. Had he come 
 forward, and have fnov/n that any of the witneffes were 
 bribed, or rather that the fenfe of their teftimony was 
 perverted, and requeued a re-hearing, and obtained it, as he 
 might have done, and then have brought forward feme of 
 the witnefll's again, and have fhown, in open court, that they 
 juftified his principle and practice, and condemned mine, 
 then he would jultly have caft the charges upon me ; but 
 to be out of humour, as I have {^t\\ fome, after trial had, 
 is nf^t the beft way to prove the innocency of his errors. 
 Had he have confidered my ufage towards him^not of the 
 bell kind, fureiy his wifdom was to have proved his fen- 
 tence unjull. Then would he have righteoufly brought on 
 me the two-fold crime of jufiifying the guilty, and con- 
 demning the innocent ; yes, had he been able to have pro- 
 duced one text, which fhould fpeak for him, he would have 
 been juilined, according to a (latement which I made at 
 the time, and before the court, in thefe words, < Ever>- 
 text is allowed to be a good witrefs, and to polTefs evidence 
 fufiicient to fet the accufed free, upon bearing tefiimony 
 in his favour.' Had he have found one text to liis pur. 
 pofe, he could have been acquitted before the public, be- 
 fore his own confcience, and alfo before the Judge of all. 
 But fo long as he fnall fubllitute hard words for hard ar- 
 gument, he may not be fully acquitted before either, an4 
 will convince but fe-.v that his caufe is good. 
 
 However, I by no means fault him for bringinc^ no .tcrt 
 to his help ; for I knew beforehand that he had none to 
 bring. Other wife I Ihould not have been fo bold in con° 
 demning his errors, and in warning him to forfake them. 
 His fault is in retaining them after they have been tried by 
 the Bible and found tuanihy. I well knew, that a degree 
 of feverity was ufed with his errors, but as truth v/ould 
 fully juftify fuch a ufe, it was confidered that the obflinacy 
 of the cafe called for it. Error muft be treated as beinr^ what 
 it is, the enemy of God and man ; and the grofs errors cfMr- 
 
 F 
 
54 Second Expcfition of 
 
 A. may call for feverer treatment ftill ; for they belong to 
 the man of fm, whom the Lord Mill condemn with the 
 Spirit o^ his mouth, and will dellroy with the brightnefs of 
 his coming. 
 
 Did Mr. A. know the figns of the times, he would not 
 have written with fo much contempt as he has done. His 
 courage, and that of his brethren too, in their wicked oppo- 
 fition againft the Baptifts willfoon fail them. He doubtlefs 
 recolleds what a bloody decree was iffued againft the Jews, 
 in the days of Haman, the fon of Hamedat]:a, the Agagite, 
 and figned in Ahafuerus's name, and fealed with the king's 
 feal, to deRroy, to kill, and caufe to perilh, all Jews, 
 throughout the hundred twenty and feven provinces, from 
 India to Ethiopia. Probably he has alfo recollection of 
 the decree which was iffued at Efther's fuit, by which the 
 Jews had full liberty to Hand for their lives, and to deftroy, 
 to fiay and caufe their enemies to perifh. This hath been 
 written in the book of Efiher, for our learning. The Pope 
 and his conclave, prompted by their rooted hatred towards 
 the baptized church, have iflued their decree againft them 
 to deflroy, to kill and caufe them to peiifli. But a very 
 different decree is now gone forth, of which Mr. A. hath 
 either not heard, or yet diibelieves. Indeed, it may be 
 that the Baptifts themfelves have not, generally, had the 
 information, or dare n»t fully credit it, that they now have, 
 according to the decree of the King, a perfedl liberty to 
 ftand for their hves, and to defcroy, to flay and caufe to 
 perifh, by the fword of the Spirit, which is the word of 
 God, not Mr. A.'s errors only, but alfo all the laws, tra- 
 ditions, (latutes and ordinances of antichrift. I'he report 
 of this decree may be to Mr. A. like as the fecond decree 
 of Ahafuerus was to the enemies of the Jews, whilil they 
 difbelicved it ; but it will have a very different effecl: upon 
 both him and his brethren, -when the ceitainty fliall be 
 known, which they will foon know, and to their coff too, 
 except they fpeediiy repent of their hatred to the baptized 
 church, it is this decree which emboldens me to (land for 
 my hfe in the prefent controverfy ; and fills m.e with ex- 
 peftation, that as it happened to the Jews, that they had 
 rule over them that hated them, fo it f^iall foon be that all 
 who walk in all the ftatutes and ordinances of the Lord 
 blamelcfs, fhall be in honour, and all their advcrfarie:^ con- 
 foufided. Let me not feem to Mr. A. or to the i eader, 
 like Lot to his fons-in law. 
 
Mr. Auflin's Myiakes. SS 
 
 111 his concliifion, he informs the reader that his pubhc 
 correfpondence wldi me is clofed. It might have been a.^ 
 well for him, and more for the credit of his errors, to have 
 taken Solomon's advice, and to have left off contention 
 before he had meddled with it. But he adds, p. 53> 
 *' Should any other appear to advocate the doclrine, that 
 immerfion is the exclufive mode of baptifm, and eifential 
 to it, he will not be entitled to a public reply, unlefs he 
 fhall make ufe of fome new topic of argument, or give old 
 arguments a much more plaufible form than they have 
 yet allumed. And he mull be holden to the Scriptures as 
 his fource of evidence, becaufe there can be no eifential 
 doctrine, inftitution, or duty, which the Scripture itfelt 
 does not clearly afcertain." 
 
 It is not difficult to affign the reafon why Mr. A. rc- 
 quefts his opponents to employ fome new topic of argument ; 
 for their prefent topics, plain fcrlpture precept and example, 
 with their deductions, he finds very hard to be managed. 
 Yet, to the confufion of his whole fcheme, he fays, " There 
 can be no eifential do<flrine, inftitution, cr duty, which the 
 Scripture itfelf does not clearly afcertaliV Upon this dec- 
 laration of Mr. A.'s the following queftions are propofed 
 to the reader : 
 
 1. Do the Scriptures clearly afcertain, that fprinkling is 
 the matter of gofpel baptifm \ 
 
 2. Does the Scripture clearly afcertain, that infants and 
 houfeholds of unbelieving adults are the fubjedts of gofpel 
 baptifm ? 
 
 3. Does the Scripture clearly afcertain, that unbaptized 
 perfons are to be admitted to the communion ? 
 
 The anfwer to each of thefe is thus, that it Joes not. Then 
 the conclufion from Mr. A.'s premifes is clearly this. That 
 fprinkling for baptifm ; that inf^iats, or unbelieving houfe- 
 holds for the fubjecls of baptifm ; and that communion 
 with the unbaptized, are not eflential doctrines, inftitutions, 
 or duties. Hence, he is amufmg the pubHc, and earneftly 
 contending for uneffential matters. This conclufion isjuft, 
 for it is indeed a trutli, that his antifcriptural notions are 
 not effential, fave to the fupport of worldly inftitutions, and 
 to the caufe of the man of fin. 
 
 What we have more to offer, is a few conclufions from 
 what we have pafted over. 
 
 1. We conclude, that Mr. A. has a weak and bad 
 caufe to defend. For no good man, poffefllng talents and 
 
56 Second Expofition of 
 
 education, could ufe fuch falfe and beggarly arguments, 
 make fo many miftakes, be guilty of Aich mifreprefenta- 
 tlons, and fill Jiis pages with notorious errcrs, in the defence 
 of a good caufe, or in the fupport of truth. 
 
 2. We conclude, that Mr. A.'s whole performance, 
 which we have examined, is one continued heterogeneous 
 mixture cf faife arguments, weak arguments, miftakes, 
 mifreprefentations, and errors ; for we have attended to 
 almoiL every page, and have found them to be of this de- 
 fcription. 
 
 3. We conclude, that his reafons for quitting the field 
 of public correfpondei\ce v/ith the Author, are but too ob- 
 vious. We would fugged the idea, whether it would not 
 be advifable for him to change his fide, or never enter the 
 like field again. 
 
 4. We conclude, that Mr. A. who is no doubt a worthy 
 diarader and a man of fenfe, has been raifed up by the 
 Lord to expofe the weaknefs of his antichriillan caufe ; 
 for he is a man of too refined an education to ufe fo much 
 ribaldry as too many of his denomination have done ; at 
 the fame time, he is a man of too much honeily, not to 
 expofe his real fentiments ; and finding no judicious argu- 
 ments to fupport what he really believed true, he has, with 
 as much plauhbility as he could, made ufe of the beft argu- 
 ments w]]ic]i hl'3 bad fide aftorded, Thefe arguments, in 
 their very nature, having no tendency to bring conndlion 
 to unprejudiced minds, will ferve to open to public view 
 the weaknefs and wickednefs of that caufe which fo labours, 
 and has need of fuch management in its defence. Nothing 
 is wanting, to the ruin of his caufe and errors, in the judg- 
 ment of the candid and imparti.il portion of the commu- 
 nity, but to liave them clearly expofcd. A few more fuch 
 publications as his Lifi: will accomplifh this bufinefs. 
 
 5. We conclude, that Mr. A. has no confident notion 
 of that kingdom, called Chrid's "c'ljilk church, which the 
 God of heaven was to fet up in the time of the four great 
 monarchies, or during the days of thofe kings fpoken of by 
 Daniel the prophet ; for in parts of his pamiphlet he ap- 
 pears to knov/ not any diiFerence between (he fpiriiual king- 
 dom of Chrill in this world, which hath continued at lead 
 fmce the converfion of Abel, and his vjfihle kingdom, which 
 was fet up during the Roman empire, and v/as at hand 
 when the Baptifi came preaching in the wilderncfi and 
 baptizing in Jordan. 
 
Mr. AwTins Miflakeu S7 
 
 6. We conclude, that Mr. A.'s three great errors, which 
 are fprinkling or pouring for baptifm, manifeil unbelievers 
 the fubjecH^ of baptifm, and unbaptized church members 
 and communion at the Lord's table with them, are all of 
 a piece ; for he has not found, nor can he find, one text of 
 fcripture to fupport either of them. Eefides, each of thefe 
 errors llrongly tends to deface and diforganize the vifible 
 church of Chrift. They muil therefore be parts of the 
 man of fm. 
 
 7. We conclude, that whilil: Mr. A. has been writing 
 his Letters to the Author, he had not for his main objec'c 
 the knowledge and defence of the truth ; for if he had, 
 evidence would not have failed him in every particular, 
 nor would he have made fuch notorious miftakes and blun- 
 ders in every page. It is not truth, but error, which com- 
 pels men to go fnch a crooked courfe as he has travelled. 
 Nor does truth require hard v*'ords to be em_ployed in her 
 defence ; her argumcnis are fufliciently trying for the erro- 
 neous to endure. Hard words are ufually the attendants 
 on a bad cauie ; but truth is encompalTed \vith hard and 
 feverc arguments. To cppofe the truth is like kicking 
 againft fharp pointed pins ; the more refolute the oppofi- 
 tion, the more does the oppofer injure himfelf. Would 
 Mr. A. look into the didurbances (Tf his awn bofom, he 
 W'ould find they are unlike wliat thofe feel, who are calmly> 
 yet earneftly vindicating the v/ays of God to men. 
 
 8. We conclude, that a real Chriftian mud be greatly 
 blinded by prejudice, to believe Mr. A.'s error?, when tliere 
 is not one text in the Bible which fpeaks a word in favour 
 of cither of them, and when, at the fame time> every text 
 v>'hich fpeaks of the fubjedl is directly againft them, and 
 explains and d'jfends the oppofite; a> the reader may fee 
 by reading the Author's twelfth Letter to Mr. A. 
 
 > Lajlly. "We conclude, tliat as the baptized church have 
 the open volume of revelation on their lide, and the Cap- 
 tain of the Lord's holl for them, and as the time is now 
 come in which they iliould have liberty, full hberty, to 
 fiand for their lives, they Ihould now be firong in the Lord 
 and in the power of his might, putting on the wijole armour 
 of God, that they may be able to ftand againft the wiles 
 of the devil ; for they indeed hav;; to wreltle, not merely 
 againft flefh and blQ.od, but againft principalities, againft 
 powers, againft the rulers of the darkncfs of this worlds 
 
38 Second Expofition^ ^c. 
 
 againft fplrltual wickednefs in high places. At fuch a time 
 Heaven may well expeci every Chriftian to do his duty ; 
 then will the conflict be fhort, and the Lord's battle glori- 
 ouily won. As Joab faid to his brother, (2 Sam. x. 12.) 
 at the critical moment when an hard fought battle was juil 
 commencing, fo I fay to my baptized brethren, Be of good 
 courage, and let us play the men for our people, and for 
 the cities of our God ; and the Lord do that which feemedi 
 him good. 
 
 With defnes for Chrift's rifmg kingdom, 
 
 I am, the reader's and trutn's friend, 
 
 DANIEL MERRILL. 
 
 Sedgwick, Awgust ii, i2o6, 
 
 IN a». 
 
BOOKS 
 
 For falc by Maxxing cff L orixg^ No. 2; Cornhilh 
 
 THE Chriftian Banner. A Sermon, preach- 
 ed before the Lincoln Baptized Affbciation, and at 
 their requeft made pubHc. By Daniel Merrill, a. m. 
 \^Price izk cts. 
 
 Mr. Merrill's Seven Sermons on the Mode and Sub- 
 jecT-s of Baptifm. \^Price 37^ cts^ 
 
 Mr. Merrill's Twelve Letters to Mr. Auftin. 
 
 \_Pnce 31^ cts, 
 Mr. Merrill's Letters on Open Communion. 
 
 IP rice 25 ciu 
 
 Letters occafioned by the Rev. Samuel 
 
 Worcester's Two Difconrfes refpeciing the Perpetuity and 
 Provif.on of God's gracious Covenant with Abraham and 
 his feed. Detecting-; by plain Scripture, (tubborn facts, and 
 fober reafon, fome of his grofs mifreprefentations, unfound- 
 ed affertionsj and iophiftical arguments. By Daniel Mer- 
 rill. IPrice ^i-^c*s. 
 Collins's Setond Edition of the Quarto BIBLE, with 
 
 Oftervald's Notes, Pl.ite?, and Concordance Collins's 
 
 Bible has obtained celebrity as being the moft correct of 
 ■any ever printed in America. 
 
 An afTortmont of Carey's Family Bible. 
 Puller's Gofpel its own Wicnefs. IPr'ce one doL 
 
 P^uller's Life of Pearc<2. [Price one doL 
 
 P'uller's Backllider. ^Prlce (ii\ cts, 
 
 Burnet's Life of the Earl of Rochefler. [Price 50 cts, 
 Priendly Vifit to the Houfe of Mourning. [Price 20 cts. 
 Abbadie on the Deity of Jefus Chrift. [Price one dol. 
 
 The Second Edition of the Pfalmodift's 
 
 Ailillant ; containing an Original Compofition of Pfalm 
 and Hymn Tunes; together with a number of Favourite 
 Pieces frorr dilFerent Authors. To which is prefixed, an in- 
 troduction to the Grounds of Mufic. By Abijah Forbush. 
 
 [Price 62\cts. 
 
 The Baptifm of Believers only, and the Par- 
 ticular Communion of the Baptift Churches, explained and 
 vindicated. In Three Parts. The firft— publilhed origin- 
 ally in 1789 J the fecond — in 1794 j the third — an AppeU' 
 
Books for f ale by Maiming l^ Loring, 
 
 dlx, containing additional Obfervations and Arguments, 
 vnth Stridlures on feveral late Publications. By Thomas 
 Baldwin. {_Price one dot. 12\ cis, 
 (jCj* The Appendix, containing i8o pages never before 
 publifhed, may be bought feparately, price bound and let- 
 tered 62^ cents, or 50 cents Pitched in blue. The Au- 
 thors whofe wiitings againft the Baptifts are more partic- 
 ularly noticed in this Appendix, are — Rev. Samuel Wor- 
 cefter, of Salezn — Dr. Ofgood, of Medford — Kev. Samuel 
 Auftin, of Worcefrer, and Rev. Peter Edv/ards. 
 
 The Doclrine of the Law and Grace un» 
 
 foulded Being a Difcourfe (hewing the different natures of 
 tlie Law and Gofpel ; and the very diffimiiar ftates of thofe 
 who are under the Law, and thofe who are under Grace, or 
 interefleJ in JefusChriiL By John Bunvan. 
 
 l_Price one dollar, 
 
 Bunyam's PILGPJM's PROGRESS, with 
 
 Qriginal Notes, Preface, Life of the Autiior, and co- 
 pious Index to the whole, by Thomas Scorr, Chaplain to 
 the Lock Hofpital, and author of Original Notes and Prac- 
 tical Obfervations on the Scriptures. (With four copper- 
 plates.) '\^Price I dc'L 25 cts. 
 
 The peaceful Refieclions and glorious Prof- 
 
 peils of the departing Saint. A Difcourfe, delivered in the 
 meeting houfe of the Finf BaptiTt Church in Bolton, March 
 16, 1807, at the interment of the Rev. Samuel Stilhnan, 
 D. D. late Pallor of faid church. By Tho?4as Baldwin, d-d. 
 Paftor of the Second Baptiit Church in Bofton. 
 
 \_Pnce 20 r/x. 
 
 Stoddard's Safety of appearing in the Righteoufncfs of 
 Chi'ii^. iPrire c::e doh 
 
 Dr. Shepard's Epiftlc to Mr. Elias Smith. ^Prlce 25 cts. 
 
 Huntington's l^ank of Faith. \_Price one doL 
 
 Doddridge's Rife and Progrefs of Religion in the Soul. 
 [^Piice one doL /mailer type 87^ cts, 
 
 Baxter's Call to the Unconverted. {_Pr:ce 62^ <://. 
 
 Burder's Oiiental CuRoms. [_Prke ttvo dots, 
 
 Thomas A. Kempis's Imitation of Chriil — This book 
 abounds v.'ith the mod folemn and weighty thoughts re- 
 ipcding Chrift, eternal things, and the wortii of the foul. 
 
 [ Price 75 cts 
 
LETTERS 
 
 OCCASIONED BY 
 
 Ref. SAMUEL WORCESTER'S 
 TWO DISCOURSES 
 
 ON THE PERPETUITY AND PROVISION OF GOd's GRA- 
 CIOUS COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM AND HIS SEED. 
 
 Detcding, 
 
 BY PLAIN SCRIPTURE, STUBBORN' FACTS, AND 3CBLR XEA50N, 
 
 SOME OF BIS GROSS MlSREPRESENTATlONSt UNFOUNDED ASSER- 
 TIONS f AND SOPHISTICAL ARGUMENTS. 
 
 BY DANIEL' MERRILL, A. M. 
 
 PASTOR OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST IN SEDGWICK. 
 
 my people ! they which lead thee caufe thee to err, and deftxoy the 
 ■way of thy paths. Ifaiab iii. iz. 
 
 1 aTi againft them that prophefy falfe dream 6, faith the Lord, and do 
 
 tell them, and eaufe my people to err by their lies, and by their 
 lightnefs Jeremiah xxiii. 32. 
 
 Even from the days of your fathers ye are gone away from mine ordi- 
 nances, and have not kept them. Malachl iii. 7. 
 
 BOSTON: 
 
 Printed and fold by MANNi?i<; ^ Loring, N°' 2^ Ccmhill- 
 
 1807. 
 
District of MjiSSACHusETTS, to wit : 
 
 BE IT REMFMBF.RED, That on the fourteenth day of March, in the 
 thirty-firft year of the independence of the United States of Amer- 
 ica, Manning llf Loring, of the faid diftrlct, have depofited in this 
 office the title of a Book, the right whereof they claim as Proprietors, 
 in the words following, to ivii .•-^" Letters occaiioned by Rev* Samuel 
 Worcefler's Two Dirco\irfes on the Perpetuity and Provifion of God's 
 gracious Covenant with Abraham and his Seed. DeteAing, by plain 
 Scripture, ftubborn Fads, and fober ReatoD, fome of his grois Mifrep- 
 rcfentations, unfounded Affertions, and fephiflical Arguments. By 
 Daniki Merrill, a. m. Paftor of the Church of Chrift in Sedgwick," 
 
 In conformity to the A&. of the Congrefs of the United States, enti- 
 tled, " An Adi for the encouragement of learning, by fecuring the 
 copies of maps, charts, and books, to the Authors and Proprietors of 
 luch copies, during the times therein mentioned :" and alfo lo an A (ft, 
 entitled, "An Ad fuppl^mentary to an ^<ft, entitled, An Ad for the 
 encouragem.ent of learning, by fecuring the copies of maps, charts, and 
 ¥ooks, to the Authors and Proprietors of fich copies, during the time^ 
 therein mentioned ; and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of 
 dcfigning, engraving, a^d etching hiftorical and other prints." 
 
 WILLIAM S. SHAW, CUri vf tbe D>fna ef Mojacbyfttts, 
 
IS 
 
 TO ALL WHO FEAR GOD. 
 
 MEN AND BRETHREN, 
 
 i OUR attention has been often deftred^ and 
 Jl'ill lujjhed for. Truth is noiv lUQrking its luay through 
 darknefs into light ; it is f)*fiking fure progrefsy like the rays 
 tf the morning ; yet error ^ ivhere it hath held its empire 
 longy ivill give place to truth but through invincible necejftty. 
 The ivriter of the following Letters is not altogether ignorant 
 of the ijifueme of prejudice^ and of flrong prepoffejfions^ 
 He might ivell defpair offuccefsy in his prefcni labours ^ ivere 
 it not that truth is Jlronger than all thitigs. 
 
 All fuch as fear God^ have feafons in ivhich their heart 
 is ivarmed ivith love to Gody to truth, and to duty. In fuch 
 precious moments, truth will be permitted to fpeak. When 
 it is thus with the godly, I w'lfh for their attention to what 
 I here prefent them. 
 
 Should you thinh that the author of the following pages 
 has rebuked Mr, Worcejier more fljarply than Paul did 
 Peter, then, I pray you, think again — Hath not Mr. Wor^ 
 sejler done wsrfe than dijpmbling Peter did ? 
 
 I am not offended at Mr, Worcefler's perfon, but I am 
 dff ended at the liberties which he hath tahfty againfl the 
 word and church of the living GoD. If I do not miflake, 
 every candid Chriflian will be offended at the fame things, 
 hefore he fhall have carefully perufed all thofe falfe and delu' 
 fory arguments, ajjertions, and inftnuations, of Mr. Worcef- 
 ler's , by which he would keep in credit his Judaizing fchemey 
 
( iv ) 
 
 and retain the vail on many nvho begin to fee. My prayer 
 to the Father of Lights is, that he will fpeedily rend the 
 vail from off the hearts of his own people. Truth, and not 
 victory, is rny object, TFhether the reader be a friend ts 
 the writer y or the reverfe, is not a matter of fo much folici- 
 tude to me, as that the reader be a friend to himfelf ; then 
 *will he feek for truth, and receive it, though it prove, for 
 the prefent, painful, a?id deJlruBive to his errors. 
 
 The fire of love and truth mujl burn up our errors, or we 
 and they mufl be dejireyed together. 
 
 Such as fear God, cannot be difpleafed with the requefly 
 that they will not be fo fwayed by prejudice and cujlom, as to 
 believe Mr. Worcefler without evidence, and difbelieve me^ 
 when the evidence is fully before them. If I have mt fairly 
 and fully proved his Sermons to be erroneous and unfounded, 
 I afk not to be believed ; but if I have, I afk this ftmple 
 quefiion — Why will you not believe me ? If the truth be fet 
 in full view, can you difbelieve and yet be innocent ? 
 
 Deft ring that truth may prevail, to the fpeedy ruin of my 
 own and the reader's errors, 
 
 I am his, with affeBion, 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 
 SedqwicRj October 27, 1806. 
 
LETTERS, (^c, 
 
 ADDRESSED TO THE PUBLIC. 
 
 w U^ 
 
 ^Fc* appeal to the Bible, to Jluhhorn fads^ and ttt 
 common fenfe> 
 
 LETTER L 
 
 MEN, BRETHREN, AND FATHERS, 
 
 VTlVE audience,- for tmth will Toon go forth 
 as brightnefs, and falvation as a lamp which burneth. 
 Many are now running to and fro, and knowledge is in- 
 creafing. 
 
 The oppofition of Herod, and the difputings of the Jew- 
 ifh dodors and prieils, all united to direct: the attention of 
 men to the child Jefus. In like manner, the oppofition of 
 the intereiled, and the difputings of the Judaizing doctors 
 and preachers in our day, will forcibly call the public at' 
 tendon to what is written of the church of Chrid:. 
 
 God, who turns the hearts of kings at his pleafure, and 
 direds the affairs of mortals, hath the means at command, 
 and can effect every purpofe. 
 
 Great events are taking place daily, and fomething 
 
 greater is expected. For more than twelve hundred and 
 
 fixty years, there hath been, in what is ftyleJ the Chriftian 
 
 world",- a church, wiiich is formed much after the model of 
 
 J:he J evv'iiljnauonal church. ;.:^ 
 
 This church hath a Pop& ahfwerinj to the Jewifh high 
 
 prieft, feveaty cardinals for the feventy elders in Ifrael ; 
 
 a national antichrlil.ai; church, anfwering to the national 
 
 Jewilh church. lofant baptifm for Jewifh infant circum- 
 
 A 
 
6' Lettters on Rev. 5. WorceJttr*s 
 
 eifion. Baptifm. admmiftered to thofe^vho bring forth no 
 fruits, as evidence of repentance, and to fuch only, fave in 
 thofe inftances where heathens are converted ; juft as 
 circumcifion was among the Jews, &c. &c. 
 
 This church is declared by her works, and by the united 
 voice of Proteftants, to be the man of fin, the antichrift^ 
 fpoken of by Paul and the beloved difciple John. How- 
 ever, many, if not moll Proteftants, whilft they have re- 
 nounced the power of antichrift, have yet retained mere or 
 lefs of her abominations. Of thefe, the Rev. Samuel 
 Worcefter appears to pollefs a full ("hare ; for no one cf all 
 the individuals who would be thought a Proteftant, ap- 
 pears more inclined to fupport, with his full (Irength, the 
 bread yet fandy foundation of popery. 
 
 Popery is little elfe, but Chrift aiiity changed into Juda- 
 Ifm, or pretended Chriftianity Judai/.ed. Judaifm was once 
 good, tor once it was fupported by the laws of Heaven. 
 But now fo far as it is pradifed, it is but will-worfhip, God 
 ao where commanding it. 
 
 The principal idea which runs through Mr. Worcefter's 
 Two Sermons on Gal. iii. 29. is, X^^ -vifihle church formed in 
 Ahr ah am^s family^ and ^juh'tch for many gtncrat'tons ivas the 
 jffwfh, is now the gofpcl church. 
 
 What we Ihall, in the follov\^ing pages, fee, if the Lord 
 give light and oppoitunity, is, 
 
 I. That the viiiMe church formed in Abraham's family, 
 is not the gofpel church, but quite a different thing. 
 
 n. That Mr. Worcefter hath, to give his Judaizrng 
 fcheme a fembiance of truth and ccnfirtency, dared to 
 mifappiy the word of God, add to it, and to take from it, 
 and misftate, or to m'freprefent, almofl every thing which 
 cam.e within his eager graip. 
 
 It is difagrceable to the writer', and it may be equally 
 fo to the reader, tliat a perfon of Mr. Worcefter's genei al 
 reputation Ihould fo commit himlelf before the public, as 
 to make it aii ind'fpenfable uuty to rebuke him before all, 
 that others alfo n^ay fear. 
 
 My purpofe is, not to ip.ire Mr. Worcefter at the^expenfe 
 of truth. At lie fame time, my wilh is, not to^ expole 
 him in a fmgle iuftance, wdiere the caufe of Lhiift does not 
 4^emand it. 
 
 Before v;e attend particularly to wliat Mr. Worcelicr 
 ^3S written, we v. iii eftabliih the ift. Piopoiition ; Ihat the 
 viVible church, formed in Abrah:nr.'s famiiy^ is vj^\ tlie 
 cl ch!-rc]i;b;u quite a uHler'i'nt th'ng. 
 
 i^'y-l 
 
Two D'lfcourfes^ Effr. 7 
 
 ^rhis 1$ evident, i. From the confiJeratlon, that the New 
 TeiVciment gives us no intimation, that any gofpel church 
 was ever formed after that in Abraham's family. 
 
 One man of great faith, and hundreds without any 
 faith, formed into a church in Abraham's houfe. There 
 is nothing hke this In all the gofpel. Not the leaft: hint, 
 that a gofpel church was ever formed upon this principle. 
 
 2. The fame thing is evident from what God tells us by 
 Mjfes, that when the Prophet, Jefus Chrift, fhould come, 
 all, who would not hear him, fhould be cut oif, (that is, 
 excluded) from the church, or be deftroyed from among 
 the people, Deut. xviii. and Acts iii. Hence the church in 
 Abraham's family, and the gofpel church, are quite di^^r- 
 ent things. One compofed of a great and good man, with 
 his unbelieving houfehold ; the other made up of believers, 
 and of believers only. 
 
 3. From the following cnnfideration, it Is manifeft, that 
 the vifible church in Abraham's family is not the gofpei 
 church, but quite another thing. Ifai. iiv 13. Ix. 2,1. 
 fpeaking of the gofpel church, tells us. That they Ihall be all 
 taught of God, that they (hall be all righteous. The 
 rrieaning, no doubt, is, that Chriil's vifible church fhall all 
 profefs, and appear to be fo. It was not thus in the church 
 formed in Abraham's family. 
 
 The fame thing is true from the confideration, th.it 
 the two churches were founded upon different covenants, 
 one was in xheftjT^, the other is in the heari, Gen. xvii, i^r, 
 xxxi If a vifible church was founded in Abraham's fan)ily, 
 it was formed altogether upon the covenant cf circum- 
 cifion. For, afiJe from this covenant, there was no mote 
 appearance of a vifible church in his family, than there 
 was in Lot's, or in Job's. If we call Abraham's circum- 
 cifed family a church, though it be no where 'fo called 
 from Genefis to Revelation, it fhould be carefully obfei ved 
 of what it was made up, of Abraham a good man, cf u 
 mocking lihmael, of an infant Ifaac, ofall the menfervants 
 whom Abraham had bought with his money, and of ail 
 who were born in his houfe, from the oldefl to the new- 
 born infant. 
 
 It ought alfo to be well remembered, that not one 01 
 the feed of tht^fe fervants, or infants, continued a member 
 of the vifible church, fave Jacob, the fon of Ifaac. Hence 
 it is manifeft, that, notwithllanding the covenant of cir- 
 cumcifion was in the ?it{h of Abraham's family, yet the 
 
B Letters on Rev, Si Worcejier^s 
 
 privileges and hlejfings comprlfed in the promijes made to 
 him, ivere noty by diiune rights their inheritance.* 
 
 All which gave Abraham's family the leaft appearance 
 of a vifible church, in diftinclion from others, was their vol- 
 untary and involuntary fubmiflion to the covenant of cir- 
 cumcifion, without any faith, in the members, generally, 
 as a necelTary qualification. 
 
 What gives vifible appearance to the New Teftament 
 church, is her being baptized upon profeffing to have re- 
 ceived, what God ^ys, Jere. xxxi. 33, 34, he will perform, 
 in her and for her ; viz. " I will put my law in their inward 
 parts, and write it in their hearts, and will be their God, 
 and they Ihall be my people. — For they Ihail all know me 
 j^ora the lead of them to the greatert of them, faith the 
 Lord.'* 
 
 i'hefe churches appear very different, the one from 
 
 ^he other. Of the one, a thoufand may he members, be- 
 caufe they belong to a good man's family ; of the other, 
 no one can be a vifible member, bat upon his being bap- 
 tized upon a perfonal profeflion of faith ; for not otherwife 
 can any one appear to be of the number with whom the 
 Lord hath made the new covenant, and of thof: who do 
 fwhatfoever Chrift commands them. 
 
 5. The Abrahamic church and the gofpel church are not 
 the fame ; for what is faid of the latter, as to the quality 
 of its members, was never applicable to the former. 
 
 Ifaiah, fpeaking of the gofpel church, fays, liv. 13, " All 
 fhy children Ihall be taught of the Lord." Chrift men- 
 
 ^ons this pafTage, as defcriptive of his followers, John 
 V. 45 Peter, in his firfl: epilUe, chap. ii. ver. 9, fpeaking 
 to the gofpel church, and defcribing her, fays, " Ye 
 are a chofen generation, a royal priefthood, an holy na- 
 tion, a peculiar people." This was never true, in a gof- 
 pel fenfe, of the Abrahamic, or Jevvifh church. 
 
 Befides, what John faid, Luke iii. 9, o{ the peculiar 
 quality of the trees, which fhould compofe, or be the 
 conftituent parts of the gofpel church, and what Paul fays 
 of the fame church, Gal. iii. 26, are totally inconfiftent 
 with the idea, .hat the Jewifh and gofpel churches are, as 
 to the quality of the members of which they are compoled, 
 one and the fame church. John f^ys, " I'he axe is laid 
 
 • For the fake of meeting the oppofcrs upon their own ground, 
 I fhall tcnn Abraham's circiimcifcd fanii'y of I'o Idlers, fcrvants, &c a 
 church; refcrving liberty to Ihow, hereafter^ ihould truth fo ic<iuij:q:. 
 fhat it waj not a church. 
 
Tvjo Difcourfes^ iffc, 9 
 
 unto the root of the trees ; every tree, therefore, which 
 hrin ^edi not forth good fruit, is hewn down." Paul fays 
 to the Galatian church, " Ye are all the children of God, 
 by faith in Chriil Jefus." As evidence of his a/Tevtion, he 
 •adds their profeiTion, which they made at their baptifm. 
 For, lays he, '*'as many of you, as have been baptized in- 
 to Chrift have put on Chrill." 
 
 6. ChrilVs abolilhing in his flefh the enmity (between 
 Jews and Gentiles) even the law of commandments, con- 
 tained in ordinances, to make in himielt of twain one neiu 
 man, is inconfillient with the notion, that the g<fpel church 
 is but the Abrahamic church ia continuation. Eph. ii. 15. 
 
 In the next chapter, this matter is, if poffible, itill more 
 ftrongly evinced. In this chapter Paul tells us, " That 
 the myjlsry of Chrift, in other ages, was not made kncivn un- 
 to \.[\e fans of men, as it is noiv revealed unto his hr.iy apof- 
 tles and prophets, by the Spirit ; that the GtntUei Jhould be 
 fellow beirs, and of the fann^ body, ?^nd parfaiers of his prom- 
 t/l in Christ, by the gofr.el.** Paul further tells us. verfe 9. 
 " That t-e fellov.fhip of the mylicry from the beginriing of 
 the w-.rld, hath been hid in God " But on fappofition, 
 that the eol'pei church i nothing elfe but t^ic Abr;.l:amic 
 church enlightened and enlarged, where is the nnitery I 
 YoT. iureiy Wiien the church was Jlrj} formed in Abrah-im^t 
 family, a very large part of it was made up of Gei.tile un- 
 be :ev ng members, as churches formed upon the fame 
 m'>Jei«(?w are. Alfo where is the myftery, wh'ch hath 
 been iiid in God, from the beginning of the world, with 
 relarini to the goipel church, and the reception of tJie 
 Ge.itiles into it, it the church hath, from Abraham's oay, 
 be-'ii vvhat it now is, fave (he hath been favoured with new 
 dcr^rees tit light, and more, or larger numbers of Gent les 
 have been added fmce Chnii's incarnation, than were added 
 befvTe?- If matters be thu<<, as the adverfaries of the bap- 
 tize i church contend, what becomes of what Paul calls a 
 newly revealed and long hidden myllery ? But on fappofi- 
 tion tiiat t'lc^ gofpel cbiirch is a ne-iv m in, or hody^ quitt a dif- 
 ferent thing from wh-Vt had ever been in the world before, 
 eiiibiilhed ir-on better prom fes,d\\d founded upon acovenant 
 very dirferent from that of circun'cifion, even uprn the 
 a.'u; ~jv.-.ia:i(. and combining al: obedient believers, Gen- 
 tiles equi!ly as .lews, and excV^din:^ ^ifcfy tree, 'wbtther Gen-' 
 t'de jr f iu, which orought not fortli good .*^^ruit, then here 
 would be a m) itery. i his wouht be a thing, never before 
 
 A 2 
 
iO Letters on Rev. S. Worce/ier's 
 
 revealed, or never generally underilood before. A myf- 
 tery, which had been kept fecret from the foundaiion of the 
 lijorldy which had been hidden in the bofonn or purpr.fc-s 
 of God. This indeed appears to be the myJlery. Such it 
 myftery is this, that, upon its bein^ true, it will fpoil all 
 Xk\Q theories of the advocates for modelling tlie gofpel church^ 
 according to the covenant of circumcifion Elliier Paul 
 miftakes, when he tells us, that a great myRery, with re* 
 fped to the church, was revealed to him and to the holy 
 apoftles and prophets in his time, or Mr. Worcefter and 
 his brethren mi Hake, when, they tell us, that all things 
 have gone on, as they were in Abraham's time, and that 
 ^c goipel church ts the fame now, as the Jewilh ehurch 
 was three thoaflind years ago ; and that there is no myf-^ 
 tery about the matter. The public will jud^i^e which is, 
 mod worthy of credit, Mr. Worcefter and his bjethren,_ or 
 Paul and other apoRles of the Lamb. 
 
 To afcertain this point, and to make it evident, that I 
 do not miftake this myllery, that the gofpel churcli is a 
 m^ man or body of rmn, fuch as the world never faw, till 
 Jefus appeared in flefh, and to Ihow, that Mr. Worcefter 
 and his brethren miltake this mutter wholly, we will add,, 
 
 7. The gofpel church is not the vifible church formed 
 in Abraham's family, but quite a different thing, as is ev- 
 ident from the circum fiances, which attended the fetting, 
 up of the gofpel church. 
 
 r. Ft was compofed of fuch, and fuch only, as mani- 
 feflly, or profefledly, brought forth good fruit. Never 
 was it thus v;ith the church formed in Abraham's family. 
 
 2. It was ccmpofed of fuch, and fuch only, as were- 
 a(5tually excommunicated from the Jewifb. church, or liable; 
 to be fo, fo far as Jews made any part of it.. J-ohn ix. 22. 
 
 3. The gofpel church and. the Jewilh church were loth 
 of them ex'ifltng at x}:\t fame timet and each oppofed t© the other ^. 
 for many years ; nor have they enyer united to this day. It 
 i&. therefore an abfurdity to fay, that they -ax^ one and the 
 
 fame^ and that the gofpel church is but a continuation of the 
 Jewifa, With equal propriety might I fiy, after having 
 creeled 9, new houfe, whilft the old one is ftanding in lull. 
 view, they are both one^ the neiu one is but a conilnuct'tji rf 
 the old: A perfon would be thought infane to talk thus 
 about things which now are ;. bur men of learning and 
 reputation may talk thus about tilings which have long< 
 iitice been, and he l^ill reputed v.-^fe. 
 
T%vo Difcourfesy l^c* 1 1 
 
 A world of additional evidence raicri>t be pro jiiced ta 
 ftiovv. ifi.ic the church formed in Abraiiani s tamiiy is not 
 liie '^oipei church, hxi q lite a dixterent tiimg. But Iharteii 
 to Jay heiore the puiilic the inconiitlencies, ablurdities, .md 
 i.ibyiinth of errors mu> Wiiich this notion i-iatii- led- iNhv 
 Woiceicer ; aad in the mean t^me, remain, 
 The public's devoted fervant, 
 
 For Chriif s aiid the goipei'b fake, &c; 
 
 We appeal io the Blhlc^ to Jluhhorn fads^ and ^^ 
 common fsnje. 
 
 LETTER IL 
 
 MEN, BRETHREN, AND FATHERS, 
 
 It is now gofpel times; in which ifaiah tells 
 us that the way of hohnefs fhnli be plain, fo that the way- 
 faring man, though a fool, unlearned, fhouid not err there- 
 in. It is, however, to be undertfooJ, tliat thefe wayfaring-' 
 jnen polfefs humble hearts and willing minds, that they do 
 as the Bereans did — fearch the fcriptures daily, that they 
 may know the things which are true 
 
 '1 he time is not far off, in which common ChriHiians wiu 
 read for themfelves,. think for themfelves, and judge for 
 themfelves, th>it they may know and do the mind and will 
 of God. They ought, all of them, to do thus now. l"he 
 writer aiks no man to believe a word which he writes, any 
 farther than the reader can difcover that truth is in it. 
 
 It is well worthy of the reader's obfervation, that every 
 writer, who undei Piaads his fubjr<fl and has truth for his ob- 
 ject, may be eafily underflood by tiie reader ; but thofe who 
 will not come to the light, leil their evil deeds faouid be' 
 reproved, ufually confound themfelvev and their re.idr-rs 
 too. Truth fears not the light ;. but eiror^ like the glow- 
 worm, fliines only in the dark. 
 
 .To every one who underftands the firft principles of trie 
 prefent controveriy, the following is a felf-evident propoii- 
 tion ; — Either Mr. Vv^orcefter and his brethren, or my bretli- 
 raiiuid myielf^ believe aad prafliie in oj^poiklon to the v^cfd 
 
1 2 Letters on Rev, S, Worcejler*s 
 
 of God ; for God's word does not fupport both fides of a 
 conrradidion. 
 
 The Baptiils, and thofe who in our land call themfelves 
 P.isdobiiptiits, believe and pradlife, as to r.heir diftinguilhing 
 tenets, in direct oppoiition to each other. The Bapiifts 
 believe chat nothing is gofpel baptifm, but immerfion in 
 the name of the Father, &c. Thole who call themfelves 
 Pasdohaptifts, believe that an^t and every application of 
 water m the name ci" the Father, occ. is gofpel baptifm. 
 As they both believe, fo they both praiflife. — The Baptiils 
 believe, that none but fuch as receive the word gladly, are 
 qualilied fuhje(fl:s for gofpel baptifm. Thole who call 
 themfelves Pasdobaptifts, beheve, that if all parents were 
 wife and faithful, all perfons would be baptized in infancy ; 
 and, of confequence, all ought to be baptized in unbelief, 
 or before they can receive the wor:i gladly. 
 
 Thus oppofite are theie two claifes of men. Both can- 
 not be right : both cannot, in tiiefe things, agree Vv'ith the 
 word of eternal truth. It cannot be true, that immerfiou 
 of the whole body in water is eilential to gofpel baptiim ; 
 and, at the fame tim.e, that any and every other application 
 of water may be gofpel baptiim Nor can it be true, that 
 none are the quaiiiied fubjefts of gofpel bapnifm. but fuch as 
 recei>rej the word gladly ; and ye:, that all ought to be 
 baptized, before they know one word from another. 
 . Before we proceed to lay open Mr. vVorceiler's miftakes, 
 nconUilencies, and ahfurjities, the author of theie pages 
 begs leave to notify his readers, that he hath not feleded 
 Mr. vVorcefter's performance, as the one to be pariicularly 
 expofed, becaufe it is materially different frorr what many 
 others upon the fame fubje»5l have written, but becauie he 
 hath taken his ground decidedly, and hath laboured to fup- 
 pori his caufe more than mofl have done. 
 
 Mr. Worcefter has, generally fpeaking, built his\theory 
 upon the principles, and fuj)ported it by the argun.ents, 
 upon which his caufe muil Itand or fall U is hence obvi- 
 ou?i. that, provided his theor)' or fenr-ment cann'.'t bj iup- 
 poited by the principles and arguivcn.s whuh lie hath 
 brougiit forward, not his Sermon- Qnly hut all the books 
 which his brethren have written in jupport of the lame 
 theory, niuii ail(> fall with them. 
 
 It may be aifo noted, that my princ-'pal obje<51: is not to 
 expof- the aniichri.iian theory and practice of Mr. Wr>rcef- 
 ter and his brethren, but tc i't trr.th to rubHc view \s 
 trutii is the belt wecqion by whicli to dellroy error, hence 
 
Two DifcourfeSy Isfc. 13 
 
 as truth is brought forw.ird, his errors will be ruined. 
 Should I on Ibme particulars be prolix, the importance of 
 the fubjecl muft be rajr apology to the public. 
 
 As Mr. Worcel^er has, profeiTedly, built his Sermons, m 
 oppofiticn to the Baptiils, on a part of Paul's epiille to th? 
 Galatians, it is expedient that we pay particular attentioiv 
 to this epiftle. 
 
 This epiftle was manifeflly written againd the very error 
 which Mr. Worceiter would eiVablifh by it. It is true, he 
 has refined a little upon Judaifm, and left out the more 
 unpopular parts of that yoke of bondage ; but he eanieltly 
 retains that part which binds to the performance of the 
 ■whole : *' for," fays Paul, " I teitify to every man that w 
 circumcifed, that he is a debtor to do the whole Law." 
 Mr. Worceiter ailerts, that baptifm hath taken the place 
 ei circumcifion, and means the fame thing. The feal, he 
 informs «-, is changed, but the thing me'A \s fuhJarUiaUy the 
 fame :* hence Mr. Worcefier holds fuhjlanUaUy to circun^- 
 cifion, and is therefore debtor to dt:) the whole law. The 
 change of a feal from red to luhiie alters not the nature of 
 an inilrument, nor does it le/Ten its obligation or binding 
 force : hence, juft fo far as Mr. Worceiler is conlifter.t 
 with his own theory, he is the very perfon, or his theory is 
 what the Holy Ghoft direded Paul to conde.TQn, as being 
 an anticliriftian error, among the Galatians. 
 
 That the reader may die more fully underfland this 
 matter, and to make it the more eafy to expofe and refut-e 
 Mr. Worcefler's Judaizing principle, we fhail here fet 
 down fo much of the epiftle to the Galatians as will bring 
 the error of their antichriuian teachers to view, and alio 
 PauPs argument againrt them. 
 
 Chap. i. ver. i, 2. ** Paul, an apoflle, (not of men, nei- 
 ther by man, but by Jefus Chrill, and God the Father^ 
 who raifed him from the deaJ,) and all the brethren which 
 are with me, unto the churches of Galatia. Ver. 6, 7. 
 I marvel that ye are fo foon rtTri<ii>sd from, htm that called you 
 into the grace of Chrift unto another gofpfl : which is not 
 another ; but there be fome that trcutle yyuy and would 
 pervert the go/pel of Chr'ijl.^^ 
 
 Chap, ii ver. 3, 4, 5. " But neither Titus, who was with 
 me, being a Greek, was compelled to he circumcijed : and lliat 
 becaufe oi falfe hrezhnn unawares brought in, who can^e in 
 privily to fpy out our Fiberty which we have in Chiill Jefus, 
 
 * Sccliit itrn-.o^.s, pge S^^ 56, 57, &c. 
 
14 Letters bh Rev. S Wo?re/}er's 
 
 that thev might bring us into bcrndage : to whom we gavt- 
 place by liibjedlion, ns, tiji for an oour, that the truth of the 
 g'^'pcl mii^^hi: cr.ntinue \s\*i\ you. Ver. ii — 14 But when 
 Peter was come to Antioch, / ivithftood him to the face, be- 
 caafe he luas t'j le blamed. For before that certain -"ame- 
 from James, he Jid eat with the Gentiles: bu:. when '"hey 
 were come, he withdrew, and icparated himieif, tearing 
 them which were rf the circumctfon. And the other jfe<ivs 
 d'tjpmbled likeivife ivith him ; infomuch that Barnabas alfo 
 was carried away with their d'Jjlmulaiion, But when T faw 
 x\\aX. they 'ivaihed XiOX. uprightly, according to the truih of 
 the go/pel, I faid unto Peter before them all, If thou^ being a 
 Jeiu, live ft after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the 
 Je'-jus^ why compeVjjl thou the Gentiles to live as do the 
 Jcnvs ? Ver. 16. Knowing that a man is not juftihed by 
 the u^rks of the law, but by the faith of Jefus Chriil, even 
 we have believed in Jefus Chrift, ihat we might be jujiji-d 
 by th^ faith fjf Chrif}^ and not by the lucrks of the law": for 
 by the ^works f t^e laiv ihall no rieih be juiiitied Ver. 2 i. 
 I do not fruflrate the grace of God : for if righteoufnefs 
 come by the lanv, then Chrljl is dead in vain.'' 
 
 Chap. iii. — '^ O foo/Jh G alatlans. r^vho hath beiL^itched jou, 
 that ye Ihould not obey tiie truth, before whofe eyes Jefiis 
 Chrift hath been evidently fet forth, crucified among you ? 
 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit 
 by the luorks rf the lai:.^, or by the hearing of faith P Are 
 ye fo foriiilh ? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made 
 
 'perfect by the ^.fh P Have ye faffered fo many things in 
 vain? If it be yet in vain. He, therefore, that miniiier- 
 eth to you the Spirit, and worketh m.iracles among you, 
 doeth he it by the works of the laiu, or by the hearing of 
 
 faith ? Even as Abrah im believed God, and it was account- 
 ed to him for rigkteoufnfs. Knov*^ ye, therefore, that they 
 tvhich are o{ faith, the fame are the children of -"jhraham. 
 And the fcripture, forefeeing that God would juftify the 
 heathen through faith, preached before tlie goipel unto 
 Abraham, faying, In ihee flail all nations be llepd. So then, 
 they which be o{ faith are blcfpd with faithful Abraham. 
 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the 
 curfe : for it is written, Curfed is every one that continu- 
 eth not in all things which are written in the book ot the 
 law to do them. ^Bat that no man is juftilieJ by the law 
 in the light of God, it is evident : for, VhtjuJI fliall live 
 by fiith. And die laiu is not of faith : but, The man thai 
 do<?th them fhalMive in them. Chriil hath redeemed u-s 
 
Two DifcGurfcs^ Iffc. 15 
 
 fVom the curfe of the law, being made a curfe for us ; for 
 it is written, Curfed is every one that hangeLh on a tree : 
 That the hlcjfing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles 
 through Jeftis Chrift ; that we might rccdve the J>rom!je of 
 the Sj?int thrsugh faith. Breihren, 1 fpcak after the man- 
 ner of men ; Though it be but a man'ls covenant, yet if it 
 be confirmed,' no mun diraramlleth, or addeth thereto. 
 Now, to Abraham and his feed were the promifes made. 
 Yi^ faith noty And to feeds ^ as of many ; but as of one^ And 
 to ihy feed, which is Chri/i. And this 1 fay, that the cov- 
 enant that was confirmed before of God in Chriil, the law, 
 which wasybwr hundred and thirty years after, cannot difan- 
 nuh that it ihould make the promile of none effe^. For 
 if the mheritajice be of the law, It is no more oi promife : but 
 God gave it to Abraham by promife. Wherefore then 
 ferveth the law ? It was added becauie of tranfgreffions, 
 till the feed ihould come^ to whom t!ie pr^nufe wa'^ m.ade ■; 
 and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a Mediator. 
 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one ; but God is one. 
 Is the law^ then agalnft xhe promifs of God I God forbid : 
 lor if there had been a law given w'hich could have given 
 life, verily righteoufnefs fliould have been by the law. 
 But the fcripture halh concluded all under fm, that the 
 promife hj faith of Jifus Chr'tfl might he given to them that 
 believe. But before faith came we were kept under the 
 law, fbut up unto the faith w^hich ihould afterwards be re- 
 vealed. Wherefore the lanv was our fchooJmajhr to bring 
 us unto ChriJ}, that we might he jufijji.d hy faith. But after 
 lh2il faith is come, we are no longer under a fchoolmqjier. For 
 ye are all the children of God by faith in Chrjl Jfus. For 
 us many of you as have been baptl-z-sd into Chrifl have/w/ e« 
 Chrfl. There is neither JVw n(.r Greek, -there is neither 
 bond HOT free, there is neither male wor female : ior ye are all 
 one in Chrill Jelus. And if ye be ChrjjVs, then are ye Abra- 
 Lam's fed, and heirs according to ihe promije.'" . 
 
 Chap. iv. ver. 9. — " But now, after that ye have i no tan 
 G'd, or rather are kneiun of God, hoio turn ye again to the 
 iveak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye deiire again to be 
 in bondage ? Ver. 16, 17. Am I, therefore, become your 
 enem.y, becaufe i tell you the truth? 1 hey z,Ltdr.ufly affe(5t 
 you, but not well ; yea, they would exclude you, thut ye 
 might afFe(5t them. Ver. 21 — 26. Teli me, ye that defire 
 to be under ihe latv, do ye nor hear the law ? For it is 
 wriuen, that Abriiham had two Tons, the rne by a bond- 
 ;> iid, the other i>v a free wCr.Jir.i. F-ut lie who wa^ of the 
 
i6 Letters on Reverend S. WorceJier*s 
 
 bond-woman was born after tlie ^£/2) ; but ke oixhe free 
 ^oman Avas by prom'tfe. Which things are an "allegory : 
 for thefe are the tivo covenants ; the on^^Vom the mount Sinai, 
 which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar- For this 
 Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and anfwereth to Jerufa- 
 lem which noiv is, and is in bondage with her children. But 
 Jerufalem which is above, is free, which is the mother of 
 us all. Ver. 28 — 31. Now lue, brethren^ as Ifaac was, are 
 the children oi promife. But as then, he that was bom after 
 the flefh, perfecuted him that was born after the Spirit, 
 even fo it is now. Neverthelefs, <zvhat faith the fcripture ? 
 C fi out the bond zuoman and her fen : for the fon of the bond- 
 woman Ihill not be heir with the fon of xhe free 'woman. 
 So tnen, br thren, we are not children of the bond-'woman^ 
 but of the/'^-f." 
 
 Chap. V Ver. 1,2,3,4: " Stand faft, therefore, in the 
 liberty wherewith Chri ft Irath made us free, and be not 
 entangled again \ th ihe yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul 
 fay unto you, T.'.at if ye be circumcifed Chrffifhal I profit you 
 nothing. For I teitify ag lin to every man tnat is circum- 
 cifed, that he is a debtor to do the ivhoie la'w. Chrifl is be- 
 come of no effect unto you, vvhofoever of you are juftitied 
 by the law ; ye are fallen from grace, v. 6. For in Je- 
 fus Chrift neither circumctjion aiiaileth any things nor uncir- 
 cumcfion ; but faith wiiicli worketh by love. v. 9. A lit- 
 tle leaven le:iveneth tiie whole lump. v. 11. And I, 
 brethren, if yet I preach circumcifon^ why do I yet fuffer ^<rr- 
 fecution ? then is the offence of the crofs ceafed.'* 
 
 Chap. vi. Ver. 12, 13, i4> 15, 16. " y?/ wd-nv as defire to 
 make 2. fair fhenv in che flefh, they conflrain you to be cir- 
 tumcfed ; only lejl they ^\\o\x\d fuffer perfcution for the crofs of 
 Chrtfl. For neither rhey themlelves, who are circumrifcdy 
 heep fhe latu ; brrt dftre to have you circumcifed^ that they 
 may glory in your fleili. But God forbid that I fhrjuld 
 glor^y fave in-: he crofs of our Lord J -fus ChriJU by whom the 
 world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world. For in 
 Chrill Jeihs neither circumciftcn availeth any thing, nor un-^ 
 circumrifm, but a new creature* And as many as walk 
 according to this rulcy peace be on them^ and mercy, and up- 
 on the Ifrael of God.''* 
 
 I have made this l^^ng quotation, that the reader may 
 have, directly before him, all which Paul wrote in his 
 epillle to the Galatiaus, relative to the fubje^t which is 
 now agltatin" the pubhc mind. The la ft '/erle of the third 
 chapter, Mr. Worcefter took for his text, on which to builj 
 
Two Difcourfes^ l^c, 17 
 
 his Judaizing theory. But neither in his text, nor In anv 
 other part of this epiftle, is there a word in favour of his 
 legal plan. But on the contrary, the whole of it was writ- 
 ten, purpofely to deflroy fuch a principle, which began to 
 work among Chriftians, even in the apofties' days. 
 
 In this epitlle, Paul meiiiions two, covenants, one con- 
 tained in the following, and fimilar words ; " In thee (hall 
 all the nations of the earth be blefled." This covenant 
 was confirmed of God in Chrift to Abraham, four hun- 
 dred and thirty years before the other, the Sinai covenant, 
 was given ; alfo this covenant of proniife was made known 
 to Abraham, m.ore than iiuenty years before the irJliiuUon 
 of the covenant of circumcifion, which was afterwards in- 
 corporated into the Sinai covenant. Neither of thefe cov- 
 enants hath any thing to do with the covenant of circum- 
 •cifion, fave the coven-ant of circumcifion was a token of 
 the former, and is included in the latter, and binds the 
 fubjedls of it to perform all the legal duties which that en- 
 joins. Hence the apoftle fcarcely gives fo much as a hint, 
 through th-e whole epiitle, of the inftitution of the covenant 
 of circumcifion. Where he mentions the covenant itfelf, 
 it is, to, difluade his brethren of Galatia from the pradlice 
 of it, and to urge them to be wholly feparate from it. 
 Greatly the reverfe is it with Mr. W. The covenant of 
 circumcifion is the theme of his difcourfe, and the bafis on 
 which his principle refts ; from the beginning, to the end 
 of his Sermons. At the fame time, he fully manifefts 
 throughor.t that he has no corred idea of the covenant of 
 circumcifion ; for he continually confounds the covenant 
 of promife with the covenant oi circumcifion. Indeed, he 
 mud thus confound covenants, or his theory would have 
 no plaufibility. 
 
 But I haften to unfold Mr. Worcefter's confuied and 
 abfurd ideas, that tlie public may be aftonifhed at the 
 blindnefs and confufion of many of their leaders. 
 
 The firft confufed and abfurd ijea of Mr, Worceder's, 
 which I (hail now mention, is contamed in his expofition 
 of his text. We will fet down his text, and then his expo- 
 fition. 
 
 His text is,* *' And \i ye be Chrt/t'sy then are ye Abra= 
 ham's feed, and heirs according to the promife.** His ex- 
 pofition follows, « If ye be Chrift's, then are ye brought 
 
 * Page 8. 
 
1 8 Letters on Rev, S. Worcejier's 
 
 into a covenant relation to Abraham, are jufllHed in the 
 fame manner in which he was, and are entitled to all the 
 privileges and hlejjings which were contained in the promijh 
 made to him and his feed/ 
 
 That the confufion and abfurdity of this expofition may 
 appear, nothing more is neceffary than to mention fome of 
 the privileges and bleffings which were contained in the 
 promifes to Abraham and his feed. Some of thefe privi- 
 leges and bleffings of Abraham's are, that in him all the 
 nations of the earth fhould be bleifed ; that he fliould be a 
 father of many nations ; that kings fhould come out of 
 him ; that the land of Canaan .fliould be their poiTeflion ; 
 and that Chrift ihould be of them, as concerning the fiefli, 
 
 The reader can judge for himfelf, 3s to the confiftency, 
 •or abfurdity of Mr. Worcefter's expofition. If every be- 
 liever in Chrift be entitled to all the privileges and blejjings 
 which were contained in the promifes made to Abraham 
 and his feed, then is he correcl, otherwife abfurd. If ev- 
 ery believer be an Abraham, and if the children of every 
 believer be the children of Abraham, &c. &c. then is Mr. 
 Worcefter's notion juft, otherwife it is confufed and incon- 
 fnlent with common fenfe. 
 
 The next thing which I ihall mention, is one of his falfe 
 ftatements. It is in the nextfentence but one, to the expo- 
 fition of his text. 
 
 * It is,' fays he, * particularly to be remarhed, that witli.a 
 view to convince his Galatian brethren, of their unhappy 
 error, in refpecft to juftification, he afcends to the memorable 
 period of the inftitution of the church in the family of Abra- 
 ham, takes the covenant then made with Abraham and his 
 feed, and traces it down in the tranfmiffion of its privileges 
 and bleffings to the Gentile church.' 
 
 This propofition is, indeed, as Mr, Worceller fays, to be 
 particularly remarked^ for nothing is more falfe and delufory, 
 than is what he here aflerts. It is not only far from truth, 
 but it is abfurd. 
 
 It is far from truth : for Paul does not afcend to the 
 memorahle period of the injlitution of the church in the family 
 Q,i Abraham^ but to the /avW in which God made to Abra- 
 ham this promifcy " In thee fliall all nations be blefTed." 
 This promife Paul repeatedly brings to view, in the chapter in 
 which is Mr. Worcefter's text ; and this promiie was made 
 
 ^ Gen. xii. and xvii. Rom. \%. 5. 
 
Two DifcGurfes^ ^c* " 1 9 
 
 TTiOrexhzn twenty yenrsheiore the irjiitution oi the church in 
 Abraham* i family. Befides, that Mr. Worcefter might have 
 no excufe for miilaking the matter, Paul exprefsly tell us, 
 that the covenant, of which he is writing to the Galatians 
 and to us, and by which he difTuaded them, and by which 
 he dilTuades us, from adhering to the covenant of circum- 
 cifion, was four hundred and thirty yean before the law ; 
 ^vhereas the memorable period in winch a church was inili- 
 tuted in Abraham's family, was not four hundred and ten 
 years. Let any who are able compare the dates. 
 
 Further, if a church were inftituted in Abraham's fam- 
 ily, it was by the covenant of circumcifion. For, previous 
 to the giving of that covenant, there is no more appearance 
 of a church in his family than in Job's or Lot's. To fup-, 
 pofe that Paul referred the Galatians to this covenant, to- 
 reprove them for their error, in feeking juftification by the 
 law, is doubly abfurd ; for their very error confifted in 
 adhering to this covenant. Alfo, he told them, tl:at, upon 
 their being circumcifed, they v/ere debtors to do the v/hole 
 law. 
 
 The propofition now under confideration is not only 
 falfe and abfurd, but delufory. By it Mr. Worcefter would 
 teach his own people and the public much as the Judaizing 
 teachers taught the Galatians, t:iat except they^ were cir- 
 cumcifed and kept the law of Mofes, they could not be 
 faved. He does not ufe the fame v/ords with thefe de- 
 ceivers, but the leading ideas through his Sermons appear 
 to go upon the fame principle ; and in page 52, his words 
 come fo nigh, that probably the perverters of the Galatian 
 church would not be offended at them, rlis words are, 
 * It is not, indeed, certain, that if you be unbelieving and 
 difobedient, your children will be finally loft ) for God 
 may, as often in hi^ fovereign mercy he does, go out ef the 
 limits of the church, and beftow his grace on thofe who are 
 aliens from the commonwealth of Ifrael, and Grangers to 
 the covenant of promife. Bat if, in this cafe, he does 
 beftow grace upon your children, it will not be in purfu- 
 ance of any covenant engagement to you.' 
 
 This language harmonized but too v/ell with thofe troub- 
 krs of the church, of whom Paul fays, " / -would they ivere 
 cut ojfr 
 
 Mr. Worcefter's proportion next to that which we have 
 been confidering (page 8) is, * The apoftle's whole argu- 
 ment proceeds upon the plain fcripture ground, that the 
 covenant which vvas made with- Abraham, and which con- 
 
20 Letters on Rev, S. iVorce/?er*s 
 
 ftltuted the church in his family, was kill in force, and was 
 never to be abrogated ; that the Gentile churches were 
 embraced in that covenant, as making one with the Jewifh 
 church ; and that, by virtue of that covenant, belrevers of 
 every age and nation were to be confidered as the children 
 cf Abraham, inheriting., by diinne right y all the privileges and 
 bleJftngS: comprifed in the promifcs made to him and his feed/ 
 
 This propofition contains artother of Mr. Worcefter's 
 falfe ftatements, delufory fophifms, and abfurd ideas. Thrs 
 propofition is full of falfe ftatements and erroneous affer^ 
 lions. 
 
 In the Jirfi place, he confounds the covenant which was 
 confirmed of God in Chrift, with the covenant of circum- 
 cifion, and gives his readers to underftand that they are 
 kGih one : whereas the Bible tells us that the latter is bvLt 
 the token of the former, Gen. xvii. 
 
 In the Tuxt place, he tells us, ' That the apoftle's whole 
 argument proceeds upon the plain fcripture ground, that 
 the covenant which vfas raade with Abraham, and which 
 corjlituted the church in his family, was (till in force, and was 
 never to be ab-rogated.' 
 
 Ihe apoftle, inftead of going, as Mr. WorceQer fays, 
 upon the fcripture ground, that the covenant which was 
 made with Abraham, and. which conftituted the church in 
 his family;* was ftill in force, and never to be abrogated, 
 does not, in the whole chapter, fo much as once mention 
 that covenant by which a vifible church was conftituted in 
 Abraham's family, unlefs it be to reprove the foclijh Gala- 
 tians, who were giving heed to Judaizing teachers, who 
 >yere preaching among them this covenant of circumcifion. 
 
 Paul goes, indeed, upon the plain fcripture ground, and 
 •oponthis plain fcripture ground too, that the gofpel church 
 •was aoad is built upon the promife made to Abraham long 
 before the covenant of circumcifion was ever mentioned,*- 
 and upon the covenant which was confirmed of God in 
 Chrift four hundred and thirty years before the law, and 
 more than twenty before there was any vifible church 
 formed in Abraham's family, or the covenant given upon 
 which it was conftituted. What Mr. Worcefter here men- 
 tions of the covenant and conflitution of a church in Abra- 
 ham's family, is manifeftly a mere delufory fophifm or 
 deception ; for the apoftle does not fo much as once inti- 
 mate any fuch thing. 
 
 • Sec Gal. iii. 8, t 7. and Gcr. ■xii. 3- 
 
3. In the propofitlon now under confideration, Mr, 
 Worcefter tells us, that tlie Gentile churches \tere em- 
 braced in that covenant, as making one with the Jewid; 
 church. Here he comes out, and fhows himlelf to be one 
 of the Judaizing teachers -, but the apoftle fays not a word ■ 
 of any fuch thing, 
 
 4. Says Mr. Worcefler, < And by virtue of that cove- 
 nant, believers of every age and nation were to be confid- 
 
 ered as the children of Abraham.' ^("piy- The apoftle 
 
 no vrhere fays, that ever>any one believer, of any age or 
 nation, was to be confidered as a child of Abraham by 
 viriue of t/jai covenant by which a church v/as conftituted 
 in his family. The apoftle fays, " If yg be Chrijl's, then 
 are ye Abraham's feed ;" no/, if ye be circumcifed, or be 
 in the covenant of circumcifion. 
 
 The abfurdity of the idea, in the clofe of the propofition^ 
 * of believers inheriting, by divine rig/?i, ail the privileges and 
 hlejfings comprifed in the promife, made to Abraham and 
 his feed," has been already expofed. 
 
 Thus falfe, delulbry, and abfurd is Mr. Worcefter's main 
 propofition, which leads to and introduces his no lefs falfe, 
 delufory, and abfurd dcclrine. 
 
 It may be pleafmg and profitable to the reader, to have 
 here ftated a few general truths, which relate to the matter 
 in hand, and may ferve to explain it. 
 
 1. It was by virtue of the covenant of grace and promife^ 
 which was revealed, and which was confirmed of God in 
 Chrift, that Abraham vras made a faithful faint. 
 
 2. It was by virtue of the covenant of circumcifion, or 
 by Abraham's compliance with it, that he and his family 
 v/ere conftituted a vifible church. 
 
 3. It is by virtue of the fame covenant of grace and 
 promife, by which Abraham was made a faint, that the 
 nations of the earth are blefled in or by him, and many are 
 made believers in Chrift. 
 
 4. It is by virtue of obedience to the ordinances of Jefus 
 Chrift, and efpecially to the firft, viz. baptifmy that believers 
 are conftituted into vifible gofpel churches. 
 
 The reader underftanding the above plain truths, we 
 will now proceed to confider the dcSrinej wliich Mr. Wor- 
 cefter would have us believe to be contained in his text. 
 
 * The text, then, (fays he) thus contemplated, in its con» 
 nexion, prefents for our confideration this great and inter- 
 efting doarincf viz. In God^s covenant of promije with Abraham^ 
 E 2 
 
22 Letter) on Rev, 5. Worcejer'^s 
 
 pro<viJion ivas made for the continuance of the church formed hy 
 it ; and thus for the tranfm'ijfton of the privileges and bie/Jings 
 contained In it, from generation to ge?:eration, down to the clofe 
 of time* 
 
 That the public may at once fee that there is no coa- 
 nexion between Mr. Worceiler's text and the doctrine which 
 he fays it prefentSj I will here fet down the text, and the 
 three verfes next preceding* 
 
 Ver. 26. *' For ye are ail the children of God by faith In 
 Jefus Chrijl.'^ Ver. 27. "For as many of you as have 
 been baptised into Chrlft have put on Chrifl" Ver. 28- 
 *' There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor 
 free, there is neither male nor female; for ye are all one'in 
 Chrift Jefus.'* Ver. 29. "And \i yeh% Chrifi's^ then 2.X& 
 ye Abraham^ s feed, and heirs according to the promift,^* 
 
 In verfe 26, Paul tells the Galatian Chriftians, that they 
 were all the children of God by faith In Ckrifi Jefus ; neJ 
 by circumcijlon^ or by the works of the laiv. In verfe 27, 
 he gives the reafon ; " For (fays he) as many of you a5 
 have been baptized into Chritt have put on Chriji." This 
 infants could not do. In verfe 28, he informs us, that in 
 the gofpel church both Jew and Greek, both bond and 
 free, both male and female, are all one in Chrift Jefus. 
 In the laft verfe, Paul fays, " And if ye be Chriji^s, then are 
 ye Abraham^ s feed, and heirs according to the promife.^' Ac- 
 cording to the promife of circumcifion ? Yes, if Mr. Worcef- 
 ler's notions are correcT:. But where does he find fuch a 
 promife ? in his text ? or in the chapter which contains his 
 text ? or in the epiftle which contains the chapter ? or m 
 any other infpired epiftle I No where ; and the public 
 ought to know it. The public ought to be apprifed of 
 this : and every one v;ho underftands the matter, ought to 
 inform his brother, that neither Paul, nor any other infpired 
 penman, hath ever told, us, that the vifible church in Abra- 
 ham's family was formed by the covenant which Paul 
 mentions repeatedly in the third chapter of his epiftle to 
 the Galatians. Paul, by mentioning in verfe 8, the cove- 
 nant of which he was fpeaking, and by fixing in verfe 17, 
 the date of ir, or the time of its being manifefted or con- 
 firmed to Abraham, explicitly, or with great plainnefs, tells 
 us that he meant no fuch thing. 
 
 A few confequences will now be ftated. 
 
 I. Mr. Worcefter appears to have mifunderftood his 
 text wholly, not a fmgle idea being found in it as he fup- 
 jpcfedb 
 
Tzvo Difcourfesy <sfc, aj 
 
 2. Mr. Worcellier appears to have wholly mirunderftood 
 the covenant of \\ hich Paul Ipeaks, in the chapter whence 
 he took his text ; this coveiuint being conipictely dillinfi 
 from the covenant which gave vifibility to the church in 
 Abraham's family. 
 
 3. Mr. Worcefter is manifoilly far from kncii'tngy that 
 the thing, and the only tljing, which conitituted Abraiiam's 
 family into a viiible churcn, was his circumcifing, at God's 
 command, all the males in his houfe. Had Mr. Wv:»rcei^er 
 have known ihis, he would have difniiiled his Sermons 
 before he dehvered them, and not io darkened couniel by 
 •words without knowledge. 
 
 4. It is man;fefi, that Mr. Worcefter is fall in fentiment 
 with thofe who troubled the Galatlan churches ; and thai 
 he hath perverted his text and the intention of the apoftle, 
 that he might defend the very herefy which Paul laboured 
 to deftroy. For all which thofe Judaizing teachers en- 
 deavoured, was to briag the gofpel church to the ftandard 
 of the Jewifn^ and what Mr. Worcefter enaeavours is, for 
 I'ubilance, the lame thing.* 
 
 The public, and every reader, is defired to hear me 
 patiently ; for, if the Lord v/ill, I have many tilings yet to 
 fay, that I may, through the grace of the Lord Jefus, 
 deliver many from the Judaizing tenets of Mr. Worcefter 
 and his brethren. 
 
 in the mean time, may Jefus poilefs my heart, and the 
 jubiic my beil wifhes and zealous labour for their good- 
 1 am, &:c. 
 
 We appeal to iJ:e Bible ^ to Jiubborn fads^ and to 
 common fenfe^ 
 
 L E T T E R m. 
 
 MEN, BRETHREN, AND FATHERS, 
 
 In my la ft I fet before you Mr. Worcefter's 
 text, dodrine, and feveral things conne(51ed with them ; 
 and mentioned the covenant of which Paul fpake, and 
 
 ♦ Sec page 8, 9, aud everi other page ia ki$ Seraaoiw. 
 
2 4 Letters on Rev. S. Worcejier^s 
 
 fnewed how Mr. Worcefter midook the whole matter. la 
 this you may expect to find tlie inanner in which he handles 
 his fubjed, and fomeof his arguments, expoled. 
 
 His general method of difccurfe was, 
 
 * -I. To Ihow that the covenant which was made with 
 Abraham, and by which the church was formed in his 
 family, was intended to be perpetual, or to continue 
 throughout all generations; and, 
 
 * II. To lliow more particularly what provifion vra? 
 made in that covenant for the continuance of- the church 
 formed by it, and for the tranfmiffion of the blelCngs con> 
 tained in it.' 
 
 His next words are, * It cannot be neceffary, in a la- 
 boured manner, to prove, that by 'Cv.^-cQxstnant made with 
 Abraham, a church was formed in his family.' Here he 
 takes for granted, or as not necelTary to be in a laboured 
 manner proved, the very JuhjeS which, of all others, it 
 became him to prove thoroughly, if he could. Had he 
 but proved, or will he now prove, that the cenfirm.ation of 
 that covenant, of which Paul fpeaks, Gah iii. 8, 17, or 
 that the being aSualty interejlcd in that covenant was what 
 conftituted Abraham and his famiily a vifible church, then 
 would we grant him all he alks. But ftubborn fads will 
 forever keep it beyond his power to prove any fuch thing. 
 For, as has been before obferved, the promife that all the 
 families of the earth fhouM be ble/Ted in Abraham, and 
 this covenant alfo was confirmed, and yet there was no 
 vifible church In his family for more than twenty years 
 after i nor was it conftituted till the covenant of circum» 
 cifion was given, and in full practice. Thefe are (lubborn 
 fads, which Mn Worcefter cannot rem^ove, till he blot out 
 the page of revelation. — Thus the firft principle, and the 
 whole foundation, on which he built his difcourfe*, and his 
 oppofition againft the gcfpel church, being removed, w^e 
 might leave the fuperibuctore to fall of itfelf, were it not 
 that he has many difmgenuous remarks and unfounded ' 
 afTei tions fcattered through the whole of it. 
 
 Mr. Worcefter has done as is ufual for the ingenioufly 
 erroneous to do ; in the ilrft place, takt for granted th^ Jirji 
 principles which were neceffary to be proved, yet incapable 
 of proof, and then proceed with confiderable plaufibility. 
 
 Says he, (page 10) * Several arguments in fupport of 
 the propofition, that the covenant made with Abraham 
 and his feed, and confequently the church formed by it, 
 did not ceafe oq the introdudion ol" the gofpel difpenfation, 
 
Tvjo Difcourfes^ ^<r. 25 
 
 but were intended to continue throughout all generations* 
 I will now, my brethren, fubmit to your confideration.' 
 
 It is fufficient juft to remark, that the co'vcnant which 
 ^ave vifible e.xiftence to the church in Abraham's family 
 did ceafe, and was never intended to continue in the vilible 
 church of God, but till the feed fhould come to whom the 
 promile was made. Paul is my firil: witnefs. Gal. v. 5. 
 ** If ye be circumcifcd Chrift (liall profit you nothing." 
 Paul is my fecond witnefs, i Cor. vii. 18. "Is any called 
 in uncircumciilon ? let him not becomt circumcifed.^^ This 
 covenant of circumcifion was the only covenant which gave 
 vifibility to a church in Abraham's fiimily. Paul told all 
 believing Gentiles, and all Jews, who were not circumcifed, 
 that they ought net to keep this covenant. It ought, 
 therefore, to have ceafed ; and it did generally, fave where 
 Paul's oppofers kept it alive. My third witnefs is, the apof- 
 tlesj elders, and the whole church at Jerafalem, who fent 
 to the Gentiles, that thty need not obferve the covenant of cir- 
 cic^nc'ijion. See Acts xv. 
 
 Mr. Worcefter's arguments are now to be confidered. 
 
 His jirjl is, * By the covenant made with Abraham, he 
 was conltituted the father of all them that believe.* 
 
 Anjiver. No perfcn, who underliands the controverfy 
 between thofe who hold to the gofpel difpenfation, and 
 thofe who plead for the continuance of the Jewifh, will 
 deny the truth of the propofition, which contains Mr. Wor- 
 cefter's hrft argument ; but every perfon who has any con- 
 fiderable knowledge of the fubje<ft, will deny that the argu- 
 ment hath any connexion with the thing to be proved by 
 it. Let Mr. Worcefter only prove, that Abraham was, by 
 the covenant of circumcilicn, conftituted the father cf all 
 them that believe, and we will grant his argument to pof- 
 fefs weight ; but till he does, his argument is defervedly 
 confidered v;ithout force. 
 
 But, fays he, page 12, * If we be members of a different 
 church, formed by a different covenant from that of Abra- 
 ham, what relation have we to Abraham ? in what refpect 
 are we his children ? how is it that v/e are bleifed with 
 himr 
 
 Aufnuer. Not by being in a vifible church (late, either 
 Jewifn or Chriilian ; but by being the children of God by 
 faith in Chrift Jefus, GaL iii. 25, 29, and according to the 
 promife, Gen. xii. 3. xxii. 18. Behdes, Abraham poffeffed 
 faith, and received the promifes, not whilft in a church 
 (late i not tn c'lrcumc'ifion^ but iti uncircumclfon, Juft, fo, if 
 
iG Letters on Rev. S, Woreefler^s 
 
 ever we be bleiTed with faithful Abraham, it (hould be,- 
 not while we be in a church Rate, but before we be bap- 
 tized ; then we may receive baptifm as Abraham did cir- 
 cumcifion, as a feal of the righteoufnefs or (Tncerity of our 
 faith. Nor did Abraham, as Mr. Worcefter (page 12) 
 would have us believe, receive the promifes, while being 
 the covenant father of a vifible church ; for when he re- 
 ceived the promifes there was no vifible church. 
 
 His fecond argument is, * God's coirenant of promtfc with: 
 Abraham comprifed all the bleiUngs and privileges ever- 
 promifed to believers and to the church.* 
 
 ouppofe we grant all this too, what hath it to do with 
 the bufniefs on hand ? how does it fhow that the gofpel 
 church is but the Jewifh church in continuation ? for the 
 covenant of promife was confirmed of God inChrift, and 
 made manifeft to Abraham, before the Jewifn church ex- 
 ifleJ ; and the bleiTmgs and privileges promifed to believers? 
 may be enjoyed by the gofpel churdi after the Jewiih is- 
 aboliihed. 
 
 ^Says Mr. "Worcefter, page 14, *I will eftablifti my cove- 
 nant between me and thee, and thy feed after thee, fays 
 the Lord to Abraham, for an everlafting covenant, to be a- 
 God unto thee, and to thy feed after thee ; and in thee, 
 and in thy feed (hall all the nations of-the earth be bleiTed.* 
 All this is true ; but what, in particular, hath this to do 
 with the conftituting of Abraham's family into a vifible 
 church? Mr. Worcefter fubjoms, 'Thefe promifes, my 
 brethren, are of v aft comprehenfion.' Certainly they are. 
 They, by implication, comprehend all the bleftings and 
 privileges which have been enjoyed by the Jewiih church ; 
 and all which have been, or ihali be, by the gofpel church. 
 Yet there is not fo much as the leaft hint, in any one of 
 them, that they comprehend vrhat-he brought them to 
 prove — that the Jewifh and gofpel churches are one and 
 the fame church. 
 
 Again, fays he, on the fame page, * To Abraham and 
 his feed, fays the apoftie, were the promifes m.ade. To 
 A.braham and his feed, comprehending Meffiah, and all 
 true believers as included in him, were made the promifes, 
 which comprife all the bleiTmgs ever to be conferred upon 
 the cliurch and people of God.' If we grant all this, ftill 
 it hath nothing to do with the point in queftion, fave it be 
 in his application of it, to deceive the credulousj and aug- 
 ment thedarkuefs of the blind,. 
 
Two BifcourfeSy ^c. 27 
 
 Mr. Wercefter adds, * Was this covenaat then, fo vaftly- 
 comprehenfive with refpedt to its bleffings, ever to be abro= 
 gated ?' We reply, Surely not. 
 
 He ailcs agaui, ' Was. the church which was formed by 
 it, and fo richly endued, ever to be aboliilied ?' Our anfwer 
 is, Firft, the vifible church in Abraham's family was never 
 formed by this covenant ; and fecondly, that the Abra= 
 harnic church was never fo richly endued, nor was ever 
 any other church, as Mr, Worcefter fuppofes. The prom- 
 ifes were not made to Abraham and the church, Jewifn or 
 Chriftian;, but to him and his feedy which is Chrift. 
 
 He again afks, * Was there to be another covenant, com° 
 prehending more and greater bleffings, another churchy 
 more largely and richly endued r' Our reply is. No, no. 
 
 But I am tired of fuch queftions, which are wholly from 
 the point. Mr. Wcrcefter appears to have forgotten his 
 fubject, or to have no argument which is applicable. 
 Should he tell us that the Englifh are white, and therefore 
 the Africans are of the fame complexion, his pofition and 
 argument would be of equal aptitude and force with what 
 he hath as yet faid. 
 
 His note, pages 17, 18, fhould have a moment's atten- 
 tion, for by it, it is manifeR that he is wholly unacquainted 
 with the fenti-ments of his opponents, as to the covenant of 
 promnfe, mentioned Gen. xii. 3. xxii. 18. Gal. v. 8, 17. 
 and in many other places. * As nothing (fays he) could 
 be more unfounded, fo nothing could be more derogative 
 of the honour of the God of Abraham, than the fentiment, 
 that the covenant made with Abraham and his feed was 
 only a temporal covenant, and included only temporal 
 bleffings.' Had he been but fmally informed as to the 
 Baptift fentiment, with relation to the above mentioned 
 covenant of promife, he could never have honeftly fuggeft- 
 ed, that they hold the fentimicnt which he in his note im- 
 plicitly charges to their account 
 
 Mr. Worcefter's ^hird argument Is now to be confidered, 
 and it is in thefe words — « The covenant made with Abra- 
 •ham and his feed, is the covenant of which, in the New 
 Teftam.ent, Chrift is faid to be the Mediator, and which is 
 defignated as the covenant to be eftablifhed with the churcJi 
 in the days of the gofpel. For this is the covenant that I 
 will make with the houfe of Ifrael, After thofe days, faith 
 the Lord, I will put my laws into their mind, and write 
 them in their hearts : and I will be their God, and they 
 ihall be my people.' Very well ; but this is not the cove- 
 
28 Letters on Rev. S. Worce/Ier's 
 
 nant of clrcumcifion, by which the Jewlfh church was con- 
 Ikituted, or by which Abraham's family was formed into a 
 viiible church. This is the new and better covenant, which 
 hath better promifes than had the covenant of circurncifion. 
 We ftill fee that Mr. Worcefter's argument makes nothing 
 to his purpofe. 
 
 Page 19, he tells us, * The Sinai covenant, the ^iofaic 
 law of commandments contained in ordinances, as it was 
 added but for temporary purpofes, has waxed old, and is 
 ■vanilhed away.' Then the covenant of circumcifion is gone 
 with it : for, fays Paul," I teftify to every man that is cir- 
 cunicifed, that h-e is a debtor to do the ivhole la<w,^^ Gal. v. 3. 
 
 What Mr. Worcei-ter alferts in pages 19 and 20, ought 
 to arreft the attention of the public ; for in thefe pages he 
 l^ath, to carry his Judaizing fcheme, dire<511y contradi(Sed 
 the word of the Lord by both Jeremiah and Paul. His 
 words are, *■ As the Lord faid to Abraham,, / "Mill eJlahVtJh 
 my covenant hdnveen me and thee ^ and thy feed after thee^ — to he 
 a God unto thee, and to thy feed after thee ; fo he faid to Ifrael 
 in Egypt y I iv'dl take you to me tor a people, and / tuill ke to 
 you a God ; and fo he faid concerning the houfe of Ifrael 
 and the houfe of Judah in the days of the gofpel, I will put 
 my law in their iniuard parts, and lor'tte it in their hearts ; 
 and I will be their God, and they fhall be my people. 
 The covenant, or the great and leading promife of the covenant, 
 as expreffed In thefe feveral injlanccs, is the fame. — On the 
 Jlightefl infpedion, it is plain that the cofenakt, mentioned in the 
 feveral injlances now before us, is one and the same ; — and ■ 
 in each of the inftances, the great promife is, To be a God to 
 the church, and to the seed of the church.^ 
 
 Here Mr> Worcefter hath dared to contradi<5l the word 
 of the Lord in dired terms ; and to this he hath been com- 
 pelled, that he might fupport his Judaizing fcheme, his 
 antichriftian error. 
 
 The word of the Lord is, Jer. xxxi. 3i» 32, 33, " Behold, 
 the days come, faith the Lord, that I will make a new cov- 
 enant with the houfe of Ifrael and with the houfe of Judah ; 
 NOT according to the covenant that 1 made with their fathers, 
 in the day that I took them, by the hand, to bring them 
 out of the land of Egypt ; (which my covenant they brake, 
 although I was an hufband unto them, faith the Lord ;) 
 but this fliall be the covenant that I will make with the houfe 
 of Ifrael, After thofe days, faith the Lord, I will put my 
 law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts ; and 
 will be their God, and they (hall be my people.'* Here 
 
Two Difcourfes^ Iffc. 29 
 
 Mr. Worceder afTerts, that God's covenant with the houfe 
 of liVael in Egypt ^ and in the days of the go/pel, are one 
 and ihe same. God faith, that the one is vot according to 
 the oth&r. 
 
 The word of the Lord b}' Paul, Heb. viii. 8, 9, 10. is, 
 •' Behold, the days come (faith the Lord) when I will 
 make a nciv covenant with the houfe of Ifrael, and with the 
 houfe of Judah : kot according to the covenant that [ made 
 aulth their fathers, in the day when I took them by the hand 
 to lead them out of the land of Egypt, &c. 
 
 How long lliall the religious world be deceived, by men 
 who make a bufmefs of wrefting, perverting, and contra' 
 di(5ling the word of the Lord ! 
 
 Mr. Worcefter not only wrefts, perverts, and contradids 
 the fcriptures, but he alio adds to them, as we fnall have 
 repeated occalion to fliow. One inftance we have in the 
 words juft quoted from page 20 ; ' And (fays he) in each 
 of the inllances, the great promife is, To be a God to the 
 church, and to the feed of the church* — ' To he a God to the feed 
 of the church.'' This is clear addition, for which he hath rea- 
 son to exped God will reprove him. For in this inftance 
 he not only adds to God's word, but manifeftly contradicts 
 it. For, fays Paul, Gal. iii. 16. "To Abraham and his 
 feed were the promifes made. He faith not. And to feds, 
 as of many ; but as of one. And to thy feed, which is Chrift.'* 
 Befides, if the great pi:omife is to the feed of the church, 
 what then became of this promife, as to &iQ feed of the church, 
 in Abraham^ s family ? Out of perhaps a thoufand members, 
 only the feed of Ifaac manifeftly bleffed, and but one of 
 his, even Jacob. Into what absurdities does Mr. Worcef- 
 ter's theory drive him ! 
 
 Page 23, fays he, * So plain from the fcriptures it is, 
 that the covenant made with Abraham is continued under 
 the gcfpel, and therefore that the church formed by it is 
 alfo ftill continued.' As Mr. Worcefter fat out with con- 
 " fufed ideas, or without any idea, of that covenant by which 
 a vifible church was conftituted in Abraham's family, fo 
 he proceeds on in darknefs. His argument in plain Englifh 
 is this — The covenant which God made wim Abraham, ^o 
 be a God to him and to his feed, is continued under the 
 gofpel ; therefore the church formed by the covenant of 
 circumcifion is ftill continued. Here his antecedent and 
 confequeRt have no connexion : the one is true, the other 
 Me. 
 
 C 
 
30 Letters on Rev. 5. IVorce/ier^s 
 
 Mr. Worcefter's note, page 23, is not pleafmg, for it is 
 not true. The principal idea in it is, * From this Iburce 
 (the wifcriptural blending of the Abrahamic and Sinai cove- 
 nants together) fprang the error of the legal Jews, in for- 
 mer ages ; and from this fam.e fource has fprung the error 
 of the cleniers of the Ahrahamtc covenant and church, or the 
 Antipsedobaptifts, in modern times.' 
 
 Anj'wcr. A more unjuft ftatement, or a more illiberal 
 fuggeftion, I prefume was never made by the man of fm. 
 But before we fnall have done with Mr. Worcefter, we 
 fhall find he has many fim.ilar ones. As to the legal Jews, 
 "we wnll pafs them ; but as to the Antipaedobaptifts, we afk. 
 Do they, in modem tim.es, or did they ever at any time, 
 deny the Abraham.ic covenant ? Our anfwer is, No : nor is 
 Mr. Worcefter able to m.ention a time in which they denied 
 it. They deny his perverted ufe of it. They deny that 
 the covenant which was manifeded to Abraham in Ur, or 
 Haran, and which was contirmed of God in Chrift four 
 hundred and thirty years before the law, was that covenant 
 by which a vifible church was formed in Abraham's family. 
 But they have never denied, nor have they the leaft inclina- 
 tion to deny, that covenant, which prcmiied to Abraham, 
 that in him and in his feed all the nations of the earth 
 Ihould be bleiTed : nay, they believe in this covenant, and 
 hope to fhare in the bieffings contained in it. 
 
 How long fnall thofe v^'ho lead God's people, caufe them 
 to err from the right ways of the Lord ! 
 
 I am, &c. 
 
 We appeal to the Bible ^ to Jlubborn fadsy and ttr 
 common fcnfe. 
 
 LETTER IV. 
 
 MEN> B8.LTHREN, AND FATHERS, 
 
 Y OU will, no doubt, join witli me in fenti- 
 ment, that Mr. Worceiter's arguments ought to be critically 
 examined ; and that when a ruler in Ifracl comes fc rward, 
 with fet purpofe to impofe his ef rors on the public, his 
 
Two Difcourfes^ ^r. 31 
 
 arguments fliould be fully inveftigated and thoroughly re- 
 futed. I muil, therefore, call your attention to his next 
 argument, which is, — 
 
 Fourth. * The church under the gofpel is uniformly in 
 the fcriptures reprefented as being the fame church, or a 
 continuation of the fame church, which was formed in the 
 family of Abraham.* 
 
 The propofitions on which he formed his preceding ar- 
 guments we have cheerfully granted to be true, and fhowed 
 that they have no relation with his fubjedl, which he would 
 eftablifli by them ; but this argument, or the proportion 
 on v/hich it is built, has no truth in it. The fcriptures give 
 no fach reprefentntion, as Mr. Worcefter here tells us that 
 they uniformly do ; at leaft, I find no fuch place. I find 
 no place where the fcriptures give fo much as a diftant hint 
 that the church under the gofpel is but a continuation of 
 the Jewifh church. The fcriptures explicitly teftify juft 
 the contrary from what Mr. Worcefter afferts. — But we 
 will hear him illuftrate and enforce his argument a little. 
 
 Says he, page 24, * It would be very remarkable indeed, 
 if this was not the cafe. It would be very remarkable 
 indeed, if, in the fcriptures, Abraham and his feed were 
 reprefented as making two or more diftindt and quite dif- 
 ferent families ; or if the children of Abraham under the 
 gofpel, who are only heirs according to the promife made 
 to him, were reprefented as compofmg a church, entirely 
 diftinct and different from that which was founded in the 
 family of their father : but fuch a reprefentation is, in the 
 fcriptures, no where to be found.' 
 
 Thus Mr. Worcefter comes cut in full, that the gofpel 
 church is but a continuation of the church formed in Abra- 
 ham's family. We might have left him to poffefs his 
 opinion in quietnefs, had he not have attempted to per- 
 iuade the public that the fcriptures fay the fame thing ; 
 but as the matter is, we wifh the public, and Mr. Wcrcefter 
 alfo, to heai a few words, which the fcriptures fay on this 
 fubje61. 
 
 Paul, fpeaking of the Jews and Gentiles, and of the 
 church as made up of both, fays, Eph. ii. 34, 15. *• For 
 he (that is, Chrilt) is our peace, who hath made both one^ 
 and hath Irohen dcwn the middle luall of partition between 
 us ; having ahd'Jhtd in his flefh the enmity, even the law of 
 commandments contained, in ordinances; for to make in 
 himfelf of tnvain one nfjf manV Here, if I underftand the 
 apoftle corre(5tly, and the pubHc will judge, Paul dirc(5tly 
 
32 Letters on Rev, S. Wcrceficr's 
 
 contradiifls what Mr. Worceller afHrms the fcriptures unt- 
 fornily leprefent. Mr. YVorcefter mys the goipel church is 
 the old one continued, the apoftle favs it is a netv one : the 
 public will judge whether Mr. Worcefter or Paul is to be 
 credited. 
 
 Daniel, ch. ii. 44. wjiilft interpreting Nebuchadnezzar's 
 dream, fpeaking of the goipel church or kingdom, fays,. 
 " And in the days of thife kings fijall the Gcd of heaven Jet vp 
 a h'lngdanu, which ihall never be deftroyed : and the kingdomi 
 fhali not be left to oth.cr pet^ple, but it iTall break in pieces 
 and confume all thefe kingdoms, and it fiiall ftand forever." 
 Here the prophet Daniel fays, " The God of }>ccven fi all Jet 
 vp a kingdom,''^ within a certain limited period, between the 
 exiftence of the Babylonifh kingdom and the deftrudtion of 
 the Roman. Mr. Worceiter fays, the God of heaven fnaii 
 continue, enlighten, and enlarge the old je<v.nfh kingdom^ or 
 church. The public will believe w'hom they pleafe, Mr. 
 WorcePier, or the prophet Daniel. 
 
 Jefus Chrift faid to the Jews, Matt. iv. 17. " Repent : 
 for the kingdom of heaven (the gofpel chu7-ck) is at hand." 
 Mr. Worcefter fays,- The old JevjlfJo church, or kingdom, 
 was about to be revived- 
 
 Again, fays the Lord, John iii. 3. "Except a man be 
 born again, he cannot fee the kingdom of God :" that is, 
 none but fuch as are born again, are qualified fabjeds for 
 the kingdom of God, or can be interefted in its bleffings. 
 Mr. Worcefter, \i I do not miftake him, fays. If the good 
 man of the houfe believe, all who are in his houfe may fee 
 the kingdom of God, or do • by divine right inherit all the 
 hlejfngs and privileges of the gofpel church .^ this kingdom of Gcd.* 
 The public wnll ftill judge whom to believe. 
 
 The fcriptures fay, that the converted Jews were, in the 
 apoftles' days, added to the gofpel church (Adls iii.) Mr. 
 Worcefter iays, the Jewifli and gofpel churches are one i 
 and of confequence.. the converted Jews could not be added 
 to the gofpel church, for they belonged to it from their 
 childhood or infancy. 
 
 The apoftle to the Hebrews, ch. xiii. 10. fays, *« V»^e have 
 an altar, wheieof they have no right to cat ivho fervc the 
 tabernacle :'* that is, thofe who abide with the JewiJJ: c hurt J>t 
 have no right to gofpel ordinances. Mr. Worcefter fays, the 
 Chriftian altar and the Jevvifti tahernacle are fubftantially 
 the fame, or the Jewift) and gofpel churches are both one i 
 and therefore, fuch as fcrve the one, have a right to eat of 
 the other. 
 
Tivo Dlfcourfesy fe^;. 35 
 
 This is but a fmall fample of Mr. Worcefter's difagree- 
 nient with che fcriptures ; we ihail fee more foon. 
 
 In pages 24, 25, Mr. Worceiter gives us a large quota- 
 tion from the lixticlh chapter of l^aah. He brought it 
 forward to prove that the Jewiih and gofpel churches 
 are one and the fame. He tells us, * that the wholj chap- 
 ter is in point, but a part may fuffice as a fpecimen.' Had 
 he given us the whole, every reader might have feen that 
 evtry part was out of point, as to what he would prove by- 
 it. The 2 id verfe informs Mr. Worceiler, that this chapter 
 knows nothing of this Judaizing fcheme The prophet 
 addrefles this chapter to the gofpel church ; and in verfe 
 21, fays to her, * Thy people alfo fhall be all righteous,'* 
 This was never true of the Jewiih church, nor of any church 
 formed after the model of the Jewifh. This promife was 
 never made concerning the Jewifh national church ; but 
 to Zion, the people of God, for the comfort of the pious 
 fevv, who were waiting for the cr^nfolation of the fpirltual 
 Ifiaelites. This promife does not belong to any cliurch, 
 nor was it ever fulfilled to any, fave to the gofpel church, 
 to the chuich formed according to the commandment and 
 pattern given— of none but bshe'vers. Thus, had Mr. Wor- 
 cefter quoted the whole chapter, it would not only have been 
 totally from his purpofe, but it might have been feen by 
 all his readers, that the promifes in it did not apply to the 
 old Jewiih church, nor to the modern Jewifh churches, like 
 his own, and all others which are compofed of believing 
 parents and their unrighteous children ; but to the church, 
 whofe members are baptized upon a profelTion of faith, or 
 upon their being manifeftly all righteous. 
 
 Mr. Worcefter's other remarks and fcripture paffages, 
 under this argument, appear equally applicable with the 
 above ; not one of them having any relation to the fubjeft 
 which he wifhes to prove. When a man fets oiF in a wron^ 
 dire<flion, he gains nothing by continuing his courfe. 
 
 Mr. Worcefter's ffih argumentative propofition is, 
 
 * The covenant made with Abraham is exprefsly declared 
 to be an everlafting or perpetual covenant ; a covenant to 
 continue to the lateft generations.' 
 
 Reply, By covenant, mufl be here meant, either — firft, 
 Shat co'venant which, by way of eminence, and on account 
 of the prom.ifes contained in it, is called the covenant of 
 grace ; or, fecondiy, the covenant of circumcifion. If the 
 £rft be inteaded, we by no means deny but it is an ever- 
 c 2 
 
34 Letters on Rev, S. Wcrcejler'* s 
 
 lailing covenant, 2.nd never in time nor in eternity lo be 
 forge tten : yet this covenant is not, as has already been 
 fully iLown, what gave viiibility to a church in Abraham's- 
 family. If the fecoiid be the one meant, then its everiaft- 
 ing continuance is equal to the everlafting inhentanc& 
 ■R-hich was given to the feed of Abraham in the land of 
 Canaan. This covenant of circirmciuon was commandedj 
 and this promifed inheritance in the land of Canaan was 
 given, in Gen. xvii. Bo^h are faid to be everlafting, yet 
 in a limited fenfe : for when the Romans, under Titus and 
 Vefpafian, deftroyed the Jewifh church and nation, their 
 inheritance was removed, and their covenant of circumcifion 
 was of no ufe, fave to continue them a diitin6V people, that 
 they might be a reproach, a taunt, and a by-word, among 
 ail nations ; and alfo to m.ake it manifeft in future, that 
 God's predidtions by the prophets were of him. But the 
 public is. defired to notice, that whatever 'bfhc. Worceftep 
 might intend by the everlafting covenant, that it hath noth- 
 ing LO do with the main object which he would eftablifh by 
 it, namely, that the gofpel church and Jevriih are one and, 
 the fame church : for that covenant by which the Jewiflv 
 church v.'as conftituted. had nothing to do with the forma- 
 tion of the gofpel church. 
 
 After Mr. Worcefter had adduced as niuny teits as he 
 pleafed, which were foreign from his point, he fays, page 
 51, * Such, my hearers, is a compendious view of the fcrip- 
 ture proofs, that the covenant which Vv^as made with Abra= 
 ham, and by which the church was conftituted in his fam: 
 ily, was intended to be perpetual, or to continue throughout 
 all generations. I fay, a compendious view ; for in order 
 to give an ample and complete view, we fhould be obliged 
 to prefent the whole fcriptures in their connexioUi The 
 whole fcriptures, in their connexion teftify, that Abraham 
 is, under God, the father of the church ; that to him and 
 his feed all the promifes were made ; that the church, built 
 ©n the foundation oi the apoflles and prophets, is one ; that 
 the covenant confirmed in Chrift, with Abraham and his 
 feed, four hundred and thirty years before the commence- 
 ment of the Mofaic difpenfation, was never to be dif- 
 annuhed.* 
 
 Here Mr. Worceiter does, as he has done in all his pre- 
 • ceding arguments, mix truth and error together. We all 
 grant, and fully believe, that the covenant which was con- 
 firmed of God in Chrift four hundred and thirty years 
 before the law> was never to be difannuUcd. But we all 
 
Tvjo DifcGurfes. Xffc, 55 
 
 deny, and fully difbelieve, that the church in Abraham's 
 family was formed by the giving or by the obferving of 
 tJiat covenant v and Paul, as we have already obferved, 
 ihows us, and declares to ns, by giving us *he year in which 
 that covenant was confirmed, that it was not.- At the time 
 of the confirmation of this covenant, there was no vifibie 
 church in Abraham's family, nor for many years after. 
 
 Mr. Worciifter has, through ail his arguments, taken for 
 granted the only thing which it was nece^ary to prove. 
 Had he only proved this one thing, namely, That the cov- 
 enant of promife, which was manifeded to Abraham in 
 Ur, or Haran, and conhrmxed in Chrift four hundred and 
 thirty years before the law, was the covenant which confti- 
 tuted his family into a vifibie church ; and that all believ- 
 ers, who are interefted in this covenant in gofpel times, 
 are, of neceJary confequence, in the vifibie gofpel church 5. 
 and that the being interelled in this covenant, did in Abra- 
 ham's time, and does in gofpel times, conllitute the favoured 
 perfons, and no others, memib^ers of the vifibie church ;. 
 then would w^e not have contended v.ith him againft the 
 onsnefs and famenefs of tiie Jewifn and gcfpel churches. 
 But he has done no fuch thing i nor does he appear to have 
 done any thing eife, five it be to prove what no Baptill 
 denies, and tlxn to take for granted what neither faint nor 
 fmner friould ever believe. H^ proves, that the covenant 
 which was confirmed of God in Chrift four hundred and 
 thirty years before the law, was never to be difannuUed. 
 This we ail believe. — He takes for granted, that the jew'ijh 
 churchy which was inftituted upon the covenant of circum- 
 cifion, is one and the fame thing with the gofpel church, whofe 
 mem'oers are, as the prophet declared they fhouid be, all 
 righteous. This no perfon ought to believe. 
 
 Had he undertaken to prove, that the churcli of Rome,, 
 and that the Proteftant church, generally, are formed after 
 the model of the old Jewi(h cliurch, we Ihould have be- 
 lieved the fad, whether his arguments were to the point or 
 not; for the fafl is intuitively evident. But he muft not 
 only pervert, add to, and dim.inifh from, but he muft change 
 the fcripturc, before he can prove that the Jev.-ifh church 
 cfnd the gofpel church are one and the fame, 
 
 Mr. Worcefter's arguments, and the manner in which he 
 handles the word of God, have repeatedly brought to my 
 mind the words of Jeremiah, ch. v. 31. *' The prophets 
 prophefy falfely, and the prlejis bear rule by their means ; and 
 my peopk hvs to bai'e it fa.** 
 
36 Letters en Rev. S, Worcejlers 
 
 In my next, we (Lall iee Mr. Worcefler altering and 
 -changing fcripture, to bring it to his purpofe ; togetiier 
 with fonae of his coniinaed inconhilency. In the mean 
 time, 1 wifn to be 
 
 The pubhc's, in the fcrvice of the Lord Jefus, &c» 
 
 We appeal to the Bible ^ to Jliibhorn fa6ls^ and to 
 common fcnfe. 
 
 LETTER V. 
 
 MEH, BRETHREN, AND FATHERS, 
 
 J.N my lull yen were promifed, that in this 
 you fhould fee feme cf Mr. WorceRer's altering and chang- 
 ing the l"criptm-es, to bring them to his purpofe. — We have 
 already feen how he confounds, mingles, and mifapplies 
 40'venants i we v/ill now fee how he alters the token of the 
 covenant of promifc, and how he changes ^promije into pro- 
 fojal. In ihort, we may fee how he turns every way, to 
 carry his error in oppcfition to the gofpel, and to perfuade 
 his readers to believe his Judaizing fcheme. 
 
 The inflances which I am about to lay before you, may 
 ferve as famples cf his altering and v^Tefting the fcriptures, 
 to give his errors a popular appearance, in the judgment 
 cf thofe who drink dov/n error as water. 
 
 Page 32, fpeaking of circumcifion, the token of die cov- 
 enant of promifc, and a feal of the righteoufnefs of Abra- 
 ham's faith, which he had v/hile in uncircumcifion, Mr. 
 V/orcefter in the J:rji place calls it the token, and then im- 
 mediately adds, or feal of the covenant. Toheriy or feaL 
 This changes the matter fo little as to be hardly perceived. 
 In the next page he tells us, that circumcifion was the token 
 and feal cf the covenant. Here he makes fome advance* 
 Yet the difference between, a token or feal, and a token and 
 leal, is fo fmall, that he might fuppofe his readers, generally, 
 would not perceive it. 
 
 After having changed the word of God, from token of 
 the covenant, to token or feal of the covenant, and to token 
 And Jeali then he drops the fcripture exprcflion and takes 
 
•.he papiftlciil fuhftitute, and calls circumcifion the outward 
 j'eal ct ihe covenant, the appoint °d fed of the covenant ; and 
 by^hirty times repeating, In diiTerent places, the leal, the 
 'juiivard Teal, the appointed fecU of the cover. ant, he no doubt 
 ^lippofed that his hearers and readers would take it for 
 granted that he was proceeding upon fcripture ground ; 
 whereas this is all a mere impofition upon the credulity 
 and prepofiefiion of the public. The word of G'.^d, in n» 
 place, from Gencds to Revelation, fays fo much as one 
 word about circumcition, as being a feal of the covenant. 
 
 The next thing v\hich we may notice, 'is his changing 
 promife into propofaL 
 
 Says he, pages 34., 35, * God's, prom'tf:fy then, or propfal^ 
 to Abraham, was to be a God, not only to him, but alfo 
 to his ieed after him. The fame was his promije^ or pro^ 
 pfa!, to Ifaac. — God prcmijedy ox prop fed ^ to Abraham, to 
 be not only his God, but alfo the God of his feed ; fo he 
 now promifet, or prcpofsy to every believing parent, to be 
 not only a God"to him, but alfo to his feed after him : and 
 the {-dine promife, or prcpofa/f &c.' Five times in thefe two 
 pages, he lo-ivers down the prormfe of God to the level of a 
 prcpofal. 
 
 We will novr recur to fome more of his inconfiftencies, 
 or attend a little farther to his continued rnconfiftency, 
 vvhich runs through and is the fom of his fnowey evidence^ 
 and is at the foundation of his fah'e reafonings, from begin- 
 ning to end cf his fu bjecl:. 
 
 Kis other general head is now to be conHdered, which is, 
 
 < II. To confider more particularly what prvo'tfon was 
 made in the Alrabam'ic c.'oenant^ for the continuance of the- 
 church formed by itj and the tranfmiilion of the bieffings 
 contained in it.' 
 
 Here Mr. Worcefter muA intend, by the Abrahamic 
 covenant, either — ^rlt, the co'venant which was confii-med 
 of God in Chrirt four hundred and thirty years before the 
 lav/ ; or, fecondly, the covenant of circumxcifionv If he 
 intend the firft, we have only to obferve, what we havt? 
 Ihown before, that this covenant never gave vifibility to 
 the Jev.-ifa church, for it was manlfjled and confrmed^ and 
 yet there was no vlfible church for years after : and be,- 
 fides, this covciiant continues forever, though the Jewifn 
 church is no more. If he intend the fecond, the covenant 
 of circumicifion, we have jull: to obferve, that it hath fo 
 paffed away, that, fo far as ive keep It, and hope for falva- 
 •.ion by it, either for ourf elves, cr for cur childreriy Chrift fhaii 
 
38 Letters on Rev. S. Worcejler^s 
 
 protir us nothing, Gal. v. 2. Nor are we once told, in the 
 Icriptures of iruth, that any covenant is fubftituted in its 
 room. 
 
 But he intends the firft, and nothing is lefs to his pur- 
 pofe : for he quotes, page 35, as proof of his propofition, 
 what Peter faid to the Jews, Acts iii. 25, 26. " Ye are the 
 children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God 
 made with our fathers, faying unto Abraham, And in thy 
 feed Jhall all the kindreds of thi earth he hleffed. Unto you 
 iir.^, God, having raifed up his Son Jefus, fent him to blefs 
 you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities." 
 This quotation fully Ihovvs v/hat covenant he intends ; but 
 what hath this to do with the formation of a vifible church 
 in Abraham's family ? Mr. Worcefter might with equal 
 propriety have quoted the iirft chapter of Genefis, or the 
 iaft of Revelation, and then hence told us, that the church 
 in Abraham's family was founded by the one, or by the 
 other, or by both ; and have concluded, that the Jewifh 
 and Chriftian churches are one and the fame. 
 
 Mr. Worcefter, under his fecond general head, has no 
 formal argument, to prove that provifion uas made in the 
 Abrahamic covenant, for the continuance of the church 
 formed by it, and the tranfmiffioa of the bleffings con- 
 tained in it. 
 
 If I apprehend his idea with cleamefs, the fum of the 
 provifion which was made in the Abrahamic covenant, for 
 the continuance of the church formed by it, and the tranf- 
 mifiion of the bleffings contained in it, is, according to his 
 notion of the matter, contained in his thirty-feventh and 
 thirty-eighth pages, and in thefollov/ing words : ' For they 
 v»hich r.re the children 01 the Hefh (merely) are not the 
 children of God ; but the children of the prcmfe^ the children 
 in refpeB to ivhcm there is that faith and fdeltty vhich are 
 the ccndii':ons of the pomife^ are counted for the feed. From 
 this pafTage (liiys he) it is, on the one hand, plain, that the 
 proraife to be a God to Abraham, and to his feed after him, 
 had refpe(^ primarily to his natural defcendants ; and, on 
 the other hand, it is equally plain, that merely their being 
 the natural defcendants rf Abraham, did not biing them 
 within the prcmife. To be children of ihe frctnife, they muft. 
 be children of frith ; children^ of ivhcm ihere is en the part of 
 the parent or parents^ the faith of Abraham in the covenant 
 of God.' 
 
 From thefe premlfes, and the fiime frequently mentioned 
 in Mr. Worcelter's pages, he would have us conclude, with 
 him, that the following inferences aie true : — Firft, That 
 
Two D'lfcourfes^ iffc, 39 
 
 everlafting fnlvjition is promifed to children, on account of 
 the faith of parent or parents. Secondly, That the children 
 Ihould be baptized on the faith of ihcir parents. Thirdly, 
 That all this is corroborative evidence, that the Jewifh and 
 gofpel churches are one and the fame. 
 
 1 have feveral ohjedions againft thefe premifes, and alfo 
 againrt the concluhons which Mr. Worcefter would druw 
 from them. 
 
 1. There is no fuch promife made, that the children 
 fhail be faved by or on account of the faith of their parents : 
 befides, God, by the prophet Ezekiel, (ch. xviii.) mani- 
 feftly fpeaks againft the exifter.ce of any fuch promife. 
 
 2. On fuppofition that fuch exifted in Abraham's day, 
 and exifts ftill, yet no perfon ever kept the covenant which 
 comprifes fuch a promife ; at leaft, we have no account of 
 any fuch perfon. Even Abraham appears to have kept 
 not more than one-eighth of fuch a covenant : for he had, 
 at leaft, eight fons, and but cne of them was a child of 
 promife, 
 
 3. Suppofe fuch a covenant exifts, and alfo fuppofe all 
 godly parents obey this covenant, it does not hence follow 
 that their children fhculd be baptized, before they are 
 manifeftly made partakers of the promife. 
 
 For the fake of Ihowing, and ftill farther expofing, the 
 abfurdity of Mr. Worcefter's theory, I will ftate a principle, 
 and then reaibn from it upon /jis principles. 
 
 All true Chrijlians have the faith of Abraham in the covenant 
 of God. 
 
 From this principle I reafon tlius :— All children cf parents 
 who have the faith oi Abraham in the covenant of God, will 
 be finally faved. All true Chrjlians have this faith : there- 
 fore, the children of all true ChrtjUans will he faved. Again, 
 all who floal! be faved, are true Chrifians ; therefore, the 
 children's chvdren of all true Chriftians, and that too, to the 
 latejt genera: lonj ftiall he faved. Again, Abraham had faith 
 in the covenant of God, and it was as operative in the 
 father of the faithful as in any of his fons ; therefore, all 
 the Iflimaelites, and all the Israelites, and all the infidel 
 and gainfaying Jews, and a'! the defcendants of the fons of 
 Keturah, are all Cved, or Mr. Worcefter's theory is abfurd 
 or falie 
 
 Mr. Worcefter may reply, * To be the natural children of 
 Abraham, does not bring them within the promife.* Verjr 
 well. Then the matter Itands thus — To be the children 
 of Abraham did not, in his day, bring them within the 
 promife ; but to be the children of otu he/i^ving parent^ nofv 
 
40 Letters on Rev. S. WorceJhr''s 
 
 does. Hence, one of thefe two things is true ; either, rfrf?, 
 that the promife is now different from what it was in 
 Abraham's time ; or, fecondly, Mr. Worcefter's theory is 
 falfe. But if tie promife be different nov/ from what it 
 •was in'Abraham's time, then his theory is falfe ; for he 
 goes, profeifedly, upon the fuppofition, that it is the fame : 
 and if the promiie be the f ime now that it was in the time 
 of Abraham, Mr. Wcrcelier's theory is ilill falfe ; for tlie 
 promife then was not to Abraham and his feed according 
 to the flelh, but according to the ele-ition of grace. Rom. 
 ix. 6 — 13. 'io make the beft of his theory, and of the 
 theory of his brethren, a perfon who has eight fons, as had 
 Abraham^ muft have eight times as much faith as Abraham 
 had, or they will not be the children oi promife ; for but one 
 of his was fo. 'i'hus ahfurd and contradictory from fcrip- 
 ture, fads, and common fenfe, is Mr. Worcefter's theory. 
 We have now paifed over and examined his firft Sermon, 
 which contains his fuhjed ; and the following oblervations 
 appear to aiife as natural dedu(51ions. 
 
 1. That Mr. Worcefter wholly mifunderftood his text, 
 as mentioned at the clofe of Letter II. 
 
 2. That his doctrine is not contained in his text, nor 
 fuppofted by any of his arguments. 
 
 3. That his whole feries of arguments is one continued 
 fophiftn, of the firil magnitude. From argument to argu- 
 ment, he proved what nobody denies, and then affumed as 
 proved what none but Judaizing Chriilians do or ever did 
 believe. 
 
 4. That Mr. Worcefter muft produce better arguments, 
 or the eyes of the underftanding part of his own denomina- 
 tion will probably difcover the weaknefs of their caufe. 
 If he have brought as good arguments as there are, t® 
 prove that the gofpel church is but* a continuation of the 
 old corrupt Jewifh church, his caufe is truly defperate, and 
 the fooner forfaken the better. 
 
 5. That he muft have taken the wrong fide of the fub- 
 jedl, Gr a perfon of his good fenfe would not have laboured 
 fo hard, and have proved nothing. 
 
 What we have yet before us, is Mr. Worcefter's appllca- 
 tion, which is the moll offenfive part of his performance. 
 But I hope to treat him with Chriftian mildnefs, M'hilft I 
 fhall be under the difagreeable neceflity of rebuking him 
 fharply, that he and others may fear, for the future, to 
 come forward with temerity, againft the facred caufe of 
 truth. 
 
 In the mean time, I am, &c. 
 
Two Di/courfesy ^c. -4*i 
 
 appeal to the Bible, to fiuhhorn fads, and to 
 .covimo7i fenfe. 
 
 LETTER VIo 
 
 Mil-*:, BRETHREN, AND FATHERS, 
 
 \^' E now come to what Mr. Worcefter caHs 
 Imprcvement ; in which he does as all, both good and bad, 
 have done, ib far as the traditions and prejudices of mor- 
 tals take the lead, wax worfe and worfe. Indeed, it is 
 perfectly natural to expecl, that if a man fets out but a 
 few degrees in a wrong direflion, he will, as he travek on, 
 deviate and wander farther from the right way. Mr. 
 Worcefter's having taken fuch a fet off, is the occafion of 
 his inconiiftencies and abfurdities, in vi'hich we have feen 
 him. The inconfiftencies, falfe ftatements, and mifrepre- 
 fentatioDs, in which we mud yet view him, I charitably 
 hope, originate from his erroneous fet off, rather than from 
 any \s icked defign, and fet purpofe to deceive and impofe 
 on the public, and on the church of the Lord Jefus. 
 
 In his improvement, his Jirji article is, * We are led 
 (fays he) to a grateful and devout contemplation of the 
 great defign, the gradual progrefs, and the ultimate exten- 
 lion and glory of the church of God, originally eftablifhed 
 in the family of Abraham.' 
 
 This article might be fo explained as to have a good 
 meaning ; but as Mr. Worcefter explains it, it has the fame 
 erroneous fignification as has the preceding Sermon. His 
 /Dbjed llill is, to prove that there is no new marif or iody of 
 msrif in the go/j)el churchy from what compcfed the Jewifti 
 cimrch ; and that the former, as well as the latter, is, of 
 right, compofed of believers and unbelievers, in dired con- 
 tradiction to the prophets, to Jefus Chrift, and to his apof- 
 ties ; who fay, that the gofpel church fhould be, and is, 
 made up of rightecus ones, Q>i fuch as are taught of God, and is 
 an holy nation, &c. 
 
 In this way alfo he excludes the myftery, which Paul 
 fpeaks of, as having been hid in God from the foundation 
 of the world, and which was not made known unto the fens 
 .of irxn, as it is noi^j rtveakd unto his holy apoiUes and 
 
 ■D 
 
42 Letters on Rev. S. Worce/ler's 
 
 prophets bv the Spirit, that the Gentiles fhould be fellcw 
 heirs, and of the lame (new man or) body (with the be- 
 lieving Jews) and partakers of his promlfe In Chrl/1 hj the 
 gofpel. According to Mr. Worcefler, there appears to 
 have been no mytlerv about the matter: nothing new took 
 place, with relation to the church, when the God of heaven 
 fat up his kingdom in the world, and called his people by 
 another name ; at leall, nothing new with refpect to the ma- 
 terials of which the church was compofed. 
 
 If fome few Gentiles were added to it at the firft, and 
 Biore afterwards, this was nothing nev,% If in procefs of 
 time more Geniiies than ever before, were added, ftill this 
 was nothing new or myfterious, any farther than it is 
 myfterious to have an old praclice fomewhat more largely 
 extended : for it had been cufcomary in m.any, if not in all, 
 generations of the Jewifh church, to receive Gentiles into it. 
 
 His fecund article, having no particular connexion with 
 tlie point in debate, may be omitted : however, a nv>te, 
 pages 50, 51, at the conclufion of his remarks on this arti- 
 cle, may be noticed. 
 
 * Though the covenant (fays he) is never, on Gcd's part, 
 eftabliflied Y.'ith any but true kelie'versy yet all who have taken 
 the vows upon them, o'ught to feel themfelves Jacredly hound 
 to f'dlfd their engagements. If they have opened their mouths 
 unto the Lord., they cannot go back.^ 
 
 All who have taken the vcws of God upon themfelves, 
 ought, no doubt, to feel themfelves facredly bound to fulnl 
 their engagement. But vhat have the wicked and unbe- 
 lieving to do, to take Ged's covenant into their mouths ; 
 yet, fays Mr. Worcefter, « If they have opened their mouths 
 unto the Lord, they cannot go back.^ 
 
 By greatly mifapplying and wrefting this general truth, 
 That fiich as have opened their mouths unto the Lord, 
 cannot go back, feveral minifters in the vicinity of Sedg- 
 wick have been binding the confciences oi their hearers, to 
 continue prafuf.ng the traditions of men, becaufe they have, in 
 time pall, ignorantly covenanted to obfeive them. Some 
 of thefe minifters are greatly abufnig the forward belief 
 and ignorance of many of their hearers. Thefe ntiniiiers 
 are unab'.e to (how their people, that the covenant into which 
 they have entered, is in agreement with the command and 
 pattern given ; yet they teach, that to break this covenant, 
 though ;'/ be found neither in the Old Tejlatnent nor in the 
 Neiv^ is next to facrilege and perjury, 'i hus they bind 
 their poor people with an heavy burden, of which God 
 
Two Difcourfes^ Iffc, 43 
 
 will, I truft, ere long eafe them. Thofe who bound 
 themfelves under an oath to kill Paul, might with as much 
 propriety, have been holden to peri'everance. — It may be 
 the above minifters are not the o-nly ones, vs^ho ufe the above 
 method, to retain their people in the Jhackles of papijlical 
 Juperjlition. 
 
 His ih'ird article is, page 51, * It appears, that a cordial 
 and obedient beHef in all which God has propofed in his 
 gracious covenant, is of high and everlafting importance' 
 
 Truly, whatever God hath propofed^ or prom'ijedy in his 
 gracious covenant, is of rery high concernment to all to 
 ■whom this matter appertains, and it Ihould command their 
 cordial and obedient belief. But hov/ doth this fhow, that 
 Chrillians have any particular and high connexion with the 
 covenant of circumcifion, by which the vifible church in 
 Abraham's family was inftituted ? Or, what hath this to 
 do with the omnefs and famenefs of the gofpel and Jevvifh 
 churches ? Or, what hath this to do with the fprinkling of 
 infants ? or with infant church memberfhip ? or with the 
 certain falvation of Ilhmael and Efau, or of the fons of 
 Keturah ? 
 
 If we will hear Mr. Worcefter, he will (how us his opin- 
 ion, page 52, * It is not, (fays he) indeed, fuppofed to be 
 fertain^ that if you be unbelieving and dif obedient., your children 
 will be finally loft ; for God may, as often in his fovereign 
 mercy he does, go out of the limits of the church, an4 
 beftow his grace on thofe who are aliens from the common- 
 wealth of Ifrael, and ftrangers from the covenant of prom- 
 ife ; but if, in this cafe, he does beftow grace upon your 
 children, it will not be in purfuance of any covenant en^ 
 gagenient to you.' 
 
 Upon theie obfervations we may make the following 
 remarks : — 
 
 1. Mr. Worcefter places unbelieving children within the 
 limits of the gofpel church. 
 
 2. He gives us to underftand, that it is probable^ that 
 the children of an unbelieving parent will be finally loft i 
 yet, he fays, It is not fuppofed to be certain that they 
 will be- 
 
 3. He informs us, that God ufuaify converts church mem- 
 bers, or thole within tlie limits ,of the church ; yet, he fays, 
 * God may, as often in his fovereign mercy he does, go 
 out of the limits of the church, and beftow his grace ' on 
 
 ■ others. 
 
44 Letters on Rev. 5. V/orceJier^s^ 
 
 Mr. Worcefter hath a very difFerent idea of gofpel church 
 members, from what the prophets, Chrift Jefus, or the 
 apoftles had : they confidered and fpake of them as being, 
 ail holy. God never converts, or beftows regenerating 
 grace, upon any within the Itnuts of the gofpel church, fave 
 it he \vhen he converts an hypocrite, who hath joined the 
 church, by profeffing to be holy when he was not. 
 
 4. Mr. Worcerter inftruds us to believe, that God he- 
 flows regenerating grace upon children, in purfuance of 
 fome covenant engagement to their parents. How difFer- 
 ent this from the Bible ! Or, at leaft, what hath the Bible 
 tp do with fuch an idea ? Where or when did God ever 
 enter into covenant with Abraham, Ifaac, or Jacob, or 
 with any other perfon, to beftow faving grace upon their 
 children, in confequence of any duty performed by parents ?- 
 If fuch a covenant exifts, or ever did exift, where is it re- 
 corded ? If it can be found, which of the children doth it 
 include ? the firil born ? or the laft ? or doth it include all ? 
 
 Have we any information that fuch a covenant was ever 
 ohferved by niariy or fulfilled by the Lord? If fo, where ? in 
 what verfe, chapter, or book, of either the Old Teftament 
 or the New ? The fadt is, the whole matter appears to be a 
 mere Jewifh or papiftical error and fuperitition, into which 
 Mr. Worcefter. and his brethren appear to have been led, 
 as a thing neceffary to be believed, to give more plaufible 
 fupport to the traditionary notion of infant baptifm. 
 
 It is, true, the Lord promifed Abraham to be a God to 
 him and his feed after him. It is alfo trae, that the Lord 
 faidy,"-I know>him, that he will command his children and 
 his houfehoid - after him*, and they Jhall hep the v;ay of the 
 Lord, to do juftice and judgment, thct-the Lord may bring 
 upon Abraham that luhich he hath Jpoken of. him*' But here 
 is no promife, that upon ribraham's being obedient and 
 faithful, his children after the Jtijh fbould be fpititual, or 
 regenerate ; nor have we information that any of them 
 were io^ fave Ifaac, who was the child of promife. 
 
 The whole which Mr. Worcefter and others have faid of 
 this matter, appears to be a m.ere prejudice, invented prob- 
 ably in the fi^ ft place to give currency to the traditionary 
 rite of infant baptiim, and infant fprinkling ; and it is man- 
 ifeftly ftill continued, to fupport the fame error. 
 
 But, fays Mr. Worcefter, ^ fourthly , from our fubjed we 
 znay infer, that for believing parents to give their children 
 to God in baptifm, is a great and important duty.' 
 
Tvjo DifcGurfes, isfc, 45 
 
 From what part of his fubje<fi does he infer this ? He 
 hath no where fhown us, that God hath, in any part of his 
 v^ord, enjoined this, by ftatute, law, or piecept, as a duty, 
 upon any of his friends. But we will hear what he hath 
 to iay, in fupport of this inference ; for we are willing he 
 ihouid demonl^rate it, if he can. 
 
 * When God (fays Mr. Worcefter) -eftabliihed his cov€- 
 -nant with Abraham, he gave him the fign of circumcifion, 
 a feal of the righteoufnefs of faith ; and in the felf-fame 
 day was Abraham circumcifed and Ifhmael his fon, and 
 all the men of his houfe, bom in the houfe, and bought 
 with money of the ftranger, were circumcii'ed with him.' 
 Fage 53, he fays, * Circumcifion has been difcontinued, and 
 Ikaptilm appointed in its place. But no order, no intima- 
 tion, has been given, that the/earm its prelent form is not, 
 as it was exprejsly required in its ancient form, to be applied 
 to the children of the church.^ 
 
 A few natural confequences from what he here afferts, 
 will fufficiently fhow its abfurdity, 
 
 1. A Carolina planter to-day purchafes a fhip-load of 
 Africans, who are worfhippers of devils ; to-morrow, their 
 malter is converted. Now he and his heathen flaves muft 
 be all baptized ; for, fays Mr. Worcefter, Baptifm hath 
 been appointed in the place of circumcifion, and all the 
 males bought with money were to be circumcifed. 
 
 2. All thefe heathen flaves belong to the Chriftian 
 church ; for thus it was in the church formed in Abra- 
 ham's family, if anyvifible church fuhlifted there. 
 
 3. The children of all thefe worfhippers of devils, muft 
 ibe baptized : for, fays Mr. Worcefter, * no order, no intima' 
 
 iion, has been given, that the feal in it* prefent form is not, 
 as it was exprefsly required in its ancient form, to be ap- 
 plied to the children of the churchy 
 
 4. Mr. Worcefter has now, according to his antichrif- 
 ^tian fcheme, hundreds of \\fAX\\^n% fealed, Jealed in the churchy 
 Jealed in the covenant of grace i for * circumcifion (he tells 
 
 us) is the outward, the appointed, feal of the covenant, and 
 
 baptifm is appointed in its place.' 
 
 How much like the man of fm does Mr. Worcefter 
 appear, whilft he is urging upon the Chriftian world, or 
 church, principles inevitably connedled with fuch confe- 
 quences ! When the leaders of God's people will not abide 
 by his word, but take liberty to alter, change, and mangle 
 it at their pleafure,- they make ftrange work, and plunge 
 themfelves and their followers into mafiy hurtful errors. 
 
 D 2 
 
4^.- Letters on Rev. S. V/crceJler's 
 
 One great occafion of Mr. Worcefter's abHirditjes, into 
 which he hath run, and falie ftatements which ve have 
 already leen, and of more which we (kail foon fee, is his 
 unufual boldnefs in wrefting the fcriptures, and afTerting- 
 things w:hich he knew not. Perhaps no one. thing hath 
 had greater influence in darkening his mind, and blinding 
 him from the truth, than his remarkable miftake, in afTert-- 
 ing, more than thirty times, that circumcijion and baptlfm are 
 the feal of the covenant of grace. When any perfon ac- 
 quires a habit of faying what is not true, it is not ftrange, 
 Ihould he believe himfelf when no other perfon (hould. 
 This is,, no doubt, the cafe with Mr. Worcefter. Speaking 
 of circumcifion. and baptifm, he tells us, page 53, * The 
 feal has, indeed, been altered.' 
 
 Meply. It is not fully. believed by the writer, that Mr. 
 Worcefter intentionally fpake falfeiy ; at the fame time, 
 there is not a word of truth in what he* fays, about circum- 
 cifion and baptifm being a feal of the covenant, and of the 
 feal of the conjenav.t being altered. '1 here is t)0t a lingle word 
 of this in the fcriptures of truth. W^ould the public be 
 perfuaded to fearch the fcriptures, as the more noble Bere- 
 ans did, they v/ouid find tliat infant fprinkling is all a mere 
 delufion or invention of men, like this feal of the covenant, 
 with which Mr. Worcefter makes I'uch a (how of argument. 
 
 In pages 5;^, 54, he lays, * Circumcifion was formerly 
 the appointed pre-requifite of admiffion into the church of 
 God J baptifm is now the appointed pre-requifite of admif- 
 fion into the fame church. In a word, (fays he) baptifm 
 is of the fame import, and of the fame ufe in the church, 
 under the prefent difpenfation, as was circumcifion under 
 the ancient.' 
 
 Here is truth and eiTor mixed together, as they are in 
 all his pages. It is true, that circumcifion was formerly 
 and always the appointed pre-requlfite of admiffion into the 
 Je.wilh church, or it was the initiating ordinance. It is 
 alfo true, that baptifm is now, and ever was, from the be° 
 ginni-ng of the gofpel church, the appointed pre-requilite of 
 admiffion into it, or it is ever the vifible admiffion itfelf, 
 notwithftanding. the great miftakes of Mr. Auftin and 
 others, as to this matter. But it is not true, that circum- 
 cifion aud baptifm are, as Mr. Worcefter fays they are, 
 pre-requifites of admiffion into- the. fame church; for in 
 A<fls iii. we are informed, that the very perlbns who were 
 circumcifed and admitted to the Jewi(h church, were after- 
 "wiards baptized and added to the gofpel churchr It-would 
 
T^'o DifcGurfes^ <^c. 47 
 
 be an abfurdity to fay, tbat a perfon was added to a fociety, - 
 01 which he w^as at the time, and had long been, a conftant 
 luember ; but, as abiurd as it is, this is Mr. Worccfter's 
 notion of the bulinefs. His theory is, tliafe the converted 
 Jews were, by baptifm, added to the church, of which they 
 had been members from their infancy. 
 
 Befides, it is not true, as he aiferts, * that baptifm is of 
 the fame im.port in the church under the prefent difpenfa- 
 tion, as was circumcifion under the ancient.' For circum- 
 cinon, when adminiftered, according to the command, at 
 eight days old, only imported, that the fubjefi was a child 
 of Abraham, after the fieih, or a child of a converted or 
 profelyted heathen ; whereas baptifm, v/hen aJminiftered 
 according to the command and pattern given, imports, that 
 the fubjeds of it are the children of God by faith in Chriil 
 Jefus. Thus we fee, that his theory leads him farther and 
 faitherinto error and milfake. 
 
 Again, fays Mr. Worcefter, * The whole analogy of 
 fcripture goes to fupport this fentiment, that baptifm has,-. 
 in faift, taken the place of circumcifion ;' and then, to ef-- 
 tabliih his fentiment, deduces a paffage of fcripture which 
 fays nothing to the point, but only mentions the circum- 
 cifion of Chrill:, which was made ivithout hands. If this 
 eleventh verfe of the feeond chapter of ColoiTians, have any 
 reference to luater baptifm^ it is all gathered from the twelfth 
 verfe, vrhich fpeaks of being buried and ra'ijed again in bap- 
 tifm. Should v.e allow Mr. Worceder to be correft, in his 
 application of the eleventh verfe, to prove that baptifm 
 hath taken the place of circuracifion, then it would prove 
 the ruin of two of his iil-fupported opinions, with which he 
 hath, of late years^ been amufmg the public. One is, his 
 traditionary notion of fprinkling for baptifm 5 for the text 
 has no intimation- of yj?/7Ki/;« 7 for baptifm, but of being 
 buried ~2Lr\d raifed again. The other is, iiis opinion, that this 
 text in Colofiians, and the parallel one in the fixth chapter 
 of Romans, intend fpiritual baptifm ; which they cannot, 
 provided the natural import of the text is, that Chriftian 
 baptifm hath taken the place of Jewifii circumcifion. In 
 this way Mr. Woreefler might make progrefs in deftroying 
 his.errors; ruin two old ones by the introducftion of a new- 
 one. So inconfiftent is error, that fuch as abide in it, can- 
 not make ftraight paths for their feet. 
 
 In the fame page, he tells us about an exprefs precept 
 for adminiftering the covenant to the infant feed of the 
 (.hurch, and that the fame precept ftill remains in- force, 
 
4^ Letters on Rev. S. Worcejier's 
 
 iTr.lefs exprefsly repealed. His words are, * There was, 
 under the former difpeniation, an exprefs precept for admin- 
 Iftering the covenant to the htfant feed of the church. That 
 precept, varying only as the Jeal is varied, ftiil remains in 
 'force, unlefs it have been exprefsly repealed.' Here is the 
 appearance of fomething new. Under the former dhpen- 
 fation, we are told, there was an exprefs precept for admin' 
 leering the covenant to the infant feed of the church ; and 
 unlefs this precept have been exprefsiy repealed, it ftill 
 remains in force. Here, if Mr. Worcefter have the truth, 
 we, who are Chriftian adminitfrators, muft adminilier the 
 covenant to the infant feed of the ChriRian church. What 
 covenant? The covenant of baptilm ? No, for there is no 
 fuch covenant mentioned. The covenant of circumcifion ? 
 No ; for if we be circumcifed Chrilf fhall profit us nothing. 
 V/hat covenant then ? The covenant of grace, or the new 
 covenant? No, for to adminifter that is God's prerogative. 
 But we may be more inquifitive than Mr. Worcefter will 
 allow ; for he tells us, (after he had taken every thing for 
 granted, which it was necefTary for him to prove) that it is 
 arrogance for us to demand any explicit precept, in the New 
 Teftament, for our practice in relation to infants, under the 
 new difpenfation. His words are, * It is arrogance, there- 
 fore, to demand, for we have no right to expe<5t, an explicit 
 renewal of this precept to be found in the New Teftament, 
 any more than of the precept f(>r the obfervance of the 
 fabbath.* This is a fliort way of doing bufmefs, to teil us 
 to believe without evidence, and praftife without precept 
 or example ; and, if we hefitate, call us arrogant. 
 
 Mr. WorceUer's note, pages ^^, 56, muft now have a 
 moment's attention, that the public may fee the fallacy, 
 deception, or imprudence of the man, when he manages 
 his opponent^ arguments. If he will confefs his ignorance 
 ■of the Baptifts' fentiments, then what he hath aflerted may 
 be pafTed over ; but otherwife, his management is highly 
 cenfurable. But we will hear a comprelfed view of this 
 note, and two former ones, as put together by himfelf. 
 His words are, 
 
 * The very palpable inconfiftencies, noticed in this and 
 two former notes, it may not be improper to exhibit to- 
 gether in one point of view. 
 
 ' I. The covenant m.ade with Abraham and his feed, 
 was only a temporal covenant, and formed only a temporal 
 church ; yet the great promife of the covenant had refped, 
 not to. natural, but only to fpiritual ieed \ 
 
T^ivo Difcoitrjes^ is'c. 49 
 
 - i;. Though the great promlfe of the covenant had re- 
 fpeif^, not to natural, but only; to Ipiritual ie^d, yet the 
 ccvenai^t was long ago abolifhed. Since the coming of 
 Meihah, God is no longer, by covenant; the God of Abra- 
 ham and his (fpiritual) ieed ! 
 
 * 3. Though the great promife of the covenant had 
 no reipedl to natural feed, 5'et the natural feed were not 
 only admitted to th.e feal of the covenant, but even, as 
 members, to all the privileges of the church ! 
 
 * 4. Though the Abrahamic church was-a type of the 
 Chriftian church, and in that church children were admit- 
 ted to the feal of the covenant, and to all the privileges of 
 members ; yet in the gofpel church, they are neither to be 
 recognized as members, nor even regarded as fit fubjefls 
 for the feal of the covenant 1 
 
 ' Such (fays he) are a few of the abfurdities of the Anti- 
 psdobaptift fcheme.' 
 
 If Mr. Worceller knew no better, he Is not to be envied i 
 If he knew better, and yet hath given this fcphlitical view 
 of his opponents- fentiments, he is to be difeiteemed. 
 
 We will now fupply, in the above particulars, what Mr, 
 Worcefter ought not to have omitted. Afterwards the 
 public will judge, V:hether- abfurdities attach tD the Bap— 
 tirts, or darknefs and mifreprefentation to Mr. Worcefter. 
 It. ought, however, to be previoufly obferved, that the Bap- 
 tifts never advanced the abfurdities. which he fets to their 
 account : he manufaclured them to his liking, and then 
 charged them upon his opponents. It may alfo be ob- 
 ferved, that the Baptifts diflike Iris antifcripturaly?i7/, which 
 he kQs fit to aifix to the covenant. 
 
 The above particulars, fomewhat rectified, are, 
 
 1. The co'venant of clrcur.-ic'ifiGn^ made with Abraham and 
 his feed, v-'as on-iy a temporal covenant, and formed only a 
 temporal church ; yet the great provufe of the covenant of 
 grace had refped, not to natural^ but on-ly to fpiritual feed ! 
 
 2. Though the great prom.ife of the covenant of grace 
 had refpe(51:, not to natural, but only to fpiritual i^ed, yet 
 the covenant of circurccifinn was long ago abolifhed. 
 Since the coming cf Meffiah, God is no lenger, by the 
 covenant of circumclfion, Hhe God 01^ Abraham and his 
 (fpiritual or) natural feed ! 
 
 3. Though the great promife of the covenant of graee 
 had no refpect to the natural (ee(\, yet the natural feed were 
 not only admitted to circum.cifion, the feal (he fhould hs-ve 
 
50 Letters on Rev. 5. WorceJler*s 
 
 faid token) of the covenant of grace, but even, as mem- 
 bers, to ail the privileges of the Jewilh church ! 
 
 4. Though the Abrahamic church was a type of the 
 Chriilian church, and in that church children were admitted 
 to circumcifion, the feal (the token) of the covenant of 
 grace, and to all the privileges of members ; yet, in the 
 gofpel church, they are neither to be recognized as mem- 
 bers, nor even regarded as fit fubjedls for baptifm, the feal, 
 token, or outivard prGfeJpon of internal nghteoujhefs, and of 
 thiir being partakers of the covenant cf grace ! 
 
 At the clofe of each of thefe Juppojed Antipasdobaptift 
 abfurdities, he adds a note of exclamation, or admiration ; 
 and, indeed, it is a little to be admired, that he fhould, in 
 four inftances at once, pervert the true fentiments of the 
 Baptifts, and of his own free choice, turn them into abfurd. 
 ities ; and, after he had finiihed the matter, wonder at it 
 himfelf, and by his notes of admiration, fet the world at 
 wondering. 
 
 The public v/ill determine whether there be any abfurdi- 
 ty in the above particulars, fave what Mr. Worcefter has 
 occafioned by his unfcripturai feal, and by mifreprefenting 
 the fentiments of the Baptifts. 
 
 In pages 57> 58, he has another note, which is nearly 
 as full of error and palpable mifreprefentations as the pre- 
 ceding. But the writer is tired in correcting a man, whofe 
 errors are as numerous as his lines. However, we mufl 
 attend him farther, for fome of his mod reprehenfible 
 management is yet before us. 
 
 With fixed intention to defend truth, and to dete<ft error, 
 
 I am, &c. 
 
 We appeal to the Bible, to Jiubhorn fa5ls^ and io 
 coinmon fenfe. 
 
 LETTER Vil. 
 
 MEN, BRETHRI-.N, AND FATHERS, 
 
 Y OUR attention would not be fo long arreft- 
 ed, by remarks on Mr. V/orc-eiler's miftakes, had he not 
 
Two Difcourfes^ l^c. 51 
 
 have laboured To hard to deceive you, and employed fuch 
 unwarrantable means to accomplilh it. But brevity is not 
 greatly to be confulted, when truth i3 either to be vindi- 
 cated and wrefted from the devourer, or firil principles of 
 the vifible church of Chrift to be given up. 
 
 Perhaps no Proteftant ever made a bolder attack on 
 truih, than Mr. Worcefler has done, or expofed himfelf 
 more in the attempt. Says he, page 59, * For more than 
 three thouiand years, tlie feal of the covenant was univer- 
 fally applied to the children of the churchy no one forbidding 
 it. — It was thus for the fpace of twelve or fifteen hundred 
 years after the introdu^Jiion of the Chriftian aifpenfation.' 
 
 Now, there is not fo much as a (hadovv of truth in all 
 this ; it is at beft one of Mr. Worceiter's bare-faced mif- 
 takes. I will not accufe Mr. Worcefter of lying to fupport 
 a fmking caufe, but this I will fay, he is either extremely 
 ignorant of the controverfy in which he writes, or he ivil- 
 Ungly makes miftakes. A volume of teftimonies, in dire<5t 
 contradidtion to what he afferts, might be cafily produced. 
 Take the following as a fample. 
 
 The Rev. Mr. Fuller informs us,* that Chriftianity had 
 a confiderable footing in England, not far from the year 
 63, in the reign of Arviragus. From the year 6^ to the 
 year 469, Chriftianity prevailed greatly in England ; and 
 multitudes of martyrs of Jefus were flain there, durfng the 
 Roman heathen perfecutions, particularly in that under 
 Dioclefian and Maximian his colleague. f 
 
 In the year 469, the Saxons invaded England, and foon 
 made a complete conqueft, fo as to drive all the Chriftians 
 into Cambria, which is now called Wales. Here, for up- 
 wards of an hundred years, the opprefled and perfecuted 
 remains of the Britifh church, had a place of fome reft ; 
 till St. or rather Sinful Auftin, in the year 596, came into 
 England, with about forty of his papiflical aiTociates.:|: 
 He miet with great fuccefs in converting the heathen Saxons 
 to the fuperftitions of popery. After he had accomplifhed 
 this bufmefs, his next was to convert the old Britifh church 
 (which had fled into the woods and mountains of Wales) 
 from the order and difcipline which they had received from 
 the apoftles or primitive mifiionaries, and kept pure till 
 that time.^ 
 
 * Eag. Bap. Hifl. p. 456. + Rapin's Hift. Eng. Vol, I. p. 28, 
 \ Fox's Mart. p. 149. 
 5 Fox's Mart. p. 153. fuller's Church Hillory, p. 6i. 
 
52 Letters on Rev, S. Worce/ier\s 
 
 All which I need here fhow, to eftablilh my point, is, 
 that the remains of the primitive Britilh church were An- 
 tipasdobaptiftsj or that they did not, and would not, baptize 
 their children.; which is perfedly evident, from Uie accom- 
 modating propofals which Auftin made to them. His 
 propofals were, " That they fhould embrace the ceremonies 
 of the church of Rome, particularly, in the time of keepii.-g 
 Eafter, and in baptlx'tng their children^' He iabouied to 
 bring them to thefe fuperftitions of the mother cf harlots^ 
 and threatened them with deftrucftionj if they would not 
 comply. Thefe noble Britons determ.ined to abide in the 
 dodrines and ordinances of Jefus Chrift, and would not 
 fubmit to- the traditions of men. 
 
 The confequence of their fidelity to their Lord, was 
 .fierce perfecution and great deftrudion, with which Auftin 
 threatened them ; and which, upon their lefufai, it is lup- 
 pofed he procured to be brought upon them by Ethelfride, 
 king of Northumberland, who ilew eleven or twelve hun- 
 dred of them in one da.y, at one place.* Here it is certain, 
 that the perfecuted Britilh church, about the year 600, were 
 Antipaedobaptifts ; and it is equally certain, by fair deduc- 
 tion, that their anceftors were fo, from the tirlt planting of 
 Chriftianity in England. 
 
 This is one impregnable contradidlion to Mr. Worcefter's 
 too bold affertion : for thefe truly Chrillian Britons not 
 Gnly did not pradtife infant baptifm, but chofe death rather 
 than to defile the church of Chriil with this popilh fuper» 
 ftition. 
 
 Salmafius and Suiferus, as quoted by Mr. Booth, Vol. 
 II. page 76, informs us, that in the two firft centuries, no 
 one was baptized, except, being inilruded in the faith, and 
 acquainted with the do(5lrine of Chrift, he was able to pro- 
 fefs himfelf a believer ; becaufe of thofe words, " He that 
 belie'vethf and is baptized.^' Firft, therefore, he was a be- 
 liever. Thence the order of catechumens in the church. 
 Then alfo, it was the conftant cuflom to give the Lord's 
 fupper to thofe catechumens immediately after their bap- 
 tifm-t 
 
 Thefe two witnefTes teftify, that Mr. Worcefter has not 
 given us the truth. 
 
 • Hift. Eng. Bapt. pref. p. aa, 23, 24. 
 
 t Et)ift. ad Juftum Patium, apud Van Dale Hift. Baptifm. Siw uri 
 Thcfau. Ecdcf. lub. vou Suraxis. Tom, ii p. 1136. 
 
Two Dlfcourfesj l^c, 53 
 
 Johanus Bohemias, as mentioned by Mr. Andrews, fays, 
 «♦ It was, in time part, the cuftom to adminifter baptifm to 
 them that were inftrudled in the faith ; but afterwards, 
 when it was thought and adjudged needful to eternal life, 
 to be baptized, it was ordained that new-born children 
 fhould be baptized, and godfathers were appointed, who 
 Ihould make confeffion and renounce the devil on their 
 behalf.* 
 
 The Petrobrufians were condemned, in the Lateran coun- 
 cil, under Pope Innocent II. in the year 1139, for rejeding 
 infant baptifm. f 
 
 If no one forbade the baptifm of new-born infants, how 
 came it to pafs that Auguftine, in the fourth century, 
 warned his hearers and readers to beware of the Baptifts, 
 and of the Antipasdobaptifls of his day ; and when writing 
 of infant baptifm, to fay, *' Let none fo much as tvhifpcr any 
 other doBrine in your ears r"' And how is it that the council 
 at Carthage, in the fifth century, fhould fay, " It is our _ 
 pleafure, that whofoever denieth that new-born infants are 
 to be baptized — let him be accurfed ?'* Befides, if no one 
 forbade infant baptifm., for t-xoeive or fifteen hundred years after 
 the commencement of the Chrifiian difpeifation., how is it that 
 Mr. Worcefter brings forward Walafrid Strabo, of the 
 ninth century^ as reprefenting that infant baptifm took its 
 origin in the time of Auftin ? (as it m.anifeftly did in En- 
 gland.) How is this, matter ? How can it be reconciled, 
 that fo many fpake, and fpake bitterly, againft thofe who 
 rejeded infant baptifm, in thofe early times, if not one, in 
 thofe times, ever forbade or fpake againft that fuperftitious 
 pradice ? This is enough to evince that Mr. Worceiler's 
 pen is incorrect. 
 
 In pages 59, 60, Mr. Worcefter has the following notice- 
 able expreffions : * If during the laft three hundred years, 
 there have been fome, in the different parts of Chriftendom, 
 who have forbidden little children to be brought to Chrift, 
 and denied the application of the feal of the covenant to 
 them ; yet, thanks be to God, in refpect to this interefting 
 matter, the great body of the church has ftill adhered to the 
 divine inftitute, and to the uniform pradice of the faithful in 
 all former ages.^ 
 
 In this quotation, we find one falfe infmuation and one 
 groundlefs aftertion, provided the church of Chrift, and not 
 
 * Andrews's Vindic. p. 106. f De Rebat Ecclcf. c. 26. 
 
 E 
 
54 Letters on Rev, S. WorceJier'*s 
 
 the church of Antlchrlft, be intended, as having adhered to 
 the inftitute of infant baptifm ; divine injlitute {traditicnury 
 or fuperjlitious injlitute^ he fhould have faid.) 
 . His falfe infmuation is, that the Baptifts have forbidden 
 little children to be brought to Chrift. There, is no truth 
 in this. He has not produced, and it is believed he cannot 
 produce, fo much as a fingle inftance, in which a Baptift 
 hath forbidden little children either to be brought to Chrift 
 or to come to him. Does he fuppofe, that to l)ring little 
 children to baptifm, is bringing them to Chrift ? It is true, 
 th>e Papifts may have fome fuch abfurd notion ; but the 
 Bible has never told us, that this was bringing them to 
 Chrift ; nor hath Chrift, nor his difciples, nor his apoftles, 
 ever once mentioned fuch a pradice. Not a word, from 
 Genefis to Revelation, is faid, about infant baptifm, much 
 lefs of its being a divine injlitute^ or of this being the way to 
 bring little children to Chrift. 
 
 His groundlefs aftertion is this : * The great body of the 
 church has ftill adhered to the divine inftitute (infant bap- 
 tifm) and to the uniform praflice of the faithful in all 
 former ages.' 
 
 In this groundlefs aftertion, there are two very great 
 miftakes. The firft is, that the great body of the church, 
 meaning the church of Chrift, adheres to infant baptifm. 
 The other is, that the faithful, in all former ages, have 
 adhered to this pra<51ice. 
 
 Two definitions appear to be both lawful and expedient, 
 in this place. 
 
 One is, The vifdle church of Chrijl^ is compofed of all thofe 
 righteous ones, ivho have been batti%ed upon a profejfion of their 
 faith in Chrif}. 
 
 The other is, The vifhle church of Antichrijl^ is compofed of 
 mil thofe^ ivho have been baptised, or fprinhled^ in manifejl un- 
 belief 
 
 Thefe plain definitions may caufe fome hard judgments 
 to be pronounced againft me, by defigning and by errone- 
 ous men ; but with me, it is a fmall thing to be judged of 
 man's judgment. 
 
 We will now take notice of Mr. Worcefter's groundlefs 
 ajfertion. He fays, < The great body of the church adheres 
 to infant baptifm.' Had he faid. The great body of the 
 church of Antichrift adheres to it, no body could, with 
 trutli, contradiifl him. For, infint baptifm hath been one 
 of the main pillars of Antichrift, from the beginning ; and 
 ^me of the feeds of this appear to hnve been fovving, by 
 
Tvjo Difcourfesy ^fr. $$ 
 
 the Jud tlzlng teachers, among the churches of Galatia, 
 even in Paul's day. But nothing is farther from the truth, 
 than this fentiment, that the great body of the church cf 
 Chrirt hath adhered to infant baptifm. Infiiead of this, 
 not fo much as any fmgle branch of this church, in any 
 place or age of the world, hath ever adhered to it. Infant 
 baptifm is peculiar to Antichrift's kingdom ; and it is ex- 
 pedient, that fuch as fear God, and are not, through preju- 
 dice, both blind and deaf to truth, fhould have here ex- 
 plained to them, what hath, perhaps more than any other 
 thing, darkened the minds of many good men, in this 
 matter. It is this, — Thofe who have written the hiftory of 
 the church, have given us the hiilory of Antichriif 's church, 
 rather than that of Chriif 's. Whenever they have giveo us 
 any hints of ChriiVs church, they have taken their docu- 
 ments, or information, from the polluted pens of Anti- 
 chrift's friends, who have, uniformly, reprefented Chrifl's 
 church as fome deformed {q&l of heretics. Mr. Worceifer 
 appears to have derived his information from the fame 
 fource, and to have poflefTed too much of the fume judg- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. Worceiler is not fo blamable for not pofTeffing the 
 hiflory of the church of Chrift, as he is for not knowing 
 her, when he fees her. For the church of Chrift hath been 
 hidden, in the place which God -appointed for her, for 
 twelve hundred and fixty years ; and it is not many years, 
 or at mod, not many ages, fnice fhe left her wildernefs 
 ftation, and hath been Ifiowing herfelf in the world ; and 
 her hillory hath not yet been written, or not collected into 
 regular form. But P^Ir. Worceiler, and his brethren too, 
 are very much to be blamed, that they do not know the 
 vifible church of ChriH:, wherever ihe difcovers herfelf; 
 foi though her hiftory be not written, yet a defcription of 
 her is given, and that plainly too, by Mofes and the proph- 
 ets, by Chrift and the apoftles. See Deut. xviii. 15, 19. 
 Pfa. xxii. 22. Ifa. viii. 18. liv. 13. Jer.^ xxxi. 31 — 34. 
 John vi. 45. A61S iii. 22, ult. Rom. i 6, 7. i Cor. i. 2. 
 2 Cor. i. I. Eph. i. I Thef. i. i — 4. Heb. ii. Ii, 12, 13. 
 viii. 8 — II. 1 Pet. rh 9. In thefe texts, and In many 
 others, is the Chrillian church defignated, and plainly too ; 
 hence it is a fm of ignorance, not to know her. But it 
 may be a fm of another kind to oppofe her, as he and many 
 
 ihis brethren have dared very boldly to do. 
 
 If many of thofe, who oppofe the gofpel church, be, as 
 we hope they are, the people of God, Ipiritually, they ought 
 
5^ Letters on Rev, 5. Worcejier^s 
 
 to hear his word, Rev, xvili. 4. " Come out of her, my 
 people, that ye be not partakers of her (Antichrifl's) fms, 
 and that ye receive not of her plagues." Becaufe that 
 many good people are found within the limits of Antichrift, 
 this is no argument that Antichrift and Chrift are one : 
 but this is exactly what was to be, juft before the dejirudion 
 of fpiritaal Babylon, or the church of Antichrift ; fome of 
 God's people were to be in her, and now the comma»d is, 
 that they come out* 
 
 His other groundlefs aflertion, * That the faithful, in all 
 former ages, have adhered to the pradice of infant baptifm,* 
 is refuted by what has been juft now faid. If more be 
 thought needful, it vvill be found in what is foon to be faid 
 upon Mr. Worcefter's note, which is now to come under 
 confideration. 
 
 The public are earneftly defired to grant me a careful 
 attention, for I am endeavouring to plead the caufe of 
 Chrift's rifing church, againft the laft ftruggles of Anti- 
 chrift. 
 
 In the note, pages 6c, 61, 62, the fpirit of Antichrift 
 appears to have done its utmoft, in fpreadlng, perhaps, the 
 laft blind over the miiids of God's people, in our land of 
 free inquiry. A greater ftietch of mifreprefentation and 
 groundlefs afTertion, perhaps never efcaped the pen of man, 
 than Mr. Worcefter hath given, in the long note to which 
 v.e Ihali foon attend. The principal part of this note will 
 be inferted, by paragraphs and fentences, that the public 
 may have a full view of Mr. Worcefter's fuppofed ftrength, 
 and may the more fully difcover his weaknefs, deception, 
 falfehood, and abfurdity. Thefe are hard accufations ; 
 but if they be literally and abundantly juft, as applied to 
 Mr. Worcefter's writings, and if he have made ufe of fuch 
 kind of management, in oppofition to the church of Chrift 
 Jefus, and to prevent her friends from beholding and em- 
 bracing her, ought he not to be expofed, and truth vindi- 
 cated, though it bring upon his writings juft contempt and 
 infamy .^ 
 
 This note begins thus : — * As there was no dlfpute about 
 baptifm, in the firft ages of Chriftianity, it fliould not be 
 expected, that much would be found particularly on the 
 fubjeift, in the writings of thofe ages.' 
 
 Anfiver, There is much found on the fubjed of baptifm, 
 in the writings of the firft ages of Chriftianity ; but not a 
 word for infant baptifm, in the two firft centuries, as is 
 ihown at large by Dr. Gale, in his Reflexions, 
 
TiL'O Difcourfts, izfc. $J 
 
 • But (lays Mr. Wcrcefter) becaufe there is nothing 
 diieclly on the fiihjecl, either for or againft infant baptifm, 
 in the fragments v.hich have come down to us, cf the writ- 
 ings of tl;e firlf century, t]\e Antipaedobaptiils, with an 
 aifurance peculiar to themfelves, have undertaken to affert, 
 not to prove, that during the firft. century, infant baptifm 
 was not praclifed in the church. With eqUcd propriety we 
 might aifert, even had we no proof to fupport our affertlon, 
 that it was pracl-iicd univerfally : but we are not reduced 
 to this extremity. The facred truth is, there is as m.uch 
 evidence, as, from the ftate of the cafe, could reafonably be 
 expected, that during the firft century, and for feveral fuc- 
 ceeding ages, infant baptifm v\as praclifed in the church, 
 univeifally, and without contradiction or queftion.* 
 
 Anf^duer. In the writings of the firft century, we have 
 the beft evidence which the circumftances of the cafe ad- 
 mit, that infant baptifm was then unknown. It was not 
 fpoken againft exphcitly, to be fure, and for this plain 
 reafon — the fcheme of infant baptifm was not then invented. 
 But what is faid by Barnabas, in his Epiftle to tlie Corin- 
 thians, and by Hermas, in his Vifions, prove this — that 
 infants were neceftarily excluded. The fiift fpeaks of the 
 perfons who were bapti'z.edy as living upon the lelief of the 
 prom'if s and of the "o^ord. The other fpeaks of the bapti^edy 
 as having been taught in the word. In Ihnrt, they both 
 give us an account of believers' baptifm, and of that only.* 
 'I'his is altogether inconfiftent with ih'd fuppojitkn, that they 
 pracf'tftd infant unbelievers^ baptifm.. Yes, it is wholly incon- 
 fiftent with the idea, that when heathen parents or mafters 
 were converted, their unconverted children and fervants 
 were admitted to baptifm. 
 
 Thefe fathers faid all which their circumftanccs permit- 
 ted, to put infant baptifm out of countenance in our day. 
 It is abfurd to require that they Ihould have faid more, and 
 equally abfurd to infer, as Mr. Worcefter does, that be- 
 caufe they did not fay more than their circumftances per- 
 mitted, they implicitly favoured It. 
 
 * But (fays Mr. Worcefter) the Antipasdobaptifts, with 
 an affurance peculiar to themfelves, have undertaken to 
 affert, not to prove, that during the firft century, infant 
 baptifm was not pradifed in the church.' 
 
 * Gale's Refledtions, Let ii. 
 
 E 2 
 
5^ Letters on Rev, S. WorceJier*s 
 
 Reply. We have appealed to the Bible, to ftubborn fads, 
 and to common fenfe. If all or any of thefe may be ad- 
 mitted as witnefs, and thefr evidence taken as proof, then 
 we have undertaken to prove^ and not merely to ajferty that 
 infant baptifm was not pradifed during the firft century of 
 the church. The Bible is not only filent as to the pradice 
 of infant baptifm, but enjoins pre-requifites to baptifm, 
 which are incompatible with the capacity of infants. One 
 Bible pre-requifite, and it is, in the prefent cafe, equally 
 conclufive with a thoufand, is this — the fubjeds of baptifm 
 Tnuft be Jirjl taughty and fo taught as to be vifible believers, 
 Matt, xxviii. Mark xvi. This is the Bible teRimony, as to 
 the firft century, and indeed, for every other, as to infant 
 baptifm and the pradice of it. 
 
 Stubborn fads fay, that the fathers, the bifnops and elders 
 of the church, in the firft century, pradifed as the Bible 
 enjoins, and baptized thofe who were previoufly taught 
 and brought to believe ; and we have not one hne of the 
 contrary pradice, that is, of unbelievers' baptifm, the firft 
 error of Antichrift,* 
 
 Common fenfe teftifies, that if the fathers of the firft 
 century baptized, as they tell us they did, upon a profeffion 
 of friith by the candidates, and fay not a word of baptizing 
 any without fuch a profeffion, then Mr. Worcefter has no 
 claim upon our belief, when he, without a fhadow ©f evi- 
 dence, tells us, that * the facred truth is, there is as much 
 evidence, as, from the ftate of the cafe, could reafonably be 
 expeded, that during the firft century, and for feveral fuc- 
 ceeding ages, infart baptifm was pradifed in the church, 
 univerfally, and without contradidion or queftion.' 
 
 We fhali now examine his argument, or rather what he 
 h?.th told us, and meant we fhould take upon his mere 
 tefiimony. 
 
 * In the v/ritings of Clemens Romanus and Hermes Paf- 
 tor, both cotemporaries with the apcftles, (fays he) paffages 
 are extant, which, by fair implication, prove the pradice 
 of infant baptifm in their day.' Mr. Worcefter gives us 
 not a line from the writings of either ; nor does he dired 
 us where we may find fo much as a fcrap, which implies 
 any fuch thing. If the reader will take the trouble to look 
 int Dr. Gale's Refledions on Dr. Wall's liiftory of infant 
 Japtifm, or into Hermes Paftor's Vifions, Lib. I. Vif iii^ 
 cliap. 2, 5, 6, 7. he may difcover the reafon why Mr. Wor^ 
 
 * See Gale's Refle(5lioi\s. 
 
Tvjo Difcourjci^ ^r. 59 
 
 cefler made no quotations. It is evident, none would have 
 been to his purpofe : for they fay not a word about infant 
 baptifm, or any thing which looks like it, or implies it, (if 
 we may credit either Dr. Wall or Dr. Gale) unlefs we 
 confider thefe fathers as being Papijis^ and then, becaufe 
 tliey held to the corruption of nature, conclude that they 
 mult to infant baptifm, as an antidote. But this argument 
 is equally good, to prove that all the CalviriRic Baptills 
 hold to infant baptifm. 
 
 We m.ay hence fee, with fufficient clearnefs, why Mr. 
 Worcefter ventured no quotations irom the fathers of the 
 firft century : and for the fam.e reafon, probably, he ven- 
 tured none from the fathers of the fecond. He only tells 
 us, that ' Juftin Martyr and Irenssus are more particular 
 and clear, to the fame puipofe.' Yes, fays he, ' more par-, 
 i'lcular and clear^^ yet not fo much as m.ention the fubject. 
 
 As Mr. Worcefter hath not fcen fit to give us a line from 
 the writings of the ancient fiuhers of the tvro firft centuries^ 
 I will fet before the public a fhort quotation out of the 
 apology which Juftin Martyr m.ade before the Roman em- 
 peror \ it may be taken as a farnple of the fentim.ect of the 
 church in his time, as to baptifm and the fubjects of bap- 
 tifm. The pailage, as Mr. Reeves translates it, is, " I fhall 
 now lay before you (fays Juilin to the emperor) the man- 
 ner of dedicating ourfelves to God through Chrift, upon 
 our converfion ; for, fhould 1 omit this, I might feema not 
 to deal fnicerely, in this account of the Chriftian religion. 
 As many, therefore, as are perfuaded and hellei^e, that the 
 things taught ^.wd /aid by us are true, and moreover take 
 upon them to live accordingly, are taught "iO pray and ajk of 
 Gody tvith fajlirg, the forgivenefs of their former fins ; — and 
 then, and not till then, they are brought to 2.. place of icater^ 
 and — are v/ashed in the name of God the Father and 
 Lord of all, and of our Saviour Jefus Chrift— The reafon 
 of this (fays Juftin) we have from the apoftles ; for having 
 nothing to do in omt Jirji birth, but being begotten bj nscejjity^ 
 or 'without our oavn confmt. — The penitent, who now makes 
 his fecond birth (or his public putting on the Lord Jefus) 
 an ad of his own choice, has called over him the name of 
 God the Father and Lord of all things,— -And, moreover, 
 the perfon baptized and illuminated, is baptized in the 
 name of the Lord Jefus, — and in the name of the Holy 
 Ghoft." * 
 
 * Booth's Psedobaptifm, Vol. II. p. xiOj iii» 
 
6o Letters on Rev. S. Worce/ler^s 
 
 Tiiis is nr.e of Mr. Worcefter's wltnefTes, and he is a 
 good one, -to fhow that Mr. Worcefter has endeavoured to 
 palm an impofition upon the public : for here is not merely 
 a filence, as to infant baptifm, but a complete prohibition 
 of it. For the Martyr cotitrojls our natural hirth with our 
 haptifm^ and tells us, that one is ivithout our confeiit^ but the 
 other an a<51: of our own choice. This is the Bible iiwj, this 
 is the Chriilian way, this is the good eld way, to receive 
 baptifm as an acl of our aivn choice. But to be baptized 
 without our cgnfent, as all infants are, is the zuay of man's 
 invention, the papiilical ivayy the way of Antichrift. 
 
 Nor does Irenaeus, nor any one of the fathers of the 
 fecond century, fay one word, which he can prove to his 
 purpofe.* 
 
 Mr. Worcefter next comes down to the third century, 
 and tells us, * TertuUian and Origen are explicit on the 
 fubje^t.' Then we may exped fomething to the purpofe. 
 And what fays TertuUian ? Not a word which Mr. Wor- 
 cefter quotes ; nor had he any thing to the point, to quote 
 from him. But we will hear what TertuUian lays, for he 
 has fomething to f ly, and fomething too which Mr. Wor- 
 cefter Vv'ould be glad not to hear. 
 
 TertuUian, fpeaking of repentance, of the ufe and necef- 
 fity of it, fays, " Baptifm is the feal of faith, w hich faith is 
 begun and adorned by the faith of repentance. We are 
 n )t, therefore, tvnjloid, that we may leave finning ^ but be- 
 caufe we have already dons it^ and are already purijied in our 
 hearis.''^\ Dr. Gale, upon thefe words of TertuUian, makes 
 the following obfervations, (p. 512, 513.) *' Are thefe the 
 words of a man, who thought baptifm might be given to 
 Infants ? Are infants already purified in heart ? Have they 
 I ft finning? and are they therfore wafjcdP Have they any 
 fuch faith as TertuUian here fpeaks of? and yet he fays, 
 Baptifm, the feal of this fort of faith particularly ; and there- 
 fore, doubtlefs he thought the feal could not be regularly 
 applied, where this faith was wanting." 
 
 I'his is one of Mr. Worcefter's witneftes for the begin- 
 ning of the third century ; and we will hear a little more 
 of his teftimony. Mr. Booth gives us the following fenti- 
 ments of TertuUian, out of Du Pin's tranflation : '* Jefus 
 Chrift: fays, indeed, Hinder not little children from coming to 
 
 * Sec Gale's Ref. throughout, Booth's Paedobap. Vol. II. p. 7^—86, 
 and even Dr. Wall himfclf. 
 
 I D« Penctentia, cap. vi. p. f 25. B. 
 
Two Difcourfesy Ifc. 6\ 
 
 me J but that they fhould come to him as focn as they are 
 advanced in years, as foon as they have learned their reli- 
 gion, when they may be taught whither they are going, 
 when they are become Chriftians, vrhen they begin to be 
 able to know Jefus Chrift. — Thofe who fhall duly confider 
 the great weight and moment of this divine lacrament, will 
 rather be afraid of making too much hajle to receive it, than to 
 defer it for fome time, fo they may be the better capable 
 of receiving it more worthily.'' * 
 
 The public will probably be at no befitancy, why Mr. 
 Worcefter produced no quotations for the two firft centu- 
 ries, and for the beginning of the third : it is fufficiently 
 obvious he had none to ofcer. It is no: a little furprilmg, 
 that he fhould prefume fo much upon the credulity of the 
 public, as to iuppcfe they would, in fuch an important 
 matter as the prelent, take his bare word, as the ground of 
 their belief, for the fpace cf more than two hundred of the 
 firft years of Chriftianity. 
 
 The nrii appearance of evidence, which Mr. WorceRer 
 brings forward, in fupport of infant baptifm, is in the follow- 
 ing repur.eJ words of Crigen : " What is the reafon, that, 
 whereas the baptifm of the church is given for forgivenefs, 
 infantt alfo, by the ufage cf the church, are baptized ; 
 when, if there were nothing in infants which wanted for- 
 givenefs or mercy, baptifm would be needlefs to them ?'* 
 This quotation Mr. WorceRer probably took from Rufi- 
 nus's corrupt, and very little to be depended upon, tranf- 
 lation of Origen, or from fome author v/ho had drawn it 
 from that fource. 
 
 There are two reafcns, which render it probable, that 
 even Origen, who lived in the middle, if not towards the 
 latter end. of the third -century, did not belitve in infant 
 baptifm, and has faid nothing in its favour. One reafon 
 is, That nothing can be found, in any of his writings which 
 are now extant, to (bow that he believed any fuch thing. 
 The ether is, There are fome paifages, in his original 
 Greek, which appear not reconcileable with the fentiment, 
 that Origen was a Psedobaptift. I will mention one, and 
 one too w^hich Dr. Wall has fclefted cut of the original 
 writings of Origen, confidering it to be as much to his 
 purpofe as any palfage which can be depended upon as 
 being Orlgen's. -Mr. Booth gives us the palfage from Dr. 
 Wall, thus : " One may inquire, when it is that the angels^ 
 
 * Booth's FceJobaptifm, Vol II. p 92, 9^, 
 
6'2 Letters ok Rev, S. Worcejler^s 
 
 here fpoken of, are fet over thofe little ones, fhowed or 
 fignitied by our Saviour ; whether they take the care and 
 management of them, from the time when they, by the 
 vafliing of regeneration, whereby they were new-born, do 
 as new-born babes defire the fmcere milk of the word, and 
 are no longer fubje<51 to any evil power, or from their birth, 
 according to the foreknowledge of God and his predefti- 
 nating of them, &c."* 
 
 We have two reafons to offer, why it is not fuppofable 
 that Origen intended infants in age, but muft have intended 
 infants in grace. One is, He fpeaks of them as defiring 
 the fincere milk of the word, which infants of a day or a 
 month old are incapable of doing. The other reafon is, 
 He is fpeaking of thofe little ones whofe angels do always 
 'behold the face of God in heaven. Thefe little ones are 
 confidered by Calvinillic divines, if not by all others, to be 
 believers in Chrift. 
 
 Mr. Worceiler in the next place brings forward Cyprian, 
 who was bifhop of Carthage, and prefident of a council 
 which was holden in that city in tl^e year 253. Before 
 which council tl.is quepLion was difcufTed, " At what age 
 ihall infants be baptized :" Infant baptifm being, at this 
 time, fo novel a thing, that the bifliops were in doubt at 
 what age it ihould be adminiilered. 
 
 This council, compofed of African biihops, is the firft 
 we read of, which explicitly admitted the fuperftiticus and 
 antichriftian pradlice of infant baptifm. Not an European 
 or Afiatic bifhop does Mr. Worcefter produce, for even 
 the third century, who fpake one word in favour of infant 
 baptifm : nor does he produce any credible evidence, that 
 any in Africa adopted this practice, till the year 253, or 
 nearly that date. And we confefs. that we are not careful 
 nor folicitous to fhow, tlrat infant baptifm did not, at this 
 time, begin to prevail confiderably ; for not far from this 
 time, as 1 may at a future period fliow at large, the church 
 of Jefus began to take her place in the wilder nefs, as God 
 had appointed hei'. 
 
 Mr. Worceder now comes down to the fourth century, 
 and manifeftiy with a confiderable degree of courage, as 
 well he may, for now he hatli fomething to fhow for infant 
 baptifm : for the error for which he pleads, had not a 
 little prevailed, before the end of this century. Says he, 
 * Gregcry Nazianzen, Bafil, Ambrofe, Chryfcftome, and 
 
 • Wall's Hlft. of Inf. Bap Part I. p 33. 
 
Two Difcourfts^ Iffc, 6 7^ 
 
 Jerome, all of whom flourlllied within about a hundred 
 years of Origen and Cyprian, are all explicit on the fub- 
 jed ; explain the defign of infant baptifm, mention it as 
 coming in the place of circumcifion, and fpeak of it as the 
 univerfal and undifputed practice of the church.' 
 
 Mr. Worcefter, even in this fourth century, which was 
 famous for the invention of fuperftitious ceremonies, runs 
 a little too fall, and takes more for granted in fix lines, 
 than he will be able to prove in the fame number of years. 
 We are willing to grant him every word of truth, for we 
 fear nothing from that quarter ; but we mud correct him 
 ftep by ftep, that no impofition may be palmed on the 
 public. He tells us, that Gregory Nazianzen, Bafil, who 
 was bilhop of Cefyrea ; Ambrofe, who was bill. op of Mi- 
 lan ; Chryfollome, billop alternately of Antioch and Con- 
 ilantinople ; and Jerome, monk of Jerufalem, are, all of 
 them, not only explicit on the fubject of infant baptifm, but 
 that tliey fpake of it as the univerfal and undifputed prac- 
 tice of the church. ^ 
 
 We by no means deny that infant baptifm was, in this 
 century, pracliied in the church of Rome ; but that it was 
 the univerfal practice of the church, as Mr. Worcefter 
 afTerts, is not true, unlefs he intends the univerfal practice 
 of the church of Antichrift, which now very manifeftly 
 ihowed herfelf, and had already driven the gofpel church 
 into her hiding place. 
 
 A few quotations will expofe Mr. Worcefter's miflakes. 
 
 *' Gregory Nazianzen, fpeaking of fuch as died without 
 baptifm, inllances in fuch as were not baptized [dta ncp'i- 
 ofita) by reafon of their infancy. And the fame Nazianzen 
 jiimfelf, though a bilhop's fon, and a long time trained up 
 under his father's care, was not baptized till he came to 
 age, as he tells us in his own life." * 
 
 " Again, St. Gregory advifes people to delay their chil- 
 dren's baptifm, till they are capable to hear and anfwer 
 fome of the holy words." f 
 
 *' Ambrofe and Chryfoftome, though born of Chriftian 
 parents, were not baptized till they were adult.":}: 
 
 " St. Ambrofe, St. Jerome, and St. Auflin, were bom 
 of Chriftian parents, and yet not baptized till the full age 
 of man, or more." 9 
 
 * Gale's Reflexions, p. 39. f Ibid. 41. 
 
 \ Hift. Cng Bapt. Vol. II, Appen. p. 68. § Ibid Vol. I pref, n ji. 
 
64 Letters on Rev. S. WorceJler*s 
 
 From thefe quotations, we fee that Gregory, Chi7fof- 
 tome, Ambrofe, and Jerome, four of Mr. WorceUer's five 
 worthies, whom he brought to prove the univerfahty of 
 paedobaptifm in the fourth century, were themfelves the 
 children of Antip^dobaptifts ; their parents being Chrif- 
 tians, and one or more of them bifhops, yet did not have 
 their children baptized : befides, Gregory, the firft of them, 
 advifed the delay of infant baptifm, till they were capable 
 to hear and anfwer fome of the holy words. The public 
 will judge what credit is to be attached to Mr, Worcefter's 
 affertions. 
 
 We will now hear what he has to fay of pardobaptifm 
 in the fifth century. The public will obferve how he la- 
 bours, continually, to imprefs his readers with an idea, that 
 what he relates is much nigher the beginning of Chriftian- 
 ity than what it really is. What he fays, with relation to 
 infant baptifm in the fifth century, is this : — 
 
 * Auftin, who was cotemporary with feme of thefe lafl, and 
 who Jtouri/Joed only about two hundred and eighty years after 
 the apoflles^ in a controverfy with Pelagius, alleged the 
 pradice of infant baptifm, in proof of the dodrine of orig- 
 inal fm. " Why are infants (fays he) baptized for the 
 remiilTon of fin, if they have none ? Infant baptifm the 
 whole church pradtifes : it was not inftituted by councils, 
 but v/as ever in ufe." Pelagius, whofe intereft it was to 
 fet this argument afide, was fo far from denj^ing the al- 
 leged fact, that in reply to the fuggeftion of fome, that by 
 denying original fm he denied the right of infants to bap- 
 tifm, he utterly difcards the idea, and afiirms, that he never 
 heard of any, not even the moft impious heretic, who de- 
 nied baptiim to infants. I'his teftimony (fays Mr. Wor- 
 cefter) is impregnable.' Why fo ? for to it we anfwer — 
 
 1. The whole of this, fo far as it has any formidablenefs 
 in it, may be a forgery, as many other things, of the like 
 nature, have been proved to be. 
 
 2. To make the moft of it, it is but the a/Tertion of one 
 man ; and if this one man's fmgle afTertion, fhould not be 
 more corre(5t than fome of Mr. Worcefter's, it might not 
 be thought impregnable. 
 
 3. It is not only the afTertion of but one man, but this 
 one man does not afiert, that there is none who denies 
 infant baptifm ; but that he has heard of none. Now, if 
 this Pelagius had not heard of every thing, his affertion 
 might be true, and yet the whole body of Chrift's vifible 
 church might deny baptifm to infants : for, 
 
Tvjo Difcourf^s, "i^c, 65 
 
 4. The vifihlc church of Chrifl was, at this time, hidden 
 ill the place which God had prepared for her ; and little 
 or nothir.g was now feen or heard of the true go/pel churchy 
 in what was called the Chriftian world ; but the church of 
 Ant'ichrijl was in high repute. Hence, 
 
 5. \i Pelagins fpake or wrote the words which Mr, 
 Worceiler fuppofes, and if they were the limple truth of 
 his heart, they only prove, that Pelagius knew nothing of 
 the hidden church of Chrift. They by no means prove 
 what Mr. Worcefter wifhed them to, that the church of 
 Chriil: held to infant baptifm. 
 
 As to what Auiiin, or Auguftine, fays, " Infant baptifm 
 the whole ciaurch praclifes : it was not inftituted by coun- 
 cils, but was ever in ufe ;" we anfwer — 
 
 I. That he had refpeft to the church of Antichrifl, 
 which alone was in reputation in his day ; and the whole 
 of this church did, no doubt, then, as it does ftill, pra(5life 
 infant baptifm. 
 
 ' 2. As to Aufiin's faying, " Infant baptifm was e'^ter in 
 «/>'* v.-e need only obferve, if Aullin thus faid, he made a 
 large miftake. 
 
 Mr. Worcefter in the next paragraph is rather too bold 
 in his aiTertion. His words are, ' From this period (fays 
 he) the matter is clear, beyond difpute. Dr. Gill himfeif, 
 one of the moit learned of the Antipsedobaptift writers, 
 acknov.' ledges that infant baptifm was the practice of the 
 c.iurc*. univerfaiiy, from the third to the eleventh century.' 
 Wert' t not that 1 am grown familiar with Mr, Worcefter's 
 erroneous ftatemencs and groiindiefs affcriiions, this might 
 a little furprile me. I will give the public Dr. Gill's own 
 words, and then each will judge for himfeif. 
 
 Says the Dcclor, in his Brief Illuftrations, &c. chap, ii, 
 conf. 4. '* Chrift has no w|iere promifed, that his dodrine 
 and ordinances fhould not be pervetted ; but, on the con- 
 trary, h.is given clear and JUrong hitimations, that there 
 ihould be a general falling aiuay, and departure from the 
 truth and ordinances of the gofpei, to tnake way for the 
 revelation <di Ar.tlchr'ifi : and though it will be allowed, that 
 during this period infant baptifm 4:irevailed, yet it did Not 
 univerfaUy obtain. There were ivUneJfes fcr adult baptifm in 
 every age : and Chrift had a cJ:urch in the wilderhefsy in oh^ 
 fcurity, at this time, namely, in the vallies of Piedmont; 
 who were, from the beginning oi the apofiafy^ dnd AvntneiTed 
 againft it, and Ijore their tefiimony againfl infant baptifm," 
 
65 Letters on Rev. S. lVorcefier*s 
 
 It is nothing ftrange, that a perfon engaged, as Mr. 
 Worceiler is, in the caufe of A.ntichrift, fhouid pervert and 
 mifrepreient the ancients ; but that a perfon of fenfe Ihould 
 expole his charader and veracity, in flagrantly mifrepre- 
 renting the moderns, as he does, is not a little to be won« 
 dered at. 
 
 After faying jufl: what he pleafed, not only without evi- 
 dence, but contrary to evidence, he produces a quotation 
 from Dr. Wall's hiftory of infant baptifm, as he tells 
 us, and the quotation itfelf is equally afide from trutli, 
 with his other quotations, and affertions of his own. Nor 
 in one inftance does he inform us where any of his quota- 
 tions are to be found : he probably did not know, or was 
 not fond of their being examined. 
 
 As he comes near the clofe of this Img note, to which 
 "we have given confiderable attention, he obferves, * The 
 unprejudiced reader will now judge, with how much can- 
 dour and truth, an attempt has been made, in fome late 
 publications, to m.ake the unlearned and unliable beHeve, 
 that the practice of infant baptifm had its rife in the dark 
 ages, under the influence of popery.* I add. The unpreju- 
 diced reader will now judge, with how much candour and 
 truth, an attempt has been made, by Mr. Worcefter, to 
 make the unlearned and unliable believe, that the human 
 rite of infant baptifm. had its i iie in the days of the apofties, 
 and that it was pralHied for t-wehe or Jifteen hundred yearsy 
 no one forbidding ii. Efpecially, flnce the fame Mr. Wcr- 
 cefter tells us, that *from Walafrid Strabo (a man, fays 
 Molheim, of no mean reputation) feme pailages have been 
 quoted, in which he reprefents infant baptifm as having 
 had its origin about the time of St. Auttin :' v\-hich, in- 
 deedj appears to have been the time of the introdudion of 
 infant baptism into England.* 
 
 * As to the ailertion (fays Mr> Worcefter) in the Minia- 
 ture Hiftory of ihe Baptiits, "That the Waldenfes, Wick- 
 iifiites, and HuflTites were Baptills," it may fufiice to faf , 
 there is fufficient evidence that it has no foundation in 
 truth ' Here Mr. Worcefter takes all for granted. Let 
 Mr. Worcefter, or let any other perfon, attempt to fnow 
 that it is not founded in truth, then will the author of it en- 
 deavour, if life and health continue, to fliow fuch an at- 
 tem.pt to be vain ; and not only fo, but that the Miniature 
 Hiftory is fcmnded on the bioad bafis of truth. For the 
 
 • 'Sec Hift. Eng. Bapt. Vol. II. pref. 
 
Tvjo Difcourfes^ ^c. 67 
 
 prefent, it fliall be only cbferved, that as Mr. Worcefter 
 and his brethren can trace their dejcent from the PapilU, 
 and their peculiarities, fuch as infant hapiijm^ infknt church 
 niemberfhip, unbelievers' baptiim, baptii'ra upon the faith 
 of others, &c. from the man of fm, and no farther ; fo the 
 Baptirts can trace their defcent, and their pecuharities, fuch 
 as believers' baptiim, communion of faints, &c. to the 
 Waldenfes, Wickliffites, Huffites, Petrobrufians, &c. and 
 through them to the apoftles, and to the Bible, vv'here they 
 ftill find their peculiarities, and an account of their anceftors. 
 
 Thus far it appears that Mr Worceiler is fubtlantially 
 incorre(5t, in every material point. Not to 2l f ingle difficulty 
 has he put the Baptifts, unlefs the trouble of detecting; his 
 antifcriptural and erroneous notions of the gofpel church, 
 and the expofmg of his falfe pofitions, be confidered one. 
 
 It is hoped, that the reader's deeds are not fo evil, and 
 his heart fo hard, that he will reject the light, and refufe 
 to come to it, left his deeds fhould be reproved. Eternity 
 will reveal all errors and remove ignorance, but it will 
 never convert and fave fuch as hate the light. 
 
 In the mean tim.e, 
 
 I am, the reader's and the public's, &c. 
 
 We appeal to the Bihle^ to fzuhhorn fads^ and to 
 common fenfe. 
 
 LETTER VIII. 
 
 MSN, BRETHREN', AND FATHERS, 
 
 \'V E would not folicit your attention to any 
 more of Mr. Worcefter's miftakes, were it not that the 
 honour of the Chriilian Lawgiver, the advancement of his 
 rifmg church, and your own happinefs, require that you 
 iTiould know the truth. 
 
 Mr. Worcefter in the firft place took a wrong fet ofr, 
 and he has fo e-tadly kept his firft direc'tion, that he has 
 feidom come v/ithin fight of truth's highway. His notions 
 of the church of Chrift appear to be as erroneous as were 
 the notions of the old Jewifti church with refpeft to Chrift 
 
68 Letters en Rev, 5. WorceJ^er's 
 
 himfelf. He alfo appears to be as ready to miirake what 
 is faid of the gofpei cliurch, as the Jews were to midake 
 what Chrift faid of himfelf. Not only fo, but he Is, mani- 
 feftly, equally ready to mifreprefent the fentiment and 
 practice of the gofpei church, that he may make room for 
 his Judaizing fenLiments, and for his Jewilh church in 
 gofpei times. 
 
 Page 57, he tells the public, that * when the Ar.tipsdo- 
 baptifts would prove that the Abrahamic covenant has 
 ceafed, the arguments advanced only go to ihow that the 
 Mofaic law, or Sinai covenawt, is abolifhed.' 
 
 From this flatement of the matter, no one would receive 
 a juft idea of the fentiments or arguments of the Antipsedo- 
 baptifts. They have no difpofition to prove, that the 
 Abrahamic covenant, which included the promife, that in 
 him and in his feed all the families of the earth fhould be 
 bleffed, has ceafed. But when they would prove, that the 
 Abrahamic covenant of circumcifion has ceafed, their argu- 
 ments go to (liow, that the law of commandments con- 
 tained in ordinances is aboliihed, and that the covenant of 
 circumcifion is one of thefe commandments and ordinances. 
 Let Mr. WorceCter and his brethren prove the contiary, if 
 they be able. 
 
 Again, pages 57, 58, fays he, * When they would prove, 
 that the infant feed of the church ought not to be bap- 
 tized, the arguments adduced only go to fhow, that be- 
 lievers, who have never received baptifm, ought to be 
 baptized.* 
 
 Mr. Worcefter is very forgetful, or he knows better than 
 to mifreprefent matters in this way. He knows, or ought 
 to know, for he has had the means of knowing, that the 
 arguments of the Antipaedobaptifts go to prove, that the 
 gofpei pre-requifite to baptifm is fuch as new-born infants 
 cannot poifefs, and therefore are excluded from the ordi- 
 nance, by the pre-requilJte enjoined in the inilitution. Had 
 he have told the public, that the arguments of the Anti- 
 psedobaptifts go to prove, that the gofpei enjoins, that per- 
 fons fhall be taught, or difcipled, previous to baptifm, and 
 lince new-born infants can be neither taught nor difcipled 
 they ^re not to be baptized, then would he have told us 
 the fimple truth. But the plain truth would not have 
 ferved his purpofe ; he therefore chofe to mifreprefent us, 
 cr elfe he has very ignorantly done it. 
 
 Mr. Worcefter's^//j inference, page 64, muft now com- 
 mand a little attention j and it is worthy cf it, both on 
 
Two Di/cour/esy '<sfc, 69 
 
 ivccount of its novelty and the popifh method which he 
 hath <^Jopted in its fupport. The inference is, * It may be 
 mferred Irom our fubjeel, i\\Al Jprinkiitig or offufion is a valid 
 and icriptural mode of baptifm.' 
 
 Would it not have been more fatisfadory to the public, 
 had Mr. Worcefter have fhown us from the word of God, 
 that jprinkl'ing or affujion is a valid and Icriptural mode of 
 baptilm : but this he could not do. He has done the beft 
 tie could : he has inferred from his fubjed that it is fo ; 
 he has alfo endeavoured to prove ic. His argument is, in 
 (hort, the following : — 
 
 The Paedobaptift church is the true gofpel church. The 
 true gofpel church, in all ages, has, according to the pur- 
 pofe and promife of God, had effeniially corred views of 
 the facraments. i he true church, for twelve or fifteen 
 hu..dred years, univerfally, allowed baptifm by fprinkling 
 or affufion to be fcriptural and valid. * Hence, if baptifm 
 by fprinkling or affufion be not valid and fcriptural, then^ 
 for the nrft twelve or fifteen hundred years, the views of 
 the whole body of the Chriftian world refpedlmg baptifm, 
 the firft facrament of the church, were effentially erroneous.' 
 
 Here, as his manner elfewhere is, he takes for granted 
 the very things, and the only things, which have need to 
 be proved, and then draws his conclufion, as though his 
 premifes were eifablifhed. 
 
 In the firft place, he takes for granted that the Paedo- 
 baptift church is the true gofpel church, which the Anti- 
 paedobaptifts have always denied ; and they have ever con- 
 lidered paedobaptifm as a badge of Antichrift, if not her 
 effential chara<fteriftic. 
 
 His next premife is fully granted, and is, no doubt, 
 fuiSciently correct ; and, if true, will fpoil his bullnefs of 
 fprinkling and affufion. It is this, The true gofpel church, 
 in ail ages, has, according to the purpofe and promife of 
 God, had elfentially corredt views of the facraments. 
 
 We will now hear his other pofition, \^hich is. The true 
 church, for twelve or fifteen hundred jears, univerfally, 
 allowed baptifm by fprinkling or affufion to be fcriptural 
 and valid. 
 
 Had not Mr. Worcefter have dealt fo largely in univerfal 
 affirmatives, he would not have fo largely expofed himfelf 
 to ievere reproof at every turn. 
 
 i he hiPorlc truth is juft this, The true church of Chrii> 
 never, in any age, allowed fprinkling or affufion to be f;rip- 
 
 F 2 
 
7© Letters on Rev. S. Worcejer's 
 
 tural and valid baplifm. But Mr. Worcefter is, in ra<5>, 
 fpeaking of the church of Antichrift ; and had he kept 
 hiftoric truth on his fide, even with refpedt to her, he would 
 have been lefs cenfurable than he now is. He, doubtlefs, 
 had the hiftory of Antichrift before him, and might have 
 been as correft as fhe is ; but even the general corruptions- 
 of Antichrill were not fufficiently erroneous for him, hut 
 he muft have them always to have been as great as they 
 were when they came to their higheft degree of perfetftnefs. 
 Hiftory informs us, that even Antichrift had not obtained 
 that degree of prefumption, as to fet afide the form or 
 matter of gofpel baptifm, and to change it for fprinkling 
 or affufion, except in cafes of ficknefs or fome bodily in- 
 firmity, till the year 1305 j when Pope Clement the fifth, 
 at the fecond fynod of Ravenna, approved, that baptifm 
 might be given, no neajjity cowpeulng, by fprinkling.* 
 
 Indeed, in Germany, fo late as the year 1542, it was not 
 generally known, if at all, that any, even in the church of 
 Antichrift, practifed or allowed fprinkling, fave in the cafe 
 of ficknefs or other infirmity, as the following alfures us : — 
 
 ^' Johannes Bugenhagius Pomeranus, when he faw, at 
 Hamburgh, an infant brought to baptifm, wrapped in 
 Twaddling clothes, and water fprinkled upon its head, w-as 
 amazed ; for that, except in the cafe of neceffity, for per- 
 fons fick in their beds, he had neither feen, nor heard, nor 
 in any hiftory read, of any fuch thing. Whereupon there 
 . being a convocation of all the minifters, it was a-fKed of 
 Mr. John Fritz, who had been formerly minifter at Lubeck, 
 how baptifm was there adminiftered, who anfwered, '' In- 
 fants were there, as in all Germany, baptized naked ; but 
 he was ignorant how that peculiar manner of baptizing 
 had crept in at Hamburgh '* " At length it was agreed 
 amongft them, that they Ihould fend to know the opinion 
 cf Luther, and the divines at Wertemberg, in this matter j 
 which being done, Luther wrote back 10 Hamburgh, that 
 this fpr'inhlin^ was an abufe, which ought to be removed ; 
 that thereupon immerfion was reftored at Hamburgh. "-f 
 
 It was not till the year 1603, that fprinkling obtained a 
 peaceable footing in England ; and even to this day, unieis 
 their rubrick has been lately changed, their piiefts are 
 obliged to dip the well children in the water.^ 
 
 • Hill. Eng Bapt Vol. II. Appendix, p. 70. -f IbiA 
 
 I Sec Eug. CI urch Rubrick on Baptil'm, 
 
Tivo Difcozirfes, l^c. 71 
 
 Even when fprinkling was fubftituted for baptiini, m 
 cale of iicknefs, yet it was a doubtful m-atrer, at belt, whe- 
 ther It V ere in fad Chrillian baptilm, or would anfwer for 
 it. This is evioeiU, from wh^it the piimitive fathers in the 
 church of Aritichrili have faid up(;n the fubje<5t. Cyprian 
 thought it might be fo conhdered.* But this fprinkhug or 
 pouring tor baptifm, was thought and judged io imperfect, 
 that it was not thought hiwful for any who were baptized 
 in this wavj to be admitted to any ofBce in the chi.rch. 
 See this point ftated ibmtv.hat largely in Dr. Gale's Ke- 
 fledions, from page 207 to 212. 
 
 What could have induced Mr. WorceCter to have framed 
 fuch palpable miflakes, the public will judge, each one lor 
 himfelf. How he, in a land of freedom, where every one 
 has liberty to fpeak and write the truth; could contradict 
 the Bible, liubborn facts, and common ienfe. as he has done, 
 is a problem I know not how otherv.'ife to folve, than to 
 conlider him fo blinded by prejudice and party, that he 
 knew not what he faid, ncr whereof he afiirmed. Indeed, 
 he appears exceeding niadagainil the church of Chrii't, and 
 as he proceeds in his pages his dirpoiaion to mifrepiefent 
 her increafes. 
 
 I pafs over feveral unfounded afTertions, that I may come 
 the focner to a mclf notorious flip of his pen, judgment, 
 information, or confcience. He will cloak himfelf under 
 which he pleafes ; but one thing is certain, that the follow- 
 ing afiertion of his is a notorious untruth. Says he, page 
 66, 'The Anabaptlfts, or Ai-itipasdobaptiifs, my brethren, 
 are a feet of modern date.' He adds another fentence, 
 which is no lefs ccntiaiy from fiubborn facts than is the 
 preceding. ' They (fays he) had their origin fome time 
 after the reformation under Lutlior and Calvin ; and their 
 origin, certainly, though v.e would by no m^eans reproach 
 our more regular bretl;ren of the prefent day with it, was 
 but very little calculated to imprefs a belief that the true 
 church of God v.as only to be found among them.' 
 
 The origin of the Antipaedobaptifts (or of the Anabap- 
 tifts, as they were ftyled by their enemies by v.ay of con- 
 tempt, as Chriilians were once called Nazarenes) Mr. Wor- 
 cefter knows not, or he will not acknowledge ; lie therefore 
 cannot inform us whether it was honc-urable, or the re'verje, 
 • They had their origin (he fays) fome time after the 
 reformation under Luther and Calvin.' But the fa<ft is, 
 
 * Cjprian, tpt. Corr, ad Fal'iun-., apud Nicer:!, fub i, c?p. 3. 
 
7 2 Letters on Rev. S. Worcefler*s 
 
 their origin cannot be found by their enemies : for they 
 are unwiiiing to find it among the difciples of John and of 
 Chrirt, where it realiy is. They can find it no where eife. 
 But to expofe Mr. Worceller's ralhnefs, relative to the 
 origin of the Baplitls, Anabaptifts, or Antipssdcbaptifts, I 
 \\-ili give the public a fhort account of it, or rather of the 
 PcEdcbaptiils' entire uncertainty or ignorance in this mat- 
 ter, as ftated by Moiheim, in his celebrated hiftory of the 
 church of x-\ntichrift. His words are, "The true origin of 
 that fcd^ nvhich acquired the denomination of the Anabapiirts 
 by their adminifteiing anew the rite of baptifm to thofe 
 who come over to their communion, and derived that of 
 Mennonites from the famous man to whom they owe the 
 greateft part of their prefent ielicity, u hid in the remote 
 depths of antiquity^ and is of confequence extremely dij^cult to 
 he ajceriained. This uncertainty will not appear furprifing^ 
 when it is confidered, that this fed llarted up all of a fudden, 
 in feveral countries at the fame point of time ^ under leaders of 
 ditl'erent talents and different mtentions, and at the 'very 
 period Vv'hen Ihe f.rfi ontefl of the reformers with the Roman 
 pontiffs drew the attention oi the world, and employed the 
 pens of the learned, in fuch a manner as to render all other 
 objtds and incidents aimort miatters of indifference."* 
 
 Mr. Worceller will not deny the tellimony of his brother 
 Mi>lheim ; if he Ihould, a multitude of others might be 
 produced, to eftablifh, in fubftance, the fame fa(5t. 
 
 After making feveral other affertions, not founded in 
 fad, he fays, page 67, * Can we, then, believe that their 
 mode of baptifm only is fcriptural and valid? If fo, what 
 becomes of the £\ithfulnefs of God to his promifes ?' 
 
 Reply. Did God ever promife to continue the gofpel 
 ordinances to the church of Antichriit ? Or, is he unfaith- 
 ful to his promifes, if he have not continued the true gofpel 
 baptilm, through all generations, in the antichriili.in church 
 of Rome ? The church of Chrift, as Mr. Worceller ought 
 to know, and he would recoiled, were he not darkened by 
 the traditions of men, hath been in the v.-ildernefs twelve 
 hundred and fixty years, during which time we are no;: to 
 exped that the hiltory of Antichrill will give us much 
 corred uiformation rel'peding her. Nor can we depend 
 upon their accounts being either friendly or jull. Belides, 
 at \.\\e beginnin'j: of the reformation under Luther and 
 Calvin, the church left her wiidernefs Ihttion, and arafe at. 
 
 * Cent. i6. fed: ;, part a. chap. 3. 
 
Tivo Difcourfcs^ ^f. ']i 
 
 from the dead, and appeared in many places, ahnnf. at the fame 
 pohit of time. And during the retorniaiion, God fhewed to 
 both Luther and Calvin, as ycu may Tee by their writings, 
 what Wiis the true goipel baptilm ; but neither they nor 
 their followers would be faithful in the practice of it : but 
 the church of Ch: ift hath both known and obferved it, and 
 will flill do thus. 
 
 The public ovght to be apprized, that Mr. Wcrcefter, 
 from beginning to end of his Sermons, has been pleading 
 llie caufe, and for the church and ordinance, of Antichrift ; 
 then will they not be greatly furprifed, to hear him com- 
 bine fprinkling and many other things, which he and his 
 brethren have praclifed. and then fay, * The man who couKl 
 believe it (that is, that thefe things are, taken together, all 
 erroneous, and the fooner demolilhed the better) would 
 find but very little difficulty in believing, that the Bible is 
 a cunningly devifed fable, &c.-' And, fays he, page 69, 
 * The fair and invincible conciunon then is, that fprinkling 
 or affufion, the mode of baptifm praftifed in thele churches, 
 is fcriptural and valid.' 
 
 Mr. Worcefter has taken the fame courfe of argumenta- 
 tion to fuppcrt the validity of fprinkling or afFufion, which 
 the mother of harlots has employed to prove all her filthy 
 abominations to be fcriptural and valid ; and her ccnclufiou 
 is equally ftrong, fcriptural, and valid with his. Yes, and 
 the Bible too muil be coniidered as a cunningly devifed 
 fable, if his antifcriptural and papiftical notion of fprinkling 
 be not granted, as being both fcriptural and valiu. 
 
 Now follows another of his confequences. * Accord- 
 ingly (fays he) there is nothing in the fcripturts againft it, 
 (fprinkling for baptifm) but much, did time permit, in 
 favour of it.' What a pity he had n^-t taken a little time, 
 to have mentioned at leaft one pafTage in favour of fprink- 
 ling : Till he does, he will be confidered as h.iving done 
 the work of the Lord deceiifuUy. 
 
 We have already feen, that ftubborr- faffs, rerorced 07 
 hirtorians, both ancient and modern, are to Mr. Worcefter 
 as rotten wood. He runs directly thrc^ugh them,, and af- 
 ferts jufl: the contrary, without giving a fhow of reaibn why 
 he does fo. He has alfo begun to treat the Bible in the 
 fume manner. But his boldnefs hitlierto is quite out-done, 
 by his daring and prefumptuous afierticns in the tv/o para- 
 graphs which next follow. Thefe two I fiiall tranlcribe 
 entire, that they may iland as perpetual monuments of his 
 tco great boldnefs. Says hcj 
 
74 Letters on Rev. S. VVorceJler^s 
 
 * V/e haiie no cuidmce in the Jcr'iptureSy that in the days of 
 Chriji and his apojlles, any psrf-m loas baptized by d'pping^ or 
 immerjion.^ 
 
 ' Ajtsr all the laborious and oftentatiovs criticifm upon the 
 Greek 'vjord bavtizo^ it Jlill remains a fady luell known to all 
 who are 'uerjed in the Greek language^ that the ufe of that ivord 
 determines nothingy in refpeB to the particular mode in ivhich 
 tuater is to b^ applied in baptifm. It is, in a 'variety of injlances^ 
 in the Greek fcriptures, and in other Greek, turitings^ vfed to 
 fg'dfy a luajloing or cleanjing^ ivhich nvas performed by fprink' 
 ling or pouring ; and may as properly fignify fprinkling or pour- 
 ingi as plunging or dipping. * 
 
 Upon theie words of Mr. Worcefter's, I fnall juft make 
 the following obfervations. 
 
 1. Had Mr. Worcefter been ignorant of the Greek, his 
 ignorance might have plead for him^ that his fault was but 
 the fn ot prejurnptive ignorance. 
 
 2. Mr. Worceiter having given us no inilance, from any 
 writings, either facred or profane, in Vvhich the word baptizo 
 is ufed in the fenfe in which he tells us it is, in a variety of 
 jnftances, in the Greek fcriptures, and in other Greek writ- 
 ings, he is therefore not entitled to the belief of any peifon. 
 
 3. Mr. Worceller does not appear to believe himfelf j 
 for in his note, on the next page, he endeavours to parry 
 the charge of prefumption and falfehood, which he proba- 
 bly expeded would be made out againd him, and fays, 
 
 * It is important to be remembered, that when words are ufed 
 in reference to drjlne injlitutio-as, and to fpiritual things, they 
 have an appropriate meaning, which can never be deter- 
 mined fronn the mean'.ng which they have in common ufe.* 
 A perfon who would believe this papiilical turn and newly 
 vamped deception of Mr. V/orceiler's, deferves to be igno- 
 rant. Let the common people but beheve him in this, and 
 he can make them Papiils at once. 
 
 To give l)is obfervation a fhow of reafon, he tells us, that 
 
 * d/ipnon fignines a feaft or common meal, and yet we think 
 it fuiticient to take a imall piece of bread and a very little 
 wine.' But do not the evapgelifts Maik and Luke fully 
 explain this matter, and teii us, that what is called the 
 Lord^s flipper was at moil but a fmall part of the fupper 
 which they ate at the time ? Can Mr. Worcefter ftiow any 
 exception, with reipe<5t to baptifm, and make it appear that 
 the word is ufed in a diminutive fenfe .'' then would his 
 obfervation not be fo in the face of fcripture and common 
 fenfe, as it now is. But even then, it wculd be noUiin^ tQ 
 
T-ivo Difcourfe^^ ^c. y^, 
 
 his purpofe ; for it would make no more than this — that 
 a partial immerrion, cr very fmall part imnieried, would be 
 baptilm. Eelides, if v.e can know nothing of the crd'inances^t 
 or of d'iv':ne things, by the uie of words in their commonly 
 received fenfe, then may the common people be deceived 
 jufl: ^'hen and ivhre and fo much as their defigning prieCls 
 lliall chocfe. If Mr. Worcerter think to tread thus upon 
 the necks of his own people, I pray the merciful Lord to 
 deliver others from fuch deceptions. 
 
 4. Mr. Worceller cannot produce a pafT^ge, from Gen^ 
 eTiS to Revelation, in which kaptizo is uled for fprir.kling. 
 If he will do it, I agree to make concefllons, before faints 
 and hnners, as pubiickly as he fhall prefcrihe. I do not 
 fay, I will make concellions, if he will aflert tliat it is thus 
 ufed, but if he will fhow it to be thus : and till he dees, he 
 is, in my judgment, worthy to lie under the imputation of 
 having deiignedly or arrogantly impofed upon all the un- 
 learned in his own fociety, and in evtry other, and upon 
 the public generally. 
 
 5. Mr. Worceiter tells us, that hapti%o, or to baptize, 
 * may as properly fjgnify fprinkling or pouring, as plunging 
 or dipping ;' and yet he adds, < It is important to be remem- 
 bered, that when words are ufed in reference to d'rclne injil- 
 tuticns, and to fpirkual things ^ tliey have an abprcpriate mean- 
 ing, which can never be determined from the m.eaning 
 which they have in their cor-^.mon ufe.' Here, according 
 to Mr. Worcefter, the word Laptlzo means any thing which 
 either he or his opponents choofe, and from its meaning 
 nothing can be determined by either. This very exactly 
 comports with what fome of the blind leaders are bold 
 enough to fay, Ihat cutmvon people can never knoiv for them- 
 fdves lukat baptifm is^ but rnuji belicve it to be ivhat their min- 
 ijhrs tell thtin. 
 
 Nor has he given the public any better argument than 
 this, to prove that the human invention cf fprinkling is the 
 divine inftitution of baptifm. His argument is this — * The 
 Paedobaptiil:, or, more ftricftly fpeai<i:i2-, the Fsedorantift 
 • denomination, is the vifible- church of Chrift. The vifible 
 church of Chrift hath been eifentially correal in her notions 
 of the gc^fpel byptifm, and Jije h.'ith htld fprinkiin'g to be 
 fcriptural and valid baptilm ; therefore fprinkling is the 
 true gofpel baptifm.' .Tuft fo his hoiinefs the pope argues — • 
 ** The holy catholic church of Rome is the true vifible 
 gofpel church. The true vifible gofpel church hath ever 
 had juft notions of the facrament of the fupper ; and Jhe 
 
•76 ■ Letters on Rev. S. IVcrcejhr^s 
 
 hath for many hundred years believed, that the bread and 
 wine, after the conitcration of the prieft, are chtinged into 
 the real body and blood of Chrift : therefore the dodrine 
 of tranfubilantiation is fcriptural and valid. So are, for 
 the fame reafons, the dodrines of purgatory, extreme unc- 
 tion, praying to the virgin Jtlary and to images, counting 
 of beads, and all the other fripperies of the church of 
 Rome, fcriptural and valid." Thus we fee that Mr. Wor- 
 cefter*s argument and the pope's are juft the fame, and 
 ufed to eitablitn the fame point — that man's inventions are 
 God's inilitutions. 
 
 Mr. Worceiter denies that the pope's church is the vifible 
 church of Chrift, and fo the pope's argument is fpoiled. 
 V>^e equally deny, that Mr. Worcefier's unbaptized church 
 is the viiible church of ChriR, his argument therefore ^alls 
 to the ground equally as did the pcjpe's. 
 
 In pages 69, 70, Mr. Worccller hns a note, which 
 deferves attention. His Vv'ords are, * It has been a com- 
 mon thing with the Antipx:dobaptifts, to fpeak very dif- 
 refpeiftfully of learning and learned men ; but of late, one 
 can baldly meet with an Antijiasdcbaptift, who is not 
 prepared to talk fo fluently and fo learnedly of the meaning 
 •f Greek and Latin words, as aimoft to amaze one. Even 
 the author of Seven Sermons, on the mode and fubjecls of 
 baptjfm, " defires to thank God that he knows the Greek 
 as well as any man ;" and has two or three fermors almcft 
 wholly upon the meaning of a few Greek and Latin words. 
 On this fubje(5l, however, though from his manner one 
 might be led to fuppofe it had never before been attended 
 to, he has nothing materially new : nothing but what was 
 furnifhed to his hands by Dr. Gill, and other Anabaptift 
 writers ; and nothing but what has been repeatedly and 
 unanfwerably anfwered. He aiferts much, but proves very 
 little ; and yet, with an authoritive air, but little becoming 
 a Chriftian minifter, he requires us all to fubmit to his 
 affertions, on pain of beir.g placed at the ban of the kingdom 
 ofChiiaV 
 
 Upon this part of his note (and more of it will be pro. 
 duced foon) the following remarks niay merit fome at- 
 tention. 
 
 I. If learning have been generally mifufed hy learned 
 men, as it has by Mr. Worceiter, to mifrepreicnt the ckar- 
 adlers and fentim^ents of the .'intipxdobaptith, it is not to 
 be wondered at, if they have fpoken dilrefpeftfully c-f both. 
 
Two Difcsurfes^ "^c, 77 
 
 2. As to the contemptuous manner in which he fpenks 
 of me, it is but a fmall thing, as it lefpccls m,e perfonally ; 
 but as to his merit or demerit, in pubhfhtng an hearfay 
 expreffion, intentionally to my dil ad vantage, the public 
 will judge. Notwithlianding his cjfertion and re-ajjertion^ 
 that 1 have made the expreffion fomeivhere^ and before 
 fome perfons, whom Solomon would call tale-bearers, I 
 ftill confider it a flander, and the accufation as falle as the 
 mann^- of his publilliing it was illiberal. Had I have 
 made the expreffion, would any man, had he a good caufe 
 to defend, have employed fuch kind of defence ? No man, 
 who fuitably regards his own reputation, will, in a religious 
 controverfy, fcek the Jupport of his caufe by leifening, in any 
 uncivil method, the character of his opponent. Should I 
 lower tbe character of Mr. Worcefter, it ihail be becaufe I 
 am compelled to it, by fetting in plain view how he has 
 expofed himfelf. I will not mention what I know of the 
 man, nor will I utter what fam.e hath reported ; my bufi- 
 nefs with him, before the public, is upon what he hath 
 committed to the infpevflion of the vrhole. 
 
 What advantage he could pupofe to himfelf, or to his 
 denomination, by telling the public, that my Sennons con- 
 tained nothing materially new, and that what I had faid 
 v.'as furnilhed to my hand by Dr. Gill and others, is diffi- 
 cult to afcertain, unlefs it were to make me appear as fmall 
 as he could, that my opponents might confider their ta/k 
 to be eafy, and the productions of my pen to be fcarce 
 worth reading. But whether my Sermons be great or 
 /wi?//, whether they contain things tie'w or old, wheiher tlie 
 fubjeft matter of them were furnilhed to my hand by Dr. 
 ■Gill (a page of whofe writings I had then never feen upon 
 the fubjecl) or by any other perfon, is not the point. The 
 queftion of importance is. Do they contain ftubborn facts, 
 fo handled by common fenfe as to expofe the Psdobaptiil 
 errors, by the exhibition of plain truth ? 
 
 3. What he tells the public, of my requiring perfons to 
 believe what my Sermons contain, upon pain of being 
 placed at the ban (that is, the curfe, or execration) of the 
 kingdom of Chrift, is equally ' unfounded with his other 
 affertions. 
 
 We will new hear fom-e more of his note. Says he, 
 * The word lapnzo, as conceded on .all hands, fignifies to 
 <ivafi,* Here he rniftakes again. It is not, by any means, 
 conceded, that hatt't%o fignifies to wajh^ iu the common 
 
B Letters on Rev. S. Worccfter'j 
 
 acceptation of that word. It fignifies to wafh in a fpecific 
 fenfe ; to wafli by immerfion, dipping, or putting the thing 
 in water : this is the only fenle in which we concede that 
 baptizo fignifies to wafh. Mr. Worcefter fubjoins, * If it be 
 faid, that fprinkling or affufion is not walhing ; it may 
 ahb, with equal pertinency, be faid, that dipping is not 
 walhing.* Here is another of his miftakes : for dipping is, 
 in the Bible, in the cafe of Naaman, put for a fpecific kind 
 of wafliing ; in one inftance it is called wafhing, and in 
 another the iame thing is called dipping. But, if my 
 recollevSlion ferves me, fprinkling is never called wafh- 
 ing ; never once fo called, from Genefis to Revelation : 
 and all he fays about it is, in my judgment, merely to 
 darken counfel by words without knowledge. 
 
 Again, fays he, * If it be faid, that dipping is one mode 
 in which wafhing is peiformed ; it may, in rejoinder, be 
 faid, fo alfo is fprinkling or affufion one mode in which 
 wafhing is peiformed ; and that too, the mode in which 
 the fcriptures moft commonly reprefent ceremonial and 
 fpirilual wafnings.* But where do the fcriptures fay any 
 fuch thine ? Where do they fo much as once mention that 
 fprinkling is ceremonial or fpiritual wafliing, or any other 
 kind of wafliing ? Mr. Worcefter's fide muft, indeed, be 
 hard piefTed, when, with all his labour, he cannot find fo 
 much as a fentence of fcripture, to help him out of his 
 increafing difficulty. 
 
 In the next paragraph, he very incautioufly involves 
 hirafelf in a double difficulty, from which he will not be 
 able to extricate himfelf. 
 
 * It is important (fliys he) to be remembered, that when 
 words are ufed in reference to {iiv'me irijtitut/onsy and to Jpir"' 
 itiiai thiri'TSj they have an appropriate meaning, which can 
 never be determined from, the meaning which they have in 
 their common ufi' Here tv,o things are highly noticeable. 
 
 I. He implicitly grants, with relation to bapti%o-, what 
 we affirm to be true, that the commiOn ufe, the plain fenfe, ^ 
 of it, is to immerfe ; otherwife, it would not be important 
 to his purpole for us to remember, * that when words are 
 ufed in reference to divine inftitutions, they have an appro- 
 priate weaning^ whicli can never be determined from the 
 meaning which they have in tlieir common ufe.* For if bap- 
 fizoy in its common ufe, ever mean to fprinkle or alfufe, 
 whi^h Mr. Worcefler tells us,, in the preceding page, it may 
 3.Z properly fignify, as to plunge or dip, then, if to fprinkle 
 
Two Difcourfa^ Isfc, 79 
 
 fcr to pour be baptiim, the word has no appropriate 
 meaiung w/jen ufed in reference to that divine iullitution. 
 But, lays he, * It is iniportant to remember, that it has an 
 appropriate meaning when ufed in reference to a divine 
 inllitution ;' therefore, in its common ufe it can have no 
 fach meaning as to fprinkle or pour. 
 
 2. For more than fevcnteen hundred years, both the 
 learned and the unlearned have, generally, been enveloped 
 in neceljcjry ignorance, as to what the divine inlliiution ot 
 bapLifra is ; for few, if any, ever knew, till Mr. Worcefter 
 gave th.e impariant information^ tliat they were not to unuer- 
 liand baptl%o, when ufed with reference to baptifm, in tlie 
 fame fenfe in which it was commonly ufed. The Lord 
 hath no where given us this important information ; and 
 had it not been lor Mr. Worcefter, we had ftill gone on in 
 our native and neceiTary ignorance. What will Chriftians 
 tlii.ik and fay of this matter ? Reader, I pray thee confider 
 v.-ifely of this. Hath the wife, the compaffionate Lord 
 Jefus com.manded all who love him to be baptized, and 
 in the command, and in the circum fiances of the command, 
 hath given them no information, but what he intended they 
 fhould obferve, what the common fenle of the word im- 
 ported, v.hile, at the i^ime time, he had an appropriate 
 fecret meaning to it ? Does Mr. Worceller think to change 
 the laws of Chrift, at this late period of the world ? Will 
 Chriilians admit fuch a grofs impofuion, not merely upon 
 the Bible and upon common fenfe, but upon the Lord of 
 both ? Shall the world be always impofed upon by fuch 
 bare-faced wickednefs i* He virtually accufes the Chriftian 
 Lawgiver v.-ith duplicity and deception. The Lord hath 
 commanded a divine inftitution, yet in the command hath 
 ufed words in an appropriate fenfe, and yet hath given no 
 intimation of their being thus ufed ; and thus he hath im- 
 pofed upon his poor followers, or elfe Mr. Woiceifer hath 
 manifeftly accufed, falfely, the Holy One of Ifrael. Will 
 Mr. Worcerter blufti and condemn himfelf, for thus abufmg 
 tiie Chriil of God ? or will he ftiil juftify himfelf, and fay, 
 that the Son of God, who taught man's tongue to fpeak, 
 and gave undenlanding to the fons of men, hath, in the 
 chara>fter of Chridian Lawgiver, ufed words in fuch an 
 appropriate fenfe, that both the learned and the rude, the 
 faint and the finner, were all of them not only equally liable 
 to miftake him, but under a natural necelTity to do fo ? For 
 Jefus Chriif haih not, in any part of his law or gcfpel, told 
 
8o Letters en Rev. S. Worcejier^s 
 
 lis what this appropriate fenfe is, in which he would hare 
 us imderltand the word baptixo^ or to baptize. Nor has he 
 fo revealed this to Mr. Worcefter, that he is able to inform 
 us with certainty what it is ; at moft, he can, or does, tell 
 us nothing more than this — It is a very fmall or little im- 
 merfion. 
 
 May the longfuiFering Redeemer kindly rebuke and 
 gracioufiy forgive the prefumption of the man, and deliver 
 his own people from fuch grofs impofitions ! 
 
 I will prefent the public with but one more quotation 
 from the note under confideration, and it is this, * Should 
 any zealous Chriftians (fays he) think it necefTary to make 
 literally a feaR, or a full meal, at the Lord's table ; they 
 might, v/ith as much propriety, and as much of the Chrif- 
 tian fpirit, feparatc themfelves from the communion of thofe 
 who only partake of a little bread and wine, and charge 
 them with refufmg to keep the ordinance of the Lord ; as 
 thofe, who think it neceifary to be plunged all over in 
 water, win feparate themfelves from the communion of 
 thofe who have only been baptized by fprinkling, and 
 charge them with not keeping the ordinance of the Lord.' 
 
 This is another of his rnifreprefentationa : for, 
 
 1. The partaking of a little bread and wine, is the plain, 
 literal import of the ordinance, or of the elements and cele- 
 bration of it ; as is manifeft in the very inftitution of it. 
 It was while they were eating and drinking, or after they 
 had for a while been eating and drinking, our Lord took 
 bread and wine, and gave them to his difciples, as a com- 
 memorative ordinance. But, 
 
 2. It is not thus in the ordinance of baptifm. There is 
 no fuch intimation, that a very fmall or partial immerfion 
 is, was, or ever fliall be, gofpel baptifm. And as for 
 fprinkling, man's fubllitute for gofpel baptifm, there is 
 nothing in it w^hich has any fimilarity to the firft gofpel 
 ordinance. There is, therefore, no likenefs in the two 
 cafes which he has put : one is according to the command- 
 ment and pattern given, and the other is quite a different 
 thing. God's people will one day fee how their leaders 
 caufe them to err. 
 
 In the mean time, I am, for defending the truth, r} e 
 reproach of many. 
 
T-juG Difcourjh, "ijfc. 8i 
 
 We appeal to the Bible, to Jiubborn fads, and ti 
 common fenfc. 
 
 L E T T E Pv IX. 
 
 MEN, BRETHREN, AND FATHERS, 
 
 X OU are, no doubt, either tired of Mr. Wor- 
 cefter's miftakes and mifreprelentations, or of my correc- 
 tions of his departures from fcripture truth, from hiftoric 
 fa6ts> and from common fenfe. But, as he has impofed 
 upon your credulity, and infuked your want of claffic 
 knowledge and hiftoric information, you will readily bear 
 with me a little, whilft I endeavour to remove the blinds 
 and uncover the deceptions which have kept you from 
 feeing the order and ordinances cf the church of the Son 
 of God. 
 
 We fhall, for a few minutes, attend upon Mr. Worcefter, 
 where he is profelfedly giving us the fcripture account of 
 gofpel baptifm. 
 
 In page 70, he introduces the fubject thus : * In two or 
 three inftances we read, (fays he) indeed, of their going 
 down into the water, and coming up out of the water ; but 
 the original particles, rendered in thefe inftances, into and 
 out ofi are as properly, and much more commonly, rendered 
 fimply to and /row.* But, I reply, they are never rendered 
 to and from. v%hen they refer to the ordinance of baptifm ; 
 nor eould they be properly ever thus rendered. Accoi'd= 
 ingly, the tranflators of^the Bible have never, in a fniglc 
 inftance, adopted Mr. Worcefter's tranflation of them, when 
 the ordinance was in queftion. Nor could they with pro- 
 priety have ever thus rendered them ; which tliey would 
 have done, if it had been poffible, confiftent with their 
 folemn engagement to fidelity : for it was in the reign of 
 king James, under whofe patronage they tranllatcd the 
 Bible, that the human rite of fprinkhng obtained public 
 countenance in England, as a common fubftilute for gofpel 
 baptifm. Thefe tranflators could not have failed to have 
 admitted Mr. Worcefter's tranflation, had the connexion 
 have juftified fuch a meafure : but in no inftance have thej* 
 done thus. They knew and pra<ftifed beiler, than to per^ 
 
 G 2 
 
82 Letters en Rt-j. S. Worcejler" s 
 
 vert the fcriptures by fuch a tranllatio}! ; and Mr. Worcei- 
 ter ought to know better, or fay leis, for God will not 
 always fufrer his people to be thus blindly led. 
 
 * But (lliys he) it is particularly to be remembered, that 
 when they went down to the \^ater, or into the water, it is 
 not in a fingle ir.lcance faid how they were there baptized, 
 whether by dipping or by iprini^iing.' 
 
 Rqny. Here let common lenfe fpeak, and iay> it the fol- 
 lowing inftances do not exprefs the manner how. They 
 were all baptized of him (John) in the river of Jordan. 
 Jefus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of 
 John IN Jordan. And Jlratght'way coming up out of the 
 water, &c. Buried with Chrift in baptifm. Planted in bap- 
 tifm. Buried by baptifm.. Raifed with Chrift in baptifm. 
 Having our hod'ies tvcJJjtd with pure water, &c.* Is it to 
 be particularly remembered, that not in a fmgle inftance, 
 when they went down to the water, or into the water, * it 
 is not faid kotv they were there baptized, whether by dip- 
 ping or by fprinkling V It ought, indeed, to be particularly 
 known, and then reinembeied, that not in a fmgle inftance, 
 in ail the Bible, is fprinkling fo much as mentioned or inti- 
 maied to be the matter or mode of gofpel baptifm. In 
 every hngle inftance, where any direct or circumftantial 
 information is c-iven of the manner how, in baptifm, it 
 implies immerfi.'.n, and nothing fhort of it. Befides, the 
 very word itfeJf, in every inftance, tells us, in its plain, 
 literal, and comm^on fenfe, as Mr. Worcefter implicitly 
 allows, that the m.anner hoiu, in baptifm, was immtrjion. 
 
 Mr. Worcefter tells us, in his note, page 71, that ' Chrift's 
 baptifm was dehgned regularly to introduce him into his. 
 prieftly oitice, according to the law of Mofes.' Where did 
 Mr. Worcefter obtain this information ? Not in the Bible, 
 for that contradids it : for, fays the apoftle to the Hebrews, 
 chap. vii. Chrift " fhould not be called after the order of 
 Aaron. For the prlejihocd being c\anged^ there is made of 
 nccejfity a change of the law. — CHir Lord fprang out of Juda ; 
 of v/hich tribe Moles fpake nothing concerning priefthood." 
 BefiJes, fays the apoftle, our Lord " is made [prieft] not 
 after the Ui'vj of a carnal commandment^ but aftej the poiver 
 of .r,i endiefs life. For he teftifieth. Thou art a prieft for- 
 ever, after the order of Melchfedec.*^ But in contradiiftion 
 to the word of God, Mr. Worcefter, that he might deprive 
 
 * Matt. iii. 6. Mark i. ^, 9, ic Rem. vi 4, 5 Col. il J 2. Keb. x, zz. 
 
Two DifcGurfes^ ^c, - '^'i^ 
 
 Chrlftians of the example of their Lord in baptifm, would, 
 Vvithout a word of fcriptiire authority, and contrary from 
 eiiery commandment in the Mofaic laiu oi prtefihoody introduce 
 Chrilt into his prieftly office according to the law of Mofes. 
 Moles knew nothing about this notion of Mr. Worcefter's ; 
 nor would he or his brethren ever have invented it, had 
 they not found difficulty in oppofmg the practice of the 
 baptized church. 
 
 We will novv hear his conclufion, as to the fcripture 
 account of fprinkling for baptifm, and his evidence, as he 
 hath fummed it up, pages 72, 73. * Is it not plain (fays 
 he) that fprinkling is a mode much more properly fignifi- 
 cant than dipping ? In reference to the application of the 
 blood of Chrid, we never read of dipping or immerfing, 
 but conftantly oi- fprinkling or pouring.^ Not fo : for, Rev. 
 i. 5. we read cf Jems Chrift, " who loved us, and luafJjed 
 us from our fms in his own blood.^* But he adds feveral 
 paifages of fcripture, which are nothing to his purpofe, for 
 they fay nothing of baptifm : hov/ever, the reader fhall 
 have fet before him the paifages mentioned. They are 
 thefe : — " Ye are come to the blood of fprinkling. And 
 fprinkling of the blood of Chriif. I will" pour out my 
 Spirit upon all iiefn. I will fprinkle clean water upon you, 
 and ye ihali be clean. S» Ihall he fprinkle many nations." 
 * Such (fays he) are the uniform reprefentations of fcrip- 
 ture.' What does he here intend ? If his meaning be, what 
 his readers would naturally underfiand, by his ftatemient of 
 the matter, that * fuch are the uniform reprefentations of 
 fcripture,' when the ordinance of baptrfm is intended or 
 fpoken of, then there is not a word of truth in what he 
 fays, but juft the reverfe is true ; lor there is not one fuch 
 reprefentation in all the Bible, when the gofpel ordinance 
 cf baptifm is mentioned. I v»ti1 not fay that Mr. Worcefter 
 meant to deceive and impofe upon the public, but this I 
 will fay, Had this been his intention, his writings could 
 not have appeared more like it. 
 
 His next itep is^ to reafon with his people upon propriety 
 and decency^ fuppofed order and folemnity, the very mother of 
 this papifiical abomination^ of \S\\s fprinkling fulfil tute for gofpel 
 baptifm. Mr. Worcefter having laboured, and labQured in 
 i}ain, to find one word f.f God, which mei-rions fprinkling 
 for the ordir.ance of baptifm, he would noiv perfuade his 
 people and the public to give their aifent to it upon the 
 fcore of propriety and decency, or upon account of ord^r and 
 
84 Letters on Rev, S. Worce^er's 
 
 fohnmlty. "What crooked paths are trodden by the blind 
 leaders of the bhnd ! Once was I, as to Infant baptlfm, in 
 this fame crooked path; but, by the grace of God, 1 am 
 ivkat I am. 
 
 Mr. Worcefter, in his note, page 73, tells u?, < The quef- 
 tlon properly between us is not this, whether any were 
 baptized, in the days of Chriil and his apcfties, by Immer- 
 ficn or dipping ; but It is preclfely this, whether immerficn 
 or dipping be the only valid mode of baptifm.* He has 
 defined the queftion well, and for a full anfwer, fee my 
 Letters to Mr. Auftln. However, I will give a fliort anfwer 
 here, and an anfwer too, which neither Mr. Worcefter nor 
 his brethren have been or ever will be able to refute. The 
 anfwer is this, — The Bible mode of baptifm is the only 
 valid mode. The Bible mxode, that which Chrift com- 
 manded, and that which the apoftles pradlfed, was Immer- 
 fion, and immerfion only, as is evident from this plain 
 reafon — Immerfion is the plain, literal, and common i^vS^ 
 cf the comimand, and the plain, literal, ai:d common fenfe 
 of the hiftory given of the apoftles' pra<fllce Is alfo imimer- 
 fion ; and there Is no different or (^ppofite fenfe to the literal 
 meaning of the word, or to the pra<fllce of the apoRles. 
 But, fays Mr. Worcefter, * if in the mod extreme cafes, fuch 
 as thofe of sickness and imprifonnrtnty baptifm might be ad- 
 mlnillered by fprlnkling or affufion, then immerfion Is not 
 elfentlal to the ordinance.* I anfwer. Certainly, If there 
 be any poffible cafe, In which gofpel baptifm m^ay be ad- 
 miniftered in any way otherwife than by immerfion, then 
 immerficn is not effential to the ordinance ; but this is the 
 very thing to be proved. The Bible, by neither precept, 
 example, nor Implication, gives any liberty for any fuch 
 baptifm. 1 he Bible knows nothing of fick-bed baptiftn, 
 nor of imprlfoned baptifm, nor of baptifm by fprinkling or 
 iiffufion. 
 
 After Mr. Worcefter had faid very many thing;, with 
 very little candour, and with lefs regard to veracity and 
 facts, he endeavours, page 74, to load the Anabaptlfts, as 
 he terms them, with reproach, and to cover them with 
 contempt, by charging to their account feveral fuperfti- 
 tious pra(flices which took place more than a thoufand years 
 before he will allow them even an exigence. Says he, 
 page 66, * The Anabaptlfts, my brethren, are a feci of 
 modern date ; they had their origin fome time after the 
 reformation under Luther and Calvin.' But now, page 
 
T^o Difcourfes^ Uc, %^ 
 
 74, to calumniate the poor Anabaptiils, he charges to their 
 reproach whai he lays was pradtiied by ancient Chriftians. 
 YLq tells us, * When they were baptized by immerfionj they 
 ■were all baptized naked, they were iinmeried three times, 
 they were figned with the crofs, and on coming o^it of the 
 water they were clothed in white lobes, &c. Let it not be 
 faid (fays he) that this was the manner of popifli immer- 
 fions ; it was the manner of the carlieft immerfions of 
 which we have any account.' 
 
 Now this whole matter, or the fubftance of it, as he has 
 ftated it, is falfe, from beginning to end of it.* Y\v: the 
 fingularity of it is, that he fhould lay thefe fuperftitious 
 pra(ftices to the reproach of the Anabaptitis, who had not 
 (if Mr. Worcefier told the truth to his brethren; any exiil- 
 ence till more than a thoufand years after the introduction 
 of thefe fuperftitions. Beiides, what renders it ftill more 
 fmgular is, the Anabaptifts, as he calls them, have never 
 praiflifed or approved of the errors with which he reviles 
 them ; but his own denomination have for ages, or in dif- 
 ferent ages, pradtifed the whole of them, as I am ready to 
 fhow at large, if he and his brethren wifli me to. It is to 
 be remiemhered, that my prcpofal is, to prove that the 
 P^dobaptifts are chargeable with, and have praftifed, all 
 the fuperftitious fripperies which Mr. Worcefter unright- 
 eoufly and iUiberally lays to the reproach of the Anabap- 
 tifts. It is not enough for Mr. Worcefter to reproach the 
 gofpel ordinance of baptifm, by calling it plunging and 
 dipping ; and to give the baptized church an ill name, 
 which never anfwered to their public fentiment, any farther 
 than this — when any, who had not received gofpel believ- 
 ers' baptifm, wifhed to be of their comxmunion, they ad- 
 miniftered it to him. Yes, it is not enough for him to do 
 all this, and to charge to the account of the baptized church 
 all the evils v. hich he can fee or hear of them ; but in 
 addition, he muft heap upon them, the fuperftitions of his 
 own profefTed denomination, v/hich took place hundreds of 
 years bcfoie there was, according to his own affertions, fo 
 much as one fociety cf Baptlfts, or, as he calls them., Ana- 
 baptifts, in the world. A man vrho can knowingly, delib- 
 erately, and wih^ully, be guilty of fuch managemxcnt, to 
 blind his C'.vn people, to keep truth out of fight, and to 
 
 * ""ee Booth's Pc-cdo. Vol II p icg. Mofheim, Vcl. I p 200,388. 
 Vel II. ctnt 4. Booth, Vol I. p. 258, :63. 265, &c. 
 
^6 Letters on Rev. S. Wcrcejfer's 
 
 retain the public mind in the belief of fome of the fuperfti- 
 lions of popery, is not deferving of very high reputation, 
 among the faithful, though dcfpifed, followers*of the Lamb. 
 
 Mr. Worcefler's exhortation, page 74 — 76, to parental 
 faiihfulnefs, would be in meafure pleafing, were it not that 
 it is founded in error, and brought to fupport it. He 
 reminds parents of their duty, * to bear their children on 
 their hearts at the throne of grace, praying with them and 
 for them ; faithfully to inftrucl them, as they become capa- 
 ble of receiving inftrudion, in the doclrines and precepts of 
 the gofpel,' &c. All this is good; and it is greatly to le 
 defired, that Chriftians, of whatever name, were more faithful 
 in bringing up their children in the nurture and admonition 
 of the Lord. But even where he enforces a gofpel duty, 
 he does it from a confideration of his erroneous principles, 
 and not by goi'pel injunctions or motives. He teils the 
 parents of their baptlxed children^ the children of the covenant^ 
 tj:e children of the churchy the covenant 'vonvs of parents 
 believingly to trujl in the promife of God refpe£fing their children^ 
 &ic. Now, we find not a word of all this in the gofpel, 
 v/ith relation to baptized unbelieving children. 
 
 In pages 78, 79, Mr. Worceiler has feveral things, which 
 deferve to be repeated in the public hearing, and to be 
 noticed by every perfon concerned in the prefent contro- 
 verfy. Says he, ' God forbid, my brethren, that in refpedt 
 to any denomination or fe(5l of profeffing Chriftians, we 
 fliould ever difplay any thi»g like a fpirit of perfecution, or 
 even uncharitablenefs.* 
 
 We do not accufe Mr. Worcefter of calling upon the 
 Jeculnr potver^ to wage direcl and bloody perfecution upon 
 any fedt or denomination of Chriftians ; but we appeal to 
 all who are converfant with the hi (lory of perfecution s, if 
 he have not manifefted the very fpirit which hath attended 
 them ? Has it not ever been the cafe, in all perfeculions, 
 that the perfecutors have faid many if not all kinds of 
 evil, falftly^ againft the perfecuted, and then proceeded to 
 other more violent flops ? Mr. Worcefter hath already faid 
 many evil tlv.ngs.fal/clj, againft the Antij: X'dobaptifts ; and 
 in the very next fentence to the one juft quoted, he impli- 
 citly charges them, and very unjuftly too, with feveral great 
 evils. Says he, ♦ So far as they difcover an adherence to 
 the truth, a regard for true religion, and a zeal for God 
 according to knowledge, we will approve and love tliom ; 
 but wherein they depart from the truths do ivr^ng to the 
 
Two Difcourfes, ^c. 87 
 
 cati/e of religion, and dijplay the unhallo'wed fp'irtt o£ party, we 
 will bear, as we are enabled and have occafion, our tefti- 
 mony agalnft them/ 
 
 All this might be taken in a good fenfe, but what he fays 
 in the two next paragraphs Ihows in what ienfe this is to 
 be taken. In the firft of the two paragraphs he infmuates, 
 that we are not contending or concerned for the caufe of 
 truth, but only for the caufe of a party. But in the next 
 paragraph, he accufes us roundly, and moft explicitly, 
 though falfely, of fome of the worft of herefies. * Merely 
 (fays he) a denial of the external rite of baptifm to the 
 infant feed of believers, though in itfelf exceedingly repre- 
 henfible, as it is a denial of an important di'vine inJituHon, 
 is, however, but a fmall part of the error of our Aritipsedc- 
 baptift brethren. They deny God^s eiyerlajl'mg covenant of 
 Juperabounding grace, the grand charter of the inheritance and 
 privileges of his people, and the foiirce of hlejfings to all the kin- 
 dreds of the earth. 2 hey deny the church of God, tvhich nvcs 
 
 formed in the family of Air ah am, and avhich is dflined to 
 
 rife and become the joy of the iiniverfe. The grar.d 
 
 proTJfion, ii'hlch, in his infnite auifdom and grace, Jehovah h^s 
 been pleafed to make, for the prefervation of a righteous feed en 
 the earth, and for the maintenance and promotion, from age to 
 age, of his caufe and kingdom in this hojiile ^vorld, they not only 
 deny, but openly contemn. They deny and contemn the groce^ 
 tvhich is fo kindly and fo condefcendingly offered, for the fpir- 
 itual renovation and everlafling falvation of the seed of the 
 church. The great body of God^s viftble profjfng people, even 
 the mo ft enlightened and the mo/l faithful, for hundreds of 
 years, they utterly fet afide, as conliituting no part of the 
 true church of Chrift, but only a part of Antichrift — The 
 flrong hond of connexion between the QUI and Neiv Tcflament 
 fcriptures, they, in a manner, dflroy. The beautiful plan of 
 divine tvifdom and grace, exhibited in the covenant, they ^'.v- 
 eeedingly mar ; and the myfieal body of Chrijl, declared in his 
 word to be one, they rend in tijuain ! ' 
 
 Thefe accufations, and mrsftated and falfe charges, we 
 confider to comprife as notorious a libel againit the baptized 
 church of Chrift, as was ever made out by a Spanilh inqui- 
 fition, againft the fame kind of reputed or pretended heretics. 
 Here we are accuied of denying a divine injlitutiony of deny- 
 ing God's everlafting covenant of grace, and the church of 
 God. We are accufed of not only denying, but of openly con- 
 temning, the grand pro-oifon which Jehovah halh made, for 
 
. 88 Letters on Rev. S. Wcrce/ler's 
 
 the preferving a righteous feed en the earth ; and of denying 
 and contemning the grace which, as Mr. Worcefter fays, is 
 oiFered for the fpir'itual renovation and ei-erlajling fahation of 
 the feed of ihe church. We are accufed of utterly fetting 
 afide God's ^'iflle people^ even the mofl enlightened and the 
 mojl faithful of them, as being in the church of Antichrift ; 
 and not only fo, but we do, in a manner, (unlefs Mr. Wor- 
 cefter fpeak falfely) deftroy the connexion between the Old 
 and New Teftament fcriptures, exceedingly mar the beau- 
 tiful plan of divine luifdom and grace, and rend in tivain tlie 
 myftical body of Chrijl. This is the fum, though not all, of 
 the charge v\'hich Mr. Worcefler, of Salem, hath feen fit to 
 lay at the door oi the baptized church. Quite fimilai is 
 it to that which the felf-righteous Scribes and Pharifees 
 brought againil our baptized Head and Lord ; and of the 
 fame kind, yet worfe, than the charge which they brought 
 againft Paul, when they judged him to be worthy of death, 
 for oppofmg the very errors which Mr. Wcrcefter is labour- 
 ing to uphold, and for vindicating thofe new-covenant 
 principles and privileges which I have endeavoured to ef- 
 tablifh. But it happens to us, as it happened to our Lord, 
 and as it hath ever happened to his faithful followers, they 
 are unable to prove the things whereof they accufe us. 
 
 Their accufations are equally falfe, and appear equally 
 malignant, v;ith thofe, with which our baptized brethren 
 have been wickedly charged from John the Baptift's day 
 to ours. But, fays Mr. Worcefter, * God forbid, my breth- 
 ren, that we fhf?uld ever difplay any thing like a perfecut- 
 ing fpirit.' But let the reader, for a moment, allc what 
 is a perfecuting fpirit ? Can any thing be more like it, 
 tlian 2.re falfe and infammatory accufaticns brought againft any 
 man, or fet of men, in order to ftir up the multitude againft 
 the accufed ? efpeciaily wh?n the accufed is charged with 
 {peaking againft God, againft \\\s grace, divine injTituticn, fa- 
 crcd ivcrd, and againft his vijille people ? Yea, againft the 
 beft of them, againft the moft enlightened and the mojl faith- 
 ful of them ? and when the accufed are charged with mar- 
 ring the plan of divine ivifdom, of rending in twain the church 
 of Chrifl, and of holding to fuch error and fuch wrong, as 
 muft be exceedingly injurious to the caufe of religion and deeply 
 nvounding to Chrift and the members of his body ! Is not 
 the very next ftep, to profcribe thefe heretics, and would 
 there be any thing to hinder their receiving from \k\^\x falfc 
 2ind felf/]j accufers fuch puniftiment, as would deter, for the 
 
Two Difcourfes^ Uc. 89 
 
 future ; provided thofe old perfecuting laws could be re- 
 vived, which once imprifoned, beat and banifned from Bof- 
 ton, Sakmy and from the limits of this now free State, the 
 €vjr defpifedyfalfely accufed, and perfecuted followers of the 
 Lamb of God ? 
 
 The fum of what I propofed to fay upon Mr. WorceRer's 
 Sermons is now faid. What remains will be included un- 
 der the following particulars, as deductions from the fubje(5i. 
 
 I. One very natural conclufion is, that Mr. Worcefter's 
 Sermons are little elfe but one continued fophifm, or falfe 
 argumentation. 
 
 We appeal to the reader, to the public, to judge if he 
 have produced one test from the Bible, one fupported fact 
 from hiftory, or one fair argument, which common itvAe 
 faail fay touches his main objecl:, or fo much as makfes it 
 probable, thai the gofpel church is but the yezvijh church 
 continued ? 
 
 We appear to the reader, to the public, to judge if he 
 have produced one text from the Bible, one fupported fact 
 from hiftory, one full and fair argument, which common 
 fenfe fhall fay gives folidity, or the Hamp of truth, to one 
 of his fecondary fubjetfls, fuch as infant lapiij-in-, infant church- 
 memherfjip, fpr'inUing or powring for hahtifm, <jfc. 
 
 The queftioii, referred to the reader, and to the public, 
 for judgment, is not this, whether Mr. Worceil:er hath 
 afferted thefe things, or whether he attenipted to prove 
 them ; but the queftion is, Hath he produced fo much as 
 one text of fciipture, vrhlch commands thefe things, or 
 which informs us, that either of thefe things was ever prac- 
 tifed upon by Chrift, or by his difciples ; or hath he pro- 
 duced one fupported facl from hiftory, which informs us that 
 the church of Chrift ever believed or prac'tifed thefe things ? 
 or that any church did, till not far from the year 250, 
 when the baptized church began to occupy her wildernefs 
 fiation ? At which time fhe left tlie unbaptized, or th.e er- 
 rcneoufly baptized, church of Antichriif lo pradife at her 
 pleafure ? Or has he produced one fair and full argument, 
 which proves in the judgment of common fenfe, that thefe 
 things v/cre ever appointed by Chrill, or practifed by his 
 gofpel church ? Let the Bible, let ftubbcrn fa-fts, let com- 
 mon fenfe fpeak, and be heard too ; but let not the public 
 be deceived, nor the truth of God run down, nor the church 
 of Chrill: fet at nought, by the fophiilry of any man. 
 
90 Leiicrs en Rev, S. Worcefter's 
 
 2. Another natural inference Is, That Mr. Worcefter 
 hath J m fo many inftances, pubhfhed untruths, and thus, 
 ignorantly cr defignedly, impofed upon the credulity of 
 the public, that he will have no occafion to take it un- 
 kindly, fhould they refufe, in future, to take his fmgle evi- 
 dence in any matter of high conceranient. 
 
 The bell apology which can be made for him, is, he 
 undertook to write upon a fubjed, the merits of which he 
 little underftood ; and to alTert things without examining, 
 and before he had time to difcover, whether they had an 
 agreement or difagreement with truth. 
 
 3. One of the following things appears evident from 
 the preceding Letters. Either firft, that the author of them 
 hath not met Mr. Worcefter's arguments, reafonings, and 
 aflertions fairly, or fecondly, that Mr. Worcefler's Sermons 
 are one continued feries of falfe cffertions, and faJfe argu- 
 vifritations. The public are requeued to deliberate candidly 
 and Judge rlghtecuCy between the two. 
 
 Should Mr. Worcefter fee fit to make any defence for 
 himfelf, then every friend to truth is eameftly defired to 
 examine wifely, that he may not be deceived by a like 
 courfe of erroneous afferllons, and delufory arguments. 
 For it will rem^aln forever true, that two fides of a con- 
 tradiction can never be fupported by folid reafonings 
 founded in fa(fls. 
 
 4. Should the author be charged with repetitions, his 
 apology is v.'hat the reader has probably noticed, he had 
 to reply to one great error, turned into a variety of Ihapes. 
 
 It is but fmall bufmefs for an author to fill his pages 
 "^•ith the incapacity and repetitions of his opponent. For 
 children and fools may fpeak the truth ; and if the repeti- 
 tions be many, a folid anfwer to one will do the bufmefs 
 for the whole. 
 
 5. It is very eafy to account for the wide difference 
 between Mr. Worcefter and the author o£ thefe pages. 
 They are defending the out- works of two different churches. 
 One, the church of Antichrift ; the other, the church of 
 Chrift. 
 
 The reader will obferve, I do not fay, Mr. Worcefter is 
 not a Chriftian ; but this is what I fay, he is within the lim- 
 its of Antichrift's church, and is labouring hard to defend 
 her principles and pra>5lices ; and if he be one of God's 
 people, the command to him is, « Come out of her." For 
 
Two Bifcourfesy l^c, 91 
 
 the prefent he is a partaker of her fins, and he may receive 
 of her plagues. 
 
 6, Another inference is, that the author of thefe pages 
 is highly cenfurable for rebuking Mr. Worcefter lo fharply 
 before all men, unlefs Mr. Worcefter have fmned openly. 
 Yes, reader, if Mr. Worcefter have not aimed his ihafrs 
 againfl the church of the Lord Jefus, and been pleading 
 for the abominations of the mother of harlots, I am not 
 only ignorant of the fubjeft, on which I write, but I have 
 rebuked him in fome inftances with too much feverity. 
 Yet, he would be worthy of rebuke for contradicting fcrip- 
 ture, ftubborn fa(5ls and common fenfe, even were he, on 
 the whole, defending the truth. But I appeal to the reader, 
 if it be not juft to rebuke him, as I have done, or, if he be 
 not worthy of all this rebuke, and if he be not in danger of 
 receiving more, provided the accufations, which I have laid 
 to his charge, be abundantly fupported, and he be guilty 
 of the whole and more. 
 
 Concliifion. What I have written upon the fubjecls, 
 which occupy the preceding pages, is not the production 
 of inattention. I have deliberated ferioufly on what I 
 have done. 
 
 It is, reader, no fmall thing, with i^e, to forego all that 
 efteem and friendfhip, which I once pollefied in the bofom of 
 many, whom I now efteem to be the people of God, though 
 in a great error, within the limits of Antichrift, and, for 
 the prefent, difobedient to the heavenly diredtion to com: 
 9ut of her. To be defpifed, to be fet at nought, and to have 
 all manner of evil faid againfl me falfely, is, in itfelf, no 
 fmall trial ; but feeing thefe things have hitherto been the 
 lot of thofe who have been God's honoured inftruments to 
 fpread and vindicate his me/Tages of grace, at times, I re- 
 joice and am exceeding g^ad. 
 
 If I miftake not, it is my conftitutional habit to be mild 
 and affable, where and when I may ; and hard and cenfori- 
 ous only where and >vhen I muft. When I firft faw^, that 
 I muft join and advocate the caufe of tlie baptized church, 
 my mind was filled, in -meafure, with the fcorn, reproach, 
 and reviling, which would fall to my Ihare from tlie ene- 
 mies of Jefus, and from his mifguided friends. But my 
 mind was not difmayed at the fight ; nor is it at all dif- 
 mayed at the reception of thofe evils, which the Captain of 
 Salvation hath taught me to expect. I am, indeed, neither 
 aftiamed of the gofpel, nor of its reproach. 
 
92 Letters y Iffc, 
 
 Let the reader remember, If he would fhare in the blelT-^ 
 ings of the gofpel, he muft willingly partake of its reproach 
 alfo. The world hated Chrlil: before it hated Chriftians ; 
 and if they have called the mafler of the hcufe Beelzebub, 
 how much more them of his houfehold ? 
 
 I have now faid to the public what I purpofed at this 
 time. My defire and prayer to God are, that truth may 
 gain ground, and be acceptable to the public ; and that 
 error may be made afhamed, and hide its hurtful and guil- 
 ty head. 
 
 I have not come to the public with excellency of fpeech, 
 or of man's wifdom, but with the fimple attire of Truth, 
 that the unlearned might read and underfland. He that 
 hath an ear to hear, let him hear. 
 
 In the mean time, I am, and hope ftiil to be, fincerely the 
 public's, in defence of the glorious gofpel of the 
 Lord Jefus Chrill, 
 
 DANIEL MERRILL. 
 
 Sedqwjck, October a;, 1806. 
 
 END. 
 
 CC> In feveral parts of the foregoing Letters^ the wteUigent 
 reader iviil ohfrve a remarkable coincidence betiveen the argu- 
 ments contained in thefe Jheets, and thofc ivhich are ufed in Dr. 
 Baldwin's Reply to Mr. IVorcesteRj lately puhlified. The 
 public are affured^ that neither Dr. B.UDiriN nor Mr. Merrill 
 faw each other's arguments till they appeared in print. 
 
BOOKS 
 
 For fale by Manning ^ Loring, 
 
 No. 2, Cornhilli Bojon, 
 
 THE BAPTISM OF BELIEVERS ONLY, 
 and the PARTICULAR COMMUNION of ihe 
 B;\?Ti3T Churches, explained and vindicated. In Three 
 Parts. The firft — publilhed originally in 1789 ; the fee- 
 oad — in 1794; the third — an Appendix, containing addi- 
 tional Obfervations and Arguments, with Striftures on 
 r«vcral late Fublications. B/ Thomas Baldwin. 
 
 [_Prke one dol. ll\ cis. 
 
 CONTAINING, 
 
 PART L. 
 
 Section I. — Remarks on the unfriendly afperfions caft 
 upon the Baptifts, for refufing communion with other 
 denominations — The gofpei doctrine of a church and 
 qualification of the members — Wiih ftriclures on baptifm. 
 
 Section II.— The impropriety of the Baptift churches 
 communicating \vith thofe of other denominations con- 
 fidered, and iheir diilertnce in fentiment more particu- 
 larly pointed out. 
 
 Section III.— The arguments for free communion con- 
 fidered — others o^ered in vindication of the clofe com- 
 munioniils. 
 
 P A K T II. 
 
 Section I. — Preliminary obfervations on thx fubjedl In 
 
 difpute. 
 Section IL — Profeired believers the only appointed fub- 
 
 jecls of baptifm. 
 Section III. — Whether John's baptifm belonged to the 
 
 Jewifh or Chriftian difpeniation. particularly confidered. 
 Section IV. — The mode of baptifm, and its connexion 
 
 with the fubje6l in difpute, particulaily confidered. 
 SiCTiON V. — The mode of baptifm farther illudrated, 
 
 from the practice of the primitive Chridians ; and the 
 
 manner in which it v/as reduced from immerfion to 
 
 fprinkling, briefly pointed out. 
 
Books for fale by Manning Iff Loring, 
 
 Section VI. — Godly fmcenty, as conne<fled with external 
 obedience, confidered. 
 
 Section VII. — Whether there be any morality in exter- 
 nals or fentiments ; and whether fmcerity of heart fecures 
 the judgnnent from error ; briefly confidered. 
 
 Section VIII. — Whether the divine conduct: towards us 
 be the rule of duty towards our Chriftian brethreH, 
 rather than God's revealed will, briefly confidered. 
 
 Section IX. — Obfervations on the plan of communion 
 propofed in the " Friendly Letter," with remarks on 
 feveral other things conne^ed with the fubjecfl. 
 
 S'ection X. — Several objeiftions particularly anfwered. 
 The fubjed concluded. 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Section I. — Introdudory obfervations on the fubjed un- 
 der confideration. 
 
 Section II. — The arguments for infant memberfhip in 
 the gofpel church, inferred from the covenant of circum- 
 cifion, confidered. 
 
 Section III. — Whether the Jewifh and Chriftian churches 
 are the fame ; or whether the latter is a diftincl church, 
 or a mere continuation of the former, confidered. 
 
 Section IV Stridlures on the Rev. Peter EJtvanis's 
 
 " Candid Reafons for renouncing the Principles of Anti- 
 paedobaptifm." 
 
 Section V. — Stri(n:ures on Two Difcourfes on the perpe- 
 tuity and provifion of God's gracious covenant with 
 Abraham and his feed. By Samuel WorceJIerj a. m. 
 Paftor of the Tabernacle Church in Salem. 
 
 Section VL — The Baptifts vindicated from the charges 
 brought againft them by the Rev. Samuel Worcejler. 
 
 Section VII. — Strictures on the obfervations of the Rev. 
 Mr. Worc:Jler^ Dr. OJgooiU and others, upon the mode of 
 baptifm. 
 
 Section VIII. — The principles of open communion ex- 
 amined. The fubje^fl concluded. 
 
 (Cj" The Appendix, containing i8o pages never before 
 publifhed, may be bought feparately, price bound and 
 
 lettered (ii\ cents, or 50 cents ftitched in blue. The 
 
 Authors whofe writings againft the Baptifts are more par- 
 ticularly noticed in this Appendix, are — Kev. Samuel Wor- 
 cefter, of Salem — Dr. Ofgood, of Medford — Kev. Samuel 
 Auftin, of Worcefter, and Rev. Peter Edwards. 
 
Books for file by Manning cs* Loring, 
 The Second Edition of SEVEN SERMONS 
 
 ©n the Mode and Subjeds of Baptifm. By Daniel 
 Merrill, a. m. \_Prtce 37I cents. 
 
 OPEN COMMUNION with aU who keep 
 
 the Ordinances as Chrift delivered them to the faints. — 
 Eight Letters to Rufus Anderfon^ A. m. By Daniel 
 Merrill, a. m. [_Price 25 cents. 
 
 TWELVE LETTERS, addreffed to Rev. 
 
 Samuel Aujl'tn, A. M. in which his Vindication of partial 
 Wafhing for Chriftian Baptifm, contained in Ten Letters, 
 is reviewed and difproved. By Daniel Merrill, a. m. 
 
 \_Price 31;^ cents. 
 
 The CHRISTIAN BANNER,— A Sermon, 
 
 preached before the Lincoln Baptized Aflbciation. By 
 Daniel Merrill, a. m. [^Price \2\cents. 
 
 A Candid EXAMINATION of the Moral 
 
 Tendency of the Dodrine of Univerfal Salvation, as taught 
 by its Advocates. By Elisha Andrews, Paftor of a 
 Church in Templeton. [^Price 62\ cents. 
 
 A VINDICATION of the Diftinguifliing Sen- 
 timents of the Baptifts, againft the Writings of Meffrs. 
 CowIeSf Miller, and Edwards, By Elisha Andrews, a. m, 
 
 [^Price 50 cents in blue, 
 
 Bunyan's PILGRIM'S PROGRESS, with 
 
 Original Notes, Preface, Life of the Author, and copious 
 Index to the whole, by Thomas Scott, Chaplain to the 
 Lock Hofpital, and author of Original Notes and Practical 
 Obfervations on the Scriptures. (With four copperplates.) 
 
 ^ The Notes add greatly to the value of this edition, 
 and are exceedingly interefting to the intelligent reader ; 
 affording a happy guide to the meaning of the author in 
 his allegory. The Rev. Mr. Scott is a man of known 
 piety, and of critical knowledge in theological literature. 
 The work contains nearly 400 pages, the Notes occupy 
 about one-third. \Price one dol 25 cts. 
 
v-^^ Books for falc by Manhing ly Loi mg 
 
 The Doclrine of the Law and Grace unfolded. 
 
 Being a Difcourfe fliewing the different natures of the Law 
 and Gofpel ; and the very diirmillar fiates of thofe who aie 
 .under the Law, and thofe who are under Grace, or interelled 
 in Jdus Chr i [^. By Jo h n B u n v a s . 
 
 [_Pnce ene dollar. 
 
 The Death of Legal Hope the Life of Evan- 
 gelical Obedience. By Abraham Booth. 
 
 [ Price 3 1 cents Jiluhed. 
 
 Mr. FuLLER^s ESSAY on TRUTH ; contain- 
 ing an Inquiry into its Nature and Importance, \^ith the 
 Caufes of Error, and the Keafons of its being permitted. 
 
 Prefident Maxcy's DISCOURSE, defigned 
 
 to explain the Do<5lrine of ATONEMENT. 
 
 \^Both Jl'tiched together in llue^ price 25 cents » 
 
 The Second Edition of the PSALMODIST's 
 
 ASSISTANT; containing an Original Compofition of 
 Pfalm and Kymn Tunes ; together with a Number of 
 Favourite Pieces from different Authors. To which is 
 prefixed, an Introduction to the Grounds of Mufic. By 
 Abijah Forbush. 
 
 \_Pr'ice 62 1 cents. 
 
 yujl received, and for Jo.le as aho've. 
 
 Dr. Samuel Shepard's Examination of the 
 
 Account lately publifhed by Mr. Ellas Smith, in two pam- 
 phlets, refpe<fiing Original Sin; the Death Adam was to 
 die the day he ate the forbidden fruit ; and the final end of 
 the V/icked after the Refurteaion Day — In an Epiftle to 
 the faid Elias Smith. 
 
 {Price 25 ctnts. 
 
 jfujl received from Nciu Torh, 
 
 CoLLiNs's Second Edition of the Quarto 
 BIBLE, with Ostervald's Notes, Plates, and Concord- 
 
 ance. 
 
 Crj* Colllns's Bible has obtained celebrity as being the 
 moft corre(fl of any ever printed in America. 
 
 I. \^